Make Up Your Mind – on Supreme Court Flip-Flopping Cases

This issue will never cease as long as there’s another one turning up every now and then. Of course I’m talking about the numerous flip-flopping issues by the Supreme Court. And as time pass by, I presume more will surface.


Here’s a quick review of related articles pertaining to Supreme Court’s Flip Flopping Cases:

Shilly-Shally in the Supreme Court

Controversial Flip-Flopping Case in the Judicial System

Appeal to the Supreme Court – Signed Manifesto

Supreme Court’s Flip Flopping – Lawyers are Concerned

Flip Flopping in the Supreme Court – When Will It End?

Politicians Slam Flip-Flopping Issues of Supreme Court

For those of you who doesn’t know what the term Flip-Flopping means, here’s an excerpt from Wikipedia:

A “flip-flop” (used mostly in the United States), U-turn (used in the Politics of the United Kingdom and Ireland) or backflip (used in Australia and New Zealand) is a sudden real or apparent change of policy or opinion by a public official, sometimes while trying to claim that both positions are consistent with each other. Often it will occur during the period prior to or following an election in order to maximize the candidate’s popularity.

Although the terms are often used against elected officials, non-elected public officials can also be accused of flip-flopping.

For more info on this, you can read more here.

So, what’s the issue this time? Please bear with me and read on… Mind you that I’m trying to write this with an open mind thus you must read it with the same frame of mind.

Last year, another flip-flopping issue resurfaced. It’s about RA 9355, “An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat Islands” in 2006. This was passed on, reviewed and approved by the then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. But, soon as it was declared and about a month later, another group filed for a petition to review the case in the lower courts. It was denied as well as trashed any motion for reconsideration.

As if not to be dissuaded, the same petitioners filed for certiorari in the highest court and finally granted their petition in February 10, 2010. The Supreme Court’s verdict – nullified RA 9355 and dismissed elected provincial leaders.

A short history on this. The petitioners said that the Dinagat island falls short on the requirements set under Section 10, Article X of the Constitution and of Section 461 of the Local Government Code (LGC). Simply put, they can’t be called a “province”.

But, the government said otherwise and that this case must be an exemption of the rule for Dinagat is composed of several islands. Thus, in it’s latest and final ruling, “The Court Resolved to DENY WITH FINALITY the said motion for reconsideration as no substantial arguments were presented to warrant the reversal of the questioned resolution.” Which also means that Dinagat Islands provincehood is legalized.

You see, this issue of flip-flopping also affects not only companies and citizens but provinces and cities as well. Who knows what will turn up next …

Hits: 624

You may also like...


  1. The government got all the lame excuses in the world, with regards to issues like this

  2. Maria Iemma says:

    The government and its bureocrasy will never change – everyone ows something to someone and it goes to the top. It is best to live by our own morality rules.

Leave a Reply