Case Digest (G.R. No. 171396) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In 522 Phil. 705 (2006), seven consolidated petitions were filed directly with the Supreme Court by diverse groups—including university professors (Prof. Randolf S. David et al., G.R. No. 171396), newspaper publishers (Ninez Cacho-Olivares and Tribune Publishing Co., Inc., G.R. No. 171409), members of the House of Representatives (Francis Joseph G. Escudero et al., G.R. No. 171485), labor organizations (Kilusang Mayo Uno et al., G.R. No. 171483), legal aid groups (Alternative Law Groups, Inc., G.R. No. 171400), Integrated Bar of the Philippines officers (Jose Anselmo I. Cadiz et al., G.R. No. 171489), and a former senator (Loren B. Legarda, G.R. No. 171424)—against Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in her capacity as President and Commander-in-Chief; Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita; Secretary of National Defense Avelino Cruz II; AFP Chief of Staff Generoso Senga; and PNP Chief Arturo Lomibao. On February 24, 2006, President Arroyo issued Presidential Proclamation No. 1017, declaring a Case Digest (G.R. No. 171396) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background and Bases for PP 1017
- Intelligence reports of a broad conspiracy involving Magdalo mutineers, NDF-CPP-NPA insurgents, opposition politicians and media to oust President Arroyo, including:
- Escape and threat of Oakwood mutineers (Magdalo Group) announcing “D-Day” on Feb 24.
- Discovery of “Oplan Hackle I” bombing plot against PMA alumni homecoming and cabinet targets.
- Intercepts of planned defections in PNP Special Action Force and meetings at Cojuangco residence linking business and military.
- Series of clashes and bombings (Bataan, Bulacan and Benguet) considered “lawless violence” and “clear and present danger” to State integrity.
- Issuance of Proclamation No. 1017 and General Order No. 5
- February 24, 2006: President Arroyo, invoking Section 18, Article VII (calling-out power) and Section 17, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, declared a state of national emergency and commanded AFP to “maintain law and order, prevent or suppress all forms of lawless violence, insurrection or rebellion.”
- Same day: Issued GO No. 5 directing AFP and PNP to “prevent and suppress acts of terrorism and lawless violence.”
- Immediate actions cited as pursuant to PP 1017/GO 5:
- Cancellation of EDSA I anniversary activities; revocation of rally permits.
- Warrantless arrests/dispersals (e.g., professors David, Llamas; KMU members).
- Raids on Daily Tribune and Malaya/Abante offices; media warnings and threats of takeover.
- Lifting of Emergency and Consolidation of Petitions
- March 3, 2006: President issued Proclamation No. 1021 lifting the national emergency.
- Seven consolidated petitions for certiorari and prohibition filed, challenging constitutionality of PP 1017 and GO 5 on grounds including abuse of discretion, overbreadth, vagueness, unlawful arrests, and press censorship.
Issues:
- Procedural
- Mootness: Has lifting of PP 1017 via PP 1021 rendered petitions moot and academic?
- Standing: Do petitioners have legal standing to challenge PP 1017/GO 5?
- Substantive
- May the Supreme Court review the factual basis of PP 1017?
- Constitutional validity of PP 1017 and GO 5:
- Facial challenge: Overbreadth/vagueness and presumption against restrictions on fundamental rights.
- Constitutional basis:
- Calling-out power (Section 18, Article VII).
- As-applied challenge: Implementation measures (warrantless arrests, press raids, dispersal of assemblies) under GO 5.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)