JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, petitioner, vs. ANIANO DESIERTO, in his capacity as Ombudsman, RAMON GONZALES, VOLUNTEERS AGAINST CRIME AND CORRUPTION, GRAFT FREE PHILIPPINES FOUNDATION, INC., LEONARD DE VERA, DENNIS FUNA, ROMEO CAPULONG and ERNESTO B. FRANCISCO, JR., respondent. G.R. No. 146710-15 March 2, 2001

Topic; EXEPTIONS TO GENERALITY PRINCIPLE

GIST: Former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada, alleged that he was still the President of the Republic of the Philippines, by the time acting President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, assumed the position and that he was just on leave, therefore, no cases could be filed against him.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FACTS:

1. In the May 11, 1998 elections, petitioner Joseph Ejercito Estrada was elected President while respondent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was elected Vice-President.

2. October 4, 2000. Ilocos Sur Governor, Luis "Chavit" Singson, a longtime friend of the petitioner, went on air and accused the petitioner, his family and friends of receiving millions of pesos from jueteng lords.

3. After the expose of the said contriversies, less. The House Committee on Public Order and Security, then headed by Representative Roilo Golez, decided to investigate the exposẻ of Governor Singson. On the other hand, Representatives Heherson Alvarez, Ernesto Herrera and Michael Defensor spearheaded the move to impeach the petitioner.

4. on November 13, House Speaker Villar transmitted the Articles of Impeachment11 signed by 115 representatives, or more than 1/3 of all the members of the House of Representatives to the Senate.

5. December 7, the impeachment trial started.

6. January 20 turned to be the day of surrender.

7. On January 22, the Monday after taking her oath, respondent Arroyo immediately discharged the powers the duties of the Presidency

8.February 7, the Senate passed Resolution No. 83 declaring that the impeachment court is functus officio and has been terminated.

9. On February 5, petitioner filed with this Court GR No. 146710-15, a petition for prohibition with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction. It sought to enjoin the respondent Ombudsman from "conducting any further proceedings in Case Nos. OMB 0-00-1629, 1754, 1755, 1756, 1757 and 1758 or in any other criminal complaint that may be filed in his office, until after the term of petitioner as President is over and only if legally warranted."

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not the Joseph Ejercito Estrada, resigned in his position as the President or simply a President on leave. and still enjoys the immunity from lawsuit.

RULING:

In this case, petitioner didn't subsequently produced a writing regarding his resignation from the position, however, there are certain actions before, during and after January 20, 2001, (which was the time of the oath-taking of the acting president) that we must consider and check in order to prove that the former president, totally, and voluntarily expressed his resignation, apart from writing:

> When he proposed for snap election, wherein he will not be a candidate himself ;

> The agreement of the peaceful and orderly transfer of powers;

> The express statement in his letter that he will no longer be able to practice his power as the President.

In sum, we hold that the resignation of the petitioner cannot be doubted. It was confirmed by his leaving Malacañang.

We reject his argument that he cannot be prosecuted for the reason that he must first be convicted in the impeachment proceedings. The impeachment trial of petitioner Estrada was aborted by the walkout of the prosecutors and by the events that led to his loss of the presidency.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petitions of Joseph Ejercito Estrada challenging the respondent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as the de jure 14th President of the Republic are DISMISSED.

==============

ADDITIONAL FACTS:

Political questions- refer "to those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch of the government

Example:

EDSA I involves the exercise of the people power of revolution which overthrew the whole government. EDSA II is an exercise of people power of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly to petition the government for redress of grievances which only affected the office of the President. EDSA I is extra constitutional and the legitimacy of the new government that resulted from it cannot be the subject of judicial review, but EDSA II is intra constitutional and the resignation of the sitting President that it caused and the succession of the Vice President as President are subject to judicial review. EDSA I presented a political question; EDSA II involves legal questions.

Quo Warranto - a writ or legal action requiring a person to show by what warrant an office or franchise is held, claimed, or exercised.