G.R. No. 184496 - HADJI HASHIM ABDUL, VS. HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN (FIFTH DIVISION) AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly ordered the suspension pendente lite of the petitioner and his co-accused from their respective positions and from any other public office which they may now or hereafter be holding for a period of 90 days from notice. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, [11] but the same was denied in a Resolution [12] dated February 11, 2004. Thus, on March 2, 2004 he filed with this Court a Petition for Certiorari with Prayer for TRO [13] alleging that the suspension order was issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction. In a Resolution [14] dated March 10, 2004, the Court dismissed the Petition, which dismissal attained finality on July 12, 2004. [15] The suspension order, however, was no longer implemented because it was superseded by the expiration of petitioners second term as municipal mayor and his unsuccessful bid for re-election during the May 2004 election. During the May 2007 election, petitioner emerged as the winner in the mayoralty race and again sat as Mayor of Mulondo, Lanao del Sur. On February 21, 2008, the OSP once again moved for his and his co-accuseds suspension pendente lite to implement respondents final and executory suspension order of October 9, 2003. [16] In his Comment and Opposition, [17] petitioner called attention to respondents pronouncement in its Resolution [18] dated December 20, 2004 that his defeat in the May 2004 election has effectively rendered his suspension moot and academic. Nonetheless, respondent, through its Resolution of May 14, 2008, [19] ordered anew the suspension of petitioner from his present position for a period of 90 days. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, [20] but the same was denied in a Resolution [21] dated September 2, 2008. Undeterred, petitioner filed on October 2, 2008 the present Petition for Certiorari with prayer for TRO submitting again the sole issue of whether the Sandiganbayan acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in suspending him pendente lite from his position as mayor of Mulondo, Lanao del Sur. On December 3, 2008, the Court issued a TRO enjoining the implementation of the suspension Order. [22] Subsequently, on November 24, 2009 while the present Petition was pending before the Court, respondent Sandiganbayan promulgated its Decision [23] acquitting petitioner and his co-accused of the offense charged. Our Ruling We dismiss the Petition for being moot and academic. For a court to exercise its power of adjudication, there must be an actual case or controversy. Thus, in Mattel, Inc. v. Francisco [24] we have ruled that [w]here the issue has become moot and academic, there is no justiciable controversy, and an adjudication thereof would be of no practical use or value as courts do not sit to adjudicate mere academic questions to satisfy scholarly interest however intellectually challenging. In the present case, the acquittal of herein petitioner operates as a supervening event that mooted the pre