About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

47 Ateneo L.J. 2 (2002-2003)

handle is hein.journals/ateno47 and id is 1 raw text is: Estrada v. Arroyo: Some Reflections justice Isagani A. Cruz* The most important case decided by the Supreme Court last year was Joseph Estrada v. Glona Macapagal Arroyo) Consolidated with joseph Estrada v. Aniano Desierto et al,2 it settled the constitutional issues of Vice-President Arroyo's succession to the presidency and President Estrada's claimed imnrunity from suit. the two cases were decided jointly, with Justice Reynato S. Puno as ponente.% Justices Josue N. Bellosillo, Jose A. R. Melo, Leonardo A. Quisuming, Minerva Gonzaga-Reyes, and Sabino R. de Leon concurred, with justices Jose C. Vitug and Vicente V. Mendoza filing separate concurring opinions. That made eight of them. Five other justices, namely, Santiago M. Kapunan, Bemardo P. Pardo, Arturo B. Buena, Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, and Angelina Sadoval-Gutierrez concurred in the result. ChiefJustice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. and Justice Arternio V. Panganiban took no part and explained their inhibition, Those who concurred only in the result reserved the filing of separate opinions except Buena, who simply concurred in the result without more and Pardo, who reserved his vote on the question of presidential immunity from suit. Concurrence only in the result suggests a partial dissent that must be explained under the mandatory provisions of Art. VIII, Sec. 13 of the Constitution. Compliance with this rule will be discussed below. The conclusions in the joint decision were supported by all the members of the Supreme Court, presumably including Davide and Panganiban if they had not recused themselves. One cannothelp thinking, however, that some of those who concurred only in the result may have done so only to give the ponencia the unanimous support of the Court, possibly in deference to Chief justice Davide, who played an active non-judicial role during the political impasse. No less compelling might have been the prevailing public opinion here and even abroad in favor of the new Arroyo government. * The author was Senior Associate justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines He is currently Dean of the University of Perpetual Help-Rizal College of Law. Cite as 47 ATENEO L.J. 2 (2002), i. Joseph Estrada v. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, G.R. No. 146738, March 2, 2001. 2. Joseph Estrada v. Aniano Desierto et al, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, March 2, 2001. Digitized from Best Copy Available

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most