Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 52 views

    Gonzales-vs-Macaraig Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Renzo R.
    This case discusses the presidential veto of Section 55 of the 1989 General Appropriations Act and Section 16 of the 1990 General Appropriations Act. The petitioners argued that the presidential veto was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the presidential veto was constitutional because the vetoed sections did not relate to any specific appropriations and instead expressed general Congressional policy rather than making appropriations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gonzales-vs-Macaraig Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Renzo R.
    52 views1 page
    This case discusses the presidential veto of Section 55 of the 1989 General Appropriations Act and Section 16 of the 1990 General Appropriations Act. The petitioners argued that the presidential veto was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the presidential veto was constitutional because the vetoed sections did not relate to any specific appropriations and instead expressed general Congressional policy rather than making appropriations.

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Original Title

    Gonzales-vs-Macaraig case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses the presidential veto of Section 55 of the 1989 General Appropriations Act and Section 16 of the 1990 General Appropriations Act. The petitioners argued that the presidential veto was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the presidential veto was constitutional because the vetoed sections did not relate to any specific appropriations and instead expressed general Congressional policy rather than making appropriations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    52 views1 page

    Gonzales-vs-Macaraig Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Renzo R.
    This case discusses the presidential veto of Section 55 of the 1989 General Appropriations Act and Section 16 of the 1990 General Appropriations Act. The petitioners argued that the presidential veto was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the presidential veto was constitutional because the vetoed sections did not relate to any specific appropriations and instead expressed general Congressional policy rather than making appropriations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Gonzales vs Macaraig (G.R. No. 87636. November 19, 1990.

    Facts

     On 16 December 1988, Congress passed House Bill No. 19186, or the General
    Appropriations Bill for the Fiscal Year 1989. As passed, it eliminated or
    decreased certain items included in the proposed budget submitted by the
    President.
     On 29 December 1988, the President signed the Bill into law, and declared the
    same to have become Rep. Act No. 6688. In the process, seven (7) Special
    Provisions and Section 55, a "General Provision," were vetoed.
     Thus it is that, on 11 April 1989, this Petition for Prohibition/ Mandamus was filed,
    with a prayer for the issuance of a Writ of Preliminary Injunction and Restraining
    Order, assailing mainly the constitutionality or legality of the Presidential veto of
    Section 55, and seeking to enjoin respondents from implementing Rep. Act No.
    6688. No Restraining Order was issued by the Court.

    Issue:

     Whether or not the presidential veto on Section 55 of the General Appropriations


    Act for the fiscal year 1989 and Section 16 of the General Appropriations Act for
    the fiscal year 1990 is constitutional?

    Ruling

     Yes. The presidential veto on Section 55 of the General Appropriations Act for
    the fiscal year 1989 and Section 16 of the General Appropriations Act for the
    fiscal year 1990 is constitutional. the vetoed "provisions" do not relate to any
    particular or distinctive appropriation. They apply generally to all items
    disapproved or reduced by Congress in the Appropriations Bill and the vetoed
    Sections are more of an expression of Congressional policy in respect of
    augmentation from savings rather than a budgetary appropriation.

    You might also like