Marquez v.

COMELEC 1995 Facts Bienvenido Marquez, a defeated candidate for the elective position for the elective position in the Province of Quezon in the 11th May 1992 elections filed this petition for certiorari praying for the reversal of the resolution of the Commission on Elections ("COMELEC") which dismissed his petition for quo warranto against the winning candidate, herein private respondent Eduardo Rodriguez, for being allegedly a fugitive from justice. It is averred that at the time respondent Rodriguez filed his certificate of candidacy, a criminal charge against him for ten counts of insurance fraud or grand theft of personal property was still pending before the Municipal Court of Los Angeles, USA. A warrant issued by said court for his arrest, it is claimed, has yet to be served on private respondent on account of his alleged flight from that country. Before the May 1992 elections, a petition for cancellation of respondents certificate of candidacy on the ground of the candidates disqualification was filed by petitioner, but COMELEC dismissed the petition. Private respondent was proclaimed Governor-elect of Quezon. Petitioner instituted quo warranto proceedings against private respondent before the COMELEC but the latter dismissed the petition. Issue: Whether private respondent, who at the time of the filing of his certificate of candidacy is said to be facing a criminal charge before a foreign court and evading a warrant of arrest comes within the term fugitive from justice. Held: The Supreme Court ruled that Article 73 of the Rules and Regulations implementing the Local Government Code of 1991 provides: Article 73. Disqualifications The following persons shall be disqualified from running for any elective local position: (a) xxxx (e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases here or abroad. Fugitive from justice refers to a person who has been convicted by final judgment. It is clear from this provision that fugitives from justice refer only to persons who has been convicted by final judgment. However, COMELEC did not make any definite finding on whether or not private respondent is a fugitive from justice when it outrightly denied the petition for quo warranto. The Court opted to remand the case to COMELEC to resolve and proceed with the case.

Liban v. Gordon 2009 Facts Petitioners are officers of the Board of Directors of the QC Red Cross Chapter while Respondent is the Chairman of the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) Board of Governors. Petitioners allege that by accepting the chairmanship of the PNRC Board of Governors, respondent has ceased to be a member of the Senate - Sec. 13, Art. VI, 1987 Consti: No Senatoror Member of the HoR may hold any other office/employment in the Govt, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including govt-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries, during his term w/o forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected). Petitioners cite Camporedondo v. NLRC which held that PNRC is a govt-owned or controlled corporation. Flores v. Drilon held that incumbent national legislators lose their elective posts upon their appointment to another government office. Respondent: Petitioners have no standing to file petition w/cappears to be an action for quo warranto they do not claim to be entitled to the Senate office of respondent. Sec. 11, Rule 66, Rules of Civil Procedure: action should be commenced w/in 1 year after the cause of public officers forfeiture of office respondent has been working as a Red Cross volunteer for 40 yrs Petitioners cannot raise a constitutional question as taxpayers no claim that they suffered some actual damage/threatened injury or illegal disbursement of public funds If petition is for declaratory relief, SC has no jurisdiction PNRC is not a govt owned/controlled corporation Sec. 13, Art. VI of Consti does not apply because volunteer service to PNRC is not an office/employment Petitioners: present petition is a taxpayers suit questioning unlawful disbursement of funds considering that respondent has been drawing his salaries and other compensation as a Senator even if he is no longer entitled to his office. Court has jurisdiction because it involves a legal/constitutional issue of transcendental importance Issue: WON petitioners have standing. HELD: NO. The petition is an action for quo warranto(Sec. 1, Rule 66, Rules of Court an action for the usurpation of a public office against a public officer who does or suffers an act which constitutes a ground for forfeiture of his office).The Petitioners do not claim to be entitled to the Senate office of respondent. Issue: WON PNRC is a Private or Government-Owned or Controlled Corporation. SC: PNRC is a Private Corporation.

May 22, 1947 Pres. Manuel Roxas signed RA95 (PNRC Charter) adhering to the GenevaConvention of July 27, 1929. PNRC is: - A non-profit, donor-funded, voluntary, humanitarian organization whose mission is to bring timely, effective, and compassionate humanitarian assistance for the most vulnerable w/o consideration of nationality, race, religion, gender, social status, or political affiliation. - A member of National Society of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. 7 Fundamental Principles:Humanity, Impartiality, Neutrality, Independence, Voluntary Service, Unity,Universality. -Must be autonomous, neutral and independent; not appear to be instrument/agency that implements govt policy to merit the trust of all and effectively carry out its mission therefore, it cannot be owned/controlled by the govt. The Philippine govt does not own the PNRC does not have govt assets and does not receive any appropriation from the Congress. It is financed primarily by contributions from private individuals/entities obtained through solicitation campaigns organized by its Board of Governors(Sec. 11, PNRC Charter).

The govt does not control the PNRC. Only 6 of the 30 members of the PNRC Board of Governors are appointed by the President of the Philippines(Sec. 6, PNRC Charter). A majority of 4/5 of the PNRC Board are elected/ chosen by the private sector members of the PNRC. The PNRC Chairman is not appointed by the President or any subordinate govt official, therefore, he is not an official/employee of the Philippine Government. Sec. 16, Art. VII of Consti President appoints all officials & employees in the Executive branch whose appointments are vested in the President by the Consti or by law. President also appoints those whose appointments are not otherwise provided by law. The law may also authorize the heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or boards Therefore, Gordon could not be considered as disqualified from the Senate by reason of his position as the Chairman of the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) Board of Governors.