THE LIGA NG MGA BARANGAY NATIONAL
vs.
THE
CITY MAYOR OF MANILA, HON. JOSE ATIENZA, JR., and THE CITY COUNCIL OF MANILA
G.R.
No. 154599 January 21, 2004
FACTS:
Petitioner Liga is the national
organization of all the barangays in the Philippines which pursuant to the
Local Govt Code, constitutes the duly elected presidents of highly-urbanized
cities, provincial chapters, Metro Manila chapter, and metropolitan political
subdivision chapters. On March 2000, the Liga adopted and ratified its own
Constitution and By-laws. Pursuant to its Constitution, it also adopted and
ratified its own Election Code. Thereafter, it came out with its calendar of
activities and guidelines for the implementation of its election code. The
synchronized elections for highly-urbanized city chapters was also set on Oct.
21, 2002.
On June 28, 2002, respondent
City Council of Manila enacted an ordinance providing among other things, for
the election of representatives of the District Chapters in the City Chapter of
Manila and setting the elections for both chapters 30 days after the barangay
elections.
Upon being informed that the
ordinance had been forwarded to Mayor Atienza for his approval, the Liga sent
him a letter requesting that said ordinance be vetoed considering that it encroached
upon or even assumed the functions of the Liga through legislation. However,
Atienza stillapproved and signed the ordinance, and issued an executive order
for its implementation.
This prompted the Liga to file
a petition for certiorari with the SC. Respondents defend the validity of the
assailed ordinance and executive order and prays for the dismissal of the
petition on the ff grounds: 1) certiorari under Rule 65 is unavailing; 2) two
actions were pending before the RTC Manila questioning the ordinance and
executive order; 3) petitioner is guilty of forum shopping; 4) act sought to be
enjoined is fait accompli; and 5) the city council does not fall within the
ambit of “tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions”
ISSUE:
WON the City Council of Manila
and Atienza committed grave abuse of discretion when they enacted and approved
the ordinance purposely to govern the elections of the Manila Chapter of the
Liga, and which provides a different manner of electing its officers, despite
the fact that the law mandates such elections to be governed by the Liga
Constitution and By-laws
HELD:
The SC ruled that the action,
in its essence, seeks to declare the unconstitutionality/illegality of the
ordinance. Thus it partakes of an action for declaratory relief of which the SC
has only appellate and not original jurisdiction.
Rule on Hierarchy of Courts. The concurrence of jurisdiction is not to be
taken, as according to parties seeking any of the writs, an absolute
unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to which the application therefore
will be directed. There is after all a hierarchy of courts. The hierarchy is
determinative of the venue of appeals, and also serves as a general determinant
of the appropriate forum for petitions for the extraordinary writs. A becoming
regard of that judicial hierarchy most certainly indicates that petitions for
issuance of extraordinary writs against the first level (inferior) courts
should be filed with RTC, and those against the latter, with the CA. A direct
invocation of the SC’s original jurisdiction to issue the writs should be
allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefore, clearly
and specifically set out in the petition. This is an established policy. It is
a policy necessary to prevent inordinate demands upon the Court’s time and
attention, which are better devoted to those matters within its exclusive
jurisdiction, and to prvent further overcrowding of the Court’s docket.
Forum Shopping; Exists if elements of Litits Pendentia are present. Forum shopping exists where
the elements of litis pendentia are present or when a final judgment in one
case will amount to res judicata in the other. For litis pendentia to exist,
the following requisites must be present: 1) identity of the parties, or at
least such parties as are representing the same interest in both actions; 2)
identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the reliefs being founded
on the same facts; 3) identity with respect to the @ preceding particulars in
the two cases, such that any judgment that may be rendered in the pending case,
regardless of which party is successful, would amount to res judicata in the
other case.
Requisites for filing of a Writ of Certiorari. For the Writ of Certiorari to
issue, the following requisites must concur: 1) it must be directed against a
tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions; 2)
the tribunal, board, or officer must have acted without or in excess of
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction; and 3) there is no appeal nor any plain, speedy, and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law.
No comments:
Post a Comment