7/31/2019 Digest Javellana

1/2

Javellana vs Executive Secretary

Gr. No. L-36142, March 31, 1973

Concepcion, C.J.

Facts: The case at bar commenced on the passage of a resolution calling

a convention to propose amendments to the constitution of the

Philippines by the Congress. The delegates have been elected and

began to perform their functions when then President Ferdinand Marcos

issued proclamation 1081 placing the entire Philippines under Martial

Law on September 21, 1972. Two months after, the convention

approved the proposed Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.

The Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 73 on November 30, 1972,submitting for ratification or rejection the Constitution, and setting the

plebiscite for the said ratification or rejection of the Constitution. In

addition to this, Marcos also declared the issuance of Presidential Decree

No. 86 setting up a so-called Citizen Assemblies that shall decide n the

ratification of the New Constitution.

Josue Javellana, a citizen and registered voter of the Republic of

the Philippines, filed the case against the Executive Secretary and the

Secretaries of Department of National Defense, Department of Justice,

and Department of Finance. He sought to restrain the abovementioned

authorities from implementing provisions in the proposed Constitution

and challenged the constitutionality of the proclamations issued by the

President.

Issue:

1. W/N the issue of the validity of Proclamation No. 1102 is a

political question?

2. W/N the 1973 Constitution has been validly ratified.

3. W/N the people consented (with or without valid ratification) to

the aforementioned proposed Constitution.

Held:

7/31/2019 Digest Javellana

2/2

1. The validity of Proclamation No. 1102 is a not a political

question but a justiciable one. The Proclamation being such

grants the judiciary with the absolute duty of determining

whether the Constitution has been amended in the manner

required by the constitution, save a special tribunal has beenorganized to identify such question. In the view of issues that

are justiciable, the constitution has vested a power to the

judiciary to settle and decide with finality justiciable

controversies between private individuals or entities as well as

disputes or conflicts between private individual or entity and an

officer or branch of government when there is a complaint

concerning acting without jurisdiction or in excess thereof or in

violation of law.

2. The New Constitution was not validly ratified because thenumber of people who voted at the Citizens Assemblies

exceeded the number of registered voters under the Election

code in force in January 1973.

3. The Supreme Court ruled that it is impossible to determine

whether the people acted freely or not with regard the

proposed Constitution because the proposal was given during

the time martial law was declared. At such time, people could

be acting only to obey the decrees and the orders of the

president.