Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 74 views

    42 - Miriam College Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Angelo Raphael B. Delmundo
    1) Miriam College suspended and expelled students for publishing fictional stories and poems in the school's publications that were deemed obscene and lacking moral values. 2) The students contested Miriam College's jurisdiction over the issue and claimed the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) had authority instead. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Miriam College's power to investigate and discipline students is protected under the Constitution's guarantees of academic freedom for institutions of higher learning. Therefore, Miriam College had proper jurisdiction over this issue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    42 - Miriam College Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Angelo Raphael B. Delmundo
    74 views2 pages
    1) Miriam College suspended and expelled students for publishing fictional stories and poems in the school's publications that were deemed obscene and lacking moral values. 2) The students contested Miriam College's jurisdiction over the issue and claimed the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) had authority instead. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Miriam College's power to investigate and discipline students is protected under the Constitution's guarantees of academic freedom for institutions of higher learning. Therefore, Miriam College had proper jurisdiction over this issue.

    Original Description:

    digest

    Original Title

    42 - Miriam College vs CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Miriam College suspended and expelled students for publishing fictional stories and poems in the school's publications that were deemed obscene and lacking moral values. 2) The students contested Miriam College's jurisdiction over the issue and claimed the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) had authority instead. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Miriam College's power to investigate and discipline students is protected under the Constitution's guarantees of academic freedom for institutions of higher learning. Therefore, Miriam College had proper jurisdiction over this issue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    74 views2 pages

    42 - Miriam College Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Angelo Raphael B. Delmundo
    1) Miriam College suspended and expelled students for publishing fictional stories and poems in the school's publications that were deemed obscene and lacking moral values. 2) The students contested Miriam College's jurisdiction over the issue and claimed the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) had authority instead. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Miriam College's power to investigate and discipline students is protected under the Constitution's guarantees of academic freedom for institutions of higher learning. Therefore, Miriam College had proper jurisdiction over this issue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    CASE #: 40

    TOPIC: Education – (a) right to quality education, Art. XIV, Sec. 1


    G.R. No. 127930 Dec. 15, 2000
    TITLE: Miriam College Foundation Inc.petitioner-appellee, vs. Hon. Court of Appeals,respondent-appellant.
    NATURE OF ACTION: Petition for review on certiorari of a CA decision which issued a TRO enjoining MC from enforcing
    letters of dismissal/suspension
    FACTS:
    Side of the Petitioner/Appellee:
     Miriam College’s school paper Chi-Rho and magazine AngMagasingPampanitikanng Chi-Rho published in their
    Sept. – Oct. 1994 issue several fictional stories and poems that the administration of Miriam College deemed to
    be obscene, vulgar, indecent, gross, sexually explicit, injurious to young readers, and devoid of all moral values
     The Chair of Miriam College’s discipline committee – Dr. Sevilla sent the student a letter informing them of
    letters of complaint against them for publishing their work, and requiring them to submit a letter to answer the
    charges filed against them – none of the students submitted their answers

    Side of the Respondent/Appellant:

     The students instead requested Dr. Sevilla to transfer their case to the DECS which they contest had
    jurisdiction over it
     Again, Dr. Sevilla required the students to file their answer, the students again averred that MC had no
    jurisdiction over the case and that it was DECS that should handle it
     The Discipline Committee, after conducting an investigation, imposed disciplinary sanctions upon the students,
    they were suspended, expelled, dismissed, and one student was unable to attend her graduation
     The students then filed a petition for prohibition and certiorari with preliminary injunction/restraining order before
    the RTC questioning the jurisdiction of MC over them

    RTC RULING:

     Jan. 17, 1995 – RTC denied their petition for TRO, the students moved for a motion for reconsideration which
    was subsequently granted, and an order granting the writ of preliminary injunction was issued
     Both parties moved for reconsideration
     Feb. 22, 1995 – RTC dismissed the petition

    CA RULING:

     Mar. 15, 1995 – the CA required MC to file a comment on the instant petition and to show cause as to why not
    preliminary injunction should be issued
     Sept. 26, 1996 – the CA granted the students’ petition, and declared the RTC Order of Feb. 22, 1995, as well as
    the student’s dismissal/suspension to be void
     HENCE THIS PETITION BY MIRIAM COLLEGE

    ISSUES:

    WON Miriam College has jurisdiction over the students

    HELD:

    YES. The power of the school to investigate is an adjunct of its power to suspend or expel.That power is an inherent part
    of the academic freedom of institutions of higher learning guaranteed by the Constitution. The Court has held before that a
    student may not be expelled or suspended based solely on articles they wrote (Sec. 7 of Campus Journalism Act), but in
    reading this provision one must note that it must not infringe upon the school’s right to discipline its students. Section 5
    (2), Article XIV of the Constitution guarantees all institutions of higher learning academic freedom. This institutional
    academic freedom includes the right of the school or college to decide for itself, its aims and objectives, and how best to
    attain them free from outside coercion or interference save possibly when the overriding public welfare calls for some
    restraint.

    The Court held that based on this, it is clear that Miriam College had jurisdiction over them.

    CA decision is REVERSED and SET ASIDE!


    DOCTRINE:

    CONCURRING OR DISSENTING OPINIONS:

    You might also like