Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 Manila Prince Hotel V GSIS

    Uploaded by

    Pierre Anthony Alfane
    37 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 10, paragraph 2 of Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which mandates that the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos in the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, is self-executing and does not require further legislation. The case involved a dispute over the privatization of shares of Manila Hotel Corporation where the losing Filipino bidder, Manila Prince Hotel, matched the winning bid of the Malaysian firm Renong Berhad. The Supreme Court held that the Constitution requires that the qualified Filipino bidder be preferred, and ordered GSIS to accept Manila Prince Hotel's matching bid instead.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    1 Manila Prince Hotel v GSIS

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 10, paragraph 2 of Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which mandates that the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos in the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, is self-executing and does not require further legislation. The case involved a dispute over the privatization of shares of Manila Hotel Corporation where the losing Filipino bidder, Manila Prince Hotel, matched the winning bid of the Malaysian firm Renong Berhad. The Supreme Court held that the Constitution requires that the qualified Filipino bidder be preferred, and ordered GSIS to accept Manila Prince Hotel's matching bid instead.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    37 views1 page

    1 Manila Prince Hotel V GSIS

    Uploaded by

    Pierre Anthony Alfane
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 10, paragraph 2 of Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which mandates that the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos in the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, is self-executing and does not require further legislation. The case involved a dispute over the privatization of shares of Manila Hotel Corporation where the losing Filipino bidder, Manila Prince Hotel, matched the winning bid of the Malaysian firm Renong Berhad. The Supreme Court held that the Constitution requires that the qualified Filipino bidder be preferred, and ordered GSIS to accept Manila Prince Hotel's matching bid instead.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Manila Prince Hotel v GSIS G.R. No.

    122156, February 3, 1997

    Facts:
    On December 8, 1986, the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) decided to sell
    through public bidding 30% to 51% of the outstanding shares of Manila Hotel Corporation,
    pursuant to the privatization program of the Philippine Government. A close bidding was held on
    September 18, 1995, and only two (2) bidders participated: Manila Prince Hotel Corporation, a
    Filipino corporation, and Renong Berhad, a Malaysian firm, which bid Php 2.42 more than the
    bid of the Manila Prince Hotel Corporation. As the losing bidder, MPH matched the bid price of
    Php 44.00 per share which the GSIS refused to accept. On October 17, 1995, MPH came to the
    Court on prohibition and mandamus, invoking Section 10, par. 2, Art. XII of the 1987
    Constitution and submits that the Manila Hotel has practically become a historical monument
    which reflects the vibrancy of Philippine heritage and culture. Hence, it has become a part of the
    national patrimony. Therefore, being a Filipino corporation, it should be preferred after it has
    matched the bid offer of the Malaysian firm.

    Issue:
    Whether or not Section 10, par. 2., Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution is a mere statement of
    principle and policy since it is not a self-executing provision and requires implementing
    legislation.

    Held:
    The Supreme Court ruled that Section 10, par. 2, Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution is a
    mandatory, positive command which is complete in itself and which needs no further guidelines
    or implementing laws or rules for its enforcement. The 1987 Constitution mandated that [i]n the
    grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, the State
    shall give preference to qualified Filipinos, it means just that --- qualified Filipinos shall be
    preferred.
    The Supreme Court also argued that those found in Art. II of the 1987 Constitution, which lays
    down a general principle, are usually not self-executing. But a provision which is complete in
    itself and becomes operative without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation, or that
    which supplies sufficient rule by means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected,
    is self-executing. If the constitutional provisions are treated as requiring legislation instead of
    self-executing, the legislature would have the power to ignore and practically nullify the mandate
    of the fundamental law. That is why the prevailing law is that “in case of doubt, the Constitution
    should be considered self-executing rather than non-self-executing x x x Unless the contrary is
    clearly intended, the provisions of the Constitution should be considered self-executing, as a
    contrary rule would give the legislature discretion to determine when, or whether, they shall be
    effective. These provisions would be subordinated to the will of the lawmaking body, which
    could make them entirely meaningless by simply refusing to pass the needed implementing
    statute.

    WHEREFORE, directing GSIS to cease and desist from selling to Renong Berhad and to accept
    the matching bit of Manila Prince Hotel.

    You might also like