Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 199082 2012-09-18	JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PERALTA, J.
It is, therefore, not only the power but the duty of both the Comelec and the DOJ to perform any act necessary to ensure the prompt and fair investigation and prosecution of election offenses. Pursuant to the above constitutional and statutory provisions, and as will be explained further below, we find no impediment for the Comelec and the DOJ to create the Joint Committee and Fact-Finding Team for the purpose of conducting a thorough investigation of the alleged massive electoral fraud and the manipulation of election results in the 2004 and 2007 national elections relating in particular to the presidential and senatorial elections.[73]
	GR NO. 169213 2006-06-22	GANIE P. OLAMA v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
x x x x.[19] Thus, as an extraordinary remedy, mandamus may be availed of only if the legal right to be enforced is well defined, clear and certain. It lies only to compel an officer to perform a ministerial duty, not a discretionary one. The duty is ministerial only when its discharge requires neither the exercise of official discretion nor judgment.[20]