Case Digest

Marcos vs Manglapus GR No. 88211 October 27, 1989

Facts:

President Corazon C. Aquino barred former President Marcos (note: Marcos died September 28, 1989)
and his family to return to the country, citing the “profound effect on the political, economic and other
aspects of national life” once the former dictator together with his family members return to the
Philippines. It was known to many that since Mr. Marcos left the country on February 25, 1986, the
Aquino administration was rocked by series of destabilization attempts initiated by Marcos supporters
and fanatics not to mention the fluidity of the country’s national security because of the presence of
other armed groups advocating secession to the Republic and the country’s economic woes brought by
accumulated foreign debt and plunder of the nation’s coffer perpetrated by the dictator and his cronies.
Before his death less than two weeks later, former President Marcos and his heir filed a petition for
mandamus and prohibition asking the Court to order the respondents headed by Raul Manglapus who
was the Secretary of Foreign Affairs to issue travel orders to Mr Marcos and his family and enjoin the
implementation of the President Aquino’s order to bar their return to the Philippines.
Voting 8-7, on September 15, 1989 the Court upheld the power of the President to bar the return of Mr.
Marcos and his family citing that the act of President Aquino constitute residual power to protect the
general welfare of the people and her determination of the threats are political issues which are beyond
the scope or power of the Court to judge.
On October 2, 1989 several days after the death of Mr. Marcos, his heirs led by his wife Imelda filed a
motion for reconsideration raising arguments such as barring their return to the Philippines is to deny
them not only inherent rights to return to their country of birth but also the protection of the
Constitution, claiming that there is no basis to bar them from returning to the Philippines

Issues
1) Can the death of Mr. Marcos who is the prime actor in this petition change the factual scenario
which served as basis for barring the return of the former president and his family?

2) Is the power of the President limited to what is written and expressly enumerated in the
Constitution?

Rulings:

1. The death of Mr. Marcos although it may be viewed as supervening event, has not changed the
factual scenario under which the Court’s decision was rendered. The threats to the government,
to which the return of the Marcoses has been viewed to provide catalytic effect, have not been
shown to have ceased. On the contrary, instead of erasing fears as to the destabilization that
will be caused by the return of the Marcoses, Mrs. Marcos reinforced the basis for the decision
to bar their return when she called President Aquino “illegal” President. (Article 42 of the Civil
Code)

2. The powers of the President are not limited to what are expressly enumerated in the Article on
the Executive Department and in scattered provisions in the Constitution. This is so,
notwithstanding the avowed intent of the members of the ConCom of 1986 to limit the powers
of the President as a reaction to the abuses under the regime of Mr. Marcos, for the result was a
limitation of specific power of the President, particularly those relating to the Commander in
Chief clause but not a diminution of the general grant of executive power.