November 29, 2006 · Posted in: Governance, In the News
Profiling the Chief Justice candidates – 2
DECISIONS and positions on key national political and socioeconomic issues
|
NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY
|
|||
|
ISSUE
|
SUPREME COURT RULING
|
CONCUR (YES)
|
DISSENT (NO)
|
|
Is the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) constitutional?
|
The votes were equally divided (7-7). With the necessary majority not obtained, the petition of former Justice Isagani Cruz was dismissed.
|
Puno Quisumbing Ynares-Santiago (all three said IPRA is constitutional) |
|
|
Is the Mining Act unconstitutional?
|
The Mining Act of 1995 is unconstitutional. (January 27, 2004 decision)
|
Sandoval-Gutierrez Carpio |
Puno Quisumbing Ynares-Santiago |
|
Is the Mining Act unconstitutional?
|
The Mining Act of 1995 is constitutional. (December 1, 2004 decision)
|
Puno Quisumbing Ynares-Santiago |
Sandoval-Gutierrez Carpio |
|
Could Amari, a private corporation, own lands of the public domain?
|
Court ruled that the Joint Venture Agreement between PEA and Amari is null and void. Private corporations are prohibited from acquiring lands of the public domain as these belong to the State.
|
Puno Quisumbing Ynares-Santiago Sandoval-Gutierrez Carpio (penned the decision) |
|
Sandoval-Gutierrez and Carpio took no part in the decision on IPRA’s constitutionality since they were not yet SC justices at the time.
|
MARCOS ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH AND ESTRADA PLUNDER
|
|||
|
ISSUE
|
SUPREME COURT RULING
|
CONCUR (YES)
|
DISSENT (NO)
|
|
Should the Swiss deposit (Marcos ill-gotten wealth) be forfeited in favor of the Republic of the Philippines?
|
The Swiss deposit deposited in escrow at the Philippine National Bank is forfeited in favor of the Republic of the Philippines.
|
Puno
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
|
|
Does the Republic of the Philippines have the right to vote on the sequestered United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) shares because these are public in character and thus belong to the government?
|
The Republic of the Philippines has the right to vote on the sequestered UCPB shares which are public in character and therefore belong to the government.
|
Puno
Quisumbing
Carpio
|
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
|
Is deposed President Estrada right when he argued that the Plunder Law is unconstitutional?
|
Republic Act No. 7080 or the Plunder Law as amended by R.A. 7659 is constitutional.
|
Puno
Quisumbing
|
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
Quisumbing was on leave while Carpio took no part in the decision on the Marcos ill-gotten wealth case. Carpio likewise inhibited himself from the case involving Estrada’s petition questioning the constitutionality of the plunder law.
|
NATIONAL POLITICAL ISSUES
|
|||
|
ISSUE
|
SUPREME COURT RULING
|
CONCUR (YES)
|
DISSENT (NO)
|
|
Did Estrada resign? Is Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo the constitutional successor of Estrada?
|
Estrada resigned. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is the 14th de jure president of the Philippines.
|
Puno (penned the decision)
Quisumbing
Ynares-Santiago (with reservations)
Sandoval-Gutierrez (with reservations)
|
|
|
Is Fernando Poe Jr. a natural-born Filipino citizen (and could therefore run for the presidency)?
|
Fernando Poe Jr. is a natural-born Filipino citizen.
|
Puno
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
Quisumbing
Carpio
|
|
Could Susan Roces substitute as petitioner for the election protest of her deceased husband, Fernando Poe Jr.?
|
Denied Susan Roces’s motion for intervention and substitution for lack of merit. Dismissed protest filed by Fernando Poe Jr. No real party in interest has come forward within the reasonable period allowed by law, to intervene in the case or be substituted for the deceased protestant.
|
Puno
Quisumbing
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
Carpio
|
|
Carpio took no part in the decision on the constitutional succession of Arroyo as he was not yet SC justice at the time.
Ynares-Santiago concurred with the majority decision but expressed “concern and disquietude” regarding the use of “people power” to create a vacancy in the presidency. She said that there is “no provision in the Constitution that sanctions people power as a legitimate means of ousting a public official, let alone the President of the Republic.”
While also concurring, Sandoval-Gutierrez said: “Indeed, it is safe to conclude that he was compelled to resign or to leave the Presidency. However, the legality or illegality of petitioner’s so-called resignation has been laid to rest by the results that have taken place.”
|
PUBLIC INTEREST ISSUES ON UTILITIES
|
|||
|
ISSUE
|
SUPREME COURT RULING
|
CONCUR (YES)
|
DISSENT (NO)
|
|
Is Meralco legally obliged to refund the amount it overcharged its consumers?
|
Ordered Meralco to refund about P28 billion that was overcharged its customers between 1994 and 1998.
|
Puno (penned the decision)
Quisumbing
Ynares-Santiago (concurred while on leave)
Sandoval-Gutierrez
Carpio
|
|
|
Is PIATCO’s contract with the government in the building and operation of NAIA-3 a monopoly that is against the public interest?
|
Set aside and declared null and void PIATCO’s 1997 Concession Agreement, the Amended and Restated Concession Agreement and its supplements with the government.
|
Puno (penned the decision)
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
Quisumbing
|
Carpio inhibited himself from the PIATCO case.
|
FREEDOM OF SPEECH, EXPRESSION AND THE PRESS
|
|||
|
ISSUE
|
SUPREME COURT RULING
|
CONCUR (YES)
|
DISSENT (NO)
|
|
Is the prohibition on the conduct of surveys during elections a prior restraint on freedom of expression?
|
Sec. 5.4 of RA 9006 or the Fair Elections Act, which prohibits the conduct of surveys during elections, is unconstitutional as it imposes prior restraint on freedom of expression.
|
Puno (penned the decision)
|
Ynares-Santiago
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
|
Do exit polls and the dissemination of their results through mass media constitute an essential part of the freedoms of speech and of the press?
|
Granted the petition of ABS-CBN on exit polls. Comelec resolution banning exit polls was nullified and set aside. Exit polls and the dissemination of their results through the mass media constitute an essential part of the freedoms of speech and of the press.
|
Puno
Quisumbing
Ynares-Santiago
|
|
|
Should live coverage by media be allowed in the trial of plunder cases against former President Estrada at the Sandiganbayan?
|
Denied the petition for live radio-TV coverage of the trial in the Sandiganbayan of the plunder cases against former President Joseph Estrada.
|
Ynares-Santiago (concurred while on leave)
Sandoval-Gutierrez
|
Puno
Quisumbing
|
Quisumbing was on leave when the Court decided on the issue of surveys. Sandoval-Gutierrez was not yet SC justice when the Court decided on the issue of exit polls. Carpio took no part in all three decisions as he was not yet appointed justice at the time.
Puno, on the other hand, was the most consistent in his judicial philosophy of promoting the right to information, said Vincent Lazatin, executive director and chairman of the Transparency and Accountability Network, also a member of SCAW.
In at least three (abovementioned) cases, Lazatin pointed out that Puno displayed an “unswerving” position in upholding freedom of speech, expression and of the press.
Puno upheld the unconstitutionality of the prohibition on surveys as it imposes prior restraint on freedom of expression. He also voted in favor of conducting exit polls as these constitute an essential part of the freedoms of speech and of the press.
Dissenting in the SC decision denying the petition for live media coverage of Estrada’s plunder trial, Puno said that: “the absolute banning of the coverage should be reexamined to readjust the balance between a free press and a fair trial.”
(Next: The candidates’ decisions and positions on threats to civil, political and democratic rights under the Arroyo administration)
