Case Digest
Topic :
Case :
GR No.
Locus Standi
5. David vs. Arroyo
171396
Date:
May 3, 2006
Ponente:
Sandoval-Gutierrez
FACTS
Title of Petition
& Case
Background
Petitioners – David
Respondents – Arroyo, President and Commander in-Chief
This case stands from:
•
•
•
•
•
•
On February 24, 2006, during the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of
the EDSA People Power I, President Arroyo issued Presidential Proclamation
No. 1017, which declared a state of national emergency.
On the same day, she also issued General Order No. 5, implementing the
proclamation.
A week later, after these seven Petitions had been filed before the Supreme
Court, she lifted PP 1017 and declared that the national emergency had
ceased to exist.
The factual bases of PP 1017 and GO 5, according to respondents, comprised
a conspiracy to unseat or assassinate President Arroyo (aim to oust or
assassinate the President and to take over the reins of government.)
Following the issuance of PP 1017 and GO 5, the Office of the President
announced the cancellation of all programs and activities related to the 20th
anniversary celebration of EDSA People Power 1 and revoked the permits to
hold rallies issued earlier by local governments.
Presidential Chief of Staff Michael Defensor further announced that
“warrantless arrests and take-over of facilities, including media, can already
be implemented.”
ISSUE
WON
1. WON the petitioner have locus standi against the issuance of PP 1021?
Complete
Conclusion
Premise 1
(Specific/
Legal Basis)
1. YES. The petitioner has legal standing against the issuance of PP 1021.
RULING
Premise 2 /
(General/
Legal Basis)
+ Conclusion
➢ As applying extant principles of Legal Standing, the Court ruled that the locus
standi of Petitioners David, Llamas, Cacho-Olivares and the Tribune Publishing
Co. Inc. was beyond any doubt. They had all alleged “direct injury” resulting
from illegal arrests and unlawful searches committed by police operatives
pursuant to PP 1017.
➢ The Court also upheld the legal standing of the other petitioners on the ground
that the subject of the Petitions was of transcendental importance to the
nation.
➢ Therefore, in view of the transcendental importance of the issue, Supreme
Court declares that petitioner have locus standi.
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
Dela Cruz, Camille D.
1
Notes:
Locus Standi
-
•
a right of appearance in a court of justice on a given question.
In private suits, standing is governed by the “real-parties-in interest” rule as contained in Section
2, Rule 3 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended.
It provides that “every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in
interest
“real-party-in interest” is “the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the
suit or the party entitled to the avails of the suit.” Succinctly put, the plaintiff’s standing is based
on his own right to the relief sought.
The difficulty of determining locus standi arises in public suits, as here, the plaintiff who asserts a
“public right” in assailing an allegedly illegal official action, does so as a representative of the
general public.\
Other related Jurisprudence:
1. Tañada v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985), that when the issue concerns a public right, it is sufficient that the
petitioner is a citizen and has an interest in the execution of the laws.
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
Dela Cruz, Camille D.
2