Back

Arlene Babst, et al. Vs. National Intelligence Board, et al. [SEPERATE OPINION, FERNANDO, C.J., CONCURRING]

ARLENE BABST, ODETTE ALCANTARA, CERES P. DOYO, JO-ANN Q. MAGLIPON, DOMINI TORREVILLAS-SUAREZ, LORNA KALAW-TIROL, CIELO BUENAVENTURA, SYLVIA MAYUGA, SHEILA S. CORONEL, ET AL., petitioners [SEPERATE OPINION, FERNANDO, C.J., CONCURRING] vs. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE BOARD, SPECIAL COMMITTEE NO. 2, BRIG. GEN. WILFREDO ESTRADA (ret.), COL. RENATO ECARMA, NBI ASST. DIRECTOR PONCIANO FERNANDO, COL. BALBINO DIEGO, COL. GALILEO KINTANAR, COL. EUSTAQUIO PERALTA, ET AL., respondents.

G.R. No. L-62992 | 1984-09-28

Separate Opinions 

FERNANDO, C.J., concurring:

The opinion of the Court penned by Justice Plana, written in his usual lucid style, is entitled to commendation. It is characterized by fealty to what has long been accepted as the task incumbent on the judiciary, namely, to resolve disputes. There is no departure from the practice very much in evidence in the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries. As pointed out by him: "The petition is premised upon the alleged illegality and unconstitutionality of the issuance by respondent NIB to petitioners of letters of invitation, their subsequent interrogation, and the filing of the...