Scribd
Upload
204 views2 pages

Santiago vs. Guingona

Senators Miriam Defensor Santiago and Francisco Tatad filed a petition for quo warranto, alleging that Senator Teofisto Guingona unlawfully held the position of Senate minority leader, which they claimed rightfully belonged to Senator Tatad. The Court ruled that it had no jurisdiction over the petition, as the Constitution does not specify how the Senate elects positions other than the Senate President. It further stated that no provision of the Constitution, laws, or Senate rules had been violated by recognizing Senator Guingona as minority leader. Therefore, no abuse of discretion could be imputed to the Senate officials.

Uploaded by

theresa
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
204 views2 pages

Santiago vs. Guingona

Senators Miriam Defensor Santiago and Francisco Tatad filed a petition for quo warranto, alleging that Senator Teofisto Guingona unlawfully held the position of Senate minority leader, which they claimed rightfully belonged to Senator Tatad. The Court ruled that it had no jurisdiction over the petition, as the Constitution does not specify how the Senate elects positions other than the Senate President. It further stated that no provision of the Constitution, laws, or Senate rules had been violated by recognizing Senator Guingona as minority leader. Therefore, no abuse of discretion could be imputed to the Senate officials.

Uploaded by

theresa
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/ 2

Theresa T.

Godinez Constitutional 1 (Weekdays)

G.R. No. 134577 November 18, 1998

SEN. MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO and SEN. FRANCISCO S. TATAD, petitioners,


vs. SEN. TEOFISTO T. GUINGONA, JR. and SEN. MARCELO B. FERNAN,
respondents.

Facts:

On July 27, 1998, the first regular session of the eleventh Congress was held, with Sen.
John Henry R. Osmena as presiding officer. On the agenda for the day was election of
officers. The nominees for the position for Senate President was Se. Marcelo B. Fernan
and Sen. Francisco S. Tatad. By a vote of 20 to 2, Senator Fernan was declared the
duly elected President of the Senate.

On July 30, 1998, the majority leader informed the body chat he was in receipt of a
letter signed by the seven Lakas-NUCD-UMDP senators,9 stating that they had elected
Senator Guingona as the minority leader. By virtue thereof, the Senate President
formally recognized Senator Guingona as the minority leader of the Senate.

The following day, Senators Santiago and Tatad filed before this Court the subject
petition for quo warranto, alleging in the main that Senator Guingona had been
usurping, unlawfully holding and exercising the position of Senate minority leader, a
position that, according to them, rightfully belonged to Senator Tatad.

Issues:

Whether or not the Court there is an actual violation of the Constitution.

Rulings:

No, the Court has no jurisdiction over the petition as there is no express provision in the
Constitution as to how both Houses elects the positions other the Senate President and
Theresa T. Godinez Constitutional 1 (Weekdays)

the House as stated in Art. 6, Sec. 16 states, “The Senate shall elect its President and
the House of Representatives, its Speaker, by a majority vote of all its respective
Members.” It further added the clause “Each House shall choose such other officers as
it may deem necessary” meaning, in this case, when the majority is reached with regard
to the election of the Senate President, the Senate rules now govern as to how the
other officers are posted.

Under these circumstances, we believe that the Senate President cannot be accused of
capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment or of an arbitrary and despotic manner by
reason of passion or hostility. Where no provision of the Constitution, the laws or even
the rules of the Senate has been clearly shown to have been violated, disregarded or
overlooked, grave abuse of discretion cannot be imputed to Senate officials for acts
done within their competence and authority.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy