Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 667 views

    Lozano vs. Macapagal-Arroyo Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Vir Stella Marianito
    The document discusses four petitions filed in the Supreme Court regarding the oath-taking of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as President of the Philippines in January 2001 after Joseph Estrada resigned. The petitions asked the Court to: 1) enjoin Estrada from exercising presidential powers and recognize Arroyo as the successor; 2) declare Arroyo's occupation of the office as constitutional; 3) issue a ruling on whether Estrada was still considered the President; and 4) nullify Arroyo's proclamation or declare her the acting President. The Court ultimately dismissed all four petitions, finding they were declaratory in nature and the Court did not have original jurisdiction, and that the petitioners did not have legal

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Lozano vs. Macapagal-Arroyo Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Vir Stella Marianito
    667 views1 page
    The document discusses four petitions filed in the Supreme Court regarding the oath-taking of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as President of the Philippines in January 2001 after Joseph Estrada resigned. The petitions asked the Court to: 1) enjoin Estrada from exercising presidential powers and recognize Arroyo as the successor; 2) declare Arroyo's occupation of the office as constitutional; 3) issue a ruling on whether Estrada was still considered the President; and 4) nullify Arroyo's proclamation or declare her the acting President. The Court ultimately dismissed all four petitions, finding they were declaratory in nature and the Court did not have original jurisdiction, and that the petitioners did not have legal

    Original Description:

    Lozano vs. Macapagal-Arroyo case digest

    Original Title

    Lozano vs. Macapagal-Arroyo case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses four petitions filed in the Supreme Court regarding the oath-taking of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as President of the Philippines in January 2001 after Joseph Estrada resigned. The petitions asked the Court to: 1) enjoin Estrada from exercising presidential powers and recognize Arroyo as the successor; 2) declare Arroyo's occupation of the office as constitutional; 3) issue a ruling on whether Estrada was still considered the President; and 4) nullify Arroyo's proclamation or declare her the acting President. The Court ultimately dismissed all four petitions, finding they were declaratory in nature and the Court did not have original jurisdiction, and that the petitioners did not have legal

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    667 views1 page

    Lozano vs. Macapagal-Arroyo Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Vir Stella Marianito
    The document discusses four petitions filed in the Supreme Court regarding the oath-taking of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as President of the Philippines in January 2001 after Joseph Estrada resigned. The petitions asked the Court to: 1) enjoin Estrada from exercising presidential powers and recognize Arroyo as the successor; 2) declare Arroyo's occupation of the office as constitutional; 3) issue a ruling on whether Estrada was still considered the President; and 4) nullify Arroyo's proclamation or declare her the acting President. The Court ultimately dismissed all four petitions, finding they were declaratory in nature and the Court did not have original jurisdiction, and that the petitioners did not have legal

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    LOZANO, ET. AL VS.

    MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
    GR No. 146528, GR No. 146549, GR No. 146579, GR No. 146631

    FACTS:
    During the postponement of the Impeachment Court, ESTRADA's Cabinet members and
    political allies resigned, EDSA II occurred, and the people demanded ESTRADA's
    resignation.
    On the morning of 20 January 2001, ESTRADA sent the Senate President and the House
    Speaker signed letters which states: “By virtue of the provisions of Section 11, Article VII of
    the Constitution, I am hereby transmitting this declaration that I am unable to exercise the
    powers and duties of my office. By operation of law and the Constitution, the Vice-President
    shall be the Acting President.”
    Senate President and House Speaker Drafted and Signed a Joint Statement of Support
    favoring Macapagal-Arroyo. At 12 noon of 20 January 2001, Chief Justice Davide
    administered the Oath to VP Macapagal-Arroyo as President.
    Four petitions pertaining to the oath-taking of GMA as President of the Philippines were
    filed in the Court.

     In GR No. 146528, the Petition asks the SC to enjoin ESTRADA from exercising
    the powers and authority of the President under the Constitution and to yield the
    Presidency to his constitutional successor, ARROYO.
     In GR No. 146549, Petitioner prays that the SC declare that the occupation of the
    Office of the President of the Philippines by VP ARROYO is constitutional and
    legal with the full support of the Filipino people and other foreign countries.
     In GR No. 146579 the Petition asks the Court to issue a definitive ruling on
    whether or not ESTRADA is still the President and, hence exempt from all
    criminal suits.
     In GR No. 146631, the Petition prays that the proclamation and oath-taking of
    ARROYO be declared null and void or that she be declared acting President and
    President ESTRADA, President-on-leave.

    ISSUE: Whether the Petitions have merit

    Ruling:
    All fours petitions are plainly without merit.
    Petitioners prayed for and all the petitions are for Declaratory Relief which the SC
    does not have Original Jurisdiction. Aside from the lack of jurisdiction, Petitioners did
    not sufficiently allege, much less shown, that respondent or anyone else "unlawfully
    neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty," to entitle
    them to the writ of mandamus.
    Petitioners have no legal standing to file the suits. They have now shown any
    direct and personal injury as a result of President Arroyo’s oath-taking. Specifically,
    Petitioner Lozano’s alleged interest as a taxpayer is far too detached from the ultimate
    objective of his Petition: nullify the oath-taking of Arroyo and declare Estrada as
    "President-on-leave."
    Wherefore, the Petitions are DISMISSED.

    You might also like