Back

Genuino vs. Hon. De Lima [CONCURRING OPINION, CARPIO, Acting C.J.]

EFRAIM C. GENUINO, ERWIN F. GENUINO AND SHERYL G. SEE, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, AND RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, CRISTINO L. NAGUIAT, JR. AND THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 199034] MA. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, PETITIONER, VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 199046] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO, PETITIONER, VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO V. PARAS III, AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS.

G.R. No. 197930 | 2018-04-17

CONCURRING OPINION

CARPIO, Acting C.J.:

I concur.

The constitutionality of the assailed administrative circular remains justiciable.

Preliminarily, the consolidated petitions continue to present a justiciable controversy. Neither the expiration of the watchlist orders issued by Leila M. De Lima (respondent) as former Secretary of Justice nor the filing of Information for electoral sabotage against petitioner Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) rendered the cases moot.

A case becomes moot when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy such that its adjudication would not yield any practical value or use.[1] Where the petition is one...