Back

Madreo vs. Bayron [CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION, PERLAS-BERNABE, J.]

ALDRIN MADREO, PETITIONER, VS. LUCILO R. BAYRON, RESPONDENT. [G.R. No. 237579, November 3, 2020] OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, PETITIONER, VS. LUCILO R. BAYRON, RESPONDENT.

G.R. No. 237330 | 2020-11-03

CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION
 
PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:
 
[W]hile the future may ultimately uncover a doctrine's error, it should be, as a general rule, recognized as "good law" prior to its abandonment. Consequently, the people's reliance thereupon should be respected.
 
— excerpt from Carpio Morales v. Court of Appeals[1] explaining why the condonation's abandonment should be prospective.
 
While I agree with the ponencia[2] that re-election is the determinative point to reckon condonation, which thus allows elective officials to still invoke the condonation doctrine...