Case Digest (G.R. No. L-14956)
Facts:
In Francisco I. Chavez v. Hon. Alberto G. Romulo, et al. (G.R. No. 157036, June 9, 2004), petitioner Francisco I. Chavez, a duly licensed firearm owner with an existing Permit to Carry Firearms Outside of Residence (PTCFOR), sought to enjoin the January 31, 2003 Guidelines in the Implementation of the Ban on the Carrying of Firearms Outside of Residence issued by PNP Chief Hermogenes E. Ebdane, Jr. These Guidelines, prompted by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s directive during a Philippine National Police (PNP) assembly, revoked all existing PTCFORs and limited new permits to meritorious cases demonstrating actual threats or official missions. Petitioner’s administrative appeal to the Department of the Interior and Local Government was denied, leading him to file a petition for prohibition and injunction directly before the Supreme Court. He challenged the President’s authority to modify firearm laws by speech, the PNP Chief’s power to issue implementing guidelines, and the GCase Digest (G.R. No. L-14956)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioner: Francisco I. Chavez, licensed owner of a firearm with a valid Permit to Carry Firearms Outside of Residence (PTCFOR).
- Respondents: Hermogenes E. Ebdane, Jr., Chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP); Alberto G. Romulo, Executive Secretary; Gerry L. Barias, Chief of the PNP Firearms and Explosives Division; and others.
- Presidential Directive and PNP Guidelines
- January 2003 – President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo delivers a speech directing a nationwide gun ban in public places and the indefinite suspension of PTCFOR issuance for civilians, reserving public carrying to uniformed military and law-enforcement personnel.
- January 31, 2003 – PNP Chief Ebdane issues the “Guidelines in the Implementation of the Ban on the Carrying of Firearms Outside of Residence,” which:
- Revokes all existing PTCFOR.
- Prescribes the conditions, requirements and procedures for issuance of new PTCFOR to persons under actual threat or with legitimate official missions.
- Enumerates categories of persons eligible for exemption (e.g., diplomats, guards on duty, gun-club members) and imposes restrictions on carrying in public places.
- Procedural History
- Petitioner’s request for reconsideration before the Department of Interior and Local Government is denied.
- Petitioner files a petition for prohibition and injunction before the Supreme Court, alleging: lack of authority by the President and PNP Chief; violation of constitutional rights (due process, equal protection, property, and right to bear arms); invalid exercise of police power; and ex post facto application.
- The Solicitor General moves to dismiss under the doctrine of hierarchy of courts; the Supreme Court elects to proceed to the merits due to the national importance of the issues.
Issues:
- Is the PNP Chief authorized to issue the assailed Guidelines under existing law?
- Is the right to bear arms in the Philippines a constitutionally protected right or merely a statutory privilege?
- Does the revocation of petitioner’s PTCFOR violate his property rights and due process?
- Is the issuance of the Guidelines a valid exercise of the State’s police power?
- Do the Guidelines constitute an ex post facto law?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)