SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

CONCURRING OPINION

PADILLA, J.:

I concur, for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Republic of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan, et al. G R. No 96073, 23 January 1995, 240 SCRA 476.

It is my view that in all actions for recovery of so-called illegally acquired wealth during the Marcos era, all persons, whether natural or juridical, who stand to lose in favor of the government under a judgment in such actions should be impleaded as defendants to afford them an opportunity to be heard and defend themselves in the action. Consequently, where shares of stock in a corporation, registered in the name of a particular stockholder or stockholders have been sequestered by the PCGG but no judicial action or proceeding has been initiated by the government against the stockholder or stockholders of record, within the period prescribed by Sec 26, Article XVIII of the Constitution, then the sequestration of the subject shares of stock Is deemed automatically lifted by operation of the Constitution.