Conduct invalidating assent

As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 79,000 lessons in math, English, science, history, and more.

L- 35929) on December 11, 1972, by Gerardo Roxas, et al., against the Commission on Elections, the Director of Printing, the National Treasurer and the Auditor General (Case G.L-36142 March 31, 1973 JOSUE JAVELLANA, petitioner, vs."WHEREAS, fourteen million nine hundred seventy-six thousand five hundred sixty-one (14,976,561) members of all the Barangays (Citizens Assemblies) voted for the adoption of the proposed Constitution, as against seven hundred forty-three thousand eight hundred sixty-nine (743,869) who voted for its rejection; while on the question as to whether or not the people would still like a plebiscite to be called to ratify the new Constitution, fourteen million two hundred ninety-eight thousand eight hundred fourteen (14,298,814) answered that there was no need for a plebiscite and that the vote of the Barangays (Citizens Assemblies) should be considered as a vote in a plebiscite; "WHEREAS, since the referendum results show that more than ninety-five (95) per cent of the members of the Barangays (Citizens Assemblies) are in favor of the new Constitution, the Katipunan ng Mga Barangay has strongly recommended that the new Constitution should already be deemed ratified by the Filipino people; "NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E.[5] If the elections would not be held, when do you want the next elections to be called?[Bulletin Today, January 11, 1973; emphasis supplied] "12.

Search for conduct invalidating assent:

conduct invalidating assent-71conduct invalidating assent-61conduct invalidating assent-77

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “conduct invalidating assent”