Practice question
The President calls out military forces to assist police. A challenger in a proper proceeding alleges that the decision was wholly bereft of factual basis and constituted grave abuse. The government asserts that military matters are always political and cannot be examined at all. The challenger separately asks judges to select preferred patrol routes. Which distinction follows IBP v. Zamora?
- Courts must either command all patrol routes or decline every legal issue
- Grave-abuse review remains available, while ordinary tactical substitution is a different matter
- Every allegation automatically invalidates the deployment
- Military involvement suspends Article VIII
- The President must obtain a court's tactical plan before deployment
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article VIII, Section 1: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
- Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, August 15, 2000, main opinion: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/36338
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.