JOSUE JAVELLANA, petitioner, vs.

THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY OF

NATIONAL DEFENSE, THE SECRETARY OF JUSTICE AND THE SECRETARY OF
FINANCE, respondents.

G.R. No. L-36164, March 31, 1973, Justice Roberto Concepcion.

FACTS:

While the Convention was in session, the President issued Proclamation No. 1081 placing the entire
Philippines under Martial Law. Then, the Convention approved its Proposed Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines. The next day, the President of the Philippines issued Presidential Decree
No. 73, “submitting to the Filipino people for ratification or rejection the Constitution of the Republic
of the Philippines proposed by the 1971 Constitutional Convention, and appropriating funds therefor,”
as well as setting the plebiscite for said ratification or rejection of the Proposed Constitution .

Petitioner Javellana filed an action to restrain respondent from implementing any of the provisions of
the proposed constitution not found in the present constitution. Petitioner alleged that, respondents are
acting without or in excess of jurisdiction in implementing proposed constitution and that the
president is without power to proclaim the ratification by the Filipino people of the proposed
constitution.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the issue on the validity of Proclamation No. 1102 partake of the nature of a political,
and, hence, non- justiciable question.

HELD:

No. The Court declared that, it is the absolute duty of the judiciary to determine whether the
Constitution has been amended in the manner required by the constitution; in the case at bar, even
though there was claimed approval by the people, the Court may determine whether or not Article XV
of the 1935 Constitution has been complied with. This hold that the issue on the validity of
Proclamation No. 1102 presents a justiciable and non-political question. The Constitution proposed by
the 1971 Convention was not validly ratified in accordance with Article XV section 1 of the 1935
Constitution which provides only one way for ratification (election or plebiscite held in accordance
with law and only with qualified voters). Due to the environmental and social conditions in the
Philippines (i.e. martial law), the Court cannot honestly say that the people acquiesced to the proposed
Constitution. The majority ruled to dismiss the cases as the effectivity of the proposed Constitution is
the basic issue posed by the cases which considerations other than judicial are relevant and
unavoidable. The new constitution is in force as there are not enough votes to say otherwise.