Lacson

v.s.
Perez
(May 10,
2001)

Topic:
Mootness
BG:
Siegeof
Malacanyang, May
1,2001

GR 147780 (prohibition, injunction, mandamus, habeas corpus w/ urgent

application
for
issuance
ofTRO/preliminary
injunction)
PanfiloLacson et
alv
Sec. Hernando
Perez et
al

GR 147781 (mandamus and/or review of factual basis of suspension ofwritof

habeas
corpus
w/prayer forTRO)
Miriam
DefensorSantiago
vsAngelo
Reyes et
al

GR 147799 (prohibition and injunction with prayer for writ of preliminary

injunction/restraining
order)
RonaldoLumbao vs
Sec.
Hernando
Perez et
al

GR
147810(certiorari and
prohibition)
The
Labanng
Demokratikong
Pilipino vDOJ

Ponente:
Melo

Facts:
Apr
25,2001
arrest
offormer Pres.
Joseph Estrada
(plunder)
Arrest was complicated by combative supporters but warrant for arrest
wasserved.
Later that day and on succeeding days, rally at EDSA of supposters
with Senators and Senatorial Bets making statements. (Enrile,
Santiago,
Honasan,
Lacson)
May 1 2001, the EDSA crowd marches toward Malacanang and are able to
penetrate
the
barricades.
On May 1, 2001 following a violent and angry mob of protesters
assaulting and attempting to break into Malacanang, Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo issued
Proclamation
No38
declaring NCR
tobe
in
a
State
of
Rebellion
General Order 1 directing the AFP and the PNP to suppress the
rebellion.
Warrantless arrests of several alleged leaders and promoters which
prompted theinstant
petitions
at
bar.

Issue:
>WoN the declaration of state of rebellion and the warantless arrests that
followed
were
pursuant
tolaw.

Holding:
>Because the assailed orders were lifted by May 6, 2001 the instant
petitions are
rendered
MOOT and
ACADEMIC .
>DoJ denies issuing orders to arrest certain individuals only orders tothe
police(via
warrants) to
enforce Proclamation
38

Discussion:

Petitions to the SC are improper at this time because they have a

surfeit
ofother
remedies.
preliminary
investigation (Rule 112,
RoC)
Art 125, RPC requires an arrested person to be delivered to
proper judicial authorities within a specified time or be held
liable.
Charge
arresting officers with
arbitrary detention

(Lacson
petition)
Premature
asthere
are
no"impending
warrant of
arrest.
They are not directly assailingthevalidityofthesubjecthold
departure order.
Writ of habeas corpus premature as petitioners are not being
detained.

(Santiago
petition)
cannot petition for mandamus asshehasyettostateclearlyand
completely the legal right to the performance of a particular
act
which is
sought
tobe
compelled.

(Lumbao
petition)
Declaration of "state of rebellion is not violative of the
constitution
asit
is
given
bySec.
18,ArticleVII
986
Consti
(aside) court may look into this act however it is not
feasible
as
Proc 38
has
beenlifted.

(LDP
petition)
not a real party in interest as a juridical person cannot be
arrested thus cannot demonstrate that it has personal stake in
the
outcome of
thecase
oran
injury to
himself.
"Every action must be brought in the name of the party whose
legal right has been invaded or infringed, or whose legal right
is
under
imminent
threat of
invasion or
infringement"
Maybe considered and action fordeclatoryreliefhoweversuchan
action
isnotunder
the
jurisdiction of
the
SC.

Judgement:

DISMISSED , However respondents are enjoined not to arrest the petitioners

without the required judicial warrant for all acts committed in relationto
or
connection
with
May
1,2001siege of
malacanang.