1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

TodayisMonday,January18,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.88211October27,1989
FERDINANDE.MARCOS,IMELDAR.MARCOS,FERDINANDR.MARCOS.JR.,IRENEM.ARANETA,IMEEM.
MANOTOC,TOMASMANOTOC,GREGORIOARANETA,PACIFICOE.MARCOS,NICANORYIGUEZand
PHILIPPINECONSTITUTIONASSOCIATION(PHILCONSA),representedbyitsPresident,CONRADOF.
ESTRELLA,petitioners,
vs.
HONORABLERAULMANGLAPUS,CATALINOMACARAIG,SEDFREYORDOEZ,MIRIAMDEFENSOR
SANTIAGO,FIDELRAMOS,RENATODEVILLA,intheircapacityasSecretaryofForeignAffairs,Executive
Secretary,SecretaryofJustice,ImmigrationCommissioner,SecretaryofNationalDefenseandChiefof
Staff,respectively,respondents.
RESOLUTION

ENBANC:
InitsdecisiondatedSeptember15,1989,theCourt,byavoteofeight(8)toseven(7),dismissedthepetition,
afterfindingthatthePresidentdidnotactarbitrarilyorwithgraveabuseofdiscretionindeterminingthatthe
returnofformerPresidentMarcosandhisfamilyatthepresenttimeandunderpresentcircumstancesposea
threattonationalinterestandwelfareandinprohibitingtheirreturntothePhilippines.OnSeptember28,1989,
formerPresidentMarcosdiedinHonolulu,Hawaii.Inastatement,PresidentAquinosaid:
IntheinterestofthesafetyofthosewhowilltakethedeathofMr.Marcosinwidelyandpassionately
conflictingways,andforthetranquilityofthestateandorderofsociety,theremainsofFerdinandE.
Marcoswillnotbeallowedtobebroughttoourcountryuntilsuchtimeasthegovernment,beit
underthisadministrationorthesucceedingone,shallotherwisedecide.[MotionforReconsideration,
p.1Rollo,p,443.]
OnOctober2,1989,aMotionforReconsiderationwasfiledbypetitioners,raisingthefollowingmajorarguments:
1.tobarformerPresidentMarcosandhisfamilyfromreturningtothePhilippinesistodenythemnotonlythe
inherentrightofcitizenstoreturntotheircountryofbirthbutalsotheprotectionoftheConstitutionandallofthe
rightsguaranteedtoFilipinosundertheConstitution
2.thePresidenthasnopowertobaraFilipinofromhisowncountryifshehas,shehadexerciseditarbitrarily
and
3.thereisnobasisforbarringthereturnofthefamilyofformerPresidentMarcos.Thus,petitionersprayedthat
theCourtreconsideritsdecision,orderrespondentstoissuethenecessarytraveldocumentstoenableMrs.
ImeldaR.Marcos,FerdinandR.Marcos,Jr.,IreneM.Araneta,ImeeM.Manotoc,TommyManotocandGregorio
AranetatoreturntothePhilippines,andenjoinrespondentsfromimplementingPresidentAquino'sdecisiontobar
thereturnoftheremainsofMr.Marcos,andtheotherpetitioners,tothePhilippines.
Commentingonthemotionforreconsideration,theSolicitorGeneralarguedthatthemotionforreconsiderationis
mootandacademicastothedeceasedMr.Marcos.Moreover,heassertsthat"the'formal'rightsbeinginvoked
bytheMarcosesunderthelabel'righttoreturn',includingthelabel'returnofMarcos'remains,isinrealityor
substancea'right'todestabilizethecountry,a'right'tohidetheMarcoses'incessantshadowyorchestrated
effortsatdestabilization."[Comment,p.29.]Thus,hepraysthattheMotionforReconsiderationbedeniedforlack
ofmerit.
Wedenythemotionforreconsideration.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

1/7

1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

1.Itmustbeemphasizedthatasinallmotionsforreconsideration,theburdenisuponthemovants,petitioner
herein,toshowthattherearecompellingreasonstoreconsiderthedecisionoftheCourt.
2.Afterathoroughconsiderationofthemattersraisedinthemotionforreconsideration,theCourtisoftheview
thatnocompellingreasonshavebeenestablishedbypetitionerstowarrantareconsiderationoftheCourt's
decision.
ThedeathofMr.Marcos,althoughitmaybeviewedasasuperveningevent,hasnotchangedthefactual
scenariounderwhichtheCourt'sdecisionwasrendered.Thethreatstothegovernment,towhichthereturnof
theMarcoseshasbeenviewedtoprovideacatalyticeffect,havenotbeenshowntohaveceased.Onthe
contrary,insteadoferasingfearsastothedestabilizationthatwillbecausedbythereturnoftheMarcoses,Mrs.
MarcosreinforcedthebasisforthedecisiontobartheirreturnwhenshecalledPresidentAquino"illegal,"claiming
thatitisMr.Marcos,notMrs.Aquino,whoisthe"legal"PresidentofthePhilippines,anddeclaredthatthematter
"shouldbebroughttoallthecourtsoftheworld."[Comment,p.1PhilippineStar,October4,1989.]
3.Contrarytopetitioners'view,itcannotbedeniedthatthePresident,uponwhomexecutivepowerisvested,has
unstatedresidualpowerswhichareimpliedfromthegrantofexecutivepowerandwhicharenecessaryforherto
complywithherdutiesundertheConstitution.ThepowersofthePresidentarenotlimitedtowhatareexpressly
enumeratedinthearticleontheExecutiveDepartmentandinscatteredprovisionsoftheConstitution.Thisisso,
notwithstandingtheavowedintentofthemembersoftheConstitutionalCommissionof1986tolimitthepowersof
thePresidentasareactiontotheabusesundertheregimeofMr.Marcos,fortheresultwasalimitationof
specificpowerofthePresident,particularlythoserelatingtothecommanderinchiefclause,butnotadiminution
ofthegeneralgrantofexecutivepower.
ThatthePresidenthaspowersotherthanthoseexpresslystatedintheConstitutionisnothingnew.Thisis
recognizedundertheU.S.Constitutionfromwhichwehavepatternedthedistributionofgovernmentalpowers
amongthree(3)separatebranches.
ArticleII,[section]1,providesthat"TheExecutivePowershallbevestedinaPresidentoftheUnited
StatesofAmerica."InAlexanderHamilton'swidelyacceptedview,thisstatementcannotbereadas
mereshorthandforthespecificexecutiveauthorizationsthatfollowitin[sections]2and3.Hamilton
stressedthedifferencebetweenthesweepinglanguageofarticleII,section1,andtheconditional
languageofarticleI,[section]1:"AlllegislativePowershereingrantedshallbevestedinaCongress
oftheUnitedStates..."Hamiltonsubmittedthat"[t]he[articleIIIenumeration[insections2and31
oughtthereforetobeconsidered,asintendedmerelytospecifytheprincipalarticlesimpliedinthe
definitionofexecutionpowerleavingtheresttoflowfromthegeneralgrantofthatpower,
interpretedinconfomitywithotherpartsoftheConstitution...
InMyersv.UnitedStates,theSupremeCourtacceptedHamilton'sproposition,concludingthatthe
federalexecutive,unliketheCongress,couldexercisepowerfromsourcesnotenumerated,solong
asnotforbiddenbytheconstitutionaltext:theexecutivepowerwasgiveningeneralterms,
strengthenedbyspecifictermswhereemphasiswasregardedasappropriate,andwaslimitedby
directexpressionswherelimitationwasneeded..."ThelanguageofChiefJusticeTaftinMyers
makesclearthattheconstitutionalconceptofinherentpowerisnotasynonymforpowerwithout
limitrather,theconceptsuggestsonlythatnotallpowersgrantedintheConstitutionarethemselves
exhaustedbyinternalenumeration,sothat,withinasphereproperlyregardedasoneof"executive'
power,authorityisimpliedunlessthereorelsewhereexpresslylimited.[TRIBE,AMERICAN
CONSTITUTIONALLAW158159(1978).]
AndneithercanwesubscribetotheviewthatarecognitionofthePresident'simpliedorresidualpowersis
tantamounttosettingthestageforanotherdictatorship.Despitepetitioners'strainedanalogy,theresidualpowers
ofthePresidentundertheConstitutionshouldnotbeconfusedwiththepowerofthePresidentunderthe1973
ConstitutiontolegislatepursuanttoAmendmentNo.6whichprovides:
WheneverinthejudgmentofthePresident(PrimeMinister),thereexistsagraveemergencyora
threatorimminencethereof,orwhenevertheinterimBatasangPambansaortheregularNational
Assemblyfailsorisunabletoactadequatelyonanymatterforanyreasonthatinhisjudgment
requiresimmediateaction,hemay,inordertomeettheexigency,issuethenecessarydecrees,
orders,orlettersofinstruction,whichshallformpartofthelawoftheland,
ThereisnosimilaritybetweentheresidualpowersofthePresidentunderthe1987Constitutionandthepowerof
thePresidentunderthe1973ConstitutionpursuanttoAmendmentNo.6.Firstofall,AmendmentNo.6refersto
anexpressgrantofpower.Itisnotimplied.Then,AmendmentNo.6referstoagranttothePresidentofthe
specificpoweroflegislation.
4.AmongthedutiesofthePresidentundertheConstitution,incompliancewithhis(orher)oathofoffice,isto
protectandpromotetheinterestandwelfareofthepeople.HerdecisiontobarthereturnoftheMarcosesand
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

2/7

1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

subsequently,theremainsofMr.Marcosatthepresenttimeandunderpresentcircumstancesisincompliance
withthisboundenduty.Intheabsenceofaclearshowingthatshehadactedwitharbitrarinessorwithgrave
abuseofdiscretioninarrivingatthisdecision,theCourtwillnotenjointheimplementationofthisdecision.
ACCORDINGLY,theCourtresolvedtoDENYtheMotionforReconsiderationforlackofmerit."

SeparateOpinions

CRUZ,J.,dissenting:
Nothingimportanthashappenedtochangemyvoteforgrantingthepetition.ThedeathofMarcoshasnot
plungedthenationintoparoxysmsofgriefasthesocalled"loyalists"hadhoped.Byandlarge,ithasbeenmet
withonlypassinginterestifnotoutrightindifferencefromthepeople.Clearly,thediscrediteddictatorisindeathno
ElCid.Marcosdeadisonlyanunpleasantmemory,notaboltoflightningtowhiptheblood.
Thisonlyshowsthatifhewasatallathreattothenationalsecuritywhenhewasalreadymoribundthatfeeble
threathasdiedwithhim.Asthegovernmentstresses,hehasbeenreducedtoanonperson(whichmakesme
wonderwhyitisstillafraidofhim).Hiscadaverisnotevenregardedasasymbolofthisorthatorwhatever
exceptbyhisfanaticalfollowers.Itisonlyadeadbodywaitingtobeinterredinthiscountry.
Thisisatempestinateapot.Wehavemoreimportantthingstodothandebatingoveracorpsethatdeservesno
kinderfatethandissolutionandoblivion.Isayletitbebroughthomeandburieddeepandletusbedonewithit
forever.
PARAS,J.,dissentingontheMotionforReconsideration:
IfindnoreasontodeviatefromthedissentingopinionIhavealreadyexpressed.
Firstly,theformerPresident,althoughalreadydead,isstillentitledtocertainrights.Itisnotcorrecttosaythata
deadman,sinceheisnolongerahumanbeing,hasceasedtohaverights.Forinstance,ourRevisedPenal
Codeprohibitsthecommissionoflibelagainstadeceasedindividual.Andevenifweweretoassumethenon
existenceanymoreofhishumanrightswhataboutthehumanrightsofhiswidowandtheothermembersofhis
family?
Secondly,uptonow,theallegedthreatstonationalsecurityhaveremainedunprovedandconsequently,
unpersuasive.OurArmedForcescaneasilycontrolanypossibleuprisingorpoliticalandmilitarydestabilization.
Infact,theconverseappearstobenearerthetruth,thatis,ifwedonotallowtheremainstocome,moretrouble
maybeexpected.
Thirdly,reconciliationcanproceedatamuchfasterpaceifthepetitionforthereturnisgranted.Torefusethe
requestcanmeanahardeningofresistanceagainstthewellintentionedaimoftheadministration.Upontheother
hand,tograntthepetitionmaywellsoftentheheartsoftheoppositionistspavingthewayforaunitedcitizenry.
Finally,theentireworldwillsurelyapplaudourgovernment'sactofmercy.AsShakespeareoncewrote"the
qualityofmercyisnotstrained."Surely,compassionisthebetterpartofgovernment.Removemercy,andyou
removethebestreasonagainstcivilstrife,whichifnotabatedcanturnourcountryintoamainstreamoffiery
dissentandintheend,asonegreatmanhasputit,thequestionwillnolongerbewhatisright,butwhatisleft.
PADILLA,J.,dissenting:
ThedeathofformerPresidentFerdinandE.Marcos,whichsupervenedafterdecisioninthiscasehadbeen
rendered,waspreemptedandforeseeninmyoriginaldissentingopinion.ThereIsaidthatthefirstcogentand
decisivepropositioninthiscaseisthat"Mr.MarcosisaFilipinoand,assuch,entitledtoreturnto,dieandbe
buriedinthiscountry."Ihaveonlytoaddafewstatementstothatdissentingopinion.
RespondentshavesucceededindenyingMr.Marcosthefirsttwo(2)rights,i.e.toreturntoanddieinthis
country,TheremainingrightofthisFilipinothatcriesoutforvindicationatthislatehouristherighttobeburiedin
thiscountry.Willtherespondentsbeallowedtocompletethecircleofdenyingtheconstitutionalandhumanright
ofMr.Marcostotravelwhich,asstatedinmydissentingopinion,includestherighttoreturnto,dieandbeburied
inthiscountry?TheanswershouldbeinthenegativeiftheConstitutionistostillprevailtheanswershouldbein
thenegativeifwearetoavoidthecompletelyindefensibleactofdenyingaFilipinothelastrighttoblendhis
mortalremainswithafewsquarefeetofearthinthetreasuredlandofhisbirth.
ThosewhowoulddenythisFilipinotheonlyconstitutionalandhumanrightthatcanbeaccordedhimnowsaythat
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

3/7

1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

theconstitutionalandhumanrighttobeburiedinthiscountrywouldapplytoanyFilipino,exceptMr.Marcos,
becausehewasadictatorandheplunderedthecountry.Thisisthemostirrelevantargumentthatcanberaised
atthistime.For,ourdemocracyisbuiltonthefundamentalassumption(sowebelieve)thattheConstitutionand
allitsguaranteesapplytoallFilipinos,whetherdictatororpauper,learnedorignorant,religiousoragnosticas
longasheisaFilipino.
ItissaidthattoaccordthisFilipinotherighttobeburiedinthiscountrywouldposeaseriousthreattonational
securityandpublicsafety.Whatthreat?Aspointedoutinmydissentingopinion,thesecondcogentanddecisive
propositioninthiscaseisthatrespondentshavenotpresentedany"hardevidence"(factualbases)orconvincing
proofofsuchthreat."Allwehavearegeneralconclusionsofnationalsecurityandpublicsafety'inavoidanceofa
specific,demandableandenforceableconstitutionalandbasichumanrighttoreturn."Recenteventshave,tomy
mind,servedtoconfirmthevalidityofsuchdissentingstatement.
IfaliveMarcosreturningtothiscountrydidnotposeaseriousthreattonationalsecurity,thesituationcannotbe
anyworsewithadeadMarcosreturning.For,adeadMarcoswillreturntobeburiedintomotherearth,where
therearenoprotests,"demos",orevendissents,wheretherulethatreigns,inthelanguageofMr.Justice
JacksoninBarnetteisthe"unanimityofthegraveyard."
Itissaidthat,whileadeadMarcoshasbeenrenderedimpotenttothreatennationalsecurity,hissupporters
wouldposethatthreattonationalsecurity.Thisargumentisuntenableasitiswithoutmerit.AsIseeit,Marcos'
supportersposeagreaterthreattopeaceandorder,withMarcosdeprivedofhisrighttoburialinthiscountry.On
theotherhand,iftheremainsofMr.Marcosarebroughttothecountryandallowedtheburialtowhichheis
constitutionallyandhumanlyentitled,Marcos'supporterswouldbedeprivedofanotherwisepotentargumentso
conducivetomassprotestsandevenviolencethattheirIdolhasbeencruellydeniedtherighttobeburiedinhis
homeland.
ItisalsosaidthatMr.Marcos,incadaverform,hasnoconstitutionalorhumanrights,tospeakof.Thiscontention
entirelybegstheissue.Inthefirstplace,onecannotoverlookthattherightofMr.Marcos,asaFilipino,tobe
buriedinthiscountry,isassertednotforthefirsttimeafterhisdeath.Itwasvigorouslyassertedlongbeforehis
death.But,moreimportantly,therightofeveryFilipinotobeburiedinhiscountry,ispartofacontinuingrightthat
startsfrombirthandendsonlyonthedayheisfinallylaidtorestinhiscountry.
ThisdissentingopiniondoesnotpretendtodenythePhilippinegovernmenttherighttolaydownconditionsfor
theburialofMr.Marcosinthiscountry,butIsubmitthattheseconditionsmust,asafundamentalpostulate,
recognizetherightoftheman,asaFilipino,tobeburiedinthiscountryNOW.
Themajorityresolution,ineffect,bansMr.Marcos'burialinthiscountrynow.Withoutinanywayaffectingmy
respectandregardformybrethrenandsistersinthemajority,Iamdeeplyconcernedandgreatlydisturbedthat,
withtheirdecisionbanningadeadMarcosfromburialinthiscountry,theyhavepassedanopportunitytodefusea
constitutionalcrisisthat,inmyhumbleassessment,threatenstoigniteanalreadydividednation,Regrettably,they
haveignoredtheconstitutionaldimensionoftheproblemrootedintheagelessandfinesttraditionofourpeople
forrespectanddeferencetothedead.Whatpredictablyfollowswillbeacontinuingstrife,amongourpeople,of
unendinghatred,recriminationsandretaliations.Godsavethiscountry!
MyvoteisforthisCourttoORDERtherespondentstoallowtheimmediatereturnandburialintheRepublicofthe
PhilippinesofformerPresidentFerdinandE.Marcos,subjecttosuchconditionsasthePhilippinegovernment
mayimposeintheinterestofpeaceandorder.
SARMIENTO,J.,Dissenting:
Thecasehascurioustrappingsofadejavu,theshoebeingontheotherfoot,yet,asIstatedbefore,Icannot
allowpersonalemotionstosoftenmy"hardenedimpartiality"anddeny,asaconsequence,therightsoftheex
President'sbereavedtoburyhisremainsinhishomeland,andforthemtoreturnfromexile.AsIhad,then,voted
tograntthepetition,sodoIvotetograntreconsideration.
IhavegonetolengthstolocateinthefourcomersoftheConstitution,bydirectgrantorbyimplication,the
President'ssupposed"residual"powertoforbidcitizensfromenteringthemotherlandreiteratedintheresolution
ofthemajority.Ihavefoundnone.Iamnotagreed,that:
3.Contrarytopetitionersview,itcannotbedeniedthatthePresident,uponwhomexecutivepoweris
vested,hasunstatedresidualpowerswhichareimpliedfromthegrantofexecutivepowerandwhich
arenecessaryforhertocomplywithherdutiesundertheConstitution.ThepowersofthePresident
arenotlimitedtowhatareexpresslyenumeratedinthearticleontheExecutiveDepartmentandin
scatteredprovisionsoftheConstitution.This,notwithstandingtheavowedintentofthemembersof
theConstitutionalCommissionof1986tolimitthepowersofthePresidentasareactiontothe
abusesundertheregimeofMr.Marcos,fortheresultwasalimitationofspecificpowersofthe
President,particularlythoserelatingtothecommanderinchiefclause,butnotadiminutionofthe
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

4/7

1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

generalgrantofexecutivepower.
Itisanicewordgame,butitisnothingelse.For,iftheConstitutionhasimposedlimitationsonspecificpowersof
thePresident,ithas,afortiori,prescribedadiminutionofexecutivepower.TheChartersaysthattherightmay
onlyberestrictedby:(1)acourtorderor(2)byfiatoflaw.Hadthefundamentallawintendedapresidential
imprimatur,itwouldhavesaidso.Itwouldhavealsocompletedthesymmetry:judicial,congressional,and
executiverestraintsontheright.NoamountofpresumedresidualexecutivepowercanamendtheCharter.
ItiswelltonotethattheBillofRightsstandsprimarily,alimitationnotonlyagainstlegislativeencroachmentson
individualliberties,butmoreso,againstpresidentialintrusions.Andespeciallyso,becausethePresidentisthe
caretakerofthemilitaryestablishmentthathas,severaltimesover,beenunkindtopartofthepopulationithas
alsosworntoprotect.
That"[t]hethreatstothegovernment,towhichthereturnoftheMarcoseshasbeenviewedtoprovideacatalytic
effect,havenotbeenshowntohaveceased"(Res.,3)istherealmofconjecture,speculation,andimagination.
Themilitaryhasshownnohardevidencethat"thereturnoftheMarcoses"wouldindeedinterposeathreatto
nationalsecurity.Andapparently,themajorityitselfisnotconvinced("hasbeenviewed...").
ThatMrs.MarcoshasreferredtoPresidentCorazonAquinoasanillegitimatePresident,doesnot,soIsubmit,
reinforceallegedfearsofamassivedestabilizationawaitingthenation.Themilitaryhassaidoverandoverthat
Marcosfollowersarenotcapableofsuccessfuldestabilizationeffort.Andonlythismorning(October27,1989),
mediareportedtheassurancesgiventoforeigninvestorsbynolessthanthePresident,ofthepoliticaland
economicstabilityofthenation,aswellastheGovernment'scapabilitytoquellforcesthatmenacethegainsof
EDSA.
IhavenoeulogiestosayonthepassingofMr.Marcos.Mypersonalimpressions,however,arebesidethepoint.I
reiteratethatthePresidenthasnopowertodenyrequestsofMarcosrelativestoburyMarcosinhishomeland.As
fortheformer,letthemgettheirjustdesertsheretoo.Andletthematterrest.
SeparateOpinions
CRUZ,J.,dissenting:
Nothingimportanthashappenedtochangemyvoteforgrantingthepetition.ThedeathofMarcoshasnot
plungedthenationintoparoxysmsofgriefasthesocalled"loyalists"hadhoped.Byandlarge,ithasbeenmet
withonlypassinginterestifnotoutrightindifferencefromthepeople.Clearly,thediscrediteddictatorisindeathno
ElCid.Marcosdeadisonlyanunpleasantmemory,notaboltoflightningtowhiptheblood.
Thisonlyshowsthatifhewasatallathreattothenationalsecuritywhenhewasalreadymoribundthatfeeble
threathasdiedwithhim.Asthegovernmentstresses,hehasbeenreducedtoanonperson(whichmakesme
wonderwhyitisstillafraidofhim).Hiscadaverisnotevenregardedasasymbolofthisorthatorwhatever
exceptbyhisfanaticalfollowers.Itisonlyadeadbodywaitingtobeinterredinthiscountry.
Thisisatempestinateapot.Wehavemoreimportantthingstodothandebatingoveracorpsethatdeservesno
kinderfatethandissolutionandoblivion.Isayletitbebroughthomeandburieddeepandletusbedonewithit
forever.
PARAS,J.,dissentingontheMotionforReconsideration:
IfindnoreasontodeviatefromthedissentingopinionIhavealreadyexpressed.
Firstly,theformerPresident,althoughalreadydead,isstillentitledtocertainrights.Itisnotcorrecttosaythata
deadman,sinceheisnolongerahumanbeing,hasceasedtohaverights.Forinstance,ourRevisedPenal
Codeprohibitsthecommissionoflibelagainstadeceasedindividual.Andevenifweweretoassumethenon
existenceanymoreofhishumanrightswhataboutthehumanrightsofhiswidowandtheothermembersofhis
family?
Secondly,uptonow,theallegedthreatstonationalsecurityhaveremainedunprovedandconsequently,
unpersuasive.OurArmedForcescaneasilycontrolanypossibleuprisingorpoliticalandmilitarydestabilization.
Infact,theconverseappearstobenearerthetruth,thatis,ifwedonotallowtheremainstocome,moretrouble
maybeexpected.
Thirdly,reconciliationcanproceedatamuchfasterpaceifthepetitionforthereturnisgranted.Torefusethe
requestcanmeanahardeningofresistanceagainstthewellintentionedaimoftheadministration.Upontheother
hand,tograntthepetitionmaywellsoftentheheartsoftheoppositionistspavingthewayforaunitedcitizenry.
Finally,theentireworldwillsurelyapplaudourgovernment'sactofmercy.AsShakespeareoncewrote"the
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

5/7

1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

qualityofmercyisnotstrained."Surely,compassionisthebetterpartofgovernment.Removemercy,andyou
removethebestreasonagainstcivilstrife,whichifnotabatedcanturnourcountryintoamainstreamoffiery
dissentandintheend,asonegreatmanhasputit,thequestionwillnolongerbewhatisright,butwhatisleft.
PADILLA,J.,dissenting:
ThedeathofformerPresidentFerdinandE.Marcos,whichsupervenedafterdecisioninthiscasehadbeen
rendered,waspreemptedandforeseeninmyoriginaldissentingopinion.ThereIsaidthatthefirstcogentand
decisivepropositioninthiscaseisthat"Mr.MarcosisaFilipinoand,assuch,entitledtoreturnto,dieandbe
buriedinthiscountry."Ihaveonlytoaddafewstatementstothatdissentingopinion.
RespondentshavesucceededindenyingMr.Marcosthefirsttwo(2)rights,i.e.toreturntoanddieinthis
country,TheremainingrightofthisFilipinothatcriesoutforvindicationatthislatehouristherighttobeburiedin
thiscountry.Willtherespondentsbeallowedtocompletethecircleofdenyingtheconstitutionalandhumanright
ofMr.Marcostotravelwhich,asstatedinmydissentingopinion,includestherighttoreturnto,dieandbeburied
inthiscountry?TheanswershouldbeinthenegativeiftheConstitutionistostillprevailtheanswershouldbein
thenegativeifwearetoavoidthecompletelyindefensibleactofdenyingaFilipinothelastrighttoblendhis
mortalremainswithafewsquarefeetofearthinthetreasuredlandofhisbirth.
ThosewhowoulddenythisFilipinotheonlyconstitutionalandhumanrightthatcanbeaccordedhimnowsaythat
theconstitutionalandhumanrighttobeburiedinthiscountrywouldapplytoanyFilipino,exceptMr.Marcos,
becausehewasadictatorandheplunderedthecountry.Thisisthemostirrelevantargumentthatcanberaised
atthistime.For,ourdemocracyisbuiltonthefundamentalassumption(sowebelieve)thattheConstitutionand
allitsguaranteesapplytoallFilipinos,whetherdictatororpauper,learnedorignorant,religiousoragnosticas
longasheisaFilipino.
ItissaidthattoaccordthisFilipinotherighttobeburiedinthiscountrywouldposeaseriousthreattonational
securityandpublicsafety.Whatthreat?Aspointedoutinmydissentingopinion,thesecondcogentanddecisive
propositioninthiscaseisthatrespondentshavenotpresentedany"hardevidence"(factualbases)orconvincing
proofofsuchthreat."Allwehavearegeneralconclusionsofnationalsecurityandpublicsafety'inavoidanceofa
specific,demandableandenforceableconstitutionalandbasichumanrighttoreturn."Recenteventshave,tomy
mind,servedtoconfirmthevalidityofsuchdissentingstatement.
IfaliveMarcosreturningtothiscountrydidnotposeaseriousthreattonationalsecurity,thesituationcannotbe
anyworsewithadeadMarcosreturning.For,adeadMarcoswillreturntobeburiedintomotherearth,where
therearenoprotests,"demos",orevendissents,wheretherulethatreigns,inthelanguageofMr.Justice
JacksoninBarnetteisthe"unanimityofthegraveyard."
Itissaidthat,whileadeadMarcoshasbeenrenderedimpotenttothreatennationalsecurity,hissupporters
wouldposethatthreattonationalsecurity.Thisargumentisuntenableasitiswithoutmerit.AsIseeit,Marcos'
supportersposeagreaterthreattopeaceandorder,withMarcosdeprivedofhisrighttoburialinthiscountry.On
theotherhand,iftheremainsofMr.Marcosarebroughttothecountryandallowedtheburialtowhichheis
constitutionallyandhumanlyentitled,Marcos'supporterswouldbedeprivedofanotherwisepotentargumentso
conducivetomassprotestsandevenviolencethattheirIdolhasbeencruellydeniedtherighttobeburiedinhis
homeland.
ItisalsosaidthatMr.Marcos,incadaverform,hasnoconstitutionalorhumanrights,tospeakof.Thiscontention
entirelybegstheissue.Inthefirstplace,onecannotoverlookthattherightofMr.Marcos,asaFilipino,tobe
buriedinthiscountry,isassertednotforthefirsttimeafterhisdeath.Itwasvigorouslyassertedlongbeforehis
death.But,moreimportantly,therightofeveryFilipinotobeburiedinhiscountry,ispartofacontinuingrightthat
startsfrombirthandendsonlyonthedayheisfinallylaidtorestinhiscountry.
ThisdissentingopiniondoesnotpretendtodenythePhilippinegovernmenttherighttolaydownconditionsfor
theburialofMr.Marcosinthiscountry,butIsubmitthattheseconditionsmust,asafundamentalpostulate,
recognizetherightoftheman,asaFilipino,tobeburiedinthiscountryNOW.
Themajorityresolution,ineffect,bansMr.Marcos'burialinthiscountrynow.Withoutinanywayaffectingmy
respectandregardformybrethrenandsistersinthemajority,Iamdeeplyconcernedandgreatlydisturbedthat,
withtheirdecisionbanningadeadMarcosfromburialinthiscountry,theyhavepassedanopportunitytodefusea
constitutionalcrisisthat,inmyhumbleassessment,threatenstoigniteanalreadydividednation,Regrettably,they
haveignoredtheconstitutionaldimensionoftheproblemrootedintheagelessandfinesttraditionofourpeople
forrespectanddeferencetothedead.Whatpredictablyfollowswillbeacontinuingstrife,amongourpeople,of
unendinghatred,recriminationsandretaliations.Godsavethiscountry!
MyvoteisforthisCourttoORDERtherespondentstoallowtheimmediatereturnandburialintheRepublicofthe
PhilippinesofformerPresidentFerdinandE.Marcos,subjecttosuchconditionsasthePhilippinegovernment
mayimposeintheinterestofpeaceandorder.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

6/7

1/18/2016

G.R.No.88211

SARMIENTO,J.,Dissenting:
Thecasehascurioustrappingsofadejavu,theshoebeingontheotherfoot,yet,asIstatedbefore,Icannot
allowpersonalemotionstosoftenmy"hardenedimpartiality"anddeny,asaconsequence,therightsoftheex
President'sbereavedtoburyhisremainsinhishomeland,andforthemtoreturnfromexile.AsIhad,then,voted
tograntthepetition,sodoIvotetograntreconsideration.
IhavegonetolengthstolocateinthefourcomersoftheConstitution,bydirectgrantorbyimplication,the
President'ssupposed"residual"powertoforbidcitizensfromenteringthemotherlandreiteratedintheresolution
ofthemajority.Ihavefoundnone.Iamnotagreed,that:
3.Contrarytopetitionersview,itcannotbedeniedthatthePresident,uponwhomexecutivepoweris
vested,hasunstatedresidualpowerswhichareimpliedfromthegrantofexecutivepowerandwhich
arenecessaryforhertocomplywithherdutiesundertheConstitution.ThepowersofthePresident
arenotlimitedtowhatareexpresslyenumeratedinthearticleontheExecutiveDepartmentandin
scatteredprovisionsoftheConstitution.This,notwithstandingtheavowedintentofthemembersof
theConstitutionalCommissionof1986tolimitthepowersofthePresidentasareactiontothe
abusesundertheregimeofMr.Marcos,fortheresultwasalimitationofspecificpowersofthe
President,particularlythoserelatingtothecommanderinchiefclause,butnotadiminutionofthe
generalgrantofexecutivepower.
Itisanicewordgame,butitisnothingelse.For,iftheConstitutionhasimposedlimitationsonspecificpowersof
thePresident,ithas,afortiori,prescribedadiminutionofexecutivepower.TheChartersaysthattherightmay
onlyberestrictedby:(1)acourtorderor(2)byfiatoflaw.Hadthefundamentallawintendedapresidential
imprimatur,itwouldhavesaidso.Itwouldhavealsocompletedthesymmetry:judicial,congressional,and
executiverestraintsontheright.NoamountofpresumedresidualexecutivepowercanamendtheCharter.
ItiswelltonotethattheBillofRightsstandsprimarily,alimitationnotonlyagainstlegislativeencroachmentson
individualliberties,butmoreso,againstpresidentialintrusions.Andespeciallyso,becausethePresidentisthe
caretakerofthemilitaryestablishmentthathas,severaltimesover,beenunkindtopartofthepopulationithas
alsosworntoprotect.
That"[t]hethreatstothegovernment,towhichthereturnoftheMarcoseshasbeenviewedtoprovideacatalytic
effect,havenotbeenshowntohaveceased"(Res.,3)istherealmofconjecture,speculation,andimagination.
Themilitaryhasshownnohardevidencethat"thereturnoftheMarcoses"wouldindeedinterposeathreatto
nationalsecurity.Andapparently,themajorityitselfisnotconvinced("hasbeenviewed...").
ThatMrs.MarcoshasreferredtoPresidentCorazonAquinoasanillegitimatePresident,doesnot,soIsubmit,
reinforceallegedfearsofamassivedestabilizationawaitingthenation.Themilitaryhassaidoverandoverthat
Marcosfollowersarenotcapableofsuccessfuldestabilizationeffort.Andonlythismorning(October27,1989),
mediareportedtheassurancesgiventoforeigninvestorsbynolessthanthePresident,ofthepoliticaland
economicstabilityofthenation,aswellastheGovernment'scapabilitytoquellforcesthatmenacethegainsof
EDSA.
IhavenoeulogiestosayonthepassingofMr.Marcos.Mypersonalimpressions,however,arebesidethepoint.I
reiteratethatthePresidenthasnopowertodenyrequestsofMarcosrelativestoburyMarcosinhishomeland.As
fortheformer,letthemgettheirjustdesertsheretoo.Andletthematterrest.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/oct1989/gr_88211_1989.html

7/7