7/24/2019 CentralBooks:Reader
Close Reader
PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 103
, p ,
Information | Reference substantially identical to each of the Electoral Tribunals under the
Constitution as amended. Copy Selection
Case Title: 3 Araneta vs. Dinglasan, Barredo vs. Commission on Elections, and Select some text within a
LORENZO M. TAÑADA and paragraph and click here to
DIOSDADO MACAPAGAL, Rodriguez vs. Teasurer of the Philippines, 84 Phil., 368, 45 Off. Gaz., copy the selected text. Citation
petitioners, vs. MARIANO JESUS 4411, 4457; Nacionalista Party vs. Bautista, 85 Phil., 101, 47 Off. Gaz., included.
CUENCO, FRANCISCO A.
DELGADO, ALFREDO CRUZ, 2356; Lacson vs. Romero, 84 Phil., 740, 47 Off. Gaz., 1778; De los Santos
CATALINA CAYETANO, MANUEL vs. Mallare, 87 Phil., 289, 48 Off. Gaz., 1787; Lacson vs. Roque, 92 Phil.,
SERAPIO, PLACIDO REYES, and
FERNANDO HIPOLITO, in his 456, 49 Off. Gaz., 93; Jover Ledesma vs. Borra, 93 Phil., 506, 49 Off. Gaz.,
capacity as cashier and 2765; Ramos vs. Avelino, 97 Phil., 844, 51 Off. Gaz., 5607.
disbursing officer, respondents.
Citation: 103 Phil. 1051 1062
More...
1062 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED
Search Result Tañada and Macapagal vs. Cuenco, et al.
said issue, but, also, the duty to do so, which cannot be
evaded without violating the fundamental
4
law and paving
the way to its eventual destruction.
Neither are the cases of Mabanag vs. Lopez Vito (78
Phil., 1) and Cabili vs. Francisco (88 Phil., 654), likewise,
invoked by respondents, in point. In the Mabanag case, it
was held that the courts could not review the finding of the
Senate to the effect that the members thereof who had been
suspended by said House should not be considered in
determining whether the votes cast therein, in favor of a
resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution,
sufficed to satisfy the requirements of the latter, such
question being a political one. The weight of this decision,
as a precedent, has been weakened, however, by our
resolutions in Avelino vs. Cuenco (83 Phil., 17), in which
this Court proceeded to determine the number essential to
constitute a quorum in the Senate. Besides, the case at bar
does not hinge on the number of votes needed for a
particular act of said body. The issue before us is whether
the Senate—after acknowledging that the Citizens Party is
the party having the second largest number of votes in the
Senate, to which party the Constitution gives the right to
nominate three (3) Senators for the Senate Electoral
Tribunal—could validly choose therefor two (2)
Nacionalista Senators, upon nomination by the floor leader
of the Nacionalista Party in the Senate, Senator Primicias,
claiming to act on behalf of the Committee on Rules for the
Senate.
_____________
4 "From the very nature of the American system of government with
Constitutions prescribing the jurisdiction and powers of each of the three
branches of government, it has devolved on the judiciary to determine
whether the acts of the other two departments are in harmony with the
fundamental law. AIl the departments of the government are
unquestionably entitled and compelled to judge of the Constitution for
themselves; but, in doing so, they act under the obligations imposed in,
the instrument, and in the order of time pointed out by it. When the
judiciary has once spoken, if the acts of the other two departments are
held to be unauthorized or despotic, in violation of the Constitution or the
vested rights of the citizen, they cease to be operative or binding.
1063
VOL. 103, FEBRUARY 28, 1957 1063
Tañada and Macapagal vs. Cuenco, et al.
The issue in the Cabili case was whether we could review a
resolution of the Senate reorganizing its representation in
the Commission on Appointments. This was decided in the
negative, upon the authority of Alejandrino vs. Quezon
(supra) and Vera vs. Avelino (supra), the main purpose of
© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016c24a55d30dd27ff49003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/1
