Occeña vs COMELEC Case Digest
Facts – Occeña vs COMELEC Case Digest
The challenge in these two prohibition proceedings against the validity of three Batasang Pambansa Resolutions proposing constitutional amendments goes further than merely assailing their alleged constitutional infirmity.
Petitioners Samuel Occena and Ramon A. Gonzales, both members of the Philippine Bar and former delegates to the 1971 Constitutional Convention that framed the present Constitution are suing as taxpayers. The rather unorthodox aspect of these petitions is the assertion that the 1973 Constitution is not the fundamental law, the Javellana ruling to the contrary notwithstanding.
The suits for prohibition were filed respectively on March 6 and March 12, 1981. On March 10 and 13 respectively, respondents were required to answer each within ten days from notice.
RELATED:
- Sanidad vs COMELEC Case Digest
- Javellana vs Executive Secretary Case Digest
- Aquino vs Enrile Case Digest
- Planas vs COMELEC Case Digest
Issue
Is the 1973 Constitution is the fundamental law?
Ruling
The present constitution is in force and effect as of January 17, 1973. In Javellana vs the Executive Secretary, it has been concluded that the new Constitution is in force and effective, resolving all doubts. At least cases were previously cited in the effectivity of the present Constitution in the first years of its effectivity alone.
Petitions dismissed for lack of merit. The Court sits to uphold and apply the Constitution and concluded that the 1973 Constitution is the fundamental law.
Occeña vs COMELEC Case Digest
