People of the Philippines Vs. Guillermo Manantan

People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-appellant

Vs.

Guillermo Manantan, Defendant-appellee


G.R. No. 14129, July 31, 1962


Facts:

Defendant Guillermo Manantan was charged with a violation of section 54 of the Revised Election Code in the Province of Pangasinan.

Section 54. Active intervention of public officers and employees. - No justice, judge, fiscal, treasurer, or assessor of any province, no officer or employee of the Army, no member of the national, provincial, city, municipal or rural police force, and no classified civil service officer or employee shall aid in any candidate, or exert influence in any manner in any election or take part therein, except to vote, if entitled thereto, or to preserve public peace, if he is a peace officer.

Defendant contends that the provision excludes justice of peace and as such, he is excluded from this prohibition.

The defense moved to dismiss the information on the ground that as justice of peace, the defendant is not one of the officers enumerated in section 54 of the Revised Election Code. The lower court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that a justice of peace is within the purview of section 54. A second motion was filed by the defense counsel who in cited in support the decision of the Court of Appeals in People vs. Macaraig, where a justice of peace is excluded from the prohibition of sec. 54. The lower court dismissed the information against the accused upon authority of the ruling in the case cited by the defense.

Issue:

Whether or Not the Justice of Peace is included in the prohibition of Section 54 of the Revised Election Code.

Held:

Yes. Petitioner argues that when section 54 of the Revised Election Code omitted the words "Justice of Peace" from the Revised Administrative Code provision from which it was taken and thus making the intention of the legislature in the omission; however, petitioner's contention is without merit. The word judge in the former provision was qualified by the phrase "of First instance" the term judge in section 54 is not modified or qualified making it more broader and generic to comprehend all kinds of judges.

Note:

The rule of Casus omissus has no applicability to the case at bar for the maxim only applies and operates if and when the omission has been clearly established.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation (GMRC) Vs. National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and Imelda Salazar

Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation (GMRC), Petitioner Vs. National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and Imelda Salazar, Respondents G.R. No. 82511, March 3, 1992 Facts: Private Respondent, "Imelda Salazar" was employed as general systems analyst of Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. (GMRC) While Delfin Saldivar, her close friend, was employed as technical operations' support manager in May 1982. Petitioner GMRC investigated Saldivar's activities due to the reports indicating that the company equipment and spare parts were in custody of Saldivar. The internal audit report also indicated that Saldivar entered into a partnership with Richard A. Yambao, owner and manager of Eledon Engineering Services (Elecon), a supplier often recommended by Saldivar to the petitioner. It also appeared in the course of Maramara's investigation that Imelda Salazar violated company regulations by involving herself in transactions with conflict of interest with t...
Read more

The Director of Lands Vs. Court of Appeals

The Director of Lands, Petitioner Vs. Court of Appeals and Teodoro Abistado, substituted by Margarita, Marissa, Maribel, Arnold and Mary Ann, all surnamed Abistado, Respondents. G.R. No. 102858, July 28, 1997 Facts : Teodoro Abistado, private respondent, Filed a petition for original registration of his title over 648 square meters of land under P.D. No. 1529 or the Property Registration Decree. The application was docketed as Land Registration Case (LRC) No. 86 and assigned to Branch 44 of the Regional Trial Court of Mamburao, Occidental Mindoro. During the pendency of the case, Teodoro Abistado died and was substituted by his children - Margarita, Marissa, Maribel, Arnold, and Mary Ann, all surnamed Abistado, who were all represented by their aunt Josefa Abistado, ad litem ( act in which a lawsuit has a representative in behalf of children not capable of representation.) Land Registration Court dismissed the petition for want of jurisdiction in compliance with the mandatory p...
Read more

The People of the Philippines Vs. Patricio Amigo

The People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee Vs. Patricio Amigo alias "Bebot," Accused-Appellant G.R. No. 116719, January 18, 1996 Facts: On December 29, 1989 at around 1:00 Pm, Benito Ng Suy was driving their gray Ford Fiera back home, with his daughters, Jocelyn Ng Suy and a younger one together with his two year old son. An accidental head on collision occurred between the Fiera and the Tamaraw being driven by one Virgillio Abogado, with Abogado was the accused, Patricio Amigo alias "Bebot". The collision caused slight damage to the right bumper of the Tamaraw. While Abogado and Benito were having a verbal confrontation, Patricio approached Benito asking the latter to leave the incident as it was only a minor incident. However, Benito said that Patricio should not interfere, which made Patricio irritated and caused the latter to stab Benito, rendering the victim into a critical condition which later caused his death due to a sepsis infecti...
Read more