June 7, 2011 | G.R. No. 191618
Atty. Romulo Macalintal, petitioner
Presidential Electoral Tribunal, respondent
FACTS:
Atty. Romulo Macalintal filed a motion for reconsideration regarding the previous ruling of the SC that found the creation of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal by the SC as constitutional. In his motion, Macalintal contended that the creation of the PET by the SC did not fall within the ambit of the last paragraph of Section 4, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution. He also contended that the PET exercises quasi-judicial power, and thus, its members violate Section 12, Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution,
ISSUE:
Whether or not the PET is constitutional.
Yes, the Court held that PET is constitutional. A look at the deliberations of the framers reveals that the exclusive authority granted to the SC in judging cases relating to the elections of President and Vice-President does not impinge on the supposed separation of power between the judiciary and the executive departments, even if the said provision can be found in Art. VII.
The Court held that election issues are adversarial and judicial proceedings, and are essentially justiciable questions.
The Court held that election issues are adversarial and judicial proceedings, and are essentially justiciable questions.
Similarly, the Court held that in creating PET, it merely constitutionalized what was statutory. The last paragraph of Section 4, Art. VII bestows upon the SC the power to hear questions relating to the election of the President and Vice-President. Following the doctrine of necessary implication, the creation of PET should be seen as the means necessary to carry said constitutional mandate into effect.
Motion for reconsideration denied.