Monday, February 08, 2016

Datu Zaldy Ampatuan vs. Hon. Ronaldo Puno, et.al. [GR No. 190259, June 7, 2011]


FACTS: After the Maguindanao Massacre, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (PGMA) issued Proclamation 1946 placing Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat and City of Cotabato under a state of emergency. She directed the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and Philippine National Police (PNP) to undertake such measures as may be allowed by the Constitution and by law to prevent and suppress all incidents of lawless violence in the named places. She also issued AO 273-A which delegated the supervision of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) to the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). Petitioners seek to assail the validity of the issuances arguing that the same constitute invalid exercise of emergency powers.

ISSUE: Whether or not then President Arroyo invalidly exercised emergency powers when she ordered the deployment of the AFP and PNP

RULING: No. Such deployment is not by itself an exercise of emergency powers as understood under Section 23(2), Article VI of the Constitution. The President did not proclaim a national emergency, only a state of emergency in the three places mentioned. And she did not act pursuant to any law enacted by Congress that authorized her to exercise extraordinary powers. The calling out of the armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence in such places is a power that the Constitution directly vests in the President under Section 18, Article VII. She did not need a congressional authority to exercise the same. The President's call on the armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence springs from the power vested in her as the Commander-in-Chief of the AFP. It is true that the Court may inquire into the factual bases for the President's exercise of the above power. However, it would generally defer to her judgment on the matter unless it is shown that the determination was attended by grave abuse of discretion. In this case, it was ruled that petitioners were not able to demonstrate that the proclamation of state of emergency in the subject places and the calling out of the armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence there have clearly no factual bases.



Digg Google Bookmarks reddit Mixx StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Buzz DesignFloat Delicious BlinkList Furl

0 comments: on "Datu Zaldy Ampatuan vs. Hon. Ronaldo Puno, et.al. [GR No. 190259, June 7, 2011]"

Post a Comment