CHAPTER 1: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, petitioner,

vs.
ANIANO DESIERTO, respondent.

Ponente: PUNO, J.│ G.R. No. 146710-15│March 2, 2001

FACTS:

Calls for the resignation of the petitioner as President of the

Philippines filled the air. The people in EDSA demanded for him to resign
from his position. Thereafter, petitioner Joseph Estrada issued a statement
that he will be leaving the Malacañang Palace in order to have a peaceful
transition of power and start the healing of the nation warped by confusion
due to his impeachment trial. Nevertheless, he sent a letter to the Senate
President and the Speaker of the House stating that he is temporarily unable
to perform the duties of the office of the President and let then Vice-
President Respondent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assume the position of
Acting President.

Subsequently, the Office of the Ombudsman filed plunder and perjury

charges against the Petitioner. A special panel of prosecutors were assigned
to investigate the charges against the Petitioner. Thus, the Petitioner filed a
petition for prohibition before the Supreme Court. He alleged that he cannot
be criminally charged by the Ombudsman on the ground of immunity from
suit. He claimed that he is still the President of the Philippines, and that
Respondent is merely holding the position in an acting capacity. Further, he
claimed that he cannot be considered as to have resigned because he is
prohibited by law from resigning since he was under an investigation, i.e. an
impeachment trial.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Petitioner Estrada has resigned as President of the

Philippines.

RULING:

Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that in a resignation, there must be an

intent to resign, and that intent must be coupled by acts of relinquishment.
The validity of a resignation is not government by any formal requirements

Estrada vs. Desierto

as to form since it can be oral or written, expressed or implied. So long as
the resignation is clear, the same act must be given legal effect.

In the present case, the Court established that the Petitioner resigned
from his position as President of the Philippines. According to the Angara
Diary, which serialized the final days of the Petitioner in Malacañang
Palace, the Petitioner made pronouncements which was interpreted as
intention of giving up the position such as when he proposed a snap election
where he would not be a candidate; non-defiance to the request of a peaceful
and orderly transfer of power; prior agreement to the transfer of power with
conditions as to the state of the Petitioner and his family; and the issuance of
a statement wherein the Petitioner leaves the palace, the seat of the
Presidency, for the sake and peace and order. Hence, the resignation of the
Petitioner was implied by his actions to leave the Presidency.

“IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petitions of Joseph Ejercito Estrada

challenging the respondent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as the de jure 14th
President of the Republic are DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.”

Estrada vs. Desierto