437. SOCIAL WEATHER STATION (SWS) VS.
COMELEC
Facts:
The herein petitioner questions the
constitutionality of Sec 5 of RA No. 9006 (Fair
Election Act) that provides “Surveys affecting
national candidates shall not be published fifteen
(15) days before an election and surveys affecting
local candidates shall not be published seven (7)
days before an election."
Petitioners argue that the restriction on
the publication of election survey results
constitutes a prior restraint on the exercise of
freedom of speech without clear justification.
Comelec justifies the restrictions in §5.4 of
R.A. No. 9006 as necessary to prevent the
manipulation and corruption of the electoral
process by unscrupulous and erroneous surveys
just before the election. It contends that the
prohibition on the publication of election survey
results during the period proscribed by law bears a
rational connection to the objective of the law, i.e.,
the prevention of the debasement of the electoral
process resulting from manipulated surveys,
bandwagon effect, and absence of reply.
Issue: Whether or not Section 5.4 of R.A. No. 9006
constitutes an unconstitutional abridgment of
freedom of speech, expression, and the press.
Ruling: Yes. For the following reasons:
1. It imposes a prior restraint on the freedom of
expression
2. It is a direct and total suppression of a category
of expression even though such suppression is only
for a limited period
3. The governmental interest sought to be
promoted can be achieved by means other than
suppression of freedom of expression.
476. Navarro vs. Executive Secretary
Facts:
Petitioners contend that the proposed
Province of Dinagat Islands is not qualified to
become a province because it failed to comply with
the land area or the population requirement,
despite its compliance with the income
requirement. It has a total land area of only 802.12
square kilometers, which falls short of the statutory
requirement of at least 2,000 square kilometers.
Moreover, based on the NSO 2000 Census of
Population, the total population of the proposed
Province of Dinagat Islands is only 106,951, while
the statutory requirement is a population of at least
250,000 inhabitants.
Issue: WON R.A. No. 9355 is unconstitutional for its
failure to comply with the criteria for the creation
of a province prescribed in Sec. 461 of the Local
Government Code.
Ruling: The Constitution clearly mandates that the
creation of local government units must follow the
criteria established in the Local Government Code.
Any derogation of or deviation from the criteria
prescribed in the Local Government Code violates
Sec. 10 Art. X of the Constitution.
514. Maceda vs. Vasquez
Facts:
A complaint was filed before the Office of
the Ombudsman against Judge Maceda of the RTC
for allegedly falsifying his Certificate of Service. He
moves to have his case referred to the SC. He
contends, among others, the Ombudsman has no
jurisdiction over his case and investigation of the
Ombudsman constitutes an encroachment into the
SC’s constitutional duty of supervision over all
inferior courts.
Issue: WON Office of the Ombudsman have
authority to investigate a criminal complaint
against a judge for alleged falsification of
Certification of Service in the absence of an
administrative action.
Ruling: No. In the absence of any administrative
action, the investigation being conducted by the
Ombudsman encroaches into the Court’s power of
administrative supervision over all courts and its
personnel, in violation of the doctrine of separation
of powers. The Constitution exclusively vests in the
SC administrative supervision over all courts and
court personnel, from the Presiding Justice of the
CA down to the lowest MTC clerk. It is only the SC
that can oversee the judges’ and court personnel’s
compliance with all laws, and take proper
administrative action against them if they commit
any violation.
553. Tanada vs. Angara
Facts:
Petitioners prayed for the nullification, on
constitutional grounds, of the concurrence of the
Philippine Senate in the ratification by the President
of the Philippines of the Agreement Establishing the
World Trade Organization (WTO Agreement, for
brevity) and for the prohibition of its
implementation and enforcement through the
release and utilization of public funds, the
assignment of public officials and employees, as
well as the use of government properties and
resources by respondent-heads of various
executive offices concerned therewith.
They contended that WTO agreement
violates the mandate of the 1987 Constitution to
“develop a self-reliant and independent national
economy effectively controlled by Filipinos x x x (to)
give preference to qualified Filipinos (and to)
promote the preferential use of Filipino labor,
domestic materials and locally produced goods” as
(1) the WTO requires the Philippines “to place
nationals and products of member-countries on the
same footing as Filipinos and local products” and (2)
that the WTO “intrudes, limits and/or impairs” the
constitutional powers of both Congress and the
Supreme Court.
Issue: WON of the Agreement Establishing the
World Trade Organization unduly limit, restrict and
impair Philippine sovereignty specifically the
legislative power which, under Sec. 2, Article VI,
1987 Philippine Constitution is ‘vested in the
Congress of the Philippines. Held:
Ruling: No, the WTO agreement does not unduly
limit, restrict, and impair the Philippine sovereignty,
particularly the legislative power granted by the
Philippine Constitution. The Senate was acting in
the proper manner when it concurred with the
President’s ratification of the agreement.