Back

Gonzales vs. Macaraig [DISSENTING OPINION, PADILLA, J.]

NEPTALI A. GONZALES, ERNESTO M. MACEDA, ALBERTO G. ROMULO, HEHERSON T. ALVAREZ, EDGARDO J. ANGARA, AGAPITO A. AQUINO, TEOFISTO T. GUINGONA, JR., ERNESTO F. HERRERA, JOSE D. LINA, JR., JOHN OSMEÑA, VICENTE T. PATERNO, RENE A. SAGUISAG, LETICIA RAMOS-SHAHANI, MAMINTAL ABDUL J. TAMANO, WIGBERTO E. TAÑADA, JOVITO R. SALONGA, ORLANDO S. MERCADO, JUAN PONCE ENRILE, JOSEPH ESTRADA, SOTERO LAUREL, AQUILINO PIMENTEL, JR., SANTANINA RASUL, VICTOR ZIGA, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. CATALINO MACARAIG, JR., HON. VICENTE JAYME, HON. CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, HON. FULGENCIO FACTORAN, HON. FIORELLO ESTUAR, HON. LOURDES QUISUMBING, HON. RAUL MANGLAPUS, HON. ALFREDO BENGSON, HON. JOSE CONCEPCION, HON. LUIS SANTOS, HON. MITA PARDO DE TAVERA, HON. RAINERIO REYES, HON. GUILLERMO CARAGUE, HON. ROSALINA CAJUCOM AND HON. EUFEMIO C. DOMINGO, RESPONDENTS.

G.R. No. 87636 | 1990-11-19

DISSENTING OPINION

PADILLA, J.:

I dissent mainly for two (2) reasons:

First:  the questioned veto has no constitutional basis.

Article VI, Section 27 of the 1987 Constitution provides:

"Sec. 27.  (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the President.  If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it.  If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass the...