Marcos v.

Manglapus

FACTS:

Former President Marcos, after his and his family spent three year exile in Hawaii, USA, sought to return
to the Philippines. The call is about to request of Marcos family to order the respondents to issue travel
order to them and to enjoin the petition of the President's decision to bar their return to the Philippines.

ISSUE:

Whether or not, in the exercise of the powers granted by the Constitution, the President may prohibit the
Marcoses from returning to the Philippines.

RULING:

Yes

According to Section 1, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution: "The executive power shall be vested in the
President of the Philippines." The phrase, however, does not define what is meant by executive power
although the same article tackles on exercises of certain powers by the President such as appointing
power during recess of the Congress (S.16), control of all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices
(Section 17), power to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after
conviction by final judgment (Section 19), treaty making power (Section 21), borrowing power (Section
20), budgetary power (Section 22), informing power (Section 23).

The Constitution may have grant powers to the President, it cannot be said to be limited only to the
specific powers enumerated in the Constitution. Whatever power inherent in the government that is
neither legislative nor judicial has to be executive.