Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 419 views

    Planas V Comelec

    Uploaded by

    Johnny English
    1. This case involved a petition challenging the validity of Presidential Decree 73 which called for a plebiscite to ratify the proposed constitution drafted by the 1971 Constitutional Convention. 2. The Court found the issue of the decree's validity to be justiciable but declared the challenge moot since the plebiscite was postponed. 3. The Court also upheld the authority of the Constitutional Convention to draft the proposed constitution and found that martial law alone did not necessarily prevent an adequate opportunity for public debate on the proposal.

    Copyright:

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

    Planas V Comelec

    Uploaded by

    Johnny English
    419 views2 pages
    1. This case involved a petition challenging the validity of Presidential Decree 73 which called for a plebiscite to ratify the proposed constitution drafted by the 1971 Constitutional Convention. 2. The Court found the issue of the decree's validity to be justiciable but declared the challenge moot since the plebiscite was postponed. 3. The Court also upheld the authority of the Constitutional Convention to draft the proposed constitution and found that martial law alone did not necessarily prevent an adequate opportunity for public debate on the proposal.

    Original Title

    2. Planas v Comelec

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. This case involved a petition challenging the validity of Presidential Decree 73 which called for a plebiscite to ratify the proposed constitution drafted by the 1971 Constitutional Convention. 2. The Court found the issue of the decree's validity to be justiciable but declared the challenge moot since the plebiscite was postponed. 3. The Court also upheld the authority of the Constitutional Convention to draft the proposed constitution and found that martial law alone did not necessarily prevent an adequate opportunity for public debate on the proposal.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    419 views2 pages

    Planas V Comelec

    Uploaded by

    Johnny English
    1. This case involved a petition challenging the validity of Presidential Decree 73 which called for a plebiscite to ratify the proposed constitution drafted by the 1971 Constitutional Convention. 2. The Court found the issue of the decree's validity to be justiciable but declared the challenge moot since the plebiscite was postponed. 3. The Court also upheld the authority of the Constitutional Convention to draft the proposed constitution and found that martial law alone did not necessarily prevent an adequate opportunity for public debate on the proposal.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Planas v Comelec

    (49 SCRA 105)

    Ponente: Concepcion, C.J.

    Facts:

    On 1 June 1971, a Constitutional Convention was held to propose amendments to the


    Constitution of the Philippines. While the Convention is in session on 21 September
    1972, the entire Philippines were placed under martial law by virtue of Proclamation
    No. 1081. On 29 November 1972, the Convention approved its proposed
    Constitution. The next day the President issued PD No. 73 “submitting to the
    Filipino people for ratification or rejection the Constitution of the republic of the
    Philippines proposed by the 1971 Constitutional Convention, and appropriating funds
    therefor”, as well as setting the Plebiscite for said ratification. On 7 December
    1972, Charito Planas petitioned the Court to enjoin respondents from implementing
    PD No. 73 on the grounds that the calling of plebiscite and appropriation of public
    funds are lodged exclusively in the Congress and that there being no freedom of
    speech, press and assembly and no sufficient time to inform the people of the
    contents thereof, there is no proper submission to the people of said proposed
    Constitution. On 17 December 1972, the President temporarily suspended the
    effects of PD 1080 for purpose of free and open debate on the proposed
    Constitution. On 23 December 1972, the Plebiscite was postponed until further
    notice by the President. Thereby the Court refrained from ruling on the cases. On
    12 January 1973, petitioners filed an “urgent motion” praying for the resolution of
    the cases “as soon as possible”.
    Issues:

    1. WON the validity of PD 73 is justiciable on the ground that the question at


    hand is political in nature.
    2. WON PD 73 is valid.
    3. WON the Constitutional Convention have the authority to pass the proposed
    Constitution.
    4. WON martial law affected the proper submission of the proposed
    Constitution to a plebiscite.

    Held:

    1. Yes. The Court finds that the issue aforementioned is a justiciable one since
    the assailed decree purports to have the force and effect of legislation, not
    only because of the long list decided by the Court on the acts of the
    Executive, but also of Subdivision (1) of Section 2, Article VIII of the 1935
    Constitution.
    2. The validity of PD 73 was declared moot and academic by the Court because
    the plebiscite ordained in said Decree has been postponed.
    3. Yes. The Court held that the Constitutional Convention was legally free to
    postulate any amendment it may deem fit to propose for as long as they
    adhere to Section 1 of Article XIV of the 1935 Constitution.
    4. The issue involves question of fact which cannot be predetermined, and that
    martial law per se does not necessarily bar the factual possibility of
    adequate freedom.

    You might also like