Philippine Bar Association v COMELEC

G.R. No. 72915, December 20, 1985

Facts:

President Ferdinand Marcos sent a letter to Batasang Pambansa informing them that he will
"irrevocably vacati(ng) the position of President effectively only when the election is held and
after the winner is proclaimed and qualified as President by taking his oath office ten (10) days
after his proclamation". The "snap election" is in between Ferdinand Marcos and Corazon "Cory"
Aquino. The opposition's answer is firm "they are willing to give the President this illegal
handicap, so long as the election is clean, fair, and honest."

The plaintiff believed conducting a Presidential and Vice-Presidential election with the following
condition from the current President is unconstitutional basing it from Section 9, Article 7 of the
Constitution. “In case of permanent disability, death, removal from office or resignation of the
President, the Vice-President shall become the President to serve the unexpired term. The Batasang
Pambansa shall by Law provide for the cases mentioned of the President and Vice-President,
declaring what officer shall then become President and Vice-President or the manner in which one
shall be selected. In case vacancy in the office of the President occurs before the election in 1987,
the Speaker of the Batasang Pambansa shall act as President until a President and Vice-President
or either one of them shall have been elected and shall have qualified. Their term of office shall
commence at noon of the 10th day following proclamation, and shall end at noon on the 13th day
of June of the 6th year thereafter”.

Multiple petitioners have filed a prohibition against the enforcement of Batas Pambansa bilang
(B.P. Blg) 883, which will restrain the COMELEC from holding the "snap election" for the offices
of President and Vice-President of the Philippines on February 07, 1986.

Issues:

Whether or not the B.P. Blg 883 is unconstitutional and should the supreme courts prohibit the
holding of elections.

Ruling:

The B.P. Blg 883 is not unconstitutional and elections are political and outside the scope of the
courts. The petitioners failed to demonstrate that B.P. Blg. 883 clearly contravenes any applicable
constitutional provision. The issue posed by these petitions are essentially political in character.
And “when the issue is a political one which comes within the exclusive sphere of Legislative and
Executive Department of the government to decide, the Judicial Department or the Supreme Court
has no authority to determine whether or not the act of Legislature or Chief Executive is against
the constitution. What determines the jurisdiction of the courts in such case is the issue involved,
and not the law or constitutional provision which may be applied (Mabanag, et al. vs. Lopez Vito,
et al., L-1123, March 5, 1948, 78 Phil). After deliberating, the majority of the Justices voted to
dismissed the petition.