Case Digest: Liban v.

Gordon (2011)
G. R. No.175352: January 18, 2011
DANTE V. LIBAN, REYNALDO M. BERNARDO and SALVADOR M. VIARI,
Petitioners vs. RICHARD J. GORDON,Respondent. PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL RED CROSS, Intervenor.
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:
FACTS: Respondent filed a motion for partial recommendation on a Supreme
Court decision which ruled that being chairman of the Philippine National Red
Cross (PNRC) did not disqualify him from being a Senator, and that the
charter creating PNRC is unconstitutional as the PNRC is a private
corporation and the Congress is precluded by the Constitution to create
such.The Court then ordered the PNRC to incorporate itself with the SEC as a
private corporation. Respondent takes exception to the second part of the
ruling, which addressed the constitutionality of the statute creating the PNRC
as a private corporation. Respondent avers that the issue of constitutionality
was only touched upon in the issue of locus standi. It is a rule that the
constitutionality will not be touched upon if it is not the lis mota of the case.
ISSUE: Whether or not it was proper for the Court to have ruled on the
constitutionality of the PNRC statute.
HELD: Petition has merit.
Political Law: It has been consistently held in Jurisprudence that the
Court should exercise judicial restraint when it comes to issues of
constitutionality where it is not the lis mota of the case.
In the case at bar, the constitutionality of the PNRC statute was raised in the
issue of standing. As such, the Court should not have declared certain
provisions of such as unconstitutional. On the substantive issue, the PNRC is
sui generis. It is unlike the private corporations that the Constitution wants to
prevent Congress from creating. First, the PNRC is not organized for profit. It
is an organization dedicated to assist victims of war and administer relief to
those who have been devastated by calamities, among others. It is entirely
devoted to public service. It is not covered by the prohibition since the
Constitution aims to eliminate abuse by the Congress, which tend to favor
personal gain. Secondly, the PNRC was created in order to participate in the
mitigation of the effects of war, as embodied in the Geneva Convention. The
creation of the PNRC is compliance with international treaty obligations.
Lastly, the PNRC is a National Society, an auxiliary of the government. It is
not like government instrumentalities and GOCC. The PNRC is regulated

directly by international humanitarian law, as opposed to local law regulating

the other mentioned entities. As such, it was improper for the Court to have
declared certain portions of the PNRC statute as unconstitutional. However, it
is the stand of Justice Carpio that there is no mandate for the Government to
create a National Society to this effect. He also raises the fact that the PNRC
is not sui generis in being a private corporation organized for public needs.
Justice Abad is of the opinion that the PNRC is neither private or
governmental, hence it was within the power of Congress to create.