PRINCIPLE OF CHECK AND BALANCES

Application and Relation to the Doctrine of Separation of Powers

Tan vs. Macapagal, 43 SCRA 677 [No. L-34161]

Facts:
A five page petition was filed by Eugene A. Tan, Silvestre J. Acejas and
Rogelio V. Fernandez, for declaratory relief as tax payers, bur purportedly
suing in behalf of themselves and the Filipino people, in assailing the validity
of the Laurel-Leido Resolution, dealing with the range of the authority of the
1971 Constitutional Convention, would have the Supreme Court declare that
it is without power, under Section 1, Article XV of the Constitution and
Republic Act 6132, to consider, discuss and adopt proposals which seek to
revise the present Constitution [the Convention being] merely empowered to
propose improvements to the present Constitution without altering the
general plan laid down therein. The petition was dismissed two days after
the filing and on the last day of the month, a thirty-two page for
reconsideration was printed.
Issue:
Whether or not the petitioners had the requisite standing to seek a
declaration of the alleged nullity of a resolution of the Constitutional
Convention?
Whether or not the Supreme Court has the power to interfere with the
Constitutional Convention?
Held:
No, the petitioners, even though they are taxpayers, have no standing
for the petition. The person who impugns the validity of a statute must have
a personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained, or
will sustain, direct injury as a result of its enforcement. The validity of a
statute may be contested only by one who will sustain a direct injury, in
consequence of its enforcement.
Where a constitutional question is raised, a Senator has usually been
considered as possessed of the requisite personality to bring a suit (Mabanag
vs. Lopez Vito, Tolentino vs. COMELEC).
No, the Supreme Court has no power to interfere with the
Constitutional Convention. The doctrine of separation of powers call for the
executive, legislative and judicial departments being left alone to discharge
GROUP 6
1JD-C

Atty. David Yap

Consti 1

PRINCIPLE OF CHECK AND BALANCES

Application and Relation to the Doctrine of Separation of Powers
their duties as they see fit. The judiciary will neither direct nor restrain
executive or legislative action. The legislative and executive branches are not
bound to seek its advice as to what to do or not to do. Such a principle
applies as well when the concerns the scope of the competence lodged in the
Constitutional Convention. The judiciary must leave it free to fulfill its
responsibility according to its lights.
In Gonzales vs. COMELEC, the controlling doctrine, had the good sense
to wait before filing his suit until after the enactment of the statute for the
submission to the electorate of certain proposed amendments to the
Constitution. It was only then that the matter was ripe for adjudication. It is a
prerequisite that something had by then been accomplished or performed by
either branch before a court may come into the picture.
The motion for reconsideration was denied.

GROUP 6
1JD-C

Atty. David Yap

Consti 1

PRINCIPLE OF CHECK AND BALANCES

Application and Relation to the Doctrine of Separation of Powers

GARCIA VS BOI (G.R. No. 88637 September 7, 1989)

Facts:
The Taiwanese who owned the Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC)
applied to the (BOI) for the Registration as a new domestic producer of
Petrochemicals in the Philippines. The Site was located in Bataan and they
request is to move it in Batangas . By the petition of Congressman Enrique
Garcia he requested a copy of BPCs original and amended application
documents but the BOI did not gave him a copy because those documents
are confidential. Congressman Garcia was not agree for the transferring but
the BOI granted the Request of the investors. The Congressman wants the
BPC to remain because the inhabitants of Bataan had an interest in the
establishment of the petrochemical plant in their midst [that] is actual, real,
and vital because it will affect not only their economic life, but even the air
tiled that BPCs amended application was in fact a second application that
required a new public notice to be filed and a new hearing to be held.
Issue:
Whether or not the BoI committed grave abuse of discretion in
granting the wishes of the investor, though they know that this involves
national interest

Ruling:
The Court find that the BOI committed a grave abuse of discretion in
approving the transfer of the petrochemical plant from bataan to batangas
and authorizing the change of feedstock from naptha only for the main
reason that the investors has the final choice of the site but. The Court has a
constitutional duty to step into this controversy and determine the
paramount issue as stated in article 8 sec 1 of the Philippine Constitution
The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower
courts as may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the
courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are
legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not
there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of
GROUP 6
1JD-C

Atty. David Yap

Consti 1

PRINCIPLE OF CHECK AND BALANCES

Application and Relation to the Doctrine of Separation of Powers
the Government. The SC has 6 reasons in this issue these are (1) Bataan
was the original choice as the plant site of the BOI which the BPC agreed That
is why it bears the name of bataan. (2) the BRC ,a government owned Filipino
corporation,located in Bataan produces 60 % of the national of naphta which
can be used as feedstock for the plant in bataan. (3) naphta as feedstock has
been exempted by law from the as valorem tax by approval of RA 6767.
(4)under sec 10 of article 12 of the 1987 Constitution it is the duty of the
state to regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its
national jurisdiction and in accordance with its national goals and
priorities(5)the capital requirements will be minimized if LPC does not have
to buy land for the project and its feedstock shall be limited to naphtha which
is certainly more economical .lastly (6) if the plant site is maintained in
bataan,the PNOC shall be a partner in the venture to the gret benefit and
advantage of the government which shall have participation in the
management of the project instead of a firm which is a huge multinational
corporation.
And this brings us to a prime consideration which the court cannot
rightly ignore.

GROUP 6
1JD-C

Atty. David Yap

Consti 1

PRINCIPLE OF CHECK AND BALANCES

Application and Relation to the Doctrine of Separation of Powers

Submitted by:
Belen, John Ric
Dinglasan, Lizzette
Martinez, Ma. Claire Joy
Riego, Jofrank David
Tito, Janette

GROUP 6
1JD-C

Atty. David Yap

Consti 1