April 2012 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 179084 : April 10, 2012]
GABRIELA WOMEN'S PARTY, REPRESENTED BY LIZA L. MAZA, ALSO APPEARING IN HER CAPACITY AS MEMBER, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; SAMAHAN NG MARALITANG KABABAIHAN NAGKAKAISA (SAMAKANA), REPRESENTED BY NERE M. GUERRERO; KARL ANGELO NUNCIO, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER, RHODERICK V. NUNCIO; MA. LUZ REBECCA T. AÑONUEVO, AND CORAZON LALU-SANTOS V. PRES. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, AND SEC. JESLI LAPUS
"G.R. No. 179084 (Gabriela Women 's Party, represented by Liza L. Maza, also appearing in her capacity as Member, House of Representatives; Samahan ng Maralitang Kababaihan Nagkakaisa (SAMAKANA), represented by Nere M. Guerrero; Karl Angelo Nuncio, represented by his father, Rhoderick V. Nuncio; Ma. Luz Rebecca T. Añonuevo, and Corazon Lalu-Santos v. Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, and Sec. Jesli Lapus).
RESOLUTION
On May 17, 2003 respondent President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (President Arroyo) promulgated Executive Order 210 (E.O. 210) entitled "Establishing the Policy to Strengthen the Use of the English Language as a Medium of Instruction in the Educational System."[1] On August 22, 2006 respondent Jesli Lapus (Secretary Lapus), as then Education Secretary, issued Department of Education Memorandum Order 36, Series of 2006 (DepEd Order 36), which is the Implementing Rules and Regulations on E.O. 210.[2]
One year later, petitioners Luz Rebecca T. Añonuevo, Corazon Lalu-Santos, Karl Angelo Nuncio represented by his father Rhoderick V. Nuncio, Gabriela Women's Party List represented by Liza L. Maza, and Samahan ng Maralitang Kababaihan Nagkakaisa represented by Nere M. Guerrero (petitioners, collectively) filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction against President Arroyo, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, and Secretary Lapus seeking the nullification of E.O. 210 and DepEd Order 36 for violating the Constitution.
Petitioners claim that the provisions of E.O. 210 and DepEd Order 36 violate Article XIV, Sections 6 and 7 of the 1987 Constitution, which states that Filipino is the medium of official communication and language of instruction in the educational system.
On March 13, 2012 the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Manifestation and Motion in compliance with the Court's resolution, stating that the DepEd has issued DepEd Order 74, Series of 2009 which institutionalized the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTBMLE) Program. The OSG submitted DepEd Order 16, Series of 2012 entitled the "Guidelines on the Implementation of the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education."
DepEd Order 74, paragraph 2 declares that MTBMLE is the effective use of more than two languages for literacy and instruction. The DepEd institutionalized it as a fundamental educational policy and program in its department in the whole stretch of formal education including pre-school and in the Alternative Learning System.
DepEd Order 74, paragraph 1 states that local and international studies validated the superiority of the use of the learner's mother tongue or first language in improving learning outcomes and promoting education for all. Paragraph 3 enumerated the results of empirical studies which are similar to the arguments raised by petitioners.
In sum, the MTBMLE Program basically superseded the policy contained in E.O. 210 and DepEd Order 36. The principles and purpose behind the MTBMLE Program are parallel to petitioners' advocacy. This renders the petition moot and academic.cralaw
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the petition for certiorari and prohibition is DISMISSED."
Perlas-Bernabe, J., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
Clerk of Court
By:
(Sgd.) FELIPA B. ANAMA
Deputy Clerk of Court En Banc
Endnotes:
[1] Rollo, p. 6.[2] Id. at 7.