-triple petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with application for the issuance of TRO and/or preliminary injunction Manifestation and Motion dated October 26, 2007 of the Office of the Solicitor G eneral (OSG) which states: The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) respectfully avers that in an Indorsem ent dated October 24, 2007, the Legal Service of the Department of Transportatio n and Communications (DOTC) has informed it of the Philippine Government's decis ion not to continue with the ZTE National Broadband Network Project (see attachm ent[2]). That said, there is no more justiciable controversy controversy for this Honorable Court to resolve. WHEREFORE, public public respondents respectfully pray pray that the the pre sent petitions be DISMISSED. court required petitioners in G.R. Nos. 178830, 179317, and 179613 to comment. Rolex Suplico, petitioner in G.R. No. 178830, filed his Consolidated Reply and O pposition, saying that: 1. the notes of the meeting between GMA and Hu Jintao were not attached to the M anifestation and Motion, thereby depriving petitioners of the opportunity to com ment thereon-1st Indorsement not sufficient for conclusion that the NBN-ZTE Deal has been permanently scrapped 2. 1st Indorsement glraingly self-serving, esp without the notes to support its allegations or other proof of the supposed decisionto cancel the deal AHI or Amsterdam Holdings, Inc. (AHI) and Nathaniel Sauz, petitioners in another case, also filed their comment: 1. since the current administration is really nasty, the petitioners are not rea ssured that the government will not re-transact, since what was attached to the Indorsement was merely a one-paged written communication sent by the DOTC to the OSG saying the project was scrapped "xxx due to several reasons and constraints xxx" petitioners: mootness of issue not a bar for the court to take cognizance of the case. asked the court to rule on merits due to the ourt's symbolic function of educating the bench and the bar by formulating guiding and controlling principle s, precepts, doctrines, and rules. because of the transcendental importance of the issues raised in the petition, w hich among others, included the President's use of the power to borrow, i.e., to enter into foreign loan agreements, this Court should take cognizance of this c ase despite its apparent mootness. OSG replied : no actual case or controversy, no conflict of rights or assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial resolution, moot no perfected contract that would prejudice the government of public interest as an executive agreement in the negotiation stage, conditions precedent for the argument have not yet been complied with to become effective effective right to information not absolute, matters raised hinges on executive policy, wh ich is political in 2008, OSG filed supplemental Manifestation and Motion, where the highlights f rom the notes of meeting between GMA and Hu Jintao held in Shanghai , China said notes mention that project scrapped due to several constraints and Hu Jinta o's understanding of the government's decision Held: -prayers of petitioners: -enjoining respondents, from pursuing, entering into indebtedness, disbursing fu nds, and implementing the ZTE-DOTC Broadband Deal;
-Compel respondents to produce and furnish petitioner or his undersigned counsel a certified true copy of the contract or agreement covering the NBN project as agreed upon with ZTE Corporation; -Annul and set aside the award of the ZTE-DOTC Broadband Deal -TRO to DOTC, to desist from entering into any other agreements and from commenc ing with any kind of activity in connection to the NBN ZTE Deal -the Court issued a TRO in G.R. No. 178830, enjoining the parties from "pursuing , entering into indebtedness, disbursing funds, and implementing the ZTE-DOTC Br oadband Deal and Project" as prayed for -it also appears that during one of the senate hearings, petitioners were given a copy of the "contract", this part now being moot -cting in her official capacity during the meeting held on October 2, 2007 in Ch ina, informed China's President Hu Jintao that the Philippine Government had dec ided not to continue with the ZTE-National Broadband Network (ZTE-NBN) Project d ue to several reasons and constraints, there is no doubt that all the other prin cipal prayers in the three petitions (to annul, set aside, and enjoin the implem entation of the ZTE-NBN Project) had also become moot. -as to the declaratios made by officials belonging to the executive branch on th e Philippine government's decision not to continue with the ZTE NBN projects, wh ich are allegedly self serving, hence inadmissible, the court cites Section 1 of Rule 129 of ROC-it is mandatory and the Court has no alternative but to take ju dicial notice of the official acts of the President of the Philippines, who head s the executive branch of our government, without the introduction of evidence -cancellation by GMA-an official act of the executive department, court must tak e judicial notice -under Section 2, paragraph (m) of Rule 131 of the Rules of Court, the official duty of the executive officials[20] of informing this Court of the government's decision not to continue with the ZTE-NBN Project is also presumed to have been regularly performed -pontificating on issues which no longer legitimately constitute an actual case or controversy will do more harm than good to the nation as a whole. -Judicial power presupposes actual controversies, the very antithesis of moot ness. In the absence of actual justiciable controversies or disputes, the Court generally opts to refrain from deciding moot issues. Where there is no more li ve subject of controversy, the Court ceases to have a reason to render any rulin g or make any pronouncement. -Republic Telecommunications Holdings, Inc. v. Santiago: withdrawal of one contr acting party, abrogating contract, withdrawal had thwarted the execution and enf orcement of the contracts----the resolution of whether the implementation of sai d agreements should be enjoined became no longer necessary -"The rule is well-settled that for a court to exercise its power of adjudicatio n, there must be an actual case or controversy - one which involves a conflict o f legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial re solution; the case must not be moot or academic or based on extra-legal or other similar considerations not cognizable by a court of justice. Where the issue h as become moot and academic, there is no justiciable controversy, and an adjudic ation thereon would be of no practical use or value as courts do not sit to adju dicate mere academic questions to satisfy scholarly interest, however intellectu ally challenging." -The exercise of the power of judicial review is limited to actual cases and con troversies. Courts have no authority to pass upon issues through advisory opinio ns or to resolve hypothetical or feigned problems. -In those cases, the Court was persuaded to resolve moot and academic issues to formulate guiding and controlling constitutional principles, precepts, doctrines
or rules for future guidance of both bench and bar -as to the prayer to brush aside mootness, the resolution of the three petitions involves settling factual issues which definitely requires reception of evidenc e-This court is NOT a trier of facts -ZTE Correct: since petitioner Suplico filed his petition directly with this Cou rt, without prior factual findings made by any lower court, a determination of p ertinent and relevant facts is needed. -some factual issues: (1) Whether an executive agreement has been reached between the Philippine and Chine se governments over the NBN Project; (2) Whether the ZTE Supply Contract was entered into by the Republic of the Philippi nes, through the DOTC, and ZTE International pursuant to, and as an integral par t of, the executive agreement; (3) Whether a loan agreement for the NBN Project has actually been executed; (4) Whether the Philippine government required that the NBN Project be completed und er a Build-Operate-and-Transfer Scheme; (5) Whether the AHI proposal complied with the requirements for an unsolicited propo sal under the BOT Law; (6) Whether the Philippine government has actually earmarked public finds for disbur sement under the ZTE Supply Contract; and (7) Whether the coverage of the NBN Project to be supplied under the ZTE Supply Cont ract is more extensive than that under the AHI proposal or such other proposal s ubmitted therefor. -as to prayer to annul and set aside the award of the contract and compel the pu blic respondents to comply with laws regarding government procurement -simply impossible for this Court "to annul and set aside the award of the ZTE-D OTC Broadband Deal" without any evidence to support a prior factual finding poin ting to any violation of law that could lead to such annulment order. -It would be too presumptuous on the part of the Court to summarily compel publi c respondents to comply with pertinent provisions of law regarding procurement o f government infrastructure projects without any factual basis or prior determin ation of very particular violations committed by specific government officials o f the executive branch. -this would amount to breach of norms of comity among co-equal branches
