DAVID VS ARROYO (G.R. No. 171396 May 3, 2006)

FACTS:

Seven (7) consolidated petitions for certiorari and prohibition was filed against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for
alleged commission of grave abuse of discretion when she issued Presidential Proclamation No. 1017 (PP 1017) and General
Order No. 5 (G.O. No. 5)- declaring state of emergency during the 20th anniversary celebration of the EDSA People Power 1.
In their presentation of the factual bases of PP 1017 and G.O. No. 5, respondents stated that the proximate cause behind
the executive issuance was the conspiracy among some military officers, leftist insurgents of the New People's Army
(NPA), and some members of the political opposition in a plot to unseat or assassinate President Arroyo.[4] They
considered the aim to oust or assassinate the President and take-over the reigns of government as a clear and present
danger. Petitioners contend that respondent officials of the Government, in their professed efforts to defend and preserve
democratic institutions,are actually trampling upon the very freedom guaranteed and protected by the
Constitution. According to them the issuance of the proclamation and general order is void for being unconstitutional.

ISSUE:

1.Whether or not the PP 1017 and G.O. No. 5 is constitutional.


HELD:

Both are partly constitutional and unconstitutional.The Court rules that PP 1017 is CONSTITUTIONAL insofar as it
constitutes a call by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on the AFP to prevent or suppress lawless violence. However, the
provisions of PP 1017 commanding the AFP to enforce laws not related to lawless violence, as well as decrees promulgated
by the President, are declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL. In addition, the provision in PP 1017 declaring national emergency under
Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution is CONSTITUTIONAL, but such declaration does not authorize the President to
take over privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest without prior legislation.G.O. No. 5 is CONSTITUTIONAL since it provides a standard by which the AFP and the PNP should implement PP 1017, i.e.
whatever is necessary and appropriate actions and measures to suppress and prevent acts of lawless violence.Ó Considering
that acts of terrorism have not yet been defined and made punishable by the Legislature, such portion of G.O. No. 5 is
declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
The Petitions are partly granted.