Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
assemblies,
etc.
Through
their
Manila, petitioners,
vs.
THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, GRACIANO
BUDOY, JULIETA BABARAN, ELSA IBABAO, HELEN
NARVASA, J.:p
The
issue
raised
in
the
special
civil
action
quasi-judicial
functions,
may
the
of
trial
and
adjudgment,
may
the
complainants
(private
respondents)
were
replaced
(unmarked
CHR
Exhibits,
and adjudication?
Apolinario
respondents, 6 the
investigation, and also moved "for suspension of the administrative proceedings pending
with
writ/temporary restraining order." But when their motion for suspension was denied by
Order dated November 8, 1990 of the Investigating Committee, which later also denied
Budoy,
Jr.,
Julieta
Esber
Babaran,
were,
latter
filed
Luz
among
separate
del
Castillo,
others,
answers,
opted
named
for
formal
their motion for reconsideration orally made at the hearing of November 14, 1990, "the
respondents led by their counsel staged a walkout signifying their intent to boycott the
entire proceedings." 7 The case eventually resulted in a Decision of Secretary Cario
dated December 17, 1990, rendered after evaluation of the evidence as well as the
some
from the service of Apolinario Esber and the suspension for nine (9) months of
800
members
public
of
Association
the
school
Manila
(MPSTA)
and
teachers,
Public
among
School
Alliance
of
them
Teachers
Concerned
4.
peaceable
assembly
docketed
as
G.R.
No.
95590." 9 Both
similarly situated" or "other similarly situated public school teachers too numerous to be
impleaded."
case." 14
motion to dismiss,
with
the
Chairman
presiding,
and
alia "ruling
that
it
was prima
orders,
file
administrative
charges
against
formal notice, and unjustly, since they did not join the
mass leave," and (b) expatiate on the grievances which
submit
disposition:
their
counter-affidavits
within
ten
(10)
"were denied due process of law; . . . they should not have been replaced without a
and political rights which the Commission was empowered to investigate; and while
chance to reply to the administrative charges;" there had been a violation of their civil
expressing its "utmost respect to the Supreme Court . . . the facts before . . . (it) are
different from those in the case decided by the Supreme Court" (the reference being
unmistakably to this Court's joint Resolution of August 6, 1991 in G.R. Nos. 95445 and
95590, supra).
superiors; and
the following 25
this
Court
having
in
fact,
as
threshold
question
Provide
appropriate
legal
measures
for
the
is
whether
or
not
the
adjudicatory powers over, or the power to try and decide, or hear and determine, certain
specific type of cases, like alleged human rights violations involving civil or political
rights.
way
of
adjudicative
receive
power
evidence
is
that
and
it
make
human
rights
and
to
provide
for
powers
and
functions
bears
any
or
other
evidence
is
necessary
or
determine causes) as courts of justice, or even quasijudicial bodies do. To investigate is not to adjudicate or
adjudge. Whether in the popular or the technical
sense, these terms have well understood and quite
distinct meanings.
understood,
means
to
"Adjudicate," commonly
The
dictionary
or
popularly
understood,
"Investigate," commonly
on,
research
an inquiry, judicial or otherwise, for the discovery and collection of facts concerning a
definition
of
been
transgressed.
More
particularly,
the
to
find
out
by
careful
by the aggrieved parties to the Civil Service Commission; and even this Court itself has
had occasion to pass upon said issues. 34
and
determined
through
motion
for
by
the
Civil
Service
Commission
and
Government
assistance;
that
would
agency
be
Commission. 35 It
cannot
arrogate
or
the
tribunal
Civil
unto
for
Service
itself
the
vs.
THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, TERESITA
VALLES, LORETO ALEDIA and PEDRO
ORDONEZ,respondents.
GRIO-AQUINO, J.:
On May 30, 1980, P.D. 1980 was issued reserving and
designating certain parcels of land in Rosario and
General Trias, Cavite, as the "Cavite Export Processing
Zone" (CEPZ). For purposes of development, the area
was divided into Phases I to IV. A parcel of Phase IV
injunction
commanding
Company
and
EPZA,
Governor
the
125th
PNP
and
their
Remulla
(EPZA).
as follows:
Loreto Aledia.
Considering the sworn statements of the farmers
Ten years later, on May 10, 1991, respondent Teresita
at
decades,
iba
pang
tulong").
The
CHR
conducted
an
including
the
failure
of
the
officials
from
bulldozing
complainants-farmers who
the
have
farmlands
come
of
to
the
the
Petition
for
Certiorari and
Prohibition"
(p.
83, Rollo).
discretion
in
issuing
the
restraining
order
and
quasi-judicial body.
On
September
19,
1991,
this
Court
issued
way
of
adjudicative
mayinvestigate, i.e.,
receive
power
is
evidence
that
and
it
make
others, to:
political rights;
have.
Provide
appropriate
legal
measures
for
the
been
transgressed.
More
particularly, the
warranting
or
are
administrative
justified
by
disciplinary
the
grievances
so.
"Jurisdiction
is
conferred
only
by
the
and
judicial
remedies
(including
the
petition