Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
praying:
respondentCommission on Elections, as well as the Department Presidential Decree No. 86,dated December 31, 1972, composed
of Local Governmentsand its head, Secretary Jose Roo; the
Department of Agrarian Reforms andits head, Secretary Conrado least six months, fifteen years of age or over,citizens of the
Estrella; the National Ratification CoordinatingCommittee and its Philippines and who are registered in the list of CitizenAssembly
Chairman, Guillermo de Vega; their deputies, subordinatesand
and reporting to thePresident or other officials concerned, the so- precisely tobroaden the base of citizen participation in the
called Citizens' Assembliesreferendum results allegedly obtained democratic process and toafford ample opportunity for the
when they were supposed to have metduring the period
Motion."
hearing "on January 17, 1973, at 9:30 a.m." While the case was
Justice) was delivering to him (the writer)a copy of Proclamation the question as to whether or not the people wouldstill like a
No. 1102, which had just been signed by thePresident.
announcedto the Court, the parties in G.R. No. L-35948 inasmuch (14,298,814) answered that there was no need for a plebiscite
as the hearing inconnection therewith was still going on and the
Thereupon, the writer read Proclamation No. 1102 which is of the (Citizens Assemblies) are infavor of the new Constitution, the
following tenor:
____________________________
people;
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
"WHEREAS, the Constitution proposed by the nineteen hundred Constitutional Convention has been ratified by anoverwhelming
seventy-one Constitutional Convention is subject to ratification by majority of all of the votes cast by the members of all the
the Filipino people;
"Done in the City of Manila, this 17th day of January, in the year people? (acquiesced - "permission" given by making objections.)
of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-three.
(Sgd.) FERDINAND E. MARCOS"President of the Philippines" 4. Whether or not the petitioners entitled to relief?
By the President:
"ALEJANDRO MELCHOR" "Executive Secretary"
_________________________________
The Resolution:
The Ratification Case
Summary:
On January 20, 1973, Josue Javellana filed Case G.R. No. L-
respondents "and their subordinates or agents fromimplementing Makalintal, Castro, Barredo, Makasiar,Antonio and Esguerra)
any of the provisions of the propose Constitution not found inthe voted to dismiss the petition. Concepcion, togetherJustices
present Constitution" referring to that of 1935. The petition
Details:
justiciable, or
six (6) members of theCourt, hold that the issue of the validity of
same "arewithout power to approve the proposed Constitution ..."; second question. Justice Barredo qualified his vote, stating that
"that the President iswithout power to proclaim the ratification by "inasmuch as it is claimed there has been approval by the people,
the Filipino people of theproposed Constitution"; and "that the
the Courtmay inquire into the question of whether or not there has
The Issue:
members of the Court hold that the issue is political and "beyond
question?
Constitutional
Convention
has
been
ratified
validly
(with
substantial, if not strict, compliance) conformably to the applicable substantial, if not strict, compliance) conformably to the applicable
constitutional and statutory provisions?
Justice Barredo qualified his vote, stating that "(A)s to whether or ascertaining what is the mind of the peoplein the absence of the
not the1973 Constitution has been validly ratified pursuant to
approved the 1973Constitution without the necessity of the usual people have accepted the Constitution."
form of plebiscite followed inpast ratifications, I am constrained to
hold that, in the political sense, if not inthe orthodox legal sense,
the people may be deemed to have cast theirfavorable votes in
the belief that in doing so they did the part required ofthem by
Article XV, hence, it may be said that in its political aspect, which
iswhat counts most, after all, said Article has been substantially
complied with,and, in effect, the 1973 Constitution has been
constitutionally ratified."
premise stated in their votes on the third question that they could
not state with judicial certainty whether the people have accepted
or not accepted the Constitution; and
Two (2) members of the Court, namely, Justice Zaldivar and
myself voted thatthe Constitution proposed by the 1971
Constitutional Convention is not inforce; with the result that there
are not enough votes to declare that the newConstitution is not in
force.
ACCORDINGLY, by virtue of the majority of six (6) votes of
Justices Makalintal, Castro, Barredo, Makasiar, Antonio and
Esguerra with the four (4) dissenting votes of the Chief Justice
and Justices Zaldivar, Fernando and Teehankee, all the
aforementioned cases are hereby dismissed. This being the vote
of the majority, there is no further judicial obstacle to the new
Constitution being considered in force and effect.
It is so ordered.