Digest Author: Cecille Mangaser

Franklin Drilon v. Hon. Jose De Venecia, Jr.

GR Numbers 180055 and 183055
Petition: Petition for review of the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-GR
SP No. 25429 upholding the constitutionality of PD 1315
For GR 180055
Petitioner: Franklin Drilon (as President and in representation of the Liberal Party of the
Philippines), Hon. Joseph Emilio Abaya, Hon. Wahab Akbar, Hon. Maria Evita Arago, Hon.
Processo Alcala, Hon. Rozzano Rufino Biazon, Hon. Mary Mitzi Cajayon, Hon. Fredenil Castro,
Hon. Glenn Ang Chong, Hon. Solomon Chunaao, Hon. Paul Ruiz Daza, Hon. Antonio Del
Rosario, Hon. Cecilia Luna, Hon. Manuel Mamba, Hon. Hermilando Mandanas, Hon. Alvin
Sandoval, Hon. Lorenzo Taada III, Hon. Reynaldo Uy, Hon. Alfonso Umali, Jr., Hon. Liwayway
Vinzons-Chato
Respondent: Hon. Jose De Venecia, Jr. (Speaker of the House of Representatives), Hon. Arthur
Defensor, Sr. (Majority Floor Leader), Hon. Manuel Villar (Ex-officio Charmain of CoA), Atty.
Gemma Aspiras (Secretary of CoA), Hon. Prospero Nograles, Hon. Edgardo Zialcity, Hon.
Abdullah Dimaporo, Hon. Jose Carlos Lacson, Hon. Eileen Ermita-Buhain, Hon. Jose Yap, Hon.
Rodolfo Albano III, Hon. Eduardo Gullas, Hon. Conrado Estrella III, Hon. Rodolfo Ompong
Plaza, Hon. Emmylou Talio-Mendoza, Hon. Emmanuel Joel Villanueva (Elected members of
CoA)
For GR 183055
Petitioner: Senator Ma. Ana Consuelo Madrigal
Respondent: Senator Manuel Villar (Senate President and ex-officio Chairman of CoA),
Representative Prospero Nograles (Speaker of the House) and the Commission on Appointments.
Ponente: Carpio-Morales, J.
Date: July 31, 2009
Facts:
In August 2007, the Senate and House of Representatives elected their respective contingents to
the Commission on Appointments. In the 2nd week of August, petitioners in the first petition
went to Speaker De Venecia to ask for one more seat for the Liberal Party, De Venecia said that
he would study the demand. During the HoR session, Taada requested from the HoR leadership
one seat in the CA for the Liberal Party. Respondents filed for dismissal of the petition.
In the meantime, Senator Madrigal sent letters to Villar and Nograles claiming that the
composition of the Senate and HoR in the CoA violated the constitutional requirement of
proportional representation. She requested for the reorganization of the membership of CoA.
Issue:
1. Whether or not the petitioner is the proper party concerned.
2. Whether or not the recourse was initiated in the proper venue.
Ruling:

Digest Author: Cecille Mangaser

1. No. The first petition has been rendered moot with the designation of a Liberal Party as
member of the House contingent. Senator Madrigal failed to show that she sustained a
direct injury as a result of the act complained of. Her petition does not allege that she
(or her political party) was deprived of a seat in the CoA, or that she or her party possess
personal and substantial interest to confer with her locus standi.
2. No. Madrigals primary recourse rests with the Senate or HoR. The doctrine of primary
jurisdiction dictates that prior recourse to the House is necessary before she may
bring her petition to the court.
Dispositive:
The motion with leave of court to withdraw the petition in GR 180055 is granted. The petition is
withdrawn. The petition in GR No 183055 is dismissed.