Revisiting the Case of De Leon vs Esquerra (153 SCRA 602)
When did the 1987 Philippine Constitution took effect? BAR Question
The decision of this case became a household reference in determining the date of the effectivity of the Constitution.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Until the term of
office of barangay officials has been determined by aw, therefore, the term of
office of 6 years provided for in the Barangay Election Act of 1982 should still govern.
________________________________________________________________________________________
In the effectivity of the Constitution, the result of plebiscite was determined and announce February 12, 2017 in which the respondents claim the date the Constitution took effect. By this, since the memorandum was signed February 8, 1987, the appointment of the new official are still valid.
However, Supreme Court says that the 1987 Constitution took effect on the date of the ratification which was on February 2, 1987 as it was the date the People of the Philippines decided and approved the new Constitution. The "will" of the People to approve the new Constitution happened on February 2, 1987 and it was merely confirmation and announcement that happened on Feb. 12, 1987.
To read the full case, please click: Full Case: De Leon vs Esguerra G.R. No. 78059 August 31, 1987
When did the 1987 Philippine Constitution took effect? BAR Question
The decision of this case became a household reference in determining the date of the effectivity of the Constitution.
_________________________________________________________________________________
De Leon v. Esguerra
Case Digest
De
Leon v. Esguerra, 153 SCRA 602, August, 31, 1987 (En Banc), J. Melencio-Herrera
 |
| image from google.com |
Facts:
On May 17, 1982, petitioner Alfredo M. De Leon was elected Barangay Captain
together with the other petitioners as Barangay Councilmen of Barangay Dolores,
Muncipality of Taytay, Province of Rizal in a Barangay election held under
Batas Pambansa Blg. 222, otherwise known as Barangay Election Act of 1982.
On
February 9, 1987, petitioner De Leon received a Memorandum antedated December
1, 1986 but signed by respondent OIC Governor Benjamin Esguerra on February 8,
1987 designating respondent Florentino G. Magno as Barangay Captain of Barangay
Dolores and the other respondents as members of Barangay Council of the same
Barangay and Municipality.
Petitoners
prayed to the Supreme Court that the subject Memoranda of February 8, 1987 be
declared null and void and that respondents be prohibited by taking over their
positions of Barangay Captain and Barangay Councilmen.
Petitioners
maintain that pursuant to Section 3 of the Barangay Election Act of 1982 (BP
Blg. 222), their terms of office shall be six years which shall commence on
June 7, 1988 and shall continue until their successors shall have elected and
shall have qualified. It was also their position that with the ratification of
the 1987 Philippine Constitution, respondent OIC Governor no longer has the
authority to replace them and to designate their successors.
On
the other hand, respondents contend that the terms of office of elective and
appointive officials were abolished and that petitioners continued in office by
virtue of Sec. 2, Art. 3 of the Provisional Constitution and not because their
term of six years had not yet expired; and that the provision in the Barangay
Election Act fixing the term of office of Barangay officials to six years must
be deemed to have been repealed for being inconsistent with Sec. 2, Art. 3 of
the Provisional Constitution.
Issue: Whether or
not the designation of respondents to replace petitioners was validly made
during the one-year period which ended on Feb 25, 1987.
Ruling: Supreme
Court declared that the Memoranda issued by respondent OIC Gov on Feb 8, 1987
designating respondents as Barangay Captain and Barangay Councilmen of Barangay
Dolores, Taytay, Rizal has no legal force and effect.
The
1987 Constitution was ratified in a plebiscite on Feb 2, 1987, therefore, the
Provisional Constitution must be deemed to have superseded. Having become
inoperative, respondent OIC Gov could no longer rely on Sec 2, Art 3, thereof
to designate respondents to the elective positions occupied by petitioners.
Relevantly, Sec 8, Art 1 of the 1987 Constitution further provides in part:
"Sec.
8. The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials,
which shall be determined by law, shall be three years x x x."
________________________________________________________________________________________
In the effectivity of the Constitution, the result of plebiscite was determined and announce February 12, 2017 in which the respondents claim the date the Constitution took effect. By this, since the memorandum was signed February 8, 1987, the appointment of the new official are still valid.
 |
| Image from google.com |
However, Supreme Court says that the 1987 Constitution took effect on the date of the ratification which was on February 2, 1987 as it was the date the People of the Philippines decided and approved the new Constitution. The "will" of the People to approve the new Constitution happened on February 2, 1987 and it was merely confirmation and announcement that happened on Feb. 12, 1987.
To read the full case, please click: Full Case: De Leon vs Esguerra G.R. No. 78059 August 31, 1987