Francisco vs House of Representatives Case Digest
Facts – Francisco vs House of Representatives Case Digest
On June 2, 2003, an impeachment complaint was filed against Chief Justice Hilario Davide and seven (7) Associate Justices. However, it was dismissed by The House Committee on Justice on October 22, 2003, for being insufficient in substance.
Representative Gilbert Teodoro and Felix Fuentabella filed a new impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Davide on October 23, 2003.
Petitions arose against the House of Representatives et al, who contend that the filing of the second impeachment complaint is unconstitutional, violating the provision of Section 5, Article XI of the Constitution.
“no impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than one within the period of one year.” – Section 5, Article XI of the Constitution.
Senator Pimentel Jr. Filed a Motion to Intervene, stating that the consolidated petitions be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction of the Court. and that the sole power, authority and jurisdiction of the Senate as the impeachment court be recognized and upheld pursuant to the provision of Article XI of the Constitution.
RELATED:
- Sanidad vs COMELEC Case Digest
- Javellana vs Executive Secretary Case Digest
- Aquino vs Enrile Case Digest
- Planas vs COMELEC Case Digest
Issue
Whether or not the Court has the jurisdiction to determine the validity of the second impeachment complaint pursuant to Article XI of the Constitution.
Ruling
The second impeachment complaint is barred under Section 3 (5) of Article XI of the Constitution.
The Constitution is to be interpreted as a whole, the said provision should function to the full extent of its substance and form and its terms, in conjunction with all other provisions of the Constitution.
Pursuant to Section 1 Article VIII of the Constitution, “the judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court.” Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights that are legally demandable and enforceable. Also, to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on part of any branch of the government.
Francisco vs House of Representatives Case Digest
