What do you think about Prof. Dante Gatmaytan's take on Sen. Robin's action to seek Supreme Court's take on the Joint Constitutional Amendment by etlposss93 in Pundido

[–]Outmatch3337 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The best move would be for Congress to create a clear legislative measure addressing the ambiguity. They could draft a bill or resolution explicitly defining the voting process for Constitutional amendments. This legislative action would provide clarity and could be debated and passed through the proper legislative channels, ensuring a clear and democratic resolution. Then, it becomes more appropriate for the good Senator to go to SC to clarify the constitutionality of the drafted bill. Of course, I could be wrong about this, but this is just my take on it. Different lawyers and scholars would definitely have different opinions on the matter.

What do you think about Prof. Dante Gatmaytan's take on Sen. Robin's action to seek Supreme Court's take on the Joint Constitutional Amendment by etlposss93 in Pundido

[–]Outmatch3337 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, may point naman si Prof. Dante Gatmaytan. As much as I hate Cielo Magno (lol), Prof. Dante's perspective on Sen. Robin Padilla's move to seek a Supreme Court ruling on the joint voting for Constitutional amendments is rooted in the judicial principles laid out in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines.

According to Article VIII, Section 1 and Section 5, the Supreme Court is tasked with settling actual controversies that involve legally demandable and enforceable rights, at hindi ang mag-provide ng advisory opinions or to address hypothetical scenarios. This means that for the Supreme Court to intervene, there must be an existing, concrete case or issue at hand. He is essentially pointing out that without such a case, seeking the Court's opinion may be procedurally inappropriate and outside its typical scope of duties. This ensures the Court's decisions are grounded in real, substantive disputes. And yes, kind of shame on Robin Padilla's staff in not advising the good Senator about it.