Practice question
A prosecutor adopts an arbitrary rule impairing a constitutional right, and the respondent properly invokes the applicable judicial remedy with supporting facts. The prosecution says non-interference forbids even examining grave abuse. Which is best?
- The absolute objection fails; Meking expressly retains corrective review for such grave abuse
- Non-interference erases all constitutional judicial power
- Any alleged violation automatically guarantees the petition
- The respondent may ignore all procedural requirements
- Only the prosecutor may finally decide constitutional limits for courts
Legal references
- Meking v. Remulla, G.R.280455, November11 2025: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/nov2025/gr_280455_2025.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.