Scribd
Upload
351 views1 page

Angara Vs Electoral Commission

This document summarizes a judicial review case between Angara and the Electoral Commission regarding the 1935 election of a member of the National Assembly. Angara was proclaimed the winner but Ynsua later filed a protest with the Electoral Commission. Angara argued the protest was invalid since he had already been confirmed by the National Assembly. The Commission took up the protest nonetheless. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Angara, finding that while the Commission has authority over election matters, in a conflict the judiciary has final say on constitutional boundaries and the Commission overstepped its authority in this case.

Uploaded by

Dann Nix
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
351 views1 page

Angara Vs Electoral Commission

This document summarizes a judicial review case between Angara and the Electoral Commission regarding the 1935 election of a member of the National Assembly. Angara was proclaimed the winner but Ynsua later filed a protest with the Electoral Commission. Angara argued the protest was invalid since he had already been confirmed by the National Assembly. The Commission took up the protest nonetheless. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of Angara, finding that while the Commission has authority over election matters, in a conflict the judiciary has final say on constitutional boundaries and the Commission overstepped its authority in this case.

Uploaded by

Dann Nix
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Angara vs Electoral Commission

Judicial Review Electoral Commission In the elections of Sept 17, 1935, Angara, and the respondents, Pedro Ynsua et al. were candidates voted for the position of member of the National Assembly for the first district of the Province of Tayabas. On Oct 7, 1935, Angara was proclaimed as member-elect of the NA for the said district. On November 15, 1935, he took his oath of office. On Dec 3, 1935, the NA in session assembled, passed Resolution No. 8 confirming the election of the members of the National Assembly against whom no protest had thus far been filed. On Dec 8, 1935, Ynsua, filed before the Electoral Commission a Motion of Protest against the election of Angara. On Dec 9, 1935, the EC adopted a resolution, par. 6 of which fixed said date as the last day for the filing of protests against the election, returns and qualifications of members of the NA, notwithstanding the previous confirmation made by the NA. Angara filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that by virtue of the NA proclamation, Ynsua can no longer protest. Ynsua argued back by claiming that EC proclamation governs and that the EC can take cognizance of the election protest and that the EC cannot be subject to a writ of prohibition from the SC. ISSUES: Whether or not the SC has jurisdiction over such matter. Whether or not EC acted without or in excess of jurisdiction in taking cognizance of the election protest. HELD: The SC ruled in favor of Angara. The SC emphasized that in cases of conflict between the several departments and among the agencies thereof, the judiciary, with the SC as the final arbiter, is the only constitutional mechanism devised finally to resolve the conflict and allocate constitutional boundaries. That judicial supremacy is but the power of judicial review in actual and appropriate cases and controversies, and is the power and duty to see that no one branch or agency of the government transcends the Constitution, which is the source of all authority. That the Electoral Commission is an independent constitutional creation with specific powers and functions to execute and perform, closer for purposes of classification to the legislative than to any of the other two departments of the government. That the Electoral Commission is the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of members of the National Assembly.

You might also like