BATCH 2018 Consti I Reviewer

Share Embed Donate


Short Description

Consti reviewer...

Description

       

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I SILLIMAN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW

       

 

 

 

   

 

     

   

BATCH 2018

                 

 

 

         

  SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

        PREAMBLE  

!  

RON  ROA  

ARTICLE  I:  NATIONAL  TERRITORY   ARTICLE  II:  DECLARATION  OF  PRINCIPLES   AND  STATE  POLICY   ARTICLE  VI:  LEGISLATIVE  DEPARTMENT  

!  

RON  ROA  

!  

RON  ROA  

!  

JOED  MARICE  ZAMORA    

ARTICLE  VII:  EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENT  

!  

MONICA  MICIANO  AND  ELAINE  CEPEDA  

ARTICLE  VIII:  JUDICIAL  DEPARTMENT   ARTICLE  IX:  CONSTITUTIONAL   COMMISSIONS   ARTICLE  X:  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT   ARTICLE  XI:  ACCOUNTABILITY  OF  PUBLIC   OFFICERS   ARTICLE  XII:  NATIONAL  ECONOMY  AND   PATRIMONY   ARTICLE  XIII:  SOCIAL  JUSTICE  AND  HUMAN   RIGHTS   ARTICLE  XIV:  EDUCAION,  SCIENCE  AND   TECHNOLOGY,  ARTS,  CULTURE  AND  SPORTS   ARTICLE  XV:  THE  FAMILY  

!  

GLENNA  DUCH  AND  NUBBIN  LAGUMBAY  

!  

NIKITA  LORETTE  AGUILAR  

!  

RAY  ARNAIZ  

!  

KAREN  DUNGOG  

!  

ROLANDO  ENQUIG  

!  

JOSE  ARVIN  MIRANDA  

!  

KIEFER  JOHN  SAGA  

!  

JOSEA  PALMA  BITO-­‐ON  

ARTICLE  XVI:  GENERAL  PROVISIONS  

!  

JOSEA  PALMA  BITO-­‐ON  

ARTICLE  XVII:  AMENDMENTS  OR  REVISIONS  

!  

JOSEA  PALMA  BITO-­‐ON  

ARTICLE  XVIII:  TRANISTORY  PROVISIONS  

!  

JOSEA  PALMA  BITO-­‐ON  

    Subject     Head       MONICA  MARIE  TEVES  MICIANO   Chairperson       ATTY.  EDUARDO  T.  SEDILLO     Associate  Professor,  SU  Law      

NIKITA  LORETTE  MARTINEZ  AGUILAR  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

PREAMBLE    

We,   the   sovereign   Filipino   people,   imploring   the   aid   of   Almighty   God,   in   order   to   build   a   just   and   humane  society  and  establish  a  government  that  shall  embody  our  ideals  and  aspirations,  promote  the   common   good,   conserve   and   develop   our   patrimony,   and   secure   to   ourselves   and   our   posterity   the   blessings   of   independence   and   democracy   under   the   rule   of   law   and   a   regime   of   truth,   justice,   freedom,   love,  equality  and  peace,  do  ordain  and  promulgate  this  constitutions   •

• • • • • •

The   change   from   “general   welfare”   to   “common   good”   was   intended   to   project   the   idea   of   a   social   order   that   enables   every   citizen   to   attain   his   or   her   fullest   development   economically,   politically,   culturally,   and   spiritually.   The   rejection   of   the   phrase   “general   welfare”   was   based   on   the   apprehension   that   the   phrase   could   be   interpreted   as   meaning   “the   greatest   good   for   the   greatest   number”   even   if   what   the   greater   number   wants   does   violence   to   human   dignity.   It   was   thought   that   the   “common   good”   would   guarantee   that  mob  rule  would  not  prevail  and  that  the  majority  would  not  persecute  the  minority.   The   phrase   “Almighty   God”   was   chosen   as   being   more   personal   than   “Divine   Providence”   and   therefore   more  consonant  with  Filipino  religiosity.   “Just   and   humane   society”   added   the   notion   that   a   constitution   not   merely   sets   up   a   government   but   is   also   an  instrument  for  building  the  larger  society  of  which  government  is  merely  a  part.   “Equality”  to  reflect  the  mounting  wave  of  protests  against  basic  social  inequalities.   The   introduction   of   the   word   “love”   serves   as   a   momentum   to   the   love   that   prevented   bloodshed   in   the   February  revolution  of  1986.   “Truth”  is  a  protest  against  the  deception  that  characterized  the  Marcos  regime.   The  Preamble  is  not  a  source  of  power  or  right  for  any  department  of  government.  But  because  it  sets  down   the   origin,   scope,   and   purpose   of   the   Constitution,   it   is   useful   as   an   aid   in   ascertaining   the   meaning   of   ambiguous  provisions  in  the  body  of  the  Constitution.    

ARTICLE  I  THE  NATIONAL  TERRITORY  

 

SECTION  1.  The  national  territory  comprises  the  Philippine  archipelago,  with  all  the  islands  and  waters   embraced   therein,   and   all   other   territory   over   which   the   Philippines   has   sovereignty   or   jurisdiction,   consisting  of  its  terrestrial,  fluvial,  or  aerial  domains,  including  its  territorial  sea,  the  seabed,  the  subsoil,   the  insular  shelves,  and  other  submarine  areas.  The  waters  around,  between,  and  connecting  the  islands   of   the   archipelago,   regardless   of   their   breath   and   dimensions,   form   part   of   the   internal   waters   of   the   Philippines.   •

• •

Scope:   1. The  Philippine  archipelago,     2. All  other  territories  over  which  the  Philippines  has  sovereignty  or  jurisdiction,     3. Terrestrial,  aerial,  and  fluvial  domains  under  numbers  1  and  2.   A   constitution   is   a   municipal   law.   As   such,   it   is   binding   only   within   the   territorial   limits   of   the   sovereignty   promulgating  the  constitution.   An   archipelago   is   a   body   of   water   studded   with   islands.   The   Philippine   archipelago   is   that   body   of   water   studded   with   islands   which   is   delineated   in   the   Treaty   of   Paris   (1898),   as   amended   by   the   Treaty   of   Washington  (1900)  and  the  Treaty  of  Great  Britain  (1930).  It  is  a  group  of  islands,  including  parts  of  islands,   interconnecting  waters  and  other  natural  features  which  are  so  closely  interrelated  that  such  islands,  waters   and   other   natural   features   from   an   intrinsic   geographical,   economic   and   political   entity,   or   which   historically   gave  been  regarded  as  such.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •

• •



• •

An  archipelagic  state  means  a  state  constituted  wholly  by  one  or  more  archipelagos  and  may  include  other   islands.   The  territorial  sea  of  ta  state,  as  distinct  from  its  inland  and  internal  waters,  consists  of  a  marginal  belt  of   maritime   waters   adjacent   to   the   base   lies   extending   twelve   nautical   miles   outward.   Outside   territorial   sea   are   the   high   seas.   A   state   exercises   sovereignty   over   its   territorial   sea   subject   to   the   right   of   innocent   passage  by  other  states.   The  waters  around,  between  and  connecting  the  islands  of  the  archipelago.  Irrespective  of  their  breadth  and   dimensions,  form  part  of  the  internal  waters  of  the  Philippines.   Important  distances  with  respect  to  the  waters  around  the  Philippines   1.  Territorial  sea  -­‐  12  nautical  miles  (n.m.)   2.  Contiguous  zone  -­‐  12  n.m.  from  the  edge  of  the  territorial  sea   3.  Exclusive  economic  zone  -­‐  200  n.m.  from  the  baseline  [includes  (1)  and  (2)]   Methods  used  for  fixing  the  starting  point  or  baseline  from  which  the  territorial  belt  is  measured  seawards:   1. Normal   baseline   method   –   under   which   the   breadth   of   the   territorial   seas   is   measured   from   the   low   water-­‐line.  Following  the  indentations  of  the  coast.   2. Straight  baseline  method  –  under  which  instead  of  the  baseline  following  the  sinusitis  of  the  coast,  it   is   drawn   as   straight   lines   connecting   appropriate   points   on   the   coast,   without   departing   to   any   appreciable  extent  from  the  general  direction  of  the  coast.   Baseline   is   the   low-­‐water   line   along   the   coast   as   marked   on   large   scale   charts   officially   recognized   by   the   coastal  State.   Contiguous  zone  is  the  maritime  zone  adjacent  to  the  territorial  seas  where  the  coastal  state  may  exercise   certain  protective  jurisdiction.  

Indonesia  v.  Malaysia   Issue:  Who  has  sovereignty  over  Pulau  Ligitan  and  Pulau  Sipadan?   Ruling:  Malaysia.  Based  on  actual  activities  and  continued  exercise  of  authority  over  these  islands.   Us  v.  Netherlands   Issue:  Is  there  positive  international  law  of  terra  firma,  or  title  based  on  contiguity,  where  the  nearest  continent  or   island  of  considerable  size  gives  title  to  the  land  in  dispute?   Ruling:  No.  The  title  of  contiguity,  understood  as  a  basis  of  territorial  sovereignty,  has  no  foundation  in  international   law.   Malaysia  v.  Singapore   Issue:  Is  there  positive  international  law  of  acquisitive  prescription  over  neighbouring  territories?   Ruling:  Yes.   Acquisitive   Prescription   is   capable   of   accounting   for   the   process   whereby   a   state   acquires   sovereignty   that  did  don’t  originally  belong  to  it  and  without  the  express  consent  of  the  original  sovereign.   Magalona  v.  Ermita   Issue:   Whether   or   not   RA   9522   “dismembers   a   large   portion   of   national   territory”   because   it   discards   the   pre-­‐ UNCLOS  III  demarcation  of  the  Philippine  territory  under  the  Treaty  of  Paris  and  related  Treaties?   Ruling:   No.   UNCLOS   III   has   nothing   to   do   with   the   acquisition   (or   loss)   of   territory.   It   is   a   multilateral   treaty   regulating,  among  others,  sea-­‐use  rights  over  maritime  zones  (i.e.,  the  territorial  waters  [12  nautical  miles  from  the   baselines],  contiguous  zone  [24  nautical  miles  from  the  baselines],  exclusive  economic  zone  [200  nautical  miles  from   the  baselines]),  and  continental  shelves  that  UNCLOS  III  delimits.   Magalona  v.  Ermita  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Issue:   that   RA   9522’s   use   of   UNCLOS   III’s   regime   of   islands   framework   to   draw   the   baselines,   and   to   measure   the   breadth  of  the  applicable  maritime  zones  of  the  KIG,  “weakens  our  territorial  claim”  over  that  area?   Ruling:   No.   Petitioners’   assertion   of   loss   of   “about   15,000   square   nautical   miles   of   territorial   waters”   under   RA   9522   is   similarly   unfounded   both   in   fact   and   law.   On   the   contrary,   RA   9522,   by   optimizing   the   location   of   base   points,   increased  the  Philippines’  total  maritime  space  (covering  its  internal  waters,  territorial  sea  and  exclusive  economic   zone)  by  145,216  square  nautical  miles   Magalona  v.  Ermita   Issue:  Whether  or  not  RA  9522  failed  to  textualize  the  Philippines’  claim  of  Sabah  in  North  Borneo?   Ruling:   No.   Petitioners   claim   is   untenable.   Section   2   of   RA   5446,   which   RA   9522   did   not   repeal,   keeps   open   the   door   for  drawing  the  baselines  of  Sabah.    

ARTICLE  II  DECLARATION  OF  PRINCIPLES  AND  STATE  POLICIES     BDCA  v.  COA   Issue:  Which  of  the  provisions  under  Art.  II  of  the  1987  are  self-­‐executing?  Which  are  enabling?   Ruling:   Most   of   the   sections   are   enabling,   they   require   legislative   action   before   rights   are   enforced.   Only   sections   4,   6,  15,  and  16  are  self-­‐executing  

SECTION  1.  The  Philippines  is  a  democratic  and  republican  state.  Sovereignty  resides  in  the  people  and   all  government  authority  emanates  from  them.   •

• • •

A   state   is   a   community   of   persons   more   or   less   numerous,   permanently   occupying   a   definite   portion   of   territory,  independent  of  external  control,  and  possessing  an  organized  government  to  which  the  great  body   of  inhabitants  render  habitual  obedience.   o Elements:   " People   " Territory   " Government   " Sovereignty   People  simply  means  a  community  of  persons  sufficient  in  number  and  capable  of  maintaining  the  continued   existence  of  the  community  and  held  together  by  a  common  bond  of  law.   The  extent  of  territory  is  discussed  in  Article  I.   Government  is  that  institution  or  aggregate  institutions  by  which  an  independent  society  makes  and  carries   out  those  rules  of  action  which  are  necessary  to  enable  men  to  live  in  a  social  state,  or  which  are  imposed   upon  the  people  forming  that  society  by  those  who  possess  the  power  or  authority  of  prescribing  them.   o Functions:   " Constituent  -­‐  compulsory  functions  which  constitute  the  very  bonds  of  society.   " Ministrant   –   optional   functions   of   government   intended   for   achieving   a   better   life   for   the   community.   o Determinants  whether  or  not  a  government  shall  exercise  certain  of  these  optional  functions  are:   " That  a  government  should  do  for  the  public  welfare  those  things  which  private  capital  would   not  naturally  undertake.   " That  a  government  should  do  those  things  which  by  its  very  nature  it  is  better  to  equipped   to  administer  for  the  public  welfare  than  is  any  private  individual  or  group  of  individuals.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  





On  the  basis  of  legitimacy,  governments  are  classified  into  de  jure  governments  and  those  which  are  de  facto   merely.  It  is  a  legal  truism  in  political  and  international  law  that  all  acts  and  proceedings  of  the  legislative,   executive,  and  judicial  departments  of  a  de  facto  government  are  good  and  valid.   Sec.  1,  Article  II  says:  “Sovereignty  resides  in  the  people  and  all  government  authority  emanates  from  them.”   Sovereignty   therefore   can   be   understood   as   the   source   of   ultimate   legal   authority.     Legal   sovereignty   means   the  power  to  adapt  or  alter  a  constitution.  This  power  resides  in  the  “people”  understood  as  those  who  have   a  direct  hand  in  the  formulation,  adoption,  and  amendment  or  alteration  of  the  Constitution.  

Bayan  Muna  v.  Romulo   Issue:  Is  the  RP-­‐US  Non-­‐Surrender  Agreement  violative  of  the  Rome  Statute  and  Philippine  sovereignty?     Ruling:   No.     Article   1   of   the   Rome   Statute   expressly   says   that   the   ICC’S   jurisdiction   will   be   complementary   to   the   criminal  jurisdiction  of  the  country,  which  has  original  jurisdiction.    

SECTION   2.   The   Philippines   renounces   war   as   an   instrument   of   national   policy,   adopts   the   generally   accepted  principles  of  international  law  as  part  of  the  law  of  the  land  and  adheres  to  the  policy  of  peace,   equality,  justice,  freedom,  cooperation,  and  amity  with  all  nations.   •

• • •





Parts:   o Renunciation  of  war   o Adoption  of  the  principles  of  international  law   o Adherence  to  a  policy  of  peace,  freedom,  and  amity  with  all  nations   The   pact   renounced   war   or   aggression   and   this   is   all   that   the   Constitution   renounces,   for   the   power   to   wage   a  defensive  war  is  of  the  very  essence  of  sovereignty.   The  Constitution  makes  defense  of  the  state  a  duty  of  government  and  of  the  people  and  gives  to  Congress   the  power  to  declare  a  state  of  war.   Implicit  in  this  provision  is  the  acceptance  of  the  dualist  view  of  legal  systems,  namely  that  domestic  law  is   distinct   from   international   law.   Since   dualism   holds   that   international   law   and   municipal   law   belong   to   different  spheres,  international  law  becomes  part  of  municipal  law  only  if  it  is  incorporated  into  municipal   law.  What  the  second  part  of  section  2  does  is  to  make  international  law  part  of  the  law  of  the  land.   Incorporation  is  the  doctrine  that  considers  the  general  or  customary  norms  of  international  law  as  part  of   municipal  law  and  are  to  be  enforced  as  such,  without  regard  as  to  whether  they  are  enacted  as  statutory  or   legislative  rules  or  not.   Jus  cogens  is  a  norm  which  states  cannot  derogate  or  deviate  from  their  agreements  in  international  law.  

Vinuya  et.  al.  v.  Executive  Secretary   Issue:  What  is  “jus  cogens”?  Is  the  Philippines  under  a  non-­‐derogable  obligation  to  prosecute  international  crimes?   Ruling:   “Jus   cogens”   literally   means   “compelling   law”.   It   refers   to   norms   that   command   peremptory   authority,   superseding   conflicting   treaties   and   customs.   They   are   mandatory,   which   do   not   admit   derogation   and   can   be   modified  only  by  general  international  norms  of  equivalent  authority.  

SECTION   3.   Civilian   authority   is,   at   all   times,   supreme   over   the   military.   The   armed   forces   of   the   Philippines  is  the  protector  of  the  people  and  the  state.  Its  goals  is  to  secure  the  sovereignty  of  the  state   and  the  integrity  of  the  national  territory.   SECTION  4.  The  prime  duty  of  the  government  is  to  serve  and  protect  the  people.  The  government  may   call   upon   the   people   to   defend   the   state   and,   in   the   fulfilment   thereof,   all   citizens   may   be   required,   under  conditions  provided  by  law,  to  render  personal  military  or  civil  service.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



The   National   Defense   Law,   in   so   far   as   it   establishes   compulsory   military   service,   does   not   go   against   this   constitutional   provision   but   is,   on   the   contrary,   in   faithful   compliance   therewith.   The   duty   of   the   Government  to  defend  the  State  cannot  be  performed  except  through  an  army.  To  leave  the  organization  of   an   army   to   the   will   of   the   citizens   would   be   to   make   this   duty   of   the   Government   excusable   should   there   be   no  sufficient  men  who  volunteer  to  enlist  therein.  

SECTION   5.   The   maintenance   of   peace   and   order,   the   protection   of   life,   liberty,   and   property,   and   the   promotion  of  the  general  welfare  are  essential  for  the  enjoyment  by  all  the  people  of  the  blessings  of   democracy.   •

The  provision  recognized  a  hierarchy  of  needs:   o First:  life   o Second:  liberty   o Third:  property  

SECTION  6.  The  separation  of  church  and  state  shall  be  inviolable.   •

Discussed  under  the  non-­‐establishment  clause  of  the  Bill  of  Rights.  

Imbong  et.  al.  v.  Ochoa   Issue:  Does  R.A.  No.  10354.  “The  Responsible  Parenthood  and  Reproductive  Health  Act  of  2012,  violate  the  principle   of  separation  of  the  church  and  the  state?   Ruling:   No.   One   religious   group   cannot   be   allowed   to   impose   its   beliefs   on   the   rest   of   the   society.   Thus,   with   this   stipulation,  it  does  not  violate  the  principle.  

SECTION   7.   The   state   shall   pursue   an   independent   foreign   policy.   In   its   relations   with   other   states   the   paramount   consideration   shall   be   national   sovereignty,   territorial   integrity,   national   interest,   and   the   right  to  self-­‐determination.   SECTION   8.   The   Philippines,   consistent   with   the   national   interest,   adopts   and   pursues   a   policy   of   freedom  from  nuclear  weapons  in  its  territory.   • •

The  Philippines  is  a  nuclear  free  country.  No  portion  of  its  territory  shall  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  storing  or   stockpiling  nuclear  weapons,  devices,  or  parts  thereof.   The  ban  is  clearly  on  nuclear  arms  only.  This  provision  is  not  a  ban  on  the  peaceful  uses  of  nuclear  energy,   nor  is  it  a  ban  on  all  “nuclear-­‐capable  vessels”.  For  a  vessel  to  be  banned,  it  is  not  enough  that  it  is  capable  of   carrying  nuclear  arms;  it  must  actually  carry  nuclear  arms.  

ICJ  Advisory  Opinion   Issue:   Is   there   customary   or   conventional   international   law   specifically   authorizing   the   threat   or   use   of   nuclear   weapons?     Ruling:  No.  At  face  value,  the  threat  or  use  of  nuclear  weapons  is  against  international  laws  of  armed  conflict.  

  SECTION  9.  The  state  shall  promote  a  just  and  dynamic  social  order  that  will  ensure  the  prosperity  and   independence   of   the   nation   and   free   the   people   from   poverty   through   policies   that   provide   adequate   social  services,  promote  full  employment,  a  rising  standard  of  living,  and  an   improved  quality  of  life  for   all.   SECTION  10.  The  state  shall  promote  social  justice  in  all  phases  of  national  development.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

PKSMMN  v.  Cocofed     Issue:  Are  the  laws  on  coco-­‐levy  fund  consistent  with  social  justice?     Ruling:   No.   As   per   meaning   the   term   levy.   Thus,   the   main   reason   of   the   coco-­‐levy   funds   was   similar   to   that   of   taxes.   As   such,   the   fund   is   considered   public   funds.   Considering   its   nature   as   public   funds,   there   are   some   provisions   in   the   coco-­‐levy  fund  that  were  contrary  to  social  justice.  Such  provisions  included  those  that  appropriated  portion  of  funds   to  private  interests.  By  doing  so,  these  provisions  violated  the  rights  of  the  citizens  to  substantive  due  process  and  as   such,  were  inconsistent  with  social  justice.    

SECTION  11.  The  state  values  the  dignity  of  every  human  person  and  guarantees  full  respect  for  human   rights.   SECTION  12.  The  state  recognizes  the  sanctity  of  family  life  and  shall  protect  and  strengthen  the  family   as  a  basic  autonomous  social  institution.  It  shall  equally  protect  the  life  of  the  mother  and  the  life  of  the   unborn  from  conception.  The  natural  and  primary  right  and  duty  of  parents  in  the  rearing  of  the  youth   for  civic  efficiency  and  the  development  of  moral  character  shall  receive  the  support  of  the  government.   •



The  unborn’s  entitlement  to  protection  begins  from  conception,  that  is,  from  the  moment  of  conception.   The   intention   is   to   protect   life   from   its   beginning,   and   the   assumption   is   that   human   life   begins   at   conception  and  that  conception  takes  place  at  fertilization.   The   1987   provision   has   added   the   adjective   “primary”   to   modify   the   right   of   parents.   It   imports   the   assertion  that  the  right  of  parents  is  superior  to  that  of  the  state.  

Imbong  et.  al.  v.  Ochoa   Issue:   Does   R.A.   No.   10354.   “The   Responsible   Parenthood   and   Reproductive   Health   Act   of   2012,   violate   the   constitutional  right  of  the  unborn.   Ruling:  No.  The  court  considers  life  from  the  moment  of  fertilization.  

SECTION   13.   The   state   recognizes   the   vital   role   of   the   youth   in   nation-­‐building   and   shall   promote   and   protect  their  physical,  moral,  spiritual,  intellectual,  and  social  well-­‐being.  It  shall  inculcate  in  the  youth   patriotism  and  nationalism,  and  encourage  their  involvement  in  public  and  civic  affairs.   SECTION   14.   The   state   recognizes   the   role   of   women   in   nation-­‐building,   and   shall   ensure   the   fundamental  equality  before  the  law  of  women  and  men.   Garcia  v.  Drilon   Issue:  Is  R.A.  9262,  An  Act  Defining  Violence  against  Women  and  their  Children,  violative  of  the  fundamental  equality   between  men  and  women?   Ruling:  No.  Equal  protection  requires  that  all  persons  or  things  similarly  situated  should  be  treated  alike,  both  as  to   rights   conferred   and   responsibilities   imposed.   The   classification   should   be   based   on   substantial   distinctions   which   makes  for  real  differences.  

SECTION   15.   The   state   shall   protect   and   promote   the   right   to   health   of   the   people   and   instil   health   consciousness  among  them.   SECTION   16.   The   state   shall   protect   and   advance   the   right   of   the   people   to   a   balanced   and   healthful   ecology  in  accord  with  the  rhythm  and  harmony  of  nature.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  





While    the    right    to    a    balanced    and    healthful    ecology    is    found    under    the  declaration  of  Principle  and   State   Policies   and   not   under   the   Bill   of   Rights,   it   does   not   follow   that   it   is   less   important   than   any   of   the   civil   and  political  rights  enumerated  in  the  latter.   The  right  to  a  balanced  and  healthful  ecology  carries  with  it  the  correlative  duty  to  refrain  from  impairing  the   environment.  

Imbong  et.  al.  v.  Ochoa   Issue:   Does   R.A.   No.   10354.   “The   Responsible   Parenthood   and   Reproductive   Health   Act   of   2012,   violate   the   constitutional  right  to  health  and  the  right  to  protection  against  hazardous  products?   Ruling:  No.  The  contraceptives  it  will  procure  shall  be  from  a  duly  licensed  drug  store  or  pharmaceutical  company   and  that  the  actual  distribution  of  these  contraceptive  drugs  and  devices  will  be  done  following  a  prescription  of  a   qualified  medical  practitioner.  

SECTION  17.  The  state  shall  give  priority  to  education,  science  and  technology,  arts,  culture,  and  sports   to  foster  patriotism  and  nationalism,  accelerate  social  progress,  and  promote  total  human  liberation  and   development.   SECTION   18.   The   state   affirms   labour   as   a   primary   social   economic   force.   It   shall   protect   the   rights   of   workers  and  promote  their  welfare.   Cercado  v.  UNIPROM   Issue:  Is  an  employee’s  passive  acquiescence  to  the  early  retirement  age  option  sufficient?   Ruling:  No.  Considering  that  a  retirement  plan  is  a  contract  between  two  parties,  i.e.  Employer  and  employee  and   that   the   assailed   revised   retirement   plan   was   not   embodied   in   a   CBA,   or   any   employment   contract   or   agreement   between   the   company   and   the   employees,   such   retirement   plan   could   not   be   unilaterally   and   compulsorily   be   imposed  to  the  employees.  

SECTION   19.   The   state   shall   develop   a   serf-­‐reliant   and   independent   national   economic   effectively   controlled  by  Filipinos.   SECTION   20.   The   state   recognizes   the   indispensable   role   of   the   private   sector,   encourages   private   enterprise,  and  provides  incentives  to  needed  investments.   SECTION  21.  The  state  shall  promote  comprehensive  rural  development  and  agrarian  reform.   SECTION  22.  The  state  recognizes  and  promotes  the  rights  of  indigenous  cultural  communities  within  the   framework  of  national  unity  and  development.   CMU  v.  Nat’l.  Anti-­‐Poverty  Com.   Issue:   Is   Presidential   Proclamation   310   that   takes   670   hectares   from   CMU’s   registered   lands   for   distribution   to   indigenous  peoples  and  cultural  communities  in  Maramag,  Bukidnon,  valid  and  constitutional?     Ruling:   No.   the   lands   by   their   character   have   become   separate   from   the   moment   President   Garcia   dedicated   the   land  for  scientific  and  technological  research  in  the  field  of  agriculture.  The  have  ceased  to  be  alienable  public  lands.  

SECTION  23.  The  state  shall  encourage  non-­‐governmental,  community-­‐based,  or  sectorial  organizations   that  promote  the  welfare  of  the  nation.   SECTION  24.  The  state  recognizes  the  vital  role  of  communication  and  information  in  nation-­‐building.   SECTION  25.  The  state  shall  ensure  the  autonomy  of  local  governments.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



The   principle   of   local   autonomy   under   the   Constitution   simply   means   decentralization.   It   does   not   make   the   local   governments   sovereign   within   the   state   or   an   imperium   in   imperio.   The   local   government   is   autonomous  in  the  sense  that  it  is  given  more  powers,  authority,  responsibilities  and  resources.  

Belgica  v.  Alcantara   Issue:  Does  the  Congressional  Pork  Barrel  go  against  the  constitutional  principles  on  local  autonomy  since  it  allows   district   representatives,   who   are   national   officers,   to   substitute   their   judgement   in   utilizing   public   funds   for   local   development?   Ruling:  Yes.  Insofar  as  individual  legislators  are  authorized  to  intervene  in  purely  local  matters  and  thereby  subvert   genuine   local   autonomy,   the   2013   PDAF   Article   as   well   as   all   other   similar   forms   of   Congressional   Pork   Barrel   is   deemed  unconstitutional.  

SECTION   26.   The   state   shall   guarantee   equal   access   to   opportunities   for   public   service,   and   prohibit   political  dynasties  as  may  be  defined  by  law.   •

The  establishment  of  political  dynasties  is  an  effective  way  of  monopolizing  and  perpetuating  power.  Hence,   the  state  is  commanded  to  prohibit  political  dynasties.  

SECTION  27.  The   state   shall  maintain   honesty  and  integrity  in  the   public  service  and  take  positive   and   effective  measures  against  graft  and  corruption   Ombudsman  v.  Racho   Issue:  Must  public  officials  declare  their  SALN?   Ruling:  Yes.  Our  public  servants  that  public  service  demands  utmost  integrity  and  discipline.  A  public  servant  must   display   at   all   times   the   highest   sense   of   honesty   and   integrity,   for   no   less   than   the   Constitution   mandates   the   principle  that  a  public  office  is  a  public  trust;  and  all  public  officers  and  employees  must  at  all  times  be  accountable   to  the  people  and  serve  them  with  utmost  responsibility,  integrity,  loyalty  and  efficiency.  

SECTION   28.   Subject   to   reasonable   conditions   prescribed   by   law,   the   state   adopts   and   implements   a   policy  of  full  public  disclosure  of  all  its  transactions  involving  public  interest.   RE:  Request  for  Copy  of  2008  SALN  and  Personal  Data  Sheet  or  Curriculum     Issue:  Are  the  information  contained  in  the  SALN  matters  of  public  necessitating  public  disclosure?   Ruling:  Yes.  Section  7  of  Article  III  of  the  Constitution  is  relevant  in  the  issue  of  public  disclosure  of  SALN  and  other   documents   of   public   officials,   which   provides   that   the   right   of   the   people   to   information   on   matters   and   to   documents,   and   papers   pertaining   to   official   acts,   transactions,   or   decisions,   as   well   as   to   government   research   data   used  as  basis  for  policy  development,  shall  be  afforded  the  citizen,  subject  to  such  limitations  as  may  be  provided  by   law.    

ARTICLE  VI  THE  LEGISLATIVE  DEPARTMENT  

 

Section  1.  The  legislative  power  shall  be  vested  in  the  Congress  of  the  Philippines  which  shall  consist  of  a   Senator  and  a  House  of  Representatives,  except  to  the  extent  reserved  to  the   people  by  the  provision  on  initiative  and  referendum.    

• •

Legislative   power   is   the   authority   to   make   laws   and   to   alter   or   repeal   them,   and   is   vested   by   the   Constitution  to  the  Congress   Congress  as  a  Bicameral  Body:  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



• • • • •

     -­‐  Senate  (elected  by  the  nation  at  large)        -­‐  House  of  Representatives  (elected  by  the  district)   Separation  of  powers:        1.  legislative  power  shall  be  vested  in  the  Congress  of  the  Philippines        2.  executive  power  shall  be  vested  in  the  President  of  the  Philippines        3.  judicial  power  shall  be  vested  in  one  Supreme  Court  and  in  such  lower  courts  as  maybe                  established  by  law        -­‐   each  is  prevented  from  invading  the  domain  of  the  others,  but  not  absolute  for  the  system  still  allows  for   "checks   and   balance"   (no   one   department   is   able   to   act   without   the   cooperation   of   at   least   one   of   the   other   departments)   Blending  of  power  –  confluence  of  2  or  more  powers  of  the  3  branches  of  the  government   Limits   of   legislative   power   of   Congress:   (1)   substantive   –   limitations   on   content   of   laws,   and   (2)   procedural   –   limitations  on  the  manner  of  passing  laws.    Holders  of  legislative  power:  (1)  Congress,  (2)  people  through  initiative  and  referendum,  and  (3)  President  in   emergency.   Non-­‐delegability  of  legislative  power,  except  (1)  delegation  of  legislative  power  to  local  governments,  and  (2)   instances  when  the  Constitution  itself  allows  for  such  delegation.   Congress  can  only  delegate  Rule-­‐Making  Power  and  Law  Execution.  

Banda  vs.  Ermita  (2010):   Issue:  Is  the  issuance  of  E.O.  378  an  invalid  exercise  of  legislative  power?   Ruling:  No.  It  is  a  well-­‐settled  principle  in  jurisprudence  that  the  President  has  the  power  to  reorganize  the  offices   and   agencies   in   the   executive   department   in   line   with   the   President’s   constitutionally   granted   power   of   control   over   executive  offices  and  by  virtue  of  previous  delegation  of  the  legislative  power  to  reorganize  executive  office  under   existing  statutes.   Pichay  vs.  Ochoa  (2012):   Issue:  Is  E.O.  13  unconstitutional  for  usurping  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  create  a  public  office?   Ruling:  No.  The  President  has  continuing  authority  to  reorganize  the  Executive  Department  under  E.O.  292  in  order   to  achieve  simplicity,  economy  and  efficiency.  The  abolition  of  the  PAGC  and  the  transfer  of  its  functions  to  a  division   specially   created   within   the   ODECLA   is   properly   within   the   prerogative   of   the   President   under   his   continuing   “delegated  legislative  authority  to  reorganize”  his  own  office.   Pimentel  vs.  Senate  (2011):   Issue:   Will   the   invocation   of   the   doctrine   of   separation   of   powers   preclude   the   Supreme   Court   from   resolving   the   legal  issues  of  a  petition?   Ruling:   No.   The   doctrine   of   separation   of   powers   does   not   prescribe   absolute   autonomy   in   the   discharge   of   the   separate   department’s   duties   assigned   to   them   by   the   sovereign   people.   Therefore,   the   Supreme   Court   is   not   precluded   from   resolving   the   legal   issues   raised   by   the   petitioner   more   so   that   such   issues   do   not   require   the   expertise,  specialized  skills  and  knowledge  of  administrative  bodies  for  their  resolution.   Belgica  vs.  Alcantara  (2013):   Issue:   Are   post-­‐enactment   measures   which   govern   the   areas   of   project   identification,   fund   release   and   fund   alignment  not  related  to  functions  of  congressional  oversight  and  not  violative  of  separation  of  powers?  Are  these   measures  violative  of  the  non-­‐delegability  of  legislative  functions?   Ruling:   Yes.   These   post-­‐enactment   measures   violate   the   separation   of   powers.   The   enforcement   of   the   national   budget,   as   primarily   contained   in   the   GAA,   is   indisputably   a   function   both   constitutionally   assigned   and   properly  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

entrusted  to  the  Executive  branch.  The  Legislative  branch,  much  more  any  of  its  members,  should  not  cross  over  the   field  of  implementing  the  national  budget.  The  court  held  that  “from  the  moment  the  law  becomes  effective,  any   provision   of   law   that   empowers   Congress   or   any   of   its   members   to   play   any   role   in   the   implementation   or   enforcement  of  the  law  violates  the  principle  of  separation  of  powers  and  is  thus  unconstitutional.”       Yes.  The  2013  PDAF  Article  violates  the  principle  of  non-­‐delegability  since  legislators  are  effectively  allowed   to  individually  exercise  the  power  of  appropriation.      Francisco  vs.  TRB  (2010):   Issue:  Can  Congress  delegate  its  franchising  power  and  prerogative?   Ruling:  Yes.  As  stressed  in  Alabano  vs.  Reyes,  there  is  nothing  in  the  Constitution  which  provides  that  the  issuance  of   a   franchise,   certificate   or   other   form   of   authorization   for   the   operation   of   a   public   utility   shall   be   subject   to   amendment,  alteration  or  repeal  by  Congress  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  only  Congress  has  the  power  to  grant   such   authorization.   Congress   may   validly   delegate   its   legislative   authority   under   the   power   of   subordinate   legislation,  to  issue  franchises  of  certain  public  utilities  to  some  administrative  agencies.     Lokin  vs.  COMELEC  (2010):   Issue:   Is   Sec.   13   of   COMELEC   Res.   No.   7804   a   valid   subordinate   legislation   as   it   implements   Section   8   of   R.A.   No.   7941?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   administrative   IRRs   must   comply   with   the   following   requisites   to   be   valid:   (1)   its   promulgation   must   be  authorized  by  the  Legislative;  (2)  it  must  be  within  the  scope  of  the  authority  given  by  the  Legislative;  (3)  it  must   be  promulgated  in  accordance  with  the  prescribed  procedure;  and  (4)  it  must  be  reasonable.  The  COMELEC  issued   Resolution  No.  7804  pursuant  to  its  powers  under  the  Constitution,  Batas  Pambansa  Bilang  881,  and  the  Party-­‐List   System  Act.     Biraogo  vs.  Philippine  Truth  Commission  (2010):   Issue:  Is  there  a  valid  delegation  of  power  from  Congress  empowering  the  President  to  create  a  public  office?   Ruling:   No.   The   court   ruled   that   the   Constitution   ever   remains   the   supreme   power   and   that   the   inclusion   of   recognition  of  the  past  presidents  in  creating  public  offices  should  not  be  an  upfront  to  the  Constitution  and  that  it  is   still   the   Judiciary   who   has   the   advanced   interest   in   the   quest   for   truth   and   should   not   be   retarded   by   any   other   branches.   Vivas  vs.  Monetary  Board  (2013):   Issue:  Is  Sec.  30  R.A.  7653  an  undue  delegation  of  legislative  power  to  the  Monetary  Board?   Ruling:  No.  The  Court  denied  the  petition  as  RA  7653  was  complete  in  itself  and  the  act  imposed  sufficient  standards   and  parameters  the  Monetary  Board  ha  to  follow.   The  Senate    

Section   2.   The   Senate   shall   be   composed   of   twenty-­‐four   senators   who   shall   be   elected   at   large   by   the   qualified  voters  of  the  Philippines,  as  may  be  provided  by  law.   •

The   numerical   composition   of   the   Senate   can   only   be   changed   by   constitutional   amendment,   and   the   phrase,  “as  may  be  provided  by  the  law”,  refers  to  the  mechanics  for  electing  the  Senators  at  large.      

Section   3.   No   person   shall   be   a   senator   unless   he   is   a   natural-­‐born   citizen   of   the   Philippines,   and,   on   the   day  of  the  election,  is  at  least  thirty-­‐five  years  of  age,  able  to  read  and  write,  a  registered  voter,  and  a   resident  of  the  Philippines  for  not  less  than  two  years  immediately  preceding  the  day  of  the  election.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •

The   residence   requirement   is   satisfied   if   one   is   domiciled   in   the   Philippines   during   the   two-­‐year   period   even   if  not  physically  present  in  the  Philippines  during  the  two-­‐year  period.   The   age   qualification   must   be   possessed   on   the   day   votes   are   cast   as   fixed   by   law   and   not   on   the   day   of   proclamation.  

Section   4.   The   term   of   office   of   the   senators   shall   be   six   years   and   shall   commence,   unless   otherwise   provided  by  law,  at  noon  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  June  next  following  their  election.     No  senator  shall  serve  for  more  than  two  consecutive  terms.  Voluntary  renunciation  of  the  office   for  any  length  of  time  shall  not  be  considered  as  an  interruption  in  the  continuity  of  his  service  for  the   full  term  for  which  he  was  elected.   • •

Senators  shall  have  a  six  year  term  with  one  immediate  re-­‐election.   A  senator  could  run  again  for  office  three  years  after  the  expiration  of  his  second  term.         The  House  

Section  5.  (1)  The  House  of  Representatives  shall  be  composed  of  not  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifty   members,   unless   otherwise   fixed   by   law,   who   shall   be   elected   from   legislative   districts   apportioned   among  the  provinces,  cities  and  the  Metropolitan  Manila  area  in  accordance  with  the  number  of  their   respective  inhabitants,  and  on  the  basis  of  a  uniform  and  progressive  ratio,  and  those  who,  as  provided   by  law,  shall  be  elected  through  a  party-­‐list  system  of  registered  national,  regional,  and  sectoral  parties   or  organizations.   (2)   The   party-­‐list   representatives   shall   constitute   twenty   per   centum   of   the   total   number   of   representatives   including   those   under   the   party   list.   For   three   consecutive   terms   after   the   ratification   of   this  Constitution,  one-­‐half  of  the  seats  allocated  to  party  list  representatives  shall  be  filled,  as  provided   by  law,  by  selection  or  election  from  the  labor,  peasant,  urban  poor,  indigenous  cultural  communities,   women,  youth,  and  such  other  sectors  as  may  be  provided  by  law,  except  religious  sector.   (3)  Each  legislative  district  shall  comprise,  as  far  as  practicable,  contiguous,  compact  and  adjacent   territory.  Each  city  with  a  population  of  at  least  two  hundred  fifty  thousand,  or  each  province,  shall  have   at  least  one  representative.   (4)   Within   three   years   following   the   return   of   every   census,   the   Congress   shall   make   a   reapportionment  of  legislative  districts  based  on  the  standard  provided  in  this  section.   • • • • •



The  total  membership  of  the  House  may  be  raised  from  time  to  time  by  statute  (through  reapportionment   due  to  the  creation  of  new  districts  or  new  provinces).   Kinds   of   representatives:   (1)   district   representatives   elected   by   districts,   (2)   party   representatives   elected   through  the  party-­‐list  system,  and  (3)  sectoral  representatives  which  only  last  for  three  consecutive  terms.   A  city  with  a  population  of  at  least  250,000  shall  have  at  least  one  representative.   A  province  is  entitled  to  one  representative  no  matter  what  its  population  size.   Parties,  coalitions  participating  in  the  system  are  required  to  obtain  at  least  two  percent  of  the  total  votes   cast  for  the  party-­‐list  system  in  order  to  be  entitled  to  a  party-­‐list  seat,  with  a  three-­‐seat  limit.   (R.A.  No.  7941)   The  party-­‐list  nominees  “must  represent  marginalized  and  underrepresented  sectors.”  

Section   6.   No   person   shall   be   a   member   of   the   House   of   Representatives   unless   he   is   a   natural-­‐born   citizen  of  the  Philippines  and,  on  the  day  of  the  election,  is  at  least  twenty  five  years  of  age,  able  to  read   and  write,  and,  except  the  party  list  representatives,  a  registered  voter  in  the  district  in  which  he  shall  be  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

elected,  and  a  resident  thereof  for  a  period  of  not  less  than  one  year  immediately  preceding  the  day  of   the  election.   • •

The  qualifications  mentioned  must  be  possessed,  by  the  candidate,  on  the  day  of  the  election.   Natural-­‐born  citizens  are  those  who  are  citizens  of  the  Philippines  from  birth  without  having  to  perform  any   act  to  acquire  or  perfect  their  Philippine  citizenship.  

Section  7.  The  Members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  shall  be  elected  a  term  of  three  years  which   shall  begin,  unless  otherwise  provided  by  law,  at  noon  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  June  next  following  their   election.     No  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives  shall  serve  for  more  than  three  consecutive  terms.   Voluntary  renunciation  of  the  office  for  any  length  of  time  shall  be  considered  as  an  interruption  in  the   continuity  of  his  service  for  the  full  term  for  which  he  was  elected.   • •

• •

The  three-­‐year  term  set  by  the  Constitution  may  not  be  changed  by  Congress.   Elective   official   whether   national   or   local   running   for   any   office   other   than   the   one   he   is   holding   in   a   permanent  capacity  except  for  the  President  and  Vice-­‐President  shall  be  considered  ipso  facto  resigned  from   his  office  upon  the  filing  of  his  certificate  of  candidacy.   Term  is  the  period  of  time  allotted  to  the  office  by  law.   Tenure  is  the  period  during  which  the  official  actually  holds  office.  

Aquino  vs.  COMELEC  (2010):   Issue:  Is  the  250  thousand  population  requirement  applicable  to  both  the  province  and  the  city?   Ruling:  No.  The  plain  and  clear  distinction  between  a  city  and  a  province  was  explained  under  the  second  sentence   of   Section   5(3)   of   the   Constitution.   It   states   that   a   province   is   entitled   a   representative,   and   nothing   was   mentioned   about  population.   Ladlad  vs.  COMELEC  (2010):   Issue:  Are  only  those  sectors  specifically  enumerated  in  R.A.  7941  or  related  to  said  sectors  may  be  registered  under   the  party-­‐list  system?   Ruling:  No.  As  mentioned  in  Ang  Barangay  Bayani  OFW  vs.  COMELEC  that  marginalized  and  underprivileged  is  not   exclusive.  It  is  not  whether  a  sector  is  stipulated  specifically  but  whether  a  particular  organization  complied  with  the   requirements  of  the  Constitution  and  the  requirements  set  forth  in  R.A.  7941.   Guardians  vs.  COMELEC  (2010):   Issue:  Is  the  Minero  ruling  a  correct  application  of  Section  6(8)  of  RA  7941?   Ruling:  No.  According  to  the  court,  the  Minero  ruling  is  an  erroneous  application  of  Section  6(8)  of  RA  7941,  hence,  it   cannot   stand   PGBI’s   delisting   from   the   roster   of   registered   national,   regional   or   sectoral   parties,   organizations,   or   coalitions  under  the  party-­‐list  system.  A  delisting  based  on  a  mixture  of  fusion  of  these  two  different  and  separate   grounds  for  delisting  is  therefore  a  strained  application  of  the  law.   BANAT  vs.  COMELEC  (2009):   Issue:   How   are   the   party-­‐list   seats   computed   and   allocated   under   the   BANAT   ruling   as   compared   to   the   Veterans   ruling?   Ruling:   To   summarize,   in   Veterans,   the   court   allocated   party-­‐list   seats   of   those   party-­‐lists   ranked   2   and   higher   in   reference   to   the   number   of   seats   allocated   to   the   rank   1party-­‐list.   This   method   of   allocation   will   never   reach   the   full   number  of  seats  as  mandated  by  the  Constitution  as  a  consequence  to  the  formula  used  by  the  courts.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

In  Banat,  the  court  allocated  the  party-­‐list  in  the  following  manner:   1. 2. 3. 4.

Rank  the  party-­‐list  organization  from  highest  votes  to  lowest.   Obtain  the  percentage  of  the  votes  received  by  each  party-­‐list.   Allocate  a  guaranteed  seat  for  those  party-­‐lists  garnering  at  least  2%.   Determine  the  maximum  number  of  party-­‐list  representations  in  the  House  of  Representatives  by  using   the  20%/80%  multiplier  to  the  number  of  legislative  districts.   5.    the  number  of  guaranteed  seats  to  be  re-­‐allocated  as  additional  seats  to  the  party-­‐lists  by  subtracting   the  number  of  guaranteed  seats  from  the  maximum  party-­‐list  seats  as  obtained  in  No.  4  above.   6. Multiplying  the  excess  seats  to  be  re-­‐allocated  (No.5)  to  the  party-­‐list  percentage  (No.2),  determine  the   number  of  additional  seats  to  be  awarded  to  the  party-­‐list  following  their  ranked  order.   7. No   party-­‐list   should   receive   more   than   3   seats   total.   This   includes   the   guaranteed   seat   and   any   additional  seats.   Atong  Paglaum  vs.  COMELEC  (2013):   Issues:  (1)  Does  the  party-­‐list  system  include  only  sectoral  parties?     (2)   Should   the   national   and   regional   parties   or   organizations   represent   the   marginalized   and   underrepresented  sectors?     (3)  Must  the  nominees  of  the  sectoral  party  either  belong  to  the  sector  or  must  have  a  track  record  of  a  draft   for  the  sector  represented?     (4)  Can  major  political  parties  participate  in  party-­‐list  elections?     Rulings:  (1)  No.  The  framers  of  the  Constitution  intended  the  party-­‐list  system  to  include  not  only  sectoral  parties   but  also  non-­‐sectoral  parties.  The  framers  intended  the  sectoral  parties  to  constitute  a  part,  but  not  the  entirety  of   the  party-­‐list  system.     (2)  Not  necessarily.  To  require  all  national  and  regional  parties  under  the  party-­‐list  system  to  represent  the   marginalized   and   underrepresented   is   to   deprive   and   exclude   by   judicial   frat,   ideology-­‐based   and   cause   oriented   parties  from  the  party-­‐list  system.       (3)  No.  It  is  sufficient  that  one  of  his  or  her  sector  is  below  the  advocated  class.     (4)   No.   They   cannot   directly   participate   because   they   neither   lack   well   defined   political   constituencies   nor   represent  marginalized  and  underrepresented  sectors.     Election  and  Vacancy  

Section   8.   Unless   otherwise   provided   by   law,   the   regular   election   of   the   Senators   and   the   House   of   Representatives  shall  be  held  on  the  second  Monday  of  May.   •

As  stated  in  the  Omnibus  Election  Code  of  the  Philippines,  the  date  of  election  may  be  postponed  to  a  date   which   should   be   reasonably   close   to   the   date   of   the   election   not   held,   suspended,   or   which   resulted   to   elect   but   not   later   than   30   days   after   the   cessation   of   the   cause   for   such   postponement   or   suspension   of   the   election.  

Section   9.   In   case   of   vacancy   in   the   Senate   or   in   the   House   of   Representatives,   a   special   election   may   be   called   to   fill   such   vacancy   in   the   manner   prescribed   by   law,   but   the   Senator   or   the   Member   of   Representatives  thus  elected  shall  serve  only  for  the  unexpired  term.   • •

The  holding  of  special  elections  has  not  been  made  mandatory,  and,  if  held,  no  set  date  is  prescribed  for  it.   The   right   and   duty   to   hold   special   election   emanates   from   the   statute   and   not   from   a   call   for   the   election   by   some  authority  like  the  COMELEC.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Perks  and  Privileges  

Section  10.  The  salaries  of  Senators  and  Members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  shall  be  determined   by  law.  No  increase  in  said  compensation  shall  take  effect  until  after  the  expiration  of  the  full  term  of  all   the  Members  of  the  Senate  and  the  House  of  Representatives  approving  such  increase.   • •



The  term  “salary”  refers  only  to  the  fixed  annual  amount  due  to  a  legislator.   The  annual  salary  of  the  Members  of  Congress  has  been  initially  fixed  by  Art.  XVIII,  Sec.  17  at  PhP204,000   and   that   of   the   Senate   President   and   of   the   Speaker   of   the   House   at   PhP240,000,   and   are   subject   to   change   by  law.   The  retirement  benefits  of  a  legislator  must  be  based  on  the  salary  in  effect  during  his  term  and  not  on  the   increased  salary  of  the  subsequent  term.  

Section  11.  A  Senator  or  Member  of  the  House  of  Representatives  shall,  in  all  offenses  punishable  by  not   more  than  six  years  imprisonment,  be  privileged  from  arrest  while  the  Congress  in  session.  No  member   shall  be  questioned  nor  be  held  liable  in  any  other  place  for  any   speech  or  debate  in  the  Congress  or  in   any  committed  thereof.   • • •

This  provision  covers  only  immunity  from  civil  arrests.   Members  of  Congress  are  not  exempt  from  detention  for  crime.   The   speech   and   debate   clause   prohibits   inquiry   only   into   those   things   generally   said   or   done   in   the   House   in   the  performance  of  official  duties  and  the  motivation  of  those  acts.     Full  Disclosure  

Section   12.   All   Members   of   the   Senate   and   the   House   of   Representatives   shall,   upon   assumption   of   office,   make   a   full   disclosure   of   their   financial   and   business   interests.   They   shall   notify   the   House   concerned   of   a   potential   conflict   of   interest   that   may   arise   from   the   filing   of   a   proposed   legislation   of   which  they  are  authors.   •

This  provision  does  prohibit  a  legislator  to  file  a  bill  that  may  result  in  possible  conflict  of  interest,  provided   that  there  is  advance  disclosure  of  such  interest.   Disqualification  and  Prohibition  

Section   13.   No   Senator   or   Member   of   the   House   of   Representatives   may   hold   any   other   office   or   employment   in   the   government,   or   any   subdivision,   agency   or   instrumentality   thereof,   including   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   or   their   subsidiaries,   during   his   term   without   forfeiting   his  seat.  Neither  shall  he  be  appointed  to  any  office  which  he  may  have  been  created  or  the  emoluments   thereof  increased  thereof  during  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected.   • •

The  prohibited  offices  include  membership  in  the  board  of  regents,  board  of  trustees,  or  board  of  directors   of  state  universities  and  colleges.   The  prohibition  is  only  during  a  legislator’s  tenure,  he  is  not  prevented  from  accepting  an  appointment.  

Section  14.  No  Senator  or  Member  of  the  House  of  Representatives  may  personally  appear  as  counsel   before  any  court  of  justice  or  before  the  Electoral  Tribunals,  or  quasi-­‐judicial  and  other  administrative   bodies.   Neither   shall   he,   directly   or   indirectly,   be   interested   financially   in   any   contract   with,   or   in   any   franchise  or  special  privilege  granted  by  the  Government,  or  any  subdivision,  agency  or  instrumentality   thereof,  including  any  government-­‐owned  or  controlled  corporation,  or  its  subsidiary,  during  his  term  of   office.   He   shall   not   intervene   in   any   matter   before   any   office   of   the   Government   for   his   pecuniary   benefit  or  where  he  may  be  called  upon  to  act  on  account  of  his  office.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •

“Intervene”  only  includes  an  act  of  a  person  who  has  the  power  to  influence  the  subject  proceedings.   Legislators  cannot  be  members  of  the  board  of  corporations  with  contract  with  the  government.  

Liban  vs.  Gordon  (2011):   Issue:  By  accepting  the  PNRC  Chair,  did  Gordon  forfeit  his  senate  seat?     Ruling:   The   court   once   more   ruled   in   favor   of   the   respondent   Gordon,   changing   its   decision   of   declaring   void   the   sections   of   RA   95   in   question   and   modifying   said   decision   to   declare   only   that   respondent   Gordon   is   not   forfeited   of   his   seat   in   the   senate   as   of   the   office   of   the   chairman   of   the   PNRC   is   not   a   government   office   or   a   government-­‐ owned  or  controlled  corporation.   Sessions,  Officers  &  Rules  

Section   15.   The   Congress   shall   convene   once   every   year   on   the   fourth   Monday   of   July   for   its   regular   session,  unless  a  different  date  is  fixed  by  law,  and  shall  continue  to  be  in  session  for  such  number  of   days   as   it   may   determine   until   thirty   days   before   the   opening   of   its   next   regular   session,   exclusive   of   Saturdays,  Sundays  and  legal  holidays.  The  President  may  call  a  special  session  at  any  time.   • •

The  session  mentioned  in  this  provision  may  last  as  long  as  Congress  wishes  but  only  “until  thirty  days  before   the  opening  of  its  next  regular  session,  exclusive  of  Saturdays,  Sundays,  and  legal  holidays.”   The  President  may  call  a  special  session  anytime  to  consider  general  legislation  or  only  such  subjects  as  he   may  designate.  

Section   16.   (1)   The   Senate   shall   elect   its   President   and   the   House   of   Representatives   its   Speaker,   by   a   majority  vote  of  all  its  respective  members.  Each  House  shall  choose  such  other  officers  as  it  may  deem   necessary.     (2)  A  majority  of  each  House  shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business,  but  a  smaller  number  may   adjourn  from  day  to  day  and  may  compel  the  attendance  of  absent  members  in  such  manner,  and  under   such  penalties,  as  such  House  may  provide.     (3)   Each   House   may   determine   the   rules   of   its   proceedings,   punish   its   members   for   disorderly   behavior,   and   with   the   concurrence   of   two-­‐thirds   of   all   its   members,   suspend   or   expel   a   Member.   A   penalty  of  suspension,  when  imposed,  shall  not  exceed  sixty  days.     (4)  Each  House  shall  keep  a  journal  of  its  proceedings,  and  from  time  to  time  publish  the  same,   excepting   such   parts   as   may,   in   its   judgment,   affect   national   security;   and   the   yeas   and   nays   on   any   question  shall,  at  the  request  of  one-­‐fifth  of  the  members  present,  be  entered  in  the  journal.  Each  house   shall  also  keep  a  record  of  its  proceedings.     (5)   Neither   House   during   the   session   of   the   Congress   shall,   without   the   consent   of   the   other,   adjourn  for  more  than  three  days,  nor  to  any  place  than  that  in  which  the  two  Houses  shall  be  sitting.   •

• • • •

The  only  officers  prescribe  by  the  Constitution  are  the  President  of  the  Senate  and  the  Speaker  of  the  House   of   Representatives,   both   of   whom   are   elected   by   a   majority   vote   of   all   the   Members   of   their   respective   Houses.   Inherent  in  any  legislative  body  is  its  power  of  internal  regulation  and  discipline.   Journals  and  records:  publicity  and  probative  value.   The   Constitution   exempt   from   publication   only   such   matters   as   may   (in   each   House’s)   judgment,   affect   national  security.   Each  House  may  adjourn  for  a  voluntary  recess;  but  neither  House  may  adjourn,  without  the  consent  of  the   other,  for  more  than  30  days  nor  to  any  place  than  that  in  which  the  two  Houses  shall  be  sitting.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Electoral  Tribunals  

Section   17.   The   Senate   and   the   House   of   Representatives   shall   each   have   an   Electoral   Tribunal   which   shall   be   the   sole   judge   of   all   contests   relating   to   the   election,   returns   and   qualifications   of   their   respective  members.  Each  Electoral  Tribunal  shall  be  composed  of  nine  members,  three  of  whom  shall   be  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  be  designated  by  the  Chief  Justice,  and  the  remaining  six  shall  be   members  of  the  Senate  or  the  House  of  the  Representatives,  as  the  case  may  be,  who  shall  be  chosen  on   the   basis   of   proportional   representation   from   the   political   parties   and   the   parties   or   organizations   registered   under   the   party-­‐list   system   represented   therein.   The   senior   Justice   in   the   Electoral   Tribunal   shall  be  its  Chairman.   •

The  HRET  is  the  sole  judge  of  all  contests  relating  to  the  election,  returns,  and  qualifications  of  members  of   the   House   of   Representatives   and   has   the   power   to   promulgate   procedural   rules   to   govern   proceedings   brought  before  it.  And  such  controversies  are  not  subject  to  appeals  to  the  Supreme  Court.  

Banat  vs.  COMELEC  (2009):   Issue:  Do  Sections  37  and  38  of  RA  7166  violate  Section  17,  Article  VI?  When  does  the  jurisdiction  of  the  COMELEC   end  and  when  does  the  jurisdiction  of  the  HRET  begin?   Ruling:   The   jurisdiction   of   the   COMELEC   ends   once   a   candidate   has   been   proclaimed   and   has   taken   oath   of   office   as   a   member   of   Congress.   Jurisdiction   is   then   passed   the   HRET.   This   is   true   even   if   there   is   allegation   on   the   proclamation  is  invalid.   Vilando  vs.  COMELEC  (2011):   Issue:  Can  the  HRET  can  look  into  the  eligibility  of  Limkaichong  even  if,  as  an  incident  thereto,  it  would  mean  looking   into  the  validity  of  the  certificate  of  naturalization?   Ruling:  The  court  is  of  the  view  that  the  HRET  committed  grave  abuse  of  discretion  in  finding  that  Limkaichong  is  not   disqualified   to   sit   as   a   member   of   the   House   of   Representatives.   The   HRET   has   jurisdiction   over   quo   warranto   to   petitions,   specifically   over   cases   challenging   ineligibility   on   the   ground   of   lack   of   citizenship,   such   powers   of   the   HRET,   no   matter   how   complete   and   exclusive   does   not   carry   with   it   the   authority   to   delve   into   the   legality   of   the   judgment  of  naturalization  in  the  pursuit  of  disqualifying  Limkaichong.   Commission  on  Appointments  

Section  18.  There  shall  be  a  Commission  on  Appointments  consisting  of  the  President  of  the  Senate,  as   ex-­‐officio   Chairman,   twelve   Senators   and   twelve   Member   of   the   House   of   Representatives,   elected   by   each   House   on   the   basis   of   proportional   representation   from   the   political   parties   and   parties   or   organizations   registered   under   the   party-­‐list   system   represented   therein.   The   Chairman   of   the   Commission   shall   not   vote,   except   in   case   of   tie.   The   Commission   shall   act   on   all   appointments   submitted  to  it  within  thirty  session  days  of  the  Congress  from  their  submission.  The  Commission  shall   rule  a  majority  vote  of  all  the  members.   • •



The  HR  has  the  authority  to  change  its  representation  in  the  Commission  on  Appointments  to  reflect  at  any   time  changes  in  the  political  alignments  of  its  membership.   The   membership   of   the   Commission   on   Appointments   is   confined   to   members   of   Congress,   however,   said   Commission  is  independent  of  Congress.  Its  powers  do  not  come  from  the  Congress,  but  emanate  directly   from  the  Constitution.   The  Commission,  as  an  independent  body,  can  promulgate  its  own  rules  and  the  Supreme  Court  cannot  pass   upon  the  correctness  of  the  interpretation  placed  by  the  Commission  of  its  own  rules.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   19.   The   Electoral   Tribunals   and   the   Commission   of   Appointments   shall   be   constituted   within   thirty   days   after   the   Senate   shall   have   been   organized   with   the   election   of   the   President   and   the   Speaker.   •

The  Commission’s  function  is  to  consent  to  or  confirm  nominations  or  appointments  submitted  to  it  by  the   President.  

Madrigal  vs.  Villar  (2009):   Issue:  Can  a  senator  challenged  before  the  Supreme  Court  that  she  was  denied  presentation  with  the  Commission   on  Appointments?   Ruling:  No.  Sen.  Madrigal’s  primary  recourse  rests  with  the  House  of  Representatives  and  not  with  this  court.  The   Constitution   expertly   grants   to   the   House   the   prerogative   within   constitutionally   defined   limits   to   choose   from   among  its  distinct  and  party-­‐list  representative.  

Section   20.   The   records   and   books   of   accounts   of   the   Congress   shall   be   preserved   and   be   open   to   the   public  in  accordance  with  law,  and  such  books  shall  be  audited  by  the  Commission  on  Audit  which  shall   publish  annually  an  itemized  list  of  amounts  paid  to  and  expenses  incurred  for  each  member.   •

Legislations   enacted   by   the   Congress   are   public   in   nature;   hence,   the   records   and   books   of   accounts   of   Congress  are  as  well  preserved  and  are  open  to  public.   Question  Hour  &  Investigation  

Section  21.  The  Senate  or  the  House  of  Representatives  or  any  of  its  respective  committees  may  conduct   inquiries   in   aid   of   legislation   in   accordance   with   its   duly   published   rules   of   procedure.   The   rights   of   person  appearing  in  or  affected  by  such  inquiries  shall  be  respected.     • •

This   provision   deals   with   the   inherent   power   of   legislative   investigation   in   aid   of   legislation   for   which   Congress  or  its  committees  are  authorized  to  summon  witnesses.   Limits   on   the   power   of   legislative   investigation:   (1)   in   aid   of   legislation,   (2)   in   accordance   with   its   duly   published   rules   of   procedure,   (3)   the   rights   of   persons   appearing   in   or   affected   by   such   inquiries   shall   be   respected,   and   (4)   the   power   of   Congress   to   commit   a   witness   for   contempt   terminates   upon   final   adjournment.  

Section  22.  The  heads  of  departments  may  upon  their  own  initiative,  with  the  consent  of  the  President,   or   upon   the   request   of   either   House,   as   the   rules   of   each   House   shall   provide,   appear   before   and   be   heard   by   such   House   on   any   matter   pertaining   to   their   departments.   Written   questions   shall   be   submitted  to  the  President  of  the  Senate  or  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  at  least  three   days   before   their   scheduled   appearance.   Interpellations   shall   not   be   limited   to   written   questions,   but   may   cover   matters   related   thereto.   When   the   security   of   the   State   or   public   interest   so   requires   and   the   President  so  states  in  writing,  the  appearance  shall  be  conducted  in  executive  sessions.   • •

The   department   heads   could   appear   but   the   legislature   is   not   obliged   to   entertain   them;   reciprocally   the   legislature  could  request  their  appearance  but  could  not  oblige  them  especially  if  the  President  objected.   The   exemption   from   summons   applies   only   to   Department   Heads   and   not   to   everyone   who   has   Cabinet   rank.  

Pimentel  vs.  Enrile  (2011):   Issue:  Should  the  Rules  of  the  Senate  Committee  of  the  whole  be  published  to  be  effective?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:  Section  12,  Article  VI  of  the  Constitution  provides  that  the  Senate  or  House  of  Representatives  or  any  of  its   respective   committees   may   conduct   inquiries   in   aid   of   legislation   in   accordance   with   its   published   rules   of   procedure.  The  right  of  persons  appearing  in  or  affected  by  such  inquiries  shall  be  respected.  The  constitution  does   not  require  publication  of  the  Internal  Rules  of  the  House  of  Senate.   Philcomstat  vs.  Senate  (2012):   Issue:  Is  the  power  to  conduct  legislative  inquiries  vested  only  on  the  Senate  or  also  on  its  committees?   Ruling:   The   respondents   Senate   committees   power   of   inquiry   relative   to   PSR   No.   455   has   been   passed   upon   and   upheld  in  the  consolidated  cases  of  “In  the  matter  of  the  petition  for  Habeas  Corpus  of  Camilo  L.  Salao  which  cited   Art.   VI   Sec.   21   of   the   Constitution   as   follows:   The   Senate   or   the   House   of   Representative   or   any   of   its   respective   committees  may  conduct  inquiries  in  aid  of  legislation  in  accordance  with  its  duly  published  rules  of  procedure.    

Section  23.  (1)  The  Congress,  by  a  vote  of  two-­‐thirds  of  both  Houses  in  joint  session  assembled,  voting   separately,  shall  have  the  sole  power  to  declare  the  existence  of  a  state  of  war.     (2)   In   times   of   war   or   other   national   emergency,   the   Congress   may,   by   law,   authorize   the   President,   for   a   limited   period   and   subject   to   such   restrictions   as   it   may   prescribe,   to   exercise   such   powers   necessary   and   proper   to   carry   out   a   declared   national   policy.   Unless   sooner   withdrawn   by   resolution  of  the  Congress,  such  powers  shall  cease  upon  the  next  adjournment.   • • •

Even  without  congressional  authority  the  President  can  declare  a  state  of  national  emergency.   The  Congress,  as  vested  by  the  Constitution,  in  joint  session  assembled  voting  separately,  has  the  sole  power   to  declare  the  existence  of  a  state  of  war.   Limitations   of   the   President’s   emergency   powers:   (1)   for   a   limited   period,   and   (2)   restrictions   as   may   be   provided  by  Congress.  

Ampatuan  vs.  Puno  (2011):   Issue:   Was   the   President’s   exercise   of   emergency   powers   pursuant   to   Proclamation   1946   violative   of   Section   23,   Article  VI  of  the  Constitution?   Ruling:  No.  The  President  did  not  proclaim  a  national  emergency,  only  a  state  of  emergency  in  the  places  mentioned.   She  did  not  act  pursuant   to   any   law   encoded   by  the  Congress  that  authorizes  her  exercises   extraordinary   powers.   She  did  not  need  congressional  authority  to  exercise  the  same.   Power  of  the  Purse  

Section   24.   All   appropriation,   revenue   or   tariff   bills,   bills   authorizing   increase   of   a   public   debt,   bills   of   local   application,   and   private   bills   shall   originate   exclusively   in   the   House   of   Representatives,   but   the   Senate  may  propose  or  concur  with  amendments.   • • • • •

Appropriation  bill  is  one  whose  purpose  is  to  set  aside  a  sum  of  money  for  public  use.   Revenue  or  tariff  bills  are  those  which  are  strictly  for  the  raising  of  revenues.     Bills   of   local   application   are   those   whose   reach   is   limited   to   specific   localities,   such   for   instance   as   the   creation  of  a  town.   The  constitutional  rule  is  that  revenue  bills  must  originate  exclusively  from  the  House  of  Representatives.   The  Senate  may  propose  or  concur  with  amendments.  

Section  25.  (1)  The  Congress  may  not  increase  the  appropriations  recommended  by  the  President  for  the   operation  of  the  government  as  specified  in  the  budget.  The  form,  content,  and  manner  of  preparation   of  the  budget  shall  be  prescribed  by  law.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

  (2)   No   provision   or   enactment   shall   be   embraced   in   the   general   appropriations   bill   unless   it   relates   specifically   to   some   particular   appropriation   therein.   Any   such   provision   or   enactment   shall   be   limited  in  its  operation  to  the  appropriation  to  which  it  relates.     (3)  The  procedure  in  approving  appropriations  for  the  Congress  shall  strictly  follow  the  procedure   for  approving  appropriations  for  other  departments  and  agencies.     (4)   A   special   appropriations   bill   shall   specify   the   purpose   for   which   it   is   intended,   and   shall   be   supported   by   funds   actually   available   as   certified   by   the   national   treasurer,   or   to   be   raised   by   a   corresponding  revenue  proposal  therein.     (5)   No   law   shall   be   passed   authorizing   any   transfer   or   appropriations;   However,   the   President,   the   President   of   the   Senate,   the   Speaker   of   the   House   of   Representatives,   the   Chief   Justice   of   the   Supreme  Court,  and  the  heads  of  the  Constitutional  Commissions  may,  by  law,  be  authorized  to  augment   any  item  in  the3e  general  appropriations  law  for  their  respective  offices  from  savings  in  other  items  of   their  respective  appropriations.     (6)   Discretionary   funds   appropriated   for   particular   officials   shall   be   disbursed   only   for   public   purposes  to  be  supported  by  appropriate  vouchers  and  subject  to  such  guidelines  as  may  be  prescribed   by  law.     (7)   If,   by   the   end   of   any   fiscal   year,   the   Congress   shall   have   failed   to   pass   the   general   appropriations   law   for   the   ensuing   fiscal   year,   the   general   appropriations   law   for   the   preceding   fiscal   year  shall  be  deemed  re-­‐enacted  and  shall  remain  in  force  and  effect  until  the  general  appropriations  bill   is  passed  by  the  Congress.   • • •



Congress   cannot   increase   the   appropriations   recommended   by   the   President   for   the   operation   of   the   Government  as  specified  in  the  budget.   No  law  shall  be  passed  authorizing  any  transfer  of  appropriations.   But  the  following  may,  by  law,  be  authorized  to  augment  any  item  in  the  general  appropriations  law  for  their   respective  offices  from  savings  in  other  items  of  their  respective  appropriations   -­‐  President   -­‐  President  of  the  Senate   -­‐  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives   -­‐  Chief  of  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court   -­‐  Heads  of  the  Constitutional  Commissions   Discretionary  funds  appropriated  for  particular  officials  shall  be:  (1)  disbursed  only  for  public  purposes,  (2)   should  be  supported  by  appropriate  vouchers,  and  (3)  subject  to  guidelines  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law.    

  Biraogo  vs.  Philippine  Truth  Commission  (2010):   Issue:  Does  E.O.  No.  1  transgress  on  the  power  of  the  Congress  to  appropriate  funds  for  the  operation  of  a  public   office?   Ruling:   No.   E.O.   No.   1   does   not   transgress   on   the   power   of   the   Congress   to   appropriate   funds   for   the   operation   of   a   public  office.  In  the  said  EO,  there  will  be  no  appropriation  but  only  an  allotment  or  allocations  existing  funds  already   appropriated.   Lamp  vs.  DBM  Secretary  (2012):   Issue:  Is  allowing  the  direct  allocation  and  release  of  PDAF  funds  to  the  Members  of  Congress  based  on  their  own  list   of  proposed  projects,  did  the  implementation  of  the  PDAF  provision  under  GAA  of  2004  violate  the  Constitution  or   the  laws?   Ruling:   No.   The   court   cited   the   principle   of   separation   of   powers   between   the   legislative,   executive,   and   judiciary   and  ruled  that  the  said  provision  is  not  unconstitutional.  Every  statute  is  presumed  valid.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Kida  vs.  Senate  (2011):   Issue:  Did  the  passage  of  RA  No.  10153  violate  Section  26  (2),  Article  VI  of  the  Constitution?   Ruling:  No.  The  Presidential  certification  dispensed  with  the  requirement  not  only  of  printing  but  also  that  of  reading   the   bill   or   separate   days.   The   phrase,   “except   when   the   President   certifies   to   the   necessity   of   its   immediate   enactment,  etc.”  in  Article  VI,  Section  26  (2)  qualifies  the  two  stated  conditions  before  a  bill  can  become  a  law;  the   bill  has  passed  three  readings  on  separate  days  and  it  has  been  printed  in  its  final  form  and  distributed  3  days  before   it  is  finally  approved.      

Section   29.   (1)   No   public   money   or   property   shall   be   paid   out   of   Treasury   except   in   pursuance   of   an   appropriation  made  by  law.     (2)  No  public  money  or  property  shall  be  appropriated,  applied  ,  paid  or  employed  ,  directly  or   indirectly,   for   the   use,   benefit   or   support   of   any   sect,   church,   denomination,   sectarian   institution,   or   system   of   religion,   or   of   any   priest,   such   priest,   preacher,   minister,   or   dignitary   is   assigned   to   the   armed   forces,  or  to  any  penal  institution,  or  government  or  orphanage  or  leprosarium.     (3)  All  money  collected  on  any  tax  levied  for  a  special  purpose  shall  be  treated  as  a  special  fund   and  paid  out  for  such  purpose.  If  the  purpose  for  which  a  special  fund  was  created  has  been  fulfilled  or   abandoned,  the  balance,  if  any,  shall  be  transferred  to  the  general  funds  of  the  Government.   • •

Presidential  budget  may  be  decreased  but  not  increased,    to  prevent  big  budget  deficits.   Limitations  of  the  congressional  power  to  enact  appropriation  laws:   a)  Appropriations  must  be  for  a  public  purpose   b)  Cannot  appropriate  public  funds  or  property,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  favor  of   (i)  Any  sect,  church,  denomination,  or  sectarian  institution  or  system  of  religion  or   (ii)  Any  priest,  preacher,  minister,  or  other  religious  teacher  or  dignitary  as  such.   Except  if  the  priest,  etc  is  assigned  to:   -­‐  the  Armed  Forces;  or   -­‐  any  penal  institution;  or   -­‐  government  orphanage;   Legislative  Mill  

Section  26.  (1)  Every  bill  passed  by  Congress  shall  embrace  one  subject  which  shall  be  expressed  in  the   title  thereof.     (2)   No   bill   passed   by   either   House   shall   become   a   law   unless   it   has   passed   three   readings   on   separate  days,  and  printed  copies  thereof  in  its  final  form  have  been  distributed  to  its  Members  three   days  before  its  passage,  except  when  the  President  certifies  to  the  necessity  of  its  immediate  enactment   to  meet  a  public  calamity  or  emergency.  Upon   the   last  reading  of   a   bill,  no   amendment   thereto   shall   be   allowed,  and  the  vote  thereon  shall  be  taken  immediately  thereafter,  and  the  yeas  and  nays  entered  in   the  Journal.   •



The  title  does  not  have  to  be  a  complete  catalogue  of  everything  stated  in  the  bill.  It  is  sufficient  if  the  title   expresses   the   general   subject   of   the   bill   and   all   the   provisions   of   the   statute   are   germane   to   that   general   subject.   In  order  to  become  a  law,  each  bill  must  pass  three  (3)  readings  in  both  Houses:   First  reading  –  only  the  title  is  read;  the  bill  is  passed  to  the  proper  committee.   Second  reading  –  Entire  text  is  read  and  debates  are  held,  and  amendments  introduced.   Third   reading   –   only   the   title   is   read,   no   amendments   are   allowed.   Vote   shall   be   taken   immediately   thereafter  and  the  yeas  and  nays  entered  in  the  journal.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   27.   (1)   Every   bill   passed   by   the   Congress   shall,   before   it   becomes   a   law,   be   presented   to   the   President.   If   he   approves   the   same,   he   shall   sign   it;   otherwise,   he   shall   veto   it   and   return   the   same   with   his  objections  to  the  House  where  it  originated,  which  shall  enter  the  objections  at  large  in  its  Journal   and  proceed  to  reconsider  it.  If,  after  such  reconsideration,  two-­‐thirds  of  all  the  Members  of  such  House   shall  agree  to  pass  the  bill,  it  shall  be  sent,  together  with  the  objections,  to  the  other  house  by  which  it   shall  likewise  be  reconsidered,  and  if  approved  by  two-­‐thirds  of  all  the  Members  of  the  House,  it  shall   become  a  law.  In  all  such  cases,  the  votes  of  each  House  shall  be  determined  by  yeas  and  nays,  and  the   names   of   the   Members   voting   for   or   against   shall   be   entered   in   its   Journal.   The   president   shall   communicate   his   veto   of   any   bill   to   the   House   where   it   originated   within   thirty   days   after   the   date   of   receipt  thereof;  otherwise,  it  shall  become  a  law  as  if  he  has  signed  it.     (2)  The  President  shall  have  the  power  to  veto  any  particular  item  or  items  in  an  appropriation,   revenue,  or  tariff  bill,  but  the  veto  shall  not  affect  the  item  or  items  to  which  he  does  not  object.   • • • • • • • •

Ordinary  bills  have  to  be  vetoed  by  the  President  in  its  entirety.   Appropriation  bills  can  be  vetoed  per  item.   Executive  Veto  –  when  an  executive  refuses  to  sign  a  bill  and  returns  it  to  the  legislature  with  a  veto  message   explaining  why   Legislative   Veto   –   a   statutory   provision   requiring   the   President   or   an   administrative   agency   to   present   the   proposed  implementing  rules  &  regulations  of  a  law  to  Congress  for  approval   Heckler’s  Veto  –  occurs  when  an  acting  party’s  right  to  freedom  of  speech  is  curtailed  or  restricted  by  the   government  in  order  to  prevent  a  reacting  party’s  behavior.   The   President   may   veto   particular   items   in   an   appropriation,   revenue   or   tariff   bill.   And   this   veto   will   not   affect  items  to  which  he  does  not  object.   A  rider  is  a  provision  which  does  not  relate  to  a  particular  appropriation  stated  in  the  bill,  and  since,  it   is  an   invalid  provision  under  Section  25(2),  the  President  may  veto  it  as  an  item.   Executive   impoundment   –   refers   to   a   refusal   by   the   President,   for   whatever   reason,   to   spend   funds   made   available  by  Congress.  

Section   28.   (1)   The   rule   of   taxation   shall   be   uniform   and   equitable.   The   Congress   shall   evolve   a   progressive  system  of  taxation.     (2)  The  Congress  may,  by  law,  authorize  the  President  to  fix  within  specified  limits,  and  subject  to   such  limitations  and  restrictions  as  it  may  impose,  tariff  rates,  import  and  export  quotas,  tonnage  and   wharfage   dues,   and   other   duties   and   imposts   within   the   framework   of   the   national   development   program  of  the  Government.     (3)  Charitable  institutions,  churches  and  parsonages  or  convents  appurtenant  thereto,  mosques,   non-­‐profit   cemeteries,   and   all   lands,   buildings   and   improvements,   actually,   directly   and   exclusively   used   for  religious,  charitable,  or  educational  purposes  shall  be  exempt  from  taxation.     (4)  No  law  granting  any  tax  exemption  shall  be  passed  without  the  concurrence  of  a  majority  of   all  the  members  of  Congress.   •

Limitations  of  the  power  to  tax:   1)  The  rule  of  taxation  should  be  uniform   2)  It  should  be  equitable   3)  Congress  should  evolve  a  progressive  system  of  taxation.   4)  The  power  to  tax  must  be  exercised  for  a  public  purpose  because  the  power  exists  for              the  general  welfare   5)  The  due  process  and  equal  protection  clauses  of  the  Constitution  should  be  observed.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• • •



Uniformity  in  taxation  means  that  persons  or  things  belonging  to  the  same  class  shall  be  taxed  at  the  same   rate.   Equitable  taxation  also  means  that  the  tax  burden  must  be  imposed  according  to  the  taxpayer’s  capacity  to   pay.   Congress  may,  by  law,  authorize  the  President  to  fix  the  following:   a)  Tariff  rates   b)  Import  and  Export  Quotas   c)  Tonnage  and  wharfage  dues   d)  Other  duties  and  imposts   Within  the  framework  of  the  national  development  program  of  the  Government   The  following  properties  are  exempt  from  real  property  taxes   a)  Charitable  institutions   b)  Churches,  and  parsonages  or  convents  appurtenant  thereto   c)  Mosques   d)  Non-­‐profit  cemeteries;  and   e)  All  lands,  buildings  and  improvements  actually,  directly  

 

Section  30.  No  law  shall  be  passed  increasing  the  appellate  jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court  as  provided   in  this  Constitution  without  its  advice  and  concurrence.   •

Section   2   Article   VIII   vests   upon   Congress   the   power   to   apportion   the   jurisdiction   of   Courts,   the   former   is   free   to   add   to   or   subtract   from   the   powers   of   the   courts   except   in   so   far   as   these   have   been   fixed   by   the   Constitution.   In   response   to   the   concern   that   the   Supreme   Court   might   be   swamped   with   jurisdictional   concerns,  this  provision  was  created.    

Section  31.  No  law  granting  a  title  of  royalty  or  nobility  shall  be  enacted.   •

No  Filipino  could  accept  “honors,  decorations  or  orders  or  titles  of  honor  and  nobility  from  foreign  nations   without  authorization  of  the  government”.  The  government  was  also  forbidden  from  establishing  or  granting   them  to  any  Filipino.  (Malolos  Constitution,  Art.  32,  Title  IV)  

Section  32.  The  Congress  shall,  as  early  as  possible,  provide  for  a  system  of  initiative  and  referendum,   and  the  exceptions  therefrom,  whereby  the  people  can  directly  propose  and  enact  laws  or  approve  or   reject   any   act   or   law   or   part   thereof   passed   by   the   Congress   or   local   legislative   body   after   the   registration   of   a   petition   therefor   signed   by   at   least   ten   per   centum   of   the   total   number   of   registered   voters,   of   which   every   legislative   district   must   be   represented   by   at   least   three   per   centum   of   the   registered  voters  thereof.   • •

Through  the  system  of  initiative  and  referendum,  the  people  can  directly  propose  and  enact  laws  or  approve   or  reject  any  act  or  law  or  part  thereof  passed  by  the  Congress  or  local  legislative  body.   Required  Petition:   a)  Should  be  signed  by  at  least  10%  of  the  total  number  of  registered  voters   b)  Every  legislative  district  should  be  represented  by  at  least  3%  of  the  registered  voters   c)  Petition  should  be  registered  

 

ARTICLE  VII  THE  EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENT     Section  1.  The  executive  power  shall  be  vested  in  the  President  of  the  Philippines.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• • •

Executive  power  vested  in  the  President   Executive  power  –  power  to  enforce  and  administer  laws   Immunity  from  suit     o granted  to  President  during  his  tenure  of  office  or  actual  incumbency   o assures  the  exercise  of  duty  free  from  any  hindrance  or  distraction   President  can  only  be  removed  from  office  by  impeachment  

•   Boac  v.  Cadapan,  G.R.  no.  184461-­‐62  

Issue:  May  the  President  of  the  Philippines  be  named  as  party  defendant  in  habeas  corpus  and  amparo  proceedings?   Ruling:  No.  Settled  is  the  doctrine  that  the  President,  during  his  tenure  of  office  or  actual  incumbency  may  not  be   sued   in   any   civil   or   criminal   case,   and   there   is   no   need   to   provide   for   it   in   the   Constitution   or   law.   It   will   degrade   the   dignity   of   the   high   office   of   the   President,   the   head   of   State,   if   he   can   be   dragged   into   court   litigations   while   serving   as  such.   • •



Executive   privilege   -­‐   Power   of   the   President   to   withhold   certain   types   of   information   from   the   Courts,   the   Congress,  and  ultimately  the  public.  It  must  be  kept  confidential  in  the  pursuit  of  public  interest.   Types  of  information  include:   o Military  or  diplomatic  objectives   o Information  about  the  identity  of  persons  who  furnish  information  of  violations  of  law   o Information   about   internal   deliberations   comprising   the   process   by   which   government   decisions   are   made   It  is  crucial  to  the  fulfillment  of  the  unique  role  and  responsibilities  of  the  executive  branch    

Section  2.  No  person  may  be  elected  President  unless  he  is  a  natural-­‐  born  citizen  of  the  Philippines,  a   registered   voter,   able   to   read   and   write,   at   least   forty   years   of   age   on   the   day   of   the   election,   and   a   resident  of  the  Philippines  for  at  least  ten  years  immediately  preceding  such  election.   •



Qualifications  of  the  President:   o Natural  born  citizen  or  the  Philippines   o A  registered  voter   o Able  to  read  and  write   o At  least  40  years  of  age  on  the  day  of  the  election   o A  resident  of  the  Philippines  for  at  least  10  years  immediately  preceding  such  election   Residence  -­‐  Domicile  (temporary  physical  absence  is  allowed)    

Section  3.  There  shall  be  a  Vice-­‐President  who  shall  have  the  same  qualifications  and  term  of  office  and   be   elected   with,   and   in   the   same   manner,   as   the   President.   He   may   be   removed   from   office   in   the   same   manner  as  the  President.   The  Vice-­‐President  may  be  appointed  as  a  Member  of  the  Cabinet.  Such  appointment  requires  no   confirmation.   • • •

Vice-­‐President  has  the  same  qualifications  of  a  President   He   may   be   appointed   as   a   member   of   the   cabinet   (but   must   always   be   prepared   to   assume   office   should   there  be  a  vacancy)   An   appointment   does   not   need   consent   from   the   Commission   on   Appointments   –   the   President   is   free   to   choose  Cabinet  members  as  his  trusted  personal  choices    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  4.  The  President  and  the  Vice-­‐President  shall  be  elected  by  direct  vote  of  the  people  for  a  term  of   six  years  which  shall  begin  at  noon  on  the  thirtieth  day  of  June  next  following  the  day  of  the  election  and   shall  end  at  noon  of  the  same  date,  six  years  thereafter.  The  President  shall  not  be  eligible  for  any  re-­‐ election.   No   person   who   has   succeeded   as   President   and   has   served   as   such   for   more   than   four   years   shall  be  qualified  for  election  to  the  same  office  at  any  time.   No  Vice-­‐President  shall  serve  for  more  than  two  successive  terms.  Voluntary  renunciation  of  the   office  for  any  length  of  time  shall  not  be  considered  as  an  interruption  in  the  continuity  of  the  service  for   the  full  term  for  which  he  was  elected.   Unless  otherwise  provided  by  law,  the  regular  election  for  President  and  Vice-­‐President  shall  be   held  on  the  second  Monday  of  May.     The   returns   of   every   election   for   President   and   Vice-­‐President,   duly   certified   by   the   board   of   canvassers  of  each  province  or  city,  shall  be  transmitted  to  the  Congress,  directed  to  the  President  of  the   Senate.  Upon  receipt  of  the  certificates  of  canvass,  the  President  of  the  Senate  shall,  not  later  than  thirty   days  after  the  day  of  the  election,  open  all  the  certificates  in  the  presence  of  the  Senate  and  the  House   of   Representatives   in   joint   public   session,   and   the   Congress,   upon   determination   of   the   authenticity   and   due  execution  thereof  in  the  manner  provided  by  law,  canvass  the  votes.   The  person  having  the  highest  number  of  votes  shall  be  proclaimed  elected,  but  in  case  two  or   more   shall   have   an   equal   and   highest   number   of   votes,   one   of   them   shall   forthwith   be   chosen   by   the   vote  of  a  majority  of  all  the  Members  of  both  Houses  of  the  Congress,  voting  separately.   The  Congress  shall  promulgate  its  rules  for  the  canvassing  of  the  certificates.   The  Supreme  Court,  sitting  en  banc,  shall  be  the  sole  judge  of  all  contests  relating  to  the  election,   returns,   and   qualifications   of   the   President   or   Vice-­‐President,   and   may   promulgate   its   rules   for   the   purpose.   • • • • •

• •

President  and  Vice-­‐President  is  directly  elected  by  the  people   The  President  has  a  fixed  term  of  6  years  to  begin  at  noon  on  June  30th.  He  is  not  eligible  for  re-­‐election.   Vice-­‐President  may  not  serve  for  more  than  2  successive  terms.  If  he  successes  the  presidency  for  less  than   four  years,  he  can  run  for  election  as  President  (not  considered  re-­‐election)   The  Congress  is  the  national  board  of  canvassers.  It  is  given  the  authority  to  make  a  “determination  of  the   authenticity  and  due  execution”  of  the  returns  from  provincial  and  city  board  of  canvassers.   Congress  breaks  the  tie  in  case  there  are  two  or  more  equal  or  highest  number  of  votes  in  the  Presidential  or   Vice-­‐Presidential   election.   It   is   broken   by   a   vote   of   majority   of   all   the   members   of   both   Houses,   voting   SEPARATELY.   Only  the  2nd  and  3rd  placers  in  a  presidential  election  can  contest  it.   The  power  of  the  Court  as  tribunal  includes  the  power  to  correct  manifest  errors  on  the  statement  of  votes   (SOV)  and  certificate  of  canvass  (COC).      

Pormento  v.  Estrada,  G.R.  no.  191988   Issue:  What  is  the  proper  interpretation  of  the  following  provision  of  Sec.  4,  Art.  VII,  Constitution:  “[t]he  President   shall  not  be  eligible  for  any  re-­‐election?”  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:  Since  the  issue  on  the  proper  interpretation  on  the  phrase,  any  “re-­‐election”  will  be  premised  on  a  person’s   second  election  as  President,  there  is  no  clear  case  or  controversy  to  be  resolved  in  this  case.  There  is  no  definite,   real  or  substantial  controversy  that  touches  on  the  legal  relation  of  parties  having  adverse  legal  interests.  Petition   was  denied.   BANAT  v.  Comelec,  G.R.  no.  177508   Issue:  Are  pre-­‐proclamation  cases  involving  the  authenticity  and  due  execution  of  certificates  of  canvass  allowed  in   elections  for  President  and  Vice-­‐President?   Ruling:  Yes  they  are  allowed  in  elections  for  President,  Vice-­‐President,  Senators,  House  Representatives.  The  general   rule  is  that  these  matters  relate  to  preparation,  transmission,  receipt,  custody  and  appreciation  of  election  returns   or  certificate  of  canvass  are  still  prohibited.  There  are  exceptions:  (1)  correction  of  manifested  errors;  (2)  questions   affecting  the  composition  of  proceeding  of  the  board  of  canvassers;  and  (3)  determination  of  the  authenticity  and   due  execution  of  certificates  of  canvass  as  provided  in  Sec  30,  RA  7166  amended  by  RA  9369.   Makalintal  v.  PET,  G.R.  no.  191618,  Nov.  23,  2010  &  June  7,  2011   Issue:  Is  the  Presidential  Electoral  Tribunal  an  illegal  and  unauthorized  progeny  of  Sec.  4,  Art.  VII  of  the  Constitution?   Ruling:  No,  the  Court  said  that  the  provision  does  not  specify  the  establishment  of  the  PET,  neither  does  it  preclude,   much  less,  prohibit  the  same.   Ruling:  No,  The  SC  said  “We  reiterate  that  the  abstraction  of  the  SC  acting  as  a  PET  from  the  unequivocal  grand  of   jurisdiction  in  the  last  paragraph  of  Sec  4,  Art  VII  of  the  Constitution  is  sound  and  tenable  what  we  have  done  is  to   constitutionalize  what  was  statutory  but  it  was  not  an  infringement  of  the  separation  of  powers  because  the  power   given  to  the  SC  is  a  judicial  power.  ”    

Section   5.   Before   they   enter   on   the   execution   of   their   office,   the   President,   the   Vice-­‐President,   or   the   Acting  President  shall  take  the  following  oath  or  affirmation:   "I  do  solemnly  swear  [or  affirm]  that  I  will  faithfully  and  conscientiously  fulfill  my  duties  as   President   [or   Vice-­‐President   or   Acting   President]   of   the   Philippines,   preserve   and   defend   its   Constitution,  execute  its  laws,  do  justice  to  every  man,  and  consecrate  myself  to  the  service  of   the  Nation.  So  help  me  God."  [In  case  of  affirmation,  last  sentence  will  be  omitted].   Section  6.  The  President  shall  have  an  official  residence.  The  salaries  of  the  President  and  Vice-­‐President   shall   be   determined   by   law   and   shall   not   be   decreased   during   their   tenure.   No   increase   in   said   compensation  shall  take  effect  until  after  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  the  incumbent  during  which  such   increase   was   approved.   They   shall   not   receive   during   their   tenure   any   other   emolument   from   the   Government  or  any  other  source.   • • •

Salaries  of  President  and  Vice-­‐President  shall  be  determined  by  law  and  cannot  be  decreased  during  tenure.   Increase  in  salary  will  take  effect  after  expiration  of  the  term,  as  approved.   No  emoluments  shall  be  received  during  tenure.    

Section  7.  The  President-­‐elect  and  the  Vice  President-­‐elect  shall  assume  office  at  the  beginning  of  their   terms.   If   the   President-­‐elect   fails   to   qualify,   the   Vice   President-­‐elect   shall   act   as   President   until   the   President-­‐elect  shall  have  qualified.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

If  a  President  shall  not  have  been  chosen,  the  Vice  President-­‐elect  shall  act  as  President  until  a   President  shall  have  been  chosen  and  qualified.   If  at  the  beginning  of  the  term  of  the  President,  the  President-­‐elect  shall  have  died  or  shall  have   become  permanently  disabled,  the  Vice  President-­‐elect  shall  become  President.   Where  no  President  and  Vice-­‐President  shall  have  been  chosen  or  shall  have  qualified,  or  where   both   shall   have   died   or   become   permanently   disabled,   the   President   of   the   Senate   or,   in   case   of   his   inability,  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  shall  act  as  President  until  a  President  or  a  Vice-­‐ President  shall  have  been  chosen  and  qualified.   The  Congress  shall,  by  law,  provide  for  the  manner  in  which  one  who  is  to  act  as  President  shall   be   selected   until   a   President   or   a   Vice-­‐President   shall   have   qualified,   in   case   of   death,   permanent   disability,  or  inability  of  the  officials  mentioned  in  the  next  preceding  paragraph.   Vacancy  occurs  at  the  start  of  term   President-­‐elect  fails  to  qualify   A  President  not  been  chosen  

Vice   President-­‐elect   sits   as   acting   President   until   one  has  been  chosen  and  qualifies  

President-­‐elect  died  or  is  permanently  disabled  

Vice-­‐President  becomes  President  

Both  President  and  Vice-­‐President  was  not  chose,   Senate   President   èSpeaker   of   House   of   not  qualified,  died,  or  is  permanently  disabled   Representatives   shall   hold   required   position   until   one  has  been  chosen  and  qualified    



Congress  provides  the  manner  on  how  one  is  temporarily  elected  into  position  

Section   8.   In   case   of   death,   permanent   disability,   removal   from   office,   or   resignation   of   the   President,   the  Vice-­‐President  shall  become  the  President  to  serve  the  unexpired  term.  In  case  of  death,  permanent   disability,   removal   from   office,   or   resignation   of   both   the   President   and   Vice-­‐President,   the   President   of   the   Senate   or,   in   case   of   his   inability,   the   Speaker   of   the   House   of   Representatives,   shall   then   act   as   President  until  the  President  or  Vice-­‐President  shall  have  been  elected  and  qualified.   The   Congress   shall,   by   law,   provide   who   shall   serve   as   President   in   case   of   death,   permanent   disability,  or  resignation  of  the  Acting  President.  He  shall  serve  until  the  President  or  the  Vice-­‐President   shall   have   been   elected   and   qualified,   and   be   subject   to   the   same   restrictions   of   powers   and   disqualifications  as  the  Acting  President.   Vacancy  occurs  in  the  middle  of  the  term   Death,   permanent   disability,   removal   from   office  or  resignation  of  President   Death,   permanent   disability,   removal   from   office   or   resignation   of   President   and   Vice-­‐ President   •

Vice-­‐President  shall  serve  unexpired  term     Senate   President   of   Speaker   of   the   House   becomes   acting   President   until   one   is   elected   and  qualified  

Congress  provides,  by  law,  who  shall  serve  as  President  (subject  to  same  restrictions  as  Acting  President)  in   case  of  death  of  Acting  President.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   9.   Whenever   there   is   a   vacancy   in  the   Office   of   the   Vice-­‐   President   during   the   term   for   which   he   was   elected,   the   President   shall   nominate   a   Vice-­‐President   from   among   the   Members   of   the   Senate   and   the  House  of  Representatives  who  shall  assume  office  upon  confirmation  by  a  majority  vote  of  all  the   Members  of  both  Houses  of  the  Congress,  voting  separately.   • •

The   President   is   authorized   to   nominate   a   member   of   Congress   (either   house)   to   fill   the   vacated   Vice-­‐ President  seat.   It  must  be  confirmed  by  a  majority  vote  of  both  Houses  voting  SEPARATELY    

Section   10.   The   Congress   shall,   at   ten   o'clock   in   the   morning   of   the   third   day   after   the   vacancy   in   the   offices  of  the  President  and  Vice-­‐  President  occurs,  convene  in  accordance  with  its  rules  without  need  of   a   call   and   within   seven   days,   enact   a   law   calling   for   a   special   election   to   elect   a   President   and   a   Vice-­‐ President   to   be   held   not   earlier   than   forty-­‐   five   days   nor   later   than   sixty   days   from   the   time   of   such   call.   The  bill  calling  such  special  election  shall  be  deemed  certified  under  paragraph  2,  Section  26,  Article  V1   of   this   Constitution   and   shall   become   law   upon   its   approval   on   third   reading   by   the   Congress.   Appropriations  for  the  special  election  shall  be  charged  against  any  current  appropriations  and  shall  be   exempt  from  the  requirements  of  paragraph  4,  Section  25,  Article  V1  of  this  Constitution.  The  convening   of   the   Congress   cannot   be   suspended   nor   the   special   election   postponed.   No   special   election   shall   be   called  if  the  vacancy  occurs  within  eighteen  months  before  the  date  of  the  next  presidential  election.   The  actions  Congress  must  take  in  the  event  of  a  vacancy  of  the  office  of  both  the  President  and  Vice-­‐President:   1) Congress  shall  convene  at  10:00am  3  days  after  the  vacancy  in  the  office  of  both  the  President  and  the   VP,  without  need  of  a  call.  The  convening  of  Congress  cannot  be  suspended.     2) Within  7  days  after  convening,  Congress  shall  enact  a  law  calling  for  a  special  election  to  elect  a   President  and  a  VP.  The  special  election  cannot  be  postponed.    



3) The  special  election  shall  be  held  not  earlier  than  45  days  not  later  than  60  days  from  the  time  of  the   enactment  of  the  law.   4) The  3  readings  for  the  special  law  need  not  be  held  on  separate  days.     5) The  law  shall  be  deemed  enacted  upon  its  approval  on  third  reading.     No  special  election  shall  be  called  if  the  vacancy  occurs  within  18  months  before  the  date  of  the  next   presidential  election.    

Section   11.   Whenever   the   President   transmits   to   the   President   of   the   Senate   and   the   Speaker   of   the   House  of  Representatives  his  written  declaration  that  he  is  unable  to  discharge  the  powers  and  duties  of   his  office,  and  until  he  transmits  to  them  a  written  declaration  to  the  contrary,  such  powers  and  duties   shall  be  discharged  by  the  Vice-­‐President  as  Acting  President.   Whenever  a  majority  of  all  the  Members  of  the  Cabinet  transmit  to  the  President  of  the  Senate   and  to  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  their  written  declaration  that  the  President  is  unable   to   discharge   the   powers   and   duties   of   his   office,   the   Vice-­‐President   shall   immediately   assume   the   powers  and  duties  of  the  office  as  Acting  President.   Thereafter,   when   the   President   transmits   to   the   President   of   the   Senate   and   to   the   Speaker   of   the   House   of   Representatives   his   written   declaration   that   no   inability   exists,   he   shall   reassume   the   powers   and   duties   of   his   office.   Meanwhile,   should   a   majority   of   all   the   Members   of   the   Cabinet   transmit   within   five   days   to   the   President   of   the   Senate   and   to   the   Speaker   of   the   House   of   Representatives,   their   written   declaration   that   the   President   is   unable   to   discharge   the   powers   and  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

duties  of  his  office,  the  Congress  shall  decide  the  issue.  For  that  purpose,  the  Congress  shall  convene,  if  it   is  not  in  session,  within  forty-­‐  eight  hours,  in  accordance  with  its  rules  and  without  need  of  call.     If  the  Congress,  within  ten  days  after  receipt  of  the  last  written  declaration,  or,  if  not  in  session,   within   twelve   days   after   it   is   required   to   assemble,   determines   by   a   two-­‐thirds   vote   of   both   Houses,   voting  separately,  that  the  President  is  unable  to  discharge  the  powers  and  duties  of  his  office,  the  Vice-­‐ President  shall  act  as  President;  otherwise,  the  President  shall  continue  exercising  the  powers  and  duties   of  his  office.   • • •

The  President  has  the  power  to  declare  himself  disabled  making  the  Vice-­‐President  the  Acting  President   When  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Cabinet  transmits  to  both  Houses  that  the  President  has  inability  to   discharge  power  –  the  Vice-­‐President  sits  as  Acting  President   When  President  transmits  to  both  Houses  that  no  inability  exists  he  resumes  as  President    

Section   12.   In   case   of   serious   illness   of   the   President,   the   public   shall   be   informed   of   the   state   of   his   health.   The   members   of   the   Cabinet   in   charge   of   national   security   and   foreign   relations   and   the   Chief   of   Staff   of   the   Armed   Forces   of   the   Philippines,   shall   not   be   denied   access   to   the   President   during   such   illness.   •

 



The  purpose  of  access  to  the  President  in  times  of  illness  is  in  order  for  the  President  to  make  the  important   decisions  in  those  areas  of  Government.   The  people  are  guaranteed  the  right  to  know  about  the  President’s  health  and  condition.  

Section  13.  The  President,  Vice-­‐President,  the  Members  of  the  Cabinet,  and  their  deputies  or  assistants   shall   not,   unless   otherwise   provided   in   this   Constitution,   hold   any   other   office   or   employment   during   their   tenure.   They   shall   not,   during   said   tenure,   directly   or   indirectly,   practice   any   other   profession,   participate   in   any   business,   or   be   financially   interested   in   any   contract   with,   or   in   any   franchise,   or   special   privilege   granted   by   the   Government   or   any   subdivision,   agency,   or   instrumentality   thereof,   including   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   or   their   subsidiaries.   They   shall   strictly   avoid   conflict  of  interest  in  the  conduct  of  their  office.   The   spouse   and   relatives   by   consanguinity   or   affinity   within   the   fourth   civil   degree   of   the   President  shall  not,  during  his  tenure,  be  appointed  as  Members  of  the  Constitutional  Commissions,  or   the   Office   of   the   Ombudsman,   or   as   Secretaries,   Undersecretaries,   chairmen   or   heads   of   bureaus   or   offices,  including  government-­‐owned  or  controlled  corporations  and  their  subsidiaries.   • •

• • • •

The   President,   Vice-­‐President,   the   members   of   the   Cabinet   and   their   deputies   and   assistants   is   prohibited   from  holding  any  other  office  or  employment  during  their  tenure.   Exceptions:  (proscribed  from  receiving  additional  compensation  though)   o The  Vice-­‐President  however  is  allowed  to  be  appointed  to  the  Cabinet   o The  Secretary  of  Justice  is  also  allowed  to  be  appointed  as  ex  officio  member  of  the  JBC   These  officials  may  be  given  additional  functions  which  are  intimately  related  to  their  primary  office.   It   is   assumed   that   this   prohibition   was   made   to   prevent   the   enhancement   of   the   powers   of   one   who   is   already  powerful  or  busy  of  other  duties.   Prohibition  to  enter  into  a  contract  with  the  Government  is  made  in  order:  (1)  to  avoid  conflict  of  interest,   and  (2)  to  force  the  officials  to  devote  full  time  to  their  official  duties.   Second  paragraph:  Anti-­‐nepotism  prohibition    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

What  is  prohibited  is  appointment  or  reappointment  and  not  uninterrupted  continuance  in  office.   Chief   Presidential   Legal   Counsel   shall   not   occupy   incompatible   other   positions   in   order   to   deliver   independent  and  impartial  legal  advice   Funa  v.  Bautista,  G.R.  no.  184740   • •

Issue:  Was  the  designation  of  Bautista  as  OIC  of  MARINA,  concurrent  with  the  position  of  DOTC  Undersecretary  for   Maritime  Transport  violative  of  Sec.  13,  Art.  VII?   Ruling:  While  the  designation  was  in  the  nature  of  an  acting  or  temporary  capacity,  the  words  “hold  the  office”  were   employed.   Such   holding   of   office   pertains   to   both   appointment   and   designation   because   the   appointee   or   designate   performs   the   duties   and   functions   of   the   office.   The   Constitution   is   prohibiting   dual   or   multiple   offices,   as   well   as   incompatible  offices,  refers  to  the  holding  of  the  office;  and  not  to  the  nature  of  the  appointment  or  designation.   Betoy  v.  NPC,  G.R.  nos.  156556-­‐57   Issue:  Do  Secs.  11(27),  48(28)  and  52  (29)  of  the  EPIRA  are  unconstitutional  for  violating  Sec  13,  Art  VII  of  the  1987   Constitution?   Ruling:  No.  The  designation  of  members  of  Cabinet  to  form  NPB  does  not  violate  the  prohibition  contained  in  our   constitution  as  the  privatization  and  restructioning  of  the  electric  power  industry  involves  the  close  coordination  and   policy  determination  of  various  gov’t  agencies.  The  concerned  Cabinet  Secretaries  were  merely  imposed  additional   duties,   and   their   post   in   the   NPB   did   not   constitute   “any   other   office”   within   the   contemplation   of   constitutional   prohibition.   PEZA  v.  Villar,  G.R.  No.  189767   Issue:  Does  the  PEZA  have  legal  basis  in  granting  per  diems  to  the  ex  officio  members  of  its  Board?  And  if  there  is  no   legal  basis,  was  there  good  faith  in  PEZA’s  grant  and  the  ex  officio  members’  receipt  of  the  per  diems?   Ruling:   The   lack   of   legal   basis   to   grant   per   diems   to   ex-­‐officio   members   of   the   PEZA   Board   including   their   representatives,   has   already   been   settled   by   no   less   than   the   Court   en   banc   holding   that   the   amendatory   law,   RA   8748,   purposely   deleted   the   last   paragraph   of   Sec.   11   of   RA   7916   that   authorized   the   grant   of   per   diems   to   PEZA   Board  Members  as  if  it  was  in  conflict  with  the  proscription  laid  down  in  the  1987  Constitution.  

Section   14.   Appointments   extended   by   an   Acting   President   shall   remain   effective,   unless   revoked   by   the   elected  President  within  ninety  days  from  his  assumption  or  re-­‐assumption  of  office.   Section   15.   Two   months   immediately   before   the   next   Presidential   elections   and   up   to   the   end   of   his   term,  a  President  or  Acting  President  shall  not  make  appointments,  except  temporary  appointments  to   executive  positions  when  continued  vacancies  therein  will  prejudice  service  or  endanger  public  safety.   •





Nature   of   the   appointing   power.   Whatever   power   is   not   properly   legislative   or   judicial   must   be   attributed   to   the  executive  (Government  v.  Springer).  Appointment  to  office  is  intrinsically  an  executive  act…  “Indeed,  the   filling  up  of  an  office  created  by  law  is  the  implementation  or  execution  of  that  law  (Conception  v.  Paredes).   The   power   to   appoint   is   Executive   function.   The   legislature   may   create   an   office   and   prescribe   the   qualifications   of   the   person   who   may   hold   the   office,   but   it   may   neither   specify   the   person   who   shall   be   appointed  to  such  office  nor  actually  appoint  him.   The  appointing  power  is  the  exclusive  prerogative  of  the  President.    No  limitations  may  be  imposed  by  the   Congress   except   those   resulting   from   the   need   of   securing   the   concurrence   of   the   Commission   on   Appointments  and  from  the  exercise  of  the  limited  legislative  power  to  prescribe  the  qualifications  to  a  given   appointive  office.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •

Appointing  authority  in  essence  is  the  power  to  choose  who  among  the  various  qualified  choices  is  the  best   suited.   Prerogative  of  the  President  to  appoint  the  members  of  the  Supreme  Court.  However,  in  Roxas  v.  Lopez,  it   upheld   the   authority   of   Congress   to   create   a   Presidential   Electoral   Tribunal   consisting   of   the   Chief   Justice   and  the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court.  The  SC  held  that  the  act  did  not  create  a  new  office  nor  specify  who   should  hold  office  but  merely  imposed  additional  duties  and  powers  upon  the  SC.  

Was   the   nomination   and   appointment   of   CJ   Corona   covered   under   the   ban   set   forth   in   Section   15,   Article   VII?   (De   Castro   v.   JBC)   –   No.   Prohibitions   made   explicit   in   section   5,   Art.   VII   reveals   that   the   prohibition   against   the   President   or  Acting  President  making  appointments  within  2  months  before  the  next  Presidential  elections  and  up  to  the  end   of  the  President’s  or  Acting  President’s  term  does  not  refer  to  the  members  of  the  Supreme  Court.  

Section   16.   The   President   shall   nominate   and,   with   the   consent   of   the   Commission   on   Appointments,   appoint   the   heads   of   the   executive   department,   ambassadors,   other   public   ministers   and   consuls,   or   officers   of   the   armed   forces   from   rank   of   colonel   or   naval   captain,   and   other   officers   whose   appointments   are   vested   in   him   in   this   Constitution.   He   shall   also   appoint   all   other   officers   of   the   Government  whose  appointments  are  not  otherwise  provided  for  by  law,  and  those  whom  he  may  be   authorized   by   law   to   appoint.   The   Congress   may,   by   law   vest   the   appointment   of   other   officers   lower   in   rank   in   the   President   alone,   in   the   courts,   or   in   the   heads   of   departments,   agencies,   commissions,   or   boards.     The   President   shall   have   the   power   to   make   appointments   during   the   recess   of   the   Congress,   whether  voluntary  or  compulsory,  but  such  appointments  shall  be  effective  only  until  disapproval  by  the   Commission  on  Appointments  or  until  the  next  adjournment  of  the  Congress.   • • • • • •

• •



Sec.  14,  15,  16  speak  of  four  different  kinds  of  Presidential  Appointments.   Sec.  14.  Deals  with  appointments      made  by  acting  President.   Sec.   15   deals   with   appointments   made   by   President   within   two   months   before   the   next   presidential   elections  and  up  to  the  end  of  his  term.   Section   16   deals   with   regular   presidential   appointments,   with   or   without   confirmation   by   the   Commission  on  Appointments,  and  with  “recess”  or  “ad-­‐interim  appointments.   COA  restored  by  the  1987  Constitution  as  a  check  on  the  President’s  appointing  authority   Only   those   coming   under   the   first   sentence   of   Section   16   need   the   consent   of   the   Commission   on   Appointments.   These   are:   “The   heads   of   the   executive   departments,   ambassadors,   other   public   ministers  and  consuls,  or  officers  of  armed  forces  from  the  rank  of  colonel  or  naval  captain,  and  other   officers  whose  appointments  are  vested  in  him  in  this  Constitution.   Three  step  appointment  rule:  nomination,  consent,  and  appointment.   It  should  be  noted  that  not  every  officer  of  Cabinet  rank  come  under  the  three  step  appointment  rule.   Only   the   heads   of   executive   departments   do.   Appointment   of   VP   if   appointed   head   of   an   executive   dep’t,  his  appointment  does  not  need  Commission  confirmation.   “Others  whose  appointments  are  vested  in  this  Constitution”:  Chairmen  and  Commissioners  of  the  Civil   Service   Commission,   COMELEC,   COA,   and   the   regular   members   of   the   Judicial   and   Bar   Council   (the   representative   of   the   IBP,   Professor   of   Law,   a   retired   member   of   the   SC,   and   a   representative   of   the   private  sector.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •



• • • • • • •

May  the  Congress  pass  a  law  requiring    that  other  appointments  should  pass  through  the  Commission  on   Appointments?  –  Congress  may  not  expand  the  list   Recess  refers  to  the  period  when  Congress  is  not  in  session  either  because  it  has  voluntarily  declared  a   recess  under  Article  VI  or  because  it  is  not  allowed  BY  THE  Constitution  to  be  in  session  (30  day  period   between  sessions  during  which  Congress  may  not  meet  that  is  30  days  before  the  fourth  Monday  of  July   or  the  period  between  the  beginning  of  the  new  term  and  the  beginning  of  a  regular  session).  Voluntary   recess   starts   the   moment   one   of   the   two   houses   adjourns   because   Congress   cannot   be   considered   in   session  when  only  one  of  them  is  meeting.   For   a   recess   or   ad-­‐interim   appointments   to   be   effective,   it   does   not   have   to   wait   for   action   by   the   Commission   on   Appointments.   It   becomes   effective   once   it   is   delivered   to   and   accepted   by   the   appointee.     If  they  are  the  type  which  require  Commission  concurrence,  they  are  “effective  only  until  disapproval  by   the  Commission  on  Appointments  or  until  the  next  adjournment  of  the  Congress.”   An  ad-­‐interim  appointment  is  not  a  temporary  appointment.  It  is  permanent.   When   the   Congress   is   in   session,   the   President   nominates   ,   and   only   upon   the   consent   of   the   Commission  on  Appointments  may  the  person  thus  named  assume  office.   Not  so  with  an  ad-­‐interim  appointments  because  it  takes  effect  at  once.  Effective  until  disapproval  by   the  Commission  on  Appointments  or  until  the  next  adjournment  of  the  Congress.     An  ad-­‐interim  appointment  cannot  be  withdrawn  or  revoked  at  the  President’s  pleasure.     When  a  vacancy  occurs  in  the  office  of  a  Department  Secretary  while  Congress  is  in  session,  a  temporary   appointment  may  be  made  by  the  President  to  fill  the  vacant  position.     Two  entities  which  can  terminate  a  recess  appointment:  the  Commission  on  Appointments,  through  its   disapproval.    

  Assigned  Cases   Can  the  President  appoint  OICs  to  govern  the  ARMM  during  the  pre-­‐synchronization  period  pursuant  to  Sections   3,4  and  5  of  RA  No.  10153?  (Kida  v.  Senate)-­‐  Yes.  The  third  class  of  appointments  the  President  is  allowed  to  make   includes,  “those  whom  the  President  may  be  authorized  by  law  to  appoint,”  is  where  his  power  to  appoint  OICs  of   interim   officials   in   the   ARMM.   These   appointments   are   just   part   of   the   interim   process   in   order   to   synchronize   ARMM  elections  with  that  of  the  National  elections.  

Section  17.  The  President  shall  have  control  of  all  the  executive  departments,  bureaus,  and  offices.  He   shall  ensure  that  the  laws  be  faithfully  executed.   • • • • •

The   president   is   given   control   “of   all   the   executive   departments,   bureaus,   and   offices.”   His   control   is   not  just  over  the  department  heads  but  also  over  all  subordinate  officers  of  the  department.     The  express  grant  of  the  2power  of  control  to  the  President  justifies  an  executive  action  to  carry  out   the  reorganization  of  an  executive  officer  under  a  broad  authority  of  law.     Reorganization  can  involve  the  reduction  of  personnel,  consolidation  of  offices,  or  even  abolition  of   positions  by  reason  of  economy  or  redundancy  of  functions.     The  authority  of  the  President  to  reorganize  the  executive  branch,  which  may  include  such  abolition,   is  permissible  under  present  laws.   Doctrine  of  Qualified  Political  Agency  recognizes  that  the  Constitution  has  established  a  single  and   not  a  plural  executive,  postulates  that  “all  executive  and  administrative  organizations  are  adjuncts  of  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• • •

the  Executive  Department,  the  heads  of  the  various  executive  departments  are  assistants  and  agents   of   the   Chief   Executive,   and,   except     in   cases   where   the   Chief   Executive   is   required   by   the   Constitution  or  law  to  act  in  person  of  the  exigencies    of  the  situation  demand  that  he  act  personally.   A  decision  of  a  department  secretary,  when  not  reprobated  by  the  Executive,  is  the  last  step  in  the   process  of  “exhausting  administrative  remedies.”     An   Executive   Secretary,   or   even   as   Assistant   Executive   Secretary,   when   acting   “by   authority   of   the   President,”  may  reverse  the  decision  of  a  department  head.   The  President  cannot  refuse  to  carry  out  a  law  for  the  simple  reason  that  in  his  judgment  it  will  not   be  beneficial  to  the  people.    

Did   Memo   Circular   No.58   diminish   the   power   of   control   of   the   President   and   bestowed   upon   the   upon   the   Secretary   of   Justice,   a   subordinate   officer,   unfettered   power?   (Angeles   v.   Gaite)-­‐   No.   It   does   not   diminish   the   power   of   the   President   of   the   President.   The   President’s   act   of   delegating   authority   to   the   Secretary   of   Justice   by   virtue  of  said  memorandum  Circular  is  well  within  the  purview  of  the  doctrine  of  qualified  political  agency,  long  been   established  in  our  jurisdiction.     Does  control  power  allow  the  President  to  create  the  Truth  Commission?  (Biraogo  v.  Phil.  Truth  Com.)  –Yes.  The   President’s   power   to   conduct   investigations   to   aid   him   in   ensuring   the   faithful   execution   of   laws   in   this   cse,   fundamental  laws  on  public  accountability  and  transparency  and  creating  bodies  to  execute  this  power,  is  inherent  in   the  President’s  powers  as  the  Chief  Executive  even  if  it’s  not  explicitly  mentioned.   Did  the  President  comply  with  the  “faithful  execution  clause”  of  the  Constitution  when  she  conferred  the  Order  of   National   Artists   to   those   who   were   not   recommended   by   the   NCCA   and   the   CCP   Boards?   (National   Artists   v.   Exec.   Sec.)-­‐  The  Presidents  discretion  in  the  conferment  of  the  order  of  National  Artist  should  be  exercised  in  accordance   with   the   duty   to   faithfully   execute   the   relevant   laws.   The   faithful   execution   clause   is   best   construed   as   an   obligation   imposed  on  the  President  and  not  a  separate  grant  of  power.  

Section  18.  The  President  shall  be  the  Commander-­‐in-­‐Chief  of  all  the  armed  forces  of  the  Philippines  and   whenever   it   becomes   necessary,   he   may   call   out   such   armed   forces   to   prevent   or   suppress   lawless   violence,   invasion   or   rebellion   .   In   case   of   invasion   or   rebellion,   when   the   public   safety   requires   it,   he   may,  for  a  period  not  exceeding  sixty  days,  suspend  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  or  place   the  Philippines  or  any  part  thereof  under  martial  law.  Within  forty-­‐eight  hours  from  the  proclamation  of   martial  law  or  the  suspension  of  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  the  President  shall  submit  a   report   in   person   or   in   writing   to   the   Congress.   The   Congress,   voting   jointly,   by   a   vote   of   at   least   a   majority  of  all  its  members  in  regular  or  special  session,  may  revoke  such  proclamation  or  suspension,   which   revocation   shall   not   be   set   aside   by   the   President.   Upon   the   initiative   of   the   President,   the   Congress   may,   in   the   same   manner,   extend   such   proclamation   or   suspension   for   a   period   to   be   determined  by  the  Congress,  if  the  invasion  or  rebellion  shall  persist  and  public  safety  requires  it.     The   Congress,   if   not   in   session,   shall   within   twenty-­‐four   hours   following   such   proclamation   or   suspension,  convene  in  accordance  with  its  rules  without  need  of  a  call.     The   Supreme   Court   may   review,   in   an   appropriate   proceeding   filed   by   any   citizen,   the   sufficiency   of  the  factual  basis  of  the  proclamation  of  martial  law  or  the  suspension  of  the  privilege  of  the  writ  or   the  extension  thereof,  and  must  promulgate  its  decision  thereon  within  thirty  days  from  its  filing.     A   state   of   martial   law   does   not   suspend   the   operation   of   the   Constitution,   nor   supplant   the   functioning  of  the  civil  courts  or  legislative  assemblies,  nor  authorize  the  conferment  of  jurisdiction  on  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

military   courts   and   agencies   over   civilians   where   civil   courts   are   able   to   function,   nor   automatically   suspend  the  privilege  of  the  writ.     The   suspension   of   the   writ   shall   apply   only   to   persons   judicially   charged   for   rebellion   or   offenses   inherent  in  or  directly  connected  with  invasion.     During  the  suspension  of  the  privilege  of  the  writ,  any  person  thus  arrested  or  detained  shall  be   judicially  charged  within  three  days,  otherwise  he  shall  be  released.   • • • • • •

• • • • • •



The  President  is  not  a  member  of  the  Armed  Forces  but  remains  a  civilian.     The  President’s  duties  as  Commander  –in-­‐Chief  represent  only  a  part  of  the  organic  duties  impose  upon  him.   All  his  other  functions  are  clearly  in  nature.     President  does  not  enlist  in,  nor  is  he  inducted  or  drafted  into  the  forces;  he  is  not  subject  to  court  martial  or   other  military  discipline.     Civilian  authority,  is  at  all  times,  supreme  over  the  military.   As  the  commander-­‐in-­‐chief  the  President  has  control  and  direction  of  the  conduct  of  war,  whether  the  war   be  declared  or  undeclared.   Call  out  powers”  to  prevent  or  suppress  lawless  violence,  invasion  or  rebellion.  His  action  is  not  subject  to   judicial  review.  His  decision  is  conclusive  upon  all  other  persons,  it  is  conclusive  on  the  courts;  it  is  conclusive   on  the  military.   Two  other  powers  of  the  President:  (1)  the  power  to  suspend  the  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  (2)   the  power  to  impose  matial  law.     Martial  law  is  essentially  police  power.  Public  safety  is  the  concern  of  police  power.     Martial  law  depend  on:  (1)  the  existence  of  invasion  or  rebellion,  and  (2)  the  requirements  of  public  safety.   The   1987   Constitution   has   narrowed   the   grounds   to   “(actual)   invasion   or   rebellion,   when   public   safety     requires  it.”   The  initial  suspension  of  the  privilege  and  the  imposition  of  martial  law  is  still  for  the  President  to  decide  but   they  can  only  be  for  a  period  not  exceeding  sixty  days.   The   Supreme   Court   may   review   in   an   appropriate   proceeding   filed   by   any   citizen,   the   sufficiency   of   the   factual   basis   of   the   proclamation   of   martial   law   or   the   suspension   of   the   privilege   of   the   writ   or   the   extension  thereof,  and  must  promulgate  its  decision  thereon  within  thirty  days  from  its  filing.   The   Congress   has   the   power   to   determine   the   duration   of   the   suspension   of   the   privilege   and   of   the   effectivity  of  Martial  Law.        

Were   there   factual   bases   for   the   issuance   of   Presidential   Proclamation   No.   1946?   (Ampatuan   v.   Puno)-­‐   Yes.   Petitoners  failed  to  show  the  lack  of  factual  basis  for  the  President’s  exercise  of  “calling  out”  powers.  They  simply   alleged   that   the   takeover   of   the   entire   ARMM   had   no   factual   bases   of   the   President’s   decision:   The   Ampatuan   &   Magundadatu  clan  are  prominent  families  engaged  in  the  political  control  of  Maguindanao,  who  have  an  arsenal  of   armed  followers.   Is   the   power   to   declare   martial   law   a   shared   power   of   the   President   with   Congress?   (Fortun   v.   Arroyo)-­‐   The   President  shares  such  power  with  Congress.  They  act  in  tandem  in  exercising  the  power  to  proclaim  martial  law  or   suspend   the   privilege   of   the   Writ   Habeas   Corpus.   They   exercise   the   power   not   only   sequentially   but   in   a   sense   jointly.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Must  the  Supreme  Court  allow  Congress  to  exercise  its  own  review  powers  on  the  martial  law  declaration  first,   before   exercising   its   own   review   powers   ?   (Fortun   v.   Arroyo)-­‐It   is   implicit   that   the   SC   must   allow   defaults   in   its   express  duty  to  defend  the  Constitution  through  such  review  should  the  SC  step  in  as  its  final  rampant.     Does   the   lapse   of   the   30-­‐day   period   operate   to   divest   the   Supreme   Court   of   its   jurisdiction   over   the   case?   (Fortun   v.  Arroyo)-­‐    The  SC  may  review  in  an  appropriate  proceeding  filed  by  any  citizen,  the  sufficiency  of  the  factual  basis   of  proclamation  or  suspension  or  the  extension  thereof,  and  must  promulgate  its  decision  thereon    within  30  days   from  its  filing.     Does  the  governor  have  the  power  to  declare  a  state  of  emergency,  and  exercise  the  powers  enumerated  under   proclamation   1-­‐09?   (Kulayan   v.   Tan)-­‐   No.   Governor   Tan   has   abrogated   unto   himself   powers   exceeding   even   the   Martial  Law  powers  of  the  President.  It  is  clear  that  the  Constitution  does  not  authorize  the  organization  of  private   armed  groups  similar  to  the  CEI  convened  by  Governor  Tan.  

Section   19.   Except   in   cases   of   impeachment,   or   as   otherwise   provided   in   this   Constitution,   the   President   may   grant   reprieves,   commutations,   and   pardons,   and   remit   fines   and   forfeitures,   after   conviction   by   final  judgement.     He   shall   also   have   the   power   to   grant   amnesty   with   the   concurrence   of   a   majority   of   all   the   Members  of  the  Congress.   • • •

• • • • • • •

• • •

The   Presidential   power   of   executive   clemency   is   a   tacit   admission   that   human   institutions   are   imperfect   and   that  there  are  infirmities  in  the  administration  of  justice.   The   duty   of   the   judge   is   to   impose   the   proper   penalty,   however   harsh   it   may   be,   but   he   is   enjoined   to   recommend  to  the  President  the  exercise  of  executive  clemency.   Limitations  on  the  power  of  executive  clemency:  (1)  it  cannot  be  exercised  over  cases  of  impeachment;  (2)   reprieves,   commutations,   and   pardons,   and   remission   of   fines   and   forfeitures   can   be   given   only   “after   conviction  by  final  judgement,”  and  (3)  a  grant  of  amnesty  must  be  with  the  concurrence  of  “a  majority  of  all   the  members  of  Congress   No   pardon,   amnesty,   parole,   or   suspension   of   sentence   for   violation   of   elections   laws,   rules,   and   regulations   shall  be  granted  by  the  President  without  the  favourable  recommendation  of  the  COMELEC.   A  Pardon  is  an  act  of  grace,  no  legal  power  can  compel  the  executive  to  give  it.     When  a  conditional  pardon  is  extended  and  accepted  and  the  condition  is  that  the  recipient  of  the  pardon   should  not  violate  any  of  the  penal  laws,  the  President  determines  whether  penal  laws  have  been  violated.   Amnesty  may  be  given  only  with  the  concurrence  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members  of  Congress.     Pardon   is   a   private   executive   act   whereas   amnesty   is   a   public   executive   proclamation   which   must   be   concurred  in  by  the  legislature.   Amnesty   may   thus   be   defined   as   the   grant   of   general   pardon   to   a   class   of   political   offenders   either   after   conviction  or  even  before  the  charges  filed.     Tax  Amnesty  is  a  “general  pardon  or  intentional  overlooking  of  its  authority  to  impose  penalties  on  person   otherwise  guilty  of  evasion  or  violation  of  revenue  or  tax  law,  partakes  of   an  absolute  forgiveness  or  waiver   by  the  Government  of  its  right  to  collect  what  otherwise  would  be  due  it.   Aside   from   Pardon   and   Amnesty,   the   President   may   also   grant   reprieves,   commutations,   and   remission   of   fines  and  forfeitures.   Reprieve  postpones  the  execution  of  an  offense  to  a  day  certain.   Commutation   is   a   remission   of   a   part   of   the   punishment;   a   substitution   of   a   less   penalty   for   the   one   originally  imposed.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

In  view  of  subsequent  amnesty  granted  in  favor  of  the  members  of  MAGDALO,  should  the  events  that  transpired   during   the   Oakwood   incident   be   still   interpreted   as   acts   of   violence   in   the   context   of   the   disqualifications   from   party   registration?   (Magdalo   v.   COMELEC)-­‐   No.   Oakwood   was   attended   with   violence.   COMELEC   did   not   commit   grave   abuse   of   discretion   by   denying   MAGDALO’s   petition.   However,   the   events   that   transpired   in   the   Oakwood   incident  can  no  longer  be  interpreted  as  acts  of  violence  in  the  context  of  the  disqualification  from  party  registration.  

Section   20.   The   President   may   contract   or   guarantee   foreign   loans   on   behalf   of   the   Republic   of   the   Philippines  with  the  prior  concurrence  of  the  Monetary  Board,  and  subject  to  such  limitations  as  may  be   provided   by   law.   The   Monetary   Board   shall,   within   thirty   days   from   the   end   of   every   quarter   of   the   calendar  year,  submit  to  the  Congress  a  complete  report  of  its  decisions  on  applications  for  loans  to  be   contracted  or  guaranteed  by  the  government  of  government-­‐owned  and  controlled  corporations  which   would  have  the  effect  of  increasing  the  foreign  debt,  and  containing  other  matters  as  may  be  provided   by  law.   • •

President   can   no   longer   contract   or   guarantee   foreign   loans   without   the   concurrence   of   the   Monetary   Board.     Termination   of   the   life   of   a   treaty   may   be   arrived   at   by   formal   agreement   of   the   parties.   The   treaty   itself   might  contain  the  manner  of  terminating  its  life.    

Is  the  RP-­‐US  Non-­‐Surrender  Agreement  valid  in  form  and  substance?  (Bayan  Muna  v.  Romulo)-­‐  No.  The  petitioner’s   contention,  perhaps  unaware  of  certain  well-­‐recognized  international  doctrines,  practices,  and  jargons  is  invalid.   Is   the   RP-­‐US   NON-­‐Surrender   Agreement   binding   without   Senate   Concurrence?   (Bayan-­‐Muna     v.   Romulo)-­‐Yes.   International   agreements   may   be   in   the   form   of   a)   treaties   that   require   legislative   concurrence   after   executive   ratification;   or   b)   executive   agreements   that   are   similar   to   treaties,   except   that   they   do   not   require   legislative   concurrence  and  are  usually  less  formal  and  deal  with  a  narrower  range  of  subject  matters  than  treaties.    

Section   22.   The   President   shall   submit   to   the   Congress   within   thirty   days   from   the   opening   of   every   regular  session,  as  the  basis  of  the  general  appropriations  bill,  a  budget  of  receipts  and  expenditures  and   sources  of  financing,  including  receipts  from  existing  and  proposed  revenue  measures.   • •

The  budget  is  prepared  by  the  President  and  submitted  to  Congress  within  thirty  days  from  the  opening  of   every  regular  session.   Complete   budgetary   process   consists   of   four   major   phases:     1.   Budgetary   preparation   2.   Legislative   authorization  3.  Budget  Executive  4.  Budget  Accountability.  

In   allowing   the   direct   allocation   and   release   of   PDAF   funds   to   the   Members   of   Congress   based   on   their   own   list   of   proposed  projects,  did  the  PDAF  provision  under  the  GAA  of  2004  violate  the  budgetary  power  of  the  President?   (LAMP   v.   Sec.   of   Budget   and   Management)-­‐   No.   While   the   budgetary   process   commence   from   the   proposal   submitted  by  the  President  to  Congress,  it  is  the  latter  which  concludes  the  exercise  by  crafting  an  appropriations  act   it  may  deem  beneficial  to  the  nation,  based  on  its  own  judgment,  wisdom,  and  purposes.   Is  the  2013  PDAF  Article  as  well  as  all  other  provisions  of  law  which  similarly  allow  legislators  to  wield  any  form  of   post-­‐enactment  authority  in  the  implementation  or  enforcement  of  the  budget,  valid  and  constitutional?  (Belgica   v.  Alcantara)-­‐  The  enforcement  of  the  National  budget,  as  contained  in  the  GAA,  is  a  function  both  Constitutionally   assigned   and   properly   entrusted   to   the   Executive   branch   of   Government.   Congress   comes   in   the   picture   when   it   deliberates  or  acts  on  the  budget  proposals  of  the  President.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  23.  The  President  shall  address  the  Congress  at  the  opening  of  its  regular  session.  He  may  also   appear  before  it  at  any  other  time.    

ARTICLE  VIII  THE  JUDICIAL  DEPARTMENT    

Section  1.  The  judicial  power  shall  be  vested  in  one  Supreme  Court  and  in  such  lower  courts  as  may  be   established  by  law.   Judicial  power  includes  the  duty  of  the  courts  of  justice  to  settle  actual  controversies  involving  rights   which  are  legally  demandable  and  enforceable,  and  to  determine  whether  or  not  there  has  been  grave   abuse   of   discretion   amounting   to   lack   or   excess   of   jurisdiction   on   the   part   of   any   branch   or   instrumentality  of  the  Government.     •

• • • • • •









Judicial  power  is  the  power  to  apply  the  laws  to  contest  or  dispute  concerning  legally  recognized  rights  or   duties  between  the  state  and  the  persons,  or  between  individual  litigants  in  cases  properly  brought  before   the  judicial  tribunals,  which  includes  the  power  to  ascertain  what  are  valid  and  binding  laws  of  the  state,  and   to  interpret  and  construe  them,  and  to  render  authoritative  judgments.     The  Judiciary  recognizes  the  doctrine  of  separation  of  powers.   The  policy  is  a  harmonious  blend  of  courtesy  and  caution.   Resolutions   of   the   Supreme   Court   are   beyond   the   investigatory   powers   of   the   other   departments   of   the   government  because  of  the  separation  of  powers.   When  the  judiciary  mediates  to  allocate  constitutional  boundaries,  it  does  not  assert  any  superiority  over  the   other  departments;  it  only  asserts  the  solemn  and  sacred  obligation  assigned  to  it  by  the  constitution.   The   Constitution,   being   the   highest   expression   of   the   sovereign   will   of   the   Filipino   people,   must   prevail   over   any  issuance  of  the  government  that  contravenes  its  mandates.   The   Constitution   did   not   intend   to   leave   the   matter   of   impeachment   to   the   sole   discretion   of   Congress.   It   provided   for   certain   well-­‐defined   limits,   or   “judicially   discoverable   standards”   for   determining   the   validity   of   the  exercise  of  such  discretion,  through  the  power  of  judicial  review.   The  Court,  in  exercising  its  power  of  judicial  review,  is  not  imposing  its  own  will  upon  a  co-­‐equal  body  but   rather  simply  making  sure  that  any  act  of  government  is  done  in  consonance  with  the  authorities  and  rights   allocated  to  it  by  the  Constitution.   Grave  abuse  of  discretion  exists  when  there  is  an  evasion  of  a  positive  duty  or  a  virtual  refusal  to  perform  a   duty  enjoined  by  law  or  to  act  in  contemplation  of  law  as  when  the  judgment  rendered  is  not  based  on  law   and  evidence  but  on  caprice,  whim,  and  despotism.  Not  every  error  in  the  proceedings,  or  every  erroneous   conclusion  of  law  or  fact,  constitutes  grave  abuse  of  discretion.   The  Constitution  impresses  upon  the  Court  to  respect  the  acts  performed  by  a  co-­‐equal  branch  done  within   its  sphere  of  competence  and  authority,  but  at  the  same  time,  allows  it  to  cross  the  line  of  separation  –  but   only   at   a   very   limited   and   specific   point   –   to   determine   whether   the   acts   of   the   executive   and   the   legislative   branches  are  null  because  they  were  undertaken  with  grave  abuse  of  discretion.   Primordial  duty  of  the  Court  is  merely  to  apply  the  law  in  such  a  way  that  it  shall  not  usurp  legislative  powers   by   judicial   legislation   and   that   in   the   course   of   such   application   or   construction,   it   should   not   make   or   supervise   legislation,   or   under   the   guise   of   interpretation,   modify,   revise,   amend,   distort,   remodel,   or   rewrite  the  law,  or  give  the  law  a  construction  which  is  repugnant  to  its  terms.  The  Court  should  shy  away   from  encroaching  upon  the  primary  function  of  a  co-­‐equal  branch  of  the  Government;  otherwise,  this  would   lead  to  an  inexcusable  breach  of  the  doctrine  of  separation.  

  Mendoza  vs.  People  (2011)   Issue:  Without  violating  the  separation  of  powers,  can  the  Supreme  Court  recommend  to  the  President,  the  grant  of   executive  clemency  to  a  convict?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:  Yes.  The  court  has  discretion  to  recommend  to  the  President  actions  it  deems  appropriate  but  are  beyond  its   power  when  it  considers  the  penalty  imposed  as  excessive.     Garcia  vs.  Drilon,  Inc.  (2013)   Issue:   Is   the   authority   of   the   barangay   officials   to   issue   barangay   protection   orders   (BPO)   an   undue   delegation   of   judicial  power?   Ruling:  No.  This  power  is  basically  executive  in  nature.    

Section   2.   The   Congress   shall   have   the   power   to   define,   prescribe,   and   apportion   the   jurisdiction   of   various   courts   but   may   not   deprive   the   Supreme   Court   of   its   jurisdiction   over   cases   enumerated   in   Section  5  thereof.     No  law  shall  be  passed  reorganizing  the  Judiciary  when  it  undermines  the  security  of  tenure  of  its   Members.     • Unless  there  is  an  applicable  law,  courts  are  without  power  to  settle  controversies.     • Courts,  other  than  the  Supreme  Court  established,  are  created  by  Congress.   • “Jurisdiction   is   the   authority   of   a   court   to   exercise   judicial   power   in   a   specific   case,   and   is,   of   course,   a   • • •

•  

prerequisite  of  judicial  power,  which  is  the  totality  of  powers  a  court  exercises  when  it  assumes  jurisdiction   and  hears  and  decides  a  case.”   “No   law   shall   be   passed   increasing   the   appellate   jurisdiction   of   the   Supreme   Court   as   provided   in   this   Constitution  without  its  advice  and  concurrence.”   There  can  only  be  “one  Supreme  Court”;  all  others  are  “lower  courts”.   “There  shall  be  an  independent  Presidential  Tribunal…which  shall  be  the  sole  judge  of  all  contests  relating  to   the   elections,   returns,   and   qualifications   of   the   president-­‐elect   and   the   vice-­‐president-­‐elect   of   the   Philippines”   and   the   Presidential   Electoral   Tribunal   “shall   be   composed   of   the   Chief   Justice   and   other   ten   Members  of  the  Supreme  Court.”   The  authority  to  create  courts  also  includes  the  authority  to  abolish  courts.  Courts,  however,  may  not  use   the  power  to  abolish  courts  as  a  subterfuge  for  removing  unwanted  judges.”  

People  vs.  Judge  Azarraga  (2011)   Issue:   Did   the   Supreme   Court   violation   Sec.   90   of   RA   9165   when   it   issued   A.M.   03-­‐8-­‐02-­‐SC,   particularly   Chap.   V,   Sec.   9,   which   prescribes   the   manner   in   which   the   executive   judge   reassigns   cases   in   instances   if   inhibition   or   disqualification  of  judges  sitting  in  special  courts?   Ruling:  No.  Under  RA  9165,  Congress  empowered  this  Court  with  full  discretion  to  designate  special  courts  to  hear,   try,   and   decide   drug   cases.   It   was   precisely   in   the   exercise   of   this   discretionary   power   that   the   powers   of   the   executive  judge  were  included  in  Chap.  V,  Sec.  9  of  A.M.  No.  03-­‐8-­‐02-­‐SC  vis-­‐à-­‐vis  Sec.5(5)  of  Article  VIII  of  the  1987   Constitution.  

  Section  3.  The  Judiciary  shall  enjoy  fiscal  autonomy.  Appropriations  for  the  Judiciary  may  not  be  reduced   by   the   legislature   below   the   amount   appropriated   for   the   previous   year   and,   after   approval,   shall   be   automatically  and  regularly  released.     • •

The  basic  aim  of  granting    fiscal  autonomy  to  the  judiciary  is  to  assure  its  independence.   The   judiciary   “should   not   be   exempt   from   the   budgetary   process   of   submitting   and   justifying   its   budget,   except  that  upon  approval,  it  should  be  automatically  and  regularly  released.”  

 

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   4.  (1)   The   Supreme   Court   shall   be   composed   of   a   Chief   Justice   and   fourteen   Associate   Justices.   It   may  sit  en  banc  or  in  its  discretion,  in  divisions  of  three,  five,  or  seven  Members.  Any  vacancy  shall  be   filled  within  ninety  days  from  the  occurrence  thereof.   (2)   All   cases   involving   the   constitutionality   of   a   treaty,   international   or   executive   agreement,   or   law,   which  shall  be  heard  by  the  Supreme  Court  en  banc,  and  all  other  cases  which  under  the  Rules  of  Court   are   required   to   be   heard   en   banc,   including   those   involving   the   constitutionality,   application,   or   operation  of  presidential  decrees,  proclamations,  orders,  instructions,  ordinances,  and  other  regulations,   shall   be   decided   with   the   concurrence   of   a   majority   of   the   Members   who   actually   took   part   in   the   deliberations  on  the  issues  in  the  case  and  voted  thereon.   (3)  Cases  or  matters  heard  by  a  division  shall  be  decided  or  resolved  with  the  concurrence  of  a  majority   of  the  Members  who  actually  took  part  in  the  deliberations  on  the  issues  in  the  case  and  voted  thereon,   and  in  no  case,  without  the  concurrence  of  at  least  three  of  such  Members.  When  the  required  number   is   not   obtained,   the   case   shall   be   decided   en   banc:   Provided,   that   no   doctrine   or   principle   of   law   laid   down  by  the  court  in  a  decision  rendered  en  banc  or  in  division  may  be  modified  or  reversed  except  by   the  court  sitting  en  banc.     • Cases  are  “decided”  while  matters,  which  include  motions,  are  “resolved”.     Sec.  2,  Adm.  Matter  10-­‐4-­‐20-­‐SC  :  Internal  Rules  of  the  Supreme  Court  En  Banc,  on  Tie  Voting   • Where   the   Court   en   banc   is   equally   divided   in   opinion   or   the   necessary   majority   vote   cannot   be   had,   the   Court  shall  deliberate  on  it  anew.   • If   after   such   deliberation   still   no   decision   is   reached,   the   Court   shall,   in   an   original   action   filed   with   it   (in  civil   cases),  dismiss  the  case;  in  appealed  cases,  it  shall  affirm  the  judgment  or  order  appealed  from.   • In  criminal  cases,  if  after  such  deliberation  still  no  decision  is  reached,  the  Court  shall  reverse  the  judgment   of  conviction  of  the  lower  court  and  acquit  the  accused.   • In   administrative   cases,   if   after   such   deliberation   still   no   decision   is   reached,   the   Court   shall   dismiss   the   administrative  case,  unless  a  majority  vote  decides  to  impose  a  lesser  penalty.   • In   cases   for   annulment   of   any   treaty,   international   or   executive   agreement,   law,   presidential   decree,   proclamation,   order,   instruction,   ordinance,   or   regulation   cannot   be   had,   if   after   such   deliberation   still   no   decision  is  reached,  the  Court  shall  deny  the  challenge  to  the  constitutionality  of  the  act.   • In  all  maters  incidental  to  the  main  action  where  the  Court  en  banc  is  equally  divided  in  opinion,  the  relief   sought   shall   be   denied.   Motions   for   Reconsideration   are   included   in   “all   matters   incidental   to   the   main   action.”     Sec.  3,  Adm.  Matter  10-­‐4-­‐20-­‐SC:  Internal  Rules  of  the  Supreme  Court  En  Banc,  on  MR.   • The  Court  shall  not  entertain  a  second  motion  for  reconsideration,  and  any  exception  to  this  rule  can  only  be   granted  in  the  higher  interest  of  justice  by  the  Court  en  banc  upon  a  vote  of  at  least  two-­‐thirds  of  its  actual   membership.   • There   is   reconsideration   “in   the   higher   interest   of   justice”   when   the   assailed   decision   is   not   only   legally   erroneous,  but  is  likewise  patently  unjust  and  potentially  capable  of  causing  unwarranted  and  irremediable   injury  or  damage  to  the  parties.   • A   second   motion   for   reconsideration   can   only   be   entertained   before   the   ruling   sought   to   be   reconsidered   becomes  final  by  operation  of  law  or  by  the  Court’s  declaration.   • In  the  Division,  a  vote  of  three  Members  shall  be  required  to  elevate  a  second  motion  for  reconsideration  to   the  Court  En  Banc.     League  of  Cities  vs.  Comelec  (2009,  2010)   Issue:   Is   the   required   vote   set   forth   in   Sec.   4(2),   Art.   VIII   limited   only   to   the   initial   vote   on   the   petition   or   also   to   the   subsequent  voting  on  the  Motion  for  Reconsideration  (MR)?  What  is  the  effect  of  a  tie-­‐vote  on  the  MR?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:  Required  majority  vote  is  needed  on  both  initial  vote  and  to  the  subsequent  voting  on  the  MR.      

Section  5.  The  Supreme  Court  shall  have  the  following  powers:   (1)   Exercise   original   jurisdiction   over   cases   affecting   ambassadors,   other   public   ministers   and   consuls,   and  over  petitions  for  certiorari,  prohibition,  mandamus,  quo  warranto,  and  habeas  corpus.   (2)  Review,  revised,  reverse,  modify,  or  affirm  on  appeal  or  certiorari  as  the  law  or  the  Rules  of  Court   may  provide,  final  judgments  and  orders  of  the  lower  courts  in:   (a)   All   cases   which   the   constitutionality   or   validity   of   any   treaty,   international   or   executive   agreement,   law,   or   presidential   decree,   proclamation,   order,   instruction,   ordinance   or   regulation   is  in  question.   (b)   All   cases   involving   the   legality   of   any   tax,   impost,   assessment,   or   toll,   or   any   penalty   imposed   in  relation  thereto.   (c)  All  cases  in  which  the  jurisdiction  of  any  lower  court  is  in  issue,   (d)  All  criminal  cases  in  which  the  penalty  imposed  is  reclusion  perpetua  or  higher.   (e)  All  cases  in  which  only  an  error  or  question  of  law  is  involved.   (3)   Assign   temporarily   judges   of   lower   courts   to   other   station   as   public   interest   may   require.   Such   temporary  assignment  shall  not  exceed  six  months  without  the  consent  of  the  judge  concerned.   (4)  Order  a  change  of  venue  or  place  of  trial  to  avoid  miscarriage  of  justice.   (5)   Promulgate   rules   concerning   the   protection   and   enforcement   of   constitutional   rights,   pleading,   practice,  and  procedure  in  all  courts,  the  admission  to  the  practice  of  law,  the  Integrated  Bar,  and  legal   assistance  to  the  underprivileged.  Such  rules  shall  proved  a  simplified  and  inexpensive  procedure  for  the   speedy   disposition   of   cases,   shall   be   uniform   for   all   courts   of   the   same   grade,   and   shall   not   diminish,   increase  or  modify  substantive  rights.  Rules  of  procedure  of  special  courts  and  quasi-­‐judicial  bodies  shall   remain  effective  unless  disapproved  by  the  Supreme  Court.   (6)  Appoint  all  officials  and  employees  of  the  Judiciary  in  accordance  with  the  Civil  Service  Law.   •

• • •

• •

Power  of  Judicial  Review   ! Judicial  review  is  the  power  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  declare  unconstitutional  a  treaty,  international  or   executive   agreement,   law,   or   presidential   decree,   proclamation,   order,   instruction,   ordinance,   or   regulation.     ! Includes   the   power   to   declare   unconstitutional   the   “application   or   operation   of   presidential   decrees,   proclamations,   orders,   instruction,   ordinance,   or   other   regulations   even   if   the   basis   for   the   action   is   constitutional.”   ! Political  questions  limit  the  power  of  judicial  review   ! Political  questions  are  to  be  decided  by  the  people  in  their  sovereign  capacity,  or  in  regard  to  which  full   discretionary  authority  has  been  delegated  to  the  legislative  or  executive  branch  of  government.   The  jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court  is  subject  to  the  requirement  of  a  justifiable  controversy  before  courts   can  adjudicate  constitutional  questions.   Judicial  power  is  not  only  a  power;  it  is  a  duty  which  cannot  be  abdicated  by  the  mere  specter  of  the  political   question  doctrine.   Two  species  of  political  questions:   1.  “Truly  political  questions”   –  beyond  judicial  review,  the  reason  for  respect  of  the  doctrine  of  separation  of   powers  to  be  maintained   2.  “Not  truly  political  questions”  –  can  be  reviewed  by  the  courts   While  the  scope  of  judicial  power  of  review  may  be  limited,  the  Constitution  makes  no  distinction  as  to  the   kind  of  legislation  that  may  be  subject  to  judicial  scrutiny,  be  it  in  the  form  of  social  legislation  or  otherwise.   The  Court  may  pass  upon  the  constitutionality  of  acts  of  the  legislative  and  the  executive  branches.  

  Vinuya  vs.  Romulo  (2010)  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Issue:   Are   all   cases   implicating   foreign   relations   present   political   question   depriving   the   courts   the   authority   to   construe  or  invalidate  treaties  and  executive  agreements?   Ruling:   No.   Not   all   cases   implicating   foreign   relations   present   political   questions,   and   courts   certainly   possess   the   authority   to   construe   or   invalidate   treaties   and   executive   agreements.   The   President,   not   the   Congress,   has   the   better  opportunity  of  knowing  the  conditions  which  prevail  in  foreign  countries.   Belgica  vs.  Alcantara  (2013)   Issue:  Is  the  issue  on  the  “Pork  Barrel  System”  a  political  question  that  is  dependent  on  the  wisdom  of  the  political   departments  of  government  since  it  involves  “budget-­‐related  reforms”?   Ruling:  Yes.  Legislators  have  been  consistently  accorded  post-­‐enactment  authority  (a)  to  identify  the  projects  they   desire  to  be  funded  through  various  Congressional  Pork  Barrel  allocations;  (b)  and  in  the  areas  of  fund  release  and   realignment.   Thus,   legislators   have   been,   in   one   form   or   another,   authorized   to   participate   in   “the   various   operational  aspects  of  budgeting”,  violating  the  separation  of  powers  principle.  That  the  said  authority  is  treated  as   merely  recommendatory  in  nature  does  not  alter  its  unconstitutional  tenor  since  the  prohibition  covers  any  role  in   the   implementation   or   enforcement   of   the   law.   Informal   practices,   through   which   legislators   have   effectively   intruded   into   the   proper   phases   of   budget   execution,   must   be   deemed   as   acts   of   grave   abuse   of   discretion   amounting  to  lack  or  excess  of  jurisdiction  and,  hence,  accorded  the  same  unconstitutional  treatment.   Imbong,  et.  al.  vs.  Ochoa  (2014)   Issue:  Can  the  Supreme  Court  exercise  its  power  of  judicial  review  over  the  RH  law  –  a  social  legislation  which  is  a   “product  of  a  majoritarian  democratic  process”  and  “characterized  by  an  inordinate  amount  of  transparency”?   Ruling:   The   authority   of   the   Court   to   review   social   legislation   like   the   RH   Law   by   certiorari   is   “weak”   since   the   Constitution   vests   the   discretion   to   implement   the   constitutional   policies   and   positive   norms   with   the   political   departments,  in  particular,  with  Congress.       • The  court’s  power  of  judicial  reviews  is  subject  to  several  limitations:   1.  An  actual  case  or  controversy  calling  for  the  exercise  of  judicial  power   ! An  actual  case  or  controversy  means  an  existing  case  or  controversy  that  is  appropriate  or  ripe  for   determination,   not   conjectural   or   anticipatory,   lest   the   decision   of   the   court   would   amount   to   an   advisory  opinion.   ! The  controversy  must  be  justiciable-­‐definite  and  concrete,  touching  on  the  legal  relations  of  parties   having  adverse  legal  interests.   ! Not  merely  a  theoretical  question  or  issue   2.  The  person  challenging  the  act  must  have  “standing”  to  challenge   ! Locus  standi  or  legal  standing  is  defined  as  a  personal  and  substantial  interest  in  a  case  such  that  the   party  has  sustained  or  will  sustain  direct  injury  as  a  result  of  the  challenged  governmental  act.   ! Taxpayers,   voters,   concerned   citizens,   and   legislators   may   be   accorded   standing   to   sue,   provided   that  the  following  requirements  are  met:   a.  The  cases  involve  constitutional  issues   b.  For  taxpayers,  there  must  be  a  claim  of  illegal  disbursement  of  public  funds  or  that  the  tax   measure  is  unconstitutional;   c.  For  voters,  there  must  be  a  showing  of  obvious  interest  in  the  validity  of  the  election  law   in  question;   d.   For   concerned   citizens,   there   must   be   a   showing   that   the   issues   raised   are   of   transcendental  importance  which  must  be  settled  early   e.  For  legislators,  there  must  be  a  claim  that  the  official  action  complained  of  infringes  upon   their  prerogatives  as  legislators.   3.  Question  of  constitutionality  must  be  raised  at  the  earliest  possible  opportunity   ! If   not   raised   in   the   pleadings,   ordinarily,   it   may   not   be   raised   in   the   trial,   and   if   not   raised   in   the   trial   court,  it  will  not  be  considered  on  appeal.   4.  Issue  of  constitutionality  must  be  the  very  lis  mota  of  the  case  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

! Cases   are   considered   of   “transcendental   importance”   if   it   involve   issues   of   paramount   importance   and   constitutional   significance.   Only   the   requirement   of   legal   standing   or   “locus   standi”   may   be   waived  if  the  case  is  of  “transcendental  importance.”   ! Determinants  in  determining  whether  a  matter  is  of  “transcendental  importance”:   a.  Character  of  funds  or  other  assets  involved  in  the  case   b.   Presence   of   a   clear   case   of   disregard   of   a   constitutional   or   statutory   prohibition   by   the   public   respondent  agency  or  instrumentality  of  the  government   c.  Lack  of  any  other  party  with  a  more  direct  and  specific  interest  in  the  questions  being  raised.   • A   case   becomes   moot   and   academic   when,   by   virtue   of   supervening   events,   there   is   no   more   actual   controversy  between  the  parties  and  no  useful  purpose  can  be  served  in  passing  upon  the  merits.     • Courts  of  justice  will  not  consider  questions  where  there  are  no  actual  interests  involved.   • A  court  will  decide  a  case,  otherwise  moot  and  academic,  if  it  finds  that:   1.  There  is  a  grave  violation  of  the  constitution   2.  The  situation  is  of  exceptional  character  and  paramount  public  interest  is  involved   3.  The  constitutional  issue  raised  requires  formulation  of  controlling  principles  to  guide  the  bench,  the  bar,   and  the  public   4.  The  case  is  capable  of  repetition  yet  evading  review.     De  Castro  vs.  JBC  (2010)   Issue:  Prior  to  its  vacancy,  does  the  issue  of  who  can  appoint  the  successor  of  CJ  Puno,  present  an  actual  controversy   and,  thus,  ripe  for  adjudication?   Ruling:   Prohibition   under   Section   15,   Article   VII   does   not   apply   to   appointments   to   fill   a   vacancy   in   the   Supreme   Court  or  to  other  appointments  to  the  Judiciary.   Pormento  vs.  Estrada  (2010)   Issue:  Does  the  challenge  on  Estrada’s  qualification  to  run  again  for  President  present  an  actual  controversy?   Ruling:  No.  Assuming  an  actual  case  or  controversy  existed  prior  to  the  proclamation  of  a  President  who  has  been   duly  elected  in  the  May  10,  2010  elections,  the  same  is  no  longer  true  today.  Following  the  results  of  that  election,   private  respondent  was  not  elected  President  for  the  second  time.  Thus,  any  discussion  of  his  “reelection”  will  simply   be  hypothetical  and  speculative.  It  will  serve  no  useful  or  practical  purpose.   Imbong  vs.  Ochoa  (2014)   Issue:  Considering  that  the  RH  Law  has  yet  to  be  implemented,  do  the  petitioners  present  actual  controversy  ripe  for   adjudication?   Ruling:  No.  Any  attack  on  the  constitutionality  of  the  RH  Law  is  premature.     • The  Constitution  vests  the  power  of  judicial  review  or  the  power  to  declare  the  constitutionality  or  validity  of   a   law,   treaty,   international   or   executive   agreement,   presidential   decree,   order,   instruction,   ordinance,   or   regulation  not  only  in  this  Court,  but  in  all  RTCs.   Hda.  Luisita  vs.  PARC   Issue:   What   is   the   “operative   fact”   doctrine?   Does   the   operative   fact   doctrine   apply   only   to   laws   subsequently   declared  unconstitutional  or  unlawful,  and  not  to  executive  acts  subsequently  declared  as  invalid?   Ruling:   Operative   fact   doctrine   is   not   limited   only   to   invalid   or   unconstitutional   laws   but   also   applies   to   decisions   made  by  the  President  or  the  administrative  agencies  that  have  the  force  and  effect  of  laws.  Prior  to  the  nullification   or  recall  of  said  decisions,  they  may  have  produced  acts  and  consequences  that  must  be  respected.     • Rule-­‐Making  Power   ! The  Supreme  Court  has  the  power  to  promulgate  rules  concerning  the  protection  and  enforcement   of  constitutional  rights  (writs  of  amparo,  habeas  data,  kalikasan),  pleading  (Judicial  Affidavit  Rule),   practice   (Code   of   Professional   Responsibility),   and   procedure   in   all   courts   (Rules   of   Court),   the   admission  to  the  practice  of  law,  the  Integrated  Bar,  and  legal  assistance  to  the  underprivileged.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



! Writ  of  amparo  –  protective  remedy  aimed  at  providing  judicial  relief  consisting  of  the  appropriate   remedial   measures   and   directives   that   may   be   crafted   by   the   court,   in   order   to   address   specific   violations  or  threats  of  violation  of  the  constitutional  rights  to  life,  liberty,  or  security.   ! Writ   of   habeas   data   –   remedy   available   to   any   person   whose   right   to   privacy   is   violated   or   threatened  by  an  unlawful  act  or  omission  of  a  public  official  or  employee  or  of  a  private  individual   or   entity   engaged   in   the   gathering,   collecting   or   storing   of   data   or   information   regarding   the   person,   family,  home  and  correspondence  of  the  aggrieved  party.   ! Writ  of  kalikasan  –  writ  of  continuing  mandamus  which  is  issued  in  an  environmental  case  directing   any   agency   or   instrumentality   of   the   government   or   officer   thereof   to   perform   an   act   or   series   of   acts  decreed  by  final  judgment  which  shall  remain  effective  until  judgment  is  fully  satisfied.   Under  the  Constitution,  the  power  to  amend  the  rules  of  procedure  is  constitutionally  vested  in  the  Supreme   Court  (Article  VIII,  Section  5)  

  Boac  vs.  Cadapan  (2011)   Issue:  Is  an  amparo  proceeding  criminal?  Or  does  it  partake  of  a  civil  or  administrative  suit?   Ruling:   An   amparo   proceeding   is   not   criminal   in   nature   nor   does   it   ascertain   the   criminal   liabilities   of   individuals   involved.   Neither   is   it   an   administrative   or   civil   suit.   Rather   it   is   a   remedial   measure   designed   to   courses   of   action   to   government  agencies  to  safeguard  the  constitutional  right  to  life,  liberty  and  security  of  aggrieved  individuals.   Cadiz  vs.  Gacott  (2011)   Issue:  Can  the  IBP  Board  of  Governors  be  held  liable  for  prematurely  recommending  disbarment  of  a  lawyer  based   on  the  position  papers  and  affidavits  of  witnesses  of  the  parties?   Ruling:   The   IBP   Commissioner   and   Board   of   Governors   merely   exercised   delegated   powers   to   investigate   the   complaint  against  Atty.  Gacott  and  submit  their  report  and  recommendation  to  the  Court.  They  cannot  be  charged   for  honest  errors  committed  in  the  performance  of  their  quasi-­‐judicial  function.    

Section   6.   The   Supreme   Court   shall   have   administrative   supervision   over   all   courts   and   personnel   thereof.   •



The  Ombudsman  cannot  determine  for  itself  and  by  itself  whether  a  criminal  complaint  against  a  judge,  or   court  employee,  involves  an  administrative  matter.  The  Ombudsman  is  duty  bound  to  have  all  cases  against   judges  and  court  personnel  filed  before  it,  referred  to  the  Supreme  Court  for  determination  as  to  whether  an   administrative  aspect  is  involved  therein.   It  is  only  the  Supreme  Court  that  can  oversee  the  judges’  and  court  personnel’s  administrative  compliance   with   all   laws,   rules   and   regulations.   No   other   branch   of   government   may   intrude   into   this   power,   without   running  afoul  of  the  doctrine  of  separation  of  powers.  

  Re:  Request  for  Guidance/Clarification  on  Sect.  7,  Rule  III  of  RA  No.  10154,  A.M.  No.  13-­‐09-­‐08-­‐SC,  October  1,  2013   Issue:   Is   the   requirement   of   seeking   a   Clearance   of   Pendency/Non-­‐Pendency   of   Administrative   Case   from   the   Civil   Service   Commission   embodied   in   Sec.   7,   Rule   III   of   the   Implementing   Rules   and   Regulations   of   R.A.   No.   10154   applicable  to  retiring  employees  of  the  Judiciary?   Ruling:   No,   this   should   not   be   made   to   apply   to   employees   of   the   Judiciary.   To   do   so   would   disregard   the   Court’s   constitutionally-­‐enshrined  power  of  administrative  supervision  over  its  personnel.  Besides,  retiring  court  personnel   are   already   required   to   secure   a   prior   clearance   of   the   pendency/non-­‐pendency   of   administrative   case/s   from   the   Court  which  makes  the  CSC  clearance  a  superfluous  and  non-­‐expeditious  requirement  contrary  to  the  declared  state   policy  of  RA  10154.    

Section   7.   (1)   No   person   shall   be   appointed   Member   of   the   Supreme   Court   or   any   lower   collegiate   court   unless  he  is  a  natural-­‐born  citizen  of  the  Philippines.  A  Member  of  the  Supreme  Court  must  be  at  least   forty  years  of  age,  and  must  have  been  for  fifteen  years  or  more  a  judge  of  a  lower  court  or  engaged  in   the  practice  of  law  in  the  Philippines.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

(2)   The   Congress   shall   prescribe   the   qualifications   of   judges   of   lower   courts,   but   no   person   may   be   appointed  judge  thereof  unless  he  is  a  citizen  of  the  Philippines  and  a  member  of  the  Philippine  Bar.   (3)   A   Member   of   the   Judiciary   must   be   a   person   of   proven   competence,   integrity,   probity   and   independence.     Section  8.  (1)  A  Judicial  and  Bar  Council  is  hereby  created  under  the  supervision  of  the  Supreme  Court   composed   of  the  Chief   Justice  as  ex  officio  Chairman,  the  Secretary  of  Justice,  and  representative  of  the   Congress   as   ex-­‐officio   members,   a   representative   of   the   Integrated   Bar,   a   professor   of   law,   a   retired   Member  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  a  representative  of  the  private  sector.   (2)  The  regular  members  of  the  Council  shall  be  appointed  by  the  President  for  a  term  of  four  year  with   the  consent  of  the  Commission  on  Appointments.  Of  the  Members  first  appointed,  the  representative  of   the  Integrated  Bar  shall  serve  for  four  years,  the  professor  of  law  for  three  years,  the  retired  Justice  for   two  years,  and  the  representative  of  the  private  sector  for  one  year.   (3)  The  Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Court  shall  be  the  Secretary  ex  officio  of  the  Council  and  shall  keep  a  record   of  its  proceedings.   (4)   The   regular   Members   of   the   Council   shall   receive   such   emoluments   as   may   be   determined   by   the   Supreme  Court.  The  Supreme  Court  shall  provide  in  its  annual  budget  the  appropriations  for  the  Council.   (5)   The   Council   shall   have   the   principal   function   of   recommending   appointees   to   the   Judiciary.   It   may   exercise  such  other  functions  and  duties  as  the  Supreme  Court  may  assign  to  it.    

Section.   9     -­‐   SC   members   and   lower   court   judges   shall   be   appointed   by   the   President   from   a   list   of   at   least  3  nominees  prepared  by  JBC.  No  need  of  confirmation.      

For  lower  court,  President  to  appoint  within  90  days  from  submission  of  the  list   ! ! ! !

JBC’s  main  function  –  to  form  list  of  nominees  to  the  judiciary  and  other  functions  SC  may  assign   The  President  may  not  appoint  anybody  not  in  the  list.   If  President  not  satisfied  with  the  nominees,  he  may  ask  for  another  list.     Temporary  appointments  in  the  SC    -­‐  not  allowed  by  the  Constitution    

Salaries   Section  10  –  The  salary  of  SC  Justices  and  lower  court  judges  shall  be  fixed  by  law.  While  in  office,  their   salary  shall  not  be  decreased.     ! Nitafan,  et  al.  v.  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue     Issue:  Is  this  provision  a  prohibition  in  imposing  income  taxes?   Ruling:  No.  “The  true  intent  of  the  framers  was  to  make  the  salaries  of  the  members  of  Judiciary   taxable.”   Security  of  tenure   Section.  11  –  SC  members  and  lower  court  Judges  shall  hold  office  during  1)  Good  behavior  and  2)  until   they  reach  70  years  old  or  become  incapacitated.      

   SC   en   banc   shall   have   the   power   to   discipline   lower   court   judges   or   order   their   dismissal   by   a   vote   of   majority  of  members  who  actually  took  part  in  the  deliberations   ! Who  determines  good  behavior  in  lower  court  judges?  SC  alone.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

! Do  administrative  offenses  prescribe?  No.  (CLB  v.  Judge  Pornillos)     ! OCA  v.  Judge  Usman     Issue:  Are  judges  required  to  submit  SALN?     Ruling:  Yes.  It  is  imperative  that  every  public  official  or  government  employee  must  make  and  submit  a   complete   disclosure   of   his   assets,   liabilities   and   net   worth   in   order   to   suppress   any   questionable   accumulation  of  wealth.       Note:  Congress  cannot  pass  a  law  to  make  lower  court  judges  removable  only  by  impeachment.       ! What  about  for  SC  members?    They  are  removed  only  by  impeachment.  Thus,  the  determination  of  gross   behavior  is  through  impeachment  proceeding.                                                                        Note:  Impeachment  Grounds  (CODE:  CT-­‐GOBB)   a.  Culpable  violation  of  the  Constitution   b.  treason   c.  graft  and  corruption   d.  other  high  crimes  or   e.  betrayal  of  public  trust   f.  bribery     ! Are   all   disciplinary   actions   for   lower   court   judges   need   to   be   decided   by   SC   en   banc?   No.   To   require   more  would  contravene  the  desire  of  the  Constitution  for  a  speedy  disposition  of  cases,  which  is  one  of   the  purposes  for  allowing  the  Court  to  rule  in  divisions.  (Justice  Regalado)   En  Banc  decisions  need  only  when  the  penalty  to  be  imposed  is:     1)  Dismissal  of  a  judge       2)  Disbarment  of  a  lawyer       3)  Suspension  of  either  for  more  than  1  year,  or  a  fine  exceeding  10K.       (People  v.  Gacott,  Jr.)     ! The  Congress  has  the  power  to  create  courts  and  apportion  their  jurisdiction,  thus  the  incidental  power   to   abolish   to   courts.   But   since,   abolition   of   office   would   imply   dismissal   of   officer-­‐in-­‐charge,   is   this   practice   valid   and   acceptable?   Yes.   Abolition   of   office   is   valid   when   done   in   good   faith   and   not   for   political  or  personal  reasons.     REQUISITES  [Mendoza  v.  Quisumbing  (1990):   " (1)  Abolition  must  be  done  in  good  faith   " (2)  Clear  intent  to  do  away  with  the  office   " (3)  Not  for  personal  or  political  reasons   " (4)  Cannot  be  implemented  in  a  manner  contrary  to  law  

Separation  of  Powers   Section.   12   –   SC   members   and   other   lower   courts   shall   not   be   designated   to   any   agency   performing   quasi-­‐judicial  or  administrative  functions.     ! Makalintal  v.  PET   Issue:  Is  the  Presidential  Electoral  Tribunal  independent  and  separate  from  SC?    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:  PET,  as  intended  by  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  is  to  be  an  institution  independent,  but  not   separate,  from  the  judicial  department.  It  has  the  exclusive  authority  to  decide  presidential  contests.    

Section.  13  –  The  conclusion  of  the  SC  in  any  case  submitted  to  it  for  decision  en  banc  or  in  division  shall   be  reached  in  consultation.  A  certification  signed  by  Chief  Justice  shall  be  issued.  Any  member  who  took   no  part  or  dissented  or  abstained  form  a  decision  or  resolution  must  state  the  reason.      

Same  requirement  must  be  observed  by  lower  collegiate  courts.     ! Per  curiam  decisions  –  decision  made  by  several  judges  as  opposed  to  single  judge.     ! What   is   the   effect   of   the   absence   of   certification?   It   would   NOT   necessarily   mean   that   the   case   submitted  for  decision  had  not  been  reached  in  consultation  before  being  assigned  to  one  member  for   the  opinion  of  the  court  since  the  regular  performance  of  duty  is  presumed.  Furthermore,  it  would  NOT   have  the  effect  of  invalidating  the  decision.     ! Is  the  dissent  opinion  mandatory?  Yes.    

Decisions   Section.  14  –  No  decision  shall  be  rendered  without  clear  and  distinct  facts  and  law  on  which  it  is  based.     Resolutions          No  petition  for  review  or  motion  for  reconsideration  of  a  decision  of  the  court  shall  be  refused   due  course  or  denied  without  stating  the  legal  basis  therefor.     ! These   rules   only   apply   to   courts.   They   do   not   apply   to   quasi-­‐judicial   or   administrative   (e.g.   military  commission,  COMELEC)   ! The  1st  paragraph  applies  to  court  DECISIONS  in  which  facts  and  law  must  be  stated.     ! The   2nd   paragraph   refers   to   court   RESOLUTIONS,   MINUTE   RESOLUTIONS,   PETITIONS   FOR   REVIEW,   AND   MOTIONS   FOR   RECONSIDERATIONS.   There   is   no   need   to   state   the   facts   and   accompanying  reasoning  but  to  state  the  “legal  basis”  for  denying  due  course  would  suffice.     ! What   is   an   extended   decision?   It   is   a   decision   rendered   on   issues   considered   moot   and   academic  but  the  importance  of  which  transcend  beyond  the  particular  case.     ! General  rule:  Moot  and  academic  cases  are  dismissed.                Exceptions:  (Bayan  v.  Ermita)     1)  grave  violation  of  Constitution     2)  exceptional  character  of  the  situation  and  paramount  public  interest     3)   when   it   requires   formulation   of   controlling   principles   to   guide   the   bench,   bar,   and   the   public.     4)  the  case  capable  of  repetition  yet  evading  review.     ! De  Castro  v.  JBC   Issue:  Is  the  SC  bound  and  controlled  by  precedents?     Ruling:  No,  only  guided    

  Section.   15   –   1)   All   cases   or   matters   filed   after   the   effectivity   of   this   Constitution   must   be   decided   or   resolved  within           (Reglamentary  or  prescribed  period)   -  24  months  for  SC,  unless  reduced  by  the  SC  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

-

12  months  for  lower  collegiate  courts      3  months  for  all  lower  (trial)  courts  Note:  Sandiganbayan  belongs  to  this  category    

 

                       2)  A  case  or  matter  shall  be  deemed  submitted  for  decision  or  resolution  upon  filing  of  the   last  pleading,  brief,  memorandum  required  by  Rules  of  Court  or  by  Court  itself.                      3)  If  there  is  failure  to  decide  the  case  within  the  said  period,  a  certification  signed  by  Chief   Justice  or  presiding  Judge  shall  be  issued.  The  certification  shall  state  why  a  decision  or  resolution  has   not  been  rendered  or  issued  within  the  said  period.                    4)  Despite  the  expiration  of  the  applicable  mandatory  period,  the  court  shall  decide  or  resolve   the  case  or  matter  submitted  thereto  for  determination,  without  further  delay.       ! The   respective   periods   are   mandatory.   Failure   to   comply   of   an   SC   Justice   is   a   ground   for   culpable   violation  of  Constitution  and  for  lower  court  judges  a  disciplinary  action.     ! What  effect  does  the  lapse  of  reglamentary  period  have  on  the  case?  The  case  shall  remain  undecided.   When   there   is   delay   and   no   decision   or   resolution   is   made   within   the   prescribed   period,   there   is   no   automatic   affirmance   of   the   appealed   decision.   The   Court   will   not   be   deprived   of   jurisdiction   and   is   enjoined  to  decide  without  further  delay.    

Section.   16   –   SC,   within   30   days   from   the   opening   of   each   regular   session   of   the   Congress,   submit   to   the   President  and  the  Congress  an  annual  report  on  the  operation  and  activities  of  the  Judiciary.      

ARTICLE  IX  CONSTITUTIONAL  COMMISSIONS     A. Common  Provisions  

Section   1.   The   Constitutional   Commissions,   which   shall   be   independent,   are   the   Civil   Service   Commission,  the  Commission  on  Elections,  and  the  Commission  on  Audit.   • • • •

Civil  Service  Commission  -­‐  personnel  office  of  the  government   Commission  on  Audit  –  auditing  office   Commission  on  Elections  –  administration  of  all  important  electoral  process   In  order  to  protect  their  integrity,  they  have  been  made  independent  constitutional  bodies  

Section  2.  No  member  of  a  Constitutional  Commission  shall,  during  his  tenure,  hold  any  other  office  or   employment.  Neither  shall  he  engage  in  the  practice  of  any  profession  or  in  the  active  management  or   control  of  any  business  which  in  any  way  may  be  affected  by  the  functions  of  his  office,  nor  shall  he  be   financially  interested,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  any  contract  with,  or  in  any  franchise  or  privilege  granted   by  the  government,  any  of  its  subdivisions,  agencies,  or  instrumentalities,  including  government-­‐owned   or  controlled  corporations  or  their  subsidiaries.   •

It   was   made   clear   that   “practice   of   a   profession,”   at   least   for   the   purpose   of   this   prohibition   does   not   include  teaching.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  





The  prohibition  of  “active  management”  of  a  business  does  not  prohibit  a  Commissioner  from  owning  a   business   but   it   prohibits   him   from   being   a   managing   officer   or   a   member   of   the   governing   board   of   a   business  “which  in  any  way  may  be  affected  by  the  functions  of  his  office.”   The   prohibition   of   financial   interest   in   government   corporations,   that   is,   corporations   formed   not   by   special  law  but  by  mother  corporations  through  the  general  corporation  law.  

Section   3.   The   salary   of   the   Chairman   and   the   Commissioners   shall   be   fixed   by   law   and   shall   not   be   decreased  during  their  tenure.   •

This  does  not  encompass  legitimate  income  tax  deduction  

Section  4.  The  Constitutional  Commissions  shall  appoint  their  officials  and  employees  in  accordance  with   law.   •

This  does  not  mean  that  appointments  made  by  them  are  not  subject  to  Civil  Service  Law  and  Rules.  

Section   5.   The   commission   shall   enjoy   fiscal   autonomy.   Their   approved   annual   appropriations   shall   be   automatically  and  regularly  released.   • • •

DBM  may  not  retain  a  portion  of  the  amount  nor  may  it  program  release.   The   “no   report,   no   release”   policy   of   the   Commission   on   Audit   may   not   be   validly   enforced   against   offices  vested  with  fiscal  autonomy.   Their   approved   annual   appropriations   shall   be   automatically   and   regularly   released   and   shall   not   be   subject  to  pre-­‐audit.  

Section   6.   Each   Commission   En   Banc   may   promulgate   its   own   rules   concerning   pleadings   and   practice   before  any  of  its  offices.  Such  rules  however  shall  not  diminish,  increase,  or  modify  substantive  rights.   • • • •

The   rule   of   the   Commission   will   prevail   if   the   proceeding   is   before   a   Commission   but   if   the   proceeding   is   before  a  court,  the  Rules  of  Court  prevail.   The   SC   has   no   power   to   disapprove   Commission   rules   except   through   the   exercise   of   the   power   of   “judicial  review”  when  such  Commission  rules  violate  the  Constitution.   If,  however,  the  rules  promulgated  by  a  Commission  are  inconsistent  with  a  statute,  the  statute  prevails.   The  Commissioners  are  given  a  fixed  term  and  are  removable  only  by  impeachment.  

Section  7.  Each  Commission  shall  decide  by  a  majority  vote  of  all  its  members  any  case  or  matter  brought   before  it  within  60  days  from  the  date  of  its  submission  for  decision  or  resolution.  A  case  or  matter  is   deemed   submitted   for   decision   or   resolution   upon   the   filing   of   the   last   pleading,   brief,   or   memorandum   required  by  the  rules  of  the  Commission  or  by  the  Commission  itself.  Unless  otherwise  provided  by  this   Constitution  or  by  law,  any  decision,  order,  or  ruling  of  each  Commission  may  be  brought  to  the  SC  on   certiorari  by  the  aggrieved  party  within  30  days  from  receipt  of  a  copy  thereof.   • • •

The  decisions  are  made  by  the  body  and  not  by  individual  members   Decisions   are   reached   by   a   majority   vote   of   the   Commission.   This   applies   whether   the   Commission   is   sitting  en  banc  or  in  division.   How  many  votes  are  needed  for  the  Commission  en  banc  to  reach  a  decision?  Majority  vote  of  ALL  ITS   MEMBERS.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• • •

• • • • •

Resolution   or   decision   of   the   COMELEC   is   considered   complete   and   validly   rendered   or   issued   when   there  is  concurrence  by  the  required  majority  of  the  Commissioners   There  is  nothing  in  the  Constitution  nor  in  the  COMELEC  Rules  of  Procedure  that  requires  the  submission   of  a  dissenting  opinion  before  a  decision  can  be  considered  validly  rendered  and  complete.   There   is   no   decision   until   the   draft   is   signed   and   promulgated.   If   a   Commissioner   signs   a   decision   but   retires   before   the   decision   is   promulgated,   his   vote   does   not   count   even   if   it   was   he   who   penned   the   decision.   If  a  decision  is  not  reached  within  the  reglamentary  period,  such  failure  does  not  affect  the  merits  of  the   case   Decisions  of  the  Commissions  may  be  brought  to  the  SC  on  certiorari.   The  review  by  certiorari  would  be  relying  on  the  provisions  of  Rule  65  of  the  Rules  of  Court.   Rule  65  requires  that  a  petitioner  must  file  a  motion  for  reconsideration.  Hence,  a  case  may  be  brought   to  the  SC  only  after  reconsideration.   Certiorari   jurisdiction   of   the   SC   is   limited   to   decisions   rendered   in   actions   or   proceedings   taken   cognizance  of  by  the  Commissions  in  the  exercise  of  their  adjudicatory  or  quasi-­‐judicial  powers.  It  does   not  refer  to  purely  executive  powers.  

Section  8.  Each  Commission  shall  perform  such  other  functions  as  may  be  provided  by  law.  

 

B. The  Civil  Service  Commission  

Section   1.   (1)   The   Civil   Service   shall   be   administered   by   the   Civil   Service   Commission   composed   of   a   Chairman  and  2  Commissioners  who  shall  be  natural-­‐born  citizens  of  the  Philippines  and,  at  the  time  of   their  appointment,  at  least  35  years  of  age,  with  proven  capacity  for  public  administration,  and  must  not   have   been   candidates   for   any   elective   position   in   the   elections   immediately   preceding   their   appointment.   (2)   The   Chairman   and   the   Commissioners   shall   be   appointed   by   the   President   with   the   consent   of   the   Commission  on  Appointments  for  a  term  of  7  years  without  reappointment.  Of  those  first  appointed,  the   Chairman   shall   hold   office   for   7   years,   a   Commissioner   for   5   years,   and   another   Commissioner   for   3   years,  without  reappointment.  Appointment  to  any  vacancy  shall  be  only  for  the  unexpired  term  of  the   predecessor.  In  no  case  shall  any  member  be  appointed  or  designated  in  a  temporary  or  acting  capacity.   • • • • •

General  objective:  To  establish  and  promote  professionalism  and  efficiency  in  public  service   Composed   of   a   Chairman   and   2   Commissioners   appointed   by   the   President   with   the   consent   of   the   Commission  on  Appointments.   The   term   of   the   Commissioners   is   set   at   7   years   and   they   may   not   be   reappointed.   The   prohibition   applies  even  if  the  Commissioner  has  served  for  less  than  7  years.   The  intent  of  the  staggering  of  terms  of  the  first  appointees  is  to  achieve  continuity  by  not  allowing  the   term  of  all  Commissioners  to  expire  all  at  one  time.   For   the   smooth   functioning   of   the   staggered   rotational   system,   there   are   2   requirements:   (1)   appointment   for   any   vacancy   shall   be   only   for   the   unexpired   portion   of   the   term   of   the   predecessor;   (2)   the   starting   point   of   all   the   first   appointments   was   February   2,   1987,   and   the   term   of   all   subsequent   appointees  start  on  a  February  2  even  if  they  actually  assume  office  later  than  February  2.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



Should  there  be  a  vacancy  in  the  office  of  the  Chairman,  the  vacancy  may  not  be  filled  by  the  President   by  designating  one  of  the  Commissioners  a  temporary  Chairman.  The  Commission  itself  must  choose  the   temporary  Chairman.  

Section  2.  (1)  The  Civil  Service  Embraces  all  branches,  subdivisions,  instrumentalities,  and  agencies  of  the   Government,  including  Government-­‐owned  or  controlled  corporations  with  original  charters.   (2)  Appointments  in  the  Civil  Service  shall  be  made  only  according  to  merit  and  fitness  to  be  determined,   as   far   as   practicable,   and,   except   to   positions   which   are   policy-­‐determining   primarily   confidential,   or   highly  technical,  by  competitive  examination.   (3)   No   officer   or   employee   of   the   Civil   Service   shall   be   removed   or   suspended   except   for   cause   provided   by  law.   (4)  No  officer  or  employee  in  the  Civil  Service  shall  engage,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  any  electioneering  or   partisan  political  campaign.   (5)  The  right  to  self-­‐organization  shall  not  be  denied  to  government  employees.   (6)  Temporary  employees  of  the  government  shall  be  given  such  protection  as  may  be  provided  by  law.   • •

• •

• • •

• •



The  status  of  being  primarily  confidential  mere  exempts  an  office  from  the  rules  on  appointment  but  not   from  other  rules.   Civil  Service  covers  not  all  government-­‐owned  or  controlled  corporations  but  only  those  “with  original   charters,”   that   is,   those   corporations   which   have   been   created   by   special   law   and   not   through   the   general  corporation  law.   The  system  includes  both  officers  and  employees.   Employee  –   generally   used   in   reference   to   persons   in   the   public   service;   Officer  –   officials   whose   duties,   not  being  of  a  clerical  or  manual  nature,  may  be  considered  to  involve  the  exercise  of  discretion  in  the   performance  of  the  functions  of  government,  whether  such  duties  are  precisely  defined  by  law  or  not.   Entities  under  the  civil  service  system  are  not  completely  beyond  the  reach  of  the  Department  of  Labor   or  labor  laws.   Classification  of  positions  in  the  Civil  Service:  (1)  competitive  and  (2)  non-­‐competitive.   Non-­‐competitive   positions   –   by   their   nature   are   policy-­‐determining,   primarily   confidential,   or   highly   technical.  A  policy  determining  position  is  one  charged  with  the  duty  to  “formulate  a  method  of  action   for  the  government  or  any  of  its  subdivisions.”  A  position  is  highly  technical  if  the  occupant  is  required   “to  possess  a  technical  skill  or  training  in  the  supreme  or  superior  degree.”   Competitive   positions   –   must   be   made   according   to   merit   and   fitness   as   determined,   as   far   as   practicable,  by  competitive  examinations   The  role  of  the  CSC  in  the  appointing  process  is  limited  to  the  determination  of  the  qualifications  of  the   candidates  for  appointment.  The  most  that  the  Commission  can  do  is  certify  to  the  qualification  of  those   being  considered  for  appointment.   The   Civil   Service   is   within   its   authority   when   it   orders   the   reinstatement   of   the   first   appointee   in   the   event  that  after  having  extended  an  appointment  that  is  immediately  accepted,  the  appointing  authority   withdraws  the  same  and  extends  it  to  someone  else.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



• • • •

• • • • •

• • • •



• •

A  “next-­‐in-­‐rank”  rule  might  be  prescribed  by  law.  But  such  rule  cannot  be  read  to  compel  the  appointing   authority   to  appointment  the  person  next  in  rank  if  others,  even  if  lower  in  rank,  are  qualified  for  the   post.   Basic  in  a  healthy  civil  service  system  is  a  guarantee  of  security  of  tenure,  a  guarantee  against  arbitrary   impairment,  whether  total  or  partial,  of  the  right  to  continue  in  the  position  held.   Suspension  or  dismissal  can  be  made  only  “for  cause  provided  by  law.”  Dismissal  here  includes  demotion   or  transfer  which  involves  reduction  of  pay  or  rank.   Procedural  due  process  would  require  that  suspension  or  dismissal  come  only  after  notice  and  hearing.   “for   cause”   –   for   reasons   which   the   law   and   sound   public   policy   recognize   as   sufficient   warrant   for   removal;   cause   must   relate   to   and   affect   the   administration   of   the   office,   and   must   be   restricted   to   something  of  a  substantial  nature  directly  affecting  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  public.   “provided   by   law”   –   the   law   must   already   be   in   existence   when   the   act   for   which   a   persons   is   being   subjected  to  disciplinary  action  was  committed.   Officials   and   employees   holding   primarily   confidential   positions   are   a   special   case.   They   still   enjoy   security  of  tenure  but  their  term  is  deemed  to  be  coterminous  with  the  confidence.    Security  of  tenure  cannot  be  circumvented  by  abolition  of  office.   For  abolition  of  office  to  escape  the  taint  of  unconstitutionality,  it  must  be  made  (1)  in  good  faith,  (2)  not   for  personal  or  political  reasons,  (3)  not  in  violation  of  the  law.   The   presidential   appointees   enjoy   security   of   tenure   but   the   procedure   is   administered   by   the   President   and   not   by   the   CSC.   The   President   has   the   power   to   discipline   them   because   the   power   to   appoint   includes  the  power  to  remove.   The  guarantee  of  security  of  tenure  is  enjoyed  only  by  permanent  appointees.   Temporary  appointees  are  removable  any  time  even  without  cause.  It  is,  however,  not  anybody  who  can   remove  him  but  only  the  appointing  authority.   The   guarantee   of   security   of   tenure   covers   not   just   removal   or   other   disciplinary   actions   but   also   transfers.     The  appointment  of  one  who  is  not  qualified  can  only  be  temporary  and  it  is  understood  from  the  outset   that  it  is  without  fixity  but  enduring  only  at  the  pleasure  of  the  appointing  authority.  For  an  appointment   to  be  permanent,  it  must  be  a  real  appointment  by  the  appointing  authority  and  not  just  a  designation   by  one  who  does  not  have  the  appointing  authority.   A   person   lacking   the   necessary   qualifications   who   is   given   a   temporary   appointment   does   not   automatically   become   a   permanent   appointee   when   he   or   she   acquires   the   required   qualification.   For   one  to  become  permanent,  he  must  receive  a  new  commission,  that  is,  a  permanent  appointment  if  he   is  to  be  considered  permanent.   The   provision   does   not   prevent   any   officer   or   employee   from   expressing   his   views   on   current   political   problems  or  issues,  or  from  mentioning  the  names  of  candidates  for  public  office  whim  he  supports.   The   court   ruled   that   employees   of   SSS   and   public   school   teachers   do   not   have   the   constitutional   right   to   strike.  

Section   3.   The   Civil   Service   Commission,   as   the   central   personnel   agency   of   the   Government,   shall   establish  a  career  service  and  adopt  measures  to  promote  morale,  efficiency,  integrity,  responsiveness,   progressiveness,   and   courtesy   in   the   civil   service.   It   shall   strengthen   the   merit   and   rewards   system,   integrate   all   human   resources   development   programs   for   all   levels   and   ranks,   and   institutionalize   a  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

management   climate   conducive   to   public   accountability.   It   shall   submit   to   the   President   and   the   Congress  an  annual  report  on  its  personnel  programs.   • •



It  can  perform  executive  powers,  quasi-­‐judicial  powers,  and  quasi-­‐legislative  or  rule-­‐making  powers.     It  also  includes  the  power  to  “promulgate  and  enforce  policies  on  personnel  actions,  classify  positions,   prescribe  conditions  of  employment  except  as  to  compensation  and  other  monetary  benefits  which  shall   be  provided  by  law.”   CSC  may  revoke  a  certificate  of  eligibility  motu  proprio.  

Liban  v.  Gordon   Issue:  Is  the  Phil.  National  Red  Cross  a  government-­‐owned  or  controlled  corporation?   Ruling:   No.   The   PNRC   is   neither   a   subdivision,   agency   or   instrumentality   of   the   gov’t.,   nor   a   GOCC   or   a   subsidiary   thereof.   Nazareno  v.  City  of  Dumaguete   Issue:  Who  shall  pay  if  the  appointment  is  disapproved  for  violation  of  the  civil  service  law?   Ruling:  No  one  will  pay.  Not  former  Mayor  Remollo  or  current  mayor  Perdices.  The  SC  ruled  that  the  petitioners  do   not  have  a  clear  right  for  it  to  compel  Mayor  Perdices  or  former  Mayor  Remollo  to  pay.   Maniebo  v.  CSC   Issue:  Will  the  subsequent  acquisition  of  the  required  eligibility  of  an  appointee  make  his  temporary  appointment   regular  or  permanent?   Ruling:  No.  Obtaining  Civil  Service  eligibility  later  on  does  not  ipso  facto  convert  his  temporary  appointment  into  a   permanent   one.   A   new   appointment   is   still   required,   because   a   permanent   appointment   is   not   a   continuation   of   the   temporary  appointment.   Ong  v.  Office  of  the  President   Issue:  Is  a  co-­‐terminous  appointment,  coterminous  with  the  term  of  the  appointing  authority?   Ruling:  Yes.  CSC  Resolution  No  91-­‐1631  defines  a  co-­‐terminous  appointment  as  one  “co-­‐existing  with  the  tenure  of   the  appointing  authority  or  at  his  pleasure.”   CSC  v.  Pililla  Water  District   Issue:  Is  the  position  of  Water  District  Manager  a  primarily  confidential  position?   Ruling:  Yes.  A  position  is  considered  to  be  primarily  confidential  when  there  is  a  primarily  close  intimacy  between   the   appointing   authority   and   the   appointee,   which   ensures   the   highest   degree   of   trust   and   unfettered   communication  and  discussion  on  the  most  confidential  matters.   Issue:  What  positions  have  been  judicially  determined  as  primarily  confidential?   Ruling:   Chief   Legal   Counsel   of   PNB,   Secretary   of   the   Sangguniang   Bayan,   Confidential   agent   of   the   office   of   the   Auditor,  GSIS,  Secretary  of  the  City  Mayor,  Senior  Security  and  Security  Guard  in  the  Office  of  the  V-­‐mayor,  Sec.  to   the   board   of   a   gov’t.   corporation,   city   legal   counsel,   city   legal   officer   or   city   attorney,   provincial   attorney,   private   secretary,  and  board  secretary  II  of  the  Philippine  State  College  of  Aeronautics.   CSC  v.  Magnaye  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Issue:  Do  probationary  employees  enjoy  security  of  tenure?   Ruling:  Yes.  The  Constitution  in  using  the  expressions  “all  workers  and  no  officer  or  employees”  put  no  distinction   between  probationary  and  a  permanent  or  regular  employee.   BOCEA  v.  Teves   Issue:  Does  R.A.  9335  violate  security  of  tenure?   Ruling:   No.   R.A.   9335   lays   down   a   reasonable   yardstick   for   removal   with   due   consideration   of   all   relevant   factors   affecting  the  level  of  collection.  This  standard  is  analogous  to  inefficiency  and  incompetence  in  the  performance  of   official  duties,  a  ground  for  disciplinary  action  under  the  Civil  service  law.   CSC  v.  Guevarra   Issue:   Whether   or   not   the   CSC   has   jurisdiction   over   cases   filed   directly   with   it,   regardless   of   who   initiated   the   complaint.   Ruling:  Yes.  The  identity  of  the  complainants  is  immaterial  to  the  acquisition  of  jurisdiction  over  an  administrative   case  by  the  CSC.   CSC  v.  Cruz   Issue:   Is   a   government   employee   who   had   been   dismissed   entitled   the   back   salaries   if   he   was   subsequently   exonerated?   Ruling:   Yes.   Back   salaries   are   awarded   to   illegally   dismissed   or   unjustly   suspended   employees   based   on   the   conditional  provision  that  no  officer  or  employee  in  the  civil  service  shall  be  removed  or  suspended  except  for  cause   provided  by  law.   Baldoz  v.  COA   Issue:  Does  the  grant  of  probation  justify  a  public  official/  employee’s  retention  in  the  government  service?   Ruling:  No.  While  the  purpose  of  probation  law  is  to  save  valuable  human  material,  unlike  pardon,  probation  does   not   obliterate   the   crime   which   the   person   under   probation   has   been   convicted.   He   may   seek   to   re-­‐enter   gov’t.   service  but  only  after  he  has  shown  that  he  is  fit  to  serve  once  again.   Camarines  Norte  v.  Gonzales   Issue:  Being  a  primarily  confidential  employee,  does  Gonzales  have  security  of  tenure?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   concept   of   security   of   tenure   labors   under   a   variation   from   primarily   confidential   employees   due   to   the   basic   concept   of   a   primarily   confidential   position.   Serving   at   the   confidence   of   the   appointing   authority,   the   primarily  confidential  employee’s  term  of  office  expires  when  the  appointing  authority  loses  trust  in  the  employee.  

Section  4.  All  public  officers  and  employees  shall  take  an  oath  or  affirmation  to  uphold  and  defend  this   Constitution.   •

This  provision  meant  to  cover  all  civilian  public  officers,  whether  elective  or  appointive.  

Section   5.   The   Congress   shall   provide   for   the   standardization   of   compensation   of   government   officials   and   employees,   including   those   in   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   with   original   chargers,   taking   into   account   the   nature   of   the   responsibilities   pertaining   to,   and   the   qualifications   required   for   their  positions.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  6.  No  candidate  who  has  lost  in  any  election  shall,  within  1  year  after  election,  be  appointed  to   any   office   in   the   government   or   any   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   or   in   any   of   their   subsidiaries.   Section   7.   No   elective   official   shall   be   eligible   for   appointment   or   designation   in   any   capacity   to   any   public  office  or  position  during  his  tenure.   Unless  otherwise  allowed  by  law  or  by  the  primary  functions  of  his  position,  no  appointive  official  shall   hold   any   other   office   or   employment   in   the   government   or   any   subdivision,   agency   or   instrumentality   thereof,  including  government-­‐owned  or  controlled  corporations  or  their  subsidiaries.     •



The  provision  prohibits  elective  officials  other  than  members  of  Congress  from  accepting  appointment   during   their   tenure.   If   the   elective   official   accepts   an   appointment   without   first   resigning   his   elective   position,  the  appointment  is  invalid.   The   second   paragraph   is   not   absolute:   they   may   hold   another   office,   if:   “allowed   by   law   or   by   the   primary  functions  of  their  position.”  

La  Carlota  City  v.  Atty.  Rojo   Issue:  Did  the  appointment  of  the  respondent  contravene  Sec.7,  Art  IX-­‐B  of  the  Constitution?   Ruling:   Yes.   Respondent   was   still   an   incumbent   regular   Sangguniang   Panglungsod   member   when   then   V-­‐Mayor   Jalandoni  appointed  him  as  Sangguniang  Panglungsod  Secretary.   Posadas  v.  Sandiganbayan   Issue:  By  holding  concurrent  position  as  University  Chancellor  and  TMC  Project  Director,  did  Dr.  Posadas  violate  the   constitutional  provision  against  double  employment  and  double  compensation?   Ruling:   No.   There   was   no   evidence   adduced   to   show   that   UP   academic   officials   were   prohibited   from   receiving   compensation  for  work  they  render  outside  the  scope  of  their  normal  duties  as  administrators  or  faculty  professors.  

Section   8.   No   elective   or   appointive   public   officer   or   employee   shall   receive   additional,   double,   or   indirect   compensation,   unless   specifically   authorized   by   law,   nor   accept   without   the   consent   of   the   Congress,  any  present,  emolument,  office,  or  title  of  any  kind  from  any  foreign  government.   Pensions  or  gratuities  shall  not  be  considered  as  additional,  double,  or  indirect  compensation.     • • • • •

The  purpose  of  the  prohibition  is  to  manifest  a  commitment  to  the  fundamental  principle  that  a  public   office  is  a  public  trust.   There   is   additional   compensation   when   for   one   and   the   same   office   for   which   a   compensation   has   been   fixed  there  us  added  to  such  fixed  compensation  an  extra  reward  in  the  form,  for  instance,  of  a  bonus.   When  a  per  diem  or  an  allowance  is  given  as  reimbursement  for  expenses  incident  to  the  discharge  of  an   officer’s  duties,  it  is  not  an  additional  compensation  prohibited  by  the  Constitution.   Double   Compensation   more   properly   refers   to   2   sets   of   compensation   for   different   offices   held   concurrently  by  one  officer.   The  purpose  of  the  Constitution  is  to  prohibit  generally  payment  for  additional  or  double  compensation   except  in  individual  instances  where  the  payment  of  such  additional  compensation  appears  not  only  to   be  just  but  necessary.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



Bonuses  given  to  those  whose  compensation  under  the  law  is  merely  per  diem  violate  the  rule  against   additional  compensation.    

In  Re-­‐Gross  Violation  by  Escala   Issue:   Did   the   respondent   violate   the   prohibition   against   dual   employment   and   double   compensation   in   the   gov’t   service?   Ruling:  Yes.  For  knowingly  and  willfully  transgressing  the  prohibition  on  dual  employment  and  double  compensation,   as   well   as   the   court’s   rules   for   its   personnel   on   conflict   of   interest,   respondent   violated   the   trust   and   confidence   reposed  on  him  by  the  court.   Dimagiba  v.  Espartero   Issue:  Was  the  gratuity  pay  given  by  the  HSDC  Board  to  the  petitioners  a  prohibited  additional  compensation?   Ruling:   Yes.   This   can   only   be   allowed   if   there   is   a   law   which   specifically   authorizes   them   to   receive   an   additional   payment  of  gratuity.   General  Santos  City  v.  COA   Issue:   Can   the   government   agencies   and   local   governments   provide   supplementary   retirement   or   pension   plans   from  their  employees?  

Ruling:   No.   All   supplementary   retirement   or   pension   plans   in   force   in   any   government   office,   agency   or   instrumentality  or  corporation  owned  and  controlled  by  the  Gov’t.  are  declared  inoperative  or  abolished.                                                                         C. Commission  on  Elections  

Section  1.  (1)  There  shall  be  a  Commission  on  Elections  composed  of  a  Chairman  and  6  Commissioners   who  shall  be  natural-­‐born  citizens  of  the  Philippines  and,  at  the  time  of  their  appointment,  at  least  35   years  of  age,  holders  of  a  college  degree,  and  must  have  been  candidates  for  any  elective  position  in  the   immediately   preceding   elections.   However,   a   majority   thereof,   including   the   Chairman,   shall   be   members  of  the  Philippine  Bar  who  have  been  engaged  in  the  practice  of  law  for  at  least  10  years.   (2)The   Chairman   and   the   Commissioners   shall   be   appointed   by   the   President   with   the   consent   of   the   Commission  on  Appointments  for  a  term  of  7  years  without  reappointment.  Of  those  first  appointed,  3   members   shall   hold   office   for   7   years,   2   members   for   5   years,   and   the   last   members   for   3   years,   without   reappointment.   Appointment   to   any   vacancy   shall   be   only   for   the   unexpired   term   of   the   predecessor.   In   no  case  shall  any  member  be  appointed  or  designated  in  a  temporary  or  acting  capacity.   • • • • •

The   Commissioners   are   appointed   by   the   President   with   the   consent   of   the   Commission   on   Appointments  for  a  term  of  7  years  “without  reappointment.”   The  first  appointees  are  given  staggered  terms  of  7,  5,  and  3  years,  also  “without  reappointment.”   The   terms   of   all   appointees   have   a   fixed   starting   time,   that   is,   on   a   February   2,   even   if   they   assumed   office  after  February.   An   ad   interim   appointment   is   permanent   in   character,   and   the   circumstance   that   it   is   subject   to   confirmation  by  the  Commission  on  Appointments  does  not  alter  its  permanent  character.   The  Constitution  imposes  no  condition  on  the  effectivity  of  an  ad  interim  appointment,  and  this  an  ad   interim   appointment   takes   effect   immediately.   The   appointment   is   effective   “until   disapproval   by   the   Commission  on  Appointments  or  until  the  next  adjournment  of  Congress.”  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •

The   prohibition   of   reappointment   is   only   of   one   who   has   been   confirmed   by   the   Commission   on   Appointments.   The   choice   of   a   temporary   Chairman   is   an   internal   matter   which   comes   under   the   discretion   of   the   Commission  as  a  body  and  that  such  discretion  cannot  be  exercised  for  the  Commission  by  anybody  else.  

Section  2.  The  Commission  on  elections  shall  exercise  the  following  powers  and  functions:   (1) Enforce  and  administer  all  laws  and  regulations  relative  to  the  conduct  of  an  election,  plebiscite,   initiative,  referendum,  and  recall.   (2) Exercise   exclusive   original   jurisdiction   over   all   contests   relating   to   the   elections,   returns,   and   qualifications  of  all  elective  regional,  provincial,  and  city  officials,  and  appellate  jurisdiction  over   all   contests   involving   elective   municipal   officials   decided   by   trial   courts   or   general   jurisdiction,   or   involving  elective  barangay  officials  decided  by  trial  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction.   Decisions,   final   orders,   or   rulings   of   the   COMELEC   contests   involving   elective   municipal   and   barangay  offices  shall  be  final,  executor,  and  not  appealable.   (3) Decide,   except   those   involving   the   right   to   vote,   all   questions   affecting   elections,   including   determination  of  the  number  and  location  of  polling  places,  appointment  of  election  officials  and   inspectors,  and  registration  of  voters.   (4) Deputize,  with  the  concurrence  of  the  President,  law  enforcement  agencies  and  instrumentalities   of   the   government,   including   the   Armed   Forces   of   the   Philippines,   for   the   exclusive   purpose   of   ensuring  free,  orderly,  honest,  peaceful,  and  credible  elections.   (5) Register,   after   sufficient   publication,   political   parties,   organizations,   or   coalitions   which,   in   addition   other   requirements,   must   present   their   platform   or   program   of   government;   and   accredit   citizens’   arms   of   the   COMELEC.   Religious   denominations   and   sects   shall   not   be   registered.  Those  which  seek  to  achieve  their  goals  through  violence  or  unlawful  means,  or  refuse   to   uphold   and   adhere   to   this   Constitution,   or   which   are   supported   by   any   foreign   government   shall  likewise  be  refused  registration.   Financial   contributions   from   foreign   governments   and   their   agencies   to   political   parties,   organizations,   coalitions,   or   candidates   related   to   elections   constitute   interference   in   national   affairs,   and,   when   accepted,   shall   be   an   additional   ground   for   the   cancellation   of   their   registration  with  the  Commission,  in  addition  to  other  penalties  that  may  be  prescribed  by  law.   (6) File,   upon   a   verified   complaint,   or   on   its   own   initiative,   petitions   in   court   for   inclusion   or   exclusion  of  voters;  investigate  and,  where  appropriate,  prosecute  cases  of  violations  of  election   laws,  including  acts  or  omissions  constituting  election  frauds,  offenses,  and  malpractices.   (7) Recommend   to   the   Congress   effective   measures   to   minimize   election   spending,   including   limitation   of   places   where   propaganda   materials   shall   be   posted,   and   to   prevent   and   penalize   all   forms  of  election  frauds,  offenses,  malpractices,  and  nuisance  candidacies.   (8) Recommend   to   the   President   the   removal   of   any   officer   or   employee   it   has   deputized,   or   the   imposition  of  any  disciplinary  action,  for  violation  or  disregard  of,  or  disobedience  to  its  directive,   order  or  decision.   (9) Submit   to   the   President   and   the   Congress   a   comprehensive   report   on   the   conduct   of   each   election,  plebiscite,  initiative,  referendum,  or  recall.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• • • • • •

• •





• •

• • • •



The  COMELEC  is  an  administrative  agency.  The  powers  it  possesses  are  executive,  quasi-­‐judicial  and   quasi-­‐legislative.   By   exception,   it   has   been   given   judicial   power   as   “sole   judge   of   all   contests   relating   to   the   elections,   returns,  and  qualifications  of  all  elective”  local  officials.   The  Commission  has  limited  powers  to  issue  writs  of  certiorari,  prohibition  and  mandamus  granted   by  Sec.  50,  B.P.  Blg.  697  but  only  in  connection  with  its  appellate  jurisdiction  under  Art  IX,  Sec.  2(2).   The  COMELEC  has  the  power  to  review  decisions  of  municipal  courts  on  election  contests.   The  1993  Rules  of  Procedure  has  provided  a  uniform  5-­‐day  period  for  taking  an  appeal.   While   the   COMELEC   may   punish   for   contempt,   such   power   may   not   be   exercised   in   connection   with   its  purely  executive  or  ministerial  functions  but  only  in  furtherance  of  its  quasi-­‐judicial,  and  now  also   judicial  functions.   If  the  proceeding  is  before  the  Commission,  the  Commission  rule  should  prevail  but  if  the  proceeding   is  in  court,  the  Rules  of  Court  should  prevail.   The   COMELEC’s   power   is   preventive   only   and   not   curative,   that   is,   if   it   fails   to   accomplish   that   purpose,  it  is  not  the  COMELEC  that  is  charged  with  the  duty  to  cure  or  remedy  the  resulting  evil  but   some  other  agencies  of  the  government.   The   court   ruled   that   the   COMELEC   has   authority   to   exclude   what   the   court   characterized   as   statistically   improbable   returns,   the   power   to   exclude   returns   which   were   the   product   of   coercion   even  if  they  be  clean  on  their  face  and  to  entertain  the  testimony  of  handwriting  experts  as  proof  of   the  falsity  of  the  returns.   Does   the   COMELEC   have   the   authority   to   call   a   special   election?   YES.   The   COMELEC   may   call   for   a   special  election  in  the  event  of  a  failure  to  elect  in  order  to  make  it  truly  effective  in  the  discharge  of   its  functions.   The   COMELEC   has   jurisdiction   over   cases   involving   plebiscites   and   has   authority   to   ascertain   the   identity  of  a  political  party  and  its  legitimate  officers.   The   COMELEC   has   the   exclusive   original   jurisdiction   over   all   contests   relating   to   the   elections,   returns,   and   qualifications   of   all   elective   regional,   provincial,   and   city   officials   and   appellate   jurisdiction  over  all  contests  involving  elective  municipal  officials  decided  by  trial  courts  of  general   jurisdiction,  or  involving  elective  barangay  officials  decided  by  trial  courts  of  limited  jurisdiction.   In  the  case  of  local  elected  officials,  even  after  proclamation  the  COMELEC  retains  power  to  decide   controversies.   The   power   of   the   COMELEC   excludes   jurisdiction   over   elections   for   the   Sangguniang   Kabataan.   Jurisdiction  over  these  is  given  to  the  Department  of  Local  Government.   The   non-­‐appealable   character   of   contests   involving   elective   municipal   and   barangay   offices   refers   only  to  questions  of  fact  and  not  of  law.   The  dividing  line  between  a  pre-­‐proclamation  controversy  and  a  contest,  is  itself  subject  to  election   laws   which   the   COMELEC   is   bound   to   administer.   Hence,   the   power   of   the   COMELEC   to   examine   the   validity   of   proclamations   and   to   nullify   or   approve   them   according   to   its   findings   has   been   recognized.   For   purposes   of   the   elections   for   President,   V-­‐President,   Senator   and   Member   of   the   House   of   Representatives,  no  pre-­‐proclamation  case  shall  be  allowed  on  matters  relating  to  the  preparation,   transmission,  receipt,  custody  and  appreciation  of  the  election  returns  or  the  certificate  of  canvass,   as  the  case  may  be.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



• •

• •

• • •







The   COMELEC’s   jurisdiction   over   a   pre-­‐proclamation   controversy   is   administrative   or   quasi-­‐judicial   and  is  governed  by  less  stringent  requirements  of  administrative  due  process  whereas  its  jurisdiction   over  “contests”  is  judicial  and  should  be  governed  by  the  requirements  of  judicial  due  process.   Election   cases   must   first   be   decided   in   division.   A   decision,   resolution   or   ruling   of   a   division   is   elevated  to  the  COMELEC  en  banc.   A  motion  for  reconsideration  is  an  interlocutory  order  of  a  division  should  be  resolved  by  the  division   which   issued   the   interlocutory   order,   it   may   be   referred   to   the   COMELEC   en   banc   if   all   the   members   of  the  division  agree.   If  a  case  which  should  be  filed  in  the  COMELEC  en  banc  is  erroneously  filed  with  a  division,  it  may  be   automatically  elevated  to  the  COMELEC  en  banc.   It  is  only  in  the  exercise  of  its  adjudicatory  or  quasi-­‐judicial  powers  that  the  COMELEC  is  mandated   to   hear   and   decide   cases   first   by   division   and   then,   upon   motion   for   reconsideration,   by   the   COMELEC  en  banc.   COMELEC   has   no   disciplinary   powers   over   the   officers   it   may   deputize.   All   that   it   can   do   is   recommend  disciplinary  action  to  the  President.   A   political   party   or   organization   acquires   judicial   personality   by   registration.   The   power   of   the   COMELEC  to  register  includes  the  power  to  de-­‐register.   Exceptions  to  those  organizations  who  may  register:  (1)  religious  denominations  and  sects;  (2)  seek   to   achieve   their   goals   through   violence   or   unlawful   means;   (3)   those   who   refuse   to   uphold   and   adhere  to  the  Constitution;  (4)  those  who  are  supported  by  any  foreign  government.   Fiscals   or   prosecutors   can   file   information   charging   an   election   offense   only   when   they   have   been   deputized  by  the  Commission.  Disciplinary  authority  over  such  fiscals  and  prosecutors  remain  with   the  Secretary  of  Justice.  The  most  that  the  COMELEC  can  do  is  recommend  disciplinary  action.   The  task  of  the  COMELEC  is  not  physical  searching  and  gathering  of  proof  in  support  of  a  complaint   for   an   alleged   commission   of   an   offense.   The   complainant   has   the   burden   to   follow   through   his   accusation  and  prove  his  complaint.   The   decisions   of   the   Commission   which   may   be   brought   to   the   SC   on   certiorari   refers   to   decisions   rendered   in   actions   or   proceedings   taken   cognizance   of   by   the   Commission   in   the   exercise   of   its   adjudicatory  or  quasi-­‐judicial  powers  such  as  decisions  in  election  contests  NOT  on  the  prosecutor   function.  

Section   3.   The   COMELEC   may   sit   en   banc   or   in   2   divisions,   and   shall   promulgate   its   rules   of   procedure   in   order   to   expedite   disposition   of   election   cases,   including   pre-­‐proclamation   controversies.   All   such   election   cases   shall   be   heard   and   decided   in   division,   provided   that   motions   for   reconsideration   of   decisions  shall  be  decided  by  the  Commission  en  banc.   • • •

Decisions  on  any  case  or  matter  are  reached  by  majority  vote.     The   COMELEC   shall   decide   all   election   cases   brought   before   it   within   90   days   from   the   date   of   submission.     Motions   for   reconsideration   are   decided   en   banc,   but   a   decision   en   banc   is   required   only   when   the   subject  for  reconsideration  is  a  “decision.”  

Section   4.   The   Commission   may,   during   the   election   period,   supervise   or   regulate   the   enjoyment   or   utilization   of   all   franchises   or   permits   for   the   operation   of   transportation   and   other   public   utilities,  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

media   of   communication   or   information,   all   grants,   special   privileges,   or   concessions   granted   by   the   Government  or  any  subdivision,  agency,  or  instrumentality  thereof,  including  any  government-­‐owned  or   controlled   corporation   or   its   subsidiary.   Such   supervision   or   regulation   shall   aim   to   ensure   equal   opportunity,  time  and  space,  and  the  right  to  reply,  including  reasonable,  equal  rates  therefor,  for  public   information  campaigns  and  forums  among  candidates  in  connection  with  the  objective  of  holding  free,   orderly,  honest,  peaceful  and  credible  elections.   • • •

The  power  subsists  not  only  during  the  voting  of  public  officers  but  also  during  referenda  and  plebiscites   especially  if  constitutional  amendments  are  at  issue.   The  objective  of  the  law  was  the  equalization.   The   Court   ruled   that   print   media   may   not   be   compelled   to   allocate   free   space   to   the   Commission   because  it  would  amount  to  prohibited  taking  of  property  without  just  compensation.  

Roque  v.  Comelec   Issue:   Is   the   Poll   Automation   law   unconstitutional   for   being   a   wholesale   abdication   of   the   COMELEC’s   mandate   to   enforce  election  law?   Ruling:   No.   SMARTNATIC   as   a   joint   venture   partner   in   charge   of   the   technical   aspect   of   the   counting   and   canvassing   does  not  translate  to  ceding  control  of  the  electoral  process  to  SMARTMATIC.   Cagas  v.  COMELEC   Issue:   The   COMELEC’s   power   to   administer   election   includes   the   power   to   conduct   a   plebiscite   beyond   the   schedule   prescribed  by  law?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   COMELEC’s   power   to   administer   elections   includes   the   power   to   conduct   a   plebiscite   beyond   the   schedule  prescribed  by  law.     Senior  Citizens  Partylist  v.  COMELEC   Issue:  Does  the  COMELEC  have  constitutional  basis  to  disallow  term-­‐sharing  among  party-­‐list  nominees?  Was  there   constitutional  basis  for  the  COMELEC  to  disqualify  the  Senior  Citizen  Party-­‐list  on  account  of  term-­‐sharing?   Ruling:   No.   The   ground   invoked   by   COMELEC   En   Banc,   the   term   sharing   among   nominees   of   Senior   Citizens,   was   not   implemented.   Arroyo  v.  DOJ   Issue:  Was  the  creation  of  the  joint  committee  an  abdication  of  COMELEC’s  independence?   Ruling:   No.   It   is   not   an   abdication   of   COMELEC’s   independence   but   as   a   means   to   fulfill   its   duty   of   ensuring   the   prompt  investigation  and  prosecution  of  election  offenses  as  an  adjunct  of  its  mandate  of  ensuring  a  free,  orderly,   honest,  peaceful  and  credible  election.    Cagas  v.  COMELEC   Issue:  Does  the  SC  have  jurisdiction  to  review  a  final  resolution  of  the  COMELEC?   Ruling:  Yes  but  it  is  limited  only  to  review  a  final  decision  or  resolution  of  the  COMELEC  en  banc  and  does  not  extend   to  an  interlocutory  order  issued  by  a  division  of  the  COMELEC.   Jalosjos  v.  COMELEC  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Issue:  In  cancelling  Jalosjos’  certificate  of  candidacy,  did  the  COMELEC  violate  Sec.  3  Art  IX-­‐C  of  the  Constitution?   Ruling:   No.   Requiring   a   motion   for   reconsideration   before   the   COMELEC   en   banc   may   take   action   is   confined   only   to   cases   where   the   COMELEC   exercises   its   quasi-­‐judicial   power.   In   this   case,   the   COMELEC   en   banc   acted   in   purely   administrative  manner.    

Section   5.   No   pardon,   amnesty,   parole,   or   suspension   of   sentence   for   violation   of   election   laws,   rules,   and   regulations   shall   be   granted   by   the   President   without   the   favorable   recommendation   of   the   COMELEC.   Section  6.  A  free  and  open  party  system  shall  be  allowed  to  evolve  according  to  the  free  choice  of  the   people,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  article.   Section  7.  No  votes  cast  in  favor  of  a  political  party,  organization,  or  coalition  shall  be  valid,  except  for   those  registered  under  the  party-­‐list  system  as  provided  by  this  Constitution.   Section  8.  Political  parties,  or  organizations  or  coalitions  registered  under  the  party-­‐list  system,  shall  not   be  represented  in  the  voter’s  registration  boards,  boards  of  election  inspectors,  boards  of  canvassers,  or   other  similar  bodies.  However,  they  shall  be  entitled  to  appoint  poll  watchers  in  accordance  with  law.   Libertal  Party  v.  COMELEC   Issue:  Do  political  parties  include  political  organizations  and  coalition?   Ruling:  Yes.  Sec  2(5)  Art  IX-­‐C   Issue:  Was  the  NPC  petition  for  registration  as  a  coalition  time  barred?   Ruling:   Yes.   No   substantial   distinction   exists   among   these   entities   germane   to   the   act   of   registration   that   would   justify  creating  distinctions  among  them  in  terms  of  deadlines.   ABC  v.  COMELEC   Issue:   Does   the   COMELEC   have   jurisdiction   over   contests   relating   to   the   qualifications   of   the   proclaimed   party-­‐list   representatives?   Ruling:   No.   It   is   the   HRET   that   has   jurisdiction   over   contests   relating   to   qualifications   or   party-­‐list   nominees   and   representatives.   Abang  Lingkod  v.  COMELEC   Issue:  For  failure  to  prove  its  track  record,  can  the  COMELEC  cancel  the  registration  of  a  party-­‐list?  

Ruling:   Yes.   The   COMELEC   determines   whether   petitioners   are   qualified   to   register   under   the   party-­‐list   system   thereby,  they  have  jurisdiction  on  matters  of  party-­‐list  qualification.                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Section   9.   Unless   otherwise   fixed   by   the   Commission   in   special   cases,   the   election   period   shall   commence  90  days  before  the  day  of  election  and  shall  end  30  days  thereafter.   • •

Election  period  –  period  of  time  needed  for  administering  an  election  (90  days  before  the  day  of  election   and  30  days  thereafter)   Campaign  period  –  period  of  active  solicitation  (may  be  set  by  the  legislature  for  a  period  less  than  the   election  period)  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Peñera  v.  COMELEC   Issue:   What   is   premature   campaigning?   May   premature   campaigning   be   committed   by   a   person   who   is   not   a   candidate?   Ruling:   No.   Any   unlawful   act   or   omission   applicable   to   a   candidate   shall   take   effect   only   upon   the   start   of   the   campaign  period.  

Section   10.     Bona   fide   candidate   for   any   public   office   shall   be   free   from   any   form   of   harassment   and   discrimination.   Section  11.  Funds  certified  by  the  Commission  as  necessary  to  defray  the  expenses  for  holding  regular   and  special  elections,  plebiscites,  initiatives,  referenda,  and  recalls,  shall  be  provided  in  the  regular  and   special   appropriations   and,   once   approved,   shall   be   released   automatically   upon   certification   by   the   Chairman  of  the  Commission.   D. Commission  on  Audit  

Section  1.  (1)  There  shall  be  a  Commission  on  Audit  composed  of  a  Chairman  and  two  Commissioners,   who   shall   be   natural-­‐born   citizens   of   the   Philippines   and,   at   the   time   of   their   appointment,   at   least   thirty-­‐five   years   of   age,   Certified   Public   Accountants   with   not   less   than   ten   years   of   auditing   experience,   or  members  of  the  Philippine  Bar  who  have  been  engaged  in  the  practice  of  law  for  at  least  ten  years,   and   must   not   have   been   candidates   for   any   elective   position   in   the   elections   immediately   preceding   their  appointment.  At  no  time  shall  all  Members  of  the  Commission  belong  to  the  same  profession.   (2)   The   Chairman   and   the   Commissioners   shall   be   appointed   by   the   President   with   the   consent   of   the   Commission   on   Appointments   for   a   term   of   seven   years   without   reappointment.   Of   those   first   appointed,   the   Chairman   shall   hold   office   for   seven   years,   one   Commissioner   for   five   years,   and   the   other  Commissioner  for  three  years,  without  reappointment.  Appointment  to  any  vacancy  shall  be  only   for  the  unexpired  portion  of  the  term  of  the  predecessor.  In  no  case  shall  any  Member  be  appointed  or   designated  in  a  temporary  or  acting  capacity.   •

It   is   the   function   of   the   COA   to   examine   the   accuracy   of   the   records   kept   and   to   determine   whether   expenditures  have  been  made  in  conformity  with  law  and  to  take  corrective  action  when  necessary.  

Funa  v.  COA  Chair  Villar   Issue:  Whether  or  not  Villar’s  promotional  appointment  as  COA  Chairman,  after  having  served  for  4  years  of  his  7-­‐ year  term  as  COA  Commissioner  is  valid.  And  if  valid,  for  how  long  can  he  serve?   Ruling:  No.  The  promotional  appointment  as  COA  Chairman  of  Villar  for  a  stated  fixed  term  of  less  than  7  years  is   violating  a  mandatory  constitutional  prescription.  The  vacancy  of  the  position  resulted  from  the  expiration  of  his  7-­‐ year  term.  Hence,  the  appointment  to  the  vacancy  this  created  ought  to  have  been  for  7  years  in  line  with  the  verbal   legis  approach  of  interpreting  the  constitution.  

Section  2.  (1)  The  Commission  on  Audit  shall  have  the  power,  authority,  and  duty  to  examine,  audit,  and   settle   all   accounts   pertaining   to   the   revenue   and   receipts   of,   and   expenditures   or   uses   of   funds   and   property,   owned   or   held   in   trust   by,   or   pertaining   to,   the   Government,   or   any   of   its   subdivisions,   agencies,   or   instrumentalities,   including   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   with   original   charters,  and  on  a  post-­‐  audit  basis:  (A)  constitutional  bodies,  commissions  and  offices  that  have  been  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

granted   fiscal   autonomy   under   this   Constitution;   (B)   autonomous   state   colleges   and   universities;   (C)   other   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   and   their   subsidiaries;   and   (D)   such   non-­‐ governmental   entities   receiving   subsidy   or   equity,   directly   or   indirectly,   from   or   through   the   Government,  which  are  required  by  law  or  the  granting  institution  to  submit  to  such  audit  as  a  condition   of   subsidy   or   equity.   However,   where   the   internal   control   system   of   the   audited   agencies   is   inadequate,   the   Commission   may   adopt   such   measures,   including   temporary   or   special   pre-­‐audit,   as   are   necessary   and  appropriate  to  correct  the  deficiencies.  It  shall  keep  the  general  accounts  of  the  Government  and,   for   such   period   as   may   be   provided   by   law,   preserve   the   vouchers   and   other   supporting   papers   pertaining  thereto.   (2)   The   Commission   shall   have   exclusive   authority,   subject   to   the   limitations   in   this   Article,   to   define   the   scope   of   its   audit   and   examination,   establish   the   techniques   and   methods   required   therefor,   and   promulgate   accounting   and   auditing   rules   and   regulations,   including   those   for   the   prevention   and   disallowance  of  irregular,  unnecessary,  excessive,  extravagant,  or  unconscionable  expenditures  or  uses   of  government  funds  and  properties.   •

• • • • • •

• • • •



Powers  and  functions:  (1)  examine  and  audit  all  forms  of  government  revenues;  (2)  examine  and  audit  all   forms  of  government  expenditure;  (3)  settle  government  accounts;  (4)  define  the  scope  and  techniques   for   its   own   audition   procedures;   (5)   promulgate   accounting   and   auditing   rules;   (6)   decide   administrative   cases  involving  expenditure  of  public  funds.   The   power   of   the   Commission   to   define   the   scope   of   the   audit   and   examination   and   to   establish   the   techniques  it  will  follow  is  exclusive.   Authority  of  the  Commission  extends  only  to  those  “with  original  charters.”   It   has   authority   not   just   over   accountable   officers   but   also   over   other   officers   who   perform   functions   related  to  accounting.   Where  pre-­‐audit  is  allowed  and  pre-­‐audit  has  already  been  performed,  the  Commission  is  not  estopped   from  making  a  post-­‐audit.   The   power   of   COA   to   settle   gov’t.   accounts   has   reference   only   to   liquidated   claims   and   not   to   unliquidated  claims.   COA   can   promulgate   accounting   and   auditing   rules   and   regulations   including   those   for   the   prevention   and   disallowance   of   irregular,   unnecessary,   excessive,   extravagant,   or   unconscionable   expenditures   or   uses  of  government  funds  and  properties.   The  Constitutional  competence  of  COA  relates  solely  to  the  administrative  aspect  of  the  expenditure  of   public  funds  and  has  no  competence  relative  to  the  criminal  aspect  of  irregular  expenditures.   COA  does  not  have  the  exclusive  power  to  examine  and  audit  government  agencies.   COA’s   findings   and   conclusions   necessarily   prevail   over   those   of   private   auditors,   at   least   insofar   as   government  agencies  and  officials  are  concerned.   Despite  the  Central  Bank’s  concurrent  jurisdiction  over  governmental  banks,  the  COA’s  audit  still  prevails   over   that   of   the   Central   Bank   since   the   COA   is   the   constitutionally   mandated   auditor   of   government   banks.   Review  power  of  the  SC  is  limited  certiorari  power  under  Rule  65  of  the  Rules  of  Court.  

BSP  v.  COA  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Issue:  Are  the  funds  and  property  owned  or  held  by  the  BSP  subject  to  the  audit  authority  of  the  COA  pursuant  to   Sec  2(1),  Art  IX-­‐D  of  the  1987  Constitution?   Ruling:   Yes.   BSP   is   a   public   corporation   or   a   government   agency   or   instrumentality   with   juridical   personality   considering  the  character  of  its  purposes  and  its  functions.   De  la  Llana  v.  COA   Issue:  Did  the  COA  violate  Sec  2  Art  IX-­‐D  when  it  lifted  pre-­‐audit  by  mere  circular?   Ruling:  No.  Pre-­‐audit  is  not  a  mandatory  duty  that  the  court  may  compel  the  COA  to  perform.  This  discretion  is  in   line  with  the  exclusive  authority  of  COA  to  define  the  scope  of  its  audit  and  examination.   Baldoz  v.  COA   Issue:  Does  the  authority  of  COA  to  rule  on  the  legality  of  the  disbursement  of  gov’t.  funds  include  the  authority  to   disallow  disbursement?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   Constitution   vests   the   COA   with   the   primary   responsibility   to   ensure   that   any   irregularity   in   the   disbursement  of  the  same  is  cleared  or  any  attendant  illegality  be  prescribed.   TESDA  v.  COA   Issue:  Are  the  TESDA  funds  subject  to  the  audit  power  of  COA?   Ruling:   Yes.   TESDA   is   an   instrumentality   of   the   government   and   the   budget   for   its   implementation   is   included   in   the   GAA  hence,  the  TESDA  fund  are  funds  belonging  to  the  government.  

Section  3.  No  law  shall  be  passed  exempting  any  entity  of  the  Government  or  its  subsidiaries  in  any  guise   whatever,  or  any  investment  of  public  funds,  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Commission  on  Audit.   Funa  v.  Meco  &  COA   Issue:  Is  Manila  Economic  and  Cultural  Office  a  non-­‐governmental  entity  and  thus  outside  the  audit  jurisdiction  of   COA?   Ruling:   Qualify.   The   court   ruled   that   the   Manila   Economic   and   Cultural   Office   is   a   non-­‐governmental   equity   but   they   are  subject  to  the  audit  jurisdiction  of  COA  pursuant  to  EO  No.  1022.  

Section   4.   The   Commission   shall   submit   to   the   President   and   the   Congress,   within   the   time   fixed   by   law,   an   annual   report   covering   the   financial   condition   and   operation   of   the   Government,   its   subdivisions,   agencies,   and   instrumentalities,   including   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations,   and   non-­‐ governmental   entities   subject   to   its   audit,   and   recommend   measures   necessary   to   improve   their   effectiveness  and  efficiency.  It  shall  submit  such  other  reports  as  may  be  required  by  law.    

ARTICLE  X  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  

  •

Local   government   has   been   described   as   “a   political   subdivision   or   state   which   is   constituted   by   law   and   has   substantial  control  of  local  affairs”.    

 

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  1.  The  territorial  and  political  subdivisions  of  the  Republic  of  the  Philippines  are  the  provinces,   cities,  municipalities,  and  barangays.  There  shall  be  autonomous  regions  in  Muslim  Mindanao  and  the   Cordilleras  as  hereinafter  provided.     Q:  Can  Congress  pass  a  law  creating  an  autonomous  region  of  the  Visayas.   A:  No.  The  Constitution  only  allows  two  autonomous  regions  in  the  Philippines.  These  are  the  Cordilleras  and  Muslim   Mindanao.   The   creation   of   other   autonomous   regions   whether   from   further   dividing   the   existing   autonomous   regions   or   by   creating   outside   these   regions   can   only   be   done   after   constitutional   amnedments   has   been   made   regarding  the  creation  of  autonomous  regions.     Q:  Without  amending  the  Section  1,  Art.  X  of  the  1987  Constitution,  can  Congress  replace  the  “Autonomous  Region  of   Muslim  Mindanao”  to  simply  “Bangsamoro”?  How  about  “Autonomous  Region  of  the  Bangsamoro”?   A:   Yes.   Though   the   Constitution   does   not   allow   any   additional   autonomous   regions   to   be   created   the   “Bangsamoro”   will   only   replace   the   “Autonomous   Region   of   Muslim   Mindanao”.   The   reason   being   that   the   Constitution   allows   mentions   only   for   the   need   to   have   a   autonomous   region   in   Muslim   Mindanao   but   not   especify   what   that   autonomous  region  is.  

 

Kida  vs.  Senate  and  House   Issue:  Is  an  autonomous  region  part  of  the  national  government  or  is  it  a  form  of  local  government?   Ruling:  Local  Government.  As  heretofore  mentioned  and  discussed,  while  autonomous  regions  are  granted  political   autonomy,  the  framers  of  the  Constitution  never  equated  autonomy  with  independence.  The  ARMM  as  a  regional   entity  thus  continues  to  operate  within  the  larger  framework  of  the  State  and  is  still  subject  to  the  national  policies   set   by   the   national   government,   save   only   for   those   specific   areas   reserved   by   the   Constitution   for   regional   autonomous  determination.  

  Section  2:  The  territorial  and  political  subdivisions  shall  enjoy  local  autonomy.   • •

The   principle   of   local   autonomy   under   the   1987   Constitution   simply   means   decentralization   of   administration.  It  does  not  make  the  local  governments  sovereign  within  the  state  or  an  imperio  in  imperio.   There  is  decentralization  of  administration  when  the  central  government  delegates  administrative  powers  to   political   subdivisions   in   order   to   broaden   the   base   of   government   power   and   in   the   process   to   make   local   governments  more  responsive  and  accountable.  

  CREBA  vs.  Agrarian  Reform  Secretary     Issue:   Does   Sec.   2.19,   Art.   Of   DAR   AO   No.   01-­‐02,   as   amended,   making   reclassification   of   agricultural   lands   subject   to   the   requirements   and   procedure   for   land   use   conversion,   violate   Sec.   20   of   R.A.   No.   7160,   and   contravene   the   constitutional  mandate  on  local  autonomy?   Ruling:   No.  The   Secretary   of   Agrarian   Reform   does   not   fall   within   the   ambit   of   a   tribunal,   board,   or   officer   exercising   judicial   or   quasi-­‐judicial   functions.    The   issuance   and   enforcement   by   the   Secretary   of   Agrarian   Reform   of   the   questioned   DAR   AO   No.   01-­‐02,   as   amended,   and   Memorandum   No.   88   were   done   in   the   exercise   of   his   quasi-­‐ legislative   and   administrative   functions   and   not   of   judicial   or   quasi-­‐judicial   functions.   In   issuing   the   aforesaid   administrative  issuances,  the  Secretary  of  Agrarian  Reform  never  made  any  adjudication  of  rights  of  the  parties.    As   such,  it  can  never  be  said  that  the  Secretary  of  Agrarian  Reform  had  acted  with  grave  abuse  of  discretion  amounting   to  lack  or  excess  of  jurisdiction  in  issuing  and  enforcing  DAR  AO  No.  01-­‐02,  as  amended,  and  Memorandum  No.  88   for   he   never   exercised   any   judicial   or   quasi-­‐judicial   functions   but   merely   his   quasi-­‐legislative   and   administrative   functions.       CSC  vs.  Yu   Issue:  What  is  devolution?  Does  a  governor  have  the  option  not  to  absorb  a  develop  position?   Ruling:   Devolution  is   the  statutory  granting   of   powers   from   the  central   government  of   a  sovereign   state  to   government  at  a  subnational  level,  such  as  a  regional,  local,  or  state  level.  It  is  a  form  of  decentralization.  Devolved  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

territories  have  the  power  to  make  legislation  relevant  to  the  area.  On  the  basis  of  the  foregoing,  it  was  mandatory   for   Governor   Salapuddin   to   absorb   the   position   of   PHO   II,   as   well   as   its   incumbent,   Dr.   Fortunata   Castillo.   Highlighting  the  absence  of  discretion  is  the  use  of  the  word  ―shall‖  both  in  Section  17  (i)  of  R.A.  No.  7160  and  in   Section   2(a)(2)   of   E.O.   No.   503,   which   connotes   a   mandatory   order.   Its   use   in   a   statute   denotes   an   imperative   obligation  and  is  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  discretion.   The  only  instance  that  the  LGU  concerned  may  choose  not   to   absorb   the   NGA   personnel   is   when   absorption   is   not   administratively   viable,   meaning,   it   would   result   to   duplication  of  functions,  in  which  case,  the  NGA  personnel  shall  be  retained  by  the  national  government.  However,   in   the   absence   of   the   recognized   exception,   devolved   permanent   personnel   shall   be   automatically   reappointed   Section  2(a)(12)  by  the  local  chief  executive  concerned  immediately  upon  their  transfer  which  shall  not  go  beyond   June  30,  1992.     Pimentel  vs.  Ochoa   Issue:   Whether   or   not   the   PHP   21   billion   CCTP   budget   allocation   under   the   DSWD   voilates   local   autonomy   by   providing  for  the  recentralization  of  the  national  government  in  the  delivery  of  basic  services  already  devolved  to  the   LGU’s?   Ruling:   No.   Under   the   Philippine   concept   of   local   autonomy,   the   national   government   has   not   completely   relinquished  all  its  powers  over  local  governments,  including  autonomous  regions.  Only  administrative  powers  over   local   affairs   are   delegated   to   political   subdivisions.   The   purpose   of   the   delegation   is   to   make   governance   more   directly  responsive  and  effective  at  the  local  levels.  

  Local  Autonomy   Section  3:  The  Congress  shall  enact  a  local  government  code  which  shall  provide  for  a  more  responsive   and   accountable   local   government   structure   instituted   through   of   a   system   of   decentralization   and   effective   mechanism   of   recall,   initiative,   and   referendum,   allocate   among   different   local   government   units   their   powers,   responsibilities,   and   resources,   and   provide   for   the   qualifications,   election,   appointment  and  removal,  term,  salaries,  powers  and  functions  and  duties  of  local  officials,  and  all  other   matters  realting  to  the  organization  and  operation  of  local  units.   •

The   Local   Government   code   was   created   as   a   guideline   to   ensure   that   while   the   Local   government   enjoy   local  autonomy  they  must  still  have  accountability  as  well  as  initiative.  This  way  they  can  best  react  to  the   changing  local  levels  while  but  at  the  same  time  still  be  held  accountable.    

  Veloso  vs.  COA   Issue:   Does   Manila   Ordinance   No.   8040,   which   authorized   the   conferment   to   the   former   three-­‐term   councilors   retirement  and  gratuity  pay  remuneration,  a  valid  exercise  of  the  powers  of  the  Sangguniang  Panlungsod?   Ruling:  No.  As  correctly  held  by  the  COA,  the  above  power  is  not  without  limitations.  These  limitations  are  embodied   in  Section  81  of  RA  7160,  to  wit:   SEC.  81.  Compensation  of  Local  Officials  and  Employees.  The  compensation  of  local  officials  and  personnel  shall  be   determined   by   the   sanggunian   concerned:  Provided,   That   the   increase   in   compensation   of   elective   local   officials   shall   take   effect   only   after   the   terms   of   office   of   those   approving   such   increase   shall   have   expired:  Provided,   further,That  the  increase  in  compensation  of  the  appointive  officials  and  employees  shall  take  effect  as  provided  in   the  ordinance  authorizing  such  increase;  Provided  however,  That  said  increases  shall  not  exceed  the  limitations  on   budgetary  allocations  for  personal  services  provided  under  Title  Five,  Book  II  of  this  Code:  Provided  finally,  That  such   compensation   may   be   based   upon   the   pertinent   provisions   of   Republic   Act   Numbered   Sixty-­‐seven   fifty-­‐eight   (R.A.   No.  6758),  otherwise  known  as  the  "Compensation  and  Position  Classification  Act  of  1989.   City  of  General  Santos  vs.  COA:   Issue:  Does  the  City  of  General  Santos  have  the  power  to  streamline  and  reorganize  its  local  government  bureucracy   as  well  as  the  authority  to  create  a  separate  or  supplementary  retirement  benefit  plan?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:   Yes.   The   constitutional   mandate   for   local   autonomy   supports   petitioner   city’s   issuance   of   Executive   Order   No.   40,   series   of   2008,   creating   change   management   teams   as   an   initial   step   for   its   organization   development   masterplan.   Local   autonomy   also   grants   local   governments   the   power   to   streamline   and   reorganize.   This   power   is   inferred  from  Section  76  of  the  Local  Government  Code  on  organizational  structure  and  staffing  pattern,  and  Section   16  otherwise  known  as  the  general  welfare  clause.  

  Section   4:   The   President   of   the   Philippines   shall   exercise   general   supervision   over   local   goverments.   Provinces  with  respect  to  component  cities  and  municipalities,  and  cities  and  municipalities  with  respect   to  component  barangays  shall  ensure  that  the  acts  of  their  component  units  are  within  the  scope  of  their   prescribed  powers  and  functions.   •

The  first  sentence  of  Section  4  prescribes  the  relation  between  the  President  and  local  governments.  Under   the   1935   Constitution,   Article   VII,   Section   10(1),   the   Preseident   was   authorized   to   “exercise   general   supervision  over  all  local  governments  as  may  be  provided  by  law.”  Thus,  not  only  was  the  President  given   merely  supervisory  powers  (not  control),  but  he  also  possessed  only  so  much  supervisory  power  as  might  be   given  to  him  by  statute.      

  Negros  Occidental  vs.  COA   Issue:  Does  the  Presidential  power  of  supervision  justify  AO  103’s  “prior  approval  rule”  from  the  President?   Ruling:  Yes.  As  stated  in  Section  4  Article  X  of  the  Constitution,  the  President  has  the  power  to  implement  and  justify   A0  103’s  “prior  apporval  rule.”     League  of  Provinces  vs  DENR   Issue:   Did   the   act   of   respondent   [DENR]   in   cancelling   the   small-­‐scale   mining   permits   amount   to   executive   control,   not  merely  supervision,  and  usurpation  of  the  devolved  powers  of  provinces?   Ruling:   No.   Paragraph   1   of   Section   2,   Article   XII   (National   Economy   and   Patrimony)   of   the   Constitution    provides   that   "the  exploration,  development  and  utilization  of  natural  resources  shall  be  under  the  full  control  and  supervision  of   the  State."  It  should  be  pointed  out  that  the  Administrative  Code  of  198733  provides  that  the  DENR  is,  subject  to  law   and  higher  authority,  in  charge  of  carrying  out  the  State's  constitutional  mandate,  under  Section  2,  Article  XII  of  the   Constitution,   to   control   and   supervise   the   exploration,   development,   utilization   and   conservation   of   the   country's   natural   resources.   Hence,   the   enforcement   of   small-­‐scale   mining   law   in   the   provinces   is   made   subject   to   the   supervision,  control  and  review  of  the  DENR  under  the  Local  Government  Code  of  1991,  while  the  People’s  Small-­‐ Scale  Mining  Act  of  1991  provides  that  the  People’s  Small-­‐Scale  Mining  Program  is  to  be  implemented  by  the  DENR   Secretary  in  coordination  with  other  concerned  local  government  agencies.  

  Local  Taxation     Section  5:  Each  local  government  unit  shall  have  the  power  to  create  its  own  sources  of  revenues  and  to   levy   taxes,   and   charges   subject   to   such   guidelines   and   limitations   as   the   Congress   may   provide,   consistent   with   the   basic   police   of   local   autonomy.   Such   taxes,   fees,   and   charges   shall   accrue   exclusively   to  the  local  governments.   •

This  Section  was  created  as  a  means  of  giving  the  LGU’s  the  ability  to  collect  revenues  for  their  own  use.  And   also  this  revenues  are  only  under  the  control  and  discretion  of  the  LGU’s.  This  was  done  so  that  they  would   not  be  completely  reliant  on  the  national  government.  As  well  as  a  means  for  the  national  government  to   have  a  lesser  burden  in  supporting  it’s  LGU’s.  Though  the  national  government  is  still  required  to  give  them   revenues  as  part  of  the  national  budget  for  every  local  government  unit.  

  Smart  vs.  Davao   Issue:  Does  the  “in  lieu  taxes  provision”  include  exemption  from  local  taxation?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:   No.   In   Digital   Telecommunications   Philippines,   Inc.   (Digitel)   v.   Province   of   Pangasinan,7  Digitel   used   as   an   argument   the   "in   lieu   of   all   taxes"   clauses/provisos   found   in   the   legislative   franchises   of   Globe,  Smart   and   Bell,  vis-­‐à-­‐ vis  Section  23  of  RA  7925,  in  order  to  claim  exemption  from  the  payment  of  local  franchise  tax.  Digitel  claimed,  just   like  the  petitioner  in  this  case,  that  it  was  exempt  from  the  payment  of  any  other  taxes  except  the  national  franchise   and  income  taxes.  Digitel  alleged  that  Smart  was  exempted  from  the  payment  of  local  franchise  tax.     However,   it   failed   to   substantiate   its   allegation,   and,   thus,   the   Court   denied   Digitel’s   claim   for   exemption   from   provincial   franchise   tax.   Cited   was   the   ruling   of   the   Court   in   PLDT   v.   City   of   Davao,10  wherein   the   Court,   speaking   through  Mr.  Justice  Vicente  V.  Mendoza,  held  that  in  approving  Section  23  of  RA  No.  7925,  Congress  did  not  intend  it   to  operate  as  a  blanket  tax  exemption  to  all  telecommunications  entities.  Section  23  cannot  be  considered  as  having   amended   PLDT’s   franchise   so   as   to   entitle   it   to   exemption   from   the   imposition   of   local   franchise   taxes.   The   Court   further   held   that   tax   exemptions   are   highly   disfavored   and   that   a   tax   exemption   must   be   expressed   in   the   statute   in   clear   language   that   leaves   no   doubt   of   the   intention   of   the   legislature   to   grant   such   exemption.   And,   even   in   the   instances  when  it  is  granted,  the  exemption  must  be  interpreted  in  strictissimi  juris  against  the  taxpayer  and  liberally   in  favor  of  the  taxing  authority.  The  Court  also  clarified  the  meaning  of  the  word  "exemption"  in  Section  23  of  RA   7925:  that  the  word  "exemption"  as  used  in  the  statute  refers  or  pertains  merely  to  an  exemption  from  regulatory  or   reporting   requirements   of   the   Department   of   Transportation   and   Communication   or   the   National   Transmission   Corporation  and  not  to  an  exemption  from  the  grantee’s  tax  liability.    

Fiscal  Autonomy     Section  6:  Local  governments  shall  have  a  just  share,  as  determined  by  law,  in  the  national  taxes  which   shall  be  automatically  released  to  them.   •

A   basic   feature   of   local   autonomy   is   the   automatic   release   of   shares   of   the   local   government   units   in   the   national  internal  revenue.  

  Section   7:   Local   governments   shall   be   entitled   to   an   equitable   share   in   the   proceeds   of   the   utilization   and   development   of   the   national   wealth   within   their   respective   areas,   in   the   manner   provide   by   law,   including  sharing  the  same  with  the  inhabitants  by  way  of  direct  benefits.   •

Section   7   gives   yet   another   source   of   revenue   for   local   governments:   share   in   the   proceeds   from   the   exploitation  and  development  of  natural  resources  found  within  the  locality.  For  example  paying  for  cheaper   power  rates  of  energy  sourced  in  the  localtiy.  

  Q:  To  be  considered  equitable,  how  much  shall  be  the  share  of  the  local  governments  in  the  procceds  of  the  utilization   and  development  of  the  national  wealth  within  their  respective  areas?   A:  The  method  for  equitable  sharing  is  found  in  Sec.  285  of  the  Local  Government  Code  of  the  Philippines:   SEC.   285.  Allocation   to   Local   Government   Units.  -­‐   The   share   of   local   government   units   in   the   internal   revenue   allotment  shall  be  allocated  in  the  following  manner:     (a)  Provinces  -­‐  Twenty-­‐three  percent  (23%);   (b)  Cities  -­‐  Twenty-­‐three  percent  (23%);   (c)  Municipalities  -­‐  Thirty-­‐four  percent  (34%);  and   (d)  Barangays  -­‐  Twenty  percent  (20%).   Provided,  however,  That  the  share  of  each  province,  city,  and  municipality  shall  be  determined  on  the  basis  of  the   following  formula:     (a)  Population  -­‐  Fifty  percent  (50%);   (b)  Land  Area  -­‐  Twenty-­‐five  percent  (25%);  and   (c)  Equal  sharing  -­‐  Twenty-­‐five  percent  (25%).    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Q:   Residents   of   Bacong,   Dumaguete   and   Dauin   are   demanding   a   share   in   the   proceeds   of   the   utilization   and   development  of  the  geothermal  plants  in  the  Palinpinon,  Valencia,  claiming  that  while  the  steam  wells  are  drilled  in   Valencia  but  most  of  the  steam  veins  come  from  the  neighboring  towns  and  city.  Resolve.   A:  I  would  resolve  that  the  residents  requests  be  granted.  For  while  the  steam  wells  are  in  Palinpinon,  Valencia,  the   steam  veins  are  located  in  their  own  towns  and  city.  Therefore  they  must  receive  a  share  from  the  use  of  the  natural   resources  that  their  towns  and  city  have  under  their  jurisdiction.  

  Section   8:   The   term   of   office   of   elective   local   officials,   except   barangay   officials,   which   shall   be   determined   by   law,   shall   be   three   years   and   no   such   official   shall   serve   for   more   than   three   consecutive   terms.  Voluntary  renunciation  of  the  office  for  any  length  of  time  shall  not  be  considered  an  interruption   in  the  continuity  of  his  service  for  the  full  term  which  he  was  elected.   •



Section   8   not   only   set   the   term   at   three   years   but   also   prohibits   local   officials   from   serving   for   more   than   three  consecutive  terms.  These  two  limitations,  however,  do  not  apply  to  barangay  officials  whose  term  and   number  of  allowable  terms  may  be  set  by  law.       For  service  to  be  counted  as  one  term  for  the  purpose  of  the  three-­‐term  limit,  two  essential  elements  are   required.  First,  the  official  must  have  been  elected  to  the  position  three  consecutive  times,  and  second,  he   must  have  served  three  full  terms.  

 

Abundo  vs.  Comelec   Issue:  Does  the  service  of  a  term   less  than  the  full  three  years  considered  as  full  service  of  the  term  for  purposes  of   the  three  term  limit  rule?   Ruling:   No.   There   can   be   no   quibbling   that,   during   the   term   2004-­‐2007,   and   with   the   enforcement   of   the   decision   of   the  election  protest  in  his  favor,  Abundo  assumed  the  mayoralty  post  only  on  May  9,  2006  and  served  the  term  until   June  30,  2007  or  for  a  period  of  a  little  over  one  year  and  one  month.  Consequently,  unlike  Mayor  Ong  in  Ong  and   Mayor  Morales  in  Rivera,  it  cannot  be  said  that  Mayor  Abundo  was  able  to  serve  fully  the  entire  2004-­‐2007  term  to   which  he  was  otherwise  entitled.  A  “term,”  as  defined  in  Appari  v.  Court  of  Appeals,63  means,  in  a  legal  sense,  “a   fixed  and  definite  period  of  time  which  the  law  describes  that  an  officer  may  hold  an  office.”64  It  also  means  the   “time  during  which  the  officer  may  claim  to  hold  office  as  a  matter  of  right,  and  fixes  the  interval  after  which  the   several  incumbents  shall  succeed  one  another.”65  It  is  the  period  of  time  during  which  a  duly  elected  official  has  title   to   and   can   serve   the   functions   of   an   elective   office.   From   paragraph   (a)   of   Sec.   43,   RA   7160,66   the   term   for   local   elected  officials  is  three  (3)  years  starting  from  noon  of  June  30  of  the  first  year  of  said  term.  In  the  present  case,   during  theperiod  of  one  year  and  ten  months,  or  from  June  30,  2004  until  May  8,  2006,  Abundo  cannot  plausibly   claim,   even   if   he   wanted   to,   that   he   could   hold   office   of   the   mayor   as   a   matter   of   right.   Neither   can   he   assert   title   to  the  same  nor  serve  the  functions  of  the  said  elective  office.  

    Section   9:   Legislative   bodies   of   local   governments   shall   have   sectoral   representation   as   may   be   prescribed  by  law.   • The  qualifications  of  sectoral  representatives  are  determined  by  law.  Sectoral  representation  is  now   provided  for  in  the  Local  Government  Code.     Section  10:  No  province,  city,  municipality,  barangay  may  be  created,  divided,  merged,  abolished,  or  its   boundary   substantially   altered,   except   in   accordance   with   the   criteria   established   in   the   local   government  code  and  subject  to  approval  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  in  a  plebiscite  in  the  political   units  directly  affected.   •

Section  10,  is  a  legacy  from  the  1973  Constitution.  It  not  only  makes  creation,  division,  merger,  abolition  or   substantial   alteration   of   boundaries   of   provinces,   cities,   municipalities   and   barangays   subject   to   “criteria   established   in   the   local   government   code,”   thereby   declaring   these   actions   properly   legislative,   but   it   also   makes  creation,  division,  merger,  abolition  or  substantial  alteration  of  boundaries  “  subject  to  approval  by   majority  of  votes  cast  in  a  plebiscite  in  the  political  units  directly  affected.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

  Navarro  vs.  Ermita,  Feb.  10,  2011   Issue:  Is  RA  9335,  An  Act  Creating  the  Province  of  Dinagat  Islands,  constitutional?   Ruling:   No.   It   is   undisputed   that   R.A.   No.   9355   complied   with   the   income   requirement   specified   by   the   Local   Government  Code.    What  is  disputed  is  its  compliance  with  the  land  area  or  population  requirement.  R.A.  No.  9355   expressly   states   that   the   Province   of   Dinagat   Islands   “contains   an   approximate   land   area   of   eighty   thousand   two   hundred  twelve  hectares  (80,212  has.)  or  802.12  sq.  km.,  more  or  less,  including  Hibuson  Island  and  approximately   forty-­‐seven  (47)  islets  x  x  x.”[33]      R.A.  No.  9355,  therefore,  failed  to  comply  with  the  land  area  requirement  of  2,000   square  kilometers.  Also  when  the  Dinagat  Islands  was  proclaimed  a  new  province  on  December  3,    2006,  it  had  an   official    population   of    only  106,951  based   on   the   NSO    2000   Census   of    Population.  Less   than   a   year   after   the   proclamation   of   the   new   province,   the   NSO   conducted   the  2007  Census   of   Population.   The   NSO   certified   that   as   of  August   1,   2007,    Dinagat  Islands  had   a   total   population   of   only  120,813,[37]  which   was    still   below   the    minimum   requirement  of  250,000  inhabitants.     Navarro  vs.  Ermita,  Apr.  12,  2011   Issue:  Is  RA  9335,  An  Act  Creating  the  Province  of  Dinagat  Islands,  constitutional?   Ruling:  Yes.    The  land  area,  while  considered  as  an  indicator  of  viability  of  a  local  government  unit,  is  not  conclusive   in   showing   that   Dinagat   cannot   become   a   province,   taking   into   account   its   average   annual   income   ofP82,696,433.23   at  the  time  of  its  creation,  as  certified  by  the  Bureau  of  Local  Government  Finance,  which  is  four  times  more  than  the   minimum   requirement   of  P20,000,000.00   for   the   creation   of   a   province.   The   delivery   of   basic   services   to   its   constituents  has  been  proven  possible  and  sustainable.  Rather  than  looking  at  the  results  of  the  plebiscite  and  the   May   10,   2010   elections   as   mere   fait   accompli   circumstances   which   cannot   operate   in   favor   of   Dinagat’s   existence   as   a  province,  they  must  be  seen  from  the  perspective  that  Dinagat  is  ready  and  capable  of  becoming  a  province.  This   Court  should  not  be  instrumental  in  stunting  such  capacity.       Umali  vs.  Comelec   Issue:  In  the  plebiscite  for  the  proposed  conversion  of  Cabanatuan  City  to  a  highly  urbanized  city,  who  are  qualified   to  cast  their  votes:  the  registered  voters  of  Cabanatuan  City  only  or  the  registered  voters  of  the  province  of  Nueva   Ecija?   Ruling:  The  registered  voters  of  the  province.  

  Section   11:   The   Congress   may,   by   law,   create   special   metropolitan     political   subdivisions,   subject   to   a   plebiscite   as   set   in   Section   10   hereof.   The   component   cities   and   municipalities   shall   retain   their   basic   autonomy   and   shall   be   entitled   to   their   own   local   executives   and   legislative   assemblies.   The   jurisdiction   of   the   metropolitan   authority   that   will   thereby   be   created   shall   be   limited   to   basic   services   requiring   coordination.     •

Section  11  authorizes  Congress  to  create  metropolitan  political  subdivisions.  The  area  of  jurisdiction  of  such   divisions  is  not  the  totality  of  the  concerns  of  municipal  government  but  only  basic  services.  As  such  it  will  be   a   juridical   entity   with   municipal   powers,   police,   eminent   domain,   and   taxation   powers   exercised   by   a   legislative  assembly  but  only  to  the  extent  needed  for  providing  basic  services.  

  Section  12:  Cities  that  are  highly  urbanized,  as  determined  by  law,  and  component  cities  whose  chapters   prohibit   their   voters   from   voting   for  provincial   elective   officials,   shall   be   independent   of   the   province.   The  voters  of  component  cities  within  a  province,  whose  charters  contain  no  such  prohibition,  shall  not   be  deprived  of  their  right  to  vote  for  elective  provincial  officials.   •

Since   the   first   and   second   categories   do   not   vote   in   provincial   elections,   they   are   independent   of   the   province.  Since  they  are  independent  of  the  province,  residents  of  such  a  province  are  not  qualified  to  run   for  provincial  positions.  But  since  those  in  the  third  category  are  under  a  province,  they  cannot  be  denied  a   vote  in  the  election  of  provincial  officials.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

  Section   13:     Local   government   units   may   group   themselves,   consolidate   or   coordinate   their   efforts,   services,  and  resources  for  purposes  commonly  beneficial  to  them  in  accordance  with  law.   •

Section  13    authorizes  local  government  units  to”group  themselves,  consolidate  or  coordinate  their  efforts,   services,  and  resources  for  purposes  commonly  beneficial  to  them  in  accordance  with  law”  It  is  important  to   note  that  the  authority  to  decide  whether  to  enter  into  groupd  efforts  with  local  government  units  is  given   to  the  units  themselves.  This  is  another  guarantee  of  local  autonomy.  

  Section   14:   The   President   shall   provide   for   regional   development   councils   or   other   similar   bodies   composed   of   local   government   officials,   regional   head   of   departments   and   other   government   offices,   and   representatives   from   non-­‐governmental   organizations   within   the   regions   for   purposes   of   administrative   decentralization   to   strengthen   the   autonomy   of   the   units   therein   and   to   accelerate   the   economic  and  social  growth  and  development  of  the  units  in  the  region.   • The   purpose   of   this   provision   is   to   foster   administrative   decentralization   as   a   complement   to   political  decentralization.  This  is  meant  to  allow  bottom-­‐to-­‐top  planning  rather  than  the  reverse.  It   will  be  noted  that  the  power  to  form  these  development  councils  is  given  to  the  President.  He  does   not  need  to  wait  for  authorization  from  Congress.     Q:   What   is   the   extent   of   the   authority   if   the   President   over   regional   development   councils:   control   or   supervision?   A:  The  authority  is  one  of  supervision.  The  reason  being  that  regional  development  councils  where  created   to   aid   in   political   decentralization.   If   the   President   were   to   have   control   over   them   then   it   would   run   contrary  to  the  point  of  political  decentralization.     Autonomous  Regions     Section   15:   There   shall   be   created   autonomous   regions   in   Muslim   Mindanao   and   in   the   Cordilleras   consisting   of   provinces,   cities,   and   municipalities,   and   geographical   areas   sharing   common   and   distinctive   historical   and   cultural   heritage,   economic   and   social   structures,   and   other   relevant   characterisitcs   within   the   framework   of   this   Constitution   and   the   national   soveriegnty   as   well   as   territorial  integrity  of  the  Republic  of  the  Philippines.   •



Section   15   says   that   the   autonomous   regions   shall   consist   of   “provinces,   cities,   municipalities,   and   geographic   areas   sharing   common   and   distinctive   historical   and   cultural   heritage,   economic   and   social   structures  and  other  relevant  characteristics  within  the  framework”  of  one  svoregin  nation.   The   understanding   is   that   there   are   such   provinces,   cities,   municipalities,   and   geographic   areas   in   Mindanao(i.e.,  the  Muslim  part)  and  in  the  Cordilleras,  but  that  between  the  areas  of  Muslim  Mindanao  and   the  Cordilleras  there  is  more  or  less  homogenous  culture.  

Section   16:   The   President   shall   exercise   general   supervision   over   autonomous   regions   to   ensure   that   laws  are  faithfully  executed.   •

The  power  of  the  President  over  autonomous  regions  is  the  same  as  his  power  over  local  governments-­‐  only   one  of  “general  supervision,”    that  is,  the  power  to  ensure  that  subordinate  officers  execute  and  act  within   existing  laws.  

  Section  17:  All   powers,   functions,   and  responsibilites  not  granted  by   the  Constitution  or   by  law   to   the   autonomous  regions  shall  be  vested  in  the  National  Government.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   18:     The   Congress   shall   enact   an   Organic   Act   for   each   autonomous   region   with   assistance   and   participation   of   the   regional   consultative   commission   composed   of   representatives   appointed   by   the   President   from   a   list   of   nominees   from   multisectoral   bodies.   The   Organic   Act   shall   define   the   basic   structure   of   government   for   the   region   consisting   of   the   executive   department   and   legislative   assembly,   both  of  which  shall  be  elective  and  representative  of  the  constituent  political  units.  The  Organic  Act  shall   likewise   provide   for   special   courts   with   personal,   family,   and   property   law   jurisdiction   consistent   with   the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  and  national  law.   The  creation  of  the  autonomous  region  shall  be  effective  when  approved  by  majority  of  the  votes   cast   by   the   constituent   units   in   a   plebiscite   called   for   the   purpose,   provided   that   only   province,   cities,   and  geographic  areas  voting  favorably  in  such  plebiscite  shall  be  included  in  the  autonomous  region.     Section   19:   The   First   Congress   elected   under   this   Constituion   shall,   within   eighteen   months   from   the   time   of   organization   of   both   houses,   pass   the   Organic   Acts   for   the   autonomous   regions   in   Muslim   Mindanao  and  the  Cordilleras.     Section   20:   Within   its   territorial   jurisdiction   and   subject   to   the   provisions   of   this   Constitution   and   national  laws,  the  organic  act  of  autonomous  regions  shall  provide  for  legislative  powers  over:   1) Administrative  organization   2) Creation  of  sources  of  revenues   3) Ancestral  domain  and  natural  resources   4) Personal,  family,  and  property  relations   5) Regional  urban  and  rural  planning  development   6) Economic,  social,  and  tourism  development   7) Educational  policies   8) Preservation  and  development  of  cultural  heritage  and;   9) Such   other   matters   as   may   be   authorized   by   law   for   the   promotion   of   the   general   welfare   of   the   people  of  the  region.   •

• •

Sections  17,  18,  and  20  set  down  the  delineation  of  the  powers  of  the  autonomous  regions  and  the  process   of   establishing   these  regions.   A   cardinal   principle   enunciated   in   Section   17   is   that   these   autonomous   regions   are  local  units  which  are  given  “enumerated  powers.”     Powers   not   included   in   the   enumeration   and   not   implicit   in   those   enumerated   remain   vested   in   the   national   government.   Notably  not  included  in  the  enumeration  are  powers  over:  national  defense  and  security,  foreign  relations   and   foreign   trade,   customes   and   tariff,   quarantine,   currency,   monetary   affairs,   foreign   exchange,   banking   and   quasi-­‐banking,   external   borrowings,   posts   and   communications,   air   amd   sea   trasnport,   immigration   and   deportation,  citizenship  and  naturalization,  and  general  auditing.  

  Section  21:   The   preservation   of   peace   and   order   within   the   regions   shall   be   the   responsibility   of   the   local   police   agencies   which   shall   be   organized,   maintained,   supervised,   and   utilized   in   accordance   with   applicable   laws.  The  defense  and  security  of  the  regions  shall  be  the  responsibility  of  the  National  Government.     •

The   creation   of   autonomous   regions   in   Muslim   Mindanao   and   Cordilleras,   which   is   peculiar   to   the   1987   Constitution   contemplates   of   the   grant   of   political   autonomy   and   not   just   administrative   autonomies   to   these  regions.  Thus,  the  provision  in  the  Constitution  for  an  autonomous  regional  government  with  a  basic   structure  consisting  of  an  executive  department  and  legislative  assembly  and  special  courts  with  personal,   family  and  property  law  jurisdiction  in  each  of  the  autonomous  regions.  

 

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Q:   The   Executive   Department   entered   into   a   Comprehensive   Agreement   on   the   Bangsamoro   (CAB)   with   the   Moro   Islamic  Liberation  Front  (MILF).  The  agreement  defines  the  core  area  of  the  Bangsamoro  as  “present  ARMM,  the  six   municipalities  in  Lanao  del  Norte  that  voted  ‘yes’  in  the  2001  plebiscite  on  the  exapnsion  of  ARMM,  all  barangays  in   six  municipalities  in  North  Cotabato  that  also  voted  ‘yes’  in  the  same  plebiscite,  Cotabato  City  and  Isabela  City,  and   all   other   contiguos   areas   where   there   is   a   revolution   of   the   local   government   unit   or   a   petition   of   at   least   10%   of   qualified  voters  in  the  area  askinf  for  their  inclusion  at  least  tw  months  prior  to  the  conduct  of  the  ratification  of  the   Bangsamoro  Basic  Law.”  Can  Congress  enact  a  law  to  this  efftect,  without  amending  the  Constitution?   A:   Yes.   Since   as   stated   in   the   agreement   it   will   replace   the   ARMM   with   the   Bangsamoro.   The   Constitution   allows   for   the  creation  of  an  autonomus  region  in  Muslim  Mindanao.  The  details  such  as  the  size  area,  name  and  others  not   mentioned  specifically  in  the  Constitution  is  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  President.     Q:  The  CAB  also  provides  for  an  establishment  of  a  “Bangsamoro  waters”  consisting  of  waters  within,  around,  and   connecting  the  Bangsamoro  core  territory  up  to  12  nautical  miles  seawards.  Can  Congress  enact  a  law  to  this  effect,   without  amending  the  Constitution?   A:     Yes.   Due   to   the   reason   that   the   Bangsamoro   waters   are   ultimately   under   Philippine   jurisdiction.   The   Bangsamoro   waters  however  also  under  the  Bangsamoro  due  to  the  fact  of  their  autonomy.     Q:  The  CAB  also  provides  for  a  establishment  of  an  asymmetric  “ministerial  form  government”  whereby  ministers  will   be   elected   from   the   constituent   units   of   the   Bangsamoro   and   who   will   in   turn   elect   the   Chief   Minister.   The   Chief   Minister   shall   be   the   Chief   Executive   of   the   Bangsamoro   and   shall   be   the   Presiding   Officer   of   the   Bangsamoro   Legislature   whereat   he   also   sits   as   a   member.   Can   Congress   enact   a   law   to   this   effect,   without   amending   the   Constitution?   A:  Yes.  The  reason  being  that  it  is  allowed  in  the  Constitution,  specifically  Section  18  of  Article  X  which  states:   The   Congress   shall   enact   an   Organic   Act   for   each   autonomous   region   with   assistance   and   participation   of   the   regional  consultative  commission  composed  of  representatives  appointed  by  the  President  from  a  list  of  nominees   from  multisectoral  bodies.  The  Organic  Act  shall  define  the  basic  structure  of  government  for  the  region  consisting  of   the   executive   department   and   legislative   assembly,   both   of   which   shall   be   elective   and   representative   of   the   constituent   political   units.   The   Organic   Act   shall   likewise   provide   for   special   courts   with   personal,   family,   and   property  law  jurisdiction  consistent  with  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  and  national  law.   Since  the  Organic  Act  can  define  the  structure  of  both  executive  and  legislative  department  provided  the  constituent   has   the   power   to   elect   their   officials   to   represent   them.   As   such   the   “ministerial   form   of   government”   is   allowed   since  it  followes  this  requirement.     Ampatuan  vs.  Puno   Issue:   Does   Proclamation   1946   and   Aos   273   and   273-­‐A   violate   the   principle   of   local   autonomy   under   Section   16,   Article  X  of  the  Constitution,  and  Section  1,  Article  V  of  the  Expanded  ARMM  Organic  Act?   Ruling:  No.  The  DILG  Secretary  did  not  take  over  control  of  the  powers  of  the  ARMM.    After  law  enforcement  agents   took  respondent  Governor  of  ARMM  into  custody  for  alleged  complicity  in  the  Maguindanao  massacre,  the  ARMM   Vice-­‐Governor,  petitioner  Ansaruddin  Adiong,  assumed  the  vacated  post  on  December  10,  2009  pursuant  to  the  rule   on  succession  found  in  Article  VII,  Section  12,  of  RA  9054.    In  turn,  Acting  Governor  Adiong  named  the  then  Speaker   of   the   ARMM   Regional   Assembly,   petitioner   Sahali-­‐Generale,   Acting   ARMM   Vice-­‐Governor.   In   short,   the   DILG   Secretary  did  not  take  over  the  administration  or  operations  of  the  ARMM.       Kida  vs.  Senate  and  House   Issue:  Do  the  supermajority  and  enlarged  plebiscite  requirements  of  RA  No.  9054  consistent  with  Section  18,   Article  X  of  the  Constitution?  Does  RA  No.  10153  violate  the  autonomy  granted  to  the  ARMM?   Ruling:  No.  Even  assuming  that  RA  No.  9333  and  RA  No.  10153  did  in  fact  amend  RA  No.  9054,  the  supermajority   (2/3)  voting  requirement  required  under  Section  1,  Article  XVII  of  RA  No.  9054  has  to  be  struck  down  for  giving  RA   No.  9054  the  character  of  an  irrepealable  law  by  requiring  more  than  what  the  Constitution  demands.        

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

ARTICLE  XI  ACCOUNTABILITY  OF  PUBLIC  OFFICERS    

Section   1.   Public   office   is   a   public   trust.   Public   officers   and   employees   must,   at   all   times,   be   accountable   to   the   people,   serve   them   with   utmost   responsibility,   integrity,   loyalty,   and   efficiency;   act   with   patriotism  and  justice,  and  lead  modest  lives.     -

-

the  basic  idea  of  the  gov’t.  of  the  Phils.  ‘is  that  of  a  representative  gov’t.,  the  officers  being  mere  agents  and   not   rulers   of   the   people,   1   where   no   1   man   or   set   of   men   has   propriety   or   contractual   right   to   office,   but   where   every   officer   accepts   office   pursuant   to   the   provision   of   law   and   holds   the   office   as   a   trust   for   the   people  whom  he  represents    although   public   service   is   its   reward,   nevertheless,   public   officers   may   by   law   be   rewarded   for   exemplary   and  exceptional  performance.  

  SERRANA  VS.  SANDIGANBAYAN  GR  NO.  162059.  JAN.  22,  2008   ISSUE:      Is  compensation  an  essential  element  of  public  office?   RULING:     NO.   It   is   well   established   that   compensation   is   not   an   essential   element   of   public   office.   It   is   merely   incidental  to  the  public  office.  Delegation  of  sovereign  function  is  essential  in  the  public  office.  An  investment  in  a   individual  of  some  portion  of  the  sovereign  functions  of  the  gov’t.  to  be  exercised  by  him  for  the  benefit  of  the  public   makes  one  a  public  officer.  

Section  2.  The  President,  the  Vice-­‐President,  the  Members  of  the  Supreme  Court,  the  Members  of  the   Constitutional  Commissions,  and  the  Ombudsman  may  be  removed  from  office  on  impeachment  for,  and   conviction   of,   culpable   violation   of   the   Constitution,   treason,   bribery,   graft   and   corruption,   other   high   crimes,  or  betrayal  of  public  trust.  All  other  public  officers  and  employees  may  be  removed  from  office   as  provided  by  law,  but  not  by  impeachment.     -

-

object  of  impeachment  was  not  to  punish  a  person  but  only  to  remove  a  person  from  office,  to  divest  him  of   his  political  capacity   removal   and   disqualification   are   the   only   punishments   that   can   be   imposed   upon   a   conviction   on   impeachment   criminal  and  civil  liability  can  follow  after  the  officer  has  been  removed  by  impeachment   prosecution  after  impeachment  does  not  constitute  prohibited  double  jeopardy   In   prohibiting   the   legislature   from   increasing   the   number   of   impeachable   officers,   the   intention   was   to   prevent  the  creation  of  a  special  class  of  statutoritly    protected  officials.  Hence,  all  other  public  officers  and   employess  may  be  may  be  removed  from  office  as  provided  by  law,  but  not  impeachment.   The   right   to   be   removed   only   by   impeachement   is   the   Constitution’s   stronges   guarantee   of   security   of   tenure   It  should  also  be  noted  that  resignation  of  an  impeachable  officer  does  not  place  him  beyond  the  reach  of   impeachment  for  offenses  committed  during  his  tenure.     Culpable   violation   of   the   Constitution   –   willfull   and   intentional   violation     of   the   Constituion   and   not   vilations   committed  unintentionally  or  involuntarily  or  in  good  faith  or  through  honest  mistake  of  judgement   High  crimes  –  offenses  which  are  indictable  offenses  and  are  such  enormous  gravity  that  they  strike  at  the   very  life  and  orderly  working  of  the  government  

  GONZALES  VS.  OCHOA  GR.  NO.  196231,  SEPT.  4,  2012  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

ISSUE:     Would   every   negligent   act   or   misconduct   in   the   performance   of   a   Deputy   Ombud’s   Man’s   duties   constituted   betrayal  or  public  trust  warranting  immediate  removal  from  office?   RULING:  NO.  Where  betrayal  of  public  trust,  for  purposes  of  impeachment,  was  not  intended  to  cover  all  kinds  of   wrongdoing   and   plain   errors   of   judgment,   this   should   remain   true   even   for   purposes   of   removing   a   Deputy   Ombudsman  and  Special  Prosecutors  from  office.  Betrayal  of  public  trust  could  not  suddenly  “overreach”  to  cover   acts   that   are   not   various   or   malevolent   on   the   same   level   as   the   other   grounds   for   impeachment.   The   tragic   hostage   taking   incident   was   the   result   of   a   confluence   of   several   unfortunate   events   including   system   failure   of   gov’t.   response   even   if   there   was   inordinate   delay   in   the   resolution   of   PLS   Institution.   Mendoza’s   motion   and   an   unexplained  failure  on  petitioner’s  part  to  supervise  his  subordinates  in  its  prompt  disposition,  the  same  cannot  be   considered   a   vicious   and   malevolent   act   warranting   his   removal   for   betrayal   of   public   trust.   More   so   because   the   neglect  imputed  upon  petitioner  appears  to  be  an  isolated  case.      

Section   3.   (1)   The   House   of   Representatives   shall   have   the   exclusive   power   to   initiate   all   cases   of   impeachment.   (2)   A   verified   complaint   for   impeachment   may   be   filed   by   any   Member   of   the   House   of   Representatives  or  by  any  citizen  upon  a  resolution  or  endorsement  by  any  Member  thereof,  which  shall   be   included   in   the   Order   of   Business   within   ten   session   days,   and   referred   to   the   proper   Committee   within   three   session   days   thereafter.   The   Committee,   after   hearing,   and   by   a   majority   vote   of   all   its   Members,  shall  submit  its  report  to  the  House  within  sixty  session  days  from  such  referral,  together  with   the  corresponding  resolution.  The  resolution  shall  be  calendared  for  consideration  by  the  House  within   ten  session  days  from  receipt  thereof.   (3)  A  vote  of  at  least  one-­‐third  of  all  the  Members  of  the  House  shall  be  necessary  either  to  affirm   a   favorable   resolution   with   the   Articles   of   Impeachment   of   the   Committee,   or   override   its   contrary   resolution.  The  vote  of  each  Member  shall  be  recorded.   (4)  In  case  the  verified  complaint  or  resolution  of  impeachment  is  filed  by  at  least  one-­‐third  of  all   the   Members   of   the   House,   the   same   shall   constitute   the   Articles   of   Impeachment,   and   trial   by   the   Senate  shall  forthwith  proceed.   (5)   No   impeachment   proceedings   shall   be   initiated   against   the   same   official   more   than   once   within  a  period  of  one  year.   (6)  The  Senate  shall  have  the  sole  power  to  try  and  decide  all  cases  of  impeachment.  When  sitting   for  that  purpose,  the  Senators  shall  be  on  oath  or  affirmation.  When  the  President  of  the  Philippines  is   on   trial,   the   Chief   Justice   of   the   Supreme   Court   shall   preside,   but   shall   not   vote.   No   person   shall   be   convicted  without  the  concurrence  of  two-­‐thirds  of  all  the  Members  of  the  Senate.   (7)   Judgment   in   cases   of   impeachment   shall   not   extend   further   than   removal   from   office   and   disqualification   to   hold   any   office   under   the   Republic   of   the   Philippines,   but   the   party   convicted   shall   nevertheless  be  liable  and  subject  to  prosecution,  trial,  and  punishment,  according  to  law.   (8)  The  Congress  shall  promulgate  its  rules  on  impeachment  to  effectively  carry  out  the  purpose  of   this  section.   -

senate  tries  the  impeachment  case  and  can  convict  only  be  a  vote  of  2/3s  off  all  its  members   the  penalty  which  the  Senate  may  impose  shall  be  limited  to  removal  from  office  and  disqualification  to  hold   any  office  under  the  RP   this   penalty   is   beyond   the   reach   of   the   President’s     power   of   executive   clemency   but   does   not   place   the   officer  beyond  liability  to  criminal  prosecution  for  the  same  offenses   initiation   of   impeachment   is   governed   by   the   rules   of   the   House;   trial   is   governed   by   the   rules   of   the   Senate   for  the  purpose  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

-

-

the  constitution  prohibits  the  initiation  of  more  than  1  “impeachable  proceeding”  within  1  year   the   proceeding   is   initiated   or   begins,   when   a   verified   complaint   is   filed   and   referred   to   the   Committee   on   Justice  for  action   the  debates  on  the  Constitutional  Commission  made  it  clear  that  when  the  impeachment  proceeding  have   become   moot   due   to   the   resignation   of   the   Pres.,   the   proper   criminal   and   civil   cases   may   already   be   filed   against  him   “incumbent   President’s   are   immune   from   suit   or   from   being   brought   to   court   during   the   period   of   their   incumbency  ans  tenure  but  not  beyond  (IN  re  Saturnino  Bermudez)  

  GUTIERREZ  VS.  HOUSE  COMMUNICATION  ON  JUSTICE,  GR  NO.  193459,  FEB.  15  2011   ISSUE:   Did   the   House   Committee   On   Justice   fail   to   ascertain   the   sufficiency   of   form   and   substance   of   the   complaints   on  the  basis  of  standards  sets  by  the  constitution  and  its  own  Impeachment  Rules?   RULING:       NO.   The   Court   said   that   the   determination   of   form   and   substance   of   an   impeachment   complaint   is   an   exponent   of   the   express   constitutional   grant   of   rule-­‐making   powers   of   the   House   of   Rep.   which   committed   such   determinative   function   to   public   respondent.   In   discharge   of   that   power   and   in   the   exercise   of   its   discretion,   the   House   has   formulated   determinable   standards   as   to   the   form   and   substance   of   an   impeachment   complaint.   Prudential  consideration  behoove  the  court  to  respect  the  compliance  by  the  House  of  its  duty  to  effectively  carry   out   the   constitutional   purpose,   absent   any   contravention   of   the   minimum   constitutional   guidelines.   Contrary   to   petitioner’s   position   that   the   Impeachment   rules   do   not   provide   for   comprehensible   standards   in   determining   the   sufficiency  of  form  and  substance,  the  Impeachment  Rules  are  clear  in  echoing  the  Constitution  Requirements  and   providing   that   there   must   be   a   “verified   complaint   or   resolution”   and   that   the   substance   requirement   is   met   if   there   is  a  “recital  of  facts  constituting  the  offense  charged  and  determinative  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  committee.   ISSUE  :  Should  the  impeachment  Rules  be  published  to  be  effective?   RULING:  NO.  It  is  within  the  discretion  of  the  congress  to  determine  how  to  promulgate  its  Impeachment  Rules,  in   much   the   same   way   that   the   Judiciary   is   permitted   to   determine   that   to   promulgate   a   decision   means   to   deliver   the   decision  to  the  clerk  of  court  for  filing  and  publication.  It  is  not  for  the  court  to  tell  a  co-­‐equal  branch  of  government   how  to  promulgate  when  the  constitution  itself  has  not  prescribed  a  specific  method  of  promulgation.  The  court  is  in   no   position   to   dictate   a   mood   of   promulgation   beyond   the   dictates   of   the   constitution.   Had   the   constitution   intended  to  have  the  impeachment  rules  published  it  could  have  categorically  stated  so  as  it  did  in  the  case  of  the   rules   of   procedure   in   legislative   inquiries.   Other   than   “promulgate”   there   is   no   other   single   formal   term   in   the   English  language  to  appropriately  refer  to  an  issuance  without  need  of  it  being  published.   ISSUE:     Should   the   impeachment   against   Gutierrez   be   considered   a   prohibited   second   impeachment   proceeding   initiated  within  one-­‐year?   RULING:    NO.  The  one-­‐year  ban  reckoned  from  date  it  is  referred  to  the  House  Committee  On  Justice.  The  term  “to   initiate”   refers   to   filing   of   the   impeachment   complaint   couple   with   Congress   taking   initial   action   of   the   said   complaint.   Hence   initiation   takes   place   by   the   act   of   filing   and   referral   or   endorsement   of   the   impeachment   complaint   to   the   House   Communication   of   Justice   or,   by   the   filing   of   at   least   one-­‐third   of   the   members   of   the   House   of   Representatives   with   the   Secretary   General   of   the   House,   the   meaning   of   Secretary   3(5)   of   Article   XI   becomes   clear.  Once  an  impeachment  complaint  has  been  initiated,  another  impeachment  complaint  may  not  be  filed  against   the  same  official  within  a  one-­‐year  period.   ISSUE   :     Should   an   impeachment   complaint   only   allege   one   impeachable   offence   under   the   one   offence,   one   complaint  rule  of  the  rules  on  criminal  procedure?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

RULING:    NO.  The  constitution  allows  the  indictment  or  multiple  impeachment  offences,  each  charge  representing   an  article  of  impeachment,  assembled  in  one  set  know  as  the  “articles  of  impeachment”.  It  therefore  follows  than  an   impeachment  complaint  need  not  allege  only  one  impeachable  offense.  

Section   4.   The   present   anti-­‐graft   court   known   as   the   Sandiganbayan   shall   continue   to   function   and   exercise  its  jurisdiction  as  now  or  hereafter  may  be  provided  by  law.     -

Generally,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  SB  is  over  public  officers,  however  in  case  private  individuals  are  charged  as   co-­‐principals,  accomplices  or  accessories  with  the  public  officer  or  employees,  they  shall  be  tried  jointly  with   said  public  officers  or  employees  (Sec.  4,  PD  No.  1606)  

  DESIERTO  VS  CARANDANG  GR.  NO.  148076  Jan.  1,  2011   Issue:   As   a   general   operating   officer   of   Radio   Philippines   Network   (a   GOCC),   does   the   Sandiganbayan   have   jurisdiction  over  Carandang?   Ruling:  The  Ombudsman  and  the  Sandiganbayan  have  jurisdiction  over  administrative  cases  committed  exclusively   by   officials   and   employees   of   GOCC   in   which   the   government   directly   or   indirectly   controls   majority   or   51%   share   of   the  capital  stock.  Consequently,    RPN  is  neither  a  government  owned  or  controlled  corporation  since  its  share  is  only   32.4%.  In  conclusion,  the  petition  is  meritorious  and  Carandang  is  correct  that  the  Ombudsman  and  SandiganBayan   have  no  jurisdiction  over  him  for  being  an  employee  of  a  private  company.  

Section   5.   There   is   hereby   created   the   independent   Office   of   the   Ombudsman,   composed   of   the   Ombudsman  to  be  known  as  Tanodbayan,  one  overall  Deputy  and  at  least  one  Deputy  each  for  Luzon,   Visayas,  and  Mindanao.  A  separate  Deputy  for  the  military  establishment  may  likewise  be  appointed.    

Section  6.  The  officials  and  employees  of  the  Office  of  the  Ombudsman,  other  than  the  Deputies,  shall  be   appointed  by  the  Ombudsman,  according  to  the  Civil  Service  Law.     -

Office  of  the  Ombudsman  is  an  independent  body  un  the  Constitution   The  Ombudsman  has  the  power  to  appoint  all  officials  &  emplyees  of  the  Office  of  the  Ombudsman,  except   his  deputies.   The  Ombudsman  has  also  been  vested  with  the  ower  of  administrative  control  and  supervision  of  the  Office.   It  includes  the  authority  to  determine  &  establish  the  qualifications,  duties,  functions  &  reponsibilities  of  the   various  dierectorates  &  allied  services  of  the  Office,  the  CSC  has  no  power  over  this.  

  OMBUDSMAN  VS  CSC,  GR  NO.  162215  JULY  30,  2007   Issue:  What  is  the  extent  of  CSC’s  power  of  the  personnel  organization  staffing  and  qualification  over  employees  of   the  Ombudsman?   Ruling:   Under   the   constitution   the   office   of   the   Ombudsman   is   an   independent   body.   As   a   guaranty   of   this   independence,   the   Ombudsman   has   the   power   to   appoint   all   officials   and   employees   of   the   office   of   the   Ombudsman,   except   its   deputies.   This   power   necessarily   includes,   the   power   of   setting,   prescribing,   and   administrative  standards  for  the  officials  and  personnel  of  the  office.  The  Ombudsman  also  has  been  vested  with  the   power   of   administrative   control   and   supervision   of   the   office.   Since   the   responsibility   for   the   establishment,   administration  lies  within  the  concerned  agency,  the  role  of  the  CSC  is  limited  to  assisting  the  agency  with  respect  to   these   qualification   standards   and   approving   them.   The   CSC   cannot   substitute   its   own   standards   for   those   of   the   agency  especially  in  a  case  like  this  in  which  an  independent  constitutional  body  is  involved.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

GONZALES  VS  OCHOA  GR.  NO.  196231   Issue:   Is   Sec.   8(2)   of   RA   6670   which   vest   unto   the   President   disciplinary   jurisdiction   over   the   Deputy   Ombudsman   valid  and    constitutional?   Ruling:   No.   The   court   ruled   that   subjecting   the   Ombudsman   to   discipline   or   removal   by   the   president   whose   own   alter  egos  and  officials  in  the  Executive  Department  are  subject  to  the  Ombudsman  disciplinary  authority,  cannot  but   seriously  place  at  risk  the  independence  of  the  Ombudsman.    Sec  8  (2)  of  RA  6770  directly  collided  not  only  with  the   independence  that  the  constitution  guarantees  to  the  office  of  the  Ombudsman  but  invariably  with  the  principle  of   checks  and  balances  that  the  creation  of  an  Ombudsman  Office  seeks  to  revitalize.  

Section  7.  The  existing  Tanodbayan  shall  hereafter  be  known  as  the  Office  of  the  Special  Prosecutor.  It   shall  continue  to  function  and  exercise  its  powers  as  now  or  hereafter  may  be  provided  by  law,  except   those  conferred  on  the  Office  of  the  Ombudsman  created  under  this  Constitution.     -

Tanodbayan   –   essentially   a   prosecutory   arm   but   RA   No.   6770   has   given   the   prosecutorial   powers   to   the   Ombudsman   Ombudsman  –  champion  of  the  citizen  and  not  bound  by  legal  technicalities   Special  prosecutor  –  continue  to  exercise  the  powers  the  former  Tanodbayan  had  except  those  which  were   passed  to  the  Ombudsman;  could  neither  investigate  not  prosecute  unless  authorized  by  the  Ombudsman  

  GONZALES  VS  OCHOA  GR.  NO.  196231   Issue:  Is  Sec.  8  (2)  of  RA  6770  which  vest  unto  the  President  disciplinary  jurisdiction  over  the  Special  Prosecutor  valid   or  constitutional?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   court   did   not   consider   the   office   of   the   Special   Prosecutor   to   be   constitutionally   within   the   office   of   the  Ombudsman.  Hence,  is  not  entitled  to  the  independence  the  latter  enjoys  under  the  constitution.  

Section   8.   The   Ombudsman   and   his   Deputies   shall   be   natural-­‐born   citizens   of   the   Philippines,   and   at   the   time   of   their   appointment,   at   least   forty   years   old,   of   recognized   probity   and   independence,   and   members   of   the   Philippine   Bar,   and   must   not   have   been   candidates   for   any   elective   office   in   the   immediately   preceding   election.   The   Ombudsman   must   have,   for   ten   years   or   more,   been   a   judge   or   engaged  in  the  practice  of  law  in  the  Philippines.   During   their   tenure,   they   shall   be   subject   to   the   same   disqualifications   and   prohibitions   as   provided  for  in  Section  2  of  Article  IX-­‐A  of  this  Constitution.    

Section  9.  The  Ombudsman  and  his  Deputies  shall  be  appointed  by  the  President  from  a  list  of  at  least  six   nominees  prepared  by  the  Judicial  and  Bar  Council,  and  from  a  list  of   three  nominees  for  every  vacancy   thereafter.   Such   appointments   shall   require   no   confirmation.   All   vacancies   shall   be   filled   within   three   months  after  they  occur.    

Section   10.   The   Ombudsman   and   his   Deputies   shall   have   the   rank   of   Chairman   and   Members,   respectively,  of  the  Constitutional  Commissions,  and  they  shall  receive  the  same  salary  which  shall  not   be  decreased  during  their  term  of  office.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   11.   The   Ombudsman   and   his   Deputies   shall   serve   for   a   term   of   seven   years   without   reappointment.  They  shall  not  be  qualified  to  run  for  any  office  in  the  election  immediately  succeeding   their  cessation  from  office.     -

The  Constitution  does  not  prescribe  the  qualifications  of  the  Special  Prosecutor  

 

Section   12.   The   Ombudsman   and   his   Deputies,   as   protectors   of   the   people,   shall   act   promptly   on   complaints  filed  in  any  form  or  manner  against  public  officials  or  employees  of  the  Government,  or  any   subdivision,   agency   or   instrumentality   thereof,   including   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations,   and  shall,  in  appropriate  cases,  notify  the  complainants  of  the  action  taken  and  the  result  thereof.     -­‐  There  is  no  constitutionally  prescribed  form  for  complaints  before  the  Ombudsman  can  act;  he  is  mandated  to  act   promptly!    

Section  13.  The  Office  of  the  Ombudsman  shall  have  the  following  powers,  functions,  and  duties:   (1)   Investigate   on   its   own,   or   on   complaint   by   any   person,   any   act   or   omission   of   any   public   official,  employee,  office  or  agency,  when  such  act  or  omission  appears  to  be  illegal,  unjust,  improper,  or   inefficient.   (2)   Direct,   upon   complaint   or   at   its   own   instance,   any   public   official   or   employee   of   the   Government,  or  any  subdivision,  agency  or  instrumentality  thereof,  as  well  as  of  any  government-­‐owned   or  controlled  corporation  with  original  charter,  to  perform  and  expedite  any  act  or  duty  required  by  law,   or  to  stop,  prevent,  and  correct  any  abuse  or  impropriety  in  the  performance  of  duties.   (3)  Direct  the  officer  concerned  to  take  appropriate  action  against  a  public  official  or  employee  at   fault,   and   recommend   his   removal,   suspension,   demotion,   fine,   censure,   or   prosecution,   and   ensure   compliance  therewith.   (4)  Direct  the  officer  concerned,  in  any  appropriate  case,  and  subject  to  such  limitations  as  may   be  provided  by  law,  to  furnish  it  with  copies  of  documents  relating  to  contracts  or  transactions  entered   into   by   his   office   involving   the   disbursement   or   use   of   public   funds   or   properties,   and   report   any   irregularity  to  the  Commission  on  Audit  for  appropriate  action.   (5)  Request  any  government  agency  for  assistance  and  information  necessary  in  the  discharge  of   its  responsibilities,  and  to  examine,  if  necessary,  pertinent  records  and  documents.   (6)   Publicize   matters   covered   by   its   investigation   when   circumstances   so   warrant   and   with   due   prudence.   (7)  Determine  the  causes  of  inefficiency,  red  tape,  mismanagement,  fraud,  and  corruption  in  the   Government  and  make  recommendations  for  their  elimination  and  the  observance  of  high  standards  of   ethics  and  efficiency.   (8)  Promulgate  its  rules  of  procedure  and  exercise  such  other  powers  or  perform  such  functions   or  duties  as  may  be  provided  by  law.     PIA  VS  GERVACIO,  GR.  NO  172334    June  5,  2013   Issue:   What   is   the   quantum   of   evidence   required   in   proceedings   before   the   Ombudsman?   Is   the   Ombudsman   decision  imposing  the  penalty  of  suspension  for  1  year  immediately  executory  pending  appeal?    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:   In   administrative   cases,   the   quantum   of   evidence   necessary   to   find   an   individual   administratively   liable   is   substantial   evidence.   The   rules   of   court   defines   substantial   evidence   as   the   amount   of   relevant   evidence   which   a   reasonable  mind  might  accept  as  adequate  to  justify  a  conclusion.  As  explained    in  Ombudsman  vs  CA,  a  decision  of   the  office  of  the  Ombudsman  is  immediately  executory  even  pending  appeal.     PEOPLE  VS  SANDIGANBAYAN  G.R.  No.  185729-­‐32,  JUNE  25,2013   Issue:  Does  the  Ombudsman  have  the  power  to  grant  immunity?   Ruling:   Yes.   Sec.   17   of   RA   6770   provides   “Under   such   terms   and   conditions   as   it   may   determine,   taking   into   account   the   pertinent   provisions   of   the   Rules   of   Court,   the   Ombudsman   may   grant   immunity   from   criminal   prosecution   to   any  person  whose  testimony  or  whose  possession  or  production  of  documents  or  other  evidence  may  be  necessary   to  determine  the  truth  in  any  hearing  conducted  by  the  Ombudsman  or  under  its  authority,  in  the  performance  or  in   the   furtherance   of   its   constitutional   functions   and   statutory   objectives.   His   authority   enables   the   Ombudsman   to   carry   out   his   constitutional   mandate   to   ensuic   accountability   in   the   public   service.   It   gives   the   ombudsman   wide   latitude   in   using   an   accused   discharged   from   the   information   to   increase   the   chances   of   conviction   of   the   other   accused  and  attain  a  higher  prosecutorial  goal.  

Section   14.   The   Office   of   the   Ombudsman   shall   enjoy   fiscal   autonomy.   Its   approved   annual   appropriations  shall  be  automatically  and  regularly  released.     -

-

-

Sec.  12  &  13  spell  out  the  duties  &  responsibilities  of  the  Ombudsman  and  his  deputies   They  function  essentially  as  complaints  &  action  bureau   One  of  the  principal  functions  is  the  capability  to  act  immediately  on  complaints  not  leading  to  prosecution   but   to   correction   or   implemention   of   the   request,   either   phoned   in,   or   simply   made   orally   or   even   in   writing   (Commisioner  Colayco).     To  cut  red  tape  in  order  to  obtain  gov’t  action,  they  can  commence  investigation  without  having  to  wait  for  a   formal  complaint   The  power  of  the  Ombudsman  to  investigate  is  very  broad  especially  as  it  has  been  given  by  R.A.  No.  6670   and  expanded  by  the  Ombudsman  Act  of  1989   He   can   investigate   ‘any   illegal   act   or   omission   by   a   public   official’   even   if   the   offense   committed   by   the   official  is  not  related  to  the  performance  of  his  functions   Even   the   claim   of   confidentiality   will   not   prevent   the   Ombudsman   from   demanding   the   production   of   documents  needed  for  the  investigation   Under  Bank  Secrecy  Law,  there  must  be  a  pending  case  before  a  court  of  competent  jurisdiction  before  an  in     camera  inspection  may  b  allowe;  account  must  be  clearly  identified;  inspiection  limited  to  subject  matter  of   pending   case;   bank   personnel   and   the   account   holder   must   be   notified   to   be   present   during   inspection   &   such  inspection  may  cover  only  the  account  identified  in  the  pending  case   When  Ombudaman  has  power  to  investigate  a  complaint,  he  also  has  the  authority  to  dismiss  the  complaint   While  Ombudsman’s  power  to  investigate  is  primary,  it  is  not  ABSOLUTE,  he  may  delegate  it  to  otherswho   have  power  to  investigate  &  take  it  back  anytime  he  wants  to   Power  to  investigate  also  includes  power  to  impose  preventive  suspension   Thus:     1.  The  Ombudsman  can  investigate  only  officers  of  the  gov’t.  owned  corps.  With  original  charter.  PAL,  even   when  still  owned  by  gov’t.,  did  not  have  original  charter   2.   The   jurisdiction   of   the   Ombudsman   over   disciplinary   cases   involving   public   school   teachers   has   been   modified  by  Sec  9.  Of  RA  No.  4670  w/c  says  that  such  cases  must  first  go  to  a  committee  appointed  by  the   Sec.   of   Education     (Ombudman   vs   Estandarte,   April   13,2007).   It   is   erroneous   thus   to   contend   the   RA   No.   4670   confers   an   exclusive   disciplinary     authority   on   the   DECS   over   public   school   teachers   &   prescribes   an   exclusive   procedure   in   administrative   investigations   involving   them.   The   1987   Consitution   &   RA   No.   6770   were  quite  explicit  in  conferring  authority  on  the  Ombudsman  to  act  on  complaints  against  ALL  public  official  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

-

-

-

&   employees,   except   those   who   may   be   removed   only   by   impeachment   or   over   members   of   congress   or   Judiciary.   3.  Sec.  25  of  RA  No.  6770,  “The  Ombudsman  may  imposein  administrative  proceedings  the  penalty  ranging   from   suspension   without   pay   fro   1   year   to   dismissal   with   forfeiture   of   benefits   or   a   fine   ranging   from   P5,000   to  twiced  the  amount  malversed,  illegally  taken  or  lost,  or  both  at  his  discretion.”   Note:  elective  officials  may  be  dismissed  only  by  the  proper  court  according  to  the  Local  Gov’t.  Code   4.  Special  Prosecutor  -­‐    may  not  file  an  information  without  authority  from  the  Ombudsman;  prosecutes  only   when  authorized  by  the  Ombudsman   Deputy  Ombudsman  –  has  been  given  a  delegated  authority  to  prosecute   5.  Ombudsman  has  been  conferred  rule  making  power  to  govern  procedures  under  it;  1  who  is  answering  an   administrative  complaint  filed  before  the  Ombudsman  may  not  appeal  to  the  procedural  rules  under  the  CSC   6.  Power  to  investigate  or  conduct  a  preliminary  investigation  on  any  Ombusdman  case  may  be  exercised  by   an   investigator   or   prosecutor   of   the   Office   of   the   Ombudsman,   or   by   any   Provincial   or   City   Prosecutor   or   their  assistance,  either  in  their  regular  capacities  as  deputized  Ombusdman  prosecutors   7.   Preventive   suspension   –   only   last   90   days   in   consonance   with   PD   No.   807,   now   Sec.   52   of   the   Administrative  Code  of  1987    

 

Section   15.   The   right   of   the   State   to   recover   properties   unlawfully   acquired   by   public   officials   or   employees,  from  them  or  from  their  nominees  or  transferees,  shall  not  be  barred  by  prescription,  laches,   or  estoppel.     -

Sec.   15   of   R.A.   No.   1379,   “The   laws   concerning   acquisitive   prescription   &   limitition   of   actions   cannot   be   invoked  by,  nor  hsall  they  benefit  the  respondent  in  respect  of  any  property  unlawfully  acquired  by  him”.   In   Preidential   Ad   Hoc   Fact-­‐Finding   Com.   on   Behest   Loans   v.   Desierto   it   has   been   declared   that   Sec.   15   of   Art.   XI  applies  only  to  civil  actions  fro  recovery  of  ill-­‐gotten  wealth,  &  not  to  criminal  cases   Prescription  of  criminal  cases  is  governed  by  special  laws  on  prescription  

  REPULIC  VS.  COJUANGCO  OR  NO.  139930,  JUNE  26,  2012.  

ISSUE:   May   the   prosecution   of   offenses   arising   from,   relating,   or   incident   to,   or   involving   its   gotten   wealth   contemplated  in  sec.  Art  XI  of  the  constitution  be  barred  by  prescription.   RULING:  Yes.  The  court  has  already  settled  in  Pres.  Ad  HOC-­‐Fact-­‐Finding  Committee  on  Behest  Loans  V.  Desierto  that   Sec.15,,  Art  IX  of  the  1987  constitution  applies  only  to  civil  actions  for  recovery  of  ill-­‐gotten  wealth,  not  to  criminal   cases  such  as  the  complaint  against  respondents  in  OMB-­‐0-­‐90-­‐2810.  Thus,  the  prosecution  of  offenses  arising  from,   relating   or   incident   to,   or   involving   ill-­‐gotten   wealth   contemplated   in   Sec.15,   ART   XI   of   the   1987   constitution   may   be   barred  by  prescription.  Prescription  of  actions  is  a  valued  rule  in  all  civilized  states  from  the  beginning  of  organized   society.   It   is   a   ruled   of   fairness,   since   without   it,   the   plaintiff   can   postpone   the   filling   of   his   action   to   the   point   of   depriving   the   defendant,   through   the   passage   of   time,   of   access   to   defense   witness   that   would   have   been   discarded   or   could   no   longer   be   located.   Moreover,   the   memories   of   witness   are   eroded   by   time.   There   is   an   absolute   need   in   the  interest  of  fairness  to  bar  actions  that  have  taken  the  plaintiff  too  long  to  file  in  court.  

Section  16.  No  loan,  guaranty,  or  other  form  of  financial  accommodation  for  any  business  purpose  may   be  granted,  directly  or  indirectly,  by  any  government-­‐owned  or  controlled  bank  or  financial  institution  to   the   President,   the   Vice-­‐President,   the   Members   of   the   Cabinet,   the   Congress,   the   Supreme   Court,   and   the  Constitutional  Commissions,  the  Ombudsman,  or  to  any  firm  or  entity  in  which  they  have  controlling   interest,  during  their  tenure.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

-

Intention   is   to   prevent   such   high   ranking   officials   from   making   use   of   their   position   fro   the   purposes   of   obtaining   financial   accommodations   from   govt.   institutions   &   from   firms   wherein   they   have   a   controlling   interest  

 

Section   17.   A   public   officer   or   employee   shall,   upon   assumption   of   office   and   as   often   thereafter   as   may   be  required  by  law,  submit  a  declaration  under  oath  of  his  assets,  liabilities,  and  net  worth.  In  the  case  of   the   President,   the   Vice-­‐President,   the   Members   of   the   Cabinet,   the   Congress,   the   Supreme   Court,   the   Constitutional   Commissions   and   other   constitutional   offices,   and   officers   of   the   armed   forces   with   general  or  flag  rank,  the  declaration  shall  be  disclosed  to  the  public  in  the  manner  provided  by  law.     -

2  commands:   1)  filing  of  a  declaration  of  assets  &  liabilities  –  applicable  to  public  officers  &  employees  regardless  of  rank   2)   public   disclosure   of   assets   &   liabilities   in   the   manner   provided   by   law   –   applicable   only   to   Pres.,   VP,   members  of  Cabinet,  the  Congress,  the  SC,  &  the  Constitutional  Commissions   However,  the  legislature  may  also  require  public  disclosure  of  assets  &  liabilities  of  other  official.  

  OMBUDSMAN  VS.  CAPULONG  GR  NO.  201643,  MARCH  12,  2014.  

ISSUE:   Did   Capulong’s   non-­‐disclosure   of   his   wife   business   interest   in   his   SALN   Constitute   serious   dishonesty   of   grave   misconduct?   RULING:  No.  Capulong’s  nondisclosure  of  his  wife’s  business  interest  does  not  constitute  serious  dishonesty  of  grave   misconduct.  Nothing   in  the  record  reveals  that  Capulong  deliberately  placed  “N/A”  in  his  SALN  despite  knowledge   about   his   wife’s   business   interest.   As   explained   by   Capulong,   the   SEC   already   revoked   the   registration   of   the   corporations  where  his  wife  was  an  incorporator  ;  hence,  he  deemed  it  not  necessary  to  indicate  it  in  his  SALN.  

Section   18.   Public   officers   and   employees   owe   the   State   and   this   Constitution   allegiance   at   all   times   and   any  public  officer  or  employee  who  seeks  to  change  his  citizenship  or  acquire  the  status  of  an  immigrant   of  another  country  during  his  tenure  shall  be  dealt  with  by  law.     -

Rationale  given  by  Com.  Ople:   Public  officers  are  expected  to  set  the  example  or  standard  of  single-­‐minded  allegiance  to  the  nation  &  to   the  public  interest.  xxx    

 

ARTICLE  XII  NATIONAL  ECONOMY  AND  PATRIMONY    

Section  1.  The  goals  of  the  national  economy  are  a  more  equitable  distribution  of  opportunities,  income,   and   wealth;   a   sustained   increase   in   the   amount   of   goods   and   services   produced   by   the   nation   for   the   benefit   of   the   people;   and   an   expanding   productivity   as   the   key   to   raising   the   quality   of   life   for   all,   especially  the  underprivileged.   The  State  shall  promote  industrialization  and  full  employment  based  on  sound  agricultural  development   and  agrarian  reform,  through  industries  that  make  full  and  efficient  use  of  human  and  natural  resources,   and   which   are   competitive   in   both   domestic   and   foreign   markets.   However,   the   State   shall   protect   Filipino  enterprises  against  unfair  foreign  competition  and  trade  practices.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

In   the   pursuit   of   these   goals,   all   sectors   of   the   economy   and   all   regions   of   the   country   shall   be   given   optimum  opportunity  to  develop.  Private  enterprises,  including  corporations,  cooperatives,  and  similar   collective  organizations,  shall  be  encouraged  to  broaden  the  base  of  their  ownership.   •

Threefold  goal  of  the  national  economy  

1.  More  equitable  distribution  of  wealth;   2.  Increase  of  wealth  for  the  benefit  of  the  people;   3.  Increased  productivity.     • The  State  shall  promote  industrialization  and  full  employment     1.  It  should  be  based  on  sound  agricultural  development  and  agrarian  reform   2.  It  should  be  through  industries  that  make  full  and  efficient  use  of  human  and  natural  resources.   Industries  should  also  be  competitive  in  both  domestic  and  foreign  markets.     • Meaning  of  the  Phrase  “UNFAIR  FOREIGN  COMPETITION  AND  TRADE  PRACTICES”     The   phrase   is   not   to   be   understood   in   a   limited   legal   and   technical   sense   but   in   the   sense   of   anything   that   is   harmful  to  Philippine  enterprises.  At  the  same  time,  however,  the  intention  is  not  to  protect  local  inefficiency.  Nor  is   the  intention  to  protect  local  industries  from  foreign  competition  at  the  expense  of  the  consuming  public.     • Manila  Prince  Hotel  vs.  GSIS     The  national  patrimony  refers  not  only  to  natural  resources  but  also  to  the  cultural  heritage  of  the  Filipinos.     • Miners  Association  of  the  Philippines  vs.  Factoran     The  1987  Constitution  assumed  a  more  dynamic  role  in  the  exploration,  development,  and  utilization  (EDU)   of  the  natural  resources  of  the  country.      

Section  2.  All  lands  of  the  public  domain,  waters,  minerals,  coal,  petroleum,  and  other  mineral  oils,  all   forces   of   potential   energy,   fisheries,   forests   or   timber,   wildlife,   flora   and   fauna,   and   other   natural   resources  are  owned  by  the  State.  With  the  exception  of  agricultural  lands,  all  other  natural  resources   shall   not   be   alienated.   The   exploration,   development,   and   utilization   of   natural   resources   shall   be   under   the  full  control  and  supervision  of  the  State.  The  State  may  directly  undertake  such  activities,  or  it  may   enter   into   co-­‐production,   joint   venture,   or   production-­‐sharing   agreements   with   Filipino   citizens,   or   corporations  or  associations  at  least  sixty  per  centum  of  whose  capital  is  owned  by  such  citizens.  Such   agreements  may  be  for  a  period  not  exceeding  twenty-­‐five  years,  renewable  for  not  more  than  twenty-­‐ five  years,  and  under  such  terms  and  conditions  as  may  be  provided  by  law.  In  cases  of  water  rights  for   irrigation,   water   supply   fisheries,   or   industrial   uses   other   than   the   development   of   water   power,   beneficial  use  may  be  the  measure  and  limit  of  the  grant.     The  State  shall  protect  the  nation's  marine  wealth  in  its  archipelagic  waters,  territorial  sea,  and  exclusive   economic  zone,  and  reserve  its  use  and  enjoyment  exclusively  to  Filipino  citizens.     The  Congress  may,  by  law,  allow  small-­‐scale  utilization  of  natural  resources  by  Filipino  citizens,  as  well  as   cooperative  fish  farming,  with  priority  to  subsistence  fishermen  and  fish-­‐  workers  in  rivers,  lakes,  bays,   and  lagoons.     The  President  may  enter  into  agreements  with  foreign-­‐owned  corporations  involving  either  technical  or   financial  assistance  for  large-­‐scale  exploration,  development,  and  utilization  of  minerals,  petroleum,  and   other   mineral   oils   according   to   the   general   terms   and   conditions   provided   by   law,   based   on   real  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

contributions  to  the  economic  growth  and  general  welfare  of  the  country.  In  such  agreements,  the  State   shall  promote  the  development  and  use  of  local  scientific  and  technical  resources.     The   President   shall   notify   the   Congress   of   every   contract   entered   into   in   accordance   with   this   provision,   within  thirty  days  from  its  execution.     •



The  following  are  owned  by  the  State:   1.  Lands  of  the  public  domain   2.  Waters   3.  Minerals,  coals,  petroleum,  and  other  mineral  oils   4.  All  sources  of  potential  energy   5.  Fisheries   6.  Forests  or  timber   7.  Wildlife   8.  Flora  and  fauna  and   9.  Other  natural  resources.     Alienation  of  Natural  Resources    General  Rule:  All  natural  resources  CANNOT  be  alienated.    Exception:  Agricultural  lands.    

What  is  Regalian  Doctrine  [Jura  Regalia]?     The  Regalian  doctrine  is  a  universal  feudal  theory  that  all  lands  were  held  from  the  Crown.   • Any  person  claiming  ownership  of  a  portion  of  the  public  domain  must  be  able  to  show  title  from  the  state   according  to  any  of  the  recognized  modes  of  acquisition  of  title.     • Exploration,  Development  and  Utilization  (EDU)  of  Natural  Resources   1.  Shall  be  under  the  full  control  and  supervision  of  the  State   2.  Meaning:   a.  The  state  may  DIRECTLY  UNDERTAKE  such  activities   b.   The   state   may   enter   into   CO-­‐PRODUCTION,   JOINT   VENTURE   OR   PRODUCTION-­‐SHARING   arrangements   with   Filipino   citizen   or   Corporation   or   association   at   least   60%   of   whose   capital   is   owned  by  such  citizens.   3.  Limitations:   a.  Period:  It  should  not  exceed  25  years,  renewable  for  not  more  than  25  years.   b.  Under  terms  and  conditions  as  may  be  provided  by  law.     4.  In  case  of  water  rights/water  supply/fisheries/industrial  uses  other  than  the  development  of  water  power     5.  The  beneficial  use  may  be  the  measure  and  limit  of  the  grant.     • Small-­‐scale  Utilization  of  Natural  Resources   1.  Congress  may,  by  law,  authorize  small-­‐scale  utilization  of  natural  resources  by  Filipino  citizens.   2.  Congress  may  also  authorize  cooperative  fish  farming  with  priority  given  to  subsistence  fishermen  and  fish   workers  in  the  rivers,  lakes,  bays  and  lagoons.     • Large-­‐Scale  Exploration,  Development  and  Utilization  of  Minerals/Petroleum/Other  Mineral  Oils   1.  The  President  may  enter  into  agreements  with  foreign  owned  corporations  involving  technical  or  financial   assistance  for  large  scale  exploration  etc.  of  minerals,  petroleum,  and  other  mineral  oils.  These  agreements  should   be  in  accordance  with  the  general  terms  and  conditions  provided  by  law.   2.  They  should  be  based  on  the  real  contributions  to  economic  growth  and  general  welfare  of  the  country.   •

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

3.   In   the   agreements,   the   State   should   promote   the   development   and   use   of   local   scientific   and   technical   resources.   4.   The   President   should   notify   Congress   of   every   contract   under   this   provision   within   30   days   from   its   execution.   5.  Management  and  service  contracts  are  not  allowed  under  this  rule.     • Protection  of  Marine  Wealth   1.  The  State  shall  protect  its  marine  wealth  in  its  archipelagic  waters,  territorial  sea  &  EEZ   2.  The  State  shall  reserve  its  use  and  enjoyment  exclusively  to  Filipino  citizens.   • Q:   Who   may   change   the   classification   of   public   lands,   e.g.,   from   inalienable   to   alienable,   and   how   is   the   classification  done?   A:   The   classification   of   public   lands   is   the   exclusive   prerogative   of   the   President   upon   recommendation   of   the  pertinent  department  head.  (CA  No.  141)   • Q:  Does  the  classification  of  land  change  automatically  when  the  nature  of  the  land  changes?   A:  No.  A  positive  act  of  the  executive  is  needed.  Anyone  who  claims  that  the  classification  has  been  changed   must  be  able  to  show  the  positive  act  of  the  President  indicating  such  positive  act.  The  classification  is  descriptive  of   its   legal   nature   and   not   of   what   the   land   actually   looks   like.   Hence,   for   instance,   that   a   former   forest   has   been   denuded  does  not  by  the  fact  meant  that  it  has  ceased  to  be  forest  land.  (Director  of  Lands  v.  Judge  Aquino,  1990)   • Q:  Can  a  land  have  a  mixed  classification,  e.g.,  partly  mineral,  partly  agricultural?   A:   No.   “The   Court   feels   that   the   rights   over   the   land   are   indivisible   and   that   the   land   itself   cannot   be   half   agricultural  and  half  mineral.     • La  Bugal-­‐B’laan  vs.  DENR     The   management   or   operation   of   mining   activities   by   foreign   contractors,   which   is   the   primary   feature   of   service  contracts,  was  precisely  the  evil  that  the  drafters  of  the  1987  Constitution  sought  to  eradicate.       • La  Bugal-­‐B’laan  vs.  DENR     All   mineral   resources   are   owned   by   the   State.   Their   exploration,   development   and   utilization   (EDU)   must   always  be  subject  to  the  full  control  and  supervision  of  the  State.    More  specifically,  given  the  inadequacy   Filipino   capital   and   technology   in   large-­‐scale   EDU   activities,   the   State   may   secure   the   help   of   foreign   companies   in   all   relevant   matters   –   especially   financial   and   technical   assistance   –   provided   that,   at   all   times,   the  State  maintains  its  rights  of  full  control.    

  Section   3.   Lands   of   the   public   domain   are   classified   into   agricultural,   forest   or   timber,   mineral   lands   and   national   parks.   Agricultural   lands   of   the   public   domain   may   be   further   classified   by   law   according   to   the   uses   to   which   they   may   be   devoted.   Alienable   lands   of   the   public   domain   shall   be   limited   to   agricultural   lands.   Private   corporations   or   associations   may   not   hold   such   alienable   lands   of   the   public   domain   except  by  lease,  for  a  period  not  exceeding  twenty-­‐five  years,  renewable  for  not  more  than  twenty-­‐five   years,  and  not  to  exceed  one  thousand  hectares  in  area.  Citizens  of  the  Philippines  may  lease  not  more   than  five  hundred  hectares,  or  acquire  not  more  than  twelve  hectares  thereof  by  purchase,  homestead,   or  grant.     Taking   into   account   the   requirements   of   conservation,   ecology,   and   development,   and   subject   to   the   requirements   of   agrarian   reform,   the   Congress   shall   determine,   by   law,   the   size   of   lands   of   the   public   domain  which  may  be  acquired,  developed,  held,  or  leased  and  the  conditions  therefor.   •

LANDS  OF  THE  PUBLIC  DOMAIN  ARE  CLASSIFIED  INTO:   1.  Agricultural   2.  Forest/timber   3.  Mineral  lands  &   4.  National  Parks  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

1.  Reclassification  of  PUBLIC  (MINERAL  AND  AGRICULTURAL)  lands  –  exclusive  prerogative  of  the  Executive   Department   through   the   Office   of   the   President,   upon   recommendation   by   the   DENR.   But   as   to   FOREST   AND   NATIONAL  PARKS,  it  is  the  Congress  which  has  the  sole  power  to  reclassify.   2.  Classification  is  descriptive  of  the  legal  nature  of  the  land  and  NOT  what  it  looks  like.   Thus,  the  fact  that  forest  land  is  denuded  does  not  mean  it  is  no  longer  forest  land.     • Alienable  lands  of  public  domain   1.  Only  agricultural  lands  are  alienable.   2.  Agricultural  lands  may  be  further  classified  by  law  according  to  the  uses  to  which  they  may  be  devoted.     • Limitations  regarding  Alienable  Lands  of  the  Public  Domain   1.  For  private  corporations  or  associations   a.  They  can  only  hold  alienable  lands  of  the  public  domain  BY  LEASE   b.  Period:  Cannot  exceed  25  years,  renewable  for  not  more  than  25  years   c.  Area:  Lease  cannot  exceed  1,000  hectares     NOTE:  A  corporation  sole  is  treated  like  other  private  corporations  for  the  purpose  of  acquiring  public  lands.   2.  For  Filipino  citizens   a.  Can  lease  up  to  500  hectares   b.  Can  ACQUIRE  not  more  than  12  hectares  by  purchase,  homestead  or  grant     • Means  by  Which  Lands  of  the  Public  Domain  Become  Private  Land   1.  Acquired  from  government  by  purchase  or  grant;   2.  Uninterrupted  possession  by  the  occupant  and  his  predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest  since  time  immemorial;  and   3.   Open,   exclusive,   and   undisputed   possession   of   ALIENABLE   (agricultural)   public   land   for   a   period   of   30   years.   a.  Upon  completion  of  the  requisite  period,  the  land  becomes  private  property  ipso  jure  without  need  of  any   judicial  or  other  sanction.   b.   Possession   since   time   immemorial   leads   to   the   presumption   that   the   land   was   never   part   of   public   domain.   c.  In  computing  30  years,  start  from  when  land  was  converted  to  alienable  land,  not  when  it  was  still  forest   land   d.  Presumption  is  always  that  land  belongs  to  the  State.     • Q:   Section   2   speaks   of   “co-­‐production,   joint   venture,   or   production   sharing   agreements”   as   modes   of   exploration,   development,   and   utilization   of   inalienable   lands.   Does   this   effectively   exclude   the   lease   system?   A:  Yes,  with  respect  to  mineral  and  forest  lands.  (Agricultural  lands  may  be  subject  of  lease).     • Q:  Who  are  qualified  to  take  part  in  the  exploration,  development  and  utilization  of  natural  resources?   A:   Filipino   citizens   and   corporations   or   associations   at   least   sixty   percent   of   whose   capital   is   owned   by   Filipino   citizens.   (Note   however,   that   as   to   marine   wealth,   only   Filipino   citizens   are   qualified.   This   is   also   true   of   natural  resources  in  rivers,  bays,  lakes  and  lagoons,  but  with  allowance  for  cooperatives.).   • Q:  If  natural  resources,  except  agricultural  land,  cannot  be  alienated,  how  may  they  be  explored,  developed,   or  utilized?   A:  (1)  Direct  undertaking  of  activities  by  the  State  or  (2)  Co-­‐production,  joint  venture,  or  production  sharing   agreements  with  the  State  and  all  “under  the  full  control  and  supervision  of  the  State.”   • Q:  May  the  State  enter  into  service  contracts  with  foreign  owned  corporations?   A:   Yes,   but   subject   to   the   strict   limitations   in   the   last   two   paragraphs   of   Section   2.   Financial   and   technical   agreements   are   a   form   of   service   contract.   Such   service   contacts   may   be   entered   into   only   with   respect   to   minerals,  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

petroleum,   and   other   mineral   oils.   The   grant   of   such   service   contracts   is   subject   to   several   safeguards,   among   them:   (1)   that   the   service   contract   be   crafted   in   accordance   with   a   general   law   setting   standard   of   uniform   terms,   conditions  and  requirements;  (2)  the  President  be  the  signatory  for  the  government;  and  (3)  the  President  report  the   executed  agreement  to  Congress  within  thirty  days.    

Section  4.  The  Congress  shall,  as  soon  as  possible,  determine  by  law  the  specific  limits  of  forest  lands  and   national   parks,   marking   clearly   their   boundaries   on   the   ground.   Thereafter,   such   forest   lands   and   national  parks  shall  be  conserved  and  may  not  be  increased  nor  diminished,  except  by  law.  The  Congress   shall  provide,  for  such  period  as  it  may  determine,  measures  to  prohibit  logging  in  endangered  forests   and  watershed  areas.     •



May  national  parks  be  increased  or  diminished?     -­‐  The  forest  lands  and  national  parks  shall  be  conserved  and  may  not  be  increased  nor  diminished,   except  by  law.     Director  of  Lands  vs.  CA     The   classification   of   public   lands   in   an   exclusive   prerogative   of   the   executive   department   of   the   government   and   not   the   courts.   In   the   absence   of   such   classification,   the   land   remains   as   unclassified   land   until   it   is   released  there  from  and  rendered  open  to  disposition.    

Section  5.  The  State,  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  Constitution  and  national  development  policies  and   programs,  shall  protect  the  rights  of  indigenous  cultural  communities  to  their  ancestral  lands  to  ensure   their  economic,  social,  and  cultural  well-­‐being.   The  Congress  may  provide  for  the  applicability  of  customary  laws  governing  property  rights  or  relations   in  determining  the  ownership  and  extent  of  ancestral  domain.   •

Protection  of  Indigenous  Cultural  Communities   1.  The  State  protects  the  rights  of  indigenous  cultural  communities  to  their  ancestral  lands   a.  Subject  to  Constitutional  provisions   b.  Subject  to  national  development  policies  and  programs  

  2.   In   determining   ownership   and   extent   of   ancestral   domain,   Congress   may   use   customary   laws   on   property   rights  and  relations.     3.  “ANCESTRAL  DOMAIN”   a.  It  refers  to  lands  which  are  considered  as  pertaining  to  a  cultural  region   b.  This  includes  lands  not  yet  occupied,  such  as  deep  forests.     • Carino  vs.  Insular  Gov’t     Native   title   held   by   Filipinos   from   time   immemorial   and   excluded   them   from   the   coverage   of   jura   regalia   since  they  are  private  and  belong  to  indigenous  people.  Their  indigenous  rights  precede  state  ownership  and   antedate  the  very  concept  of  public  dominion.       • Cruz  vs.  Secretary     R.A.    8371,  or  the  Indigenous  People’s  Rights  Act  of  1997,  recognizes  the  existence  of  the  indigenous  cultural   communities  or  indigenous  peoples  as  a  distinct  sector  in  the  Philippine  society.  It  grants  these  people  the   ownership   and   possession   of   their   ancestral   domains   and   ancestral   lands,   and   defines   the   extent   of   these   lands  and  domains.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   6.   The   use   of   property   bears   a   social   function,   and   all   economic   agents   shall   contribute   to   the   common   good.   Individuals   and   private   groups,   including   corporations,   cooperatives,   and   similar   collective  organizations,  shall  have  the  right  to  own  establish,  and  operate  economic  enterprises,  subject   to   the   duty   of   the   State   to   promote   distributive   justice   and   to   intervene   when   the   common   good   so   demands.     •

Manila  Memorial  Park  vs.  DSWD     The  right  to  property  has  a  social  dimension.  While  Article  XIII  of  the  Constitution  provides  the  precept  for   the   protection   of   property,   various   laws   and   jurisprudence,   particularly   on   agrarian   reform   and   the   regulation  of  contracts  and  public  utilities,  continuously  serve  as  a  reminder  that  the  right  to  property  can  be   relinquished  upon  the  command  of  the  State  for  the  proportion  of  public  good.       Q:   May   the   National   Electrification   Authority,   a   government   agency   empowered   by   law   to   supervise   and   control  electric  cooperatives  and  borrowers,  override  the  decisions  of  a  cooperatives  board?   A. In  the  facts  of  this  case  the  Court  saw  no  proof  of  direct  injury  to  petitioner.  Hence  it  did  not  want  to  rule   directly   on   the   constitutionality   of   the   law   authorizing   NEA   to   override   a   board.   However,   the   court   observed  that  Article  XII  Section  6  of  the  Constitution  says  that  cooperatives  are  subject  to  the  duty  of   the   State   to   intervene   when   the   common   good   demands.   [La   Union   Electric   Cooperative   vs.   Judge   Yaranon].  

Section   7.   Save   in   cases   of   hereditary   succession,   no   private   lands   shall   be   transferred   or   conveyed   except   to   individuals,   corporations,   or   associations   qualified   to   acquire   or   hold   lands   of   the   public   domain.   Who  may  acquire  private  lands?   • GENERAL  RULE:   1.  Private  lands  CAN  only  be  transferred  or  conveyed  to:   a.  Filipino  citizens     b.   Corporations   or   associations   incorporated   in   the   Philippines,   at   least   60%   of   whose   capital   is   owned  by  Filipino  citizens              Exceptions   i.  In  intestate  succession,  where  an  alien  heir  of  a  Filipino  is  the  transferee  of  private  land.   ii.  A  natural  born  citizen  of  the  Philippines  who  has  lost  his  Philippine  citizenship  may  be  a  transferee   of   PRIVATE   LAND,   subject   to   limitation   provided   by   law.   Hence,   land   can   be   used   only   for   residential   purposes.  In  this  case,  he  only  acquires  derivative  title.   iii.  Foreign  states  may  acquire  land  but  only  for  embassy  and  staff  residence  purposes.     3.  Filipino  citizenship  is  only  required  at  the  time  the  land  is  acquired.  Thus,  loss  of  citizenship  after  acquiring   the  land  does  not  deprive  ownership.     4.  Restriction  against  aliens  only  applies  to  acquisition  of  ownership.  Therefore:   a.  Aliens  may  be  lessees  or  usufructuaries  of  private  lands   b.  Aliens  may  be  mortgagees  of  land,  as  long  as  they  do  not  obtain  possession  thereof  and  do  not  bid   in  the  foreclosure  sale.   5.  Land  tenure  is  not  indispensable  to  the  free  exercise  of  religious  profession  and  worship.     A  religious  corporation  controlled  by  non-­‐  Filipinos  cannot  acquire  and  own  land,  even  for  religious  purposes.     •

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  







J.G.  Summit  Holdings  v.  CA     The  prohibition  under  Section  7,  Article  XII  of  the  Constitution  applies  only  to  ownership  of  land  –  it  does   not  extend  to  immovable  or  real  property  as  defined  in  Article  415  of  the  Civil  Code.       Republic  vs.  Iglesia  ni  Kristo     The   Iglesia   ni   Kristo,   a   corporation   sole   of   juridical   person,   is   disqualified   to   acquire   or   hold   alienable   lands  of  the  public  domain,  because  the  said  church  is  not  entitled  to  avail  itself  of  the  benefits  which   applies  only  to  Filipino  citizens  or  natural  persons.  A  corporation  sole  has  no  nationality.       Cheesman  vs.  IAC     The   constitution   prohibits   the   sale   of   the   land   to   aliens.   He   acquired   no   right   whatsoever   over   the   property  inspite  of  the  fact  that  it  was  purchased  by  his  wife  during  their  marriage.    

    Section   8.   Notwithstanding   the   provisions   of   Section   7   of   this   Article,   a   natural-­‐born   citizen   of   the   Philippines   who   has   lost   his   Philippine   citizenship   may   be   a   transferee   of   private   lands,   subject   to   limitations  provided  by  law.     A   natural   born   citizen   of   the   Philippines   who   has   lost   his   Philippine   citizenship   may   be   a   transferee   of   PRIVATE   LAND,   subject   to   limitation   provided   by   law.   Hence,   land   can   be   used   only   for   residential   purposes.   In  this  case,  he  only  acquires  derivative  title.     Remedies  to  recover  private  lands  from  disqualified  aliens:   1.  Escheat  proceedings   2.  Action  for  reversion  under  the  Public  Land  Act   3.  An  action  by  the  former  Filipino  owner  to  recover  the  land   a.  The  former  in  pari  delicto  principle  has  been  abandoned   b.  Alien  still  has  the  title  (didn’t  pass  it  on  to  one  who  is  qualified)   •

  Section   9.   The   Congress   may   establish   an   independent   economic   and   planning   agency   headed   by   the   President,  which  shall,  after  consultations  with  the  appropriate  public  agencies,  various  private  sectors,   and   local   government   units,   recommend   to   Congress,   and   implement   continuing   integrated   and   coordinated  programs  and  policies  for  national  development.     Until   the   Congress   provides   otherwise,   the   National   Economic   and   Development   Authority   shall   function  as  the  independent  planning  agency  of  the  government.     •

National  Economic  Development  Authority  (NEDA)  in  the  independent  planning  agency  of  the  Government   as   provided   for   by   the   Constitution.   This   is   the   central   planning   agency   which   is   recommendatory   to   Congress.  While  it  is  independent  of  Congress,  it  is  under  the  President  and  dependent  on  the  President  who   chairs  the  body.    

Section  10.  The  Congress  shall,  upon  recommendation  of  the  economic  and  planning  agency,  when  the   national  interest  dictates,  reserve  to  citizens  of  the  Philippines  or  to  corporations  or  associations  at  least   sixty   per   centum   of   whose   capital   is   owned   by   such   citizens,   or   such   higher   percentage   as   Congress   may   prescribe,   certain   areas   of   investments.   The   Congress   shall   enact   measures   that   will   encourage   the   formation  and  operation  of  enterprises  whose  capital  is  wholly  owned  by  Filipinos.     •

In  the  grant  of  rights,  privileges,  and  concessions  covering  the  national  economy  and  patrimony,  the  State   shall  give  preference  to  qualified  Filipinos.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

The  State  shall  regulate  and  exercise  authority  over  foreign  investments  within  its  national  jurisdiction  and  in   accordance  with  its  national  goals  and  priorities.   • Power  of  Congress     1.   Congress,   upon   the   recommendation   of   NEDA,   can   reserve   to   Filipino   citizens   or   to   corporations   or   associations   at   least   60%   of   whose   capital   is   owned   by   such   citizens,   or   such   higher   percentage   as   Congress   may   prescribe  certain  areas  of  investment.  This  may  be  done  when  the  national  interest  dictates.   2.  Congress  shall  also  enact  measures  to  encourage  the  formation  and  operation  of  enterprises  whose   capital  is  wholly  owned  by  Filipinos.     • National  Economy  and  Patrimony   In   the   grant   of   rights,   privileges   and   concessions   covering   the   national   economy   and   patrimony,   the   State  shall  give  preference  to  QUALIFIED  Filipinos.     •

Section   11.   No   franchise,   certificate,   or   any   other   form   of   authorization   for   the   operation   of   a   public   utility  shall  be  granted  except  to  citizens  of  the  Philippines  or  to  corporations  or  associations  organized   under  the  laws  of  the  Philippines  at  franchise,  certificate,  or  authorization  be  exclusive  in  character  or   for  a  longer  period  than  fifty  years.  Neither  shall  any  such  franchise  or  right  be  granted  except  under  the   condition  that  it  shall  be  subject  to  amendment,  alteration,  or  repeal  by  the  Congress  when  the  common   good  so  requires.  The  State  shall  encourage  equity  participation  in  public  utilities  by  the  general  public.   The   participation   of   foreign   investors   in   the   governing   body   of   any   public   utility   enterprise   shall   be   limited   to   their   proportionate   share   in   its   capital,   and   all   the   executive   and   managing   officers   of   such   corporation  or  association  must  be  citizens  of  the  Philippines.     Power  to  grant:   1.    Congress  may  directly  grant  a  legislative  franchise;  or   2.  Power  to  grant  franchises  may  be  delegated  to  appropriate  regulatory  agencies  and/or  LGU’s   • Public  utility   1.   In   order   to   be   considered   as   a   public   utility,   and   thus   subject   to   this   provision,   the   undertaking   must   involve  dealing  directly  with  the  public.   2.   Thus,   a   Build-­‐Operate-­‐Transfer   grantee   is   NOT   a   public   utility.   The   BOT   grantee   merely   constructs   the   utility,   and   it   leases   the   same   to   the   government.   It   is   the   government   which   operates   the   public   utility   (operation  separate  from  ownership).   • To  whom  granted:   1.  Filipino  citizens  or   2.  Corporations  or  associations  incorporated  in  the  Philippines  and  at  least  60%  of  the  capital  is  owned  by   Filipino  citizens.   • Terms  and  conditions:   1.  Duration:  Not  more  than  50  years   2.  Franchise  is  NOT  exclusive  in  character   3.  Franchise  is  granted  under  the  condition  that  it  is  subject  to  amendment,  alteration,  or  repeal  by  Congress   when  the  common  good  so  requires.   • Participation  of  Foreign  Investors   1.  The  participation  of  foreign  investors  in  the  governing  body  of  any  public  utility  enterprise  shall  be  limited   to  their  proportionate  share  in  its  capital.   2.   Foreigners   cannot   be   appointed   as   the   executive   and   managing   officers   because   these   positions   are   reserved  for  Filipino  citizens.     • A  franchise,  certificate  or  authorization  shall  not  be  exclusive  nor  for  a  period  more  than  50  years,  and  shall   be  subject  to  amendment,  alteration  or  repeal  by  Congress.   •

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• • •

 All  executive  and  managing  officers  must  Filipino  citizens.  In  Pilipino  Telephone  Corporation  v.  NRC,  2003,  it   was  held  that  a  franchise  to  operate  a  public  utility  is  not  an  exclusive  private  property  of  the  franchisee.     No  franchisee  can  demand  or  acquire  exclusivity  in  the  operation  of  a  public  utility.  Thus,  a  franchisee  cannot   complain  of  seizure  or  taking  of  property  because  of  the  issuance  of  another  franchise  to  a  competitor.   Albano  v.  Reyes   The   Supreme   Court   said   that   Congress   does   not   have   the   exclusive   power   to   issue   such   authorization.   Administrative  bodies,  e.g.  LTFRB,  ERB,  etc.,  may  be  empowered  to  do  so.    

  Section   12.   The   State   shall   promote   the   preferential   use   of   Filipino   labor,   domestic   materials   and   locally  produced  goods,  and  adopt  measures  that  help  make  them  competitive.     • •

Filipino  First  Policy   Manila  Prince  Hotel  v.  GSIS     The   Supreme   Court   said   that   this   provision   is   a   positive   command   which   is   complete   in   it   and   needs   no   further   guidelines   or   implementing   rules   or   laws   for   its   operation.   It   is   per   se   enforceable.   It   means   precisely   that  Filipinos  should  be  preferred  and  when  the  Constitution  declares  that  a  right  exists  in  certain  specified   circumstances,  an  action  may  be  maintained  to  enforce  such  right.    

  Section  13.  The  State  shall  pursue  a  trade  policy  that  serves  the  general  welfare  and  utilizes  all  forms  and   arrangements  of  exchange  on  the  basis  of  equality  and  reciprocity.     • Forms   and   arrangements   in   economic   exchange   to   can   be   any   number   of   those   which   are   in   practice,  e.g.,  counter-­‐trade,  common  market  arrangements  and  others.  As  to  the  quality  of  these   arrangements,   first,   they   must   serve   the   general   welfare   –   which   includes   not   just   health,   safety,   security  but  also  the  idea  of  protection  of  local  enterprises.  Secondly,  these  must  be  characterized   not  only  by  reciprocity  but  also  by  equality  which  imports  mutual  benefits.   Section  14.  The  sustained  development  of  a  reservoir  of  national  talents  consisting  of  Filipino  scientists,   entrepreneurs,   professionals,   managers,   high-­‐level   technical   manpower   and   skilled   workers   and   craftsmen   in   all   fields   shall   be   promoted   by   the   State.   The   State   shall   encourage   appropriate   technology   and  regulate  its  transfer  for  the  national  benefit.   The   practice   of   all   professions   in   the   Philippines   shall   be   limited   to   Filipino   citizens,   save   in   cases   prescribed  by  law.   •

Care   for   Filipino   professionals   and   skilled   workers.   This   reflects   the   desire   not   only   to   develop   a   ready   reservoir   of   Filipino   professionals,   scientists   and   skilled   workers   but   also   to   protect   their   welfare.   The   limitation  on  the  practice  of  professions,  however,  is  subject  to  exceptions  found  in  reciprocity  laws.  

Section  15.   The   Congress   shall   create   an   agency   to   promote   the   viability   and   growth   of   cooperatives   as  instruments  for  social  justice  and  economic  development.   •

Development   of   cooperatives.   This   provision   indicates   a   line   agency   under   the   Office   of   the   President   and   outside  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture.  The  purpose  would  be  to  promote  the  growth  and   viability  of  cooperatives  in  the  private  sectors.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   16.   The   Congress   shall   not,   except   by   general   law,   provide   for   the   formation,   organization,   or   regulation   of   private   corporations.   Government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   may   be   created   or   established  by  special  charters  in  the  interest  of  the  common  good  and  subject  to  the  test  of  economic   viability.   • •

Private  corporations   Congress  can  only  provide  for  the  formation,  etc  of  private  corporations  through  a  general  law.   GOCC’s   They  may  be  created  by:   a.  Special  charters  in  the  interest  of  the  common  good  and  subject  to  the  test  of  economic  viability.   b.  By  incorporation  under  the  general  corporation  law.  

  Section  17.  In  times  of  national  emergency,  when  the  public  interest  so  requires,  the  State  may,  during   the   emergency   and   under   reasonable   terms   prescribed   by   it,   temporarily   take   over   or   direct   the   operation  of  any  privately  owned  public  utility  or  business  affected  with  public  interest.     Takeover  of  Public  Utilities   The   power   given   to   the   President   to   take   over   the   operation   of   public   utilities   does   not   stand   alone.   It   is   activated  only  if  Congress  grants  emergency  powers  to  the  President  under  Article  VI,  Section  23.     1.  Temporary  takeover  or  direction  of  operations:   a.  Conditions   i.  National  emergency  and   ii.  When  the  public  interest  requires   b.  May  be  used  against  privately  owned  public  utilities  or  businesses  affected  with  public  interest.   c.  Duration  of  the  takeover:  period  of  emergency   d.  Takeover  is  subject  to  reasonable  terms  and  conditions   e.  No  need  for  just  compensation  because  it  is  only  temporary.   2.  Nationalization  of  vital  industries:   a.  Exercised  in  the  interest  of  national  welfare  or  defense   b.  Involves  either:   i.  Establishment  and  operation  of  vital  industries;  or   ii.   Transfer   to   public   ownership,   upon   payment   of   just   compensation,   public   utilities   and   other   private  enterprises  to  be  operated  by  the  government.     •

Section   18.   The   State   may,   in   the   interest   of   national   welfare   or   defense,   establish   and   operate   vital   industries   and,   upon   payment   of   just   compensation,   transfer   to   public   ownership   utilities   and   other   private  enterprises  to  be  operated  by  the  Government.   Q.  Distinguish  Section  17  from  Section  18.   A.   Section   18   deals   with   state   ownership   of   public   utilities   and   industries,   Section   17   deals   merely   with   temporary   state   take-­‐over   of   “the   operation   of   any   privately   owned   public   utility   or   business   affected   with   public   interest.”  Hence,  no  compensation  is  involved  in  Section  17.  

Section   19.   The   State   shall   regulate   or   prohibit   monopolies   when   the   public   interest   so   requires.   No   combinations  in  restraint  of  trade  or  unfair  competition  shall  be  allowed.   •

Monopoly  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

A  monopoly  is  “a  privilege  or  peculiar  advantage  vested  in  one  more  persons  or  companies,  consisting  in  the   exclusive  right  (or  power)  to  carry  on  a  particular  business  or  trade,  manufacture  a  particular  article,  or  control  the   sale   of   a   particular   commodity.”   Clearly,   monopolies   are   not   per   se   prohibited   by   the   Constitution   but   may   be   permitted  to  exist  to  aid  the  government  in  carrying  on  an  enterprise  or  to  aid  in  the  performance  of  various  services   and  functions  in  the  interest  of  the  public.     1.  The  Constitution  does  NOT  prohibit  the  existence  of  monopolies.   2.  The  State  may  either  regulate  or  prohibit  monopolies,  when  public  interest  so  requires.   3.  Combinations  in  restraint  of  trade  or  unfair  competition  are  prohibited.  

  Section   20.   The   Congress   shall   establish   an   independent   central   monetary   authority,   the   members   of   whose   governing   board   must   be   natural-­‐born   Filipino   citizens,   of   known   probity,   integrity,   and   patriotism,  the  majority  of  whom  shall  come  from  the  private  sector.  They  shall  also  be  subject  to  such   other   qualifications   and   disabilities   as   may   be   prescribed   by   law.   The   authority   shall   provide   policy   direction   in   the   areas   of   money,   banking,   and   credit.   It   shall   have   supervision   over   the   operations   of   banks   and   exercise   such   regulatory   powers   as   may   be   provided   by   law   over   the   operations   of   finance   companies  and  other  institutions  performing  similar  functions.     Until   the   Congress   otherwise   provides,   the   Central   Bank   of   the   Philippines,   operating   under   existing   laws,  shall  function  as  the  central  monetary  authority.     •

The  main  concern  in  the  formulation  of  this  provision  was  to  assure  independence  of  the  central  monetary   authority  from  all  sectors,  local  or  foreign,  but  especially  from  the  executive  department.  It  was  envisioned   that   Congress   would   fix   the   term   of   the   members   and   give   them   security   of   tenure   to   enhance   their   independence.  

Section   21.   Foreign   loans   may   only   be   incurred   in   accordance   with   law   and   the   regulation   of   the   monetary  authority.  Information  on  foreign  loans  obtained  or  guaranteed  by  the  Government  shall  be   made  available  to  the  public.   Q.  What  are  the  restrictions  with  respect  to  the  contracting  of  foreign  loans?   A.  1)  They  must  be  in  accordance  with  law;            2)   they   must  be  in  accordance  with  regulations  of  the  Monetary  Board  and  with  the  prior  concurrence  of   the  Monetary  Board.  

Section   22.   Acts   which   circumvent   or   negate   any   of   the   provisions   of   this   Article   shall   be   considered   minimical  to  the  national  interest  and  subject  to  criminal  and  civil  sanctions,  as  may  be  provided  by  law.   •

Congress  should  penalize  acts  which  seek  to  circumvent  the  goals  set  down  by  the  economic  provisions  of   the  Constitution.  

ARTICLE  XIII  SOCIAL  JUSTICE  AND  HUMAN  RIGHTS  



  Social   justice   includes   all   phases   of   national   development,   instead   of   being   merely   the   removal   of   socio-­‐ economic  equities.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   1.   The   Congress   shall   give   highest   priority   to   the   enactment   of   measures   that   protect   and   enhance   the   right   of   all   the   people   to   human   dignity,   reduce   social,   economic,   and   political   inequalities,   and  remove  cultural  inequities  by  equitably  diffusing  wealth  and  political  power  for  the  common  good.   To  this  end,  the  State  shall  regulate  the  acquisition,  ownership,  use,  and  disposition  of  property  and  its   increments.   Section   2.   The   promotion   of   social   justice   shall   include   the   commitment   to   create   economic   opportunities  based  on  freedom  of  initiative  and  self-­‐reliance.   Social  justice  in  the  Constitution  is  principally  the  embodiment  of  the  principle  that  those  who  have  less  in   life  should  have  more  in  law   • When   the   law   is   clear   and   valid,   it   simply   must   be   applied;   but   when   the   law   can   be   interpreted   in   more   ways  than  one,  an  interpretation  that  favors  the  underprivileged  must  be  favored     Q:  Is  social  justice  like  Robin  Hood:  he  steals  from  the  rich  and  gives  it  to  the  poor?   •

A:   No.   Social   Justice,   as   the   term   suggests,   is   used   to   correct   an   injustice   with   the   fundamental   and   paramount   objective  of  the  state  of  promoting  health,  comfort,  and  quiet  of  all  persons,  and  of  bring  about  the  ‘greatest  good  to   the   greatest   number.’   Hence,   stealing   from   the   rich   and   conveniently   giving   it   to   the   poor   would   not   address   any   concern  of  the  state’s  general  welfare,  as  it  is  an  injustice  in  itself  by  tolerating  behavior  that  is  contrary  to  law.  What   the  law  demands  instead,  is  a  legal  bias  in  favor  of  those  who  are  underprivileged.  Section  1,  Art.  XIII  translates  the   principle   of   more   in   law   for   those   who   have   less   in   life   into   a   duty   of   the   state   to   attend   “to   the   enactment   of   measures   to   protect   and   enhance   the   right   of   all   the   people   to   human   dignity,   reduce   social,   economic,   and   political   inequalities,   and   remove   cultural   inequities   by   equitably   diffusing   wealth   and   political   power   for   the   common   good.”   Q:  Is  the  concept  of  laissez  faire  consistent  with  the  principle  of  social  justice?   A:  In  the  most  basic  sense,  no.  Laissez  faire(‘let  them  do’  or  ‘let  them  do  as  they  will’)  is  a  policy  or  attitude  of  letting   things  take  their  own  course,  without  interfering[or  interference  of  state]  with  only  enough  regulations  to  protect   property  rights  while  the  principle  of  social  justice,  in  its  attempt  to  correct  an  injustice,  is  presented  as  consisting  of   two  principal  tracks(which  are  contrary  to  the  concept  of  laissez  faire),  namely:  1)  according  to  the  second  paragraph   of   Sect.   1,   Art.   XIII,   there   must   be   regulation   of   the   acquisition,   ownership,   use,   and   disposition   of   property   and   its   increments,   and   2)   according   to   Sect.   2,   Congress   should   create   economic   opportunities   based   on   freedom   of   initiative  and  self-­‐reliance.     Q:  Cannot  social,  economic,  and  political  inequalities  be  removed?   A:  In  the  state’s  effort  to  ‘reduce  social,  economic,  and  political  inequalities,’  it  should  be  noted  that  one  goal  is  to   reduce,  and  not  remove,  inequalities  because  inequalities  by  themselves  are  not  evil.  Cultural  inequities,  however,   are  evil  and  therefore  must  be  ‘removed.’  And  since  the  goals  embodied  in  the  command  are  to  be  achieved  through   legislation,  the  task  is  given  to  Congress.   Issue:   Do   the   social   justice   principles   of   labor   law   outweigh   or   render   inapplicable   the   civil   law   doctrine   of   unjust   enrichment?   Ruling:  Yes.  The  Court  then  stressed  that  as  opposed  to  the  abovementioned  Genuino  v.  National  Labor  Relations  Commission,   the  social  justice  principles  of  labor  law  outweigh  or  render  inapplicable  the  civil  law  doctrine  of  unjust  enrichment.       Labor  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  3.  The  State  shall  afford  full  protection  to  labor,  local  and  overseas,  organized  and  unorganized,   and  promote  full  employment  and  equality  of  employment  opportunities  for  all.   It   shall   guarantee   the   rights   of   all   workers   to   self-­‐organization,   collective   bargaining   and   negotiations,   and   peaceful   concerted   activities,   including   the   right   to   strike   in   accordance   with   law.   They   shall   be   entitled  to  security  of  tenure,  humane  conditions  of  work,  and  a  living  wage.  They  shall  also  participate   in  policy  and  decision-­‐making  processes  affecting  their  rights  and  benefits  as  may  be  provided  by  law.   The  State  shall  promote  the  principle  of  shared  responsibility  between  workers  and  employers  and  the   preferential   use   of   voluntary   modes   in   settling   disputes,   including   conciliation,   and   shall   enforce   their   mutual  compliance  therewith  to  foster  industrial  peace.   The  State  shall  regulate  the  relations  between  workers  and  employers,  recognizing  the  right  of  labor  to   its   just   share   in   the   fruits   of   production   and   the   right   of   enterprises   to   reasonable   returns   to   investments,  and  to  expansion  and  growth.   • •

Under   the   Constitution,   labor   and   management   are   not   completely   free   to   decide   between   themselves   how   their  relationship  should  go  even  in  the  matter  so  personal  as  wages   State  should  seek  a  balance  between  “the  right  of  labor  to  its  just  share  in  the  fruits  of  production  and  the   rights  of  enterprises  to  reasonable  returns  on  investments,  and  to  expansion  and  growth”   –  does  not  mean   mandatory  profit-­‐sharing  but  a  voluntary  sharing  that  is  born  of  the  acceptance  of  the  social  function  of  the   means  of  production  

  Yrasuegui  v  PAL     Issue:  What  is  the  Meiorin  Test?  Is  it  valid  and  constitutional?     Ruling:   In   British   Columbia   Public   Service   Employee   Commission   (BSPSERC)   v.   The   British   Columbia   Government   and   Service   Employee’s   Union   (BCGSEU),   the   Supreme   Court   of   Canada   adopted   the   so-­‐called   “Meiorin   Test”   in   determining  whether  an  employment  policy  is  justified.    Under  this  test,  (1)  the  employer  must  show  that  it  adopted   the   standard   for   a   purpose   rationally   connected   to   the   performance   of   the   job;   (2)   the   employer   must  establish   that   the   standard   is   reasonably   necessary   to   the   accomplishment   of   that   work-­‐related   purpose;   and   (3)   the   employer   must   establish   that   the   standard   is   reasonably   necessary   in   order   to   accomplish   the   legitimate   work-­‐related   purpose.  Similarly,   in   Star   Paper   Corporation   v.   Simbol,   this   Court   held   that   in   order   to   justify   a   BFOQ(bona   fide   occupational  qualification)  ,  the  employer  must  prove  that  (1)  the  employment  qualification  is  reasonably  related  to   the   essential   operation   of   the   job   involved;   and   (2)   that   there   is   factual   basis   for   believing   that   all   or   substantially   all   persons  meeting  the  qualification  would  be  unable  to  properly  perform  the  duties  of  the  job.       In   short,   the   test   of   reasonableness   of   the   company   policy   is   used   because   it   is   parallel   to   BFOQ.   BFOQ   is   valid  “provided  it  reflects  an  inherent  quality  reasonably  necessary  for  satisfactory  job  performance.”   Agrarian  and  Natural  Resources  Reform  

Section   4.   The   State   shall,   by   law,   undertaken   an   agrarian   reform   program   founded   on   the   right   of   farmers  and  regular  farmworkers,  who  are  landless,  to  own  directly  or  collectively  the  lands  they  till  or   in  the  case  of  other  farmworkers,  to  receive  a  just  share  of  the  fruits  thereof.  To  this  end,  the  State  shall   encourage   and   undertake   the   just   distribution   of   all   agricultural   lands,   subject   to   such   priorities   and   reasonable   retention   limits   as   the   Congress   may   prescribe,   taking   into   account   ecological,   developmental,   or   equity   considerations,   and   subject   to   the   payment   of   just   compensation.   In  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

determining   retention   limits,   the   State   shall   respect   the   right   of   small   landowners.   The   State   shall   further  provide  incentives  for  voluntary  land-­‐sharing.   • • • • • •

The  farmer  has  a  right  to  the  land  he  tills,  but  this  is  not  an  immutable  rights     Congress   has   the   right   to   limit   the   beneficiary’s   right   to   sell,   dispose,   or   even   mortgage   the   property;   it   is   given  discretion  to  set  priorities  and  retention  limits   Agrarian  reform  program  is  based  on  the  right  of  farmers  and  regular  farm  workers  to  own  the  lands  they   till(a  land-­‐to-­‐the-­‐tiller  program)   As  to  size  of  the  land,  the  general  guideline  is  that  these  should  be  ‘reasonable’   Agricultural  lands  are  ‘arable  and  suitable  agricultural  lands’  and  do  not  include  ‘commercial,  industrial  and   residential  lands’   For  distribution  to  agrarian  reform  beneficiaries,  there  is  need  to  compensate  landowners  justly    

Section   5.   The   State   shall   recognize   the   right   of   farmers,   farmworkers,   and   landowners,   as   well   as   cooperatives,   and   other   independent   farmers'   organizations   to   participate   in   the   planning,   organization,   and   management   of   the   program,   and   shall   provide   support   to   agriculture   through   appropriate   technology  and  research,  and  adequate  financial,  production,  marketing,  and  other  support  services.   •

What  is  referred  to  is  participation  in  the  management  of  the  land  reform  program,  not  participation  in  the   management  of  the  land  reform  program,  not  participation  in  the  management  of  a  privately-­‐owned  farm    

Section  6.  The  State  shall  apply  the  principles  of  agrarian  reform  or  stewardship,  whenever  applicable  in   accordance  with  law,  in  the  disposition  or  utilization  of  other  natural  resources,  including  lands  of  the   public  domain  under  lease  or  concession  suitable  to  agriculture,  subject  to  prior  rights,  homestead  rights   of  small  settlers,  and  the  rights  of  indigenous  communities  to  their  ancestral  lands.   The  State  may  resettle  landless  farmers  and  farmworkers  in  its  own  agricultural  estates  which  shall  be   distributed  to  them  in  the  manner  provided  by  law.   • • •

Nation’s  principal  natural  resource  is  land  of  which,  constitutionally,  there  are  two  basic  kinds:  alienable  and   inalienable   CARL(Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Law)  is  an  exercise  of  police  power  and  power  of  eminent  domain   To  the  extent  that  the  law  prescribes  retention  limits  for  landowners,  there  is  an  exercise  of  police  power.   But  where  it  becomes  necessary  to  deprive  owners  of  their  land  in  excess  of  the  maximum  allowed  there  is   compensable  taking  and  therefore  the  exercise  of  eminent  domain.  

  Hda.  Luisita  v  PARC   Issue:  Is  Sec.  31  of  RA  6657,  which  permits  stock  transfer  in  lieu  of  outright  agricultural  land  transfer,  inconsistent   with  the  basic  concept  of  agrarian  reform  ingrained  in  Sec.  4,  Art.  XIII  of  the  Constitution?     Ruling:   No.   Clearly,   workers’   cooperatives   or   associations   under   Sec.   29   of   RA   6657   and   corporations   or   associations   under   the   succeeding   Sec.   31,   as   differentiated   from   individual   farmers,   are   authorized   vehicles   for   the   collective   ownership   of   agricultural   land.   Cooperatives   can   be   registered   with   the   Cooperative   Development   Authority   and   acquire   legal   personality   of   their   own,   while   corporations   are   juridical   persons   under   the   Corporation   Code.   Thus,   Sec.   31   is   constitutional   as   it   simply   implements   Sec.   4   of   Art.   XIII   of   the   Constitution   that   land   can   be   owned   COLLECTIVELY  by  farmers.  Even  the  framers  of  the  l987  Constitution  are  in  unison  with  respect  to  the  two  (2)  modes   of  ownership  of  agricultural  lands  tilled  by  farmers––DIRECT  and  COLLECTIVE.    

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Land  Bank  v  Obias   Issue:  Whether  or  not  the  provisions  of  DAR  Administrative  Order  (A.O.)  No.  13,  as  amended  are  mandatory  insofar   as  the  computation  of  interest  for  P.D.  27-­‐acquired  properties  concerned?  How  should  just  compensation  be  treated   viewed  against  the  Bill  of  Rights  and  agrarian  reform?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   mandate   of   determination   of   just   compensation   is   a   judicial   function,   hence,   the   court   exerts   all   efforts   to   consider   and   interpret   all   the   applicable   laws   and   issuances   in   order   to   balance   the   right   of   the   farmers   to   own  a  land  subject  to  the  award  the  proper  and  just  compensation  due  to  the  landowners.   Section  4,  Article  XIII  of  the  1987  Constitution  mandates  that  the  State  shall,  by  law,  undertake  an  agrarian   reform   program   founded   on   the   right   of   farmers   and   regular   farm   workers   who   are   landless,   to   own   directly   or   collectively  the  lands  they  till  or,  in  the  case  of  other  farm  workers,  to  receive  a  just  share  of  the  fruits  thereof.  It  also   provides   that   the   State   shall   encourage   and   undertake   the   just   distribution   of   all   agricultural   lands   subject   to   the   payment   of   just   compensation.   Further,   the   deliberations   of   the   1986   Constitutional   Commission   on   this   subject   reveal   that   just   compensation   should   not   do   violence   to   the   Bill   of   Rights,   but   should   also   not   make   an   insurmountable   obstacle   to   a   successful   agrarian   reform   program.    Hence,   the   landowner's   right   to   just   compensation  should  be  balanced  with  agrarian  reform.    

Diamond  Farms  v  Diamond  Farm  Workers   Issue:  If  farmers  are  allowed  to  collectively  own  lands,  must  the  control  thereof  be  also  with  the  farmers?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   matter   has   already   been   settled   in   Hacienda   Luisita,   Incorporated,   etc.   v.   Presidential   Agrarian   Reform   Council,   et   al.,   when   we   ruled   that   the   Constitution   and   the   CARL   intended   the   farmers,   individually   or   collectively,  to  have  control  over  agricultural  lands,  otherwise  all  rhetoric  about  agrarian  reform  will  be  for  naught.   We  stressed  that  under  Section  4,  Article  XIII  of  the  1987  Constitution  and  Section  2  of  the  CARL,  the  agrarian  reform   program  is  founded  on  the  right  of  farmers  and  regular  farm  workers  who  are  landless  to  own  directly  or  collectively   the   lands   they   till.   The   policy   on   agrarian   reform   is   that   control   over   the   agricultural   land   must   always   be   in   the   hands  of  the  farmers.  

Section  7.  The  State  shall  protect  the  rights  of  subsistence  fishermen,  especially  of  local  communities,  to   the   preferential   use   of   the   communal   marine   and   fishing   resources,   both   inland   and   offshore.   It   shall   provide   support   to   such   fishermen   through   appropriate   technology   and   research,   adequate   financial,   production,   and   marketing   assistance,   and   other   services.   The   State   shall   also   protect,   develop,   and   conserve   such   resources.   The   protection   shall   extend   to   offshore   fishing   grounds   of   subsistence   fishermen   against   foreign   intrusion.   Fishworkers   shall   receive   a   just   share   from   their   labor   in   the   utilization  of  marine  and  fishing  resources.   •

The  right  given  to  subsistence  fishermen  is  the  preferential  but  not  exclusive    

Section  8.  The  State  shall  provide  incentives  to  landowners  to  invest  the  proceeds  of  the  agrarian  reform   program   to   promote   industrialization,   employment   creation,   and   privatization   of   public   sector   enterprises.   Financial   instruments   used   as   payment   for   their   lands   shall   be   honored   as   equity   in   enterprises  of  their  choice.   This   section   sees   agrarian   reform   as   a   unique   instrument   for   releasing   capital   locked   up   in   land   for   use   in   industrialization  in  particular  and  economic  development  in  general     Urban  Land  Reform  and  Housing   •

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section   9.   The   State   shall,   by   law,   and   for   the   common   good,   undertake,   in   cooperation   with   the   private   sector,  a  continuing  program  of  urban  land  reform  and  housing  which  will  make  available  at  affordable   cost   decent   housing   and   basic   services   to   underprivileged   and   homeless   citizens   in   urban   centers   and   resettlement   areas.   It   shall   also   promote   adequate   employment   opportunities   to   such   citizens.   In   the   implementation  of  such  program  the  State  shall  respect  the  rights  of  small  property  owners.   •

Urban  land  reform  and  housing  are  to  be  undertaken    “in  cooperation  with  the  private  sector”    

Section   10.   Urban   or   rural   poor   dwellers   shall   not   be   evicted   nor   their   dwelling   demolished,   except   in   accordance  with  law  and  in  a  just  and  humane  manner.   No   resettlement   of   urban   or   rural   dwellers   shall   be   undertaken   without   adequate   consultation   with   them  and  the  communities  where  they  are  to  be  relocated.   • • • •

The  intent  of  this  provision  is  to  prevent  the  recurrence  of  past  abuses  when  law  enforcement  agents  would   move  in,  bulldoze  dwellings  and  even  inflict  violence  on  persons   Protection  extends  to  both  hose  who  have  valid  claims  to  stay  on  the  land  and  to  those  who  do  not,  always   “in  accordance  with  law  and  in  a  just  and  humane  manner”   Even  violators  of  the  law  are  entitled  to  humane  treatment   Occupants  should  be  sufficiently  notified  before  actual  eviction  or  demolition  is  done  and  there  be  no  loss  of   lives  ,  physical  injuries  or  unnecessary  loss  of  or  damage  to  properties  

  Q:  Is  the  constitutional  protection  to  urban  and  rural  poor  dwellers  whose  dwellings  cannot  be  demolished  except  in   accordance   with   law   and   in   a   just   and   humane   manner   applicable   to   squatters   who   either   have   or   have   no   valid   claims  on  the  land?   A:  Yes.  The  phrase  “urban  or  rural  poor  dwellers”  refers  to  principally  to  squatters.  The  intent  of  the  provision  is  to   prevent  the  recurrence  of  past  abuses  when  law  enforcement  agents  would  move  in,  bulldoze  dwellings,  and  even   inflict   violence   on   persons.   Sec.   10(2),   Art.   XIII,   commands   that   every   relocation   process   must   be   preceded   by   consultation  with  the  dwellers  to  be  relocated  and  also  with  the  communities  where  they  are  to  be  relocated.  This,   however,  “does  not  mean  that  the  validity  or  legality  of  the  demolition  or  eviction  is  hinged  on  the  existence  of  a   resettlement   area   designated   or   earmarked   by   the   government.”   Rather,   it   means   that   “the   person   to   be   evicted   be   accorded  due  process  or  an  opportunity  to  controvert  the  allegation  that  his  or  her  occupation  or  possession  of  the   property  involved  is  unlawful  or  against  the  will  of  the  landowner;  that  should  the  illegal  or  unlawful  occupation  be   proven,   the   occupant   be   sufficiently   notified   before   actual   eviction   or   demolition   is   done;   and   there   be   no   loss   of   lives,  physical  injuries  or  unnecessary  loss  of  or  damage  to  properties.”   Q:  Is  the  constitutional  mandate  for  urban  land  reform  directed  to  on-­‐site  housing  development  or  relocation?   A:  Relocation.  A  person  occupying  land  may  be  relocated  and  the  improvements  on  land  demolished  by  the  National   Housing   Authority(NHA)   authorities   as   part   of   its   mandate   to   improve   blighted   areas.   The   NHA,   as   the   decree’s   designated  administrator  for  the  national  government,  is  empowered  to  take  possession,  control  and  disposition  of   the   expropriated   properties   with   the   power   if   demolition   of   their   improvements.   There   is   no   violation   of   social   justice.  (Section  29,  R.A.  No.  7279,  1992)   Health  

Section   11.   The   State   shall   adopt   an   integrated   and   comprehensive   approach   to   health   development   which  shall  endeavor  to  make  essential  goods,  health  and  other  social  services  available  to  all  the  people  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

at   affordable   cost.   There   shall   be   priority   for   the   needs   of   the   under-­‐privileged   sick,   elderly,   disabled,   women,  and  children.  The  State  shall  endeavor  to  provide  free  medical  care  to  paupers.   Section   12.   The   State   shall   establish   and   maintain   an   effective   food   and   drug   regulatory   system   and   undertake  appropriate  health  manpower  development  and  research,  responsive  to  the  country's  health   needs  and  problems.   Section   13.   The   State   shall   establish   a   special   agency   for   disabled   person   for   their   rehabilitation,   self   development  and  self-­‐reliance,  and  their  integration  into  the  mainstream  of  society.   Right  to  health  should  be  enjoyed  by  all   Integration   connotes   a   unified   health   delivery   system,   a   combination   of   public   and   private   sector,   and   a   blend  of  western  medicine  and  traditional  health  care  modalities   • Free  medical  care  should  be  extended  to  paupers     Imbong,  et.  Al.  v  Ochoa   • •

Issue:  By  giving  priority  to  the  poor,  does  the  RH  Law  violate  the  equal  protection  clause  of  the  1987  Constitution?   Ruling:  No.  To  provide  that  the  poor  are  to  be  given  priority  in  the  government's  reproductive  health  care  program  is   not   a   violation   of   the   equal   protection   clause.   In   fact,   it   is   pursuant   to   Section   11,   Article   XIII   of   the   Constitution   which  recognizes  the  distinct  necessity  to  address  the  needs  of  the  underprivileged  by  providing  that  they  be  given   priority  in  addressing  the  health  development  of  the  people.     It   should   be   noted   that   Section   7   of   the   RH   Law   prioritizes   poor   and   marginalized   couples   who   are   suffering  from   fertility  issues  and  desire  to  have  children.  There  is,  therefore,  no  merit  to  the  contention  that  the  RH  Law  only  seeks   to   target   the   poor   to   reduce   their   number.   While   the   RH   Law   admits   the   use   of   contraceptives,   it   does   not,   as   elucidated  above,  sanction  abortion.  As  Section  3(1)  explains,  the  "promotion  and/or  stabilization  of  the  population   growth  rate  is  incidental  to  the  advancement  of  reproductive  health."   Manila  Memorial  Park  v  DSWD   Issue:   Does   the   tax   deduction   scheme   under   R.A.   7432,   violate   Article   XIII,   Sect.   11   of   the   Constitution   because   it   shifts  the  State’s  constitutional  mandate  or  duty  improving  the  welfare  of  the  elderly  to  the  private  sector?  Is  it  in   the  nature  of  an  exercise  of  police  power  or  eminent  domain?     Ruling:  No.  The  right  to  property  has  a  social  dimension.  While  Article  XIII  of  the  Constitution  provides  the  precept   for   the   protection   of   property,   various   laws   and   jurisprudence,   particularly   on   agrarian   reform   and   the   regulation   of   contracts  and  public  utilities,  continuously  serve  as  x  x  x  reminder[s]  that  the  right  to  property  can  be  relinquished   upon   the   command   of   the   State   for   the   promotion   of   public   good.   Undeniably,   the   success   of   the   senior   citizens   program  rests  largely  on  the  support  imparted  by  petitioners  and  the  other  private  establishments  concerned.  This   being  the  case,  the  means  employed  in  invoking  the  active  participation  of  the  private  sector,  in  order  to  achieve  the   purpose   or   objective   of   the   law,   is   reasonably   and   directly   related.   Without   sufficient   proof   that   Section   4   (a)   of   R.A.   No.  9257  is  arbitrary,  and  that  the  continued  implementation  of  the  same  would  be  unconscionably  detrimental  to   petitioners,  the  Court  will  refrain  from  quashing  a  legislative  act.   The   court,   thus,   found   that   the   20%   discount   as   well   as   the   tax   deduction   scheme   is   a   valid   exercise   of   the   police   power  of  the  State.   Women  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  14.  The  State  shall  protect  working  women  by  providing  safe  and  healthful  working  conditions,   taking  into  account  their  maternal  functions,  and  such  facilities  and  opportunities  that  will  enhance  their   welfare  and  enable  them  to  realize  their  full  potential  in  the  service  of  the  nation.   This  provision  asserts  the  fundamental  equality  between  men  and  women   Implicitly   acknowledges   that   between   women   and   men   there   are   distinctions   which   make   for   real   differences     Role  and  Rights  of  People's  Organization   • •

Section  15.  The  State  shall  respect  the  role  of  independent  people's  organizations  to  enable  the  people   to   pursue   and   protect,   within   the   democratic   framework,   their   legitimate   and   collective   interests   and   aspirations  through  peaceful  and  lawful  means.   People's   organizations   are   bona   fide   associations   of   citizens   with   demonstrated   capacity   to   promote  the  public  interest  and  with  identifiable  leadership,  membership,  and  structure.   Section  16.  The  right  of  the  people  and  their  organizations  to  effective  and  reasonable  participation  at  all   levels   of   social,   political,   and   economic   decision-­‐making   shall   not   be   abridged.   The   State   shall,   by   law,   facilitate  the  establishment  of  adequate  consultation  mechanisms.   Empowering  the  people  is  a  key  to  the  attainment  of  the  ends  of  social  justice   “People”  here  refers  not  just  to  the  electorate  but  to  all  the  people   The  intention  of  the  proponents  was  to  project  the  independence  of  these  organizations  in  the  performance   of  their  role  as  promoters  of  social  justice  and  to  distinguish  them  from  those  associations  which  are  set  up   and  operate  like  “company  unions”  of  the  state   • In   relation   to   consultation   mechanisms,   the   role   of   the   state   is   “facilitate”   their   creation,   instead   of   implying   that  they  cannot  come  into  existence  except  through  state     Human  Rights   • • •

Section  17.  (1)  There  is  hereby  created  an  independent  office  called  the  Commission  on  Human  Rights.   (2)   The   Commission   shall   be   composed   of   a   Chairman   and   four   Members   who   must   be   natural-­‐born   citizens  of  the  Philippines  and  a  majority  of  whom  shall  be  members  of  the  Bar.  The  term  of  office  and   other  qualifications  and  disabilities  of  the  Members  of  the  Commission  shall  provided  by  law.   (3)   Until   this   Commission   is   constituted,   the   existing   Presidential   Committee   on   Human   Rights   shall   continue  to  exercise  its  present  functions  and  powers.   (4)  The  approved  annual  appropriations  of  the  Commission  shall  be  automatically  and  regularly  released.   • • • •

Not  on  the  same  level  as  the  Constitutional  Commissions  mentioned  in  Article  IX   Its  full  operationalization  requires  congressional  action   When  Congress  passes  a  new  law,  the  statutory  Commission  on  Human  Rights  will  no  longer  function  as  a   statutory  creation,  but  as  a  constitutional  creation   It  is  given  fiscal  autonomy  although  not  on  the  same  level  as  the  ConComms  in  Article  IX    

Section  18.  The  Commission  on  Human  Rights  shall  have  the  following  powers  and  functions:  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

(1)  Investigate,  on  its  own  or  on  complaint  by  any  party,  all  forms  of  human  rights  violations  involving   civil  and  political  rights;   (2)  Adopt  its  operational  guidelines  and  rules  of  procedure,  and  cite  for  contempt  for  violations  thereof   in  accordance  with  the  Rules  of  Court;   (3)   Provide   appropriate   legal   measures   for   the   protection   of   human   rights   of   all   persons   within   the   Philippines,   as   well   as   Filipinos   residing   abroad,   and   provide   for   preventive   measures   and   legal   aid   services  to  the  underprivileged  whose  human  rights  have  been  violated  or  need  protection;   (4)  Exercise  visitorial  powers  over  jails,  prisons,  or  detention  facilities;   (5)   Establish   a   continuing   program   of   research,   education,   and   information   to   enhance   respect   for   the   primacy  of  human  rights;   (6)   Recommend   to   the   Congress   effective   measures   to   promote   human   rights   and   to   provide   for   compensation  to  victims  of  violations  of  human  rights,  or  their  families;   (7)   Monitor   the   Philippine   Government's   compliance   with   international   treaty   obligations   on   human   rights;   (8)  Grant  immunity  from  prosecution  to  any  person  whose  testimony  or  whose  possession  of  documents   or  other  evidence  is  necessary  or  convenient  to  determine  the  truth  in  any  investigation  conducted  by  it   or  under  its   authority;   (9)   Request   the   assistance   of   any   department,   bureau,   office,   or   agency   in   the   performance   of   its   functions;   (10)  Appoint  its  officers  and  employees  in  accordance  with  law;  and   (11)  Perform  such  other  duties  and  functions  as  may  be  provided  by  law.   Section   19.   The   Congress   may   provide   for   other   cases   of   violations   of   human   rights   that   should   fall   within  the  authority  of  the  Commission,  taking  into  account  its  recommendations.   • • • • • •

   

• •

The  principal  function  of  the  Commission  is  investigatory   Beyond  investigation,  it  will  have  to  rely  on  the  Justice  Department  which  has  full  control  over  prosecutions   It  can  only  request  assistance  from  executive  offices   It   may   not   issue   writs   of   injunction   or   restraining   orders   against   supposed   violators   of   human   rights   to   compel  them  to  cease  and  desist  from  continuing  their  acts  complained  of   The  scope  of  the  investigation  is  “all  forms  of  human  rights  violations  involving  civil  and  political  rights”   Its  rules  of  procedure  must  not  violate  the  Rules  of  Court,  but  it  is  not  strictly  bound  to  judicial  procedural   rules.It  need  only  adopt  administrative  procedural  norms   The  commission  has  no  power  to  order  the  release  of  a  detainee   A  very  significant  power  is  to  grant  immunity  to  witnesses  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

ARTICLE  XIV  EDUCATION,  SCIENCE  AND  TECHNOLOGY,  ARTS,   CULTURE,  AND  SPORTS     E. EDUCATION   Section  1.  The  State  shall  protect  and  promote  the  right  of  all  citizens  to  quality  education  at  all  levels   and  shall  take  appropriate  steps  to  make  such  education  accessible.   • •



• •

Right  of  all  citizens  to  quality  education  is  a  basic  right  and  a  constitutional  right.   The  support  that  is  expected  of  the  state  is  by  way  of  promoting  quality  education  that  is  accessible  to   all.  Efforts  should  be  made  to  upgrade  these  so  that  quality  education  should  be  made  available  to  all   citizenry.   Is   quality   education   a   demandable   right   enforceable   in   court?   No,   the   right   guaranteed   in   the   constitution   is   demandable   from   the   state   because   the   constitution   governs   the   relationship   between   people  and  state  and  not  between  private  parties  and  private  parties.   It   is   the   prerogative   of   the   school   to   set   high   standards   of   efficiency   for   its   teachers   since   quality   education  is  a  mandate  of  the  constitution,  as  long  as  standards  fixed  are  reasonable  not  arbitrary.   Against   whom   is   the   constitutional   mandate   to   protect   and   promote   the   right   of   all   citizens   to   quality   education  at  all  levels  directed?  It  is  directed  to  the  state  and  not  to  the  school.  (PTA  of  SMCA  vs  MBTC)  

Section  2. The  State  shall:   1. Establish,  maintain,  and  support  a  complete,  adequate,  and  integrated  system  of  education  relevant   to  the  needs  of  the  people  and  society;   2. Establish  and  maintain,  a  system  of  free  public  education  in  the  elementary  and  high  school  levels.   Without  limiting  the  natural  rights  of  parents  to  rear  their  children,  elementary  education  is   compulsory  for  all  children  of  school  age;   3. Establish  and  maintain  a  system  of  scholarship  grants,  student  loan  programs,  subsidies,  and  other   incentives  which  shall  be  available  to  deserving  students  in  both  public  and  private  schools,   especially  to  the  under-­‐privileged;   4. Encourage  non-­‐formal,  informal,  and  indigenous  learning  systems,  as  well  as  self-­‐learning,   independent,  and  out-­‐of-­‐school  study  programs  particularly  those  that  respond  to  community  needs;   and   5. Provide  adult  citizens,  the  disabled,  and  out-­‐of-­‐school  youth  with  training  in  civics,  vocational   efficiency,  and  other  skills.   • •



The   constitution   envisions   a   complete,   adequate   and   integrated   system   of   education   relevant   to   the   needs  of  the  people  and  society.     Did  RA  6655  (free  elementary  and  high  school  education  act)  satisfy  the  constitutional  mandate?  Qualify,   while  it  is  true  pursuant  to  section  2(2)  Article  XIV.  The  explicit  mandate  for  a  free  education  up  to  high   school  is  provided  to  emphasize  the  importance  of  giving  the  citizens  free  education.  But  the  provision   on  free  high  school  education  is  more  an  expression  of  an  objective  or  priority  rather  than  an  immediate   mandate.  Congress  shall  give  priority  to  the  determination  of  the  period  for  the  full  implementation  of   free  public  secondary  education.   Education   is   compulsory   only   up   to   elementary   level   which   seeks   to   address   the   social   problems   such   as   illiteracy.  The  compulsory  requirement  reflects  consciousness  to  the  natural  right  of  parents  to  rear  their   children  and  decide  what  is  best  for  them.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



• •

Can  teachers  demand  reinstatement  upon  their  return  from  suspension?  Yes,  in  light  of  the  obligation  of   the   state   and   the   exigencies   of   the   service   but   teachers   must   subject   themselves   also   to   accept   assignment  elsewhere.  (Superintendent  vs  Azarcon)   The  constitutional  mandate  to  provide  free  public  secondary  education  is  addressed  to  the  state  and  not   to  the  University  of  the  Philippines  which  decided  to  phase  out  high  school  department.  (UP  vs.  Ayson)   The  law  allows  an  increase  in  school  tuition  fees  on  the  condition  that  70%  of  the  increase  shall  go  to  the   payment  of  personal  benefits.  Thus  remedy  for  sympathy  on  contention  on  the  tuition  fee  increase  lies   on  the  legislative  branch  and  not  of  the  judiciary.  (Joseph  College  vs.  SJC-­‐WA)  

Section  3.   1. All  educational  institutions  shall  include  the  study  of  the  Constitution  as  part  of  the  curricula.   2. They   shall   inculcate   patriotism   and   nationalism,   foster   love   of   humanity,   respect   for   human   rights,   appreciation   of   the   role   of   national   heroes   in   the   historical   development   of   the   country,   teach   the   rights  and  duties  of  citizenship,  strengthen  ethical  and  spiritual  values,  develop  moral  character  and   personal   discipline,   encourage   critical   and   creative   thinking,   broaden   scientific   and   technological   knowledge,  and  promote  vocational  efficiency.   3. At  the  option  expressed  in  writing  by  the  parents  or  guardians,  religion  shall  be  allowed  to  be  taught   to   their   children   or   wards   in   public   elementary   and   high   schools   within   the   regular   class   hours   by   instructors  designated  or  approved  by  the  religious  authorities  of  the  religion  to  which  the  children   or  wards  belong,  without  additional  cost  to  the  Government.   • •

A  practical  knowledge  of  the  constitution  as  part  of  the  curricula  will  raise  our  people’s  political  literacy   so  that  they  will  be  able  to  effectively  participate  in  governance.   The  values  mentioned  in  Section  3(2)  which  seeks  to  inculcate  but  there  is  no  constitutional  command   that   these   should   be   taught   as   prescribed   subjects.   How   these   are   to   be   taught   is   covered   by   the   guarantee  of  academic  freedom  for  educational  institutions.   Optional   religious   instructions   in   public   school   schools.   Subject   to   following   conditions   in   order   it   will   be   allowed  to  be  taught:     o Parents  desire  expressed  in  writing   o The  instruction  must  be  approved  by  the  religious  authorities  and   o No  additional  cost  shall  be  incurred  by  the  government  for  such  teaching.    

Jenosa  vs.  USA  (2010):     Issue:   Is   discipline   in   education   specifically   mandated   by   the   1987   Constitution?   Can   School   authorities   impose   discipline  on  students?     Ruling:   Yes,   Discipline   in   education   is   specifically   mandated   by   the   1987   Constitution   which   provides   that   all   educational   institutions   shall   teach   and   develop   moral   character   and   personal   discipline.  Schools   and   school   administrators  have  the  authority  to  maintain  school  discipline  and  the  right  to  impose  appropriate  and  reasonable   disciplinary   measures.  On   the   other   hand,   students   have   the   duty   and   the   responsibility   to   promote   and   maintain   the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  the  school  by  observing  the  rules  of  discipline.     Go  vs.  Letran  (2012):   Issue:   Does   Letran,   a   private   school,   possess   authority   to   impose   a   dismissal   or   any   disciplinary   action   against   students  who  violate  is  policy  against  fraternity  membership?     Ruling:   Yes,   private   schools   have   the   authority   to   promulgate   and   enforce   a   similar   prohibition   pursuant   to   their   right  to  establish  disciplinary  rules  and  regulations.  This  right  has  been  recognized  in  the  Manual  of  Regulations  for  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Private   Schools,   which   has   the   character   of   law.   Section   78   of   the   1992   Manual   of   Regulations   of   Regulations   for   Private  Schools.  The  right  to  establish  disciplinary  rules  is  consistent  with  the  mandate  in  the  Constitution  for  schools   to  teach  discipline;  in  fact,  schools  have  the  duty  to  develop  discipline  in  students.    

Section  4.   1. The   State   recognizes   the   complementary   roles   of   public   and   private   institutions   in   the   educational   system  and  shall  exercise  reasonable  supervision  and  regulation  of  all  educational  institutions.   2. Educational  institutions,  other  than  those  established  by  religious  groups  and  mission  boards,  shall   be   owned   solely   by   citizens   of   the   Philippines   or   corporations   or   associations   at   least   sixty   per   centum   of   the   capital   of   which   is   owned   by   such   citizens.   The   Congress   may,   however,   require   increased  Filipino  equity  participation  in  all  educational  institutions.  The  control  and  administration   of  educational  institutions  shall  be  vested  in  citizens  of  the  Philippines.   No  educational  institution  shall  be  established  exclusively  for  aliens  and  no  group  of  aliens  shall   comprise   more   than   one-­‐third   of   the   enrollment   in   any   school.   The   provisions   of   this   sub   section   shall  not  apply  to  schools  established  for  foreign  diplomatic  personnel  and  their  dependents  and,   unless  otherwise  provided  by  law,  for  other  foreign  temporary  residents.   3. All  revenues  and  assets  of  non-­‐stock,  non-­‐profit  educational  institutions  used  actually,  directly,  and   exclusively  for  educational  purposes  shall  be  exempt  from  taxes  and  duties.  Upon  the  dissolution  or   cessation   of   the   corporate   existence   of   such   institutions,   their   assets   shall   be   disposed   of   in   the   manner  provided  by  law.   Proprietary   educational   institutions,   including   those   cooperatively   owned,   may   likewise   be   entitled  to  such  exemptions,  subject  to  the  limitations  provided  by  law,  including  restrictions  on   dividends  and  provisions  for  reinvestment.   4. Subject   to   conditions   prescribed   by   law,   all   grants,   endowments,   donations,   or   contributions   used   actually,  directly,  and  exclusively  for  educational  purposes  shall  be  exempt  from  tax.   •



• •

• •

The   constitution   recognized   the   necessary   and   indispensable   role   which   private   schools   plays   in   the   society.   However   that   state   is   enjoined   to   supervise   and   regulate   all   educational   institutions.   Thus   it   must  be  a  reasonable  supervision  and  regulation.   Can  a  school  be  wholly  run  and  operated  by  foreign  religious  groups?  Yes,  as  an  exemption  under  the   provision   …other   than   those   established   by   religious   groups   and   mission   boards.     Moreover,   the   exemption   applies   both   to   schools   already   established   and   those   yet   to   be   established.   However,   Congress  may  require  increased  Filipino  equity  participation.   Filipinization  of  academic  administration  only  applies  on  line  position  on  the  level  of  President,  Dean,   Principal  or  member  of  the  board  of  trustees.   Qualify   that   while   it’s   true   that   no   educational   institution   shall   be   established   exclusively   for   aliens   and   should   not   comprise   more   than   1/3.   It   shall   not   apply   to   schools   established   for   foreign   diplomatic   personnel  unless  provided  by  law.   Educational  institutions  may  accept  donations  from  foreign  students.  No  provision  in  the  Constitution   or  any  law  prohibits  it.   The  tax  exemption  for  non-­‐stock  non-­‐profit  educational  institutions  is  given  by  the  constitution  itself.   Hence  it  may  not  be  diminished  by  legislation  or  by  administrative  regulation.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •

The  profits  or  assets  and  revenues  of  the  school  must  be  used  directly  and  exclusively  for  educational   purposes.     Scholarship   grants   shall   be   made   available   to   deserving   students   in   both   public   and   private   schools   especially  to  underprivileged,  this  is  in  keeping  the  idea  to  make  quality  education  made  available  to  all.  

Section  5.   1. The   State   shall   take   into   account   regional   and   sectoral   needs   and   conditions   and   shall   encourage   local  planning  in  the  development  of  educational  policies  and  programs.   2. Academic  freedom  shall  be  enjoyed  in  all  institutions  of  higher  learning.   3. Every   citizen   has   a   right   to   select   a   profession   or   course   of   study,   subject   to   fair,   reasonable,   and   equitable  admission  and  academic  requirements.   4. The   State   shall   enhance   the   right   of   teachers   to   professional   advancement.   Non-­‐teaching   academic  and  non-­‐academic  personnel  shall  enjoy  the  protection  of  the  State.   5. The  State  shall  assign  the  highest  budgetary  priority  to  education  and  ensure  that  teaching  will   attract  and  retain  its  rightful  share  of  the  best  available  talents  through  adequate  remuneration   and  other  means  of  job  satisfaction  and  fulfillment.   •







• • • •



The   1987   Constitution   has   not   increased   its   scope   of   academic   freedom   from   that   of   1973.   The   1987   provision  on  academic  freedom  essentially  preserves  the  provision  of  1973  constitution.  There  was  an   acceptance  and  reinforcement  of  the  elements  that  make  institutional  academic  freedom  the  right  of   the  institution  to  decide  on  academic  grounds     o what  should  be  taught     o how  it  should  be  taught     o who  may  teach     o who  may  be  taught.  Hence,  academic  freedom  shall  be  enjoyed  in  all  schools.   Qualify  while  it  is  true  that  Academic  freedom  as  a  right  of  an  individual  student,  as  his  right  to  write   and  speak  freely  about  his  school,  to  form  or  join  student  associations  and  promote  student  welfare  but   it   is   still   subject   to   reasonable   rules   and   regulations   of   the   educational   institution   which   also   enjoys   academic  freedom.   What  is  academic  freedom?  Academic  freedom  of  institutions  of  higher  learning  involves   a  wide  sphere   of   autonomy   in   deciding   their   objectives   and   the   best   means   of   attaining   them   without   outside   interference   except   when   overriding   public   welfare   calls   for   some   restraint.   (Garcia   vs.   Faculty   Admission  Committee) Qualify   while   it   is   true   that   under   the   constitution   the   highest   budgetary   priority   must   be   given   to   education  (and  not  to  debt  servicing)  however  it  is  still  subject  to  consideration  by  the  Congress,  such   as  responding  imperatives  of  national  interests.  (Guingona  vs  Carague)   What   are   institutions   of   higher   learning   which   are   entitled   to   academic   freedom?     The   right   of   the   school  to  determine  the  qualification  of  the  applicants  to  be  admitted  (Garcia  vs.  Carague)   Academic   freedom   includes   to   refuse   students   who   did   not   meet   necessary   standards   for   the   school   (Tangonan  vs.  Pano)   Academic   freedom   includes   to   remove   with   due   process   a   teacher   and   chose   who   may   teach   (Montemayor  vs.  Araneta)   To  compel  students  to  take  part  in  the  flag  ceremony  when  it  is  against  their  religious  beliefs  will  violate   their  religious  freedom.  Their  expulsion  also  violates  the  duty  of  the  State  under  Article  XIV,  Section  1  of   the   Constitution   to   protect   and   promote   the   right   of   all   citizens   to   quality   education   and   make   such   education  accessible  to  all.  (Ebralinag  vs  Supt.  Division  of  Cebu)   Academic  freedom  is  also  the  freedom  of  a  faculty  member  to  pursue  studies  (Reyes  vs.  CA)  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



The  constitution  now  explicitly  recognized  the  right  of  every  citizen  to  select  a  profession  or  course  of   study.   This   right   is   subject   however   to   fair,   reasonable   and   equitable   admission   and   academic   requirements   of   the   school.   Such   requirement   may   be   prescribed   or   regulate   by   law.   (PRC   vs.   De   Guzman)  

Mercado  vs.  AMACC  (2010):   Issue:  Does  institutional  academic  freedom  include  the  right  of  the  school  or  college  to  decide  and  adopt  screening   guidelines  for  its  faculty?     Ruling:   Yes,   academic   freedom   grants   the   school   the   autonomy   to   decide   for   itself   the   terms   and   conditions   for   hiring   its   teacher   (who   may   teach),   subject   within   the   terms   of   the   Manual   of   Regulations   for   Private   Schools.   Academic   freedom,   too,   is   not   the   only   legal   basis   for   AMACC’s   issuance   of   screening   guidelines.   The   authority   to   hire   is   likewise   covered   and   protected   by   its   management   prerogative   –   the   right   of   an   employer   to   regulate   all   aspects  of  employment,  such  as  hiring  and  the  freedom  to  prescribe  work  assignments.   Calawag  vs.  UP  (2013):   Issue:   Is   the   right   to   education   absolute?   Does   academic   freedom   give   the   dean   the   power   to   disapprove   the   composition  of  a  thesis  committee?   Ruling:   No,   Right   to   education   is   not   absolute,   Section   5(e),   Article   XIV   of   the   Constitution   provides   that   "every   citizen  has  a  right  to  select  a  profession  or  course  of  study,  subject  to  fair,  reasonable,  and  equitable  admission  and   academic  requirements."     Yes,  academic  freedom  is  accorded  to  instructors  of  higher  education  the  prerogative  to  establish  requirements  for   graduation,   such   as   the   completion   of   a   thesis,   and   the   manner   by   which   this   shall   be   accomplished   by   their   students.   Imbong  vs.  Ochoa  (2014):   Issue:  In  mandating  the  teaching  of  Age  and  Development  Appropriate  Reproductive  Health  Education  under  threat   of  fine  and/or  imprisonment,  does  the  Reproductive  Health  Law  violate  academic  freedom?   Ruling:   The   court   decline   to   rule   on   its   constitutionality   or   validity   considering   the   premature   nature   of   this   particular   issue   because   the   DepEd   has   yet   to   formulate   a   curriculum   on   age-­‐appropriate   reproductive   health   education.  One  can  only  speculate  on  the  content,  manner  and  medium  of  instruction  that  will  be  used  to  educate   the  adolescents  and  whether  they  will  contradict  the  religious  beliefs.  

F. LANGUAGE   Section   6.  The   national   language   of   the   Philippines   is   Filipino.   As   it   evolves,   it   shall   be   further   developed  and  enriched  on  the  basis  of  existing  Philippine  and  other  languages.     Subject  to  provisions  of  law  and  as  the  Congress  may  deem  appropriate,  the  Government  shall  take   steps   to   initiate   and   sustain   the   use   of   Filipino   as   a   medium   of   official   communication   and   as   language  of  instruction  in  the  educational  system.   Section   7.  For   purposes   of   communication   and   instruction,   the   official   languages   of   the   Philippines   are  Filipino  and,  until  otherwise  provided  by  law,  English.   The  regional  languages  are  the  auxiliary  official  languages  in  the  regions  and  shall  serve  as  auxiliary   media  of  instruction  therein.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Spanish  and  Arabic  shall  be  promoted  on  a  voluntary  and  optional  basis.   Section  8.  This  Constitution  shall  be  promulgated  in  Filipino  and  English  and  shall  be  translated  into   major  regional  languages,  Arabic,  and  Spanish.   Section   9.  The   Congress   shall   establish   a   national   language   commission   composed   of   representatives   of  various  regions  and  disciplines  which  shall  undertake,  coordinate,  and  promote  researches  for  the   development,  propagation,  and  preservation  of  Filipino  and  other  languages.   •





• • •



Official   language   (Filipino   and   English)   is   the   prescribed   medium   of   communication   and   instruction   in   the  government,  the  courts  and  the  school.  While  National  language  (Filipino)  is  the  standard  medium   of  communication  among  people.   A  city  ordinance  was  passed  prescribing  the  use  of  local  dialect  as  medium  for  instruction  in  the  primary   grade  is  invalid.  The  Constitution  provides  in  Art.  XIV,  Sec.  7  for  the  use  of  regional  dialect  as  auxiliary   medium  of   instruction.  If   the   ordinance   prescribes   the   use   of   local   dialect   not   as   auxiliary   but   as   exclusive  language  of  instruction,  then  it  is  violative  of  the  Constitution.   The  constitution  adheres  that  Filipino  will  be  the  medium  of  official  communication  and  as  a  language   of  instruction  in  the  educational  system  while  English  also  as  official  language  until  otherwise  provided   by  law.  In  short  Filipino  and  English  are  the  official  languages  of  the  Philippines.   Auxiliary  languages  shall  serve  also  as  media  for  instruction  to  supplement  Filipino  and  English.   Spanish  and  Arabic  are  promoted  on  a  voluntary  and  optional  basis.   Section   8   commands   the   constitution   to   promulgate   in   Filipino   and   English   be   translated   into   major   languages,   however   the   commission   decided   to   be   silent   about   which   text   should   prevail   thereby   leaving  the  matter  to  unarticulated  logic.   However  if  Filipino  version  of  the  constitution  is  made  and  in  case  of  conflict  in  its  interpretation,  the   English  text  shall  prevail.  For  the  very  reason  that  the  1971  constitutional  convention  were  conducted   in  English.  

G. SCIENCE  AND  TECHNOLOGY   Section   10.  Science   and   technology   are   essential   for   national   development   and   progress.   The   State   shall  give  priority  to  research  and  development,  invention,  innovation,  and  their  utilization;  and  to   science   and   technology   education,   training,   and   services.   It   shall   support   indigenous,   appropriate,   and   self-­‐reliant   scientific   and   technological   capabilities,   and   their   application   to   the   country's   productive  systems  and  national  life.   Section  11.  The  Congress  may  provide  for  incentives,  including  tax  deductions,  to  encourage  private   participation  in  programs  of  basic  and  applied  scientific  research.  Scholarships,  grants-­‐in-­‐aid,  or  other   forms  of  incentives  shall  be  provided  to  deserving  science  students,  researchers,  scientists,  inventors,   technologists,  and  specially  gifted  citizens.   Section  12.  The  State  shall  regulate  the  transfer  and  promote  the  adaptation  of  technology  from  all   sources  for  the  national  benefit.  It  shall  encourage  the  widest  participation  of  private  groups,  local   governments,   and   community-­‐based   organizations   in   the   generation   and   utilization   of   science   and   technology.   Section  13.  The  State  shall  protect  and  secure  the  exclusive  rights  of  scientists,  inventors,  artists,  and   other  gifted  citizens  to  their  intellectual  property  and  creations,  particularly  when  beneficial  to  the   people,  for  such  period  as  may  be  provided  by  law.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

• •



While  these  provision  on  science  and  technology  are  of  little  significance  as  constitutional  law,  they  are   important  as  expression  of  national  policy  and  concern.     The  Constitution  directs  the  state  to:   o give  priority  to  research  and  development,  invention  and  innovation   o support  technological  capabilities  and  their  application  to  country’s  productive  system   o provide  scholarship  grants,  incentives  to  deserving  scientists.   The  Congress  may  provide  for  incentives,  including  tax  deductions  to  encourage  private  participation  in   programs  of  basic  and  applied  scientific  research.    

H. ARTS  AND  CULTURE   Section   14.  The   State   shall   foster   the   preservation,   enrichment,   and   dynamic   evolution   of   a   Filipino   national  culture  based  on  the  principle  of  unity  in  diversity  in  a  climate  of  free  artistic  and  intellectual   expression.   Section   15.  Arts   and   letters   shall   enjoy   the   patronage   of   the   State.   The   State   shall   conserve,   promote,   and  popularize  the  nation's  historical  and  cultural  heritage  and  resources,  as  well  as  artistic  creations.   Section   16.  All   the   country's   artistic   and   historic   wealth   constitutes   the   cultural   treasure   of   the   nation   and  shall  be  under  the  protection  of  the  State  which  may  regulate  its  disposition.   Section  17.  The  State  shall  recognize,  respect,  and  protect  the  rights  of  indigenous  cultural  communities   to  preserve  and  develop  their  cultures,  traditions,  and  institutions.  It  shall  consider  these  rights  in  the   formulation  of  national  plans  and  policies.   Section  18.   1. The   State   shall   ensure   equal   access   to   cultural   opportunities   through   the   educational   system,   public   or   private   cultural   entities,   scholarships,   grants   and   other   incentives,   and   community   cultural  centers,  and  other  public  venues.   2. The  State  shall  encourage  and  support  researches  and  studies  on  the  arts  and  culture.   • •



They  seek  to  express  a  national  policy  and  are  evidence  of  a  nation  seeking  to  understand  and  articulate   its  own  cultural  identity  after  many  years  of  colonial  rule. The  constitution  directs  state  to: o Foster   the   preservation,   enrichment   and   dynamic   evolution   of   a   Filipino   national   culture   base.   o Conserve,  promote  and  popularize  the  nation’s  historical  and  cultural  heritage.   o Protect  the  country’s  artistic  and  historic  wealth.   The  right  of  indigenous  cultural  communities  to  reserve  and  develop  their  cultures  must  be  recognized,   respected  and  protected  by  the  State.  

National  Artists  vs.  Executive  Sec.  (2013):   Issue:   Did   the   President   validly   confer   the   Order   of   National   Artist   to   Gudote-­‐Alvarez,   Caparas,   Manosa   and   Moreno   as  National  Artists?      

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:   It   does   not   have   to.   The   advice   of   the   NCCA   and   the   CCP   is   subject   to   the   President’s   discretion.   Nevertheless,  the  Presidents  discretion  on  the  matter  is  not  totally  unrestricted  nor  the  role  of  NCCAA  and  the  CCP   Boards   meaningless.   The   President’s   discretion   in   the   conferment   of   the   Order   of   National   Artists   should   be   exercised  in  accordance  with  the  duty  to  faithfully  execute  the  relevant  laws.    

I. SPORTS   Section  19.   1. The  State  shall  promote  physical  education  and  encourage  sports  programs,  league  competitions,   and  amateur  sports,  including  training  for  international  competitions,  to  foster  self-­‐discipline,   teamwork,  and  excellence  for  the  development  of  a  healthy  and  alert  citizenry.   2. All  educational  institutions  shall  undertake  regular  sports  activities  throughout  the  country  in   cooperation  with  athletic  clubs  and  other  sectors.   • •

The  promotion  of  amateur  sports,  as  distinguished  from  professional  players,  shall  be  provided  by  law,   including  the  training  of  national  athletes  for  Olympic  Games.   The  constitution  directs  state  to: o Promote  physical  education  and   o Encourage  sports  programs  to  foster  self-­‐discipline  

ARTICLE  XV  THE  FAMILY    

Section  1.  The  State  recognizes  the  Filipino  family  as  the  foundation  of  the  nation.  Accordingly,  it  shall   strengthen  its  solidarity  and  actively  promote  its  total  development.     Imbong  Et.  al.  V.  Ochoa,  G.R.  No.  204819,  April  8,  2014   Issue:   Section   7   of   the   RH   Law   debars   parental   consent   in   cases   where   the   minor   who   will   be   undergoing   a   procedure,  is  already  a  parent  or  has  had  a  miscarriage,  valid  and  constitutional?   Ruling:   No.   To   insist   on   a   rule   that   interferes   with   the   right   of   parents   to   exercise   parental   control   over   their   minor– child  or  the  right  of  the  spouses  to  mutually  decide  on  matters  which  very  well  affect  the  very  purpose  of  marriage,   that  is,  the  establishment  of  conjugal  and  family  life,  would  result  in  the  violation  of  one’s  privacy  with  respect  to  his   family.  It  would  be  dismissive  of  the  unique  and  strongly–held  Filipino  tradition  of  maintaining  close  family  ties  and   violative  of  the  recognition  the  State  affords  couples  entering  into  the  special  contract  of  marriage  that  they  act  as   one  unit  in  forming  the  foundation  of  the  family  and  society.    

Section   2.   Marriage,   as   an   inviolable   social   institution,   is   the   foundation   of   the   family   and   shall   be   protected  by  the  State.    





Although  marriage  is  generally  regarded  as  a  union  that  has  been  formalized  by  legal  or  religious  sanction,   the  protection  of  the  state  is  also  meant  for  other  stable  unions  entered  into  through  folk  ritual  or  by  simply   living  together.   It  remains  the  province  of  legislature  to  define  all  legal  aspects  of  marriage  and  prescribe  the  strategy  and   the  modalities  to  protect  it.  

  Republic  V.  Encelan,  G.R.  No.  170022,  Jan.  9,  2013   Issue:   How   should   “Psychological   Incapacity”   under   Article   36   of   the   Family   Code   be   interpreted?   In   voiding   of   marriage  ,  how  should  any  doubt  be  resolved?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:   In   interpreting   this   provision,   we   have   repeatedly   stressed   that   psychological   incapacity   contemplates   "downright   incapacity   or   inability   to   take   cognizance   of   and   to   assume   the   basic   marital   obligations”,   not   merely   the   refusal,   neglect   or   difficulty,   much   less   ill   will,   on   the   part   of   the   errant   spouse.   Marriage   is   an   inviolable   social   institution   protected   by   the   State.   Any   doubt   should   be   resolved   in   favor   of   its   existence   its   existence   and   continuation  and  against  its  dissolution  and  nullity.    

Section  3.  The  State  shall  defend:   (1)  The  right  of  spouses  to  found  a  family  in  accordance  with  their  religious  convictions  and  the   demands  of  responsible  parenthood;   (2)   The   right   of   children   to   assistance,   including   proper   care   and   nutrition,   and   special   protection   from   all   forms   of   neglect,   abuse,   cruelty,   exploitation   and   other   conditions   prejudicial   to   their   development;   (3)  The  right  of  the  family  to  a  family  living  wage  and  income;  and   (4)  The  right  of  families  or  family  associations  to  participate  in  the  planning  and  implementation   of  policies  and  programs  that  affect  them.    

• •



The  intent  to  prohibit  coercive  methods  of  family  size  limitation  is  clear.   Republic   Act   No.   7610   was   passed   as   a   measure   geared   towards   the   implementation   of   a   national   comprehensive   program   for   the   survival   of   the   most   vulnerable   members   of   the   population,   the   Filipino   children.   A   guarantee   of   equal   rights   for   legitimate   and   illegitimate   children   was   not   approved.   But   there   is   no   prohibition  of  a  law  equalizing  their  rights.  

  Valino  V.  Adriano  G.R.  No.  182894,  April  22,  2014   Issue:  As  between  the  legal  wife  and  the  common-­‐law  wife,  who  has  the  legal  right  over  the  remains  of  the  deceased   patriarch?   Ruling:  The  surviving  legal  wife  has  the  legal  right  over  the  deceased  patriarch  pursuant  to  Article  199  of  the  Family   Code  which  gave  to  the  former  the  right  and  duty  to  make  funeral  arrangements.     Imbong  Et.  al.  V.  Ochoa,  G.R.  No.  204819,  April  8,  2014   Issues:   1.  In  mandating  the  teaching  of  Age-­‐and-­‐Development-­‐appropriate  reproductive  health  education,  does  RH   Law   violate   Sec   3(1),   Article   XV   of   the   1987   Constitution?   2.   Is   Section   23   (a)(2)(i)   RH   Law   unconstitutional   for   intruding  into  marital  privacy  and  autonomy?   Ruling:    1.   No.   Section   14   also   mandates   that   the   mandatory   reproductive   health   education   program   shall   be   developed  in  conjunction  with  parent-­‐teacher-­‐community  associations,  school  officials  and  other  interest  groups,  it   could  very  well  be  said  that  it  will  be  in  line  with  the  religious  beliefs  ofthe  petitioners.  By  imposing  such  a  condition,   it   becomes   apparent   that   the   petitioners'   contention   that   Section   14   violates   Article   XV,   Section   3(1)   ofthe   Constitution  is  without  merit.   2.  Yes.  the  RH  Law,  in  its  not-­‐so-­‐hidden  desire  to  control  population  growth,  contains  provisions  which  tend  to  wreck   the  family  as  a  solid  social  institution.  It  bars  the  husband  and/or  the  father  from  participating  in  the  decision  making   process  regarding  their  common  future  progeny.    

Section  4.  The  family  has  the  duty  to  care  for  its  elderly  members  but  the  State  may  also  do  so  through   just  programs  of  social  security.  

  Manila  Memorial  Park  V.  DSWD  Secretary,  G.R.  No.  175356,  Dec.  3,  2013   Issue:  Does  the  tax  deduction  scheme  under  R.A.  7432,  violate  Article  XV,  Section  4  of  the  Constitution  because  it   shifts  the  state’s  constitutional  mandate  or  duty  of  improving  the  welfare  of  the  elderly  to  the  private  sector?  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Ruling:   No.   While   the   Constitution   protects   property   rights,   petitioners   must   accept   the   realities   of   business   and   the   State,   in   the   exercise   of   police   power,   can   intervene   in   the   operations   of   a   business,   which   may   result   in   an   impairment  of  property  rights  in  the  process.  The  law  is  a  legitimate  exercise  of  police  power,  which,  similar  to  the   power  of  eminent  domain,  has  general  welfare  for  its  object.  Police  power  is  not  capable  of  an  exact  definition,  but   has  been  purposely  veiled  in  general  terms  to  underscore  its  comprehensiveness  to  meet  all  exigencies  and  provide   enough   room   for   an   efficient   and   flexible   response   to   conditions   and   circumstances,   thus   assuring   the   greatest   benefits.    

ARTICLE  XVI  GENERAL  PROVISIONS     Section   1.   The   flag   of   the   Philippines   shall   be   red,   white,   and   blue,   with   a   sun   and   three   stars,   as   consecrated  and  honored  by  the  people  and  recognized  by  law.   •

The  design  of  the  flag  may  be  changed  only  by  constitutional  amendment.    

Section  2.  The  Congress  may,  by  law,  adopt  a  new  name  for  the  country,  a  national  anthem,  or  a  national   seal,  which  shall  all  be  truly  reflective  and  symbolic  of  the  ideals,  history,  and  traditions  of  the  people.   Such  law  shall  take  effect  only  upon  its  ratification  by  the  people  in  a  national  referendum.   Section  3.  The  State  may  not  be  sued  without  its  consent.   Not  all  government  entities,  whether  corporate  or  non-­‐corporate,  are  immune  from  suits.  The  character  of   the  objects  for  which  the  entity  is  organized  determines  immunity  from  suits.   • Whether   or   not   government   immunity   from   suit   can   be   pleaded   in   a   suit   against   government   officers   is   made  to  turn  on  whether  the  ultimate  liability  will  fall  on  the  government.   • Where  the  liability  of  the  officer  is  personal  because  it  arises  from  a  tortious  act  in  the  performance  of  his   duties,  the  officer  cannot  plead  sovereign  immunity  from  suit.   • Consent  to  be  sued  may  be  given  by  the  legislative  through  a  special  law  or  a  general  law.   • When   the   state   consents   to   be   sued,   it   cannot   be   inferred   from   such   consent   that   the   state   concedes   its   liability.     Vigilar  V.  Aquino,  GR  No.  180388,  Jan.  18,  2011   •

Issue:  Was  the  doctrine  of  sovereign  immunity  properly  invoked?   Ruling:   No.   Under   these   circumstances,   respondent   may   not   validly   invoke   immunity   from   suit,   considering   that   this   principle  yields  to  certain  settled  exceptions.  True  enough,  the  rule,  in  any  case,  is  not  absolute  for  it  does  not  say   that   the   state   may   not   be   sued   under   any   circumstance.   Under   these   circumstances,   respondent   may   not   validly   invoke   the   Royal   Prerogative   of   Dishonesty   and   conveniently   hide   under   the   State's   cloak   of   invincibility   against   suit,   considering  that  this  principle  yields  to  certain  settled  exceptions.  in  any  case,  is  not  absolute  for  it  does  not  say  that   the  state  may  not  be  sued  under  any  circumstance.   Lockheed  V.  UP,  GR  No.  185918,  Apr.  18,  2012   Issue:  Having  a  charter  with  which  it  can  sue  and  be  sued,  can  UP  funds  be  garnished?   Ruling:  Yes.  UP  is  a  juridical  personality  separate  and  distinct  from  the  government  and  has  the  capacity  to  sue  and   be  sued.  Thus,  it  cannot  evade  execution,  and  its  funds  may  be  subject  to  garnishment  or  levy.   DOH  V.  Phil.  Pharmawealth,  Inc.,  GR  No.  182358,  Feb.  20,  2013  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Issue:  Does  the  mantle  of  non-­‐suability  extend  to  complaints  filed  against  public  officials?   Ruling:   Yes.   The   doctrine   of   state   immunity   extends   its   protective   mantle   also   to   complaints   filed   against   state   officials   for   acts   done   in   the   discharge   and   performance   of   their   duties.   "The   suability   of   a   government   official   depends  on  whether  the  official  concerned  was  acting  within  his  official  or  jurisdictional  capacity,  and  whether  the   acts  done  in  the  performance  of  official  functions  will  result  in  a  charge  or  financial  liability  against  the  government."  

Section  4.  The  Armed  Forces  of  the  Philippines  shall  be  composed  of  a  citizen  armed  force  which  shall   undergo  military  training  and  serve  as  may  be  provided  by  law.  It  shall  keep  a  regular  force  necessary  for   the  security  of  the  State.   Section  5.  (1)  All  members  of  the  armed  forces  shall  take  an  oath  or  affirmation  to  uphold  and  defend   this  Constitution.   (2)   The   State   shall   strengthen   the   patriotic   spirit   and   nationalist   consciousness   of   the   military,   and   respect  for  people’s  rights  in  the  performance  of  their  duty.   (3)  Professionalism  in  the  armed  forces  and  adequate  remuneration  and  benefits  of  its  members  shall  be   a  prime  concern  of  the  State.  The  armed  forces  shall  be  insulated  from  partisan  politics.   No   member   of   the   military   shall   engage,   directly   or   indirectly,   in   any   partisan   political   activity,   except   to   vote.   •

Partisan  political  activity  –  campaigning  for  a  candidate  or  for  a  party.    

(4)  No  member  of  the  armed  forces  in  the  active  service  shall,  at  any  time,  be  appointed  or  designated  in   any   capacity   to   a   civilian   position   in   the   Government,   including   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations  or  any  of  their  subsidiaries.   (5)  Laws  on  retirement  of  military  officers  shall  not  allow  extension  of  their  service.   (6)  The  officers  and  men  of  the  regular  force  of  the  armed  forces  shall  be  recruited  proportionately  from   all  provinces  and  cities  as  far  as  practicable.   (7)  The  tour  of  duty  of  the  Chief  of  Staff  of  the  armed  forces  shall  not  exceed  three  years.  However,  in   times  of  war  or  other  national  emergency  declared  by  the  Congress,  the  President  may  extend  such  tour   of  duty.   •

The   President   may   shorten   the   Chief   of   Staff’s   tour   of   duty   to   less   than   3   years   if   he   is   proven   to   be   incompetent.    

Section  6.  The  State  shall  establish  and  maintain  one  police  force,  which  shall  be  national  in  scope  and   civilian  in  character,  to  be  administered  and  controlled  by  a  national  police  commission.  The  authority  of   local  executives  over  the  police  units  in  their  jurisdiction  shall  be  provided  by  law.   •

The  PNP  is  civilian  in  character  and  is  subject  to  the  Civil  Service  Commission.    

Section   7.   The   State   shall   provide   immediate   and   adequate   care,   benefits,   and   other   forms   of   assistance   to   war   veterans   and   veterans   of   military   campaigns,   their   surviving   spouses   and   orphans.   Funds   shall   be  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

provided  therefor  and  due  consideration  shall  be  given  them  in  the  disposition  of  agricultural  lands  of   the  public  domain  and,  in  appropriate  cases,  in  the  utilization  of  natural  resources.   • •

The  veterans  covered  are  not  just  veterans  of  a  declared  war  but  also  veterans  of  peacekeeping  campaigns.   The  determining  status  in  giving  them  due  consideration  in  disposition  of  lands  of  the  public  domain  is  not   status  but  need.    

Section  8.  The  State  shall,  from  time  to  time,  review  to  increase  the  pensions  and  other  benefits  due  to   retirees  of  both  the  government  and  the  private  sectors.   Section   9.   The   State   shall   protect   consumers   from   trade   malpractices   and   from   substandard   or   hazardous  products.   Section  10.  The  State  shall  provide  the  policy  environment  for  the  full  development  of  Filipino  capability   and  the  emergence  of  communication  structures  suitable  to  the  needs  and  aspirations  of  the  nation  and   the  balanced  flow  of  information  into,  out  of,  and  across  the  country,  in  accordance  with  a  policy  that   respects  the  freedom  of  speech  and  of  the  press.   Section   11.   (1)   The   ownership   and   management   of   mass   media   shall   be   limited   to   citizens   of   the   Philippines,   or   to   corporations,   cooperatives   or   associations,   wholly-­‐owned   and   managed   by   such   citizens.   The   Congress   shall   regulate   or   prohibit   monopolies   in   commercial   mass   media   when   the   public   interest  so  requires.  No  combinations  in  restraint  of  trade  or  unfair  competition  therein  shall  be  allowed.   •



“Mass   media”   in   this   section   includes   radio,   television   and   printed   media.   It   does   not   include   commercial   telecommunications   (governed   by   public   utilities   under   Article   XII)   and   is   separate   from   the   advertising   industry.   The  definition  of  “monopolies”  is  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  Congress.    

(2)   The   advertising   industry   is   impressed   with   public   interest,   and   shall   be   regulated   by   law   for   the   protection  of  consumers  and  the  promotion  of  the  general  welfare.   Only  Filipino  citizens  or  corporations  or  associations  at  least  seventy  per  centum  of  the  capital  of   which  is  owned  by  such  citizens  shall  be  allowed  to  engage  in  the  advertising  industry.   The  participation  of  foreign  investors  in  the  governing  body  of  entities  in  such  industry  shall  be   limited  to  their  proportionate  share  in  the  capital  thereof,  and  all  the  executive  and  managing  officers  of   such  entities  must  be  citizens  of  the  Philippines.   •

Advertising  is  not  mass  media  but  the  use  of  mass  media.    

Section   12.   The   Congress   may   create   a   consultative   body   to   advise   the   President   on   policies   affecting   indigenous   cultural   communities,   the   majority   of   the   members   of   which   shall   come   from   such   communities.  

 

ARTICLE  XVII  AMENDMENTS  AND  REVISIONS  

Section  1.  Any  amendment  to,  or  revision  of,  this  Constitution  may  be  proposed  by:  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

(1)  The  Congress,  upon  a  vote  of  three-­‐fourths  of  all  its  Members;  or   (2)  A  constitutional  convention.   • • •

An  amendment  envisages  an  altercation  of  one  or  a  few  specific  and  separable  provisions  while  a  revision   may  involve  a  rewriting  of  the  constitution.   The  amendatory  and  revision  provisions  are  called  the  “constitution  of  sovereignty”  because  they  define  the   constitutional  meaning  of  “sovereignty  of  the  people”.   Since  nothing  is  said  about  a  joint  session,  it  is  submitted  that  each  house  may  separately  form  amendments   by  a  vote  of  three-­‐fourths  of  all  its  members,  and  then  pass  it  to  the  other  house  for  a  similar  process.  It  is   also  submitted  that  what  is  essential  is  that  both  houses  vote  separately.    

Section   2.   Amendments   to   this   Constitution   may   likewise   be   directly   proposed   by   the   people   through   initiative  upon  a  petition  of  at  least  twelve  per  centum  of  the  total  number  of  registered  voters,  of  which   every   legislative   district   must   be   represented   by   at   least   three  per   centum  of   the   registered   voters   therein.  No  amendment  under  this  section  shall  be  authorized  within  five  years  following  the  ratification   of  this  Constitution  nor  oftener  than  once  every  five  years  thereafter.   The  Congress  shall  provide  for  the  implementation  of  the  exercise  of  this  right.   • • •

“Initiative  and  referendum”  is  a  method  whereby  the  people  themselves  can  directly  propose  amendments   to  the  constitution.   Without  implementing  legislation,  this  section  cannot  operate.   There   is   as   yet   no   law   implementing   the   provision   on   amendment   by   initiative   and   referendum.   Congress   enacted   R.A.   No.   6735,   the   Initiative   and   Referendum   Law;   but   the   Supreme   Court   held   that   the   law,   as   worded,  did  not  apply  to  constitutional  amendment.  

 

Section  3.  The  Congress  may,  by  a  vote  of  two-­‐thirds  of  all  its  Members,  call  a  constitutional  convention,   or   by   a   majority   vote   of   all   its   Members,   submit   to   the   electorate   the   question   of   calling   such   a   convention.   • •

A  constituent  assembly  may  not  propose  anything  that  is  inconsistent  with  what  is  known  as  Jus  Cogens.   “Jus   Cogens”     means   “a   norm   accepted   and   recognized   by   the   international   community   of   States   as   a   whole   as  a  norm  from  which  no  derogation  is  permitted  and  which  can  be  modified  only  by  subsequent  norm  of   general  international  law  having  the  same  character.    

Section  4.  Any  amendment  to,  or  revision  of,  this  Constitution  under  Section  1  hereof  shall  be  valid  when   ratified  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  in  a  plebiscite  which  shall  be  held  not  earlier  than  sixty  days  nor   later  than  ninety  days  after  the  approval  of  such  amendment  or  revision.   Any   amendment   under   Section   2   hereof   shall   be   valid   when   ratified   by   a   majority   of   the   votes   cast   in   a   plebiscite   which   shall   be   held   not   earlier   than   sixty   days   nor   later   than   ninety   days   after   the   certification  by  the  Commission  on  Elections  of  the  sufficiency  of  the  petition.   •

The   date   of   effectivity   of   any   amendment   or   revision   should   ordinarily   the   same   as   that   of   the   date   of   ratification,  that  is,  the  day  on  which  the  votes  as  cast.  

   

  SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

ARTICLE  XVIII  TRANSITORY  PROVISIONS    

Section   1.   The   first   elections   of   Members   of   the   Congress   under   this   Constitution   shall   be   held   on   the   second  Monday  of  May,  1987.   The   first   local   elections   shall   be   held   on   a   date   to   be   determined   by   the   President,   which   may   be   simultaneous   with   the   election   of   the   Members   of   the   Congress.   It   shall   include   the   election   of   all   Members  of  the  city  or  municipal  councils  in  the  Metropolitan  Manila  area.   Section  2.  The  Senators,  Members  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  the  local  officials  first  elected   under  this  Constitution  shall  serve  until  noon  of  June  30,  1992.   Of   the   Senators   elected   in   the   elections   in   1992,   the   first   twelve   obtaining   the   highest   number   of   votes  shall  serve  for  six  years  and  the  remaining  twelve  for  three  years.   •

This  common  termination  date  will  synchronize  future  elections  to  once  every  three  years.    

Section  3.  All  existing  laws,  decrees,  executive  orders,  proclamations,  letters  of  instructions,  and  other   executive   issuances   not   inconsistent   with   this   Constitution   shall   remain   operative   until   amended,   repealed,  or  revoked.   •

The   modification   of   executive   issuances   is   left   to   either   the   Congress   or   the   president   depending   on   the   nature  off  the  issuance  involved.    

Section   4.   All   existing   treaties   or   international   agreements   which   have   not   been   ratified   shall   not   be   renewed  or  extended  without  the  concurrence  of  at  least  two-­‐thirds  of  all  the  Members  of  the  Senate.   •

Any   treaty   or   international   agreement,   even   if   valid   under   previous   constitutions   and   even   if   containing   a   renewal  or  extension  clause,  can  be  renewed  and  extended  only  according  to  the  procedure  prescribed.    

Section   5.   The   six-­‐year   term   of   the   incumbent   President   and   Vice-­‐President   elected   in   the   February   7,   1986  election  is,  for  purposes  of  synchronization  of  elections,  hereby  extended  to  noon  of  June  30,  1992.   The   first   regular   elections   for   the   President   and   Vice-­‐President   under   this   Constitution   shall   be   held  on  the  second  Monday  of  May,  1992.   Kida  V.  Senate,  GR  No.  196271,  Oct.  18,  2011   Issue:  Does  the  synchronization  mandated  by  the  Constitution  include  the  regional  elections  of  the  ARMM?   Ruling:   Yes.   That   the   ARMM   elections   were   not   expressly   mentioned   in   the   Transitory   Provisions   of   the   Constitution   on  synchronization  cannot  be  interpreted  to  mean  that  the  ARMM  elections  are  not  covered  by  the  constitutional   mandate  of  synchronization.  We  have  to  consider  that  the  ARMM,  as  we  now  know  it,  had  not  yet  been  officially   organized  at  the  time  the  Constitution  was  enacted  and  ratified  by  the  people.  Keeping  in  mind  that  a  constitution  is   not   intended   to   provide   merely   for   the   exigencies   of   a   few   years   but   is  to   endure   through   generations   for   as   long   as   it   remains   unaltered   by   the   people   as   ultimate   sovereign,   a   constitution   should   be   construed   in   the   light   of   what   actually   is   a   continuing   instrument   to   govern   not   only   the   present   but   also   the   unfolding   events   of   the   indefinite   future.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

Section  6.  The  incumbent  President  shall  continue  to  exercise  legislative  powers  until  the  first  Congress   is  convened.   •

The  legislative  power  of  President  Aquino  ended  on  July  27,  1987  when  the  Congress  under  this  constitution   convened.    

Section   7.   Until   a   law   is   passed,   the   President   may   fill   by   appointment   from   a   list   of   nominees   by   the   respective  sectors,  the  seats  reserved  for  sectoral  representation  in  paragraph  (2),  Section  5  of  Article  VI   of  this  Constitution.   • •

One   appointed   and   qualified,   such   representatives   would   enjoy   the   term   given   by   the   constitution   which   would  not  be  affected  by  whatever  implementing  legislation  Congress  might  eventually  pass.   The  appointment  of  sectoral  representatives  need  confirmation  by  the  Commission  on  Appointments.      

Section   8.   Until   otherwise   provided   by   the   Congress,   the   President   may   constitute   the   Metropolitan   Manila   Authority   to   be   composed   of   the   heads   of   all   local   government   units   comprising   the   Metropolitan  Manila  area.   Section   9.   A   sub-­‐province   shall   continue   to   exist   and   operate   until   it   is   converted   into   a   regular   province   or  until  its  component  municipalities  are  reverted  to  the  mother  province.   •

Sub  provinces  are  merely  extensions  of  the  mother  province  and  are  not  treated  as  territorial  and  political   units  by  themselves.    

Section  10.  All  courts  existing  at  the  time  of  the  ratification  of  this  Constitution  shall  continue  to  exercise   their  jurisdiction,  until  otherwise  provided  by  law.  The  provisions  of  the  existing  Rules  of  Court,  judiciary   acts,  and  procedural  laws  not  inconsistent  with  this  Constitution  shall  remain  operative  unless  amended   or  repealed  by  the  Supreme  Court  or  the  Congress.   Section  11.  The  incumbent  Members  of  the  Judiciary  shall  continue  in  office  until  they  reach  the  age  of   seventy  years  or  become  incapacitated  to  discharge  the  duties  of  their  office  or  are  removed  for  cause.   Section  12.  The  Supreme  Court  shall,  within  one  year  after  the  ratification  of  this  Constitution,  adopt  a   systematic  plan  to  expedite  the  decision   or   resolution   of   cases   or   matters   pending   in   the   Supreme   Court   or   the   lower   courts   prior   to   the   effectivity   of   this   Constitution.   A   similar   plan   shall   be   adopted   for   all   special  courts  and  quasi-­‐judicial  bodies.   Section   13.   The   legal   effect   of   the   lapse,   before   the   ratification   of   this   Constitution,   of   the   applicable   period   for   the   decision   or   resolution   of   the   cases   or   matters   submitted   for   adjudication   by   the   courts,   shall  be  determined  by  the  Supreme  Court  as  soon  as  practicable.   Section  14.  The  provisions  of  paragraphs  (3)  and  (4),  Section  15  of  Article  VIII  of  this  Constitution  shall   apply   to   cases   or   matters   filed   before   the   ratification   of   this   Constitution,   when   the   applicable   period   lapses  after  such  ratification.   Section  15.  The  incumbent  Members  of  the  Civil  Service  Commission,  the  Commission  on  Elections,  and   the  Commission  on  Audit  shall  continue  in  office  for  one  year  after  the  ratification  of  this  Constitution,   unless  they  are  sooner  removed  for  cause  or  become  incapacitated  to  discharge  the  duties  of  their  office  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

or   appointed   to   a   new   term   thereunder.   In   no   case   shall   any   Member   serve   longer   than   seven   years   including  service  before  the  ratification  of  this  Constitution.   Section  16.  Career  civil  service  employees  separated  from  the  service  not  for  cause  but  as  a  result  of  the   reorganization  pursuant  to  Proclamation  No.  3  dated  March  25,  1986  and  the  reorganization  following   the  ratification  of  this  Constitution  shall  be  entitled  to  appropriate  separation  pay  and  to  retirement  and   other   benefits   accruing   to   them   under   the   laws   of   general   application   in   force   at   the   time   of   their   separation.  In  lieu  thereof,  at  the  option  of  the  employees,  they  may  be  considered  for  employment  in   the   Government   or   in   any   of   its   subdivisions,   instrumentalities,   or   agencies,   including   government-­‐ owned   or   controlled   corporations   and   their   subsidiaries.   This   provision   also   applies   to   career   officers   whose  resignation,  tendered  in  line  with  the  existing  policy,  had  been  accepted.   •

What  is  envisioned  in  this  section  is  a  form  of  relief  for  the  members  of  the  career  civil  service  who  may  have   been   or   may   be   legally   but   involuntarily   reorganized   out   of   the   service   or   may   have   voluntarily   resigned   pursuant  to  the  reorganization  policy.      

Section  17.  Until  the  Congress  provides  otherwise,  the  President  shall  receive  an  annual  salary  of  three   hundred  thousand  pesos;  the  Vice-­‐President,  the  President  of  the  Senate,  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of   Representatives,  and  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court,  two  hundred  forty  thousand  pesos  each;   the   Senators,   the   Members   of   the   House   of   Representatives,   the   Associate   Justices   of   the   Supreme   Court,  and  the  Chairmen  of  the  Constitutional  Commissions,  two  hundred  four  thousand  pesos  each;  and   the  Members  of  the  Constitutional  Commissions,  one  hundred  eighty  thousand  pesos  each.   Section   18.   At   the   earliest   possible   time,   the   Government   shall   increase   the   salary   scales   of   the   other   officials  and  employees  of  the  National  Government.   Section  19.  All  properties,  records,  equipment,  buildings,  facilities,  and  other  assets  of  any  office  or  body   abolished  or  reorganized  under  Proclamation  No.  3  dated  March  25,  1986  or  this  Constitution  shall  be   transferred   to   the   office   or   body   to   which   its   powers,   functions,   and   responsibilities   substantially   pertain.   Section   20.   The   first   Congress   shall   give   priority   to   the   determination   of   the   period   for   the   full   implementation  of  free  public  secondary  education.   Section  21.  The  Congress  shall  provide  efficacious  procedures  and  adequate  remedies  for  the  reversion   to  the  State  of  all  lands  of  the  public  domain  and  real  rights  connected  therewith  which  were  acquired  in   violation   of   the   Constitution   or   the   public   land   laws,   or   through   corrupt   practices.   No   transfer   or   disposition   of   such   lands   or   real   rights   shall   be   allowed   until   after   the   lapse   of   one   year   from   the   ratification  of  this  Constitution.   Section   22.   At   the   earliest   possible   time,   the   Government   shall   expropriate   idle   or   abandoned   agricultural  lands  as  may  be  defined  by  law,  for  distribution  to  the  beneficiaries  of  the  agrarian  reform   program.   •

Abandoned   lands   –   those   devoted   to   any   crop   but   which   were   not   utilized   by   the   owner   for   his   benefit   for   5   years   prior   to   notice,   except   when   such   non-­‐utilization   was   due   to   reasons   of   force   majeure   or   other   fortuitous  event.  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



Idle   lands   –   those   not   devoted   directly   to   any   crop   or   to   any   economic   purpose   for   at   least   one   year   prior   to   notice  but  which  used  to  be  devoted  or  were  suitable  for  such  crop,  but  not  lands  devoted  permanently  or   regularly  to  other  essential  or  more  productive  purposes.    

Section  23.  Advertising  entities  affected  by  paragraph  (2),  Section  11  of  Article  XVI  of  this  Constitution   shall   have   five   years   from   its   ratification   to   comply   on   a   graduated   and   proportionate   basis   with   the   minimum  Filipino  ownership  requirement  therein.   •

This   is   intended   to   provide   a   period   of   adjustment   in   order   to   accommodate   agencies   which   may   have   Filipino  equity  as  low  as  zero.  No  legislation  is  needed.    

Section  24.  Private  armies  and  other  armed  groups  not  recognized  by  duly  constituted  authority  shall  be   dismantled.  All  paramilitary  forces  including  Civilian  Home  Defense  Forces  not  consistent  with  the  citizen   armed  force  established  in  this  Constitution,  shall  be  dissolved  or,  where  appropriate,  converted  into  the   regular  force.   • •

Armed  groups  –  referred  to  private  armies  and  fanatical  groups.   Paramilitary   forces   –   includes   CHDF   (Civilian   Home   Defense   Forces)   under   the   operational   control   of   the   Ministry  of  National  Defense.    

Section  25.  After  the  expiration  in  1991  of  the  Agreement  between  the  Republic  of  the  Philippines  and   the  United  States  of  America  concerning  military  bases,  foreign  military  bases,  troops,  or  facilities  shall   not  be  allowed  in  the  Philippines  except  under  a  treaty  duly  concurred  in  by  the  Senate  and,  when  the   Congress  so  requires,  ratified  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  by  the  people  in  a  national  referendum  held   for  that  purpose,  and  recognized  as  a  treaty  by  the  other  contracting  State.   • •

United  States  alone  could  be  allowed  to  have  military  bases  in  the  Philippines.   Concurrence   by   the   US   senate   is   not   needed   as   long   as   the   treaty   is   considered   by   both   the   US   and   the   Philippines,  and  have  undergone  all  the  necessary  steps  needed  to  make  it  a  treaty  under  law.    

Section   26.   The   authority   to   issue   sequestration   or   freeze   orders   under   Proclamation   No.   3   dated   March   25,   1986   in   relation   to   the   recovery   of   ill-­‐gotten   wealth   shall   remain   operative   for   not   more   than   eighteen  months  after  the  ratification  of  this  Constitution.  However,   in  the  national  interest,  as  certified   by  the  President,  the  Congress  may  extend  such  period.   A   sequestration   or   freeze   order   shall   be   issued   only   upon   showing   of   a  prima   facie  case.   The   order  and  the  list  of  the  sequestered  or  frozen  properties  shall  forthwith  be  registered  with  the  proper   court.  For  orders  issued  before  the  ratification  of  this  Constitution,  the  corresponding  judicial  action  or   proceeding  shall  be  filed  within  six  months  from  its  ratification.  For  those  issued  after  such  ratification,   the  judicial  action  or  proceeding  shall  be  commenced  within  six  months  from  the  issuance  thereof.   The   sequestration   or   freeze   order   is   deemed   automatically   lifted   if   no   judicial   action   or   proceeding  is  commenced  as  herein  provided.   • •

The   president   created   the   Presidential   Commission   on   Good   Government   (PCGG)   and   conferred   upon  it  powers  of  sequestration.   Sequestration  –  means  to  place  or  cause  to  be  placed  under  its  possession  or  control  said  property,   or   any   building   or   office   wherein   any   such   property   and   any   records   pertaining   thereto   may   be   found,   including   “business   enterprises   and   entities”   –   for   the   purpose   of   preventing   the   destruction,  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  



concealment  or  dissipation  of,  and  otherwise  conserving  and  preserving  the  same   –  until  it  can  be   determined,   through   appropriate   judicial   proceedings,   whether   the   property   was   in   truth   “ill-­‐ gotten”.   Freeze  order  –  prohibits  the  person  having  possession  or  control  of  property  having  been  alleged  to   constitute  “ill-­‐gotten  wealth”  from  transferring,  conveying,  encumbering  or  otherwise  depleting  or   concealing   such   property   ,   or   from   assisting   or   taking   part   in   its   transfer,   encumbrance,   concealment,  or  dissipation.  

  Cojuangco  V.  Republic,  GR  No.  180705,  Nov.  27,  2012   Issue:  Is  the  PCA-­‐Cojuangco  Agreement  involving  coco-­‐levy  funds,  constitutional?   Ruling:  No.  As  the  coconut  levy  funds  partake  of  the  nature  of  taxes  and  can  only  be  used  for  public  purpose,  and   importantly,  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  exacted,  i.e.,  the  development,  rehabilitation  and  stabilization  of  the   coconut  industry,  they  cannot  be  used  to  benefit  whether  directly  or  indirectly  private  individuals,  be  it  by  way  of  a   commission,   or   as   the   subject   Agreement   interestingly   words   it,   compensation.   Consequently,   Cojuangco   cannot   stand   to   benefit   by   receiving,   in   his   private   capacity,   7.22%   of   the   FUB   shares   without   violating   the   constitutional   caveat  that  public  funds  can  only  be  used  for  public  purpose.  Accordingly,  the  7.22%  FUB  (UCPB)  shares  that  were   given  to  Cojuangco  shall  be  returned  to  the  Government,  to  be  used  "only  for  the  benefit  of  all  coconut  farmers  and   for  the  development  of  the  coconut  industry."   Republic  V.  Bakunawa  GR.  No.  180418,  August  28,  2013   Issue:   What   quantum   of   evidence   is   required   in   the   recovery   of   ill-­‐gotten   wealth?   Was   the   republic   able   to   establish   the  ill-­‐gotten  nature  of  the  Bakunawas’  wealth?   Ruling:  Preponderance  of  evidence  is  required  in  actions  brought  to  recover  ill-­‐gotten  wealth.  By  preponderance  of   evidence  is  meant  that  the  evidence  adduced  by  one  side  is,  as  a  whole,  superior  to  that  of  the  other  side.     No,   no   proof   was   established   that   there   was   a   link   between   the   alleged   acts   of   the   Bakunawas   and   those   of   the   Marcoses,  or  even  the  proximity  of  Luz  Bakunawa  as  a  Marcos  relative  or  Marcos  dummy.  the  Republic  still  did  not   satisfy   its   quantum   of   proof   because   the   facts   it   established   were   not   sufficient   to   prove   its   case   against   respondents.  

Section  27.  This  Constitution  shall  take  effect  immediately  upon  its  ratification  by  a  majority  of  the  votes   cast  in  a  plebiscite  held  for  the  purpose  and  shall  supersede  all  previous  Constitutions.   The   foregoing   proposed   Constitution   of   the   Republic   of   the   Philippines   was   approved   by   the   Constitutional  Commission  of  1986  on  the  twelfth  day  of  October,  Nineteen  hundred  and  eighty-­‐six,  and   accordingly   signed   on   the   fifteenth   day   of   October,   Nineteen   hundred   and   eighty-­‐six   at   the   Plenary   Hall,   National   Government   Center,   Quezon   City,   by   the   Commissioners   whose   signatures   are   hereunder   affixed.             ★ ★ ★ ★ ★★  

SU  LAW  Batch  2018  

 

       Constitutional  Law  I  Reviewer  

View more...

Comments

Copyright ©2017 KUPDF Inc.
SUPPORT KUPDF