Lex Rex Ph

Cariño vs. CHR

G.R. No. 96681, 02 December 1991


  • In 1990, an two associations of teachers (MPSTA and ACT) undertook a protest rally at the DECS (now DepEd) premises to call the DECS Secretary Cariño to make a certain action. Cariño ordered them to return to work in 24 hours or face dismissal. Nevertheless, the mass actions continued into the week and became even bigger. 
  • Among the protesting teachers were the 8 respondents herein, which were administratively charged and eventually, one was dismissed by Cariño and 3 were suspended.
  • The respondent teachers also submitted their sworn statements to CHR in Sept 1990 after they were replaced.
  • The CHR Chairman and commissioners heard the case and issued an ordered Cariño to appear before the CHR en banc in October 1990 and bring all relevant documents. Otherwise, CHR will resolve the complaint based on the teachers’ evidence.
  • Cariño filed a motion to dismiss through the OSG on the ground that CHR has no jurisdiction.


Does the CHR has the power under the Constitution or has jurisdiction to try, decide, hear, determine alleged human rights violations like a court of justice?


  • No. 
  • It was not meant by the fundamental law to be another court or quasi-judicial agency in this country, or duplicate the functions of the latter.
  • The most that may be conceded to the Commission in the way of adjudicative power is that it may investigate, i.e. receive evidence and make findings of fact as regards claimed human rights violations involving civil and political rights. 
  • But fact-finding is not adjudication, and cannot be likened to judicial function of a court of justice, or even a quasi judicial agency or official.

Other Content You May Be Interested In:


The purpose of including such provision in our [laws] is to harmonize our civil laws with the religious faith of our people – Republic v Molina

Read More »

Rebus Sic Stantibus

The contract can only be valid if the conditions prevailing at the time of contracting continue to exist at the time of performance. If the conditions have changed that it becomes manifestly

Read More »

Jurisdiction and its Types

Means “the power to hear and decide cases” (Herrera vs. Barreto) and execute judgment thereon (Echegaray vs. Sec. of Justice) “The authority to resolve cases, and determine the rights and obligations of

Read More »

Lim vs. CA Digest

January 24, 2000 Facts In 1994, Pastor Y. Lim died intestate. Surviving spouse Rufina filed a petition for administration of his estate. The properties of respondent corporations (Auto Truck et. al.) were

Read More »

Cortes vs. Yu-Tibo Digest

My Title: My Windows Were Covered by My Neighbor Facts The house of the plaintiff Maximo in Calle Rosario, house No. 65, has certain windows therein, through which it receives light and

Read More »

Portuguez vs. GSIS (2007)

Doctrines Facts The petitioner, Ricardo Portuguez, alleged that he was discriminated against by the GSIS Family Bank in terms of payment of salary and grant of benefits and allowances. He claimed that

Read More »