Tan Vs Macapagal - Garcia Vs BOI
Tan Vs Macapagal - Garcia Vs BOI
Tan Vs Macapagal - Garcia Vs BOI
Facts:
A five page petition was filed by Eugene A. Tan, Silvestre J. Acejas and
Rogelio V. Fernandez, for declaratory relief as tax payers, bur purportedly
suing in behalf of themselves and the Filipino people, in assailing the validity
of the Laurel-Leido Resolution, dealing with the range of the authority of the
1971 Constitutional Convention, would have the Supreme Court declare that
it is without power, under Section 1, Article XV of the Constitution and
Republic Act 6132, to consider, discuss and adopt proposals which seek to
revise the present Constitution [the Convention being] merely empowered to
propose improvements to the present Constitution without altering the
general plan laid down therein. The petition was dismissed two days after
the filing and on the last day of the month, a thirty-two page for
reconsideration was printed.
Issue:
Whether or not the petitioners had the requisite standing to seek a
declaration of the alleged nullity of a resolution of the Constitutional
Convention?
Whether or not the Supreme Court has the power to interfere with the
Constitutional Convention?
Held:
No, the petitioners, even though they are taxpayers, have no standing
for the petition. The person who impugns the validity of a statute must have
a personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained, or
will sustain, direct injury as a result of its enforcement. The validity of a
statute may be contested only by one who will sustain a direct injury, in
consequence of its enforcement.
Where a constitutional question is raised, a Senator has usually been
considered as possessed of the requisite personality to bring a suit (Mabanag
vs. Lopez Vito, Tolentino vs. COMELEC).
No, the Supreme Court has no power to interfere with the
Constitutional Convention. The doctrine of separation of powers call for the
executive, legislative and judicial departments being left alone to discharge
GROUP 6
1JD-C
GROUP 6
1JD-C
Ruling:
The Court find that the BOI committed a grave abuse of discretion in
approving the transfer of the petrochemical plant from bataan to batangas
and authorizing the change of feedstock from naptha only for the main
reason that the investors has the final choice of the site but. The Court has a
constitutional duty to step into this controversy and determine the
paramount issue as stated in article 8 sec 1 of the Philippine Constitution
The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower
courts as may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the
courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are
legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not
there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of
GROUP 6
1JD-C
GROUP 6
1JD-C
Submitted by:
Belen, John Ric
Dinglasan, Lizzette
Martinez, Ma. Claire Joy
Riego, Jofrank David
Tito, Janette
GROUP 6
1JD-C