Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Marcos V Manglapus

    Uploaded by

    rattya
    The case involved a dispute over whether former President Marcos and his family should be allowed to return to the Philippines from exile. President Aquino barred their return, citing the consequences to the nation. The Court ruled that it had jurisdiction to decide the issue and was not barred by the political question doctrine. It could review whether the President's action constituted a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. However, the Constitution did not intend for courts to settle all actual controversies and political questions were still limited to a review of grave abuse of discretion.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Marcos V Manglapus

    Uploaded by

    rattya
    11 views1 page
    The case involved a dispute over whether former President Marcos and his family should be allowed to return to the Philippines from exile. President Aquino barred their return, citing the consequences to the nation. The Court ruled that it had jurisdiction to decide the issue and was not barred by the political question doctrine. It could review whether the President's action constituted a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. However, the Constitution did not intend for courts to settle all actual controversies and political questions were still limited to a review of grave abuse of discretion.

    Original Description:

    digest

    Original Title

    Marcos v Manglapus

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The case involved a dispute over whether former President Marcos and his family should be allowed to return to the Philippines from exile. President Aquino barred their return, citing the consequences to the nation. The Court ruled that it had jurisdiction to decide the issue and was not barred by the political question doctrine. It could review whether the President's action constituted a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. However, the Constitution did not intend for courts to settle all actual controversies and political questions were still limited to a review of grave abuse of discretion.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    11 views1 page

    Marcos V Manglapus

    Uploaded by

    rattya
    The case involved a dispute over whether former President Marcos and his family should be allowed to return to the Philippines from exile. President Aquino barred their return, citing the consequences to the nation. The Court ruled that it had jurisdiction to decide the issue and was not barred by the political question doctrine. It could review whether the President's action constituted a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. However, the Constitution did not intend for courts to settle all actual controversies and political questions were still limited to a review of grave abuse of discretion.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Marcos v.

    FACTS + IMPORTANT PROVISIONS ISSUE + RULING


    Maglapus (Recurring Case, First seen in Article VII the Executive Branch) WoN the issue at bar constitutes a political issue which is beyond the jurisdiction
    of the Court
    In February 1986, Former President Marcos was deposed from
    presidency via the non-violent “people power” revolution and forced into No, The present Constitution limits resort to the political question doctrine and broadens
    exile. the scope of judicial inquiry into areas which the Court, under previous constitutions,
    would have normally left to the political departments to decide.
    In 1989, Marcos in his deathbed, has signified his wish to return to the
    Philippines to die. President Aquino, considering the dire consequence
    to the nation of his return, has stood firmly on the decision to bar the
    return of Marcos and his family. The deliberations of the Constitutional Commission cited by petitioners show that the
    framers intended to widen the scope of judicial review but they did not intend courts of
    justice to settle all actual controversies before them. When political questions are
    involved, the Constitution limits the determination to whether or not there has been a
    grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the
    official whose action is being questioned.

    You might also like