Scribd
Upload
124 views1 page

Pormento v. Estrada G.R. No. 191988 August 31, 2010

This case discusses whether former President Joseph Estrada was eligible to run for president again in 2010 based on a constitutional provision banning reelection. The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that no actual case or controversy existed since Estrada lost the 2010 election and was not reelected. As Estrada was not successful in his second candidacy, any discussion of reelection would only be hypothetical. Therefore, the case was deemed moot and non-justiciable.

Uploaded by

jodelle11
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
124 views1 page

Pormento v. Estrada G.R. No. 191988 August 31, 2010

This case discusses whether former President Joseph Estrada was eligible to run for president again in 2010 based on a constitutional provision banning reelection. The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that no actual case or controversy existed since Estrada lost the 2010 election and was not reelected. As Estrada was not successful in his second candidacy, any discussion of reelection would only be hypothetical. Therefore, the case was deemed moot and non-justiciable.

Uploaded by

jodelle11
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Pormento v.

Estrada
G.R. No. 191988 August 31, 2010

 What is the proper interpretation of the following provision of Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution:
[t]he President shall not be eligible for any reelection?
 The petition asks whether private respondent Joseph Ejercito Estrada is covered by the ban on the
President from any reelection. Private respondent was elected President of the Republic of the
Philippines in the general elections held on May 11, 1998. He sought the presidency again in the
general elections held on May 10, 2010. Petitioner Atty. Evillo C. Pormento opposed private
respondents candidacy and filed a petition for disqualification. However, his petition was denied by
COMELEC. MR denied by COMELEC en banc.
 Petitioner filed the instant petition for certiorari on May 7, 2010. However, under the ROC, the filing of
such petition would not stay the execution of the judgment, final order or resolution of the COMELEC
that is sought to be reviewed. Besides, petitioner did not even pray for the issuance of a temporary
restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction. Hence, private respondent was able to participate as a
candidate for the position of President in the May 10, 2010 elections where he garnered the second
highest number of votes.
 Private respondent was not elected President the second time he ran. Since the issue on the proper
interpretation of the phrase any reelection will be premised on a person’s second (whether immediate or
not) election as President, there is no case or controversy to be resolved in this case. No live conflict of
legal rights exists. There is in this case no definite, concrete, real or substantial controversy that touches
on the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests…When a case is moot, it becomes non-
justiciable.
 Assuming an actual case or controversy existed prior to the proclamation of a President who has been
duly elected in the May 10, 2010 elections, the same is no longer true today. Following the results of
that elections, private respondent was not elected President for the second time. Thus, any discussion
of his reelection will simply be hypothetical and speculative. It will serve no useful or practical purpose.
PETITION DENIED.

You might also like