David v Arroyo – G.R. No.

171396 May 3, 2006

FACTS:
1.) On February 24, 2006, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued PP
1017 declaring a State of National Emergency. The basis cited was the
conspiracy of the opposition, the extreme left, and the extreme right
which have repeatedly attempted to out her from the position.
2.) Petitioners alleged that the President committed a grave abuse of
discretion in declaring a State of National Emergency claiming that PP
1017 encroached the emergency powers of the Congress, avoided the
constitutional requirements for the imposition of martial law and violated
the constitutional guarantee of freedom of the press, of speech and of
assembly.
3.) After one week, the President issued Proclamation No. 1021 which
declared the state of National Emergency to have ceased and rendered all
petitions moot and academic.
ISSUES:
1.) Whether or not the petitions are rendered moot and academic.

HELD:
1.) No. The Court held that the President’s issuance of PP 1021 did not
render the present petitions moot and academic. Courts will decide cases,
otherwise moot and academic if: 1) there is a grave violation of the
Constitution, 2) the exceptional character of the situation and the
paramount public interest is involved; 3) when constitutional issue raised
requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar
and the public; 4) the case is capable of repetition yet evading review. All
of these were present and justified the Court’s assumption of judicial
review of the petitions.