Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1

Bondoc v.

Pineda, 201 SCRA 792


Facts:
Emigdio Bondoc and Marciano Pineda were rivals for a
Congressional seat in the 4th District of Pampanga. Pineda was a
member of the Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP). While
Bondoc was a member of the Nacionalista Party (NP). Pineda won
in that election. However, Bondoc contested the result in the
HRET (House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal). Bondoc won
in the protest and he was subsequently declared as the winner by
the HRET.
Pineda contends that the issue is already outside the jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court because Camasura’s removal is an official act of
Congress and by virtue of the doctrine of separation of powers, the judiciary
may not interfere.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the Supreme Court may inquire upon the validity of the said
act of the HRET without violating the doctrine of separation of powers.
HELD:
Yes. The SC can settle the controversy in the case at bar without
encroaching upon the function of the legislature particularly a part thereof,
HRET. The issue here is a judicial question. It must be noted that what is
being complained of is the act of HRET not the act of Congress. In here,
when Camasura was rescinded by the tribunal, a decision has already been
made, members of the tribunal have already voted regarding the electoral
contest involving Pineda and Bondoc wherein Bondoc won. The LDP cannot
withdraw their representative from the HRET after the tribunal has already
reached a decision. They cannot hold the same election since the issue has
already become moot and academic. LDP is merely changing their
representative to change the outcome of the election.

That duty is part of the judicial power vested in the courts by an express
grant under Sec. 1, Art. VIII of the Constitution which states:
“Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable,
and to determine
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack
or
excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of
Government

You might also like