SC - The 1987 Constitution expanded the scope of judicial review to include cases involving "political questions."

- July 27, 2024

Recourse to the political question doctrine necessarily raises the underlying doctrine of separation of powers among the three great branches of government that our Constitution has entrenched. But at the same time that the Constitution mandates this Court to respect acts performed by co-equal departments done within their sphere of competence and authority, it has also allowed us to cross the line of separation on a very limited and specific point – to determine whether the acts of the executive and the legislative departments are null because they were undertaken with grave abuse of discretion. IBP v. Zamora teaches us that -

When political questions are involved, the Constitution limits the determination as to whether there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the official whose action is being questioned.

xxx xxx xxx

[W]hile this Court has no power to substitute its judgment for that of Congress or of the President, it may look into the question of whether such exercise has been made in grave abuse of discretion. A showing that plenary power is granted either department of government, may not be an obstacle to judicial inquiry, for the improvident exercise or abuse thereof may give rise to justiciable controversy.

Jurisprudence has defined grave abuse of discretion to mean the capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment that is so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.

FOOTNOTES

G.R. No. 157584 April 2, 2009

CONGRESSMAN ENRIQUE T. GARCIA of the 2nd District of Bataan, Petitioner,

vs.

THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, CALTEX PHILIPPINES, INC., PETRON CORPORATION, and PILIPINAS SHELL CORPORATION Respondents