Back

Sanidad etc. vs. Commission on Election etc. [CONCURRING IN THE RESULT AND DISSENTING IN PART, FERNANDO, J.]

ABLO C. SANIDAD AND PABLITO V. SANIDAD, PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT. [G.R. NO. L-44684. OCTOBER 12, 1976] VICENTE M. GUZMAN, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT. [G.R. NO. L-44714. OCTOBER 12, 1976] RAUL M. GONZALES, RAUL T. GONZALES, JR., AND ALFREDO SALAPANTAN, PETITIONERS, VS. HONORABLE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND HONORABLE NATIONAL TREASURER, RESPONDENTS.

G.R. No. L-44640 | 1976-10-12

CONCURRING IN THE RESULT AND DISSENTING IN PART
 
 
FERNANDO, J.:
 
 
These three petitions, the latest in a series of cases starting from Planas v. Commission on Elections,[1] continuing with the epochal resolution in Javellana v. Executive Secretary,[2] and followed successively in three crucial decisions, Aquino v. Ponce Enrile,[3] Aquino v. Commission on Elections,[4] and Aquino v. Military Commission,[5] manifest to the same degree the delicate and awesome character of the function of judicial review.  While previous rulings supply guidance and enlightenment, care is to be taken to avoid doctrinaire rigidity...