People v.

Almuete
Facts of the case:
Wenceslao Almuete, Fernando Fronda, Cipriano Fronda, and Fausto Durion
were tenants of Margarita Fernando in her riceland and were charged with a
violation of section 39 of the Agricultural Tenanc !aw" #t was alleged in the
information that in Decem$er %9&3, in Mu'o(, )ueva *ci+a" The accused, without
notice or without her consent of the owner of the riceland, pre,threshed a portion of
their respective harvests" The accused pleaded not guilt" The -led motion for a $ill
of particulars as to the e.act date of the commission of the o/ense charged" The
lower court denied their motion $ecause the had alread entered their plea"
)evertheless, the -led a motion to 0uash the information on that grounds that %1it
does not allege facts su2cient to constitute the crime charged3 41 that there is no
law punishing it3 and 31 that the court has no +urisdiction over the alleged time The
-scal opposed the motion" The court granted the motion and dismissed the
information" The prosecution appealed from the order of dismissal"
#ssue:
Whether or not a tenant who prereaped or prethreshed pala without the
consent of the landlord in violation of the Agricultural Tenanc Act ma $e held
criminall lia$le therefor5
6eld: )o" 7etition of dismissed" 8udgment of lower court a2rmed"
9atio:
The Agricultural !and 9eform Code superseded the Agricultural Tenanc !aw"
The Code instituted the leasehold sstem and a$olished share tenanc su$+ect to
certain conditions indicated in section : thereof" #t is signi-cant that section 39 is
not reproduced in the Agricultural !and 9eform Code" ;nder the leasehold sstem,
the prohi$ition against pre,threshing has no more raison d<etre $ecause the lessee
is o$ligated to pa a -.ed rental as prescri$ed in section 3: of the Agricultural !and
9eform Code"
=tatCon ma.im:
#t is a fundamental principle of statutor construction that when the reason of
the law ceases, the law itself ceases" This principle is e.pressed in the ma.im,
cessante ratione legis, cessat et ipsa le."
Matabuena v. Cervantes
Facts of the case:
The owner of the propert in 0uestion was Feli. Mata$uena >deceased1" 6e
e.ecuted a Deed of Donation to 7etronila Cervantes over the parcel of land in
0uestion" Cervantes accepted the donation which was made during the common law
relationship as hus$and and wife" The later on got married" When Feli. died, the
Cornelia Mata$uena claims the propert $ reason of $eing the onl sister and
nearest collateral relative of the deceased $ virtue of an a2davit of self,
ad+udication e.ecuted $ her in %9&4 and had the land declared in her name and
paid the estate and inheritance ta.es thereon" Cornelia, sister of Feli. Mata$uena
maintains that the donation made $ Feli. to 7etronila Cervantes was void $ecause
the were living without the $ene-t of marriage or common law marriage" The lower
court declared the donation valid as it was made $efore Cervantes? marriage to the
donor" 6ence this appeal"
#ssue:
Whether or not the $an on a donation $etween the married spouses also
applies to common,law relationships
6eld:
Decision of lower court reversed" @an on donation applies to common,law,
relationships too
9atio:
Although Art %33 of the Civil Code sas A*ver donation $etween the spouses
during the marriage shall $e voidB, we should looC into the spirit of the law" The
reason for the $an on donations $etween spouses during the marriage is to
prevent the possi$ilit of undue inDuence and improper pressure $eing e.erted $
one spouse on the other, there is no reason wh this prohi$ition shall not appl also
to common,law relationships"
=tatCon ma.im:
What is within the spirit of the law is as much a part of it as what is written
pursuant to which an apparent omission in an interpretation purel literal of the
language used ma $e remedied $ adhering to its avowed o$+ective and intent"
Farinas v. Barba
Facts of the case:
Carlito @" Domingo was a mem$er of the =angguniang @aan of =an )icolas,
#locos )orte" En March 4:, %99:, he resigned after going, without leave, to the
;nited =tates" To -ll the vacanc created $ his resignation, a recommendation for
the appointment of *dward 7alafo. was made $ the =angguniang @aan of =an
)icolas $ut the recommendation was made to Maor @ar$a" The resolution,
containing the recommendation, was su$mitted to the =angguniang 7anlalawigan of
#locos )orte purportedl in compliance with =ec" F& of the !ocal Government Code"
The =angguniang 7anlalawigan, purporting to act under this provision of the !ocal
Government Code, disapproved the resolution for the reason that the authorit and
power to appoint =angguniang @aan mem$ers are lodged in the Governor"
Accordingl, the =angguniang 7anlalawigan recommended to the Governor the
appointment of petitioner Al )acino" En 8une H, %99:, the Governor appointed
petitioner )acino and swore him in o2ce that same da" En the other hand,
respondent Maor @ar$a appointed respondent *dward 7alafo. to the same
position" En 8une %:, %99:, petitioners -led with the 9egional Trial Court of #locos
)orte a petition for 0uo warranto and prohi$ition" En 8ul H, %99: the trial court
rendered its decision, upholding the appointment of respondent 7alafo. $
respondent Maor @ar$a"
#ssue:
Whether or not, in case of a permanent vacanc in the =angguniang @aan
caused $ the cessation from o2ce of a mem$er who does not $elong to an
political part, a governor can appoint its replacement5
6eld:
Ies" Governor appoints upon recommendation of =angguniang @aan"
7etitioner Al )acino nor respondent *dward 7alafo. was appointed in the manner
indicated in the preceding paragraph, neither is entitled to the seat in the
=angguniang @aan of =an )icolas, #locos )orte" For while petitioner Al )acino was
appointed $ the provincial governor, he was not recommended $ the
=angguniang @aan of =an )icolas" En the other hand, respondent *dward 7alafo.
was recommended $ the =angguniang @aan $ut it was the maor and not the
provincial governor who appointed him"
9atio:
=ec :F, par c of the !ocal Government Code states J#n case the permanent
vacanc is caused $ a sanggunian mem$er who does not $elong to an political
part, the local chief e.ecutive shall, upon recommendation of the sanggunian
concerned, appoint a 0uali-ed person to -ll the vacanc"B The 0uestion now is who
is referred to as the JsanggunianB and Jlocal chief e.ecutive"B The court ruled that
the JsanggunianB $eing referred to is the sanggunian where the vacanc was
created" With respect to the Jlocal chief e.ecutive,B the court referred to the old
!ocal Government Code which states, J#n case of permanent vacanc in the
sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, sangguniang $aan, or
sangguniang $aranga, the 7resident of the 7hilippines, upon recommendation of
the Minister of !ocal Government, shall appoint a 0uali-ed person to -ll the vacanc
in the sangguniang panlalawigan and the sangguniang panlungsod3 the governor, in
the case of sangguniang $aan mem$ers3 or the cit or municipal maor, in the
case of sangguniang $aranga mem$ers" *.cept for the sangguniang $aranga, the
appointee shall come from the political part of the sanggunian mem$er who
caused the vacanc, and shall serve the une.pired term of the vacant o2ce"B
Largado v. Masaganda
Facts of the case:
En 8anuar K, %9&L, Angelo de los 9ees -led a petition $efore the 8ustice of
the 7eace court of ;nisan, Mue(on, praing that he $e appointed guardian of the
persons and properties of certain minors" The hearing was set" A0uilina !argado,
mother of the minors, $ecause of the failure of her counsel to appear, was declared
in default" Two hours later, the counsel appeared and moved for the reconsideration
of the order default, $ut the same was denied" Thereupon, the +ustice of the peace
court issued an order appointing Angelo de los 9ees guardian as praed for" A
month after, A0uilina !argado -led a petition to dismiss on the ground that said
+ustice of the peace court has no +urisdiction to appoint a guardian under 9epu$lic
Act )o" 4&%3, which was enacted on August %, %9F9" This motion was also denied"
6ence, A0uilina !argado -led a petition for certiorari with preliminar in+unction
$efore the Court of First #nstance of Mue(on praing for the nulli-cation of the
orders entered $ the 8ustice of the 7eace Court of ;nisan on the ground of lacC of
+urisdiction" And acting on it, the court a 0uo granted e. parte the writ praed for" #n
the meantime, respondents gave their answer +ustifing the appointment $ the
8ustice of the 7eace Court of ;nisan, and after issues were +oined, the court a 0uo
rendered decision holding that the 8ustice of the 7eace Court of ;nisan has no
+urisdiction to appoint a guardian $ecause the same is prohi$ited $ 9epu$lic Act
)o" 4&%3" #n due time, petitioner tooC the present appeal"
#ssue:
Whether or not, a +ustice of the peace court has +urisdiction to appoint a
guardian at the time the present petition was -led $efore the 8ustice of the 7eace
Court of ;nisan5
6eld:
)o" 8ustice of the 7eace cannot appoint a guardian"
9atio:
9eling on =ection %L of 9epu$lic Act )o" 4&%3, the said section amends
=ection HH of 9epu$lic Act )o" 49&, Cnown as the 8udiciar Act of %9:H, provides
that the +urisdiction of the +ustice of the peace courts shall not e.tend, among
others, to the appointment of guardians" =C held that provisions of said Act are
clear"
=tatCon ma.im:
Where the statute is clear and to correct it would $e to change the meaning
of the law or speci-c provision will $e a$rogated" To do so is to rewrite the law and
invade the domain of the legislature3 it is +udicial legislation in the guise of
interpretation"
United States v. Paguiguiran
Facts of the case:
7aguiguiran was charged for threatening to Cill 7ascua, Mar0ue(, and !ope("
These men were engaged in transplanting rice upon land which was claimed $ the
defendant" While the were at worC, 7aguiguiran appeared, Dourished a cane in an
e.cited manner, ordered them to stop their worC and leave" 7aguiguiran to Cill them
unless the o$eed" 7aguiguiran was convicted under the second part of Article :9:
of the 7enal Code to one month and one da or arresto maor and to pa a -ne of
34F pesetas"
#ssue:
Whether or not 7aguiguiran should $e convicted under Art" :9: of the 7enal
Code or Art" FH95
6eld:
6e should $e convicted under Art" FH9, su$division 3"
9atio:
Article :9: refers to formal threats against a private person which would
amount to crime" Whereas, Art FH9 provides that JThose who shall threaten
another, $ words and in the heat of anger, with an in+ur that would constitute a
crime, and who $ their su$se0uent actions show that the persisted in the
intention which the gave utterance to in their threat3 provided that, in view of the
circumstances of the deed, it should not $e included in the @ooC 4 of this code"B The
fact that the threat was made in the heat of anger, and that su$se0uent actions of
the part show that he did not seriousl intend to carr the threat into e.ecution,
reduce the o/ense from a crime to a misdemeanor" Although Art"FH9 used the
words J... and who$ their su$se0uent action showed that T6*I 7*9=#=T*D in the
intention which the gave utterance to in their threat,B the =C ruled that a negation
should $e placed $etween the words JtheB and JpersistedB and to read it as Jand
who $ their su$se0uent actions showed that T6*I D#D )ET 7*9=#=T*D in the
intention which the gave utterance to in their threat"B
=tatCon ma.im:
Where a literal adherence to the language of a statute would produce a$surd
result, unless the appropriate word or words are written or omitted therein, the
court has power to suppl or omit the words from a statute in order to prevent an
a$surd result"
People v. Duque
Facts of the case:
=ometime in 8anuar %9H&, at Calam$a, !aguna, the accused, Du0ue, well
Cnowing that he is not licensed nor authori(ed $ the proper government agenc
>7E*A1 to engage in recruitment of worCers for placement a$road, recruited si.
people as worCers a$road e.acted and actuall received mone from the a$ove,
named victims, to their damage and pre+udice" During the trial, Du0ue denied the
charges" The court found Du0ue guilt for violating =ection 3H in relation to =ection
39 of 7"D" )o" ::4, as amended, Cnown as The !a$or Code of the 7hilippines" Du0ue
raised the 0uestion of prescription of the criminal o/ense for which he was
convicted since illegal recruitment is a crime penali(ed not $ 9evised 7enal Code
$ut $ the !ocal Government Code" Article 49L of the !a$or Code provides
JE/enses penali(ed under this Code and the rules and regulations issued pursuant
thereto shall prescri$e in three ears"B 6owever, the !a$or Code does not contain
an provisions on the mode of computation of the three,ear prescriptive period it
esta$lished" 6ence, the application of 9A 334&"
=ection 4 of 9A 334& shows that there are two rules for determining the
$eginning of the prescriptive period: %1 on the da of the commission of the
violation, if such commission $e Cnown3 and 41 if the commission of the violation
was not Cnown at the time, then from discover thereof and institution of +udicial
proceedings for investigation and punishment" Du0ue contends that the prescriptive
period in the case at $ar commenced from the time mone in consideration of
promises for overseas emploment was parted with $ complainants, it was on
8anuar %9H&" Du0ue concludes that the o/ense of illegal recruitment had
accordingl prescri$ed $ Ma %99L since it was -led : ears after" Appellant Du0ue
assails =ection 4 of Act )o" 334& as illogical or a$surd"
#ssue:
Whether or not, the prescription of the criminal o/ense will start from the
time appellant was convicted5
6eld:
)o" The applica$le prescriptive period in the case at $ar $egan to run from
the time the recruitment activities of appellant Du0ue were ascertained $ the
complainants and $ the 7E*A to have $een carried out without an license or
authorit from the government"
9atio:
A literal reading of =ection 4 appears to suggest that two elements must
coincide for the $eginning of the running of the prescriptive period: -rst, the
element of discover of the commission of the violation of the special law3 and
second, the Ainstitution of +udicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment"A
#t is then argued $ appellant that $ecause the co,e.istence of these two
re0uirements is necessar under =ection 4 of Act )o" 334&, the relevant prescriptive
period would never $egin to run"
#t should $e noted, -rstl, that the literal reading that appellant suggests,
does not $ene-t appellant, for the prescriptive period in the case at $ar had not in
an case $een e.hausted since prosecution of appellant commenced onl a few
months after the 7E*A and the complainants had discovered that appellant had no
governmental authorit to recruit for overseas worC and was merel pretending to
recruit worCers for overseas emploment and to receive mone therefor, i"e", that
appellant did not even attempt to locate emploment a$road for complainants"
=econdl, we do not thinC there is an real need for such a literal reading of =ection
4"
=tatCon ma.im:
The well,Cnown principles of statutor interpretation are that statutes must
$e construed in such a wa to give e/ect to the intention of the legislature and so
as to give a sensi$le meaning to the language of the statute and thus avoid
nonsensical or a$surd results, departing to the e.tent unavoida$le from the literal
language of the statute"
Amatan v. Aujero
Facts of the case:
En or a$out the =eptem$er %:, %9HK, 9odrigo ;mpad, alias AMeonB, Cilled
with deli$erate intent Genaro Tagsip, with a revolver inDicting upon the victim fatal
gunshot wound on his head which was the direct and immediate cause of his death"
;pon arraignment, the parties, with the agreement of the 7u$lic 7rosecutor and the
consent of the o/ended part, entered into plea $argaining where it was agreed
that the accused would plead guilt to the lesser o/ense of ATT*M7T*D 6EM#C#D*
#)=T*AD EF 6EM#C#D* as originall charged in the information, and would incur the
penalt of four ears, two >41 months and one da of prision correccional as
minimum to si. ear of prision correccional ma.imum as ma.imum" Conse0uentl,
respondent +udge found the accused, 9odrigo ;mpad, guilt $eond reasona$le
dou$t of the lesser crime of Attempted 6omicide and sentenced him to su/er
imprisonment in accordance with the plea $argaining agreement"
En Ecto$er %&, %994, a letter,complaint addressed to the Chief 8ustice and
signed $ 7edro =" Amatan, a $rother,in,law of the deceased, accused 8udge Nicente
Au+ero of gross incompetence, gross ignorance of the law and gross misconduct,
relative to his disposition of criminal case entitled 7eople v" 9odrigo ;mpad alias
AMeon"A #n said letter,complaint, complainant contends that the sentence of
respondent +udge -nding the accused guilt $eond reasona$le dou$t of the lesser
o/ense of Attempted 6omicide and not 6omicide as charged is proof indicative, Aon
its face, of gross incompetence, gross ignorance of the law or gross misconduct"
8udge Au+ero asserts that he relied on =ec" 4, 9ule %%& of the %9HF 9evised 9ules of
Criminal 7rocedure"
#ssue:
Whether or not, the respondent +udge is guilt of gross ignorance of the law5
6eld:
9espondent +udge<s erroneous e.ercise of his +udicial prerogative was neither
tainted with malice nor $ad faith" =C constrained themselves to -nd the respondent
+udge G;#!TI of gross ignorance of the law for which he is here$ 9*79#MA)D*D na
F#)*D E)* T6E;=A)D >7%,LLL"LL1 7*=E=" And this decision appears in
respondent<s record of service"
9atio:
=ection 4, 9ule, %%& of the %9HF 9evised 9ules of Criminal 7rocedure, as
amended, allows the accused in criminal case to plead guilt Ato lesser o/ense
regardless of whether or not it is necessaril included in the crime charged"A The
fact of death of the victim for which the accused 9odrigo ;mpad was criminall
lia$le, cannot $ simple logic and plain common sense $e reconciled with the plea
of guilt to the lower o/ense of attempted homicide" The crime of homicide as
de-ned in Article 4:9 of the 9evised 7enal Code necessaril produces death3
attempted homicide does not"
Salvacion v. Central Ban
Facts of the case:
Greg @artelli, an American tourist, illegall detained and raped Oaren
=alvacion, then %4 ears old" 7olicemen and people living near$ rescued Oaren"
Greg @artelli was arrested and detained at the MaCati Municipal 8ail" The policemen
recovered from @artelli the following items: %"1 ;= Dollar ChecC 3,9L3"4L3 4"1
CECE@A)O 7eso @anC $ooC3 and 3"1 Dollar Account P China @anCing Corp"
MaCati #nvestigating Fiscal *dwin G" Condaa -led against Greg @artelli,
Criminal Case for =erious #llegal Detention and four counts of 9ape" En the same
da, petitioners -led with the 9egional Trial Court of MaCati Civil Case for damages
with preliminar attachment against Greg @artelli" En the da of a scheduled
hearing for @artelli<s petition for $ail, he latter escaped from +ail" The court granted
the civil case of the petitioner" =alvacion tried to e.ecute the +udgment on the dollar
deposit of @artelli with the China @anCing Corp" $ut the latter refused arguing that
=ection %% of Central @anC Circular )o" 9&L e.empts foreign currenc deposits from
attachment, garnishment, or an other order or process of an court, legislative
$od, government agenc or an administrative $od whatsoever" =alvacion -led
suit for declarator relief $efore the =C"
#ssue:
Whether or not, =ection %%3 of Central @anC Circular )o" 9&L and =ection H of
9"A" &:4& >Foreign Currenc Deposit Act1, as amended, $e made applica$le to a
foreign transient5
6eld:
)E" The provisions of =ection %%3 of C@ Circular )o" 9&L and 7D )o" %4:&
>Foreign Currenc Deposit Act1 are here$ held to $e #)A77!#CA@!* to this case
$ecause of its peculiar circumstances"
9atio:
The application of the law depends on the e.tent of its +ustice" *ventuall, if
we rule that the 0uestioned =ection %%3 of Central @anC Circular )o" 9&L which
e.empts from attachment, garnishment, or an other order or process of an court,
legislative $od, government agenc or an administrative $od whatsoever, is
applica$le to a foreign transient, in+ustice would result especiall to a citi(en
aggrieved $ a foreign guest liCe accused Greg @artelli" This would negate Article %L
of the )ew Civil Code which provides that Jin case of dou$t in the interpretation or
application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaCing $od intended right and
+ustice to prevail"
=tatCon ma.im:
#n case of dou$t in the interpretation or application of law, it is presumed that
the lawmaCing $od intended right and +ustice to prevail"
Dema!les v. Comelec
Facts of the case:
9espondent Galido asCed the provincial $oard, acting as municipal $oard of
canvassers pursuant to section %&K >$1 of the 9evised *lection Code, to disregard,
the election return from precinct K for the it was o$viousl manufactured on the
ground that the said return shows that %9F voters were registered >of whom %HH
voted1, when, according to a certi-cate of the municipal election registrar onl %H4
had registered in that precinct as of Ecto$er 3L, %99K" At its session on the
following da, )ovem$er 44, the $oard voted to re+ect the return from precinct K
and then proceeded with the canvass of the returns from the other precints" The
resulting tall gave Galido HHH votes as against H:: for Dema-les" Accordingl,
Galido was proclaimed maor,elect of the municipalit of =e$aste, Anti0ue"
En )ovem$er 4: Dema-les wired the Commission on *lections, protesting
the $oard<s action of re+ection of the return from precinct K and the su$se0uent
proclamation of Galido, and challenging the right of two $oard mem$ers, 8ulito
Moscoso and Muirico *sca'o, to sit, considering that the were reelectionists"
Dema-les -led the present petition for mandamus and certiorari to set aside the
aforesaid resolution of the CEM*!*C, to annul the proclamation of Galido, and to
secure an order directing the CEM*!*C to appoint su$stitute mem$ers of the
provincial $oard and to order a new canvass of the returns, including that from
precinct K"
#ssue:
Whether or not the election case has $ecome moot alread >since Galido is
alread proclaimed1
6eld:
)o" 9esolutions made $ CEM*!*C are set aside" 7roclamation of Galido
annulled"
9atio:
9espondent Galido argued that the case is moot $ecause he had JtaCen his
oath and assumed o2ceB on )ovem$er 44, pursuant to 9epu$lic Act :HKL"
E$viousl, the frame of reference is section 4 of the statute which reads: JThe -rst
maor, vice,maor and councilors of the Municipalit of =e$aste shall $e elected in
the ne.t general elections for local o2cials and shall have 0uali-ed"B The court,
re+ected the argument of Galido and stated that the last portion of the provision P
Aand shall have 0uali-edA P is devoid of an meaning, is unmitigated +argon in or
out of conte.t, and does not necessaril mean that he assumed o2ce upon
proclamation" Accordingl, the general rule that the term of o2ce of municipal
o2cials shall $egin on the -rst da of 8anuar following their election, and so the
assumption of o2ce $ the respondent Galido in no wa a/ected the $asic issues in
this case, which we need not reach and resolve"
=tatCon ma.im:
Where a word, phrase or clause in a statute is devoid of meaning in relation
to the conte.t or intent of the statute, or where it suggests a meaning that nulli-es
the statute or renders it without sense, the word, phrase or clause ma $e re+ected
as surplusage and entirel ignored"
People v. "utierre#
Facts of the case:
#n the morning of Ma 44, %9KL, a group of armed persons set -re to various
inha$ited houses in @arrio Era Centro, @anta, #locos =ur" #n the afternoon of the
same da, several residential houses were also $urned $ the group, resulting in the
destruction of various houses and death of an old woman, in @arrio Era *ste,@anta,
#locos =ur" These two information were -led in the Court of First #nstance >one arson,
one arson with homicide1, charging %K respondents together with H4 other
unidenti-ed persons for conspiring and helping one another in $urning several
residential houses, Cnowing the said houses were occupied" Two of the accused, one
is a Crisologo, son of a Cnown politician there, furnished $ail and pleaded not guilt"
The =ecretar of 8ustice issued administrative order no" 44%, authori(ing respondent
+udge of the circuit criminal court of the 4
nd
+udicial district to hold a special term in
#locos =ur" Three das after, the =ecretar of 8ustice issued AE )o" 44& authori(ing
respondent +udge to transfer the criminal case to the circuit criminal court" The
prosecution moved the respondent +udge for a transfer of said cases to circuit
criminal court invoCing the said AE, and for securit and safet purposes as
witnesses" The accused opposed such transfer and respondent +udge declined the
transfer sought on the ground that the said AE onl provided for transfer of cases to
circuit criminal court where the interest of +ustice re0uired it for more e.peditious
disposal of cases" #n these cases, the accused had alread pleaded guilt, and if the
o$+ective of the transfer was o$tain change of venue, it should have $een done from
the $eginning of the case"
9A F%K9 created criminal circuit courts for the purpose of alleviating the
$urden of the CF# and to accelerate disposition of criminal cases $ut it did not
indicate intent to permit the transfer of preselected individual cases to the circuit
courts" @ecause the lower court denied the motion to transfer the cases to criminal
court, the prosecution resorted to =C for writs of certiorari and mandamus, charging
a$use of discretion and praing to set aside the order of denial to transfer and to
compel CF# to remand the cases to circuit criminal court"
#ssue:
Whether or not the CF# committed a$use of discretion in dening transfer
cases to circuit criminal court
6eld:
9espondent 8udge, in construing AE )o 44& as permissive and not mandator
acted within limits of his discretion and did not violate the law" The =C agrees with
the respondent +udge that 9A F%K9 does not confer upon the secretar of +ustice
power to determine what speci-c cases the court should hear"
6owever, in refusing to consider AE 44& as mandator, respondent +udge
failed to act upon the contention of the prosecution that the cases should $e
transferred $ecause a miscarriage of +ustice was impending" #n view of the
prosecution witness to testif in the court where the felt their lives would $e
endangered" Also, we should taCe in consideration the fact that the respondent
+udge was an appointee of the father of one of the accused in this case"
Aba$an v. Comelec
Facts of the case:
7etitioners seeC to direct the Commission on *lections to conduct a special
registration $efore the Ma %:, 4LL% General *lections, of new voters ages %H to 4%"
According to petitioners, around four million outh failed to register on or $efore the
Decem$er 4K, 4LLL deadline set $ the respondent CEM*!*C under 9epu$lic Act
)o" H%H9" @ecause of the petitions, =enator 9aul 9oco, Chairman of the Committee
on *lectoral 9eforms, =u/rage, and 7eople?s 7articipation, sent a letter and invited
the CEM*!*C to a pu$lic hearing for the purpose of discussing the e.tension of the
registration of voters to accommodate those who were not a$le to register $efore
the CEM*!*C deadline" 7eople from Comelec attended the pu$lic hearing" En
8anuar 49, 4LL%, Commissioners Tancangco and !antion su$mitted Memorandum
)o" 4LL%,L4K on the 9eport on the 9e0uest for a Two,da Additional 9egistration of
)ew Noters Enl" En Fe$ruar H, 4LL%, the CEM*!*C issued 9esolution )o" 3FH:
dening the re0uest to conduct a two,da additional registration of new voters on
Fe$ruar %K and %H, 4LL%" 6ence this petition"
#ssue:
Whether or not respondent CEM*!*C committed grave a$use of discretion in
dening the petition for 4,da registration e.tension"
6eld:
)o" Where time constraint and the surrounding circumstances maCe it
impossi$le for the CEM*!*C to conduct special registration of voters, the
Commission cannot $e faulted for refusing to do so, for the law does not re0uire the
impossi$le to $e done3 there is no o$ligation to do the impossi$le thing"
=tatCon ma.im:
#t is well,settled that the law does not re0uire that the impossi$le $e done"