David vs Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No.

171396
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J.

03 May 2006

Ponente:

On the 20th anniversary of EDSA People Power 1, GMA issued PP1107 declaring a State of National
Emergency and ordering the AFP and the PNP to immediately suppress and prevent lawless violence in
the NPA. A week later, GMA lifted PP1017 by issuing PP1021. However, during the week that PP1107
was effective various rally permits were revoked resulting to violent disperals, warrantless arrests of
various individuals, raids and confiscations in newspaper offices and arrest of Congressman Beltran under
a 1985 arrest warrant. Petitioners now allege that PP1107 is void as it violated numerous rights provided
by the Constitution. Respondents however state that the issue is already moot and academic as PP107 is
already revoked by PP11021. Is the respondents contention correct?
No. The court held that President Arroyos issuance of PP 1021 did not render the present
petitions moot and academic. A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a justiciable
controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or
value. Generally, courts decline jurisdiction over such case or dismiss it on ground of mootness. Further,
the moot and academic principle is not a magical formula that can automatically dissuade the courts in
resolving a case. Courts will decide cases, otherwise moot and academic, if: first, there is a grave
violation of the Constitution; second, the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public
interest is involved; third, when constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles
to guide the bench, the bar, and the public; and fourth, the case is capable of repetition yet evading review.
During the eight days that PP 1017 was operative, the police officers committed illegal acts implementing
it. There is no question that the issues being raised affect the publics interest involving as they do the
peoples basic rights to freedom of expression, of assembly and of the press. An otherwise moot case
may still be decided provided that the party raising it continues to be prejudiced or damaged as a direct
result of its issuance (Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary) which is applicable in the present case.