Scribd
Upload
75 views1 page

Garcillano vs Gloria: Senate Inquiry Case

This document discusses two petitions related to the "Hello Garci" scandal. The first petition sought to bar the Senate from conducting a legislative inquiry using the tapes, but the Court did not issue an injunction so the inquiry proceeded. The second petition addressed the parties' standing to file the cases. The Court recognized the standing of petitioner Garcilliano since he would be directly injured by the inquiry. It also recognized the standing of Ranada and Agcaoili as concerned citizens and taxpayers, as well as the standing of intervenor Sagge based on his constitutional right to due process. The issues raised in the petitions were deemed important for the Court, Bench, and Bar to provide guidance.

Uploaded by

Milcah Magpantay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
75 views1 page

Garcillano vs Gloria: Senate Inquiry Case

This document discusses two petitions related to the "Hello Garci" scandal. The first petition sought to bar the Senate from conducting a legislative inquiry using the tapes, but the Court did not issue an injunction so the inquiry proceeded. The second petition addressed the parties' standing to file the cases. The Court recognized the standing of petitioner Garcilliano since he would be directly injured by the inquiry. It also recognized the standing of Ranada and Agcaoili as concerned citizens and taxpayers, as well as the standing of intervenor Sagge based on his constitutional right to due process. The issues raised in the petitions were deemed important for the Court, Bench, and Bar to provide guidance.

Uploaded by

Milcah Magpantay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Garcialliano vs Gloria

FACTS:

On September 6, 2007, petitioners including Santiago Ranada and Oswaldo Agcaoili,


retired justices of the Court of Appeals, filed before this Court a Petition for Prohibition
with Prayer for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of
Preliminary Injunction, docketed as G.R. No. 179275, seeking to bar the Senate from
conducting its scheduled legislative inquiry. They argued in the main that the intended
legislative inquiry violates R.A. No. 4200 and Section 3, Article III of the Constitution.1

As the Court did not issue an injunctive writ, the Senate proceeded with its public
hearings on the "Hello Garci" tapes.

ISSUE:

The issue on the parties’ standing, argued at length in their pleadings.

HELD:

Obviously, petitioner Garcillano stands to be directly injured by the House committees’


actions and charges of electoral fraud. The Court recognizes his standing to institute the
petition for prohibition.

Ranada and Agcaoili justify their standing by alleging that they are concerned citizens,
taxpayers, and members of the IBP. They are of the firm conviction that any attempt to
use the "Hello Garci" tapes will further divide the country.

G.R. No. 179275 shows that the petitioners and intervenor Sagge advance constitutional issues
which deserve the attention of this Court in view of their seriousness, novelty and weight as
precedents. The issues are of transcendental and paramount importance not only to the public
but also to the Bench and the Bar, and should be resolved for the guidance of all.

Given that petitioners Ranada and Agcaoili allege an interest in the execution of the laws and
that intervenor Sagge asserts his constitutional right to due process, they satisfy the requisite
personal stake in the outcome of the controversy by merely being citizens of the Republic

(Guys, two petitions ito. The 1st one was declared moot and academic. Garci prayed not to play
the recordings in the House but it was already played before his petition. The 2nd one, di ko na
sinali kasi about “one of the requisite for a valid leg. Inquiry”,, knows naman na natin yun)

You might also like