Scribd Logo
Fazer o upload

Bem-vindo(a) ao Scribd!

  • PMPF Vs Manglapus

    Enviado por

    Ives Delasas Pedrosa
    1K visualizações1 página
    The petitioners, members of the mass media, sought information from the President's representatives about negotiations with the US over military base agreements. This caused a collision between the government's power over foreign affairs and citizens' right to information. The Court denied the petition, holding that the President is solely responsible for negotiations with other countries, and secrecy in these negotiations does not violate freedom of speech, press, or access to information.

    Descrição original:

    PMPF vs Manglapus

    Título original

    PMPF vs Manglapus

    Direitos autorais

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formatos disponíveis

    DOCX, PDF, TXT ou leia online no Scribd

    Você considera este documento útil?

    Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

    Denunciar este documento
    The petitioners, members of the mass media, sought information from the President's representatives about negotiations with the US over military base agreements. This caused a collision between the government's power over foreign affairs and citizens' right to information. The Court denied the petition, holding that the President is solely responsible for negotiations with other countries, and secrecy in these negotiations does not violate freedom of speech, press, or access to information.

    Direitos autorais:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Baixe no formato DOCX, PDF, TXT ou leia online no Scribd
    Sinalizar o conteúdo como inadequado
    1K visualizações1 página

    PMPF Vs Manglapus

    Enviado por

    Ives Delasas Pedrosa
    The petitioners, members of the mass media, sought information from the President's representatives about negotiations with the US over military base agreements. This caused a collision between the government's power over foreign affairs and citizens' right to information. The Court denied the petition, holding that the President is solely responsible for negotiations with other countries, and secrecy in these negotiations does not violate freedom of speech, press, or access to information.

    Direitos autorais:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Baixe no formato DOCX, PDF, TXT ou leia online no Scribd
    Sinalizar o conteúdo como inadequado
    de 1

    Peoples Movement for Press Freedom vs.

    Manglapus
    GR 84642, September 13, 1988
    FACTS:
    Petitioners, consisted of members of the mass media, were seeking
    information from the Presidents representatives on the state of the then ongoing negotiations of the RP-US Military Bases Agreement.
    A collision between governmental power over the conduct of foreign affairs
    and the citizens right to information.
    ISSUE:
    Whether the information sought by the petitioners are of public concern and are still
    covered by the doctrine of executive privilege?
    HELD:
    The Court adopted the doctrine in U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. that the
    President is the sole organ of the nation in its negotiations with foreign countries.
    The Court denied the petition, stressing that "secrecy of negotiations with foreign
    countries is not violative of the constitutional provisions of freedom of speech or of
    the press nor of the freedom of access to information."

    Você também pode gostar