Case Digest (G.R. No. 191002) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Arturo M. de Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (G.R. No. 191002), Jaime N. Soriano v. Judicial and Bar Council (G.R. No. 191032), Philippine Constitution Association v. Judicial and Bar Council (G.R. No. 191057), In re Applicability of Section 15, Article VII of the Constitution to Appointments to the Judiciary (A.M. No. 10-2-5-SC), John G. Peralta v. Judicial and Bar Council (G.R. No. 191149), Atty. Amador Z. Tolentino, Jr. and Atty. Roland B. Inting v. Judicial and Bar Council (G.R. No. 191342), and Philippine Bar Association, Inc. v. Judicial and Bar Council and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (G.R. No. 191420), the Supreme Court, en banc, resolved a series of petitions filed in early 2010 concerning the forthcoming compulsory retirement of Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno on May 17, 2010—just one week after the presidential election set for May 10, 2010. Under Section 15, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution, the President is barred Case Digest (G.R. No. 191002) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Context and Parties
- Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno’s mandatory retirement on May 17, 2010, shortly after the May 10, 2010 presidential election, spurred legal questions over the appointment of his successor.
- Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo named respondents; multiple petitioners (Arturo De Castro, Jaime Soriano, PHILCONSA, Estelito Mendoza, John Peralta, Amador Z. Tolentino Jr., Philippine Bar Association) filed separate but related actions.
- JBC Proceedings
- December 22, 2009 – Ex officio JBC member requests commencement of nominations for Chief Justice.
- January 18, 2010 – JBC en banc resolution to open application, nominations, public comment, public interviews, and shortlist preparation, but “welcome[d] views” on submission timing due to potential conflict between Sections 4(1)/9 of Article VIII and Section 15 of Article VII.
- January 20, 2010 – Announcement in major newspapers opening Chief Justice position for applications by February 4, 2010.
- Late January–February 2010 – JBC automatically considered five senior Associate Justices; some declined, others applied or were nominated, withdrew, or were excluded based on JBC rules.
- February 8, 2010 – JBC announced candidate list for public comments/opposition to be filed by February 22, 2010; yet to hold interviews or finalize shortlist.
- Consolidated Petitions and Interventions
- G.R. No. 191002 (De Castro) – Certiorari/mandamus to compel JBC to submit shortlist to incumbent President.
- G.R. No. 191032 (Soriano) – Prohibition to stop JBC from conducting search and nominations, claiming Supreme Court en banc appoints Chief Justice.
- G.R. No. 191057 (PHILCONSA) – Mandamus against JBC to submit shortlist, arguing election ban excludes judicial appointments.
- A.M. No. 10-2-5-SC (Mendoza) – Guidance whether Section 15, Article VII applies to judicial appointments.
- G.R. No. 191149 (Peralta) – Mandamus to immediate transmission of shortlist to President.
- G.R. No. 191342 (Tolentino) – Prohibition and injunction against JBC submitting shortlist during election ban; raised JBC composition challenge.
- G.R. No. 191420 – Philippine Bar Ass’n petitioned on election ban applicability.
- Numerous oppositions and interventions from lawyers’ groups, associations, students’ organizations arguing for/against the ban’s scope and JBC’s role.
Issues:
- Constitutional Scope of Election-Period Ban
- Does Section 15, Article VII’s ban on presidential appointments (“two months immediately before … up to the end of his term”) extend to judicial appointments?
- If Section 15 applies to the Judiciary, can judicial appointments be saved by “imperative national interest” or “public service” exception?
- Effect of Section 4(1) and Section 9, Article VIII
- Does the 90-day requirement to fill a Supreme Court vacancy conflict irreconcilably with the election ban?
- Is the 90-day period suspended during the election-ban months?
- JBC’s Authority and Duties
- May the JBC defer or refuse to submit its shortlist to the incumbent President?
- Does the JBC have power to decide when and to whom to submit the list?
- Does the judiciary act by mandamus or prohibition compelling or enjoining JBC’s functions?
- Presidential Appointment Power
- Can the incumbent President validly appoint Chief Justice Puno’s successor?
- Is the appointment power over Chief Justice vested in the Supreme Court en banc?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)