The principle of co-equality

By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III

So much has been said about the co-equality among the three major branches of government which are: the legislative, the executive and the judicial departments. Indeed, co-equality demands mutual respect and in turn, mutual respect, means finding ways to avoid encroaching on the other’s turf.

The recent decision in Duterte v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 278353/ G.R. No. 278359, July 25, 2025, has received criticism from many quarters as it seems to have veered from the previous ruling in Francisco Jr. v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261, November 10, 2003. To recall, the 1987 Constitution prohibits the “initiation” of more than one (1) impeachment against an impeachable public officer. In Francisco Jr., “initiation” was defined as the referral of the impeachment complaint to the Committee on Justice in the House of Representatives and its consideration of the same. Mere filing of a complaint therefore does not constitute as “initiation.”

The Duterte ruling states that the filing of three impeachment complaints in December 2024 which were “archived” and deemed “dismissed,” had served to bar the filing of the fourth complaint in 2025 as the same was within the prohibited one-year period.

There is now a debate on the nuances of “initiation” and that may be subject of a motion for reconsideration by the House of Representatives and/or other interested quarters. This article is not about that topic.

The main subject of this article is “co-equality.” In legal literature, this principle was conceptualized by Montesquieu, an 18^th century French political philosopher. In simplest terms, each department of government (legislative, executive, judicial) has a domain such that the legislative is tasked to make laws, the executive to implement them, and the judicial to interpret the same. One branch must not encroach on the other/s.

As a consequence of the principle of co-equality is the concept of “checks and balances.” The constitution has put in place some safeguards where each department can “check” any excesses or grave irregularities in the exercise of functions in one department’s domain.

In the Philippine constitutional set-up, the duty to “initiate” impeachment complaints is part of the “checks and balances” principle which devolves on the House of Representatives. The wisdom of the House of Representatives must therefore be given much weight in deciding “how” to “initiate” an impeachment complaint. It is within the realm of a political question.

True, the 1987 Philippine Constitution had expanded the “Judicial power” to include the power to annul acts of the legislative and executive departments when the same are in grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Because of the expanded judicial power,  the political question doctrine had effectively shrunk. Yet, it was not totally abrogated.

This article was written without any intention to criticize the decision in Duterte, but rather to articulate some fundamental principles in law. As a professor in civil law teaching first year law students about the basic elements of fairness and justice and equity, this columnist feels it his duty to explain the basic principles to align with the lectures that happen in class.

To end, in deciding cases, what matters is what every first year law student must know- that our courts are not only courts of law but of justice and equity.   (Alonzo v. IAC, G.R. No. 72873, May 28, 1987, Republic v. Manalo, G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018; The Missionary Sisters of Our Lady of Fatima (Peach Sisters of Laguna) represented by Rev. Mother Ma. Concepcion R. Realon v. Amando V. Alzona et al., G.R. No. 224307, August 6, 2018RG Cabrera Corporation, Inc v. Department of Public Works and Highways, G.R. No. 231015/G.R. No. 240618/G.R. No. 249212. January 26, 2021).

As held in Alonzo, ibid., “Thus, we interpret and apply the law not independently of but in consonance with justice. Law and justice are inseparable, and we must keep them so. To be sure, there are some laws that, while generally valid, may seem arbitrary when applied in a particular case because only of our nature and functions, to apply them just the same, in slavish obedience to their language. What we do instead is find a balance between the word and the will, that justice may be done even as the law is obeyed.”

(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates (ETRIIILaw)– a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, a law professor, MCLE lecturer, bar reviewer and a book author. Among the books he authored is Law on Property and Essentials of Land Registration [2024 Edition] which was on the bestseller’s list in online shops for several months. His website is etriiilaw.com).