MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court junked the petition challenging the constitutionality of the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act filed by a former law dean for failing to prove the government committed grave abuse of discretion.
The SC Public Information Office on Wednesday said the court en banc dismissed the Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition filed by lawyer Jaime Ibañez who assailed the constitutionality of the Bayanihan law “in so far as the imposition in the country of the Enhanced Community Quarantine.”
Related Stories
Ibañez said that the law granted the president “legislative authority to exercise power other than what is necessary and proper to carry out the declared national policy,” supposedly shown with the use of the phrase “for other purposes.”
The phrase “for other purposes” in the Bayanihan law constitutes “undue delegation of power” and is unconstitutional.
Cabinet Secretary Karlo Nograles, Francisco Duque III and the Inter-Agency Task Force on the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases were named as respondents in the petition.
But the SC said Ibañez’s petition “failed to show grave abuse of discretion committed by respondents.”
The media brief sent by the SC PIO did not expound on the court’s action.
Associate Justice Alexander Gesmundo was the member-in-charge of the case. Associate Justices Marvic Leonen and Samuel Gaerlan dissented from the majority, the SC PIO added.
A copy of the resolution has yet to be made public, and the PIO said they will upload it once available from the Office of the Clerk of Court.
Approved in a special session last May 23, the Bayanihan Act granted the president authority for three months to realign funds to distribute emergency cash aid to the poor and those who were left jobless by the pandemic, and impose stiffer penalties for local officials refusing to comply with emergency measures.
The law expired on June 25. — Kristine Joy Patag