Consti2Digest - Ildefonso Santiago Vs. Philippines, G.R. No. L-48214 (19 Dec.

1978)

Ildefonso Santiago, represented by his Attorney-in-Fact, Alfredo T. Santiago Vs.

Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-48214 (19 Dec. 1978)

Facts:
Santiago’s plea was for the revocation of a deed of donation executed by him and his spouse with the
Bureau of Plant Industry as the donee. As alleged in such complaint, such Bureau, contrary to the terms
of the donation, failed to "install lighting facilities and water system on the property donated and to build
an office building and parking [lot] thereon which should have been constructed and ready for occupancy.
That led him to conclude that under the circumstances, he was exempt from compliance with such an
explicit constitutional command.

Issue:
Whether or not. the Bureau is immune from suit.

Held:
Yes. If an order of dismissal would suffice, then the element of unfairness enters, the facts alleged being
hypothetically admitted. It is the considered opinion of this Court then that to conform to the high dictates
of equity and justice, the presumption of consent could be indulged in safely. That would serve to accord
to petitioner as plaintiff, at the very least, the right to be heard.

The doctrine of governmental immunity from suit cannot serve as an instrument for perpetrating an
injustice on a citizen.

Under the circumstances, the fundamental postulate of non-suability cannot stand in the way. It is made
to accommodate itself to the demands of procedural due process, which is the negation of arbitrariness
and inequity. The government, in the final analysis, is the beneficiary. It thereby manifests its adherence
to the highest ethical standards, which can only be ignored at the risk of losing the confidence of the
people, the repository of the sovereign power.