271059/271347/E-02472/E-04036 Representative Edcel C. Lagman, substituted by Albay First District Representative Krisel B. Lagman, et al. Vs. The Congress of the Philippines, et al./Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III and Pantaleo “Bebot” Alvarez Vs. Lucas P. Bersamin, in his capacity as executive secretary, and Amenah F. Pangandaman, in her capacity as secretary of the Department of Budget and Management/Filipinos for Peace, Justice and Progress Movement, Inc. (FPJPM), represented by its president and chairperson, Joseph F. Cadsawan, and Gloria T. Puzon, chapter Officer Vs. The House of Representatives, et al./Edgar R. Erice and Leila De Lima Vs. The Senate of the Philippines, et al. — Official PDF

Decision 21 G.R. Nos. 271059, 271347, E-02472 and E-04036 Court's ruling The Petitions in G.R. Nos. 271059, and E-02472 are meritorious. Th~ '' Petitions in G.R. Nos. 271347 and E-04036 are partly meritorious. I The Court may exercise its extraordinary power of judicial review Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution is both an extraordinary power and a duty imposed upon this Court to exercise its power of judicial review: SECTION 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law. Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to sett!~ 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 the Governrnent. 113 • The development of the courts' judicial power· beyond its traditional sense was made in response to the use and abuse of the political question doctrine during the martial law era: 114 This development of the courts' judicial power arose from the use • and abuse of the political question doctrine during the martial law era under former President Ferdinand Marcos. In Association of Medical Clinics for Overseas Workers, Inc. v. GCC Approved Medical Centers Association, Inc., this Court held: In Francisco v. The House of Representatives, we· recognized that this expanded jurisdiction was meant "to ensure the potency of the power of judicial review to curb grave abuse of discretion by 'any branch or instrumentalities of government."' Thus, the second paragraph of Article VIII, Section 1 engraves, for the first time in its history, into black letter law the "expanded certiorari jurisdiction" of this Court, whose nature and purpose had been provided in the sponsorship speech of its proponent, fonner Cl,i.ief Justice Constitutional Commissioner Roberto Concepcion[:] Fellow Members of this Commission, this is actually a product of our experience during martial Jaw. As a matter 113 CONST., art. VIII. sec. l_ t 114 KMU v. Aquino Ill, 850 Phil. 1168 (2019) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc], citing Association of Medical Clinics for Overseas Workers,. Inc. v. GCC Approved Medical Centers Association, Inc., 802 Phil. 116 (20 I 6) [Per J. Brion, En Banc].