Download pdf - Javellana v Sect

Transcript
  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    1/264

    Today is Tuesday,

    Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

    Manila

    EN BN!

    G.R. No. L-36142 March 31, 1973

    JOSUE JAVELLANA, petitione",#s$TE E!ECUT"VE SECRETAR#, TE SECRETAR# O$ NAT"ONAL %E$ENSE, TE SECRETAR# O$ JAN% TE SECRETAR# O$ $"NANCE, "espondents$

    G.R. No. L-36164 March 31, 1973

    V"%AL TAN, J. ANTON"O ARANETA, ALEJAN%RO ROCES, MANUEL CRU%O, ANTON"O U. M"RAN%A%E PERALTA AN% LOREN&O M. TA'A%A, petitione"s,#s$TE E!ECUT"VE SECRETAR#, TE SECRETAR# O$ $"NANCE , TE SECRETAR# O$ JUST"CE, T

    SECRETAR# O$ LAN% RE$ORM, TE SECRETAR# O$ NAT"ONAL %E$ENSE, TE AU%"TOR GENE(U%GET COMM"SS"ONER, TE CA"RMAN O$ PRES"%ENT"AL COMM"SS"ON ON REORGAN"&AT"OTREASURER O$ TE P"L"PP"NES, TE COMM"SS"ON ON ELECT"ONS AN% TE COMM"SS"ONERSERV"CE, "espondents$

    G.R. No. L-3616) March 31, 1973.

    GERAR%O RO!AS, AM(ROS"O PA%"LLA, JOV"TO R. SALONGA, SALVA%OR . LAUREL, RAMON VJR. a*+ EVA ESTRA%A-ALA, petitione"s,#s$ALEJAN%RO MELCOR, * h/ ca0ac a/ Ec5 Scrar JUAN PONCE ENR"LE, * h/ ca0aScrar o8 Nao*a %8*/ G*ra ROMEO ESP"NO, * h/ ca0ac a/ Ch8 o8 Sa88 o8 h Ar:

    $orc/ o8 h Ph00*/ TANC"O E. CASTA'E%A, * h/ ca0ac a/ Scrar G*ra Src/ G"L J. PU#AT, * h/ ca0ac a/ Pr/+* o8 h S*a a*+ S*aor JOSE RO#, h/ ca0ac, a/ PPro T:0or o8 h o8 h S*a, "espondents$

    G.R. No. L-36236 March 31, 1973

    E%%"E (. MONTECLARO, ;0r/o*a a*+ * h/ ca0ac a/ Pr/+* o8 h Nao*a Pr// C5< oPh00*/=, petitione",#s$TE E!ECUT"VE SECRETAR#, TE SECRETAR# O$ PU(L"C "N$ORMAT"ON, TE AU%"TOR GENER

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    2/264

    (U%GET COMM"SS"ONER > TE NAT"ONAL TREASURER, "espondents$

    G.R. No. L-362?3 March 31, 1973

    NAPOLEON V. %"LAG, AL$RE%O SALAPANTAN, JR., LEONAR%O ASO%"SEN, JR., a*+ RAUL M.GON&ALE&,petitione"s,#s$

    TE ONORA(LE E!ECUT"VE SECRETAR#, TE ONORA(LE SECRETAR# O$ NAT"ONAL %E$EONORA(LE (U%GET COMM"SS"ONER, TE ONORA(LE AU%"TOR GENERAL, "espondents$

    Ramon A. Gonzales for petitioner Josue Javellana.

    Lorenzo M. Taada and Associates for petitioners Vidal Tan, et al.

    Taada, Salonga, rdoez, Rodrigo, Sanidad, Ro!as. Gonzales and Arro"o for petitioners Gerardo Ro!as

    Jo#er $. Arro"o and Rogelio %. $adilla for petitioner &ddie Monteclaro.

    Raul M. Gonzales and Associates for petitioners 'apoleon V. (ilag, et al.

    Arturo M. Tolentino for respondents Gil J. $u"at and Jose Ro".

    ffice of t)e Solicitor General &stelito $. Mendoza, Solicitor Vicente V. Mendoza and Solicitor Re"nato S. ot)er respondents.

    R E % & ' ( T ) & N

    CONCEPC"ON, C.J.:

    The abo#e*entitled fi#e +- cases a"e a se.uel of cases /$R$ Nos$ '*2, '*40, '*41, '*42, '*4, '*, '*61, '*'*3, decided on Janua"y 22, 13, to hich 5e ill he"eafte" "efe" collecti#ely as the plebiscite case

    %ac#ground of t)e $le*iscite +ases.

    The factual settin the"eof is set fo"th in the decision the"ein "ende"ed, f"o7 hich 5e .uote8

    &n Ma"ch 16, 163, !on"ess of the Philippines passed Resolution No$ 2, hich as aResolution No$ 4 of said body, adopted on June 13, 16, callin a !on#ention a7end7ents to the !onstitution of the Philippines$ %aid Resolution No$ 2, as a7

    i7ple7ented by Republic ct No$ 612, app"o#ed on uust 24, 130, pu"suant to the phich the election of deleates to said !on#ention as held on No#e7be" 10, 130, a!onstitutional !on#ention bean to pe"fo"7 its functions on June 1, 131$ 5hile the !onin session on %epte7be" 21, 132, the P"esident issued P"ocla7ation No$ 101 placinPhilippines unde" Ma"tial 'a$ &n No#e7be" 2, 132, the !on#ention app"o#ed it!onstitution of the Republic of the Philippines$ The ne9t day, No#e7be" 0, 132, the P"ePhilippines issued P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 3, ;sub7ittin to the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    3/264

    %oon afte", o" on :ece7be" 3, 132, !ha"ito Planas filed, ith this !ou"t, !ase /$R$ Naainst the !o77ission on Elections, the T"easu"e" of the Philippines and the udito" en=oin said ;"espondents o" thei" aents f"o7 i7ple7entin P"esidential :ec"ee No7anne", until fu"the" o"de"s of the !ou"t,; upon the "ounds,inter alia, that said P"esiden;has no fo"ce and effect as la because the callin $$$ of such plebiscite, the settin of the conduct of the sa7e, the p"esc"iption of the ballots to be used and the .uestion to bby the #ote"s, and the app"op"iation of public funds fo" the pu"pose, a"e, by the !onstitu

    e9clusi#ely in !on"ess $$$,; and ;the"e is no p"ope" sub7ission to the people of sai!onstitution set fo" Janua"y 1, 13, the"e bein no f"eedo7 of speech, p"ess and assthe"e bein no sufficient ti7e to info"7 the people of the contents the"eof$;

    %ubstantially identical actions e"e filed, on :ece7be" , 132, by Pablo !$ %anidad !o77ission on Elections +!ase /$R$ No$ '* 2- on :ece7be" 11, 132, by /e"a"do Raainst the !o77ission on Elections, the :i"ecto" of P"intin, the National T"easu"e" and/ene"al +!ase /$R$ '*40-, by Eddie B$ Montecla"o aainst the !o77ission on ElectT"easu"e" of the Philippines +!ase /$R$ No$ '*41-, and by %edf"ey &"do>e?, et al$ National T"easu"e" and the !o77ission on Elections +!ase /$R$ No$ '*42-@ on :e132, by Aidal Tan, et al$, aainst the !o77ission on Elections, the T"easu"e" of the Phiudito" /ene"al and the :i"ecto" of P"intin +!ase /$R$ No$ '*4- and by Jose 5$Benino %$ .uino aainst the !o77ission on Elections +!ase /$R$ No$ '*-@ on :e

    132, by Jacinto Ji7ene? aainst the !o77ission on Elections, the udito" /ene"al, the Tthe Philippines and the :i"ecto" of the Bu"eau of P"intin +!ase /$R$ No$ '*61-, and/on?ales aainst the !o77ission on Elections, the Budet !o77issione", the Nationaand the udito" /ene"al +!ase /$R$ No$ '*6-@ and on :ece7be" 16, 132, by E"nestoaainst the !o77ission on Elections, the %ec"eta"y of Education, the National T"easuudito" /ene"al +!ase /$R$ No$ '*3-$

    )n all these cases, e9cept the last +/$R$ No$ '*3-, the "espondents e"e "e.ui"edanse"s ;not late" than 12800 +oDcloc- noon of %atu"day, :ece7be" 16, 132$; %aid calso, set fo" hea"in and pa"tly hea"d on Monday, :ece7be" 1, 132, at 80 a$7$ The continued on :ece7be" 1, 132$ By a"ee7ent of the pa"ties, the afo"e7entioned last cNo$ '*3 as, also, hea"d, =ointly ith the othe"s, on :ece7be" 1, 132$ t the c

    the hea"in, on that date, the pa"ties in all of the afo"e7entioned cases e"e i#en a shti7e ithin hich ;to sub7it thei" notes on the points they desi"e to st"ess$; %aid notes diffe"ent dates, beteen :ece7be" 21, 132, and Janua"y 4, 13$

    Meanhile, o" on :ece7be" 13, 132, the P"esident had issued an o"de" te7po"a"ily suseffects of P"ocla7ation No$ 101, fo" the pu"pose of f"ee and open debate on th!onstitution$ &n :ece7be" 2, the P"esident announced the postpone7ent of the plebi"atification o" "e=ection of the P"oposed !onstitution$ No fo"7al action to this effect aJanua"y 3, 13, hen /ene"al &"de" No$ 20 as issued, di"ectin ;that the plebiscite sbe held on Janua"y 1, 13, be postponed until fu"the" notice$; %aid /ene"al &"7o"eo#e", ;suspended in the 7eanti7e; the ;o"de" of :ece7be" 13, 132, te7po"a"ily the effects of P"ocla7ation No$ 101 fo" pu"poses of f"ee and open debate on th!onstitution$;

    )n #ie of these e#ents "elati#e to the postpone7ent of the afo"e7entioned plebiscitedee7ed it fit to "ef"ain, fo" the ti7e bein, f"o7 decidin the afo"e7entioned cases, fo"date no" the conditions unde" hich said plebiscite ould be held e"e non o" announcThen, aain, !on"ess as, pu"suant to the 1 !onstitution, scheduled to 7eet in "eon Janua"y 22, 13, and since the 7ain ob=ection to P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 3 P"esident does not ha#e the leislati#e autho"ity to call a plebiscite and app"op"iate funhich !on"ess un.uestionably could do, pa"ticula"ly in #ie of the fo"7al postponeplebiscite by the P"esident "epo"tedly afte" consultation ith, a7on othe"s, the!on"ess and the !o77ission on Elections the !ou"t dee7ed it 7o"e i7pe"ati#e to d

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    4/264

    action on these cases$

    ;)n the afte"noon of Janua"y 12, 13, the petitione"s in !ase '*4 filed an ;u"ent 7otion,; p"ayin that said case be decided ;as soon as possiblenot late" than Janua"y 1, 13$; )t as alleed in said 7otion,inter alia8

    ;6$ That the P"esident subse.uently announced the issuance of P"esidential :ec

    o"ani?in the so*called !iti?ens sse7blies, to be consulted on ce"tain public .uestioToday, Janua"y 1, 13G@

    ;3$ That the"eafte" it as late" announced that ;the sse7blies ill be ased if they fa#o

    F1G The Ne %ociety@

    F2G Refo"7s instituted unde" Ma"tial 'a@

    FG The holdin of a plebiscite on the p"oposed ne !onstitution andtentati#e ne dates i#en folloin the postpone7ent of the plebisci

    o"iinal date of Janua"y 1 a"e

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    5/264

    government-FBulletin Today, Janua"y 10, 13@ e7phasis an additional .u

    ;11$ That on Janua"y 11, 13, it as "epo"ted that si9 +6- 7o"e .uestions ould be sub7so*called !iti?ens sse7blies8

    F1G :o you app"o#e of the citi?ens asse7blies as the base of popula" o#decide issues of national inte"estsH

    F2G (o "ou approve of t)e ne +onstitution-

    FG :o you ant a plebiscite to be called to "atify the ne !onstitutionH

    F4G :o you ant the elections to be held in No#e7be", 13 in acco"danp"o#isions of the 1 !onstitutionH

    FG )f the elections ould not be held, hen do you ant the ne9t eleccalledH

    F6G :o you ant 7a"tial la to continueH FBulletin Today, Janua"y 11, 13

    suppliedG

    ;12$ That acco"din to "epo"ts, the "etu"ns ith "espect to the si9 +6- additional .uestabo#e ill be on a fo"7 si7ila" o" identical to nne9 ;; he"eof@

    ;1$ That attached to pae 1 of nne9 ;; is anothe" pae, hich e 7a"ed as nnehich "eads8

    !&MMENT% &N

    I(E%T)&N No$ 1

    )n o"de" to b"oaden the base of citi?ensD pa"ticipation in o#

    I(E%T)&N No$ 2

    But e do not ant the d )nte"i7 sse7bly to be con#oed$ &" if it is to bat all, it should not be done so until afte" at least se#en +3- yea"s f"o7 thethe Ne !onstitution by the !iti?ens sse7blies$

    I(E%T)&N No$

    The #ote of the !iti?ens sse7blies should al"eady be conside"ed the pthe Ne !onstitution$

    )f the !iti?ens sse7blies app"o#e of the Ne !onstitution, then the ne should be dee7ed "atified$

    I(E%T)&N No$ 4

    5e a"e sic and ti"ed of too f"e.uent elections$ 5e a"e fed up ith politicsdebates and so 7uch e9penses$

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    6/264

    I(E%T)&N No$

    P"obably a pe"iod of at least se#en +3- yea"s 7o"ato"iu7 on elections ilfo" stability to be established in the count"y, fo" "efo"7s to tae "oot and "etu"n$

    I(E%T)&N No$ 6

    5e ant P"esident Ma"cos to continue ith Ma"tial 'a$ 5e ant hi7 to poe"s ith 7o"e autho"ity$ 5e ant hi7 to be st"on and fi"7 so acco7plish all his "efo"7 p"o"a7s and establish no"7alcy in the count"y7easu"es fail, e ant P"esident Ma"cos to decla"e a "e#olutiona"y o#e"nthe lines of the ne !onstitution ithout the ad inte"i7 sse7bly$;

    ;ttention is "espectfully in#ited to the co77ents on ;Iuestion No$ ,; hich "eads8

    I(E%T)&N No$

    The #ote of the !iti?ens sse7blies should be conside"ed the plebiscite

    !onstitution$

    )f the !iti?ens sse7blies app"o#e of the Ne !onstitution, then the ne should be dee7ed "atified$

    This, e a"e af"aid, and the"efo"e allee, is p"enant ith o7inous possibilities$

    14$ That, in the 7eanti7e, speain on tele#ision and o#e" the "adio, on Janua"y 3P"esident announced that the li7ited f"eedo7 of debate on the p"oposed !onstitutionithd"an and that the p"ocla7ation of 7a"tial la and the o"de"s and dec"ees issuedould thencefo"th st"ictly be enfo"ced F:aily E9p"ess, Janua"y , 13G@

    1$ That petitione"s ha#e "eason to fea", and the"efo"e state, that the .uestion added in th.uestions to be ased to the !iti?ens sse7blies, na7ely8

    :o you app"o#e of !onstitutionH

    in "elation to the .uestion folloin it8

    :o you still ant a plebiscite to be called ne !onstitutionH;

    ould be an atte7pt to by*pass and sho"t*ci"cuit this Cono"able !ou"t befo"e hich the

    the #alidity of the plebiscite on the p"oposed !onstitution is no pendin@

    ;16$ That petitione"s ha#e "eason to fea", and the"efo"e allee, that if an affi"7ati#e ans.uestions =ust "efe""ed to ill be "epo"ted then this Cono"able !ou"t and the enti"e naconf"onted ith a fait accomplihich has been attained in a hihly unconstitutional and un7anne"@

    ;13$ That the fait accompliould consist in the supposed e9p"ession of the people app"oposed !onstitution@

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    7/264

    ;1$ That, if such e#ent ould happen, then the case befo"e this Cono"able !ou"t could, and pu"poses, beco7e 7oot because, petitione"s fea", and they the"efo"e allee, that on such supposed e9p"ession of the ill of the people th"ouh the !iti?ens sse7blies, announced that the p"oposed !onstitution, ith all its defects, both conenital and othbeen "atified@

    ;1$ That, in such a situation the Philippines ill be facin a "eal c"isis and the"e is l

    confusion if not chaos, because then, the people and thei" officials ill not no hich !oin fo"ce$

    ;20$ That the c"isis 7entioned abo#e can only be a#oided if this Cono"able !ou"t ill decide and announce its decision on the p"esent petition@

    ;21$ That ith the ithd"aal by the P"esident of the li7ited f"eedo7 of discussion on th!onstitution hich as i#en to the people pu"suant to %ec$ of P"esidential :ec"ee opposition of "espondents to petitione"sD p"aye" at the plebiscite be p"ohibited has no cothat a f"ee plebiscite can no lone" be held$;

    t about the sa7e ti7e, a si7ila" p"aye" as 7ade in a ;7anifestation; filed by the peti

    4, ;/e"a"do Ro9as, et al$ #$ !o77ission on Elections, et al$,; and '*42, ;%edf"ey et al$ #$ The National T"easu"e", et al$;

    The ne9t day, Janua"y 1, 13, hich as a %atu"day, the !ou"t issued a "esolution ""espondents in said th"ee +- cases to co77ent on said ;u"ent 7otion; and ;7anifeslate" than Tuesday noon, Janua"y 16, 13$; P"io" the"eto, o" on Janua"y 1, 13, shnoon, the petitione"s in said !ase /$R$ No$ '*4 "iled a ;supple7ental 7otion fo" "est"ainin o"de" and inclusion of additional "espondents,; p"ayin

    ;$$$ that a "est"ainin o"de" be issued en=oinin and "est"ainin !o77ission on Elections, as ell as the :epa"t7ent of 'ocal /o#e"n7ehead, %ec"eta"y Jose Ro>o@ the :epa"t7ent of "a"ian Refo"7s an%ec"eta"y !on"ado Est"ella@ the National Ratification !oo"dinatin !o77!hai"7an, /uille"7o de Aea@ thei" deputies, subo"dinates and substituothe" officials and pe"sons ho 7ay be assined such tas, f"o7 collectinand announcin and "epo"tin to the P"esident o" othe" officials conce"ncalled !iti?ensD sse7blies "efe"endu7 "esults alleedly obtained hensupposed to ha#e 7et du"in the pe"iod co7p"ised beteen Janua"y 10 a1, 13, on the to .uestions .uoted in pa"a"aph 1 of this %upple7eMotion$;

    )n suppo"t of this p"aye", it as alleed

    ;$ That petitione"s a"e no befo"e this Cono"able !ou"t in o"de" to as fu"the" that this!ou"t issue a "est"ainin o"de" en=oinin he"ein "espondents, pa"ticula"ly "espondent !o7

    Elections as ell as the :epa"t7ent of 'ocal /o#e"n7ents and its head, %ec"eta"y Jos:epa"t7ent of "a"ian Refo"7s and its head, %ec"eta"y !on"ado Est"ella@ the Nationa!oo"dinatin !o77ittee and its !hai"7an, /uille"7o de Aea@ and thei" deputies, sando" substitutes, f"o7 collectin, ce"tifyin, announcin and "epo"tin to the P"esident th!iti?ensD sse7blies "efe"endu7 "esults alleedly obtained hen they e"e supposed du"in the pe"iod beteen Janua"y 10 and Janua"y 1, 13, pa"ticula"ly on the to .uestin pa"a"aph 1 of this %upple7ental ("ent Motion@

    ;4$ That the p"oceedins of the so*called !iti?ensD sse7blies a"e illeal, null and #oidinsofa" as such p"oceedins a"e bein 7ade the basis of a supposed consensus fo" the "a

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    8/264

    the p"oposed !onstitution because8

    FaG The elections conte7plated in the !onstitution, "ticle KA, at hich thconstitutional a7end7ents a"e to be sub7itted fo" "atification, a"e electioonly .ualified and duly "eiste"ed #ote"s a"e pe"7itted to #ote, he"eas, t!iti?ensD sse7blies e"e pa"ticipated in by pe"sons 1 yea"s of ae"ea"dless of .ualifications o" lac the"eof, as p"esc"ibed in the Election !o

    FbG Elections o" plebiscites fo" the "atification of constitutional aconte7plated in "ticle KA of the !onstitution ha#e p"o#isions fo" thechoice and of #ote, hich is one of the safeua"ds of f"eedo7 of action, the !iti?ensD sse7blies e"e open and e"e cast by "aisin hands@

    FcG The Election !ode 7aes a7ple p"o#isions fo" f"ee, o"de"ly and honeand such p"o#isions a"e a 7ini7u7 "e.ui"e7ent fo" elections o" plebisc"atification of constitutional a7end7ents, but the"e e"e no si7ila" p"o#isioand "eulate p"oceedins of the so called !iti?ensD sse7blies@

    FdG )t is se"iously to be doubted that, fo" lac of 7ate"ial ti7e, 7o"e than

    the so called !iti?ensD sse7blies ha#e been actually fo"7ed, because theof thei" o"ani?ation e"e still bein discussed a day o" so befo"e the dasupposed to bein functionin8

    ;P"o#incial o#e"no"s and city and 7unicipal 7ayo"s had beith ba""io captains and co77unity leade"s since laFJanua"y , 13- to th"esh out the 7echanics in the fo"7!iti?ens sse7blies and the topics fo" discussion$; FBulJanua"y 10, 13G

    ;)t should be "ecalled that the !iti?ensD sse7blies e"e o"de"ed fo"7ed only at the beiyea" F:aily E9p"ess, Janua"y 1, 13G, and conside"in the lac of e9pe"ience of the locaof said asse7blies, as ell as the absence of sufficient uidelines fo" o"ani?ation, it is belie#e that such asse7blies could be o"ani?ed at such a sho"t notice$

    ;$ That fo" lac of 7ate"ial ti7e, the app"op"iate a7ended petition to include the additioand o#e"n7ent aencies 7entioned in pa"a"aph of this %upple7ental ("ent Motion cco7pleted because, as noted in the ("ent Motion of Janua"y 12, 13, the sub7isp"oposed !onstitution to the !iti?ensD sse7blies as not 7ade non to the public until13$ But be that as it 7ay, the said additional officials and aencies 7ay be p"ope"ly incpetition at ba" because8

    FaG The he"ein petitione"s ha#e p"ayed in thei" petition fo" the annul7entP"esidential :ec"ee No$ 3, but also of ;any si7ila" dec"ee, p"ocla7atioinst"uction$

    so that P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6, insofa" at least as it atte7pts to sub7it the p"oposed to a plebiscite by the so*called !iti?ensD sse7blies, is p"ope"ly in issue in this case, andenfo"ce, i7ple7ent, o" ca""y out the said P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6$ and the inst"uctiothe"eto clea"ly fall ithin the scope of this petition@

    FbG )n thei" petition, petitione"s souht the issuance of a "it of p"eli7ina"est"ainin not only the "espondents na7ed in the petition but also thei" ;ai7ple7entin not only P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 3, but also ;any othe" si7o"de", inst"uction, o" p"ocla7ation in "elation to the holdin of a plebiscite

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    9/264

    1, 13 fo" the pu"pose of sub7ittin to the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    10/264

    ;NN&(N!)N/ TCE RT)

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    11/264

    ;E9ecuti#e %ec"eta"y;

    %uch is the bac"ound of the cases sub7itted dete"7ination$ fte" ad7ittin so7e of the7ade in the petition in '*4 and denyin the othe" alleations the"eof, "espondealleed in thei" anse" the"eto, by ay affi"7ati#e defenses8 1- that the ;.uestions "aipetition ;a"e political in cha"acte";@ 2- that ;the !onstitutional !on#ention acted f"eely andautho"ity to p"opose not only a7end7ents but a !onstitution hich ould supe"sede

    !onstitution;@ - that ;the P"esidentDs call fo" a plebiscite and the app"op"iation of fupu"pose a"e #alid;@ 4- that ;the"e is not an i7p"ope" sub7ission; and ;the"e can be a plebMa"tial 'a;@ and - that the ;a"u7ent that the P"oposed !onstitution is #aue and 7aes an unconstitutional deleation of poe", includes a "efe"endu7 on the p"ocla7atio'a and pu"po"ts to e9e"cise =udicial poe"; is ;not "ele#ant and $$$ ithout 7e"it$; )dentice"e set up in the othe" cases unde" conside"ation$

    )77ediately afte" the hea"in held on Janua"y 13, 13, o" since the afte"noon of thMe7be"s of the !ou"t ha#e been delibe"atin on the afo"e7entioned cases and, aftediscussions on the 7e"its the"eof, ha#e dee7ed it best that each Me7be" "ite histhe"eon and that the"eafte" the !hief Justice should state the "esult o" the #otes thus points in issue$ Cence, the indi#idual #ies of 7y b"eth"en in the !ou"t a"e set fo"th in tattached he"eto, e9cept that, instead of "itin thei" sepa"ate opinions, so7e Me

    p"efe""ed to 7e"ely concu" in the opinion of one of ou" colleaues$

    Then the "ite" of said decision e9p"essed his on opinion on the issues in#ol#ed the"ein, afte"ecapitulated the #ies of the Me7be"s of the !ou"t, as follos8

    1$ The"e is unani7ity on the =usticiable natu"e of the issue on the leality of P"esidential3$

    2$ &n the #alidity of the dec"ee itself, Justices Maalintal, !ast"o,

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    12/264

    a"e of the opinion that the .uestion of #alidity of said P"ocla7ation hap"ope"ly "aised befo"e the !ou"t, hich, acco"dinly, should not pass.uestion$

    b$ Justice Ba""edo holds that the issue on the constitutionality of P"ocla1102 has been sub7itted to and should be dete"7ined by the !ou"t, a;pu"po"ted "atification of the P"oposed !onstitution $$$ based on the

    a7on !iti?ensD sse7blies falls sho"t of bein in st"ict confo"7i"e.ui"e7ents of "ticle KA of the 1 !onstitution,; but that such d"abac notithstandin, ;conside"in all othe" "elated "ele#ant ci"cu7stane !onstitution is leally "econi?able and should be "econi?ed as lefo"ce$;

    c$ Justice aldi#a" 7aintains un.ualifiedly that the P"oposed !onstitution h"atified in acco"dance ith "ticle KA of the 1 !onstitution, and that, ahas no fo"ce and effect hatsoe#e"$

    d$ Justice ntonio feels ;that the !ou"t is not co7petent to act; on the issthe P"oposed !onstitution has been "atified by the people o" not, ;in theany =udicially disco#e"able and 7anaeable standa"ds,; since the issu.uestion of fact$

    3$ &n the .uestion hethe" o" not these cases should be dis7issed, Justices MaalinBa""edo, Maasia", ntonio and Esue""a #oted in the affi"7ati#e, fo" the "easons set f"especti#e opinions$ Justices

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    13/264

    of the P"esidential !o77ission on Reo"ani?ation, the T"easu"e" of the Philippines, the !o77ission oand the !o77issione" of !i#il %e"#ice4on

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    14/264

    P"esident P"o Te7po"e, "especti#ely, of the %enate of Philippines, as p"o#ided by la and the Rules of th

    Re.ui"ed to co77ent on the abo#e*7entioned petitions ando" a7ended petitions, "espondents filed, !ou"t fi"st had and obtained, a consolidated co77ent on said petitions ando" a7ended petitions, allesa7e ouht to ha#e been dis7issed out"iht@ cont"o#e"tin petitione"sD alleations conce"nin the ai7pai"7ent of the f"eedo7 of the 131 !onstitution !on#ention to app"o#e the p"oposed !onstitution, itsof autho"ity to inco"po"ate ce"tain contested p"o#isions the"eof, the alleed lac of autho"ity of the P"esid

    and establish !iti?ensD sse7blies ;fo" the pu"pose sub7ittin to the7 the 7atte" of "atification !onstitution,; the alleed ;i7p"ope" o" inade.uate sub7iss of the p"oposed constitution,; the ;p""atification adopted $$$ th"ouh the !iti?ens sse7blies;@ a 7aintainin that8 1- ;+t-he !ou"t is ithout =uact on these petitions;@ 2- the .uestions "aised the"ein a"e ;political in cha"acte" and the"efo"e non=us;the"e substantial co7pliance ith "ticle KA of the 1 !onstitution;@ 4- ;+t-he !onstitution as p"ope"ly speople in a f"ee, o"de"ly and honest election@ - ;P"ocla7ation No$ 1102, ce"tifyin the "esults of theconclusi#e upon the cou"ts;@ and 6- ;+t-he a7endin p"ocess outlined in "ticle KA of the 1 !onstie9clusi#e of othe" 7odes of a7end7ent$;

    Respondents Puyat and Roy, in said !ase /$R$ No$ '*616, filed thei" sepa"ate co77ent the"ein, a;+t-he sub=ect 7atte"; of said case ;is a hihly political .uestion hich, unde" the ci"cu7stances, this $$$not be in a position to act upon =udicially,; and that, in #ie of the opinions e9p"essed by th"ee 7e7be"s in its decision in the plebiscite cases, in effect upholdin the #alidity of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102, ;fu"the"

    in this case 7ay only be an acade7ic e9e"cise in futility$;

    &n

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    15/264

    This defense o" theo"y, set up by counsel fo" "espondents /il J$ Puyat and Jose Roy in /$R$ No$ '*616by the %olicito" /ene"al, is p"edicated upon the fact that, in &u" decision in the plebiscite cases, M"$ Jushad e9p"essed the #ie that the 1 !onstitution had ;p"o tanto passed into histo"y; and ;been supplanted by the !onstitution no in fo"ce by #i"tue of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 $$$;@ that M"$ Justice ntfeel ;that this !ou"t co7petent to act; in said cases ;in the absence of any =udicially disco#e"able and standa"ds; and because ;the access to "ele#ant info"7ation is insufficient to assu"e the co""ect dete"7inissue,; apa"t f"o7 the ci"cu7stance that ;the ne constitution has been p"o7ulated and "eat int

    al"eady a"isen unde" it; and that the political o"an of the /o#e"n7ent has "econi?ed its p"o#isions@ Justice Esue""a had postulated that ;+-ithout any co7petent e#idence $$$ about the ci"cu7stances aholdin; of the ;"efe"endu7 o" plebiscite; th"u the !iti?ensD sse7blies, he ;cannot say that it as not laand that, acco"dinly, he assumed;that hat the p"ocla7ation +No$ 1102- says on its face is t"ue and unby satisfacto"y e#idence; he could not ;subsc"ibe to the clai7 that such plebiscite as not held acco"dinhe accepted ;as a fait accompli that the !onstitution adopted +by the 131 !onstitutional !on#ention- on0, 132, has been duly "atified$

    !ounsel fo" "espondents /il J$ Puyat and Jose Roy oes on to say that, unde" these ci"cu7stance"e7ote o" i7p"obable that the necessa"y eiht +- #otes unde" the 1 !onstitution, and 7uch less #otes "e.ui"ed by the 132 +13- !onstitution, can be obtained fo" the "elief souht in the 7ended PetiNo$'*616$

    ) a7 unable to sha"e this #ie$ To bein ith, M"$ Justice Ba""edo announced publicly, in open cou"hea"in of these cases, that he as and is illin to be con#inced that his afo"e7entioned opinion in thcases should be "econside"ed and chaned$ )n effect, he thus decla"ed that he had an open 7ind in conthe cases at ba", and that in decidin the sa7e he ould not necessa"ily adhe"e to said opinion if thehe"ein succeeded in con#incin hi7 that thei" #ie should be sustained$

    %econdly, counsel fo" the afo"esaid "espondents had appa"ently assu7ed that, unde" the 1 !onstitut#otes a"e necessa"y to decla"e in#alid the contested P"ocla7ation No$ 1102$ ) do not belie#e that this asbo"ne out by any p"o#ision of said !onstitution$ %ection 10 of "ticle A))) the"eof "eads8

    ll cases in#ol#in the constitutionality of a t"eaty o" la shall be hea"d and decided by t

    !ou"t in *anc, and no t"eaty o" la 7ay be decla"ed unconstitutional ithout the concu""thi"ds of all the 7e7be"s of the !ou"t$

    Pu"suant to this section, the concu""ence of to*thi"ds of all the Me7be"s of the %up"e7e !ou"t is "e.decla"e ;t"eaty o" la; unconstitutional$ !onst"uin said p"o#ision, in a "esolution dated %epte7be" 16!hief Justice Mo"an, #oicin the unanimous#ie of the Me7be"s of this !ou"t, postulated8

    $$$ The"e is not)ingeithe" in the !onstitution o" in the Judicia"y ct "e.ui"in the #ote of eto nullify a "ule o" "eulation o" an e9ecuti#e o"de" issued by the P"esident$ )t is #e"y sinifthe p"e#ious d"afts of section 10, "ticle A))) of the !onstitution, ;e9ecuti#e ;"eulation;ere includeda7on those that "e.ui"ed fo" thei" nullification the #ote of tothe 7e7be"s of the !ou"t$ But ;e9ecuti#e o"de"; and ;"eulation; e"e late"deletedf"o

    d"aft +"ueo, The

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    16/264

    sa7e, a lesse" nu7be" of #otes is necessa"y in the %up"e7e !ou"t than that "e.ui"ed to in#alidate a la o" t"ea

    lthouh the fo"eoin "efe"s to "ules, "eulations and e9ecuti#e o"de"s issued by the P"esident, the dicith e.ual fo"ce to e9ecuti#e p"ocla7ation, lie said P"ocla7ation No$ 1102, inas7uch as the autho"ity sa7e is o#e"ned by section 6 of the Re#ised d7inist"ati#e !ode, hich p"o#ides8

    d7inist"ati#e acts and co77ands of the +/o#e"no"*/ene"al- P"esident of the Philippin

    the o"ani?ation o" 7ode of ope"ation of the /o#e"n7ent o" "ea""anin o" "ead=ustindist"icts, di#isions, pa"ts o" po"ts of the +Philippine )slands- Philippines and all acts ando#e"nin the ene"al pe"fo"7ance of duties by public e7ployees o" disposin of issueconce"n shall be 7ade effecti#e in e9ecuti#e o"de"s$

    E9ecuti#e o"de"s fi9in the dates hen specific las, "esolutions, o" o"de"s a"e to ha#e+ha#e- effect and an" information concerning matters of pu*lic momentdete"7ined by lao" e9ecuti#e o"de"s, 7ay be p"o7ulated in an e9ecuti#e p"ocla7ation, it) all t)e fe!ecutive order$ 14

    )n fact, hile e9ecuti#e o"de" e7body ad7inist"ati#e acts o" co77ands of the P"esident, e9ecuti#e p"ocla7ainly info"7ati#e and decla"ato"y in cha"acte", and so does counsel fo" "espondents /il J$ Puyat an

    7aintain in /$R$'*616$ 1)s conse.uence, an e9ecuti#e p"ocla7ation has no morethan ;the fo"ce of an e9ecuti#e o"de",the %up"e7e !ou"t to decla"e such p"ocla7ation unconstitutional, unde" the 1 !onstitution, the sa7e nu7needed to in#alidate an e9ecuti#e o"de", "ule o" "eulation na7ely, si9 +6- #otes ould suffice$

    s "ea"ds the applicability of the p"o#isions of the p"oposed ne !onstitution, app"o#ed by the 131 !!on#ention, in the dete"7ination of the .uestion hethe" o" not it is no in fo"ce, it is ob#ious that sudepends upon hethe" o" not the said ne !onstitution has been "atified in acco"dance ith the "e.ui"e71 !onstitution, upon the autho"ity of hich said !onstitutional !on#ention as called and app"o#ed th!onstitution$ )t is ell settled that the 7atte" of "atification of an a7end7ent to the !onstitution shoulby appl"ing t)e provisions of t)e +onstitution in force at t)e time of t)e alleged ratification, or t)e old +ons

    ))

    (oes t)e issue on t)e validit" of $roclamation 'o. 4478 parta#e of t)e nature of a political, and, )6usticia*le 9uestion-

    The %olicito" /ene"al 7aintains in his co77ent the affi"7ati#e #ie and this is his 7ain defense$ )n supphe allees that ;petitione"s ould ha#e this !ou"t decla"e as in#alid the Ne !onstitution of the Republic he clai7s ;this !ou"t no de"i#es its autho"ity;@ that ;nea"ly 1 7illion of ou" body politic f"o7 thyea"s ha#e 7andated this !onstitution to be the Ne !onstitution and the p"ospect of unsettlin a"eliance on it caution aainst inte"position of the poe" of =udicial "e#ie;@ that ;in the case of the Ne !the o#e"n7ent has been "econi?ed in acco"dance ith the Ne !onstitution;@ that ;the count"yDs fo"eia"e no bein conducted in acco"dance ith the ne cha"te";@ that ;fo"ein o#e"n7ents ha#e taen nothe ;plebiscite cases; a"e ;not p"ecedents fo" holdin .uestions "ea"din p"oposal and "atification =ust

    that ;to abstain f"o7 =ud7ent on the ulti7ate issue of constitutionality is not to abdicate duty$;

    t the outset, it is ob#ious to 7e that 5e a"e not bein ased to ;decla"e; thene !onstitution inpetitione"s dispute is the theo"y that it has been #alidly "atified by the people, especially that they ha#eaccordance it) Article :V of t)e 4;25 +onstitution$ The petitione"s 7aintain that the conclusion "ea!hief E9ecuti#e in the dispositi#e po"tion of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 is not bo"ne out by the he"eases p"sa7e, as the p"edicates f"o7 hich said conclusion as d"an@ that the plebiscite o" ;election; "e.u"ticle KA has not been held@ that the !hief E9ecuti#e has no autho"ity, unde" the 1 !onstitution,to dsaid election o" plebiscite@ that the p"oceedins befo"e the !iti?ensD sse7blies did not constitute andconside"ed as such plebiscite@ that the facts of "eco"d abundantly sho that the afo"e7entioned sse

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    17/264

    not ha#e been held th"ouhout the Philippines f"o7 Janua"y 10 to Janua"y 1, 13@ and that, in anyp"oceedins in said sse7blies a"e null and #oid as an alleed "atification of the ne !onstitution p"op131 !onstitutional !on#ention, not only because of the ci"cu7stances unde" hich said sse7bliec"eated and held, but, also, because pe"sons dis.ualified to #ote unde" "ticle A of the !onstitution e"pa"ticipate the"ein, because the p"o#isions of ou" Election !ode e"e not obse"#ed in said sse7blies, sa7e e"e not held unde" the supe"#ision of the !o77ission on Elections, in #iolation of section 2 of "t1 !onstitution, and because the e9istence of Ma"tial 'a and /ene"al &"de" No$ 20, ithd"ain o"

    the li7ited f"eedo7 to discuss the 7e"its and de7e"its of said p"oposed !onstitution, i7pai"ed the peopin #otin the"eon, pa"ticula"ly a viva voce, as it as done in 7any instances, as ell as thei" ability"easonable nolede of the contents of the docu7ent on hich they e"e alleedly called upon to e#ies$

    Refe""in no 7o"e specifically to the issue on hethe" the ne !onstitution p"oposed by the 131 !!on#ention has been "atified in acco"dance ith the p"o#isions of "ticle KA of the 1 !onstitution .uestion o" not, ) do not hesitate to state that the anse" 7ust be in the neati#e$ )ndeed, such is the pby this !ou"t, 13 in an endless line of decisions, too lon to lea#e any "oo7 fo" possible doubt that sinhe"ently and essentially =usticiable$ %uch, also, has been the consistent position of the cou"ts of the (of 7e"ica, hose decisions ha#e a pe"suasi#e effect in this =u"isdiction, ou" constitutional syste7 !onstitution bein patte"ned afte" that of the (nited %tates$ Besides, no plausible "eason has, to 7yad#anced to a""ant a depa"tu"e f"o7 said position, consistently ith the fo"7 of o#e"n7ent established

    !onstitution$$

    Thus, in the afo"e7entioned plebiscite cases, 1?/e re6ectedthe theo"y of the "espondents the"ein that thethe" P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 3 callin a plebiscite to be held on Janua"y 1, 13, fo" the "atification o"the p"oposed ne !onstitution, as #alid o" not, as not a p"ope" sub=ect of =udicial in.ui"y because, theypa"too of a political natu"e, and 5e unanimousl"decla"ed that the issue as a6usticia*leone$ /it) identica5e o#e""uled the "espondentsD contention in the 131 )a*eas corpuscases, 19.uestionin &u" autho"ity to deconstitutional sufficiency of the factual bases of the P"esidential p"ocla7ation suspendin the p"i#ilee of )a*eas corpuson uust 21, 131, despite the opposite #ie taen by this !ou"t in %a%a#er2@and Montenegro v. +astaeda, 21insofa" as it adhe"ed to the fo"7e" case, hich #ie 5e, abandoned and "efused to apply$

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    18/264

    This p"inciple of sepa"ation of poe"s unde" the p"esidential syste7 oes hand in hand ith the systeand balances, unde" hich each depa"t7ent is #ested by the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    19/264

    deleated to the 'eislatu"e o" e9ecuti#e b"anch of the o#e"n7ent$; )t is conce"ned ith issues depethe isdom, not legalit", of a pa"ticula" 7easu"e$;

    cco"dinly, hen the "ant of poe" is .ualif ied, conditional o" sub=ect to li7itations, the issue on hethp"esc"ibed .ualifications o" conditions ha#e been 7et, o" the li7itations "espected, is =usticiable o" non*c"u9 of the p"oble7 bein one of legalit" or validit"of the contested act, notits isdo7$ &the.ualifications, conditions o" li7itations pa"ticula"ly those p"esc"ibed o" i7posed by the !onstitution

    set at nauht$ 5hat is 7o"e, the =udicial in.ui"y into such issue and the settle7ent the"eof a"e themaincou"ts of =ustice unde" the P"esidential fo"7 of o#e"n7ent adopted in ou" 1 !onstitution, and thchecs and balances, one of its basic p"edicates$ s a conse.uence, 5e ha#e neithe" the authodisc"etion to decline passin upon said issue, but a"e under t)e inelucta*le o*ligation 7ade pa"tice9actin and pe"e7pto"y by ou" oath, as 7e7be"s of the hihest !ou"t of the land, to suppo"t and!onstitution to settle it$ This e9plains hy, inMiller v. Jo)nson, 2?it as held that cou"ts ha#e a ;dut", "poe";, to dete"7ine hethe" anothe" b"anch of the o#e"n7ent has ;ept it)in constitutional limits$; Not sthis postulate, the cou"t ent fa"the" and st"essed that, if the !onstitution p"o#ides ho it 7ay be a7ended a1 !onstitution ;then, unless t)e manner is folloed, t)e 6udiciar" as t)e interpreter of t)at constitution, t)e amendment invalid$; 29)n fact, this #e"y !ou"t speain th"ouh Justice 'au"el, an outstandin aPhilippine !onstitutional 'a, as ell as one of the hihly "espected and fo"e7ost leade"s of the !on#ention the 1 !onstitution decla"ed, as ea"ly as July 1, 16, that ;+i-n ti7es of social dis.uietude o" politicalthe "eat land7a"s of the !onstitution a"e apt to be fo"otten o" 7a""ed, if not enti"ely oblite"ated$ )n cases

    the6udicialdepa"t7ent is the onl" constitutional organhich can be called upon to dete"7ine the p"ope" apoe"s beteen the se#e"al depa"t7ents; of the o#e"n7ent$ 3@

    The %olicito" /ene"al has in#oed Lut)er v. %orden31in suppo"t of his stand that the issue unde" conside"=usticiable in natu"e$ Neithe" the factual bac"ound of that case no" the action taen the"ein by the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    20/264

    the "ebel o#e"n7ent hich as ne#e" able to e9e"cise an"autho"ity in the state b"oe into his hou

    Meanhile, the cha"te" o#e"n7ent had taen 7easu"es to call its on con#ention to "e#ise the e9iso#e"n7ent$ E#entually, a ne constitution as d"afted by a con#ention held unde" the autho"ity ofo#e"n7ent, and the"eafte" as adopted and "atified by the people$ ;+T-he ti7es and places at hich theto be i#en, the pe"sons ho e"e to "ecei#e and "etu"n the7, and the .ualifications of the #ote"s)avi

    previousl" aut)orized and provided for *" la passed *" t)e c)arter government,; the latte" fo"7ally su"

    of its poe"s to the ne o#e"n7ent, established unde" its autho"ity, in May 14, hich hope"ation uninterruptedl" since then$

    bout a yea" befo"e, o" in May 142, :o"", at the head of a 7ilita"y fo"ce, had 7ade an unsuccessful attpossession of the state a"senal in P"o#idence, but he as "epulsed, and, afte" an ;asse7blae of so7e a"7ed 7en unde" his co77and at !hepatchet in the June folloin, hich dispe"sed upon app"oach of tthe old o#e"n7ent, nofu"the" effo"t as 7ade to establish; his o#e"n7ent$ ;$$$ until the !onstitutionadopted unde" the auspices of the cha"te" o#e"n7ent ;ent into ope"ation, the cha"te" o#e"n7entcasse"t its autho"ity and e9e"cise its poe"s and to enforce o*edience t)roug)out t)e state$$$ $;

    Ca#in offe"ed to int"oduce e#idence to p"o#e that the constitution of the "ebels had been "atified by thethe people, hich the !i"cuit !ou"t "e=ected, apa"t f"o7 "ende"in =ud7ent fo" the defendants, the plaicase fo" "e#ie to the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    21/264

    Then, too, the case of Lut)er v. %orden hined 7o"e on the .uestion of "econition of governmen"econition of constitution, and the"e is a funda7ental diffe"ence beteen these to +2- types of "econitbein ene"ally conceded to be a political .uestion, he"eas the natu"e of the latte" depends upon afacto"s, one of the7 bein hethe" the ne !onstitution has been adopted in the 7anne" p"esc!onstitution in fo"ce at the ti7e of the pu"po"ted "atification of the fo"7e", hich isessentiall"a6usticia*The"e as, in Lut)er v. %orden, a conflict beteen to +2- rival o#e"n7ents, antaonistic to each othabsent in the p"esent cases$ Ce"e, the /o#e"n7ent established unde" the 1 !onstitution is the

    o#e"n7ent hose E9ecuti#e :epa"t7ent has u"ed the adoption of the ne o" "e#ised !onstitution p"op131 !onstitutional !on#ention and no allees that it has been "atified by the people$

    )n sho"t, the #ies e9p"essed by the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    22/264

    decide such .uestion$

    The %up"e7e !ou"t of the (nited %tates has 7eaninfully postulated that ;the cou"tscannot "e=ect as Dn because it alleedly in#ol#es a political .uestion ;a bona fide cont"o#e"sy as to hethe" sdeno7inated ;political; e!ceeds constitutional aut)orit"$; 37

    )))

    as t)e proposed ne or revised +onstitution *een ratified conforma*l" to said Art. :V of t)e 4;25 +onst

    Petitione"s in '*6142 7aintain the neati#e #ie, upon "ound8 1- that the P"esident ;is ithout autho"the !iti?ensD sse7blies; th"ouh hich, "espondents 7aintain, the p"oposed ne !onstitution has been said sse7blies ;a"e ithout poe" to app"o#e the p"oposed !onstitution;@ - that the P"esident ;is ithop"oclai7 the "atification by the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    23/264

    2$ That such a7end7ents be ;sub7itted to the people fo" thei" "atification; at an ;election;@ and

    $ That such a7end7ents be ;app"o#ed by a 7a=o"ity of the #otes cast; in said election$

    !o7pliance ith the fi"st "e.ui"e7ent is #i"tually conceded, althouh the petitione"s in '*6164 .uestion of the 131 !onstitutional !on#ention to inco"po"ate ce"tain p"o#isions into the d"aft of the ne!onstitution$ The 7ain issue in these fi#e +- cases hines, the"efo"e, on hethe" o" not the last to +2- "

    ha#e been co7plied ith$

    2$ as t)e contested draft of t)e ne or revised +onstitution *een su*mitted to t)e people for t)eir conforma*l" to Art. :V of t)e +onstitution-

    )n this connection, othe" p"o#isions of the 1 !onstitution conce"nin ;elections; 7ust, also, be taen ina7ely, section ) of "t$ A and "t$ K of said !onstitution$ The fo"7e" "eads8

    %ection 1$ %uff"ae 7ay be e9e"cised by 7ale citi?ens of the Philippines not othe"ise disla, ho a"e tenty*one yea"s of ae o" o#e" and a"e able to "ead and "ite, and ho"esided in the Philippines fo" one yea" and in the 7unicipality he"ein they p"opose to #otesi9 7onths p"ecedin the election$ The National sse7bly shall e9tend the "iht of suff"a

    if in a plebiscite hich shall be held fo" that pu"pose ithin to yea"s afte" the adop!onstitution, not less than th"ee hund"ed thousand o7en possessin the necessa"y .shall #ote affi"7ati#ely on the .uestion$

    %ections 1 and 2 of "t$ K of the !onstitution o"dain in pa"t8

    %ection 1$ The"e shall be an independent !o77ission on Elections co7posed of a !hai"7othe" Me7be"s to be appointed by the P"esident ith the consent of the !o7ppoint7ents, ho shall hold office fo" a te"7 of nine yea"s and 7ay not be "eappointed$

    999 999 999

    %ec$ 2$ The !o77ission on Elections shall ha#e e!clusivecha"e of the enfo"cad7inist"ation of all las "elati#e to the conduct of electionsand shall e9e"cise all othhich 7ay be confe""ed upon it by la$ )t shall decide, sa#e those in#ol#in t#ote, allad7inist"ati#e .uestions, affectin elections, includin the dete"7ination of the location of pollin places, and the appoint7ent of election inspecto"s and of othe" electionla enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of t)e Government, hen so "e.u!o77ission, shall act as its deputiesfo" the pu"pose of insuring fee, orderl", and )onesThe decisions, o"de"s, and "ulins of the !o77ission shall be sub=ect to "e#ie*" t)+ourt$

    999 999 999 39

    a$ /)o ma" vote in a ple*iscite under Art. V of t)e +onstitution-

    Petitione"s 7aintain that section 1 of "t$ A of the !onstitution isa limitationupon the e9e"cise of the "ihtThey clai7 that no othe" pe"sons than ;citi?ens of the Philippines not othe"ise dis.ualified by la, hoone yea"s of ae o" o#e" and a"e able to "ead and "ite, and ho shall ha#e "esided in the Philippines and in the 7unicipality he"ein they p"opose to #ote fo" at least si9 7onths p"ecedin the election,; 7ay "iht of suff"ae in the Philippines$ (pon the othe" hand, the %olicito" /ene"al contends that sa7e"ely guarantees the "iht of suff"ae to pe"sons possessin the afo"e7entioned .ualifications and dis.ualifications, p"esc"ibed by la, and that said "iht 7ay be #ested by co7petent aupe"sons lac#ing so7e o" all of the afo"e7entioned .ualifications, andpossessingso7e of thedis.ualifications$ )n suppo"t of this #ie, he in#oes the pe"7issi#e natu"e of the lanuae ;+s-uff"

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    24/264

    e9e"cised; used in section 1 of "t$ A of the !onstitution, and the p"o#isions of the Re#ised BaRepublic ct No$ 0, pa"ticula"ly sections 4 and 6 the"eof, p"o#idin that citi?ens of the Philippines ;eiof ae o" o#e",; ho a"e "eiste"ed in the list of ba""io asse7bly 7e7be"s, shall be 7e7be"s the"epa"ticipate as such in the plebiscites p"esc"ibed in said ct$

    ) cannot accept the %olicito" /ene"alDs theo"y$ "t$ A of the !onstitution decla"es)o 7ay e9e"cise suff"ae, so that those lacin the .ualifications the"ein p"esc"ibed 7aynot e9e"cise such "iht$ This #i

    out by the "eco"ds of the !onstitutional !on#ention that d"afted the 1 !onstitution$ )ndeed, section the 1 !onstitution as la"ely based on the "epo"t of the co77ittee on suff"ae of the !on#entionsaid !onstitution hich "epo"t as, in tu"n, ;st"only influenced by the election las then in fo"ce in the P$; 4@; %aid co77ittee had "eco77ended8 1- ;That the "iht of suff"ae should e9e"cised onl"by 7ale citPhilippines$; 2- ;That should be limitedto those ho could "ead and "ite$; - ;That the dut"to #ote7ade o*ligator"$; )t appea"s that the fi"st "eco77endation as discussed e9tensi#ely in the !on#ention, and of co7p"o7ise, it as e#entually a"eed to include, in section 1 of "t$ A of the !onstitution, the second sentei7posin upon the National sse7bly established by the o"iinal !onstitution instead of the bica7e"asubse.uently c"eated by a7end7ent said !onstitution the duty to ;e9tend the "iht of suff"ae o7en, if in to, be held fo" that pu"pose ithin to yea"s afte" the adoption of this !onstitution, not less than th"ee hund"eo7en possessin the necessa"y .ualifications shall #ote affi"7ati#ely on the .uestion$; 41

    The thi"d "eco77endation on ;co7pulso"y; #otin as, also debated upon "athe" e9tensi#ely, afte"

    "e=ected by the !on#ention$ 42This accounts, in 7y opinion, fo" the pe"7issi#e lanuae used in the fi"st said "t$ A$ :espite so7e debates on the ae .ualification a7end7ent ha#in been p"oposed to "educe theo" 20, hich e"e "e=ected, and the "esidence .ualification, as ell as the dis.ualifications to the e9e"cise ofsuff"ae the second "eco77endation limitingthe "iht of suff"ae to those ho could ;"ead and "ite; lanuae of :"$ Jose M$ "ueo, one of the :eleates to said !on#ention ; readil" approved in the !on#enany dissentin #ote,; althouh the"e as so7e debate on hethe" the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    25/264

    election; o" a sinle election, not sepa"ately o" in se#e"al o" distinct elections, and that the p"oposed a7end7ebe sub7itted to a plebiscite as not even a completea7end7ent, but a ;pa"tial a7end7ent; of said sectcould *e amended furt)er, after its ratification, had the sa7e taen place, so that the afo"e7entioned pa"tial as, fo" leal pu"poses, no 7o"e than aprovisional o" temporar" a7end7ent$ %aid pa"tial a7end7ent asupon the ene"ally accepted conte7po"a"y const"uction that, unde" the 1 !onstitution, pe"sons belo teyea"s of ae could not e9e"cise the "iht of suff"ae, ithout a p"e#ious a7end7ent of the !onstitution$

    (pon the othe" hand, the .uestion, hethe" 1*yea"*old 7e7be"s of ba""io asse7blies 7ay #ote in ba""plebiscites is, to say the least, a debatable one$ )ndeed, the"e see7s to be a conflict beteen the last psaid section 6 of Rep$ ct No$ 0,46pu"suant to hich the ;7a=o"ity #ote of all the ba""io asse7blymeminclude all ba""io "esidents 1 yea"s of ae o" o#e", duly "eiste"ed in the list of ba""io asse7bly 7e7be"s- is nethe app"o#al, in an asse7bly plebiscite, of ;any budeta"y, supple7ental app"op"iations o" special ta9 ohe"eas, acco"din to the pa"a"aph p"ecedin the penulti7ate one of said section, 47;+a-ll duly "eisasse7bly 7e7be"s 9ualified to vote; ho, pu"suant to section 10 of the sa7e ct, 7ust be citi?Philippines, tent"1one "ears of age or over, able to "ead and "ite,; and "esidents the ba""io ;du"in thei77ediately p"ecedin election, duly "eiste"ed in the list of #ote"s; and ; othe"ise dis.ualified $$$; =p"o#isions of p"esent and past election codes of the Philippines and "t$ A of the 1 !onstitution ;7ayplebiscite$;

    ) belie#e, hoe#e", that the appa"ent conflict should "esol#ed in fa#o" of the 21*yea"*old 7e7be"s of th

    not only because this inte"p"etation is in acco"d ith "t$ A the !onstitution, but, also, because p"o!onstitution pa"ticula"ly of a "itten and "iid one, lie ou"s ene"ally acco"ded a 7andato"y status intention to the cont"a"y is 7anifest, hich is not so as "ea"ds said "t$ A fo" othe"ise they ould noconside"ed sufficiently i7po"tant to be included in the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    26/264

    the p"oceedins in the !iti?ensD sse7blies 7ust be conside"ed null and #oid$)3

    )t has been held that ;+t-he poe" to "e=ect anentirepoll $$$ s)ould *e e!ercised$$$ in a case he"e it is imasce"tain ith "easonable ce"tainty the t"ue #ote,; as he"e ;it isimpossi*le to separate the leal #otilleal o" spu"ious $$$ $; )4

    )n @sman v. +ommission on &lections, et al$, ))5e held8

    %e#e"al ci"cu7stances, defyin e9act desc"iption and dependent 7ainly on the factual 7pa"ticula" cont"o#e"sy, ha#e the effect of dest"oyin the inte"ity and authenticity of dispu"etu"ns and of a#oidin thei"prima facie#alue and cha"acte"$ )f satisfacto"ily p"o#en, alsu77a"y p"oceedin, such ci"cu7stances as alleed by the affected o" inte"ested pa"tieselection "etu"ns ith the indelible 7a" of falsity and i""eula"ity, and, conse.uently, of and =ustify thei" e9clusion f"o7 the can#ass$

    Then, too, the 1 !onstitution "e.ui"es ;a 7a=o"ity of the #otes cast; fo" a p"oposed a7end7

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    27/264

    o"an, election las in the Philippines e"e enfo"ced by the then :epa"t7ent of the )nte"io", th"ouh itBu"eau, one of the offices unde" the supe"#ision and cont"ol of said :epa"t7ent$ The sa7e lie othe" dof the E9ecuti#e B"anch of the /o#e"n7ent as, in tu"n, unde" the cont"ol of the !hief E9ecuti#eadoption of the 1 !onstitution, and had been until the abolition of said :epa"t7ent, so7eti7e athe cont"ol of the P"esident of the Philippines, since the effecti#ity of said

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    28/264

    election las f"o7 ti7e i77e7o"ial pa"ticula"ly at a ti7e hen the sa7e as ofutmosti7po"tancthe e!istence of Martial La$

    )n Glen v. Gnau, 6)in#ol#in the castin of 7any #otes, openly, ithout co7plyin ith the "e.ui"e7entspe"tinent the"eto, it as held that the ;election office"s; in#ol#ed ; cannot *e too strongl" condemned; the"efothey ;could leally dispense ith such "e.ui"e7ent $$$ they could ith e.ual p"op"iety dispense ith all of thet)e one t)at t)e vote s)all *e *" secret *allot, or even *

    at all$$$ $;

    Mo"eo#e", upon the fo"7al p"esentation to the E9ecuti#e of the p"oposed !onstitution d"afted b!onstitutional !on#ention, o" on :ece7be" 1, 132, P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 3 +on the #alidity of has contested in the plebiscite cases, as ell as in the 132)a*eas corpuscases 66 5e need not, inba", e9p"ess any opinion- as issued, callin a plebiscite, to be held on Janua"y 1, 13, at hich th!onstitution ould be sub7itted to the people fo" "atification o" "e=ection@ di"ectin the publication of sa!onstitution@ and decla"in, inter alia, that ;+t-he p"o#ision of the Election !ode of 131, insofa" as thinconsistent; ith said dec"ee e9ceptin those ;"ea"din "iht and obliations of political pa"ties and can;s)all appl"to the conduct of the plebiscite$; )ndeed, section 2 of said Election !ode of 131 p"o#ides that ;+aof public office"s e9cept ba""io officials and ple*iscitesshall be conducted in the 7anne" p"o#ided by this !od&"de" No$ 20, dated Janua"y 3, 13, postponin until fu"the" notice, ;the plebiscite scheduled to be held on 13,; said nothin about the p"ocedu"e to be folloed in plebiscite to tae place at such notice, and no oth

    dec"ee has been b"ouht to &u" attention, e9p"essly o" i7pliedly "epealin the p"o#isions of P"esidential :ec"eeas said p"ocedu"e is conce"ned$

    (pon the othe" hand, said /ene"al &"de" No$ 20 e9p"essly suspended ;the p"o#isions of %ection of :ec"ee No$ 3 insofa" as they allo f"ee public discussion of p"oposed !onstitution $$$ te7po"a"ily suspenof P"ocla7ation No$ 101 fo" the pu"poses of f"ee open dabate on the p"oposed !onstitution $$$ $; T7ention of the po"tions of the dec"ees o" o"de"s o" inst"uctions suspended by /ene"al &"de" No$ 20i7plies that allothe" po"tions of said dec"ees, o"de"s o" inst"uctions and, hence, the p"o#isions of :ec"ee No$ 3 outlinin the p"ocedu"e to be folloed in the plebiscite fo" "atification o" "e=ection of th!onstitution "e7ained in fo"ce, assu7in that said :ec"ee is #alid$

    )t is clai7ed that by #i"tue of P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6* the te9t of hich is .uoted belo67 thdecla"ed, inter alia, that the collecti#e #ies e9p"essed in the !iti?ensD sse7blies ;shall be considered in the

    of national policies o" p"o"a7s and, he"e#e" p"acticable, shall be t"anslated into conc"ete and specific desuch !iti?ensD sse7blies ;shall conside" #ital national issues $$$ lie the holdin of the plebiscite on the ne !oand othe"s in the futu"e, hich shall se"#e as guideo" *asis for actiono" decision by the national o#e"n7ent;@ !iti?ensD sse7blies ;shall conduct beteen Janua"y 10 and 1, 13, a referendumon i7po"tant natiincludin those specified in pa"a"aph 2 he"eof, and sub7it the "esults the"eof to the :epa"t7ent of 'ocal /and !o77unity :e#elop7ent i77ediately the"eafte", $$$ $; s in P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6, this :ec"ee No$ 6and cannot e9clude the e9e"cise of the constitutional supe"#iso"y poe" of the !o77ission on Elections o" its pin the p"oceedins in said sse7blies, if the sa7e had been intended to constitute the ;election; o" Plebiscite "A of the 1 !onstitution$ The p"o#ision of :ec"ee No$ 6* di"ectin the i77ediate sub7ission of the "esuthe :epa"t7ent of 'ocal /o#e"n7ents !o77unity :e#elop7ent is not necessa"ily inconsistent ith, asubo"dinate to the constitutional poe" of the !o77ission on Elections to e9e"cise its ;e9clusi#e autho"enfo"ce7ent and ad7inist"ation of all las to the conduct of elections,; if the p"oceedins in the sse7blies oof the natu"e of an ;election; o" plebiscite fo" the "atification o" "e=ection of the p"oposed !onstitution$

    5e a"e told that P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6 as fu"the" a7ended by P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6*B, do"de"in ;that i7po"tant national issues shall f"o7 ti7e to ti7e@ be "efe""ed to the Ba"anays +!iti?ens fo" "esolution in acco"dance ith P"esidential :ec"ee No$ 6* dated Janua"y , 13 and that the initialinclude the 7atte" of "atification of the !onstitution by the 131 !onstitutional !on#ention; and that ;+t-hof the :epa"t7ent of 'ocal /o#e"n7ents and !o77unity :e#elop7ent shall insu"e the i7ple7entation os in the case of P"esidential :ec"ees Nos$ 6 and 6*, the fo"eoin di"ecti#es do not necessae9e"cise of the poe"s #ested by the 1 !onstitution in the !o77ission on Elections, e#en if the E9the autho"ity to "epeal "t$ K of ou"

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    29/264

    No$ 6*B is appended he"eto as nne9 B he"eof$

    The point is that, such of the Ba""io sse7blies as e"e held too place ithout the inte"#ention of the !on Elections, and ithout co7plyin ith the p"o#isions of the Election !ode of 131 o" e#en of those of :ec"ee No$ 3$ 5hat is 7o"e, they e"e held unde" the supe"#ision of t)e ver" officers and agen&!ecutive (epartment soug)t to *e e!cludedthe"ef"o7 by "t$ K of the 1 !onstitution$ 5o"se still, and aencies of the 1 !onstitution ould be fa#o"ed the"eby, oin to the p"actical indefinite e9ten

    "especti#e te"7s of office in conse.uence of section of the T"ansito"y P"o#isions, found in "t$ KA)) of t!onstitution, ithout any elections the"efo"$ nd the p"ocedu"e the"ein 7ostly folloed is such thatreasona*le means of c)ec#ingthe accu"acy of the "etu"ns files by the office"s ho conducted said plebisanothe" patent #iolation of "t$ of the !onstitution hich can ha"dly be sanctioned$ nd, since the p"o#ia"ticle fo"7 pa"t of the fundamental sche7e set fo"th in the 1 !onstitution, as a7ended, to insuo"de"ly, and honest; e9p"ession of the peopleDs ill, the afo"e7entioned #iolation the"eof "ende"s null acontested p"oceedins o" alleed plebiscite in the !iti?ensD sse7blies, insofa" as the sa7e a"e clai7"atified the "e#ised !onstitution p"oposed by the 131 !onstitutional !on#ention$ ;$$$BaCll t)e aut)oritiesthe leal definition of an election, as ell as that hich is usually and o"dina"ily unde"stood by the te"7, iso" as election by those ha#in a "iht to pa"ticipate +in the selection- of those ho shall fill the officeadoption or re6ection of an" pu*lic measure affecting t)e territor" involved$ 1 !yc$ 23@ Leis v. %o"nto46, Pac$ 32@ Saunders v. a"nes, 1 !al$ 14@ Seaman v. %aug)man, 2 )oa 216, 43 N$5$ 104@ State v. irs),12 )nd$ 203, 24 N$E$ 1062, '$R$$ 130@ Bou#ie"Ds 'a :ictiona"y$6?

    )A

    as t)e proposed +onstitution afore*een approved *" a ma6orit" of t)e people+itizens0 Assem*lies allegedl" t)roug)out t)e $)ilippines-

    Respondents 7aintain the affi"7ati#e, "elyin upon P"ocla7ation No$ 1102, the #alidity of hich is p"econtested by petitione"s he"ein$ Respondents clai7 that said p"ocla7ation is ;conclusi#e; upon this !oleast, entitled to full faith and c"edence, as an en"olled bill@ that the p"oposed !onstitution has been, in app"o#ed o" adopted by the ;o#e"hel7in; 7a=o"ity of the people@ that "t$ KA of the 1 !onstituti

    been ;substancially; co7plied ith@ and that the !ou"t "ef"ain f"o7 passin upon the #alidity of P"ocla1102, not only because such .uestion is political in natu"e, but, also, because should the !ou"t inp"ocla7ation, the fo"7e" ould, in effect, #eto the action of the people in ho7 so#e"einty "esides poe" a"e de"i#ed$

    The 7a=o" fla in this p"ocess of "ationali?ation is that it assu7es, as a fact, the #e"y p"e7ise onp"edicated, and hich, 7o"eo#e", is contested by the petitione"s$ s the %up"e7e !ou"t of Minnessota hit

    $$$ ever" office" unde" a constitutional o#e"n7ent 7ust act acco"din to la and su"est"ictions, and ever" departurethe"ef"o7 o" dis"ea"d the"eof 7ust sub=ect hi7 to theand cont"ollin of the people, acting t)roug) t)e agenc" of t)e 6udiciar"> for it must *e re

    t)at t)e people act t)roug) courts, as ell as th"ouh the e9ecuti#e o" the 'eisdepa"t7ent is =ust as "ep"esentati#e as the othe", and t)e 6udiciar" is t)e departmec)arged it) t)e special dut" of determining t)e limitations )ic) t)e la places uponaction$ $$$ $

    cco"dinly, the issue boils dons to hethe" o" not the E9ecuti#e acted ithin the li7its of his authoce"tified in P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 ;that the !onstitution p"oposed by the nineteen hund"ed and se#enty!onstitutional !on#ention has been "atified by an o#e"hel7in 7a=o"ity of all of the #otes cast by the all the Ba"anays +!iti?ens sse7blies- th"ouhout the Philippines and has the"eby co7e into effect$;

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    30/264

    )n this connection, it is not clai7ed that the !hief E9ecuti#e had pe"sonal nolede of the data he ce"p"ocla7ation$ Mo"eo#e", "t$ K of the 1 !onstitution as p"ecisely inse"ted to place*e"ondthe E9poe" to supe"#ise o" e#en e9e"cise an"autho"ity hatsoe#e" o#e" ;all las "elati#e to the conduct oand, hence, hethe" the elections a"e fo" the choice o" selection of public office"s o" fo" the "atification oany p"oposed a7end7ent, o" "e#ision of the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    31/264

    ith the "esults of this 7ethod and the de#elop7ent of 7o"e scientific and satisfacto"y 7ethods of "aisin "e#enthe 'eislatu"e to sub7it to the people an a7end7ent to the !onstitution hich p"o#ided 7e"ely that ta9unifo"7 upon the sa7e class of sub=ects$ This p"oposed a7end7ent as sub7itted at the ene"al elecNo#e7be", 106, and in due ti7e it as certifiedby the state can#assin boa"d and p"oclai7ed by the /o#e"nbeen leally adopted$ ctin upon the assu7ption that the a7end7ent had beco7e a pa"t of the !ons'eislatu"e enacted statutes p"o#idin fo" a %tate Ta9 !o77ission and a 7o"tae "eist"y ta9, and the latte" sthe sa7e theo"y, as held constitutional; by said !ou"t$ ;The dist"ict cou"t found that the a7end7ent had no adopted, and on this appeal; the %up"e7e !ou"t as ;re9uired to determine t)e correctness of that conclusion

    Refe""in to the effect of the certificationof the %tate Boa"d of !an#asse"s c"eated by the 'eislatheproclamation 7ade by the /o#e"no" based the"eon, the !ou"t held8 ;)t ill be noted that this boa"d dothan tabulate the "epo"ts "ecei#ed f"o7 the #a"ious county boa"d and add up and ce"tify the "esults$ %ta4 5ash$ 24, Pac$ 126, '$R$$ +($%$- 1221$ )t issettled la that the decisions of election ocan#assin boa"ds a"e not conclusive and that t)e final decision must rest it) t)e courts, unless the lathat the decisions of the boa"d shall be final; and the"e is no such la in the cases at ba"$ ;$$$ The cothe conclusion of the state boa"d "ests upon the co""ectness of the "etu"ns 7ade by the county bois inconceiva*le that it as intended that this state7ent of "esult should be final and conclusive regardactual facts$ The p"ocla7ation of the /o#e"no" adds not)ing in the ay of conclusi#eness to the leal action of the can#assin boa"d$ )ts pu"pose is to fo"7ally notify the people of the state of the "esult of tfound by the can#assin boa"d$ Ja7es on !onst$ !on#$ +4th Ed$- sec$ 2$;

    )n %ott v. /artz, 73the !ou"t revieed the state7ent of "esults of the election 7ade by the can#assin boa"d, the t"ue "esults could be =udicially dete"7ined$ nd so did the cou"t in Rice v. $almer$ 74

    )nas7uch as "t$ K of the 1 !onstitution places unde" the ;e9clusi#e; cha"e of the !o77ission o;the enfo"ce7ent and ad7inist"ation of all las "elati#e to the conduct of elections,;independentl" of theand t)ere is not even a certification *" t)e +ommission in suppo"t of the alleed "esults of the citi?ensD"elied upon in P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 apa"t f"o7 the fact that on Janua"y 13, 13 neithe" the alleed the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    32/264

    E#en 7o"e i7po"tant, and decisi#e, than the fo"eoin is the ci"cu7stance that the"e is a7ple "eason to7any, if not 7ost, of the people did not no that the !iti?ensD sse7blies e"e, at the ti7e theyplebiscites fo" the "atification o" "e=ection of the p"oposed !onstitution$ Cence, in &u" decision in the pleb5e said, inter alia8

    Meanhile, o" on :ece7be" 13, 132, the P"esident had issued an o"de" te7po"a"ily suseffects of P"ocla7ation No$ 101, fo" the pu"pose of f"ee and open debate on th

    !onstitution$ &n :ece7be" 2, the P"esident announced the postpone7ent of the plebi"atification o" "e=ection of the P"oposed !onstitution$ No fo"7al action to this effect aJanua"y 3, 13, hen /ene"al &"de" No$ 20 as issued, di"ectin ;that the plebiscite sbe held on Janua"y 1, 13, be postponed until fu"the" notice$; %aid /ene"al &"7o"eo#e", ;suspended in the 7eanti7e; the ;o"de" of :ece7be" 13, 132, te7po"a"ily the effects of P"ocla7ation No$ 101 fo" pu"poses of f"ee and open debate on th!onstitution$

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    33/264

    national inte"estsH

    F3G :o you app"o#e of the ne !onstitutionH

    FG :o you ant a plebiscite to be called to "atify the ne !onstitutionH

    FG :o you ant the elections to be held in No#e7be", 13 in acco"dance ith the p"o#

    1 !onstitutionH

    F10G )f the elections ould not be held, hen do you ant the ne9t elections to be calledH

    F11G :o you ant 7a"tial la to continueH FBulletin Today, Janua"y 11, 13G

    To bein ith, .uestions nos$ 1, 2, , 4, , 6, , 10 and 11 a"e not p"ope" in a plebiscite fo" the "atip"oposed !onstitution o" of a p"oposed a7end7ent the"eto$ %econdly, neithe" is the lanuae of .uesti;:o you app"o#e the ne !onstitutionH; &ne app"o#es ;of; the act of anothe" hich does notneed such the effecti#ity of said act, hich the fi"st pe"son, hoe#e", finds to be ood, ise satisfacto"y$ The app7a=o"ity of the #otes cast in plebiscite is, hoe#e",essential fo" an a7end7ent to the !onstitution to be #the"eof$ Thi"dly, if the p"oceedins in the !iti?ensD sse7blies constituted a plebiscite .uestion No$

    been unnecessa"y and i7p"ope", "ea"dless of hethe" .uestion No$ 3 e"e anse"ed affi"7ati#ely o" nthe 7a=o"ity of the anse"s to .uestion No$ 3 e"e in the affi"7ati#e, the p"oposed !onstitution ould heffecti#e and no othe" plebiscite could be held the"eafte" in connection the"eith, e#en if the 7a=o"ity of to .uestion No$ e"e, also, in the affi"7ati#e$ )f the 7a=o"ity of the anse"s to .uestion No$ 3 e"e in tneithe" 7ay anothe" plebiscite be held, e#en if the 7a=o"ity of the anse"s to .uestion No$ e"e in the)n eithe" case, not 7o"e than one plebiscite could be held fo" the "atification o" "e=ection of the p"oposed !)n sho"t, the inse"tion of said to +2- .uestions apa"t f"o7 the othe" .uestions ad#e"ted to abo#e st"only that the p"oceedins the"ein did not pa"tae of the natu"e of a plebiscite o" election fo" the "a"e=ection of the p"oposed !onstitution$

    )ndeed, ) can not, in ood conscience, decla"e that the p"oposed !onstitution has been app"o#ed o" adopeople in the citi?ensD asse7blies all o#e" the Philippines, hen it is, to 7y 7ind, a 7atte" of =udicial nothe"e ha#e been no such citi?ensD asse7blies in man"pa"ts of Manila and subu"bs, not to say, also, in othe Philippines$ )n a lette" of /o#e"no" Ef"en B$ Pascual of Bataan, dated Janua"y 1, 13, to the !hiethe fo"7e" "epo"ted8

    $$$ This "epo"t includes a "esu7ee +sic- of the acti#ities e unde"too in effectin therefthe ele#en .uestions you anted ou" people consultedon and the %u77a"y of Resultseach 7unicipality and fo" the hole p"o#ince$

    999 999 999

    $$$ &u" initial plans and p"epa"ations, hoe#e", dealt only on the o"iinal fi#e .uestions$ !ohen e received an instruction on Januar" 47 to c)angethe .uestions, e urgentl" susc)eduled +itizens Assem*l" meetings on t)at da" and called all Mayo"s, !hiefs of &fficeo#e"n7ent officials to anothe" confe"ence to discuss ith the7 the ne set of ui7ate"ials to be used$

    n Januar" 44, ... anot)er instruction from t)e top as receivedto include the o"iinal fi#a7on those to be discussed and ased in the !iti?ensD sse7bly 7eetins$ 5itho"de", e again )ad to ma#e modifications in our instructionsto all those 7anain and the holdin of the !iti?ensD sse7bly 7eetins th"ouhout the p"o#ince$ $$$ sidcoo"dinato"s e had f"o7 the &ffice of the /o#e"no", the splendid coope"ation and suppoby al7ost all government officials and emplo"ees in the p"o#ince, pa"ticula"ly of the :eEducation, P! and P!: pe"sonnel, p"o#ided us ith enouh hands to t"ouble shoot an

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    34/264

    sudden chanes in the inst"uctions anyti7e and anyhe"e needed$ $$$

    $$$ s to ou" people, in ene"al, thei" enthusiastic pa"ticipation shoed thei" p"efe"ence anto accept this ne 7ethod of o#e"n7ent to people consultation in s)aping up o#e"n7en

    Thus, as late as Janua"y 10, 13, the Bataan officials had tosuspend;all scheduled !iti?ens7eetins $$$; and call all a#ailable officials ;$$$ todiscuss ith the7 t)e ne set of guidelines and 7ate"ials

    $$$ $; Then, ;on Janua"y 11 $$$ anothe" inst"uction f"o7 the top as "ecei#ed to include the o"iinal fi#a7on those be discussed and ased in the !iti?ensD sse7bly 7eetins$ 5ith this latest o"de", e a7ae 7odifications in ou" inst"uctions to all those 7anain and supe"#isin holdin of the !iti?ens7eetins th"ouhout p"o#ince$ $$$ s to ou" people, in ene"al, thei" enthusiastic pa"ticipation sp"efe"ence and "eadiness to accept the ne 7ethod of o#e"n7ent to people consultation in s)aping uppolicies$;

    This co77unication 7anifestly shos8 1- that, as late a Janua"y 11, 13, the Bataan officials had still not put into ope"ation 7eans and ays to ca""y out the chanin inst"uctions f"o7 the top on ho to ociti?ensD asse7blies, hat to do the"ein and e#en hat .uestions o" topics to p"opound o" touch in said 2- that the asse7blies ould in#ol#e no 7o"e thanconsultations o" dialoues beteen people and o#not decisions be 7ade *" t)e people@ and - that said consultations e"e ai7ed only at ;shapin upg

    policies; and, hence could not, and did not, pa"tae of the natu"e of a plebiscite fo" the "atification o" "p"oposed a7end7ent of a ne o" "e#ised !onstitution fo" the latte" does not entail the fo"7ulation of apGovernment, but the 7ain of decision *" t)e peopleon the ne ay of life, as a nation, they ish tothe p"oposed !onstitution shall ha#e been "atified$

    )f this as the situation in Bataan one of the p"o#inces nea"est to Manila as late as Janua"y 11, 1easily i7aine the p"edica7ent of the local officials and people in the "e7ote ba""ios in no"the"n and soutin the Bicol "eion, in the Aisayan )slands and Mindanao$ )n fact, se#e"al 7e7be"s of the !ou"t, includthei" i77ediate fa7ilies and thei" household, althouh duly "eiste"ed #ote"s in the a"ea of /"eate" Maneven notifiedthat citi?ensD asse7blies ould be held in the places he"e thei" "especti#e "esidences e"the P"ohibition and 7end7ent case, 77attention as called to the ;dut"cast upon the cou"t of tacognizance of anythin affectin the e9istence and #alidity of any la o" po"tion!onstitution $$$ $; )n line ith its on p"onounce7ent in anothe" case, the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    35/264

    to the E9ecuti#e$ This, notithstandin, the political o"an of a o#e"n7ent that pu"po"ts to be "eessentially the !on"ess o" 'eislati#e :epa"t7ent$ 5hate#e" 7ay be the functions allocated to th:epa"t7ent specially unde" a "itten, "iid !onstitution ith a "epublican syste7 of /o#e"n7ent lie"ole of that :epa"t7ent is inhe"ently, basically and funda7entally e9ecuti#e in natu"e to ;tae ca"e thatfaithfully e9ecuted,; in the lanuae of ou" 1 !onstitution$79

    !onse.uently, ) a7 not p"epa"ed to concede that the acts the office"s and offices of the E9ecuti#e :epa"t

    ith P"ocla7ation No$ 1102, connote a "econition the"eof o an ac.uiescence the"eto$ 5hethe" they "ecp"oposed !onstitution o" ac.uiesce the"eto o" notis so7ethin that cannot leally, 7uch less necessano"7ally, be deduced f"o7 thei" acts in acco"dance the"eith, because the a"e*oundto obey and act inith the o"de"s of the P"esident, unde" hose ;cont"ol; they a"e,pursuant to t)e 4;25 +onstitution$absolutely no ot)er c)oice, specially in #ie of P"ocla7ation No$ 101 placin the Philippines unde" Besides, by #i"tue of the #e"y dec"ees, o"de"s and inst"uctions issued by the P"esident the"eafte", he haall poe"s of /o#e"n7ent althouh so7e .uestion his autho"ity to do so and, conse.uently, theanythin he has done since the issuance of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102, on Janua"y 13, 13 decla"!onstitution p"oposed by the 131 !onstitutional !on#ention has been "atified by the o#e"hel7in 7apeople that he could not do unde" the autho"ity he clai7ed to ha#e unde" Ma"tial 'a, since %epte7be9cept the poe" of supe"#ision o#e" infe"io" cou"ts and its pe"sonnel, hich said p"oposed !onstitution unde" the %up"e7e !ou"t, and hich the P"esident has not ostensibly e9e"cised, e9cept as to so7e 77atte"s, hich the :epa"t7ent of Justice has continued to handle, this !ou"t ha#in p"efe""ed to 7ainta

    9uo in connection the"eith pendin final dete"7ination of these cases, in hich the effecti#ity of the afo"!onstitution is disputed$

    Then, aain, a i#en depa"t7ent of the /o#e"n7ent cannot ene"ally be said to ha#e ;"econi?ed; itReconition no"7ally connotes the acnoled7ent by a pa"ty of the acts ofanot)er$ cco"dinsubo"dinate office" o" office of the /o#e"n7ent co7plies ith the co77ands of a supe"io" office" o" ohose supe"#ision and cont"ol he o" it is, the fo"7e" 7e"ely o*e"sthe latte"$ %t"ictly speain, and f"o7constitutional #iepoint, the"e is no act of "econition in#ol#ed the"ein$ )ndeed, the loe" office" o" officacted othe"ise, ould =ust be uilty of insubo"dination$

    Thus, fo" instance, the case of Ta"lor v. +ommonealt)?@ cited by "espondents he"ein in suppo"t of the tpeopleDs ac.uiescence in#ol#ed a constitution o"dained in 102 and ;p"oclai7ed by a con#ention duly called

    #ote of the people of the state to "e#ise and a7end the !onstitution of 16$ The "esult of the o" of that !onbeen "econi?ed, accepted and acted upon as the onl"#alid !onstitution of the %tate; by

    1$ The ;/o#e"no" of the %tate in sea"in fidelity to it and p"oclai7in it, as di"ected the"eby;@

    2$ The ;'eislatu"e in its formal officialact adoptin a6oint resolution, July 1, 102, "econi?in the o"dained by the !on#ention $$$;@

    $ The ;indi#idual oaths of its 7e7be"s to suppo"t it, and*" its )aving *een engaged for nearl" a "ear, iunde" it and puttin its p"o#isions ope"ation $$$;@

    4$ The ;=udicia"y in tain the oath p"esc"ibed the"eby to suppo"t it and by enfo"cin its p"o#isions $$$;@ and

    $ The ;people in thei" p"i7a"y capacity by peacefully acceptin it and ac.uiescin in it, by "eiste"inunde" it to the e9tent of thousands th"ouhout the %tate, and by #otin, unde" its p"o#isions, at a ene"athei" "ep"esentati#es in the !on"ess of the (nited %tates$;

    Note that the Ne !onstitution of Ai"inia, d"afted by a con#ention hose 7e7be"s e"e elected di"people, as not sub7itted to the people fo" "atification o" "e=ection the"eof$ But, it as "econi?edcon#ention itself, but by ot)ersecto"s of the /o#e"n7ent, na7ely, the /o#e"no"@ the 'eislatu"e noindi#idual acts of its 7e7be"s, but by formal 6oint resolution of its to +2- cha7be"s@ by the =udicia"y@

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    36/264

    people, in the #a"ious ays specified abo#e$ 5hat is 7o"e, the"e asno martial la$ )n the p"esent casthe fo"eoin acts of ac.uiescence as p"esent$ 5o"se still, the"e is 7a"tial la, thestrict enforcement oannounced s)ortl" *efore the alleed citi?ensD asse7blies$ To top it all, in the Taylo" case, the effeccontested a7end7ent as not contested =udicially until aboutone B4C "earafte" the a7end7ent had bope"ation in all b"anches of the /o#e"n7ent, and co7plied ith by the people ho pa"ticipated in the elepu"suant to the p"o#isions of the ne !onstitution$ )n the cases unde" conside"ation, the leality of :ec"ee No$ 3 callin a plebiscite to be held on Janua"y 1, 13, as i7puned as ea"ly as :ece7be"

    fi#e +- ees *efore the scheduled plebiscite, he"eas the #alidity of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 decla"in 13, 13, that the p"oposed !onstitution had been "atified despite /ene"al &"de" No$ 20, issued on132, fo"7ally and officially suspendin the plebiscite until fu"the" notice as i7puned as ea"ly as 13, hen '*6142 as filed, o" t)ree B2C da"safte" the issuance of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102$

    )t is fu"the" alleed that a 7a=o"ity of the 7e7be"s of ou" Couse of Rep"esentati#es and %enate ha#e acthe ne o" "e#ised !onstitution, by filin "itten state7ents optin to se"#e in the d )nte"i7 sse7bly esthe T"ansito"y P"o#isions of said !onstitution$ )ndi#idual acts of "econition by 7e7be"s of ou" leislatu"of othe" colleiate bodies unde" the o#e"n7ent, a"e in#alid as acts of said leislatu"e o" bodies, unless iha#e pe"fo"7ed said acts in session dul" assem*led, o" unless the la p"o#ides othe"ise, and the"e is in the Philippines$ This is a ell*established p"inciple of d7inist"ati#e 'a and of the 'a of Public &ffiplausible "eason has been adduced to a""ant depa"tu"e the"ef"o7$ ?1

    )ndeed, if the 7e7be"s of !on"ess e"e ene"ally a"eeable to the p"oposed !onstitution, hy dinecessa"y to padloc its p"e7ises to p"e#ent its 7eetin in session on Janua"y 22, 13, and the"eafte" in the 1 !onstitutionH )t is t"ue that, theo"etically, the 7e7be"s of !on"ess, if bent on discha"in thunde" said !onstitution, could ha#e 7et in any othe" place, the buildin in hich they pe"fo"7 thei" di77ate"ial to the leality of thei" official acts$ The fo"ce of this a"u7ent is, hoe#e", offset o" dissipatethat, on o" about :ece7be" 23, 132, i77ediately afte" a confe"ence beteen the E9ecuti#e, on the on7e7be"s of !on"ess, on the othe", so7e of ho7 e9p"essed the ish to 7eet in session on Janua"y 2p"o#ided in the 1 !onstitution, a :aily E9p"ess colu7nist +P"i7iti#o Mi=a"es- att"ibuted to P"esident/uille"7o de Aea a state7ent to the effect that ;Dce"tain 7e7be"s of the %enate appea" to be 7issinissueD hen they "epo"tedly insisted on ta#ing up first t)e 9uestion of convening +ongress$; The :aily E9pdate, ?2lieise, headlined, on its f"ont pae, a ;%enato"ial $lotainst DMa"tial 'a /o#e"n7entD :isclosed;issue of :ece7be" 2, 132, the sa7e pape" i7puted to the E9ecuti#e an appeal ;to di#e"se "oups

    a conspirac" to unde"7ine; his poe"s; unde" 7a"tial la to desist from provo#inga constitutional c"isis $$result in t)e e!ercise *" me of aut)orit" < )ave not e!ercised$;

    No 7atte" ho ood the intention behind these state7ent 7ay ha#e been, the idea i7plied the"ein an ominousfo" any 7e7be" of !on"ess ho thouht of o"ani?in, holdin o" tain pa"t in a session onot to et the i7p"ession that he could ha"dly do so ithout in#itin o" "isin the application of Ma"tial(nde" these conditions, ) do not feel =ustified in holdin that the failu"e of the 7e7be"s of !on"ess toJanua"y 22, 13, as due to thei" "econition, ac.uiescence in o" confo"7ity ith the p"o#isafo"e7entioned !onstitution, o" its alleed "atification$

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    37/264

    e!perienced la"ers and social scientists find it difficult to "asp the full i7plications of so7e p"o#isions ithe"ein$

    s "ea"ds the applicability to these cases of the ;en"olled bill; "ule, it is ell to "e7e7be" that the sa7docu7ent ce"tified to the P"esident fo" his action unde" the !onstitution by the %enate P"esid%peae" of the Couse of Rep"esentati#es, and attested to by the %ec"eta"y of the %enate and the %ecCouse of Rep"esentati#es, conce"nin leislati#e 7easu"es app"o#ed by the to Couses of !on"ess$ Th

    of the %olicito" /ene"al is, "ouhly, this8 )f the en"olled bill is entitled to full faith and c"edence and, to thisconclusi#e upon the P"esident and the =udicial b"anch of the /o#e"n7ent, hy should P"ocla7ation Noless conside"ation than in en"olled billH

    Befo"e anse"in this .uestion, ) ould lie to as the folloin8 )f, instead of bein ce"tified by the afooffice"s of !on"ess, the so*called en"olled bill e"e ce"tified by, say, the P"esident of the ssociatiPlante"s ando" Mille"s of the Philippines, and the 7easu"e in .uestion e"e a p"oposed leislation concePlantations and Mills sponso"ed by said ssociation, hich e#en p"epa"ed the d"aft of said leislationlobbied actually fo" its app"o#al, fo" hich "eason the office"s of the ssociation, pa"ticula"ly, its afo"p"esident hose honesty and inte"ity a"e un.uestionable e"e p"esent at the delibe"ations in !onthe sa7e app"o#ed the p"oposed leislation, ould the en"olled bill "ule apply the"etoH %u"ely, the anha#e to be in the neati#e$ 5hyH %i7ply, because said ssociation P"esident has absolutely no officialpe"fo"7 in connection the"eith, and, hence, his ce"tification is leally, as ood as non*e9istent$

    %i7ila"ly, a ce"tification, if any, of the %ec"eta"y of the :epa"t7ent of 'ocal /o#e"n7ents and :e#elop7ent about the tabulated "esults of the #otin in the !iti?ens sse7blies alleedly)eld Philippines and the "eco"ds do not sho that any such ce"tification, to the P"esident of the PhilippinP"esident

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    38/264

    s a 7atte" of fact, so7e of those issues had been "aised in the plebiscite cases, hich e"e dis7issed acade7ic, oin to the issuance of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 subse.uently to the filin of said cases, alththe "endition of =ud7ent the"ein$ %till one of the 7e7be"s of the !ou"t +Justice aldi#a"- as of the opiafo"e7entioned issues should be settled in said cases, and he, acco"dinly, filed an opinion passin upothe"eof$ &n the othe" hand, th"ee +- 7e7be"s of the !ou"t Justices Ba""edo, ntonio and Esuesepa"ate opinions fa#o"able to the "espondents in the plebiscite cases, Justice Ba""edo holdin ;th!onstitution has p"o tanto passed into histo"y and has been leiti7ately supplanted by the !onstitution

    #i"tue of P"ocla7ation 1102$; ?65hen the petitions at ba" e"e filed, the sa7e th"ee +- 7e7be"s oconse.uently, #oted fo" the dis7issal of said petitions$ The 7a=o"ity of the 7e7be"s of the !ou"t did not sha"eithe" #ie, belie#in that the 7ain .uestion that a"ose befo"e the "endition of said =ud7ent had not beendiscussed and a"ued as the natu"e and i7po"tance the"eof de7anded$

    The pa"ties in the cases at ba" e"e acco"dinly i#en e#e"y possible oppo"tunity to do so and to elucidiscuss said .uestion$ Thus, apa"t f"o7 hea"in the pa"ties in o"al a"u7ent fo" fi#e +- consecuti#e daysand afte"noon, o" a total of e9actly 26 hou"s and 1 7inutes the "especti#e counsel filed e9tensi#e noo" a"u7ents, as ell as on such additional a"u7ents as they ished to sub7it, and "eply notes o" 7eaddition to "e=oinde"s the"eto, aside f"o7 a si?eable nu7be" of docu7ent in suppo"t of thei" "especti#e o" as "e.ui"ed by the !ou"t$ The a"u7ents, o"al and "itten, sub7itted ha#e been so e9tensi#e and e9hthe docu7ents filed in suppo"t the"eof so nu7e"ous and buly, that, fo" all intents and pu"poses, the situ dis"ea"din fo"7s the petitions had been i#en due cou"se and the cases had been sub7itted fo" d

    cco"dinly, the 7a=o"ity of the 7e7be"s of the !ou"t belie#e that they should e9p"ess thei" #iafo"e7entioned issues as if the sa7e e"e bein decided on the 7e"its, and they ha#e done so in theopinion attached he"eto$ Cence, the "esu7e of the #otes cast and the teno" of the "esolution, in thehe"eof, despite the fact that technically the !ou"t has not, as yet, fo"7ally i#en due cou"se to the petition

    nd, no, he"e a"e m"#ies on the "eliefs souht by the pa"ties$

    )n '*616, it is clea" that e should not issue the "it ofmandamusp"ayed fo" aainst /il J$ Puyat anP"esident and P"esident P"o Te7po"e "especti#ely of the %enate, it bein settled in ou" =u"isdiction, bastheo"y of sepa"ation of poe"s, that the =udicia"y ill not issue such "it to the head of a co*e.ual depathe afo"e7entioned office"s of the %enate$

    )n all othe" "espects and ith "ea"d to the othe" "espondent in said case, as ell as in cases '*6142, 626 and '*62, 7y #ote is that the petitions the"ein should be i#en due cou"se, the"e bein 7o"facie shoin that the p"oposed !onstitution has not been "atified in acco"dance ith "ticle KA !onstitution, eithe" st"ictly, substantially, o" has been ac.uiesced in by the people o" 7a=o"ity the"ep"oposed !onstitution is not in forceand effect@ and that the 1 !onstitution is still the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    39/264

    s ea"lie" stated, afte" the sub7ittal by the 7e7be"s of the !ou"t of thei" indi#idual opinions ando" concappended he"eto, the "ite" ill no 7ae, ith the concu""ence of his colleaues, a "esu7e o" su7#otes cast by each of the7$

    )t should be stated that by #i"tue of the #a"ious app"oaches and #ies e9p"essed du"in the delibe"aa"eed to synthesi?e the basic issues at ba" in b"oad ene"al te"7s in fi#e .uestions fo" pu"poses of tain)t as fu"the" a"eed of cou"se that each 7e7be" of the !ou"t ould e9pound in his indi#idual op

    concu""ence his on app"oach to the stated issues and deal ith the7 and state +o" not- his opinion theo" =ointly and ith such p"io"ity, .ualifications and 7odifications as he 7ay dee7 p"ope", as ell as discothe" "elated issues hich he 7ay conside" #ital and "ele#ant to the cases at ba"$

    The fi#e .uestions thus a"eed upon as "eflectin the basic issues he"ein in#ol#ed a"e the folloin8

    1$ )s the issue of the #alidity of P"ocla7ation No$ 1102 a =usticiable, o" political and the"efo"e non.uestionH

    2$ Cas the !onstitution p"oposed by the 131 !onstitutional !on#ention been "atified #alidly +ith subsst"ict, co7pliance- confo"7ably to the applicable constitutional and statuto"y p"o#isionsH

    $ Cas the afo"e7entioned p"oposed !onstitution ac.uiesced in +ith o" ithout #alid "atification- by the p

    4$ "e petitione"s entitled to "eliefH and

    $ )s the afo"e7entioned p"oposed !onstitution in fo"ceH

    The "esults of the #otin, p"e7ised on the indi#idual #ies e9p"essed by the 7e7be"s of the !ou"t in topinions ando" concu""ences, a"e as follos8

    1$ &n the fi"st issue in#ol#in the political*.uestion doct"ine Justices Maalintal, aldi#a", !ast"oTeehanee and 7yself, o" si9 +6- 7e7be"s of the !ou"t, hold that the issue of the #alidity of P"ocla7atp"esents a =usticiable and non*political .uestion$ Justices Maalintal and !ast"o did not #ote s.ua

    .uestion, but, only infe"entially, in thei" discussion of the second .uestion$ Justice Ba""edo .ualified his that ;inas7uch as it is clai7ed the"e has been app"o#al by the people, the !ou"t 7ay in.ui"e into the hethe" o" not the"e has actually been such an app"o#al, and, in the affi"7ati#e, the !ou"t should eep hof "espect to the peopleDs ill, but, in neati#e, the !ou"t 7ay dete"7ine f"o7 both factual and leal ano" not "ticle KA of the 1 !onstitution been co7plied ith$; Justices Maasia", ntonio, Esue""a,7e7be"s of the !ou"t hold that the issue is political and ;beyond the a7bit of =udicial in.ui"y$;

    2$ &n the second .uestion of #alidity of the "atification, Justices Maalintal, aldi#a", !ast"o,

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    40/264

    co7plied ith, and, in effect, the 13 !onstitution has been constitutionally "atified$;

    Justices Maasia", ntonio and Esue""a, o" th"ee +- 7e7be"s of the !ou"t hold that unde" thei" #iebeen in effect substantial co7pliance ith the constitutional "e.ui"e7ents fo" #alid "atification$

    $ &n the thi"d .uestion of ac.uiescence by the

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    41/264

    )t is so o"de"ed$

    Ma#alintal, +astro, %arredo, Ma#asiar, Antonio and &sguerra, JJ., concur.

    NNEK

    PERT)NENT P&RT)&N%

    &< TCE

    M)NNE%%&T %(PREME !&(RT

    :E!)%)&N

    &N TCE !%E

  • 7/26/2019 Javellana v Sect

    42/264

    !onstitution$;

    ;)n conside"in the cases it is necessa"y to note hethe" in the pa"ticula" case the cou"t as caldete"7ine beteen rival governments, o" hethe" the 'eislatu"e, o" so7e boa"d o" official, hadlegall"t)e dut" imposed *" t)e +onstitution or statutes$ )n "e State v. Mc%ride, 4 Mo$ 0, 2 7$ :ec$ 66, it the /ene"al sse7bly, under t)e poer granted *" t)e +onstitution, could chane the !onstitutionmanner prescri*ed *" it, and that it as t)e dut" of t)e court to dete"7ine hethe" all p"e"e.uisite

    co7plied ith$ )n +ollier v. =rierson, 24 la$ 100, it as held that a !onstitution can be chanes only by tconventiono" in a 7ode desc"ibed *" t)e +onstitutionitself, and that if the latte" 7ode is adoptedever" t)e +onstitution must *e o*served$ D)t has been said,; says the cou"t, ;that ce"tain acts a"e to be d"e.uisitions a"e to be obse"#ed, befo"e a chane can be effected@ but to hat pu"pose a"e these acts these "e.uisitions en=oined, if the 'eislatu"e o" any othe" depa"t7ent of the o#e"n7ent candispensedo so ould be to #iolate the inst"u7ent hich they a"e so"n to suppo"t@ andever" principle of pu*sound constitutional polic" re9uires t)e court to pronounce against ever" amendment )ic) is s)on n*een made in accordance it) t)e rules prescri*ed *" t)e fundamental la$D

    ;)n State v. Sift, 6 )nd$ 0, it as said that8 DThe people of a state 7ay fo"7 anoriginal!onstitution, an old one and fo"7 a ne one, at any ti7e, ithout any political "est"iction,e!cept the !onstitution o%tates, but if t)e" underta#e to add an amendment, by the autho"ity of leislation to a !onstitutione9istence, they can do it only by the 7ethod pointed out by the !onstitution to hich the a7end7ent is

    poe" to a7end a !onstitution by leislati#e action does notconfe" the poe" to *rea#it, any 7o"e thathe poe" to leislate on any othe" sub=ect cont"a"y to its p"ohibitions$D %o, inState v. Timme, 4 5is$ 3, it as held that no a7end7ents can be 7ade to the !onstitution of the stateit)out a complian

    provisions t)ereof, both in the passae of such a7end7ent by the 'eislatu"e and t)e manner of su*mittpeople$ The cou"ts ha#e not all a"eed as to the st"ictness of co7pliance hich should be "e.ui"ed$

    ;)n the P"ohibition and 7end7ent !ase, 24 an$ 300, the cou"tdetermined 6udiciall" hethe" an a7end!onstitution had been leally adopted$ fte" app"o#in the state7ent .uoted f"o7+ollier v. =rierson, supente"tain no dou*t that, to chane the !onstitution in an othe" 7ode than by a con#ention,ever" re9uisdemanded *" t)e instrument itself must *e o*served, and t)e omission of an" one is fatal to t)e amencou"t held that, Das substance of "iht is "ande" and 7o"e potent than 7ethods of fo"7,D the"e had beenco7pliance ith the constitutional "e.ui"e7ent that a p"oposed a7end7ent to the !onstitution 7ust b

    lengt)on the leislati#e =ou"nal$ )t appea"s that the =oint "esolution 7ain sub7ission si7ply p"o#p"oposition should be sub7itted to the electo"s at the ene"al election of 10$ )t did not decla"e that thof the ene"al election la should cont"ol, or t)at an" particular officers or *oard oul