Case name: Defensor-Santiago and Tatad vs Guingona and Fernan Citation: G.R. No.

134577 Facts: -On the first regular session of the 11th Congress, Senator Fernan and Senator T atad was nominated for Senate President. Fernan defeated Tatad in 20-2 votes -Senator Tatad assumed the position of a Minority leader and explained that thos e who have voted for him, the losing nominee, are members of the minority. And a s to those who voted for Senator Fernan, the winning nominee, are the members of the majority. -Senator Flavier manifested that the Senators under the LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP Party wh o also is a member of the minority had chosen Senator Guingona as the minority l eader. -And by virtue thereof, the Senate President recognized Senator Guingona as the minority leader. -Senators Defensor-Santiago and Tatad filed a petition for quo warranto alleging that Senator Guingona had been usurping, unlawfully holding and exercising the position of Senate minority leader, a position that according to them, rightfull y belonged to Senator Tatad. Issues + holding: Whether or not the Court has jurisdiction over the petition -The court has jurisdiction to settle the said issue to see that no bran ch or agency of the Government transcends the Constitution, not only in justicia ble but political questions as well. -The reason why the said issue is a justiciable matter and not political in char acter is simple. The so-called political question involves the provided acts, me asures or decisions within the area allocated thereto by the Constitution. -While the justiciable question in this issue however involves whenever the gran t of power is qualified, conditional or subject to limitations, the issue of whe ther or not the prescribed qualifications or conditions have been met, or the li mitations respected. Therefore, the core problem of the issue is the legality or validity of the contested act, not its wisdom. -As a consequence, the Supreme Court has neither the authority nor the discretio n to decline passing upon said issue, but is under the ineluctable obligation. Whether or not there is an actual violation in the constitution -In recognizing Senator Guingona as the minority leader, did the Senate officials including Senate President Fernan violate the constitution or the laws ? No provision of the Constitution or the laws or the rules and even the practic e of the Senate had been violated. The constitution only mandates that the Presi dent of the Senate must be elected by a number constituting more than one half o f all the members thereof, it does not provide that the members who will not vot e for him shall ipso facto constitute the "minority," who could thereby elect th e minority leader. Verily, no law or regulation states that the defeated candida te shall automatically become the minority leader. Was Respondent Guingona usurping, unlawfully holding and exercising the position of Senate minority leader? -No, the respondent was not guilty of usurping, unlawfully holding and e xercising the position in which he was voted for since as discussed earlier, the re is no provision of the Constitution or the laws or the rules and even the pra ctice of the Senate explicitly states the specific norm and standards that may b e used in determining who may lawfully occupy the disputed position.

Did Respondent Fernan act with grave abuse of discretion in recognizing Responde nt Guingona as the minority leader? -No, respondent Fernan did not act with grave abuse of discretion in rec ognizing Respondent Guingona as the minority leader since the latter was voted b y the LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP. By the unanimous resolution of the minority that he be th e minority leader, he was recognized as such by the Senate President. HOLDING: PETITION DISMISSED.