truth com - digest

Upload: yerdxx

Post on 02-Jun-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/10/2019 Truth Com - Digest

    1/3

    LOUIS "BAROK" C. BIRAOGO vs. THE PHILIPPINE TRUTH COMMISSION OF 2010G.R. No. 192935 and G.R. No. 193036 | 2010-12-07

    G.R. No. 192935, a special civil action for prohiition instit!ted " petitioner #o!is $irao%o&$irao%o' in his capacit" as a citi(en and ta)pa"er. $irao%o assails Executve O!e! N#. 1for ein% violative of the le%islative po*er of +on%ress !nder ection 1, rticle / of the

    +onstit!tion as it !s!rps the constit!tional a!thorit" of the le%islat!re to create a p!licoce and to appropriate f!nds therefor.

    Executve O!e! N#. 1- estalishin% the hilippine r!th +oission of 2010 &r!th+oission' - ere ad hoc od" fored !nder the 4ce of the resident *ith the priar"tas to investi%ate reports of %raft and corr!ption coitted " third-level p!lic ocersand eplo"ees, their co-principals, accoplices and accessories d!rin% the previo!sadinistration, and thereafter to s!it its ndin% and recoendations to the resident,+on%ress and the 4!dsan. ho!%h it has een descried as an independent colle%ialod", it is essentiall" an entit" *ithin the 4ce of the resident roper and s!8ect to hiscontrol. o!tless, it constit!tes a p!lic oce, as an ad hoc od" is one.

    etitioners-le%islators contentions:

    1. ;.4. No. 1 violates the separation of po*ers as it arro%ates the po*er of the +on%ressto create a p!lic oce and appropriate f!nds for its operation.

    2. he provision of $oo ///, +hapter 10, ection 31 of the dinistrative +ode of 19

  • 8/10/2019 Truth Com - Digest

    2/3

    2. ;.4. No. 1 does not !s!rp the po*er of +on%ress to appropriate f!nds eca!se thereis no appropriation !t a ere allocation of f!nds alread" appropriated " +on%ress

    3. he r!th +oission does not d!plicate or s!persede the f!nctions of the 4ce ofthe 4!dsan &4!dsan' and the epartent of >!stice &4>', eca!se it is afact-ndin% od" and not a =!asi-8!dicial od" and its f!nctions do not d!plicate,s!pplant or erode the latterAs 8!risdiction.

    . he T!ut, C#--ss#) #es )#t v#$&te t,e e/u&$ *!#tect#) c$&use ec&uset &s v&$$% c!e&te (#! $&u&$e *u!*#ses.&. ;.4. No. *as iss!ed in vie* of *idespread reports of lar%e scale %raft and

    corr!ption in the previo!s adinistration *hich have eroded p!lic condence inp!lic instit!tions.

    . he se%re%ation of the precedin% adinistration as the o8ect of fact-ndin% is*arranted " the realit" that !nlie *ith adinistrations lon% %one, the c!rrentadinistration *ill ost liel" ear the iediate conse=!ence of the policies ofthe previo!s adinistration.

    c. he classication of the previo!s adinistration as a separate class forinvesti%ation lies in the realit" that the evidence of possile criinal activit", theevidence that co!ld lead to recover" of p!lic onies ille%all" dissipated, thepolic" lessons to e learned to ens!re that anti-corr!ption la*s are faithf!ll"e)ec!ted, are ore easil" estalished in the re%ie that iediatel" precede thec!rrent adinistration.

    . Ban" adinistrations s!8ect the transactions of their predecessors toinvesti%ations to provide clos!re to iss!es that are pivotal to national life or evenas a ro!tine eas!re of d!e dili%ence and %ood ho!seeepin%.

    HEL3

    1. P#e! #( t,e P!ese)t t# C!e&te t,e T!ut, C#--ss#)a. N# P#e! ) Re#!'&)4&t#)- ection 31 refers to red!ction of personnel,

    consolidation of oces, or aolition thereof " reason of econo" or red!ndanc"of f!nctions. hese point to sit!ations *here a od" or an oce is alread"e)istent !t a odication or alteration thereof has to e eCected. he creationof an oce is no*here entioned, !ch less envisioned in said provision.

    . N# e$e'&t#) #( P#e! - .. No. 1?16 *as a dele%ation to then residentBarcos of the a!thorit" to reor%ani(e the adinistrative str!ct!re of the national%overnent incl!din% the po*er to create oces and transfer appropriations.

    c. P#e! t# c!e&te t,e A ,#c I)vest'&t)' C#--ttee- the resident has theoli%ation to ens!re that all e)ec!tive ocials and eplo"ees faithf!ll" copl"*ith the la*.

    2. P#e! #( t,e T!ut, C#--ss#) t# I)vest'&te )#t &5uc&tea. + *ill not s!pplant the 4!dsan or the 4> or erode their respective po*ers

    - investi%ative f!nction of the coission *ill copleent those of the t*ooces. hese oces, therefore, are not deprived of their andated d!ties !t *illinstead e aided " the reports of the + for possile indictents for violationsof %raft la*s.

    . Dindin%s of the + are N4 concl!siveness - its ndin%s *o!ld, at est, e

    recoendator" in nat!re. 4!dsan and the 4> have a *ider de%ree oflatit!de to decide *hether or not to re8ect the recoendation.

    6. 7#$&tve #( E/u&$ P!#tect#) C$&use3a. ;)ec!tive 4rder No. 1 clear andate of the envisioned tr!th coission is to

    investi%ate and nd o!t the tr!th concernin% the reported cases of %raft andc#!!u*t#) u!)' t,e *!ev#us &-)st!&t#)" #)$%.he intent to sin%leo!t the previo!s adinistration is plain, patent and anifest.

    . +lassication to eet the re=!ireents of constit!tionalit", it !st incl!de orerace all persons *ho nat!rall" elon% to the class.

  • 8/10/2019 Truth Com - Digest

    3/3

    - iscriinator" - rro"o adinistration is !t 8!st a eer of a class of pastadinistrations. Not to incl!de past adinistrations siilarl" sit!atedconstit!tes aritrariness *hich the e=!al protection cla!se cannot sanction.

    - !percial diCerences do not ae for a valid classication - the reports of*idespread corr!ption in the rro"o adinistration cannot e taen as asisfor distin%!ishin% said adinistration fro earlier adinistrations *hich *ere

    also leished " siilar *idespread reports of ipropriet".- hat the previo!s adinistration *as piced o!t *as delierate andintentional - !nderscored at least three ties in the assailed e)ec!tive order.

    - Dact reains that ;)ec!tive 4rder No. 1 s!Cers fro aritrar" classication.he +, to e tr!e to its andate of searchin% for the tr!th, !st not e)cl!dethe other past adinistrations. he + !st, at least, have the a!thorit" toinvesti%ate all past adinistrations.

    - o e)cl!de the earlier adinistrations in the %!ise of s!stantial distinctions*o!ld onl" conr the petitionersA laent that the s!8ect e)ec!tive order isonl" an advent!re in partisan hostilit".

    . Executve O!e! N#. 1 8 UNCONSTITUTIONAL )s#(&! &s t s v#$&tve #( t,ee/u&$ *!#tect#) c$&use #( t,e C#)sttut#).