B. Theory of Judicial Review
-Separation of Powers
G.R. No. L-45081
July 15, 1936
JOSE A. ANGARA, petitioner, vs.THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION, PEDRO YNSUA, MIGUEL CASTILLO, and DIONISIO C.
MAYOR,respondents.
PONENTE: LAUREL, J.
DIVISION: EN BANC
FACTS: In the elections of Sept 17, 1935, Angara, and the respondents, Pedro Ynsua et al. were candidates voted
for the position of member of the National Assembly for the first district of the Province of Tayabas. On Oct 7,
1935, Angara was proclaimed as member-elect of the National Assemblyfor the said district. On November 15,
1935, he took his oath of office. On Dec 3, 1935, the National Assembly in session assembled, passed Resolution
No. 8 confirming the election of the members of the National Assembly against whom no protest had thus far been
filed. On Dec 8, 1935, Ynsua, filed before the Electoral Commission a “Motion of Protest” against the election of
Angara. On Dec 9, 1935, the Electoral Commissionadopted a resolution,
resolution, of which fixed said date a s the last day for
the filing of protests against the election, returns and qualifications of members of the National Assembly, should
be upheld. Angara filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that by virtue of the National Assembly proclamation, Ynsua
can no longer protest. Ynsua argued back by claiming that Electoral Commission proclamation governs and that the
Electoral Commission can take cognizance of the election protest and that the Electoral Commission cannot be
subject to a writ of prohibition from the Supreme Court.
ISSUES: Whether or not the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over such matter.
Whether or not Electoral Commission acted without or in excess of jurisdiction in taking cognizance of the
election protest.
HELD: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Angara. The Supreme Court emphasized that in cases of conflict
between the several departments and among the agencies thereof, the judiciary, with the Supreme Court as the
final arbiter, is the only constitutional
c onstitutional mechanism devised finally to resolve the conflict and allocate constitutional
boundaries.That judicial supremacy is but the power of judicial review in actual and appropriate cases and
controversies, and is the power and duty to see that no one branch or agency of the government transcends the
Constitution, which is the source of all authority.
That the Electoral Commission is an independent constitutional creation with specific powers and functions to
execute and perform, closer for purposes of classification to the legislative than to any of the other two
departments of the government.
That the Electoral Commission is the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of
members of the National Assembly.