Title
Mitra, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 56503
Decision Date
Apr 4, 1981
Petitioners challenged the validity of the 1973 Constitution, seeking a plebiscite and reinstatement of the 1935 Constitution. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, upholding the 1973 Constitution's validity based on Javellana precedent and public acquiescence.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 56503)

Facts:

Ramon Mitra, Jr., Napoleon Rama, Emmanuel T. Santos, Ernie Rondon, Antonio Martinez, Jejomar Binay, Rodrigo H. Melchor, Joaquin (Titong) Roces, Rafael Yap, and Mel Lopez v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 56503, April 04, 1981, Supreme Court En Banc, Fernando, C.J., writing for the Court.

Petitioners filed a petition for mandamus and prohibition asking the Court to declare that the 1973 Constitution was not in force and to require the holding of a plebiscite so that the people could ratify the Constitution anew; they further argued that, if the Constitution were rejected, the 1935 Constitution should be reinstated after the lifting of martial law. The petition proceeded on the fundamental premise that the 1973 Constitution was not operative — an argument substantially similar to petitions earlier filed by former delegates Samuel C. Occena and Ramon A. Gonzales (G.R. Nos. 56350 and 56404), which the Court had just dismissed.

No lower-court disposition is reported: the case was brought directly to the Supreme Court by original petition for mandamus and prohibition. The Court considered the petition alongside prior decisions, notably Javellana v. Executive Secretary (L-36142, 50 SCRA 30) and subsequent martial-law era jurisprudence. The Court heard the matter En Banc and issued the present decisi...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Is the petition for mandamus and prohibition proper and justiciable in light of the Court's prior rulings on the validity and operative force of the 1973 Constitution?
  • Are petitioners entitled to mandamus or prohibition directing respondent Commission on Elections to hold a plebiscite to ratify the 1973 Constitution and, if rejected, to restore the 1935 Constitution?
  • Did the proclamation and exercise of martial law suspend the operation of constitutionalism and the Court’s power of judicial review, and may the President, as Commander-in-Chief, invoke martial-law powers to addre...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.