Temere Animus

Understanding the Impeachment of Philippine Government Officials Sec. 2, Article XI provides: Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment. Understanding the Impeachment Process: Step-by-Step Guide Impeachment is a legal mechanism used to hold top government officials accountable for serious offenses. In the Philippines, this process applies to the President, Vice President, Supreme Court Justices, Members of Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman for crimes such as treason, bribery, graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust, or culpable violation of the Constitution . Here’s...

Oposa vs. Factoran, Jr., 224 SCRA 792, July 30, 1993 Case Nature : SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION for certiorari of the dismissal order of the RTC of Makati, Br. 66. Division: EN BANC Docket Number: G.R. No. 101083 Ponente: DAVIDE, JR. Dispositive Portion: WHEREFORE, being impressed with merit, the instant Petition is hereby GRANTED, and the challenged Order of respondent Judge of 18 July 1991 dismissing Civil Case No. 90-777 is hereby set aside. The petitioners may therefore amend their complaint to implead as defendants the holders or grantees of the questioned timber license agreements. DOCTRINES: Petitioners instituted Civil Case No. 90-777 as a class suit. The original defendant and the present respondents did not take issue with this matter. Nevertheless, We hereby rule that the said civil case is indeed a class suit. The subject matter of the complaint is of common and general interest not just to several, but to all citizens of the Philippines. Consequently, since the parties are so num...

G.R. No. 128096. January 20, 1999.* PANFILO M. LACSON, petitioner, vs. THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE SANDIGANBAYAN, OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MYRNA ABALORA, NENITA ALAP-AP, IMELDA PANCHO MONTERO, and THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents. ROMEO M. ACOP and FRANCISCO G. ZUBIA, JR., petitioners-intervenors. Ponente: MARTINEZ, J.: Nature of the case: The constitutionality of Sections 4 and 7 of Republic Act No. 8249 — an act which further defines the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan — is being challenged in this petition for prohibition and mandamus. Petitioner Panfilo Lacson, joined by petitioners-intervenors Romeo Acop and Francisco Zubia, Jr., also seeks to prevent the Sandiganbayan from proceedings with the trial of Criminal Cases Nos. 23047-23057 (for multiple murder) against them on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. Facts: In May 1995, eleven members of the Kuratong Baleleng gang were killed by elements of the Anti-Bank Robbery and Intellige...