Tuesday, June 10, 2014

IBP v. Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora et al. case brief summary


IBP v. Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora et al. case brief summary
G.R. No. 141284, August 15, 2000

FACTS: President Joseph Estrada ordered the deployment of the Philippine Marines to join the Philippine National Police (PNP) in visibility patrols around Metro Manila to stem the tide of rising violence and crime. In response to such order, the PNP through Police Chief Superintendent Edgar B. Aglipay issued Letter of Intent (LOI) dated 02/2000 which detailed the joint visibility patrols called Task Force Tulungan. This was confirmed by a memorandum Pres. Estrada issued dated 24 January 2000. On January 17, 2000, the IBP filed a petition to annul LOI 02/2000 arguing that the deployment of the Marines is unconstitutional and is an incursion by the military on the civilian functions of government as embodied in Article II, Sec. 3 and Art. XVI, Sec. 5(4) of the 1987 Constitution.

ISSUE: (1) Does the IBP have legal standing in the case at bar?
(2) Is the president’s factual determination of the necessity of calling the armed forces subject to judicial review?
(3) Is the calling of the armed forces to assist the PNP in joint visibility patrols violate constitutional provisions on civilian supremacy over the military and the civilian character of the PNP?

RULING: In the first issue, the IBP has failed to provide the requisites for legal standing in the case at bar in that it has failed to conclusively prove that such deployment would harm the IBP in any way. It’s contention that it is fighting to uphold the rule of law and the constitution is insufficient, too general and too vague. As to the second issue, the Court disagrees with the contention of the Solicitor-General that the president’s act is a political question beyond the authority of the Court to review when the grant of power is qualified or subject to limitations, the issue becomes whether the prescribed qualifications have been met, then it becomes a question of legality and not wisdom, so is not a political question. It is then subject to the Court’s review power. As to the third issue, the Marines only assist the PNP, the LOI itself provides for this. In fact, the PNP Chief is the leader of such patrols and in no way places the over-all authority in the Marines.
Petition is dismissed.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.