Professional Documents
Culture Documents
oner to arrest and detain petitioners with pending probable cause leading to an
administrative investigation.
Ruling: Yes. Although the constitution grants freedom from unreasonable searches
to all persons, including aliens, whether accused of crime or not, one constitu
tional requirement of a valid search warrant is basis upon probable cause. This
was determined after close surveillance of their activities and was affirmed thr
ough the photographs and posters. The deportation charges by respondent Commissi
oner are in accordance with Section 37(a) of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1
940, in relation to Section 69 of the Revised Administrative Code. The requireme
nt of probable cause, to be determined by a Judge, does not extend to deportatio
n proceedings. Petitioners were, in order, also denied of bail since the right to
bail was a matter of discretion on the part of the Commissioner in deportation
proceedings which do not partake the nature of criminal actions. The power to de
port lies on the sovereign power of the State upon any grounds it may deem prope
r; it is a measure against aliens deemed harmful to public welfare. Respondent a
cted in the interests of the state.
ROMULO
F: Petitioner files a petition declaring PET's unconstitutionality on the ground
that the Constitution does not provide for the creation of the PET, and it viol
ates Sec 12, Art VIII of the Constitution. The Solicitor General affirms that th
e construction of PET lies on the SC's power to be the sole judge of all electio
n contests for the President or VP under par 7, section 5, Art VII of the Consti
tution. SC then dismisses Macalintal's petition yet petitioner files for a motio
n for reconsideration.
Issue: Whether or not PET exercises quasi-judicial power.
ruling: Yes. The Constitution grants this power to the SC in Section 1, Art 7 an
d is consistent to its power to settle "disputes and controversies involving rig
hts duties or prerogatives that are legally demandable and enforceable and to de
termine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to l
ack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of th
e Government." The power was expanded, but it remained absolute.
The set up embodied in the Constitution and statutes characterizes the resolutio
n of electoral contests as essentially an exercise of judicial power.
CEREZO
F: Petitioner filed a complaint for libel against respondents. Finding probable
cause, the Prosecutor filed the corresponding Information against them, but reve
rsed its earlier finding and recommended the withdrawal of the information. Rely
ing on the recommendation of the prosecutor, the RTC ordered the criminal case d
ismissed on the ground that it is a settled rule that the determination of the p
ersons to be prosecuted rests primarily with the Public Prosecutor who is vested
with quasi-judicial discretion in the discharge of this function. Being vested
with such power, he can reconsider his own resolution if he finds that there is
reasonable ground to do so.
However, upon petitioner s motion for reconsideration, the RTC granted the same an
d reinstated the case after the DOJ Secretary reversed the resolution of the pro
secutor.
Issue: Whether or not the RTC judge necessarily has to make an independent evalu
ation or assessment of the merits of the case.
Ruling: Yes. There is a rule that once a case is filed with the court, its dispo
sition rests on the discretion of the court. The trial court should not rely sol
ely on the findings of the public prosecutor or the Secretary of Justice in reso