GR 184389 CAguioa (Digest)
G.R. No. 184389 , November 16, 2021
ALLAN MADRILEJOS, ALLAN HERNANDEZ, GLENDA GIL, AND LISA GOKONGWEI-CHENG, PETITIONERS, VS. LOURDES GATDULA, AGNES LOPEZ, HILARION BUBAN, AND THE OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR OF MANILA, RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
Petitioners challenged the validity of Manila Ordinance No. 7780, an anti-obscenity law, after criminal charges were filed against them for its violation. The main Decision dismissed their petition on two grounds: (1) the dismissal of the criminal charges rendered the case moot and academic, and (2) a facial challenge on the ground of overbreadth is not allowed against an obscenity law because obscenity is unprotected speech. The dissenting opinion re-evaluates these grounds, arguing that an actual justiciable controversy remains for adjudication despite the dismissal of the charges, as the Ordinance continues to exist as law and its overbroad provisions create a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech.
ISSUE
Whether the petition presents an actual case or controversy ripe for judicial review despite the dismissal of the criminal charges against the petitioners.
RULING
The dissenting opinion holds that an actual case or controversy exists and the issue is ripe for adjudication. The dismissal of the criminal charges did not remove the requirement of an actual case, as there remains an “evident clash of the parties’ legal claims” regarding the constitutionality of Ordinance No. 7780. The Ordinance, not having been struck down, remains in effect and its overbroad provisions pose a threat of immediate or direct injury by chilling the fundamental freedom of speech and expression. Following precedents such as Imbong v. Ochoa, Jr. and Samahan ng mga Progresibong Kabataan (SPARK) v. Quezon City, the Court’s expanded judicial power allows it to take cognizance of facial challenges involving fundamental rights, even absent concrete enforcement, when the challenged law creates a chilling effect on protected speech. Therefore, the Court should not have dismissed the petition as moot and academic.