TAÑADA VS.

CUENCO

FACTS:

Pending before the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) was an election protest filed by members of the
Citizens Party (CP) who lost to members of the Nacionalista Party (NP). The Senate was at the time
composed of 23 members of the NP and 1 of the CP — petitioner Sen. Tañada. When the SET was
being organized, Sen. Tañada, in behalf of the CP, nominated himself alone. Sen. Primicias, a
member of the NP, then nominated “not on behalf of the [NP] but on behalf of the Committee on
Rules of the Senate” Sens. Delgado and respondent Cuenco “to complete the membership of the
Tribunal”. This he claims is the mandate of the Constitution which reads: “xxx Each Electoral
Tribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom shall be Justices of the Supreme Court
xxx and the remaining six shall be Members of the [House] who shall be chosen by each House,
three upon nomination of the party having the largest number of votes and three of the party having
the second largest number of votes therein. xxx.” Over the objection of Sen. Tañada, Sens. Delgado
and Cuenco were chosen to sit in the SET. Sen. Tañada now contests them in Court. Respondents
aver, among others, that the SC has no jurisdiction on the matter as the issue is a political question
and not judicial.

ISSUE:

Is the issue a political question beyond the ambit of judicial inquiry?

HELD:

No. The issue at bar is not a political question for the Senate is not clothed with “full discretionary
authority” in the choice of members of the SET.* The exercise of its power thereon is subject to
constitutional limitations. It is clearly within the legitimate prove of the judicial department to pass
upon the validity the proceedings in connection therewith. We have not only jurisdiction, but also
the duty to consider and determine the principal issue** raised by the parties herein.
* The question is said to be political when it is a matter which is to be exercised by the people in
their primary political capacity. It is judicial when it is a matter that has been specifically delegated
to some other department or particular officer of the government, with discretionary power to act. In
short, the term “political question” connotes a question of policy; that is, it refers to “those questions
which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity, or in
regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the Legislature or Executive
branch of the Government.” It is concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not legality, of
a particular measure. (Tañada v. Cuenco, 103 Phil 1051)

** On the issue on whether the election of Sens. Delgado and Cuenco is valid, the Court ruled in the
negative. It was held that the clear intention of the framers of the Constitution in prescribing the
manner for organizing the Electoral Tribunals is to prevent the majority party from ever controlling
the Electoral Tribunals, and that the structure thereof be founded upon the equilibrium between the
majority and the minority parties with the Justices of the SC to insure greater political justice in the
determination of election contests. Thus, the party having the largest number of votes in the Senate
may nominate not more than 3 members thereof to the SET, and the party having the second largest
number of votes in the Senate has the exclusive right to nominate the other 3 Senators. The Senate
may not elect, as members of the SET, those who have not been nominated by the political parties
specified in the Constitution; hence, the Committee on Rules for the Senate has no standing to
validly make such nomination. (Ibid.).