CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEWER DOCTRINES FOR CITING CASES

ARTICLE II SECTION 1 a) In Re Letter of Associate Justice Puno Two "ercent threshold9three limit rule: the twenty "ercent is a ceiling for "arty list in the congress it is not mandatory# SECTION 6 a) Romualde- (arcos vs# 3/(4L43: Aquino vs# 3/(4L43 A "erson;s residence is not his tem"orary residence but his domicile# b) 0omino vs# 3/(4L43 In order to establish domicile there must be animus manendi cou"led with animus non revertendi) an intention of abandoning the former "lace of residence and establishing a new one# SECTION10 a) Philconsa vs# (athay The reason for the delayed effect of the salary increase is to "lace a legal bar on legislators; yielding to the natural tem"tation to increase their salary# SECTION 11 a) /smena vs# Pendatun The "arliamentary "rivilege of s"eech does not immune the congressman from the disci"linary "owers but it is an absolute "rotection against libel# b) Jimene- vs# 3abangbang: Antonino vs# 2alencia The s"eech and utterances must constitute legislative action < that is actions that are done in relation with the duties of a 3ongressman# c) ,ravel vs# +& The "rivilege e=tends to the agents of the assemblyman "rovided that the agency consist "recisely in assisting the legislator in the "erformance of legislative action# SECTION 14 a) Puyat vs de ,u-man jr# The "rohibition against 3ongressmen in the "ractice of "rofession includes acts that are im"liedly "rohibited 5e=# buying stoc>s in the interest of a client)# SECTION 16 a) &antiago vs# ,uigona The courts may not interfere in the internal affairs of the legislature# b) /smena vs# Pendatun 4ach house shall be the sole judge of what disorderly behavior is# c) +& vs# Pons The journal is conclusive u"on the courts

The Aquino government is a de jure government because it was established by a legitimate sovereign the !ili"ino "eo"le# Article $ section % "rovides that &overeignty resides on the "eo"le and all government authority emanates from it# SECTION 2 The Phili""ines renounces war as an instrument of national "olicy# It ado"ts general "rinci"les of international law as "art of the law of the land and adheres to the "rinci"les of "eace justice freedom equality coo"eration and amity with all nations ARTICLE VI SECTION 1 a) Rubi vs# Provincial 'oard The congress may delegate is legislative "owers to local governments (ay an administrative rule be a "enal regulation) *es# Provided that the following condition concur) b) +& vs# ,rimmaud) The dealing statute must authori-e the "romulgation of a "enal regulation c) +& vs# 'arrias) The "enalty to im"osed must be "rovided in the delegating statute d) Peo"le vs# .ue Po Lay) &aid regulation must be "ublished in the /fficial ,a-ette# e) Peo"le vs# 0acucuy The law which "rovided that the "eriod of the "enalty shall be u"on the discretion of the court is I12ALI0# SECTION 5 a) Ang 'agong 'ayani vs# 3/(4L43 /nly "arties that re"resent the under"rivileged and marginali-ed sector are allowed to run for "ositions in the "arty list# Religius sectors are not allowed 5RA 678%) b) 2eterans !ederation Party vs# 3/(4L43

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

d) 3asco Phili""ine 3hemical 3or"# vs ,imeneThe enrolled bill is conclusive assurance that the bill is authentic and thus is more conclusive in courts than the journal# e) Astorga vs# 2illegas If the signatories re"udiates their signatures on the enrolled bill it is no longer considered authentic and the journal shall be conclusive# SECTION 1# a) 'ondoc vs# Pineda: Robles vs# ?R4T: 3o vs# ?R4T: Arroyo vs# ?R4T The su"reme court may intervene in the 4lectoral tribunals if there grave abuse of discretion# b) Angara vs# 4lectoral 3ommission The congress may not intervene in the 4T for they are inde"endent constitutional bodies# SECTION 1$ a) ,uingona Jr# vs# ,on-ales There is no need to fill u" the %$ seats in the 3A# &ection $% a) Aurnault vs# 1a-areno @hy legislative inquiry is im"ortant and why there is a need to "unish b) 'eng-on vs# &enate 'lue Ribbon 3ommittee The s"eech of 4nrile contained no suggestion of contem"lated legislation# Thus the legislative inquiry that followed is not for the aid of legislation# c) 1egros II vs# &anguniang Panlungsod The "ower to "unish for contem"t on leguslative inquiries is inherent only in the 3ongress and may be e=ercised by L,+# SECTION 24 a) Tolentino vs# &ecretary of !inance Prerogative to "ass this bills in based on the house alone# 'ut once a""roved the &enate may overhaul it with its own version# ARTICLE VII SECTION 1 a) 2illena vs# &ecretary of Interior The "resident is the e=ecutive of the government of the Phili""ines and no one else# b) (arcos vs# (angla"us et al# The "resident is the e=ecutive of the government and his "owers are more than the totality of the s"ecific "owers that are enumerated in the constitution# The President has the duty to "rotect and serve the citi-ens "rotect liberty "ro"erty and life "romote general welfare and ensure "eace and order# These duties "oint to the e=istence of unstated residual "owers# c) Laurel vs# ,arcia The "resident may not convey real "ro"erties of the government solely u"on his will# &uch conveyance must be authori-ed by law enacted by the 3ongress# SECTION $

a) Liberties +nion vs# 4=ecutive &ecretary 4/ $A8 is invalid for it gives the "resident and the family broad e=ce"tions under &ection 6 of Art# IB# The e=ce"tion of &ection %C Art# 2II should be the one to a""ly for the "resident# b) &oliven vs# Judge (a>aisar Immunity from suits is a "residential "rerogative which only the "resident can invo>e or waive# SECTION 15 a) In re 2alen-uela and 2allarta The "rohibition on section %D also a""lies to judiciary a""ointments of the "resident b) dela Rama vs# 3A The "rohibition only a""lies to "residential a""ointees SECTION 16 a) ,overnment vs# &"ringer Power to a""oint is e=ecutive in nature b) (analang vs# .uitoriano &ince "ower to a""oint is e=ecutive in nature the legislature may not usur" said "ower 5see boo>)# c) !lores vs# 0rilon The congress limiting the choice of the "resident for the &'(A chairman to only the (ayor of /lango is invalid thus null and void# d) 'autista vs# &alonga A""ointment of 3?R 3hairman does not need 3A confirmation the "osition not being one of those listed in the %st sentence of article %E# e) .uintos9deles vs# 3A A""ointment of &ectoral re"resentative needs the confirmation of 3A because the a""ointment is e="ressly "rovided by the constitution 5falls in the first sentence)# f) &armiento vs# (ison The a""ointment of 3ustoms 3ommissioner needs no confirmation from 3A# /nly those falling in the first sentence needs confirmation# g) 3alderon vs# 3arale The congress may not e="and the list of a""ointment needing confirmation# &ee &armiento vs# (ison h) (analo vs# &isto-a 3ongress may not e="and the list of those who needs the confirmation of 3A# #P1P officers are not a member of A! but civilians# i) (atibag vs# 'eni"ayo Ad interim a""ointment is "wemanent in nature# The fact that it is subject to confirmation of the 3A does not alter its "ermanent character# SECTION %VII a) (ondano vs# &ilvosa Power of control is the "ower of an officer to alter modify or nullify the judgments of subordinate officers in the "erformance of his duties# b) 'laquera vs# Alcasid 4/ $7 and $EA are valid e=ercise of "residential control for the "resident is merely modifying the acts of the res"ondents who granted incentives without a""ro"riate

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 2 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

clearance from the "resident thereby resulting to uneven distribution of government resources# c) 2illena vs# &ecretary of Interior The acts of the secretaries of e=ecutive de"artments "romulgated in the regular course of business unless disa""roved and re"robated by the "resident are considered acts of the 3hief 4=ecutive himself# d) Lacson9(agallanes vs# Pano The 4=ecutive &ecretary when acting by the authority of the "resident may reverse the decision of another de"artment secretary# e) 0e Leon vs# 3ar"io The acts of the &ecretary of justice in the regular course of the "erformance of his duties are acts of the "resident which are controlling over all e=ecutive offices# ?ence 1'I chief must obey# f) Ang9Angco vs# 3astillo The "resident;s "ower of control can only be e=ercised over acts of made by a subordinate officer of his duties# g) 1A(AR3/ vs# AR3A The "resident has the "ower to control government owned cor"oration# 51ote) "ower does not come from the constitution but from statue thus it may also be ta>en away by statue) SECTION %VIII a) (artin vs# (ott The ultimate authority to decide whether such necessity already arisen lies on the President and is conclusive u"on all other "ersons# b) I'P vs# Famora The factual necessity of calling out the armed forces is for the "resident to decide based on his "owers "rovided for in Art# 2II section %A# c) Lacson vs# &ecretary PereThe "resident has the vast "ower of intelligence networ> to gather information affecting the security of the state# Although the 3ourt in "ro"er cases may loo> into the sufficiency of the factual basis of the e=ercise of this "ower based on its "ower to determine grave abuse of discretion such is no longer "ossible when "roclamation has already been lifted# SECTION %I% a) Llmas vs# /rbos The 3onstitution does not ma>e any distinction with regard to the e=tent of the "ardoning "ower of the "resident e=ce"t with res"ect to im"eachment# b) 0rilon vs# 3A 3ommutation may come in any form# ?ouse arrest in "lace of im"risonment is a form of commutation by shortening the "enalty# c) 3abantag vs# @olfe A distinction between absolute and conditional "ardon must be made# An absolute "ardon will ta>e effect even without acce"tance while conditional "ardon will only ta>e effect after acce"tance of the condemned# The reason for this is that the conditional "ardon may be less acce"table to him than the original sentence and may in fact be more onerous# d) (onsanto vs# !actoran

/ne who is given absolute "ardon has no demandable right to reinstatement# 1onetheless he may a""ly for new a""ointment# e) ,arcia vs# 3ommission on Audit If "ardon is given because one is acquitted on the ground that he did not commit the crime he has a right to reinstatement and bac> wages due# f) Torres vs# ,on-ales The convicts acce"tance of "ardon also involves acce"tance of the "resident;s authority to withdraw such conditional "ardon# g) Peo"le vs# &alle Jr# Pardons have no effect to those that are not serving by final judgment# A""eals must be withdrawn before "ardon can be effected# SECTION %%I a) +saffe 2eterans Association Inc# vs# Treasurer of the Phili""ines Treaties require the concurrence of the &enate less formal ty"es of international agreements may be entered into by the 3hief 4=ecutive and become binding without the concurrence of the legislative body# b) 'ayan vs# 4=ecutive &ecretary &ection $% of Art# 6 a""lies as to the manner of ratifying the treaty# ARTICLE VIII SECTION 1 a) Lo"e- vs# Ro=as Judicial "ower is the authority of the courts to settle actual controversies involving rights that are legally demandable and enforceable before the courts of justice# 0/3TRI14) I! 1/ LA@ I& APPLI3A'L4 T?4 3/+RT& ?A24 1/ J+RI&0I3TI/1# b) &antiago vs# 'autista Award of honors to a student by the board of teachers may not be reversed by the 3ourt where the awards are governed by no a""licable law# c) 3hannie Tan vs# Re"ublic 3ourt has no authority to entertain an action for judicial declaration of citi-enshi" where there is no law authori-ing such "roceeding# d) !eli"e vs# Leuterio 3ourt may not reverse the award of the bard of judges in an oratorical contest# e) +&T vs# 'oard of Ta= A""eals Im"licit in the conferment of "ower on 3ongress to create courts and to determine their jurisdiction is the denial of the same to other de"artments# f) &imon vs# 3&3 ,rave abuse of discretion means such ca"ricious and whimsical e=ercise of judgment as in equivalent to lac> of jurisdiction# g) 2illarosa vs# ?R4T The court may determine whether the ?R4T committed grave abuse of discretion thus former may review the decision of the latter# h) 4chagaray vs# &ecretary of Justice The "ower of control over the e=ecution of its decision is within the "rovince of the Judiciary;s "ower since the constitution granted it with the entirety of judicial "ower# The most im"ortant "art if litigation whether civil or criminal is the "rocess of evaluation of decisions were su"ervening events may change the circumstances of

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! + o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

the "arties to com"el the court to intervene and adjust the rights of the litigants to "revent unfairness# &ection %7 Article 6 should not be inter"reted as denying the courts of this "ower since even after the finality of the decision the court may still review their decision# The sus"ension of the death sentence is within the e=ercise of judicial "ower and it does not encroach u"on the "ower of the "resident to grant re"rieve although the effect is the same# The same logic lies when the 3ongress in e=ercising its legislative "ower enacts a law amending the 0eath Penalty Law# To contend that the e=ecutive has the "ower to "rotect life would be a violation of the "rinci"le of the co9equal and coordinate "owers of the three branches of the government# c) &antiago vs# ,uingona It is well within the "owers of the court to determine whether the &enate and its members gravely abused their discretion in the e=ercise of its function and "rerogatives# ?owever the court may not delve into matters that are "urely within the internal affairs of the legislature# SECTION 2 a) Lu"angco vs# 3ourt of A""eals @here a statute designates the court having jurisdiction other than courts of general jurisdiction then courts of general jurisdiction do not have authority# 'ut where there is silence the general rule a"" lies# b) (antrust &ystem Inc# vs# 3A The "ower to "rescribe the jurisdiction of the court belongs to the legislature e=ce"t for those "owers which the constitution says may not be ta>en from the &u"reme 3ourt 5section D)# The "resident herself in her e=ercise of her legislative "owers issued the law in question# Thus because of the se"aration of "ower doctrine there can be no justification for judicial interference un the business of administrative agencies e=ce"t when there is a violation of any of the constitutional rights or it commits grave abuse of discretion amounting to e=cess or lac> of jurisdiction# DOCTRINE, T-E COURT IS ONL. GIVEN /UDICIAL )OWER an" NOT-ING 0ORE T-US) c) (anila 4lectric co# vs# Pasay Trans"ortation inc The courts may not be required to act as board of arbitrators d) 1oblejas vs# Tehan>ee The court may not be charged of administrative functions e=ce"t when reasonably incidental to the fulfillment of judicial duties# e) 0irector of Prisons vs# #Ang 3ho Gio It is not the function of the court to give advisory o"inions SECTION 4 a) !ortich vs# 3orona A decision of the court $9$ is a decision in itself that the motion for reconsideration shall not be granted# 3ases are decided (atters are resolved# b) !irestone 3eramics vs# 3A 0ecisions or resolutions of the &u"reme 3ourt en banc is the decision of the &u"reme 3ourt itself# The su"reme court is not an a""ellate court vis9H9vis its

divisions and e=ercise no a""ellate jurisdiction over the latter# The only constraint is that the any doctrine or "rinci"le of law rendered by the court en banc or in division can only be reversed or modified by the court sitting en banc# SECTION 5 Requisites for the e=ercise of judicial review) a) PA3+ vs# &ecretary of 4ducation There must be before the court actual case calling for the e=ercise of judicial "ower and such question must be ri"e for adjudication meaning the governmental action has an adverse effect on the "erson challenging it# b) Peo"le vs# 2era The "erson challenging must have a legal standing that is heIshe should have a direct and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustain or will sustain a direct injury as a result of the enforcement# c) Peo"le vs# 2era .uestion of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest o""ortunity so that if it is not raised on the "leasing it shall not be raised in the trial and if not raised on the trial it may not be raised on a""eal# d) Philconsa vs# 4nriqueThe court will not touch the issue of unconstitutionality unless it is really unavoidable or the lis mota# Stan"in(, a) Telecommunications and 'roadcast Attorney of the Phili""ines vs# 3/(4L43 The "erson has standing if it can be shown that) %# he has "ersonally suffered an injury as a result of the alleged governmental action $# &uch injury can be directly traced to the challenged action C# The injury will li>ely be redressed by a favorable action# b) Gilosbayan vs# ,uigona: Tatad vs# 0e"artment of 4nergy The &3 may ta>e cogni-ance of a suit which does not satisfy the requirements of legal standing: the 3ourt has ado"ted a liberal attitude on the locus standi of a "etitioner where the "etitioner is able to craft an issue of transcendental significance to the "eo"le or "aramount im"ortance to the "ublic# TA% )A.ER1S SUIT a) Tan vs# (aca"agal: &anidad vs#3/(4L43 Ta= "ayers legal standing) %# @hen it is established that "ublic funds have been disbursed in alleged contravention of the law or the constitution or in "reventing the illegal e="enditure of money raised by ta=ation# $# ?e will sustain a direct injury as a result of the enforcement of the questioned statute# UNCONSTITUTIONALIT. OF A STATUTE a) de Agbayani vs# Phili""ine 1ational 'an> The &3 rejected the /rthodo= view but instead the court ado"ted the view that before an act is declared unconstitutional it is an o"erative fact which can be a source of rights and duties#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 4 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

0o"aliti!s o* 2onstitutional int!'3'!tation, a) historical a""roach < a""roach through analy-ing the intention of the framers of the 3onstitution and the circumstance of its ratification b) structural a""roach < drawing inference from the architecture of the three9 cornered "ower relationshi"s found in the constitutional arrangement# c) 0octrinal a""roach < rely on established "recedents d) 4thical a""roach < see>s to inter"ret the !ili"ino moral commitments that are embedded in the constitutional document e) Te=tual a""roach < reading the language of the constitution as the man on the street would understand it# f) Prudential a""roach < weighing and com"aring the costs and benefits that might be found in conflicting rules# )oliti2al 4u!stions, a) 'a>er vs# 3arr 2arious ty"es of "olitical questions) te=tual ty"e) where there is found a te=tually demonstrable commitment of the issue to a "olitical de"artment 5&antiago vs# ,uingona and Arroyo vs# devencia) functional ty"e) lac> of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving the issue or there is im"ossibility of deciding without initial "olicy determination of a >ind clearly for non9judicial discretion 5Avelino vs# 3uenco Tanada vs# (aca"agal and 0a-a vs# &ingson) "rudential ty"e) there is im"ossibility of a court;s underta>ing an inde"endent resolution without e="ressing lac> of res"ect due to coordinate branches of government: or adherence to a "olitical decision already made: or the "otentiality of embarrassment from multifarious "ronouncements by various de"artments on one question 5frequent during the (arcos 4ra)# SECTION 6 (aceda vs# 2asque-) "ower to disci"line judges of lower courts## 5section %%) the ombudsman may not investigate a judge inde"endently of any administrative action of the &3# SECTION $ 1itafan vc# 3ommission of Internal Revenue) salary of judges and justices are subject to income ta=: overruled 4ndecia vs# 0avid and Perfecto vs# (eer# Peo"le vs# ,acott) decision en banc is needed only when the "enalty to be im"osed is dismissal of a judge disbarment of a lawyer sus"ension for more than one year and a fine e=ceeding Ph" %J JJJ#JJ# Fandueta vs de la 3osta) Abolition of office is valid when done in good faith and not for "olitical or "ersonal reasons# Ins such a situation there is no removal from office because a removal im"lies that the office e=ists after the ouster# 2istan vs# 1icolas) A judge may not "resent himself as a congressional candidate for that would constitute misconduct# In re) Judge (an-ano) the judge may not acce"t the "osition because of &ection %$# 3onsing vs 3A) the absence of a certification will not invalidate a decision#

3ourt Administator vs# .uinanola

CONSTITUTIONAL CO00ISSIONS Aruejo vs 3A) Rules "romulagater by the 3/(4L43 will govern only cases filed in the 3/(4L43# !or cases filed in regular court: rule of court shall "revail# /rocio vs# 3/A: 'ustamante vs# 3/A) decisions must be made by the collegial body (ison vs# 3/A) a decision that is void cannot be ratified: a chairman us not the commission# Absent a decision of the collegial body there is no valid decision# Paredes vs 3/(4L43) &u"reme 3ourt may review finding of fact but only on cases when there is evidence of arbitrariness# Reyes vs RT3) decisions en banc may be brought to the 3/+RT but motion for reconsideration shall be decisded by 3ommission en banc# 3ua vs 3/(4L43) $9% decision valid Ambil vs# 3/(4L43) a "onente who retired cannot "romulgate his decision# 0umayas vs 3/(4L43) Retirement of the judges disqualifies them from "romulgating the decision# The justices left may form another majority# (ateo vs# 3A) RA 67J$ "rovides that the judgment of quasi9judicial agencies may be a""ealed to the 3A within %D days from the recei"t of notice# This is "ursuant to &ection 6 which states) +nless otherwise "rovided by this constitution or by law# ,arces vs 3A) the case or matter that can be brought to the &3 on certiorari under &ection 6 Art IB93 are those that relate to the e=ercise of adjudicatory or quasi9judicial "owers# In the case of comelec T?I& involves elective regional "rovincial and city officials# CIVIL SERVICE CO00ISSION Aquino vs# 3&3) 3&3 cannot disa""rove an a""ointment and require the a""ointment of another "erson whom he believes is more qualified# 'inamira vs# ,arrucho) A""ointment is the selection by authority vested with "ower of an individual who is to e=ercise the functions of a given office# 0esignation connotes merely an im"osition by law of additional duties of an incumbent official# The latter is a function of the e=ecutive# 'inamira;s a""ointment was invalid because he was not a""ointed by the President# 'orres vs# 3A) "rimarily confidential) nature of the office must be such as to require 5see delos santos) 'riones vs# /smena) @hile abolition of office does not im"ly removal of the incumbent officer this is true only where the abolition of office is done in good faith and not merely as a cover for a removal otherwise not allowed by the constitution# The right to abolish cannot be used to discharge em"loyees in violation of civil service laws 5,acho vs# /smena)# 3anoni-ado vs# Aguirre) There is no bona fide reorgani-ation thus declaring the "ositions e="ired is unconstitutional# 0elos &antos vs# (allare) PR/BI(IT* R+L4) every a""ointment im"lies confidence but much more than ordinary confidence is necessary to a holder of a "osition that is "rimarily confidential# The latter "hrase denotes not only confidence in the a"titude of the a""ointee but "rimarily close intimacy which

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 5 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

ensure freedom of intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgivings or betrayals of "ersonal trust on confidential matters of the state# (ayor vs (acaraig) The commissioners had a right to remain in office until the e="iration of the terms for which they have been a""ointed unless removed for cause "rovided by law# &ecurity of tenure is "rotected right under the constitution# Abolition is not the same as removal from office# !L/R4& vs# 0RIL/1) @hen an elective official acce"ts an a""ointment without first resigning his elective "osition the a""ointment is invalid# 1aseco vs# 1LR3) civil service laws embrace all government owned and controlled cor"orations with original charterKthat is created by law 54II' vs 3A)# 1aseco is not covered by 3&3 for it is merely a subsidiary of the 103# P1/3 vs 1LR3) 3or"orations created by s"ecial charters are subject to 3ivil &ervice those unincor"orated under the 3or"oration code are not &A(&/1 vs 3A) The "osition of assistant secretary to the mayor is not one of those considered as highly confidential under &ection D! of RA $$EJ# @hat were enumerated are secretaries but not assistant secretaries# The com"ensation attached and designation given suggest that the "osition is "urely clerical and the fact the they sometimes handle confidential matter does not alter the nature of their wor> 5Ingles vs# (utuc) &antiago vs 3&3) Power to a""oint is a matter of discretion ne=t in ran> rule does not a""ly# Larin vs 4=ecutive &ecretary) the "resident;s "ower to disci"line include the "ower to remove# 'ut it is limited# The career service officers and em"loyees who enjoy security of tenure may be removed only for causes "rovided by law in accordance with "rocedural due "rocess# A3?A3/&/ vs# (acaraig) Permanent a""ointment can only be e=tended to a "erson that has all the qualifications# The mere fact that the "osition he occu"ied belongs to a career service does not automatically confer on him security of tenure# ,AR34& vs# 3A) 3onsent of the official concerned is needed for a transfer to be valid#

SECTION + &oller vs# 3/(4L43) comelec division has jurisdiction over cases in the first instance# LOCAL GOVERN0ENT &u"anagan Jr# vs# &antos) legislative bodies of local governments shall have &ectoral re"resentation as may be "rescribed by law# +nder the Local ,overnment 3ode 5'P CC6) the "ower to a""oint &ectoral is conferred u"on the President of the Phili""ines but the secretary of Local ,overnment may by authority of the "resident inform the &ectoral re"resentatives of their a""ointments# It is the "resident who a""oints and the secretary is merely the transmitter# Tan vs# 3/(4L43) Areas affected refer to both "laces that are covered by the new "rovince and those other areas of the Province of 1egros /ccidental since the remaining areas are also affected# As "rovided in the dissenting o"inion of Justice Abad &antos in the case of Paredes vs# 4=ecuting &ecretary when the constitution s"ea>s of the unit or units affected t means all of the "eo"le of the munici"ality if such is to be divided or all the "eo"le of two or more munici"alities if there be a merger# Padilla vs# 3/(4L43) The deletion of the "hrase Lunit orM in &ection %J Article %J of the constitution does not affect the ruling in Tan vs# 3/(4L43# The reason that when the law states that the "lebiscite shall be conducted in the "olitical units directly affected it means that residents of the "olitical entity who would be economically dislocated by the se"aration of a "ortion thereof should have a right to vote in the said "lebiscite Abella vs# 3/(4L43) 3om"onent cities are those whose charters "rohibit their voters from voting for "rovincial elective officials are treated li>e highly urbani-ed cities which are outside the su"ervisory "ower of the "rovince to which they are geogra"hically attached# &uch inde"endence carries with it the "rohibition directed to registered voters not to vote and be voted for the "rovincial elective offices# Co'"ill!'a 5'oa" Coalition 6s& COA ) 3AR is merely an administrative region created under the Reorgani-ation Plan# 3onsidering the control and su"ervision e=ercised by the President over 3AR and the offices created under 4/ $$J 3AR may be considered at most as a regional coordinating agency if the 1ational ,overnment which is similar to the regional develo"ment councils which the "resident may create under &ection %8 A77as 6s& CO0ELEC, the creation of the autonomous region is made effective u"on the a""roval Nby a majority votes cast by the constituent units in a "lebiscite;# 4ven is we assume that it is in conflict with the Tri"oli agreement the standard for the validity of said act is "rovided by the constitution thus RA E6C8 will "revail# (oreover granting that the Tri"oli agreement is "art of the law of the land it will be of the same class as RA E6C8 which is a statute# The rule is that the Later law "revails thus RA E6C8 will "revail over the older Tri"oli agreement# Co'"ill!'a R!(ional Ass!87l9 6s& CO0ELEC ) It is e="ressly "rovided in the constitution that the autonomous region shall be com"osed of "rovinces cities

CO0ELEC SECTION 2 Antonio vs# 3/(4L43) 3/(4L43 can "romulgate its own rules of "rocedure# Tan vs# 3/(4L43) 3ommission may merely issue recommendation of disci"linary action for de"uti-ed officers# Alunan vs# (irasol) 4lection of &> is beyond the sco"e of su"ervision of the 3/(4L43 Gilosbayan Inc# vs 3/(4L43) 3/(4L43 has "ower to investigate and "rosecute but the com"lainant must show "robable cause# L/R4T/ vs# 'RI/1) second "lacer cannot ta>e "lace of the winner Taule vs# &ecretary &antos) The "ower of 3/(4L43 is over "o"ular election# 'rillantes vs# *orac) a designation as acting chairman is tem"orary because it is revocable at will# It is not allowed for it violates the safeguards of the commission;s inde"endence# &ala-ar vs# 3/(4L43) @hat the constitution says must be heard en banc are motion for reconsideration of decisions that is resolution of substantive issues#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 6 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

munici"alities etc# In other words the term LregionM used should mean two or more "rovinces# L!ono' 6s& Co'"ill!'a 5o"on( A"8inist'ation ) &ince 3ordillera Autonomous region did not come into e=istence since only Ifugao ratified RA E6EE as a consequent the 3ordillera 'odong Administration which was created in "ursuant to section %C of 4/ $$E the indigenous and s"ecial courts for the indigenous cultural communities of the 3ordillera region and the 3PLA as the regional "olice force do not legally e=ist#

ACCOUNTA5ILIT. -i3olitas 6s& 0!'(as ) 4ven if the offense is not very serious the nature of the "osition amounts the acts as malfeasance# Public &ervice requires utmost integrity and strictest disci"line# The yardstic> of "ublic service is honesty and integrity both im"rinted in the %76C and the %7A6 constitution# R/(+L/ vs# *1I,+4F) The 'atasan by a majority as "rovided for the rules of court can dismiss the com"laint for im"eachment because there would not be any use of "roceeding further if the required $IC would not be obtained# &uch act of the 'atasan as a body is an e=ercise of "owers that have been vested u"on it by the 3onstitution beyond the "ower of the court to review# I1 R4 ,/1FAL4F) A "ublic officer who under the constitution is required to be a member if the Phili""ines 'ar as a qualification for the office held by him and who may be removed from office by im"eachment cannot be charged with disbarment during the incumbency of such "ublic officer# &uch "ublic officer during his incumbency cannot be charged before the &andinganbayan or any other court with the offence which carries with it "enalty of removal from office or any "enalty service of which would amount to removal from office 1+14F vs# &A10I,A1'A*A1) The creation of the &andiganbayan was "recisely aimed for curtailing and minimi-ing the o""ortunities for official corru"tion and maintaining a standard of honesty in "ublic service# (A*/R L43AR/F vs# &A1) broad "owers were given to the sandiganbayan which includes all other civil and criminal "ractices involving "ublic officers of the court# &ection 8 Article BIII of the 3onstitution "rovides for the creation of a s"ecial as the &andiganbayan which has jurisdiction cases involving such other offenses committed by "ublic officers and em"loyees including those in government9owned and controlled cor"orations in relation to their office as may be determined by law# FAL0I2AR vs# &A1) The Tanodbayan 5&"ecial Prosecutor) and /mbudsman have different duties# The former shall be >nown as the /ffice of the &"ecial Prosecutor and shall continue to function as may have been "rovided for by law e=ce"t those conferred on the /ffice of the /mbudsman created under the 3onstitution# The latter shall have the duty to investigate on its own any act or omissions of any "ublic official when such act or omission a""ears to be illegal unjust im"ro"er or inefficient# 04L/&/ vs# 0/(I1,/) The clause Lany illegal act or omission; of any "ublic official is broad enough to embrace any crime committed by a "ublic official# !urthermore the /mbudsman act ma>es "erfectly clear that the jurisdiction of the /mbudsman encom"asses all >inds of malfeasance that have been committed by any officer or em"loyee during his tenure of office# The murder of C "ersons is no doubt an illegal act and since this was committed by a

governor the crime lies within the jurisdiction of the /mbudsman;s investigative authority# 3R+F vs# &A10I,A1'A*A1) The authority of the /mbudsman is not e=clusive but is concurrent with other similarly authori-ed agencies of the government li>e the P3,,# '+41&A0A vs# !LA2I4R) The /mbudsman has the "ower to sus"end government officials and em"loyees "ending investigation# The court held in 1era vs# ,arcia that sus"ension is just a "reliminary ste" in an administrative investigation# The moment a criminal or administrative com"laint is filed with the ombudsman the res"ondent is deemed to be in his authority and he can "roceed to determine whether said res"ondent should be "laced under "reventive sus"ensions# 1ATI2I0A0 vs# !4LIB) 0eloso vs 0omingo has already been re9e=amined in the case of Aguinaldo vs# 0omagas and &anche- vs# 0emetriou which both "rovided that the authority of the /mbudsman is not an e=clusive authority but rather a shared or concurrent authority in res"ect of the offense charged# Accordingly the /mbudsman may ta>e over the investigation of such case at any stage from any investigative agency of the ,overnment# 3/134R140 /!!I3IAL& /! (@&& vs# 2A&.+4F) The discretion to acce"t or reject a bid and award contract is vested on government agencies# 3ourts will not interfere unless it is a""arent that it is used as a shield to a fraudulent award# LA&TI(/&A vs# 2A&.+4F) In the e=ercise of his "owers the /mbudsman is authori-ed to call in "rosecutors for assistance as "rovided for in &eciton C% of the /mbudsman Act of %7A7 5RA E66J)# @hen a "rosecutor is de"uti-ed he comes under the su"ervision and control of the /mbudsman meaning he is subject to the "ower of the /mbudsman to direct review a""rove reverse and modify his decision# Petitioner cannot legally act on her own and refuse to "re"are and file the information as directed by the /mbudsman# The "reventive sus"ension is also valid in "ursuant to &ection $8 of the /mbudsman act which e="ressly "rovided that the "reventive sus"ension shall continue until the case is terminated by the /ffice of the /mbudsman but not more than si= months without "ay# AL(/1T4 vs# 2A&.+4F) The "rivilege of confidentiality is recogni-ed only on matters relating to military di"lomatic and other national security secrets# If the claim of confidentiality does not rest on these matters the "rivilege cannot be invo>ed#

GENERAL )ROVISIONS (4TRA1 vs# PAR404&) It is also a well settled rule that where a suit is brought against an officer or agency with relation to some matter in which defendant re"resents the state in action and liability and the state while not a "arty to the record is the real "arty against which relief is sought so that a judgment for "laintiff although nominally against the named defendant as an individual or entity distinct from the state will o"erate to control the action of the state or subject it to liability the suit is in effect one against the state and cannot be maintained without its consent# 1ATI/1AL AIRP/RT& 3/RP vs# T4/0/R/) 1ot all government entities whether cor"orate or non9cor"orate are immune from suits# Immunity from

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! # o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

suits is determined by the character of the objects for which the entity is organi-ed# 3AA vs# 3A) It has already been settled in the Teodoro case that 3AA as an agency is not immune from suit# It being engaged in functions "ertaining to a "rivate entity for is essentially runs a business even if revenues be not its "rime objective but the "romotion of travel and the convenience of the traveling "ublic an enter"rise not e=clusive "rerogative of the state R4P+'LI3 vs# !4LI3IA1/) A suit for the recovery of "ro"erty is not an action in rem but an action in "ersonam# It is an action directed against a s"ecific "arty or "arties and any judgment therein binds only such "arty or "arties# The com"laint is clearly a suit against the state which under settled jurisdiction is not "ermitted e=ce"t u"on a showing that the state has consented to be sued wither e="ressly or im"liedly (/'IL P?ILIPPI14& vs# ARRA&TR4) A non9cor"orate government entity "erforms a function "ro"rietary in nature does not necessarily result in its being suable# If said non9governmental function is underta>en as an incident to its governmental function there is no waiver of sovereign immunity from suit e=tended to such government entity !4&T4J/ vs# !4R1A10/) Rule of immunity may be rela=ed where its strict a""lication will result in an injustice# (I1I&T4RI/ vs# 3!I) (unici"al cor"orations e=ist in a dual ca"acity and their functions are twofold# In one they e=ercise the right s"ringing form sovereignty the other ca"acitates the munici"alities to e=ercise a "rivate "ro"rietary right# In the second function the officers and agents act in their cor"orate or individual ca"acity# (+1I3IPALIT* /! &A1 !4R1A10/ vs# J+0,4 !IR(4) The test of liability of the munici"ality de"ends on whether or not the driver acting on behalf of the munici"ality is "erforming governmental or "ro"rietary functions 0A vs# 1LR3) a state may be said to have descended to the level of an individual and this can be deemed to have actually given its consent to be sued only when it a""ears into business contracts# It does not a""ly where the contract relate to the e=ercise of sovereign functions 5+& vs# Rui-)# P1R vs# IA3) 3onsent of state to be sued can be manifested e="ressly through a general or s"ecial law or indicated im"licitly as when the state commences litigation for the "ur"osed of asserting an affirmative relief or when it enters

a""licable to com"laints filed against officials of the state for acts allegedly "erformed by them in the discharge of their duties# @*GI4 vs# RARA1,) 3rimes cannot be "ossible covered by the immunity agreement# /ur laws and even the laws of +& do no allow the commission of cries in the name of official duty# R4P+'LI3 /! I10/14&IA vs# 2I1F/1&) The rule that a state may not be sued without its consent is a necessary consequence of the "rinci"les of inde"endence and equality of states# All states are sovereign equals and cannot assert justification over one another# The establishment of a di"lomatic mission is an act jure im"erii# 4ntering into a contract for maintenance is therefore an act jure im"erii and not a waiver of immunity#

NATIONAL )ATRI0ON. SANTA ROSA 0INING 6s& LEIDO) whatever right that was vested over the mining claims before P0 %$%8 were merely "ossessory right which can be lost through abandonment or forfeiture or may be revo>ed for valid legal grounds#

into a contract# @hen the state enters into a covenant it is deemed to have descended to the level of the other "arty# R4P+'LI3 vs# &A10/2AL) The (endiola 3ommission only has recommendatory "owers and he "residents; statement was merely an e="ression of solidarity with the rallyists# Although consent to be sued may be given im"liedly still it cannot be maintained that such consent was given considering the circumstances obtaining in the instant case +&# vs# R4*4&) The doctrine of state immunity and its e=ce"tions are summari-ed in &hauf vs# 3A where it was held that the rule may not be sued without its consent is one of the generally acce"ted "rinci"les of international law that we have ado"ted as "art of the law of the land# @hile the doctrine a""ears to "rohibit suits against the state without its consent it is also

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! $ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

NOTES AND DIGESTS

)REA05LE There are s"ecific terms included in the "reamble which although does not create rights or obligations it sets down the origin sco"e and "ur"ose of the 3onstitution 5Jacobson v. Massachussets %76 +& %%)# The significance of the first "erson @e stresses the active and sovereign role of the !ili"ino "eo"le as authors of the 3onstitution# These s"ecific terms are) Al8i(:t9 Go" ; This reflects "ersonalist !ili"ino behavior toward religion# Co88on Goo" < This statement im"lies an aim toward the "revention against tyranny of the majority# The "hrase Lgeneral welfareM was avoided because general welfare may not be the common good# Lo6! < This word was included as a tribute to 40&A# @e;re the only country in the world with the word LloveM in our fundamental law# T'ut: < This is a statement against the su""ression of truth in the (arcos era# )!a2! < This is mentioned last because this is su""osed to be a fruit of truth justice freedom love and equality# Rul! o* La < This em"hasi-es that government officials have only the authority given and defined by law and such authority continues only with the concurrence of the "eo"le# Article I National T!''ito'9 The national territory com"rises the Phili""ine archi"elago with all the islands and waters embraced therein and all other territories over which the Phili""ines has sovereignty or jurisdiction consisting of its terrestrial fluvial and 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 archi"elago regardless of their breadth and dimensions form "art of the internal waters of the Phili""ines#

*ou may not find a declaration of territory in other 3onstitutions because 3onstitutions are munici"al law and are not binding as International Law# The Treaty of Paris signed in %7CD described the Phili""ines as a rectangle and the territorial limitations in the treaty e=cluded "arts of @estern Phili""ines and 'atanes hence the clause) and any other territories within Philippine jurisdiction# This allowed for the inclusion of 'atanes and the e=cluded islands because historically they have always been under Phili""ine jurisdiction# The sco"e of the national territory as defined in this Article refers to) the Phili""ine Archi"elago all other territories over which the Phili""ines has sovereignty or jurisdiction < worded so that it may include all future land acquisitions of the Phili""ines either by war or by grant of international law the territorial sea the seabed the subsoil the insular shelves and other submarine areas corres"onding to the first two "rovisions or the country;s terrestrial fluvial and aerial domains# A'2:i3!la(i2 )'in2i3l! There are two elements to the archi"elagic "rinci"le the inclusion of internal waters in the territorial waters of a country and the straight baseline method of defining territorial waters# %# &traight 'aselines 9 against normal baselines that follow the coast) %$ 1( O territorial waters P %$ 1( O contiguous -one P $DJ 1( e=clusive economic -one# (alam"aya falls under our e=clusive economic -one# This creates controversy over the local government share $# Internal @aters 9 @aters found between islands with a distance greater than what is considered under territorial waters# This conflicts with the %7A$ Treaty on the Law of the &ea which recogni-es these internal waters as international waters# @e signed the treaty with reservations 5%7A8) declaring that it does not in any manner im"air or "rejudice the sovereign tights of the Phili""ines in accordance with its 3onstitution# Article II D!2la'ation o* )'in2i3l!s an" Stat! )oli2i!s )RINCI)LES S!2tion 1 The Phili""ines is a democratic and re"ublican state# &overeignty resides in the "eo"le and all government authority emanates from them# A stat! is a community of "ersons more or less numerous "ermanently occu"ying a definite "ortion of territory inde"endent of e=ternal control and "ossessing an organi-ed government to which a body of inhabitants render habitual obedience# !our requirements for a government)

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! < o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Peo"le Territory &overeignty ,overnment

or not the government shall e=ercise these functions are) that a government should do for the "ublic welfare those things that "rivate ca"ital would not naturally underta>e and that a government should do those things which by its very nature it is better equi""ed to administer for the "ublic welfare than any "rivate individual or grou" of individuals# Stat!> (o6!'n8!nt> an" a"8inist'ation &tate is the cor"orate entity government is the institution that im"lements the will of the &tate and administration refers to the "eo"le running the institution# D! ?u'! an" "! D! *a2to (o6!'n8!nt Judicial acts and "roceedings of de facto governments remain good and valid even after the liberation or reoccu"ation of the Phili""ines by the American and !ili"ino forces# Go @i8 C:an 6& Val"!= Tan @!: 0octrine There are three >inds of de facto governments# !irst is when the government de facto gets "ossession and control of or usur"s by force or by the voice of the majority the rightful legal government and maintains itself against the will of the latter# 53romwell;s 4ngland) The second is a government established and maintained by military forces who invade and occu"y a territory of the enemy in the course of war and which is denominated a government of "aramount force 5Ja"anese /ccu"ation) The third >ind is that established as an inde"endent government by the inhabitants of a country who rise in insurrection against the "arent state 5&outhern 3onfederacy) /f the second >ind denominated as a government of "aramount force# Its e=istence is maintained by active military "ower within the territories and against the rightful authority of an established and lawful government @hile it e=ists it must necessarily be obeyed in civil matters by "rivate citi-ens who by obedience rendered in submission to such force do not become res"onsible as wrongdoers for those acts though not warranted by the laws of the rightful government# In R!, L!tt!' o* Asso2iat! /usti2! )uno &yno"sis@ith res"ect to the Aquino government of %7AE it can be said that the organi-ation of (rs# Aquino;s government was met by little resistance and her control of the state evidenced by the a""ointment of the 3abinet and other >ey officers of 3abinet officials revam" of the Judiciary and the (ilitary signaled the "oint where the legal system in effect had ceased to be obeyed by the !ili"ino "eo"le# )att!'ns o* Go6!'n8!nt

A '!3u7li2an state im"lies a re"resentative government while a "!8o2'ati2 state im"lies a direct democracy# So6!'!i(nt9 &overeignty is the "ower to ma>e legal decisions# All sovereignty resides in the "eo"le and whatever "ower you have has to be given to you# &overeignty is defined by Jelline> as the su"reme "ower to affect all legal interests either by e=ecutive legal or judicial action# )!o3l! 6& Go=o 0octrine The Phili""ine government merely consents to a foreign state;s jurisdiction in certain areas as a matter of comity courtesy or e="ediency# The +& has "rior or "referential but not e=clusive jurisdiction and the Phili""ines does not divest itself of jurisdiction over offenses committed inside the military bases# The bases are not foreign territory# Fun2tions o* Go6!'n8!nt As defined in 'acani v# 1A3/3/ the functions of government are classified into constituent and ministrant functions# Constituent Functions The constituent functions of government are the com"ulsory functions of government that constitute the very bonds of society# As enumerated by @oodrow @ilson they are) The >ee"ing of order and "roviding for the "rotection of "ersons and "ro"erty from violence and robbery# The fi=ing of legal relations between man and wife and between "arents and children# The regulation of the holding transmission and interchange of "ro"erty and the determination its liabilities for debt or for crime The determination of contract rights between individuals# The definition and "unisment of crime# The administration of justice in civil cases# The determination of the "olitical duties "rivileges and relations of citi-ens 0ealings of the state with foreign "owers) the "reservation of the state from e=ternal danger or encroachment and the advancement of its international interest# It is o"ined that housing for the "eo"le and the com"elling demands of social justice now fall under the ambit of a government;s constituent functions# Ministrant Functions (inistrant functions of the government are the o"tional functions that are intended for achieving a better life for the community# The "rinci"les for determining whether

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 10 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

@hat su"erficially a""ears to be a bewildering variety of a""lications of constitutional democracy can be reduced to the following basic "atterns) Di'!2t (o6!'n8!nt < the "eo"le organi-ed as the electorate are the "re"onderant "ower holder 5Ancient ,ree> 3ity9&tates) Ass!87l9 (o6!'n8!nt < name for the "attern which the "arliament as the re"resentation of the "eo"le is the "re"onderant "ower holder 53hina former +&&R) )a'lia8!nta'is8 < where there e=ists an equilibrium between the inde"endent "ower holders "arliament and government and is attem"ted by the integration of the two# There are two widely divergent forms of this ty"e where the "arliament is su"erior in "olitical "ower to the cabinet 5!rench model) or vice versa 5'ritish model)# )'!si"!ntial < If the inde"endent "ower holders government and "arliament are >e"t se"arated but are constitutionally obligated to cor"orate for the formation of the will of the state interde"endence is achieved by coordination# 0a'2os Di2tato's:i3 an" )a'lia8!nta'is8 6s& )'!si"!ntial Go6!'n8!nt The (arcos government was a "residential form of government# A "residential form of government has these distinguishing features) se"aration of "owers the "reeminence of the President !irst of all (arcos inherited the "owers of the President as defined in the %7CD 3onstitution# ?e was also su"erior to the Prime (inister by the fact that he nominated the Prime (inister a""roved the "rogram of government to be administered by the Prime (inister terminated the term of the Prime (inister if and when he nominates his successor and could delegate "owers to the Prime (inister# ?e also had control over the ministries# (oreover while there was a closer relationshi" between the e=ecutive and legislative thereby manifesting some as"ects of "arliamentarism there was a definite se"aration# &e"aration from the Judiciary was also maintained# S!2tion 2 The Phili""ines renounces war as an instrument of national "olicy ado"ts the generally acce"ted "rinci"les of international law as "art of the law of the land and adheres to the "olicy of "eace equality justice freedom coo"eration and amity with all nations# The war that is renounced is an aggressive and not a defensive war# International law can only become "art of munici"al law through the a""ro"riate constitutional machinery such as an act of "arliament or 3ongressional legislation# Although the doctrine of incor"oration tells us that "ublic international law carries the same weight as statutory law when it comes to general "rinci"les of international law the ones that will be ado"ted by the country are arrived at through juris"ruidential develo"ment#

S!2tion + 3ivilian authority is at all times su"reme over the military# The Armed !orces of the Phili""ines is the "rotector of the "eo"le and the &tate# Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the &tate and the integrity of the national territory# The section is divided into two clauses the 3ivilian &u"remacy clause and the (ar> of &overeignty clause# Ci6ilian Su3'!8a29 9 3ivilian authority is at all times su"reme over the military# 0a'A o* So6!'!i(nt9 9The A!P is the "rotector of the "eo"le and the state# 0a'A o* So6!'!i(nt9 The (o& clause is in ca"sule form the descri"tion of a soldier;s vocation# The soldier is su""osed to renounce "olitical ambition because he finds nobility and dignity and honor in being the guardian of the "eo"le and of the integrity of the national territory of a legitimate government# This is not a "rinci"le which once articulated creates the reality that it see>s to describe# To >ee" the dream of civilian su"remacy alive two elements are needed) a civilian government that is both legitimate and stable and an armed force of the highest "rofessionalism# S!2tion 4 The "rime duty of the ,overnment is to serve and "rotect the "eo"le# The ,overnment may call u"on the "eo"le to defend the &tate and in the fulfillment thereof all citi-ens may be required under conditions "rovided by law to render "ersonal military or civil service# S!2tion 5 The maintenance of "eace and order the "rotection of life liberty and "ro"erty and "romotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the "eo"le of the blessings of democracy# The %7A6 version "laces an em"hasis in the service to and "rotection of the "eo"le# This is in contrast with earlier versions "roclaiming the defense of the state being a "rime duty of government# The "hrase Lunder conditions "rovided by lawM in the second sentence of Article 8 "laces a "remium on serving the "eo"le and "rotecting their rights even when there is a need to defend the &tate# S!2tion 6 T?4 &4PARATI/1 /! 3?+R3? A10 &TAT4 &?ALL '4 I12I/LA'L4# &ee Article III &ection D#

STATE )OLICIES

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 11 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

S!2tion # The &tate shall "ursue an inde"endent foreign "olicy# In its relations with other states the "aramount consideration shall be national sovereignty territorial integrity national interest and the right to self9determination# S!2tion $ The Phili""ines consistent with the national interest ado"ts and "ursues a "olicy of freedom from nuclear wea"ons in its territory# The 3onsitution "rescribes a "olicy of freedom from nuclear wea"ons# The "olicy includes the "rohibition of not only the "ossession control and manufacture of nuclear wea"ons but also nuclear arms tests# Any e=ce"tion to this "olicy must be justified by national interest# The "olicy should not be construed as a "rohibition against the "eaceful use of nuclear energy# Any new agreement on bases or the "resence of troo"s must embody the basic "olicy of freedom from nuclear wea"ons# S!2tion < The &tate shall "romote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the "ros"erity and inde"endence of the nation and free the "eo"le from "overty through "olicies that "rovide adequate social services "romote full em"loyment a rising standard of living and an im"roved quality of life for all# S!2tion 10 The &tate shall "romote social justice in all "hases of national develo"ment# The social justice "rovisions mean the equali-ation of economic "olitical and social o""ortunities with s"ecial em"hasis on the duty of the state to tilt the balance of social forces by favoring the disadvantaged in life# The social justice "rovision guides the attitude of the 3ourt toward juris"rudence with res"ect to "ro"erty rights# S!2tion 11 The &tate values the dignity of every human "erson and guarantees full res"ect for human rights# S!2tion 12 The &tate recogni-es the sanctity of family life and shall "rotect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution# It shall equally "rotect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conce"tion# The natural and "rimary right and duty of "arents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the develo"ment of moral character shall receive the su""ort of the ,overnment# S!2tion 1+

The &tate recogni-es the vital role of the youth in nation9building and shall "romote and "rotect their "hysical moral s"iritual intellectual and social well9 being# It shall inculcate in the youth "atriotism and nationalism and encourage their involvement in "ublic and civic affairs# The word family em"hasi-es a stable heterose=ual relationshi"# &ec# %$ also acce"ts the "rinci"le that the family is anterior to the state# It also "rotects the family from instrumentali-ation by the state# The legal meaning and "ur"ose of the "rotection of the unborn clause is not an assertion that the unborn is a legal "erson# This is also not an assertion that the life of the unborn is the same as the life of the mother# The idea is that life begins at conce"tion although the time of conce"tion is for science to s"ecify# As to the education of children the rights of the &tate and "arents are delineated as the "rimary right belongs to the "arents and affirms the secondary and su""ortive role of the state# The &tate as parens patriae may ste" in when a natural "arent cannot or fails to co"e with the duties of raising his or her children# S!2tion 14 The &tate recogni-es the role of women in nation9building and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men# The "rovision is worded as not to dislocate the 3ivil 3ode and the juris"rudence on the subject# @hat it does is to give im"etus to the removal through statutes of e=isting inequalities# The general idea is for the law to ignore gender in determining rights and duties S!2tion 15 The &tate shall "rotect and "romote the right to health of the "eo"le and instill health consciousness among them# S!2tion 16 The &tate shall "rotect and advance the right of the "eo"le to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature# This "rovision recogni-es an enforceable right# This is illustrated in the following cases# O3osa 6& Fa2to'an Ruling The subject matter of the com"laint is the general interest of all citi-ens of the Phili""ines# The "etitioner minors assert that they re"resent their generation and the generations yet un>nown# Their "ersonality to sue in behalf of succeeding generations is based on the conce"t of intergenerational res"onsibility# 4very generation has a res"onsibility to the ne=t to "reserve the rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced ecology# La(una LaA! D!6!lo38!nt Aut:o'it9 6& Cou't o* A33!als

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 12 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

&yno"sis&ome residents near the dum"site in 3aloocan were concerned about "ollution# The LL0A issued a cease and desist order because of its harmful effects on the residents and the "ossible "ollution to the receiving streams# The 3ourt u"held the LL0A ruling# S!2tion 1# The &tate shall give "riority to education science and technology arts culture and s"orts to foster "atriotism and nationalism accelerate social "rogress and "romote total human liberation and develo"ment# This does not mean that the government is not free to balance the demands of education against other com"eting and urgent demands# S!2tion 1$ The &tate affirms labor as a "rimary social economic force# It shall "rotect the rights of wor>ers and "romote their welfare# This means that the human factor has "rimacy over the non9human factor in "roduction# S!2tion 1< The &tate shall develo" a self9reliant and inde"endent national economy effectively controlled by !ili"inos# Any doubt in the inter"retation of "rovisions on the economy and "atrimony should be resolved in favor of the self9reliance and inde"endence of !ili"inos# In ,arcia v# 'oard of Investments no cogent advantage was shown in the "etrochemical "lant transfer# It is a re"udiation of the inde"endent "olicy of the government to run its own affairs in its best interests# S!2tion 20 The &tate recogni-es the indis"ensable role of the "rivate sector "rivate enter"rise and "rovides incentives to needed investments#

S!2tion 2+ The &tate shall encourage non9governmental community9based organi-ations that "romote the welfare of the nation#

or sectoral

S!2tion 24 The &tate recogni-es the vital role of communication and information in nation9 building# S!2tion 25 The &tate shall ensure the autonomy of local governments# All further discussed in Article B# S!2tion 26 The &tate shall guarantee equal access to o""ortunities for "ublic service and "rohibit "olitical dynasties as may be defined by law# This is to give substance to the desire for the equali-ation of "olitical o""ortunities# ?owever the definition of the term L"olitical dynastyM is left to legislature# S!2tion 2# The &tate shall maintain honesty and integrity in the "ublic service and ta>e "ositive and effective measures against graft and corru"tion# 0iscussed in Article BI# S!2tion 2$ &ubject to reasonable conditions "rescribed by law the &tate ado"ts and im"lements a "olicy of full "ublic disclosure of all its transactions involving "ublic interest#

encourages Article 2I T:! L!(islati6! D!3a't8!nt S!2tion 1 The legislative "ower shall be vested in the 3ongress of the Phili""ines which shall consist of a &enate and a ?ouse of Re"resentatives e=ce"t to the e=tent reserved to the "eo"le by the "rovision on initiative and referendum# 5i2a8!'al 5o"9 The Jones Law called for a bicameral 3ongress but the %7CD and %76C 3onstitutions both originally called for a unicameral 3ongress# ?owever the %7CD 3onstitution was later amended to "rovide for a bicameral legislature#

This is nothing more than an ac>nowledgment of the im"ortance of "rivate initiative in building the nation but it is not a call for the official abdication of duty to the citi-enry# S!2tion 21 The &tate shall "romote rural develo"ment and agrarian reform# com"rehensive

This includes a broader s"ectrum of social economic human cultural "olitical and industrial develo"ment# &ee more in Article BIII# S!2tion 22 The &tate recogni-es and "romotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within the framewor> of national unity and develo"ment#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 1+ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

The arguments for a unicameral body as contem"lated in the %7CD and %76C 3onstitutions are) sim"licity of organi-ation resulting in economy and efficiency facility in "in"ointing res"onsibility for legislation avoidance of du"lication strengthening of the legislature in relation to the e=ecutive# This debate resurfaced in the deliberations for the %7A6 3onstitution# A bicameral legislature was ado"ted by a vote of $C9$$ because) an u""er house has the ca"acity to loo> at "roblems from a national "ers"ective and this national "ers"ective serves as a chec> on the "arochial tendency of a body elected by districts a bicameral legislature allows for a more careful study of legislation bicameralism is less vulnerable to attem"ts by the e=ecutive at mani"ulation Natu'! o* L!(islati6! )o !' Legislative "ower is the authority to ma>e laws and to alter and re"eal them# It is a derivative and vested "ower given to the legislature by the 3onstitution# According to American juris"rudence Lthe 3onstitution fi=es limits to the e=ercise of legislative authority and "rescribes the limits within it must move# This also "rovides the basis for non9delegability and the "rohibition against the "assage of irre"ealable laws# +nli>e the +nited &tates 3onstitution the %7A6 5li>e the %7CD and %76C 3onstitutions) gives a grant of "lenary legislative "ower to the Phili""ine legislature# This means that Lany "ower deemed to be legislative by usage and tradition is necessarily "ossessed by 3ongress unless the organic act has lodged it elsewhere#M S!3a'ation o* )o !'s A basic corollary of the "residential system of government is the "rinci"le of se"aration of "owers# &e"aration of "owers means that legislation belongs to 3ongress e=ecution to the e=ecutive and settlement of judicial controversies to the judiciary#This "rinci"le is an im"licit limitation on legislative "ower# ?owever the se"aration is not absolute because it allows for chec>s and balances because no one de"artment is able to act without the coo"eration of at least one of the other de"artments# The "ur"ose of these chec>s and balances is to avoid "ower being concentrated in one de"artment# The danger in the concentration of "ower was reali-ed in the dar> days of martial law# Li8its on L!(islati6! )o !' Legislative "ower is subject to substantive limitations which circumscribe both the e=ercise of the "ower itself and the allowable subjects of legislation## The substantive limitations are chiefly found in the 'ill of Rights and there e=ist "rocedural limitations "rescribing the manner of "assing bills and the forms that these bills should ta>e# Initiati6! an" R!*!'!n"u8 In re"ublican constitutional theory the original legislative "ower belongs to the "eo"le who through the 3onstitution confer derivative legislative "ower on the legislature# ?owever under the %7A6 3onstitution the grant of legislative "ower to

3ongress is not e=clusive# The 3onstitution "rovides for initiative and referendum as a direct means for the "eo"le to create law# The "ower of initiative and referendum is thus the "ower of the "eo"le directly to "ro"ose and enact laws or a""rove or reject any act or law or "art thereof "assed by the 3ongress or local legislative body# The "ur"ose of the "rovisions for initiative and referendum 5&ections % and C$) is to institutionali-e Peo"le Power# The o"erationali-ation of initiative and referendum has been left by the 3onstitution to 3ongress# Although the legislative "ower of 3ongress is "lenary the sco"e of the legislative "ower that is given to the "eo"le by initiative and referendum is limited to whatever e=ce"tions that 3ongress may im"ose# Ga'2ia 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisIn its Pambayang Ga"asyahan the &angguniang 'ayan of (orong agreed to the inclusion of the munici"ality of (orong as "art of the &ubic &"ecial 4conomic Fone# The residents of (orong o""osed this resolution through their "ower of initiative "rovided under the Local ,overnment 3ode of %77%# They started soliciting signatures to cause the re"eal of the resolution# In its decision the &u"reme 3ourt held that the "etition of the residents was valid because the subject matter directly affects the welfare of the residents of (orong and that the "ower of initiative covers the re"eal of a resolution "assed by a local legislative body# L!(islati6! )o !'s o* 0a'2os an" ABuino The %76C 3onstitution "rovided for two concurrent legislative agencies) the 'atasang Pambansa and the President# The legislative "ower of the 'atasan was ordinary while the legislative "ower of the President was e=traordinary# The e=traordinariness of the PresidentQs "ower however did not lie solely in that it was a tool for co"ing with emergency: it also lay in the distinct advantage it gave to the President over the legislature# It not only enabled him to su""ly for the legislature when the latter in the judgment of the President RfailSedT or SwasT unable to act on any matterR that may need immediate action but it also enabled the President to undo what the legislature might have done not to his satisfaction# (oreover he could legislate or re"eal or amend old legislation unham"ered by any need for debate or three readings or by the other formal limitations that are im"osed on the legislative body# Immediately after the !ebruary %7AE revolution President 3ora-on 3# Aquino assumed revolutionary legislative "ower and on (arch $D %7AE issued Proclamation 1o# C the Provisional !reedom 3onstitution whose Article I &ection C abolished the 'atasang Pambansa and whose Article II &ection % vested legislative "ower in the President RSuTntil a legislature is elected and convened under a new 3onstitution#R &ection E of the %7A6 Transitory Provisions in turn said) RThe incumbent President S3ora-on AquinoT shall continue to e=ercise legislative "owers until the first 3ongress is convened#R Thus the only difference between the

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 14 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

sco"e of the legislative "owers of President Aquino and that of President (arcos was that whereas (r# (arcos e=ercised the "ower concurrently first with the interim 'atasang Pambansa and subsequently with the regular 'atasang Pambansa President Aquino e=ercised it alone# &he lost it on July $E %7A6# 'ut she lost it with a bang signing a batch of forty9two legislative acts on the eve of the convening of the !irst 3ongress# NonC"!l!(a7ilit9 o* L!(islati6! )o !' There are three theories that advance the non9delegability of legislative "ower) &e"aration of Powers >ee"s the res"onsibility for the creation of statutes to the legislative branch 0ue Process < the "rocess by which the "owers are se"arated and safeguarded demand that legislation come from the legislative 0elegata "otestas non "otest delegari which means that which has been delegated to you cannot be further delegated by you &ince the 3onstitution gave to 3ongress alone the "ower to ma>e law means that no other body or branch of government can ma>e laws# The controlling legal ma=im is the ma=im of agency delegata potestas non potest delegari # ?owever in s"ite of this "rinci"le numerous statutes have been "assed conferring legislative "ower to administrative agencies authori-ing them to e=ercise regulatory "owers# This is justified by two theories) the first theory advanced in %A$D is that a non9 legislative body may be authori-ed to Lfill in the ga"sM of a statute# The other theory is that 3ongress may "ass contingent legislation which leaves to another body the business of the fact necessary to bring the law into actual o"eration# As a result the function "erformed by the administrative agency becomes administrative in nature# In order to ensure that the function of the administrative agency is not law9ma>ing "ower the statute ma>ing the delegation must) 7! 2o83!t! in its!l* < it must set forth therein the "olicy to be carried out or im"lemented by the delegated agency and *iD a stan"a'" < the limits of which are sufficiently determinate or determinable to which the delegate must conform in the "erformance of his functions# &ince rules and regulations "romulgated by administrative agencies "ursuant to the valid delegating statute have the force of law juris"rudence tells us that their violation may be "unished as a "enal offense as long as these conditions are met) the violation must have been made criminal by the delegating statute the "enalty must be "rovided by the statute itself the regulation must be "ublished# !urthermore legislative "ower is delegated to local government by constitutional tradition 5as defined as a "ractice that has e=isted since time immemorial)# 3ongress may by law grant the President "owers necessary to carry out declared national "olicy in times of war or other national emergency# 3ongress may also by

law subject to limitiations that it may im"ose tariff rates im"ort and e="ort quotas tonnage and wharfage dues and other duties or im"osts# East!'n S:i33in( Lin!s 6& )OEA &yno"sisThe res"ondent was awarded a sum for the death of her husband who wor>ed in a vessel and was >illed in an accident in To>yo# 4&L said that P/4A does not have jurisdicition because the deceased is not an overseas wor>er# The &u"reme 3ourt held the P/4A had jurisdiction and that 4&L;s violations constituted a breach of the administrative statute of the P/4A given that the standard Lfair and equitable em"loyment "racticesM was a sufficient enough basis for a regulation "rescribing a model contract for overseas wor>ers# Ta7la'in 6& Gutti!'!= &yno"sisThe "etitioners flun>ed the 1(AT but wanted to ta>e med school anyway# The &u"reme 3ourt ruled that the authority of the 'oard of (edical 4ducation to set rules for the closure of medical schools was drawn from the general standard Lstandardi-ation and regulari-ationM of the medical "rofession ta>en together with the other "rovisions of the delegating statute# The "etitioners could not enter med school# F'!! T!l!3:on! Wo'A!'s Union 6& 0inist!' o* La7o' 0octrine The "owers given to the (inister of Labor to certify a labor dis"ute to the 1LR3 for com"ulsory arbitration are valid# C!7u OD9(!n an" A2!t9l!n! Co& 6& D'ilon &yno"sisThe issue was whether or not an im"lenting order by the &ecretary of Labor can "rovide a "rohibition not contem"lated by the law it see>s to im"lement# The &u"reme 3ourt held that an administrative agency cannot e="and laws enacted by 3ongress because that would be tantamount to amending an act of 3ongress# )!o3l! 6& Da2u92u9 &yno"sis&ome teachers were charged with the violation of the (agna 3arta for "ublic school teachers# The "etitioners questioned whether or not &ec# C$ of RA 8E6J was constitutional# RA 8E6J "rescribed a "enalty whose duration was left Lto the discretion of the court#M The &u"reme 3ourt declared this "rovision invalid# It is not for the courts to fi= the term of im"risonment where no "oints of reference have been "rovided by the legislative# @hat valid delegation "resu""oses and sometimes is an e=ercise of discretion to fi= the length of service which must be served within s"ecific or designated limits "rovided by law the absence of which designated limits will constitue such e=ercise as undue delegation if not an outright intrusion or assum"tion of legislative "ower# C:on(7ian 6& O'7os

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 15 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

&yno"sisPursuant to Article A &ection %A of the 3onstitution 3ongress enacted RA E6C8 the /rganic Act for the AR(( calling for a "lebiscite to be held in %C "rovinces and 7 cities# President Aquino issued 4/ 8$7 "roviding for the reorgani-ation of the administrative regions of (indanao# The issue was whether there was an undue delegation of "ower to the President in her issuing 4/ 8$7# The &u"reme 3ourt held that in conferring to the President the "ower to merge the e=isting regions following the establishment of the AR(( 3ongress merely followed the "atterns set out by "revious legislation# The "ower to merge administrative regions has been traditionally lodged with the President to facilitate the "ower of su"ervision over local government units# A legislative standard need not be e="ressed# It may sim"ly be gathered or im"lied# 1or need it be found in the law challenged because it may be found in other statutes on the same subjects as that of the challenged legislation# E83lo9!!s Con*!"!'ation 6& National Wa(!s Co88ission &yno"sisThe 4m"loyers 3onfederation of the Phili""ines is questioning the validity of a wage order issued by a RT@P' "romulgated to fi= new wage rates and wage incentives "ursuant to the @age Rationali-ation Act# The 3ourt held that the "ower of the RT@P' as an e="ert commission to fi= wages under strict standards set by 3ongress is necessary in an age of s"eciali-ed activities# Soli2ito' G!n!'al 6& 00A &yno"sis((A "assed a regulation authori-ing the confiscation of license "lates and drivers licenses for certain traffic violations# The 3ourt held that this regulation was invalid because it was an undue delegation of legislative "ower because it runs counter to P0 %EJD# Tata" 6& S!2'!ta'9 o* En!'(9 &yno"sisThe 3ourt invalidated 4/ C7$ because in effecting the full deregulation of the oil industry President Ramos added a standard which did not a""ear in the delegating law RA A%AJ# The standards set by RA A%AJ for oil deregulation were) o the time when the "rice of crude oil and "etroleum "roducts in the world mar>et were declining and o the time when the e=change rate of the "eso to the dollar was stable# In 4/ C7$ Ramos used the de"letion of the /P&! as a third factor for ordering the full deregulation of the oil industry# The 3ourt held that such consideration amounts to rewriting the standards set forth in RA A%AJ and the 4=ecutive failed to follow faithfully the standards set in RA A%AJ# )ITC 6& An(!l!s

0octrine Administrative agencies are allowed to "romulgate su""lementary rules because as a result of the growing com"le=ity of modern society it is necessary to create more administrative bodies to hel" in regulation of its ramified activities# &"eciali-ed in the field assigned to them they can deal with "roblems with more e="ertise and dis"atch than can be e="ected from the legislature or courts of justice# Ot:!' ED2!3tions to NonC"!l!(a7ilit9 Local governments may be allowed to legislate on "urely local matters# /n the local level the "rinci"le of se"aration of "owers does not a""ly strictly between the e=ecutive and the law9ma>ing body# ?ence the local law9ma>ing agency may be given e=ecutive functions# @hen what is given is an e=ecutive "ower the rules a""licable to the em"owerment of administrative agencies also becomes a""licable to the local law9ma>ing body# There are two other e=ce"tions given to the President one in times of war and national emergency where the President has the "owers necessary and "ro"er to carry out a declared national "olicy and where the President is delegated to fi= tariff rates im"ort and e="ort quotas tonnage and wharfage dues and other duties and im"osts# S!2tion 2 The &enate shall be com"osed of twenty9four &enators who shall be elected at large by the qualified voters of the Phili""ines as may be "rovided by law# The number of senators is "egged at twenty four because the drafters envisioned a small &enate which was su""osed to ensure that the quality of the "eo"le elected to the &enate remained at a high standard# S!2tion + 1o "erson shall be a &enator unless he is a natural9born citi-en of the Phili""ines and on the day of the election is at least thirty9five years of age able to read and write a registered voter and a resident of the Phili""ines for not less than two years immediately "receding the day of the election# The residence requirement is satisfied if one is domiciled in the Phili""ines even though not "hysically "resent within the two9year "eriod and the age qualification must be "ossessed on the day the votes are cast and not on the day of the "roclamation# S!2tion 4 The term of office of the &enators shall be si= years and shall commence unless otherwise "rovided by law at noon on the thirtieth day of June ne=t following their election# 1o &enator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms# 2oluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interru"tion in the continuity of his service for the full term of which he was elected# The term of office of &enators is si= years and unless otherwise "rovided by law commences at noon on the thirtieth day of June ne=t following their election# The term follows that found in the %7CD 3onstitution# There is a two consecutive term limit# A &enator can run again three years after the e="iration of his second term#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 16 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

S!2tion 5 5%) The ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall be com"osed of not more than two hundred and fifty members unless otherwise fi=ed by law who shall be elected from legislative districts a""ortioned among the "rovinces cities and the (etro"olitan (anila area in accordance with the number of their res"ective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and "rogressive ratio and those who as "rovided by law shall be elected through a "arty9list system of registered national regional and sectoral "arties or organi-ations# 5$) The "arty9list re"resentatives shall constitute twenty "er centum of the total number of re"resentatives including those under the "arty list# !or three consecutive terms after the ratification of this 3onstitution one9half of the seats allocated to "arty9list re"resentatives shall be filled as "rovided by law by selection or election from the labor "easant urban "oor indigenous cultural communities women youth and such other sectors as may be "rovided by law e=ce"t the religious sector# 5C) 4ach legislative district shall com"rise as far as "racticable contiguous com"act and adjacent territory# 4ach city with a "o"ulation of at least two hundred fifty thousand or each "rovince shall have at least one re"resentative# 58) @ithin three years following the return of every census the 3ongress shall ma>e a rea""ortionment of legislative districts based on the standards "rovided in this section# The membershi" of the ?ouse is fi=ed at two hundred and fifty# ?owever the total membershi" of the ?ouse may be raised from time to time by statute because the 3onstitution says that the total must be $DJ unless otherwise fi=ed by law# This can be done by rea""ortionment resulting in the creation of new districts or the creation of new "rovinces since one "rovince is entitled to one re"resentative or therough the creation of cities entitled to at least one district# @hen one of the munici"alities of a congressional district is converted into a city large enough to entitle it to one legislative district the incidental effect is the s"litting of the district into two# The incidental arising of a new district in this manner need not be "receded by a census# (oreover this incidental effect is deemed im"licitly contained in the title announcing the creation of the new city thus satisfying the requirement that the content of the bill be announced in the title# ?owever if an imbalance is created in the remaining legislative districts the imbalance can only be corrected by a rea""ortionment law# A33o'tion8!nt The rules for dividing "rovinces and cities and the (etro"olitan (anila area as well as other metro"olitan areas which might be created in the future are set down in &ection D# The first basic rule is that the legislative districts shall be Ra""ortioned among the "rovinces cities and the (etro"olitan (anila area in accordance with

the number of their res"ective inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and "rogressive ratio#R The second rule is that each legislative district shall com"rise as far as "racticable contiguous com"act and adjacent territory#R In !elwa v# &alas construing an identical "rovision in the %7CD 3onstitution there was a suggestion that ethnic or tribal considerations might justify de"arture from the rule# A third rule is that each city with a "o"ulation of at least two hundred fifty thousand or each "rovince shall have at least one re"resentative# It should be noted that for a city to merit one re"resentative it should have a "o"ulation of at least two hundred fifty thousand# If a city is smaller than the minimum si-e required it will sim"ly be re"resented as a "art of one of the districts within the "rovince# A "rovince however is entitled to one re"resentative no matter what its "o"ulation si-e# The fourth rule is that within three years following the return of every census the 3ongress shall ma>e a rea""ortionment of legislative districts based on the standards "rovided in this section# The observance of the constitutional mandate regarding a""ortionment of re"resentative districts is a justiciable question cogni-able by the courts# 0ecisions in this tenor were "romulgated by the 3ourt under the %7CD 3onstitution# &o far 3ongress has not rea""ortioned any legislative district following the return of a census# Although it is the constitutional duty of 3ongress to ensure "ro"ortional re"resentation it is submitted that there is no "ower which can com"el 3ongress to ma>e a rea""ortionment even when through the growth and movement of "o"ulations the e=isting a""ortionment has in fact become inequitable# In fact juris"rudence suggests that what the 3onstitution abhors is inequality in a""ortionment if the inequality is created by law and not when it arises from a change in the "o"ulation# To7ias 6& A7alos &yno"sisAn act was "romulgated converting the (unici"ality of (andaluyong into a 3ity# Although only %8#8%U of the voting "o"ulation voted the act was ratified# The act was challenged on the ground that it did not mention any census indicating &an Juan and (andaluyong had the minimal requirement of $DJ JJJ inhabitants but the challengers never gave any evidence that the "o"ulation was less than the minimum requirement# The 3ourt "resumed that 3ongress gave this minimum requirement due consideration# 0a'iano> /'&> 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisRA 6AD8 "rovided for the conversion of (a>ati into a highly urbani-ed city# The act was assailed on the fact that it did not "ro"erly identify the land area by metes and bounds in violation of the 3onstitution# It was also assailed on the basis that the increase in legislative districts as "rovided for in the act is not in accord with &ection D5C) of the 3onstitution# The 3ourt held that the districts may be

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 1# o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

increased and a""ortionment of legislative districts may be made by s"ecial law# The 3ourt also held that the descri"tion was sufficient enough to describe the land# 0ont!?o 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisThe Province of Leyte has D legislative districts# 'iliran is "art of the thirds district before it became a "rovince# After the conversion the 3/(4L43 transferred the certain sub"rovinces from one district to another# (ontejo contended that there was an unequitable distribution of inhabitants# 0oes the 3/(4L43 have the constitutional "ower to transfer munici"alities from one district to anotherV 1o# The 3om4lec only "ossesses the "ower to effect minor adjustments according to an ordinance a""ended to the %7A6 3onstitution# There should be no change in the allocation "er district# S!2to'al R!3'!s!ntation According to 3ommisioner 2illacorta Lthe idea of giving meaningful re"resentation "articularly to the farmers and the wor>ers would be our 3ommissionQs humble gesture of e=tending "rotection to the interests of these grou"s which are not adequately attended to in normal legislative deliberations# &ectoral re"resentation is a necessity es"ecially in these times when the "eo"le are giving the democratic "rocess another chance if not its last chance#M )a't9 List V!t!'ans F!"!'ation )a't9 6& CO0ELEC 0octrine 3ongress is vested with the broad "ower to define and "rescribe the mechanics of the "arty list system# The 3onstitution im"licitly set down only the "ercentage of the total membershi" in the ?ouse reserved for "arty9list re"resentatives# In im"osing a two "ercent threshold for "arties to qualify for re"resentation 3ongress wanted to ensure that only those "arties organi-ations and coalitions having a sufficient number of constituents deserving of re"resentation were actually re"resented in 3ongress# The 3ourt also ruled that the $JU "rescri"tion of the 3onstituition was merely a ma=imum limit to the number of "arty list re"resentatives but the ma=imum need not be filled# An( 5a(on( 5a9ani 6& CO0ELEC 0octrine The intent of the 3onstitutional 3ommission and of the "arty List Law is not to allow all associations to "artici"ate indiscriminately in the system but to limit "artici"ation to "arties or organi-ations re"resenting the marginali-ed and under"rivileged# The "arty list system is a form sectoral re"resentation meant to "romote social justice# !or this "ur"ose the 3ourt laid down guidelines for the 3omelec to a""ly in deciding which organi-ations qualified# Among the guidelines was the requirement that the "arties or organi-ations must re"resent the marginali-ed and underre"resented sector# The 3ourt said that even "olitical "arties must com"ly with this requirement# (oreover the nominees themselves must com"ly with the qualitative requirement#

@hat is clear from these decisions is that the 3ourt s"ea>ing through Justice Panganiban sees the "arty9list system not as a "ro"ortional system of re"resentation designed to strengthen democracy but as Rsectoral re"resentationR meant to "romote social justice# The deliberations of the 3onstitutional 3ommission were clearly to the contrary# In the course of the drafting of the "rovision 3ommissioner 2illacorta "ro"osed that CJU of the seats in the ?ouse of Re"resentatives be allocated equally between sectors and re"resentatives of "arties and organi-ations# The thrust of the "ro"osal was that CJU of the "arty9list seats should be "ermanently reserved for marginali-ed sectors# @hen the dissenting o"inion of Justice (endo-a "ointed to what the Record of the 3onstitutional 3ommission showed Panganiban retorted that 3ommission records should be consulted only when the te=t of the 3onstitution is not clear# !or him the te=t 99 in s"ite of the s"ecific three term and fifty "ercent limitation 99 was clearly not for twenty five only but for fifty seats and not for three terms only but forever# 4ffectively he deleted the "hrase R!or three consecutive terms after the ratification of this 3onstitution one9half of the seats # # #R Indeed after such am"utation and only after such am"utation the te=t becomes clearly on his side## That is not all# The majority also ruled that "arty9list nominees Rmust re"resent marginali-ed and underre"resented sectors#R This means that nominees who do not have this ideological quality 5which incidentally is not easily "roved or dis"roved) they are not qualified to be members of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives as "arty9list re"resentatives# 'ut this is another de"arture from the constitutional te=t: this time however not by am"utation but by grafting# 1o such ideological requirement is found in &ection E of Article 2I which enumerates the qualifications of a member of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives# S!2tion 6 1o "erson shall be a (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives unless he is a natural9born citi-en of the Phili""ines and on the day of the election is at least twenty9five years of age able to read and write and e=ce"t the "arty9list re"resentatives a registered voter in the district in which he shall be elected and a resident thereof for a "eriod of not less than one year immediately "receding the day of the election# )a't9 List an" S!2to'al R!3'!s!ntati6! 4uali*i2ations They must be able to read and write and belong to the minority which they re"resent and since the 3onstitution is silent on the qualifications of sectoral re"resentatives they are assumed to be the same as those for "arty list re"resentatives# R!si"!n2! 4uali*i2ation The residence "eriod qualification must be "ossessed on the day of the election# ?e must not only reside in the district where he is elected he must also be a registered voter# Gall!(o 6& V!''a

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 1$ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

0octrine The term LresidenceM as used in the election law is synonymous with LdomicileM which im"orts not only the intentionto reside in a fi=ed "lace but also "ersonal "resence in that "lace cou"led with conduct indicative of such intention# In order to acquire domicile by choice these must concur) o residence or bodily "resence in the new locality o an intention to remain there indefinitely 5 animus mamendi) o an intention to abandon the old domicile voluntarily 5animus non revertendi) Ro8ual"!=C0a'2os 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisAt issue is the candidacy of The Imeldific in Leyte# The 3ourt ruled that Imeldific had satisfied the one year residency requirement# If a "erson retains his domicile of origin then the one year "eriod is irrelevant because by legal fiction wherever he may be he is a resident of his domicile of origin# If a "erson reestablishes a "reviously abandoned domicile or wishes to acquire a new one the one year requirement must be satisfied# The 3ourt also held that a widow u"on the death of her s"ouse reverts bac> to her domicile of origin# ABuino 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sis'ut- Aquino was not able to satisfy the requirement that he abandon his domicile in Tarlac when he ran for a (a>ati 3ongressional district# 4ven if he had he had not been in (a>ati for one year "receding the election# In this case Justice Padilla;s view was that either domicile or evidence would suffice "rovided that there is a "hysical "resence of one year in the district where a candidate is running is satisfied# Do8ino 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisThe "etitioner;s domicile of origin was 3andon Ilocos &ur and in %77% he acquired a new domicile of choice in .ue-on 3ity as shown in his certificate of candidacy to run as a re"resentative of .ue-on 3ity# Then in %77D he abandoned his old domicile of choice and established a new one in &aranggani# The 3ourt found that the above facts were insufficient to establish a new domicile by choice# Personal "resence in a "articular "lace must be cou"led with conduct indicative of that intention# In order to change a domicile one must have a bona fide intention to abandon the other and establish a new one through definite acts# The lease contract did not show the >ind of "ermanency required to "rove abandonment of the old domicile# 0omino;s old registration as a voter in .ue-on 3ity also belied his claims# Natu'alC5o'n Citi=!ns A natural9born citi-en according to the 3onstitution are those citi-ens who are citi-ens of the Phili""ines from birth without having to "erform any act to acquire or "erfect their Phili""ine citi-enshi"# Those who elect Phili""ine citi-enshi" in accordance with "aragra"h C &ection % of Article I2 are also considered natural9 born citi-ens 5those born before January %6 %76C of !ili"ino mothers who elect Phili""ine citi-enshi" u"on reaching the age of majority)#

5!n(son 6& C'u= 0octrine A natural9born citi-en who loses his citi-enshi" by naturali-ation in another country but is later re"atriated recovers his status as a natural9born citi-en and therefore is qualified to become a member of 3ongress# S!2tion # The (embers of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin unless otherwise "rovided by law at noon on the thirtieth day of June ne=t following their election# 1o (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall serve for more than three consecutive terms# 2oluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interru"tion in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected# T!'8 an" T!nu'! Aside from fi=ing the three year term of Re"resentatives there is a three9term limit for Re"resentatives# The 3onstitution also "laces a distinction between one;s term and one;s tenure since Lvoluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interru"tion in the continuity of his service 5 or tenure) for the full term for which he was elected#M Di8a3o'o 6& 0it'a &yno"sis0ima"oro filed his candidacy for ,overnor of AR(( and he was e=cluded from the Roll of (embers in the ?ouse of Re"resentatives as the ?ouse com"lied with &ection E6 Article IB of the /mnibus 4lection 3ode which considered someone running for an elective office other than President or 2ice9President resigned i"so facto from his office u"on filing of the certificate of candidacy# The law was challenged because 0ima"oro claimed that it shortened his term as 3ongressman but the 3ourt ruled that it only shortened his tenure but not his term# S!2tion $ +nless otherwise "rovided by law the regular election of the &enators and the (embers of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall be held on the second (onday of (ay# S!2tion < In case of vacancy in the &enate or in the ?ouse of Re"resentatives a s"ecial election may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner "rescribed by law but the &enator or (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives thus elected shall serve only for the une="ired term# The service of the une="ired term shall count as one term for "ur"oses of counting the number of allowable successive terms# The holding of s"ecial elections is not mandatory# S!2tion 10

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 1< o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

The salaries of &enators and (embers of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall be determined by law# 1o increase in said com"ensation shall ta>e effect until after the e="iration of the full term of all the (embers of the &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives a""roving such increase# Any increase in the com"ensation shall not ta>e effect until after the e="iration of the full term of all the (embers of the &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives a""roving such increase# This serves as a legal bar to the legislators yielding to the natural tem"tation to increase their salaries# It is only after the e="iration of the si= year term of the &enators who a""roved the increase that the increase becomes effective# (oreover the retirement benefits of a legislator must be based on the salary during his term and not on the "resent salary of a legislator# There is no legal limit to the amount 3ongress may a""ro"riate for e="enses toward su""lies and "ersonnel# The limit shall be moral inasmuch as the records and boo>s of account shall be o"en to the "ublic in accordance with law and that such boo>s shall be audited by the 3ommission on Audit# S!2tion 11 A &enator or (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall in all offenses "unishable by not more than si= years im"risonment be "rivileged from arrest while the 3ongress is in session# 1o (ember shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other "lace for any s"eech or debate in the 3ongress or in any committee thereof# The "rivilege from arrest is the same "rivilege e=tended to the Parliament of 4ngland and to members of the +nited &tates 3ongress# The immunity a""lies to all arrests "unishable by not more than si= years; im"risonment and e=ists for as long as 3ongress is in session whether or not the legislator involved is actually attending it# This immunity is not e=tended to one who is convicted# /i8!n!= 6& Ca7an(7an( &yno"sis3abangbang wrote an o"en letter to the President and caused this to be "ublished in several news"a"ers# 3abangbang contends that he is shielded from suit# The 3ourt noted that the o"en letter is not within the sco"e of "rivileged communication# Antonino 6& Val!n2ia &yno"sis2alencia issued a libelous "ress release attac>ing the honor and re"utation of the "laintiff# The "ress release is not qualified "rivileged communication because he has not shown that he "ublished the same with good intentions and justifiable ends# !urthermore the statement was not made in his function as a legislator# )!o3l! 6& /alos?os 0octrine The grant of 3ongressional immunity does not e=tend to one convicted much less one convicted of ra"e# ?e cannot claim that he should be freed because of "o"ular sovereignty and that his constituents need to be re"resented# The 3ourt

noted that (embers of 3ongress may be arrested for crimes "unishable by more than si= months im"risonment whether or not 3ongress is in session# Os8!Ea 6& )!n"atun 0octrine The "rovision that no (ember shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other "lace means that a legislator may still be held liable by 3ongress in 3ongress for offensive s"eech# The "rovision guarantees the legislator com"lete freedom of e="ression without fear of being made res"onsible in criminal actions before the courts or any other forum outside of the 3ongressional hall but it does not "rotect him from res"onsibility before the legislative body itself whenever his words and conduct are considered by the latter disorderly or unbecoming of a member thereof# S!2tion 12 All (embers of the &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall u"on assum"tion of office ma>e a full disclosure of their financial and business interests# They shall notify the ?ouse concerned of a "otential conflict of interest that may arise from the filing of a "ro"osed legislation of which they are authors# The first sentence sets down a "olicy of full disclosure of the financial and business affairs of a legislator# The second sentence requires him to "ut the ?ouse on notice for any "otential conflict of interest# This does not mean that a legislator may not further his or her "ersonal interest in his term as a legislator# It merely allows the ?ouse to e=amine his arguments with a shar"er eye and in the conte=t of his "ersonal interest# The advance disclosure shifts any "resum"tion to favor the legislator in cases of conflict of interest# S!2tion 1+ 1o &enator or (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives may hold any other office or em"loyment in the ,overnment or any subdivision agency or instrumentality thereof including government9owned or controlled cor"orations or their subsidiaries during his term without forfeiting his seat# 1either shall he be a""ointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected# The "rohibited offices include membershi" in the 'oard of Regents 'oard of Trustees or 'oard of 0irectors in &+3;s# &ince the "rohibition is only during his tenure he may be offered and he may acce"t an a""ointment# ?owever if he does acce"t he automatically forfeits his seat in 3ongress# S!2tion 14 1o &enator or (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives may "ersonally a""ear as counsel before any court of justice or before the 4lectoral Tribunals or quasi9 judicial and other administrative bodies# 1either shall he directly or indirectly be interested financially in any contract with or in any franchise or s"ecial "rivilege granted by the ,overnment or any subdivision agency or instrumentality thereof including any government9owned or controlled cor"oration or its subsidiary during his term of office# ?e shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 20 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

,overnment for his "ecuniary benefit or where he may be called u"on to act on account of his office# Con*li2t o* Int!'!st Legislators are "rohibited from being directly or indirectly interested financially in any contract with or in any franchise or s"ecial "rivilege granted by the ,overnment or any subdivision agency or instrumentality thereof including any government owned and controlled cor"orations and its subsidiaries during his term of office# They cannot be members of boards of cor"orations that do business with the government# 1either may they intervene in any manner before any other office of the ,overnment where he may be called u"on to act u"on account of his office# This "rohibition is direct and indirect and covers "ecuniary benefits for relatives# La 9!' L!(islato's )u9at 6& D! Gu=8an &yno"sisThis involves an Assemblyman who bought a nominal amount of shares in a cor"oration which was "arty to a suit before the &43# ?e then "roceeded to a""ear Lin interventionM "u"ortedly to "rotect his own interest# The 3ourt saw through the ruse and said that a ruling u"holding the LinterventionM would ma>e the 3onstitutional "rovision "reventing members of 3ongress from using their office to influence their dealings with courts ineffective# It is inferred from this decision that a legislator may a""ear in "erson before a court if in fact is is a genuine "arty in the case# S!2tion 15 The 3ongress shall convene once every year on the fourth (onday of July for its regular session unless a different date is fi=ed by law and shall continue to be in session for such number of days as it may determine until thirty days before the o"ening of its ne=t regular session e=clusive of &aturdays &undays and legal holidays# The President may call a s"ecial session at any time# S!ssions o* Con('!ss A regular session lasts for as long as 3ongress wishes but only until thirty days before the o"ening of its ne=t regular session e=clusive of &aturdays &undays and legal holidays# ?owever the President may call 3ongress to a s"ecial session at any time# It can last for as long as 3ongress wants# The President is given the "ower to call for a session and to s"ecify the subjects considered but cannot "rohibit any other subject from being considered# Technically 3ongress can stay in session for as long as it wants# S!2tion 16 5%) The &enate shall elect its President and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives its &"ea>er by a majority vote of all its res"ective (embers# 4ach ?ouse shall choose such other officers as it may deem necessary# 5$) A majority of each ?ouse shall constitute a quorum to do business but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and may com"el the attendance of

absent (embers in such manner and under such "enalties as such ?ouse may "rovide# 5C) 4ach ?ouse may determine the rules of its "roceedings "unish its (embers for disorderly behavior and with the concurrence of two9thirds of all its (embers sus"end or e="el a (ember# A "enalty of sus"ension when im"osed shall not e=ceed si=ty days# 58) 4ach ?ouse shall >ee" a Journal of its "roceedings and from time to time "ublish the same e=ce"ting such "arts as may in its judgment affect national security: and the yeas and nays on any question shall at the request of one9fifth of the (embers "resent be entered in the Journal# 4ach ?ouse shall also >ee" a Record of its "roceedings# 5D) 1either ?ouse during the sessions of the 3ongress shall without the consent of the other adjourn for more than three days nor to any other "lace than that in which the two ?ouses shall be sitting# )oliti2al 4u!stions A6!lino 6& Cu!n2o 0uring the &enate session of !ebruary $% %787 &enate President Avelino wal>ed out of the session hall followed by nine other senators# This left only twelve senators in the session hall# The &enate President "ro9tem"ore too> over and by a resolution a""roved by the other senators the "osition of &enate Presdent was declared vacant and &enator 3uenco was declared Acting &enate President# The 3ourt refused jurisdiction# El!2tion o* O**i2!'s 4uo'u8 The basis of determining the e=istence of a quorum should be the total membershi" of the body# A6!lino 6& Cu!n2o &yno"sis0uring the &enate session of !ebruary $% %787 &enate President Avelino wal>ed out of the session hall followed by nine other senators# This left only twelve senators in the session hall# The &enate President "ro9tem"ore too> over and by a resolution a""roved by the other senators the "osition of &enate Presdent was declared vacant and &enator 3uenco was declared Acting &enate President# 'y a vote of E98 the 3ourt refused to assume jurisdiction on the basis of it being a "olitical question of the second ty"e 5see later discussion on "olitical questions) Santia(o 6& Guin(ona &yno"sis(iriam questioned the ca"acity of those who voted for !ernan to become &enate President to fill the &enate (inority "osts# The res"ondents alleged that the

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 21 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

3ourt had no jurisdiction because there was no statutory "rovision guiding the filling of &enate "osts other than that of the &enate whose rules accorded the "osts according to "arty number# The 3ourt said that Lin the absence of constitutional guidelines or s"ecific rules it is devoid of any basis u"on which to determine the legality of the acts of the &enate# The 3ourt may not intervine in the internal affairs of 3ongress because of the res"ect it has for the se"aration of "owers#M Int!'nal Dis2i3lin! 4ach ?ouse may determine the rules of its "roceedings# Therefore it is clear that on matters affecting only the internal o"eration of the legislature the legislature;s formulation and im"lementation of its rules is beyond the reach of the 3ourts# In these matters the jurisdiction conferred to by Article 2III &ection I does not a""ly unless it affects "rivate rights# Os8!Ea 6& )!n"atun 0octrine 0isci"linary "roceedings were initiated by the ?ouse against &ergio /smeWa Jr# for a s"eech delivered on the floor of 3ongress# /smeWa filed for declaratory relief saying that his s"eech did not constitute disorderly behavior and that by ?ouse Rules he could not be censured because the business had trans"ired before 3ongress decided to ta>e action# The 3ourt ruled that the ?ouse is the final judge of what it construes as disorderly behavior# )a'!"!s> /'& 6& San"i(an7a9an &yno"sis3ongressman Paredes was charged with violations of the Anti9,raft law that he allegedly committed while he was still a "rovincial governor# The &andiganbayan "rescribed a mandatory sus"ension# Paredes as>ed the &u"reme 3ourt on the basis that only the ?ouse can sus"end him# /n the argument that the grounds was not based on &ection %E5C) or the ?ouse Rules the 3ourt u"held the sus"ension with a one "age decision# @hen the ?ouse decided not to im"lement the sus"ension the 3ourt could do nothing# /ou'nals The duty to >ee" a journal has two "ur"oses) to insure "ublicity to the "roceedings of the legislature and corres"ondent res"onsibility of the members to their res"ective constituents to "rovide "roof of what actually trans"ired in the legislature# a

&yno"sisThe defendant argued that the statute under which he was being "rosecuted was invalid for having been "assed after the last allowable day of the legislative session# ?e claimed that the legislature;s cloc> had been sto""ed at midnight on the last day of the session and it was in fact after midnight that the statute was "assed# The journal said that the statute was "assed before midnight# The 3ourt said that to inquire into the veracity of the journals when they are clear and e="licit would violate both the letter and the s"irit of the organic law# En'oll!" 5ill Do2t'in! +nder the enrolled bill doctrine the signature of the &"ea>er of the ?ouse and the &enate President and the certification of the &ecretaries of both ?ouses of 3ongress are conclusive of its due enactment# Cas2o ):il& C:!8i2al Co83an9 6& Gi8!n!= &yno"sis3asco claimed that both urea and formaldehyde were included in the ta= e=em"tion given by a law to urea formaldehyde a fertili-er# To "rove its case 3asco referred to the 3ongressional journal# The 3ourt o"ined that the statement in the law itself was clear and did not lend itself to construction but sto""ed short of declaring the statute a mista>e# It further o"ined Lif there has been a mista>e in the "rinting of a bill before it was certified by the 3ongrress and a""roved by the 4=ecutive on which we cannot s"eculate without jeo"ardi-ing the "rinci"le of se"aration of "owers the remedy is amendment or curative legislation and not judicial decree#M Asto'(a 6& Vill!(as 0octrine The &enate President and the President of the Phili""ines withdrew their signatures u"on the discovery of the inaccuracies in the bill the document was stri""ed of the character and "robative value of an enrolled bill and had to yield to the version found in the journal# A''o9o 6& D! V!n!2ia 0octrine The issue is whether or not RA A8$J which amends "ortions of the 1ational Internal Revenue 3ode which im"oses sin ta=es on beer and cigarettes is null and void because it is in violation of the Rules of the ?ouse# @hat is alleged to have been violated are merely internal Rules of Procedure not the 3onstitutional requirements for the enactment of a law# (ere failure to com"ly with the Rules of Procedure does not invalidate a law# R!2!ss 'oth houses may hold session "ractically all year round# They go on com"ulsory recess thirty days before the o"ening of the ne=t regular session# 4ach ?ouse may also adjourn for a voluntary recess but neither house may adjourn without the consent of the other for more than three days nor to any "lace other than that in which the two ?ouses are sitting# This is necessary because there are only two houses and one body# S!2tion 1#

+nder the %7CD 3onstitution 3ongress could im"ose secrecy at its discretion the %76C and %7A6 3onstitutions e=em"t from "ublication only such matters Las may in each ?ouse;s judgment affect national securityM# It still remains to be seen how the rule can be enforced and who will enforce it in 3ongress# US 6& )ons

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 22 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

The &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall each have an 4lectoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election returns and qualifications of their res"ective (embers# 4ach 4lectoral Tribunal shall be com"osed of nine (embers three of whom shall be Justices of the &u"reme 3ourt to be designated by the 3hief Justice and the remaining si= shall be (embers of the &enate or the ?ouse of Re"resentatives as the case may be who shall be chosen on the basis of "ro"ortional re"resentation from the "olitical "arties and the "arties or organi-ations registered under the "arty9list system re"resented therein# The senior Justice in the 4lectoral Tribunal shall be its 3hairman# Co83osition o* El!2to'al T'i7unals The electoral tribunals are a mi=ture of members of the &u"reme 3ourt and 3ongress# The si= members from 3ongress are selected through "ro"ortional "arty re"resentation and the three &u"reme 3ourt Justices are selected by the 3hief Justice# The &u"reme 3ourt justices are su""osed to re"resent the rights of all other "olitical "arties not re"resented in the tribunal# A77as 6& SET &yno"sisAbbas sought to disqualify all si= &enator (embers of the 4lectoral Tribunal on the ground that they together with all the other &enators were res"ondents in the contest filed by the o""osition "arty# ?e therefore wanted his case to be heard by the three Justices on the Tribunal# The 3ourt rejected this contention because it left the Tribunal no alternative but to abandon a duty that no other court or body can "erform but which it cannot lawfully discharge if shorn of the "artici"ation of its entire membershi" of &enators# 5on"o2 6& )in!"a &yno"sisThis involved a blatant attem"t of a "olitical "arty to mani"ulate the decision of the Tribunal by mani"ulating its membershi"# /n the eve of the "romulgation of a decision by the Tribunal against the L0P the L0P e="elled 3amasura from the "arty on the ground of disloyalty# 3amasura the L0P member of the 4lectoral Tribunal had earlier confided that he bro>e "arty ran> because he followed his conscience# The 3ourt considered the e="ulsion of 3amasura from the Tribunal a clear im"airment of the Tribunal;s "rerogative to be the sole judge of election contests# /u'is"i2tion o* t:! El!2to'al T'i7unals An(a'a 6& El!2to'al Co88ission 0octrine The 4lectoral 3ommission has jurisdiction over all election contests regarding qualifications and returns of members of the 1ational Assembly# V!'a 6& A6!lino

0octrine The 4lectoral 3ommission has the "ower to be the Lsole judge of all contests#M 4lection contests relate only to statutory contests in which the contestant see>s not only to oust the intruder but also to have himself inducted into office# @here therefore no defeated candidate challenges the credentials of a member in order not only to dislodge him but also tota>e his seat the legislative body itself in the e=ercise of its inherent right of self9"reservation may inquire into the credentials of the member and judge his qualifications# @hen a member of the legislative body challenges the qualification of another an election contest does not therefore ensue because the former does not see> to be substituted for the latter and hence it is the legislative body itself and not the 3ommission which has jurisdiction over the question raised# San2:!= 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisThe candidate who was trailing in the announced count wanted the 3/(4L43 to withhold "roclamation until a recount could be made of the votes# The name of another candidate &anche- without s"ecification of a given name had been considered an invalid vote# ?e wanted the ballot bo=es reo"ened for "ur"oses retrieving the invalidated &anche- votes# The 3ourt laid down that this was not a "re9"roclamation controversy and thus the jurisdiction for this belongs to the 4lectoral Tribunals# C:a6!= 6& -RET &yno"sis3have- was trailing in the announced count and wanted the 3/(4L43 to withhold "roclamation until a recount could be made# Pre9"roclamations are limited to incom"lete returns returns with material defects or returns which a""ear to be tam"ered with falsified or "re"ared under duress or containing discre"ancies in the votes credited to any candidate the difference of which could affect the results# Gu!''!'o 6& CO0ELEC &yno"sisThe right of !ariWas to sit in the ?ouse was challenged on the ground that his certificate for candidacy was invalid# The question here is not about qualification but election over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction because what !ariWas failed to show was just his certificate of candidacy## /therwise he had all the qualifications as mentioned in &ection E# La=atin 6& CO0ELEC 0octrine @hen there has been a "roclamation and a defeated candidate claims he is the winner the 4lectoral Tribunal has jurisdiction# )i8!nt!l 6& -RET &yno"sisThe "etitioners are assailing the com"osition of the ?R4T saying that "arty list re"resentatives should have at least one seat in the ?R4T# The 3ourt ruled that the "ro"er venue is the ?ouse and not the 3ourt#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 2+ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Co"illa 6& D! V!n!2ia &yno"sisThe "roclamation of Locsin was void because it was "remature it having been released "rior to the resolution of 3odilla;s disqualification case# The case is still within the 3/(4L43;s jurisdiction hence the ?R4T has no say on the matter# In"!3!n"!n2! o* t:! El!2to'al T'i7unals Although the Tribunals have si= legislators on them they are not "art of either ?ouse of 3ongress# They are inde"endent constitutional creations which have "ower to create their own rules and are not under the su"ervision or control of 3ongress# La=atin 6& -RET 0octrine 4lectoral Tribunals are inde"endent of the 3/(4L43# The cases before the ?R4T are governed by their own rules# Ga'2ia 6& -RET &yno"sisPetitioners see>ing to disqualify ?arry Ang"ing failed to ma>e the cash de"osit required by the rules of the ?R4T# The "etition was dismissed and the 3ourt said that because of the nature and im"ortance of the charge the ?R4T rules of "rocedure must be ta>en seriously# G'a6! A7us! o* Dis2'!tion Ro7l!s 6& -RET 0octrine The &u"reme 3ourt still has the authority to loo> into the 4lectoral Tribunal under its jurisdiction over actions where there may have been a grave abuse of discretion leading to a lac> or e=cess of jurisdiction## L!'ias 6& -RET 0octrine The 3ourt invalidated a final tally made by the ?R4T without su""orting evidence because it found that the Tribunal acted with a grave abuse of discretion# A''o9o 6& -RET 0octrine Rules of 4vidence can be made a""licable in a su""letory manner to ?R4T rules in judging the correct number of botes for each of the two com"eting 3ongressional candidates San"o6al 6& -RET 0octrine The 3ourt can still review the decision of the ?R4T when there is a judicial controversy concerning whether or not the decision constituted a grave abuse of discretion leading to a lac> or e=cess of jurisdiction#

S!2tion 1$ There shall be a 3ommission on A""ointments consisting of the President of the &enate as e= officio 3hairman twelve &enators and twelve (embers of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives elected by each ?ouse on the basis of "ro"ortional re"resentation from the "olitical "arties and "arties or organi-ations registered under the "arty9list system re"resented therein# The chairman of the 3ommission shall not vote e=ce"t in case of a tie# The 3ommission shall act on all a""ointments submitted to it within thirty session days of the 3ongress from their submission# The 3ommission shall rule by a majority vote of all the (embers# S!2tion 1< The 4lectoral Tribunals and the 3ommission on A""ointments shall be constituted within thirty days after the &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall have been organi-ed with the election of the President and the &"ea>er# The 3ommission on A""ointments shall meet only while the 3ongress is in session at the call of its 3hairman or a majority of all its (embers to discharge such "owers and functions as are herein conferred u"on it# Co83osition o* COA The 3ommission on A""ointments is com"osed of twelve &enators and twelve Re"resentatives and the &enate President as e= oficio chair# Its members are according to "arty "ro"ortion# The twelve seats need not be filled u"# Da=a 6& Sin(son 0octrine The ?ouse of Re"resentatives "ro"ortionally a""ortioned its %$ seats in the 3ommission on a""ointments among the several "olitical "arties# The "etitioner Raul 0a-a was chosen to re"resent the L0P# Later the L0P was reorgani-ed# $8 members from the LP resigned from the "arty and joined the L0P swelling its number and reducing the LP to only %6# The ?ouse revised the re"resentation in the 3ommission of A""ointments withdrawing the "etitioner;s seat# 0a-a challenged the validity of his removal# ?e said his seat was "ermanent and the L0P was not a duly registered "olitical "arty and has not yet attained stability# The 3ourt held that the ?ouse has the authority to change its re"resentation in the 3/A to reflect any changes that may trans"ire in "olitical alignments# It is understood that such changes must be "ermanenet and do not include tem"orary alliances not involving severance of "olitical loyalties or formal disa""lication# Cos!t!n( 6& 0it'a &yno"sis3oseteng was the only member of 3ongress from the "olitical "arty GAI'A# The 3ourt ruled that she was not entitled to a seat in the 3ommission on A""oint>ments# To be entitled a "arty must have %6 members in the house or A#8U of the total membershi"# 0isregard the fractions# S!2tion 20 The records and boo>s of accounts of the 3ongress shall be "reserved and be o"en to the "ublic in accordance with law and such boo>s shall be audited by the 3ommission on Audit which

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 24 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

shall "ublish annually an itemi-ed list of amounts "aid to and e="enses incurred for each (ember# S!2tion 21 The &enate or the ?ouse of Re"resentatives or any of its res"ective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly "ublished rules of "rocedure# The rights of "ersons a""earing in or affected by such inquiries shall be res"ected# !or the "rotection of the rights of witnesses there are im"licit limitations on the "ower of legislative investigation# It must be in aid of legislation it must be in accordance with duly established rules of "rocedure and the rights of "ersons a""earing in such inquiries must be res"ected# 1o "erson may be "unished in contem"t unless his testimony is required in a matter into which the legislature has jurisdiction to inquire# The "hrase in aid of legislation contributes nothing towards "rotecting witnesses# Practically any investigation can be in aid of the broad legislative "ower of 3ongress# It is not necessary that every question "ro"ounded to a witness must be material to or in aid of legislation# In other words the materiality of the question must be determined by its relation to the subject of the inquiry and not its relation to any "ro"osed legislation# The 3onstitution e="licitly recogni-es the "ower of investigation not just of either ?ouse but also of its committees# L!(islati6! In6!sti(ations N!('os O'i!ntal II El!2t'i2 Coo3!'ati6! 6& San((unian( )an(lun(so" &yno"sisThe &angguniang Panglungsod sub"oenaed 1/R43/ for inquiry as to the alleged installation of inefficient "ower lines# The &P held 1/R43/ in contem"t# The 3ourt ruled that such an inquiry is beyond the jurisdicition of the &P# 5!n(=on> /'& 6& S!nat! 5lu! Ri77on Co88itt!! &yno"sisGo>oy Romualde- transferred some "ro"erties to the Lo"e- ,rou" of 3om"anies and the &enate 'lue Ribbon 3ommittee decided "ur"ortedly in aid of legislation to investigate the transaction# The "etitioners are also charged with a criminal case in the &andiganbayan# @hen they were as>ed to a""ear before the &enate they as>ed for a TR/ because a""earing before the &enate would "rejudice their case before the &andiganbayan thus violating due "rocess# The 3ourt ruled that the investigation was not in aid of legislation because the s"eech of &enator 4nrile contained no suggestion of contem"lated legislation but merely "ointed to the need to determine wheteher the relatives of President Aquino "articularly Ricardo Lo"a had violated the law#

S!2tion 22 The heads of de"artments may u"on their own initiative with the consent of the President or u"on the request of either ?ouse as the rules of each ?ouse shall "rovide a""ear before and be heard by such ?ouse on any matter "ertaining to their de"artments# @ritten questions shall be submitted to the President of the &enate or the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives at least three days before their scheduled a""earance# Inter"ellations shall not be limited to written questions but may cover matters related thereto# @hen the security of the &tate or the "ublic interest so requires and the President so states in writing the a""earance shall be conducted in e=ecutive session# &ection $% deals with the inherent "ower of legislative investigation in aid of legislation for which 3ongress or its committees are authori-ed to summon witnesses# 'ecause of se"aration of "owers however and the "eculiar "osition which heads of de"artments hold in relation to the President the relationshi" of 3ongress to the official family of the President is also delicate# &ection $$ deals with this delicate relationshi"# The "rovision rejects the original "ro"osal "atterned after the %76C version and reflects instead its %7CD counter"art# The tenor is "ermissive# The President may or may not consent to the a""earance of de"artment heads: and even if he does he may require that the a""earance be in e=ecutive session# Reci"rocally 3ongress may refuse the initiative ta>en by the de"artment secretary# ?ence although the tas> of legislation demands adequate information and although the 'ill of Rights guarantees the right of the "eo"le to information on matters of "ublic concern the dynamics of legislative9e=ecutive relations would dictate that 3ongress find ways of obtaining information from de"artment heads other than by com"ulsion# /n the other hand de"artment heads should be aware that information vital to legislation legitimately requested by 3ongress should not for the welfare of the nation be withheld# The "rovision does not "revent the sub"oena of 0e"artment +ndersecretaries# S!2tion 2+ 5%) The 3ongress by a vote of two9thirds of both ?ouses in joint session assembled voting se"arately shall have the sole "ower to declare the e=istence of a state of war# 5$) In times of war or other national emergency the 3ongress may by law authori-e the President for a limited "eriod and subject to such restrictions as it may "rescribe to e=ercise "owers necessary and "ro"er to carry out a declared national "olicy# +nless sooner withdrawn by resolution of the 3ongress such "owers shall cease u"on the ne=t adjournment thereof# @ar is defined as armed hostilities between two states# The e=ecutive "ower when necessary may ma>e war even in the absence of a declaration of war# This is because the actual "ower to ma>e war resides in the 4=ecutive# @hat the

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 25 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

3onstitution "rovides is for the legislature to have the "ower to declare the e=istence of a state of war and to enact all measures to su""ort the war# S!2tion 24 All a""ro"riation revenue or tariff bills bills authori-ing increase of the "ublic debt bills of local a""lication and "rivate bills shall originate e=clusively in the ?ouse of Re"resentatives but the &enate may "ro"ose or concur with amendments# O'i(inatin( Claus! Laws with the following subjects (+&T come from the Lower ?ouse alone) 'ills of A""ro"riation < one whose "ur"ose is to set aside a sum of money for "ublic use# /nly a""ro"riation bills in the strict sense of the word are included# Revenue or Tariff 'ills < these are strictly for the raising of revenues# 'ills for other "ur"oses which incidentally create revenues are not included# 'ills increasing the "ublic debt < this is meant as a safeguard against the ram"ant borrowing of foreign debt during the (arcos era 'ills of Local A""lication < these refer to those whose reach is limited li>e those creating a town munici"ality or city# Private 'ills < those which affect "rivate "ersons such as Ronnie 1athaniels- and (ichael Geon Tol!ntino 6& S!2'!ta'9 o* Finan2! 0octrine) The e=clusivity of the "rerogative of the ?ouse means sim"ly that the ?ouse alone can initiate the "assage of a revenue bill such that if the ?ouse does not initate one no revenue law will be "assed# 'ut once the ?ouse has "assed a revenue bill and "assed it on to the &enate the &enate can overhaul the bill# It does not matter that the &enate already antici"ated a bill from the ?ouse and "re"ared one to ta>e the "lace of whatever the ?ouse might send# The 3ourt rejected the idea that the &enate is bound to retain the essence of what the ?ouse a""roved# S!2tion 25 5%) The 3ongress may not increase the a""ro"riations recommended by the President for the o"eration of the ,overnment as s"ecified in the budget# The form content and manner of "re"aration of the budget shall be "rescribed by law# 5$) 1o "rovision or enactment shall be embraced in the general a""ro"riations bill unless it relates s"ecifically to some "articular a""ro"riation therein# Any such "rovision or enactment shall be limited in its o"eration to the a""ro"riation to which it relates# 5C) The "rocedure in a""roving a""ro"riations for the 3ongress shall strictly follow the "rocedure for a""roving a""ro"riations for other de"artments and agencies# 58) A s"ecial a""ro"riations bill shall s"ecify the "ur"ose for which it is intended and shall be su""orted by funds actually available as certified by the 1ational Treasurer or to be raised by a corres"onding revenue "ro"osal therein#

5D) 1o law shall be "assed authori-ing any transfer of a""ro"riations: however the President the President of the &enate the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives the 3hief Justice of the &u"reme 3ourt and the heads of 3onstitutional 3ommissions may by law be authori-ed to augment any item in the general a""ro"riations law for their res"ective offices from savings in other items of their res"ective a""ro"riations# 5E) 0iscretionary funds a""ro"riated for "articular officials shall be disbursed only for "ublic "ur"oses to be su""orted by a""ro"riate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be "rescribed by law# 56) If by the end of any fiscal year the 3ongress shall have failed to "ass the general a""ro"riations bill for the ensuing fiscal year the general a""ro"riations law for the "receding fiscal year shall be deemed re9enacted and shall remain in force and effect until the general a""ro"riations bill is "assed by the 3ongress# Li8its on A33'o3'iati6! )o !' The "rovision that law shall only be "aid out of the treasury if there is a law is a "rohibition on the disbursing "ower of the e=ecutive# This does not mean that the legislative has no restrictions on their "ower to a""ro"riate funds# There are e="licit restrictions to the "ower of 3ongress to a""ro"riate funds to wit) All a""ro"riation revenue or tariff bills bills authori-ing increase of the "ublic debt bills of local a""lication and "rivate bills shall originate e=clusively in the ?ouse of Re"resentatives but the &enate may concur with amendments# The 3ongress may not increase the a""ro"riations recommended by the President for the o"eration of the ,overnment as s"ecified in the budget 3ongress may not clutter the general a""ro"riation law with "rovisions not s"ecifically related to some "articular item of a""ro"riation and every such "rovision shall be limited in its o"eration to the a""ro"riation item to which it relates# 3ongress may not ado"t a "rocedure for a""roving a""ro"riations for itself different from the "rocedure for other a""ro"riations# &"ecial a""ro"riations bills must s"ecify the "ur"ose for which they are intended and must be su""orted by funds certified as available by the 1ational Treasurer# If the funds are not actually available the s"ecial a""ro"riation bill must "rovide a corres"onding revenue "ro"osal# 3ongress has limited discretion to authori-e transfer of funds 0iscretionary funds a""ro"riated for "articular officials shall be dusbursed only for "ublic "ur"oses to be su""orted by a""ro"riate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be "rescribed by law 3ongress cannot cri""le the o"eration of government by refusing to "ass a new a""ro"riations bill# If no general a""ro"riations bill is "assed the last year;s a""ro"riation carries over until a new one is "assed# The e="enditure of "ublic funds can never be for religious "ur"oses# The general a""ro"riation law must be based on the budget "re"ared by the President# Ri"!'s Provisions unrelated to the a""ro"riation

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 26 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Ga'2ia 6& 0ata &yno"sisRA %EJJ which "rovided for the s"ecific a""ro"riation of the A!P contained a rider a "rovision not relevant to the act itself# The "rovision dealt with the security of tenure of a reserve officer from reversion to inactive service# The "rovision in RA %EJJ is unconstitutional# It is invalid and ino"erative# T'ans*!' o* Fun"s The rule on the transfer of funds says that only the President the &enate President the ?ouse &"ea>er the 3hief Justice and the heads of the constitutional commissions may by law be authori-ed to augment any item in the general a""ro"riations law for their res"ective offices from savings in other items of their res"ective a""ro"riations# This list is e=clusive# )u7li2 )u'3os! )as2ual 6& S!2'!ta'9 o* )u7li2 Wo'As &yno"sisAt issue was the a""ro"riation of PhP AD JJJ for the a""ro"riation of a "rojected feeder road which ran through a "rivate subdivision and over "rivate "ro"erty# The 3ourt incalidated the a""ro"riation saying that inasmuch as the land on which the "rojected roads were to be constructed belonged to a "rivate individual the result is that the a""ro"riation sought a "rivate "ur"ose# The subsequent donation of the feeder road is inconsequential since the validity of a statute de"ends u"on the "owers of 3ongress at the time of its "assage or a""roval not u"on events occurring or acts "erformed subsequently thereto# D!8!t'ia 6& Al7a &yno"sisThe constitutionality of the 'udget Reform 0ecree of %766 was being challenged on the ground that it infringes u"on the fundamental law by authori-ing the illegal transfer of "ublic money# The "rovision is unconstitutional because it violates the 3onstitutional "rovisions on a""ro"riations# S!2tion 26 5%) 4very bill "assed by the 3ongress shall embrace only one subject which shall be e="ressed in the title thereof# 5$) 1o bill "assed by either ?ouse shall become a law unless it has "assed three readings on se"arate days and "rinted co"ies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its (embers three days before its "assage e=ce"t when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a "ublic calamity or emergency# +"on the last reading of a bill no amendment thereto shall be allowed and the vote thereon shall be ta>en immediately thereafter and the yeas and nays entered in the Journal# Su7?!2t an" Titl! o* 5ills

The requirement that every bill shall embrace only one subject which shall be e="ressed in the title thereof is both directory and mandatory and com"liance with this requirement is essential to the validity of legislation# Tio 6& Vi"!o('a8 R!(ulato'9 5oa'" &yno"sis) Tio claimed that the ta= on CJU of gross recei"ts "ayable to local governments was a rider# The 3ourt held that the title was sufficiently broad to cover a regulatory ta= "rovision included in the act# ):ili33in! /u"(!s Asso2iation 6& )'a"o &yno"sis) The case at bar dealt with the fran>ing "rivileges of judicial mail# The title was found to be sufficiently broad to cover the removal of the fran>ing "rivileges of the judiciary but the 3ourt found other reasons to restore fran>ing "rivileges# Tan 6& D!l Rosa'io &yno"sis) &im"lified 1et Income Ta= scheme for "rofessionals engaged in the "ractice of their "rofession# The requirements of the one9subject one9title rule has been sufficiently met# The title of a law is not an inde= of its contents# To7ias 6& A7alos &yno"sis) The 3ourt ruled that the title of the law creating the city of (andaluyong was sufficient enough to cover the creation of another 3ongressional district# R!a"in( on S!3a'at! Da9s Tol!ntino 6& S!2'!ta'9 o* Finan2! There was no dis"ute that the 2AT law had gone through the second and third readings on the same day#The President;s certification effects a dis"ensation from all the "rocedural requirements# S!2tion 2# 5%) 4very bill "assed by the 3ongress shall before it becomes a law be "resented to the President# If he a""roves the same he shall sign it: otherwise he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the ?ouse where it originated which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and "roceed to reconsider it# If after such reconsideration two9thirds of all the (embers of such ?ouse shall agree to "ass the bill it shall be sent together with the objections to the other ?ouse by which it shall li>ewise be reconsidered and if a""roved by two9thirds of all the (embers of that ?ouse it shall become a law# In all such cases the votes of each ?ouse shall be determined by yeas or nays and the names of the (embers voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal# The President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the ?ouse where it originated within thirty days after the date of recei"t thereof otherwise it shall become a law as if he had signed it#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 2# o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

5$) The President shall have the "ower to veto any "articular item or items in an a""ro"riation revenue or tariff bill but the veto shall not affect the item or items to which he does not object# )assa(! o* 5ills Two ste"s are required before a bill finally becomes a law# !irst it must be a""roved by both ?ouses of 3ongress# The votes of the members of 3ongress may be obtained viva voce# ?owever there are instances when a roll call vote is required and individual members must vote with a yea or nay# &uch roll call vote iss required u"on the last and third readings of a bill at the request of one9fifth members "resent and re9"assing a bill vetoed by the President# If unchallenged a bill not acted u"on within thirty days of the President;s recei"t becomes law# Con*!'!n2! Co88itt!!s Tol!ntino 6& S!2'!ta'9 o* Finan2! 0octrine In the +nited &tates conference committees could be held in e=ecutive session and amendments germane to the "ur"ose of the law may be introduced even if these were not in either original bill# The 3onstitutional safeguards against last minute "rovisions have been disregarded by the &u"reme 3ourt in the Tolentino ruling# A''o9o 6& D! V!n!2ia &yno"sisThe issue is whether or not RA A8$J which amends "ortions of the 1ational Internal Revenue 3ode which im"oses sin ta=es on beer and cigarettes is null and void because it is in violation of the Rules of the ?ouse# @hat is alleged to have been violated are merely internal Rules of Procedure not the 3onstitutional requirements for the enactment of a law# (ere failure to com"ly with the Rules of Procedure does not invalidate a law# It!8 V!to )o !' CIR 6& CTA FCat!'!'1s TaDG &yno"sisThe President vetoed a "ortion of &ection 8$ of RA E%%J referring to $JU of the caterer;s ta= on restaurants o"erated by hotels motels and rest houses# The 3ourt u"held the veto because an LitemM in a revenue bill does not refer to an entire section im"osing a "articular >ind of ta= but refer to the subject ot the ta= and the ta= rate# 5!n(=on 6& D'ilon

&yno"sisThe law a""ro"riated DJJ million "esos for the general fund adjustment Lfor o"erational and s"ecial requirements as indicated hereunderM and one of the authori-ed uses of the fund was for the adjustment of "ension of justices as "rovided for in an earlier law# The President vetoed the use of the fund# In declaring the veto invalid the 3ourt said it was not the veto of an item# The item was the entire DJJ million smac>ers# Do2t'in! o* Ina33'o3'iat! )'o6isions Gon=al!s 6& 0a2a'ai( 0octrine The doctrine says that a "rovision that is constitutionally ina""ro"riate for an a""ro"riation bill may be singled out for veto even if it is not an a""ro"riation or revenue item# ):il2onsa 6& En'iBu!= &yno"sisThe 3ourt invalidated a veto of a restriction on the use of funds for road maintenance and a restriction on the use of funds for the "uchase of medicines since the veto did not include the veto of the a""ro"riated funds themselves# An item which can be subject of a se"arate veto must be a distinct or severable "art of a bill# I83oun"8!nt ):il2onsa 6& En'iBu!= &yno"sisThe President did not veto a "rovision for the com"ensation and se"aration benefits of 3A!,+;s but instead said that the im"lementation of the "rovision would be subject to the "eace and order situation of the affected localities# The 3ourt said that the "rovision was in effect deactivated 3A!,+s and the President had no choice but to im"lement the law# S!2tion 2$ 5%) The rule of ta=ation shall be uniform and equitable# The 3ongress shall evolve a "rogressive system of ta=ation# 5$) The 3ongress may by law authori-e the President to fi= within s"ecified limits and subject to such limitations and restrictions as it may im"ose tariff rates im"ort and e="ort quotas tonnage and wharfage dues and other duties or im"osts within the framewor> of the national develo"ment "rogram of the ,overnment# 5C) 3haritable institutions churches and "ersonages or convents a""urtenant thereto mosques non9"rofit cemeteries and all lands buildings and im"rovements actually directly and e=clusively used for religious charitable or educational "ur"oses shall be e=em"t from ta=ation# 58) 1o law granting any ta= e=em"tion shall be "assed without the concurrence of a majority of all the (embers of the 3ongress#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 2$ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Uni*o'8it9 o* TaDation Tan 6& D!l Rosa'io 0octrine The uniformity of ta=ation li>e its >indred conce"t of equal "rotection merely requires that all subjectsIobjects of ta=ation similarly situated are to be treated equally# +niformity does not "rohibit classification as long as) 5a) 5b) 5c) 5d) same class# D!l!(a7ilit9 Ga'2ia 6& ED!2uti6! S!2'!ta'9 &yno"sisThere was an 4=ecutive /rder im"osing an additional DU ad valorem ta= to all articles im"orted to the Phili""ines# The rule that revenue bills must originate from the ?ouse of Re"resentatives under the /riginating 3lause does not "revent 3ongress from e=ercising this delegable authority even if it involves the authority to create revenue measures# TaD ED!83tions 3orollary to the "ower to ta= is the "ower to e=em"t from ta=ation# This is another limit on the "ower to ta=# The "rovision "rovides that charitable institutions churches and "ersonages or convents a""urtenant thereto mosques non9"rofit cemeteries and all lands buildings and im"rovements actually directly and e=clusively used for religious charitable or educational "ur"oses shall be e=em"t from ta=ation# S!2tion 2< 5%) 1o money shall be "aid out of the Treasury e=ce"t in "ursuance of an a""ro"riation made by law# 5$) 1o "ublic money or "ro"erty shall be a""ro"riated a""lied "aid or em"loyed directly or indirectly for the use benefit or su""ort of any sect church denomination sectarian institution or system of religion or of any "riest "reacher minister other religious teacher or dignitary as su2: e=ce"t when such "riest "reacher minister or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces or to any "enal institution or government or"hanage or le"rosarium# 5C) All money collected on any ta= levied for a s"ecial "ur"ose shall be treated as a s"ecial fund and "aid out for such "ur"ose only# If the "ur"ose for which a s"ecial fund was created has been fulfilled or abandoned the balance if any shall be transferred to the general funds of the ,overnment# the the the the standards used are substantial and not arbitrary categori-ation is germane to achieve the legislative "ur"ose law a""lies to both "resent and future conditions and classification a""lies equally well to all those belonging to the

ED3!n"itu'! o* )u7li2 Fun"s 3ongress is the guardian of the "ublic treasury# The "ower of the "urse com"rehends both the "ower to generate money for the government by ta=ation and the "ower to s"end it# 3ongress alone can authori-e the e="enditure of "ublic funds with its "ower of a""ro"riation# Public money cannot be "aid to a religious "erson if they are "aid as religious "ersons and not if they are fulfilling another ca"acity# Guin(ona 6& Ca'a(u! &yno"sisThe case is about the constitutionality of the automatic a""ro"riation for debt service# The 3ourt found that the /rigination 3lause only referred to bills still to be "assed by 3ongress and that the questioned laws were com"lete in their essential terms and the sufficient standards are indicated therein# After 3ongress ma>es the a""ro"riation it is the 4=ecutive that actually s"ends the fund# S3!2ial Fun" Os8!Ea 6> O'7os &yno"sisThe question is whether or not the money that went into the /P&! was ta= money levied for a s"ecial "ur"ose# As set u" by the law it was a Ltrust fundM which derived funding from the following sources) %# from increase in the ta= collection as a result of lifting ta= e=em"tions from government cor"orations $# from any increase in ta= collection from ad valorem ta=es on oil "roducts C# from "eso savings from the fluctuation of the "eso against currencies used for the im"ortation of crude oil or "etroleum "roducts @hile the funds may be referred to as ta=es they are e=acted in the e=ercise of the "olice "owers of the state# The /P&! is a s"ecial fund# S!2tion +0 1o law shall be "assed increasing the a""ellate jurisdiction of the &u"reme 3ourt as "rovided in this 3onstitution without its advice and concurrence# Fa7ian 6& D!si!'to !abian claims that according to &ection $6 of RA E66J a""eals to decisions of the /mbudsman go directly to the &u"reme 3ourt# Agustin says that the bar on administrative case a""eal based on the /mbudsman;s rules on "rocedure must be binding# 4ven though no "arty raised the issue the &3 ordered the "arties to loo> into the constitutionality of &ection $6 of RA E66J as it increased the a""ellate jurisdiction of the &u"reme 3ourt without its consent# S!2tion +1

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 2< o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

1o law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted# S!2tion +2 The 3ongress shall as early as "ossible "rovide for a system of initiative and referendum and the e=ce"tions therefrom whereby the "eo"le can directly "ro"ose and enact laws or a""rove or reject any act or law or "art thereof "assed by the 3ongress or local legislative body after the registration of a "etition therefor signed by at least ten "er centum of the total number of registered voters of which every legislative district must be re"resented by at least three "er centum of the registered voters thereof# The current im"lementing law is RA E6CD which "rovides that to e=ercise the "ower of referendum at least %J "ercent of the registered voters with at least C "ercent of all the voters "er legislative district shall sign a "etition for the "ur"ose and register the same "etition with the 3/(4L43# It should "rovide the conte=t or te=t of the "ro"osed law the "ro"osition the reason or reasons therefore that it is not an e=ce"tion as "rovided the signatures of the voters and an abstract of less than %JJ words "rinted on to" of every "age of the "etition# @ithin CJ days from recei"t of the "etition the 3/(4L43 shall "ublish the "etition in both 4nglish and !ili"ino at least twice in news"a"ers of general circulation and set the date of the election between forty five and ninety days from the determination by the 3/(4L43 of the sufficiency of the "etition# The 3/(4L43 shall set a s"ecial registration day three wee>s before the election# If a""roved by a majority of the votes cast the law becomes effective fifteen days following the com"letion of "ublication of the "ro"osition and certification by the 3ommission in the /fficial ,a-ette or in a news"a"er of general circulation in the Phili""ines# A national or local initiative "ro"osition a""roved by a majority of the votes cast becomes effective fifteen days after its "roclamation by the 3onstitution# The one subject one title rule still a""lies to these laws# &tatutes involving emergency measures cannot be subject to referendum until ninety days after effectivity# Article 2II T:! ED!2uti6! D!3a't8!nt S!2tion 1 The e=ecutive "ower shall be vested in the President of the Phili""ines# ED!2uti6! )o !' The conviction that "ermeated the %7AE 3on3om was that (arcos had ta=ed the e=ecutive "ower beyond its allowable limits# ?owever the "ower that emerges from this te=t is still "otent because the "rimary source of "residential "ower the national vote still e=ists# 0a'2os 6& 0an(la3us

&yno"sisThe e=istence of Lresidual "owersM not s"ecified in the 3onstitution allowed President Aquino to "revent (arcos from returning home# 4=ecutive "ower is more than the sum of s"ecific "owers so enumerated# @hatever "ower not lodged in the legislative or the judiciary is e=ecutive# According to !r# 'ernas the doctrine enunciated in these two resolutions will be regretted when another (arcos emerges as President# C!'!8onial Fun2tions The long catalogue of "ublic duties that the .ueen discharges in 4ngland the President of the Re"ublic of !rance and the ,overnor ,eneral of 3anada are the President;s res"onsibilities in this country# I88unit9 *'o8 Suit There is no "rovision clothing the President with immunity from suit during his tenure# This immunity only refers to suits that may arise out of the "erformance of his duties# The President may be charged with criminal acts during his tenure 54strada v# 0esierto) and with civil suits not arising from the e=ercise of his duties after his tenure 53linton v# Jones)# Soli6!n 6& 0aAasia' 0octrine The rationale for the grant of "residential immunity is to assure the e=ercise of his duties free from hindrance or distraction# This "rivilege "ertains only to the President# There is also nothing in our laws that "revents the President from waiving that right and submitting himself to the 3ourt;s jurisdiction# Clinton 6& /on!s &yno"sisThe trial on the merits was "ost"oned until after the tenure of 3linton as this was a civil suit for damages# Est'a"a 6& D!si!'to 0octrine The non9termination of the im"eachment of a President whose tenure has ended should not serve as a bar for "rosecution# The decision im"lies that a sitting President does not have any immunity from suit for non9official acts or for wrongdoing# S!2tion 2 1o "erson may be elected President unless he is a natural9born citi-en of the Phili""ines 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 Phili""ines for at least ten years immediately "receding such election# /ne must be a registered voter able to read and write at least forty years old on the day of the election and a resident of the Phili""ines for at least ten years immediately "receding the election# It is enough that the candidate is domiciled anywhere in the Phili""ines#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +0 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

S!2tion + There shall be a 2ice9President who shall have the same qualifications and term of office and be elected with and in the same manner as the President# ?e may be removed from office in the same manner as the President# The 2ice9President may be a""ointed as a (ember of the 3abinet# &uch a""ointment requires no confirmation# The 2ice President is a President in reserve# Attem"ts to give him another constitutional function failed because it was seen as either encroaching on the ind"endence of the &enate 5as &enate President in the +nited &tates) or below his office# +nless he is a""ointed as a member of the 3abinet or is given some other e=ecutive funvtion he has no other function than to be "re"ared to assume the Presidency in case a vacancy in the office arises# ?e must have the same qualifications as President# ?e may also be removed from office in the same manner as the President# In deference to his office any a""ointment given to him need not "ass through the 3ommission on A""ointments# S!2tion 4 The President and the 2ice9President shall be elected by direct vote of the "eo"le for a term of si= years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June ne=t following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date si= years thereafter# The President shall not be eligible for any re9election# 1o "erson 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# 1o 2ice9President shall serve for more than two successive terms# 2oluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interru"tion in the continuity of the service for the full term for which he was elected# +nless otherwise "rovided by law the regular election for President and 2ice9 President shall be held on the second (onday of (ay# The returns of every election for President and 2ice9President duly certified by the board of canvassers of each "rovince or city shall be transmitted to the 3ongress directed to the President of the &enate# +"on recei"t of the certificates of canvass the President of the &enate shall not later than thirty days after the day of the election o"en all the certificates in the "resence of the &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives in joint "ublic session and the 3ongress u"on determination of the authenticity and due e=ecution thereof in the manner "rovided by law canvass the votes# The "erson having the highest number of votes shall be "roclaimed 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 (embers of both ?ouses of the 3ongress voting se"arately#

The 3ongress shall "romulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates# The &u"reme 3ourt sitting en banc shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election returns and qualifications of the President or 2ice9President and may "romulgate its rules for the "ur"ose# The fi=ing of the e=act time and date for the start and end of the term e=cludes the right to hold over in case there is a vacancy in the ne=t Presidency# /n June CJ th $JJ8 either a newly elected President ta>es over 5since ,loria said she;s not running I have to ta>e her word for it) or &ection 6 becomes o"erative# A President is limited to only one term the 2ice President may not serve for more than two consecutive terms# A voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interru"tion in the continuity of the 2ice President;s service# (oreover if the 2ice President succeeds the President and serves for less than four years she may run for President as it would not constitute a re9election# 3ongress merely acts as a national board of canvassers charged with the ministerial and e=ecutive duty to ma>e the declaration on the basis of the duly certified election returns# This duty does not im"ose on 3ongress the "ower to determine whether or not the returns were irregularly made or tam"ered with# The e=tent to which 3ongress as a canvassing body may determine authenticity and due e=ecution must only be in the manner "rovided by law# A tie in the count is bro>en by a vote of majority of all the members of both ?ouses of 3ongress voting se"arately# The &u"reme 3ourt is the sole 4lectoral Tribunal for electoral contests involving the President and 2ice President# S!2tion 5 'efore they enter on the e=ecution of their office the President the 2ice9President or the Acting President shall ta>e the following oath or affirmation) RI do solemnly swear Sor affirmT that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties as President Sor 2ice9President or Acting PresidentT of the Phili""ines "reserve and defend its 3onstitution e=ecute its laws do justice to every man and consecrate myself to the service of the 1ation# &o hel" me ,od#R SIn case of affirmation last sentence will be omittedT# S!2tion 6 The President shall have an official residence# The salaries of the President and 2ice9 President shall be determined by law and shall not be decreased during their tenure# 1o increase in said com"ensation shall ta>e effect until after the e="iration of the term of the incumbent during which such increase was a""roved# They shall not receive during their tenure any other emolument from the ,overnment or any other source#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +1 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

S!2tion # The President9elect and the 2ice President9elect shall assume office at the beginning of their terms# If the President9elect fails to qualify the 2ice President9elect shall act as President until the President9elect shall have qualified# If a President shall not have been chosen the 2ice President9elect shall act as President until a President shall have been chosen and qualified# If at the beginning of the term of the President the President9elect shall have died or shall have become "ermanently disabled the 2ice President9elect shall become President# @here no President and 2ice9President shall have been chosen or shall have qualified or where both shall have died or become "ermanently disabled the President of the &enate or in case of his inability the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall act as President until a President or a 2ice9President shall have been chosen and qualified# The 3ongress shall by law "rovide for the manner in which one who is to act as President shall be selected until a President or a 2ice9President shall have qualified in case of death "ermanent disability or inability of the officials mentioned in the ne=t "receding "aragra"h# S!2tion $ In case of death "ermanent disability removal from office or resignation of the President the 2ice9President shall become the President to serve the une="ired term# In case of death "ermanent disability removal from office or resignation of both the President and 2ice9President the President of the &enate or in case of his inability the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives shall then act as President until the President or 2ice9President shall have been elected and qualified# The 3ongress shall by law "rovide who shall serve as President in case of death "ermanent disability or resignation of the Acting President# ?e shall serve until the President or the 2ice9President shall have been elected and qualified and be subject to the same restrictions of "owers and disqualifications as the Acting President# There are two sets of rules for determining who is President in case of a vacancy# The first set of rules 5&ec# 6) a""lies to when the vacancy occurs at the start of the term and the second set 5&ec# A) a""lies to when the vacancy occurs in the middle of the term# 4strada v# Arroyo Three justices acce"ted some form of resignation two justices saw "ermanent disability three justices acce"ted the Arroyo "residency as an irreversible fact# !ive justices signed the decision without any o"inion there was one dissent and two abstained# There is no clear doctrine from this case#

S!2tion < @henever there is a vacancy in the /ffice of the 2ice9President during the term for which he was elected the President shall nominate a 2ice9President from among the (embers of the &enate and the ?ouse of Re"resentatives who shall assume office u"on confirmation by a majority vote of all the (embers of both ?ouses of the 3ongress voting se"arately# Also >nown in my contem"orary history as the ,uingona rule him being the first "erson to assume the 2ice9Presidency in this manner# S!2tion 10 The 3ongress shall at ten oQcloc> in the morning of the third day after the vacancy in the offices of the President and 2ice9President occurs convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call and within seven days enact a law calling for a s"ecial election to elect a President and a 2ice9President to be held not earlier than forty9five days nor later than si=ty days from the time of such call# The bill calling such s"ecial election shall be deemed certified under "aragra"h $ &ection $E Article 2% of this 3onstitution and shall become law u"on its a""roval on third reading by the 3ongress# A""ro"riations for the s"ecial election shall be charged against any current a""ro"riations and shall be e=em"t from the requirements of "aragra"h 8 &ection $D Article 2% of this 3onstitution# The convening of the 3ongress cannot be sus"ended nor the s"ecial election "ost"oned# 1o s"ecial election shall be called if the vacancy occurs within eighteen months before the date of the ne=t "residential election# &ubject to &ection A# S!2tion 11 @henever the President transmits to the President of the &enate and the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the "owers and duties of his office and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary such "owers and duties shall be discharged by the 2ice9President as Acting President# @henever a majority of all the (embers of the 3abinet transmit to the President of the &enate and to the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the "owers and duties of his office the 2ice9President shall immediately assume the "owers and duties of the office as Acting President# Thereafter when the President transmits to the President of the &enate and to the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives his written declaration that no inability e=ists he shall reassume the "owers and duties of his office# (eanwhile should a majority of all the (embers of the 3abinet transmit within five days to the President of the &enate and to the &"ea>er of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the "owers and duties of his office the 3ongress shall decide the issue# !or that "ur"ose the 3ongress shall convene if it is not in session within forty9eight hours in accordance with its rules and without need of call#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +2 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

If the 3ongress within ten days after recei"t of the last written declaration or if not in session within twelve days after it is required to assemble determines by a two9thirds vote of both ?ouses voting se"arately that the President is unable to discharge the "owers and duties of his office the 2ice9President shall act as President: otherwise the President shall continue e=ercising the "owers and duties of his office# Est'a"a 6& A''o9o 4strada made a statement of inability and gave this to the &enate and ?ouse of Re"resentatives# +naware of the letter Arroyo too> her oath as President both ?ouses declared their su""ort for Arroyo the &enate declared the im"eachment functus oficio and ,uingona was nominated and sworn in as the new 2ice President## The 3ourt declared that this was not a case of tem"orary disability because in light of all that had ha""ened 4strada;s inability was no longer tem"orary# 'ecause 3ongress already "assed on the subject of 4strada;s inability to govern it became a "olitical question of the second ty"e as enumerated in 'a>er v# 3arr# S!2tion 12 In case of serious illness of the President the "ublic shall be informed of the state of his health# The members of the 3abinet in charge of national security and foreign relations and the 3hief of &taff of the Armed !orces of the Phili""ines shall not be denied access to the President during such illness# This section refers to a serious illness that is not inca"acitating# This guarantees the "eo"le;s right to >now about the President;s health contrary to secretive "ractice in totalitarian governments# S!2tion 1+ The President 2ice9President the (embers of the 3abinet and their de"uties or assistants shall not unless otherwise "rovided in this 3onstitution hold any other office or em"loyment during their tenure# They shall not during said tenure directly or indirectly "ractice any other "rofession "artici"ate in any business or be financially interested in any contract with or in any franchise or s"ecial "rivilege granted by the ,overnment or any subdivision agency or instrumentality thereof including government9owned or controlled cor"orations or their subsidiaries# They shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the conduct of their office# The s"ouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the President shall not during his tenure be a""ointed as (embers of the 3onstitutional 3ommissions or the /ffice of the /mbudsman or as &ecretaries +ndersecretaries chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices including government9 owned or controlled cor"orations and their subsidiaries# )'o:i7itions The President the 2ice President the members of the 3abinet or their de"uties or assistants are forbidden by the 3onstitution from holding any other office or em"loyment during their tenure with the e=ce"tion of the 2ice President who can serve as a member of the 3abinet#

Ci6il Li7!'ti!s Union 6& ED!2uti6! S!2'!ta'9 &yno"sisThe 3L+ assailed 4/ $A8 which allowed the 3abinet to hold more than two "ositions in the government and ,/33;s# The 3ourt ruled that this /rder went contrary to &ection %C# 4=ce"t for the 2ice President who may be a""ointed to the 3abinet and the &ecretary of Justice who by e= officio membershi" is a member of the Judicial and 'ar 3ouncil the officials enumerated in &ection %C may not hold any other office "ublic or "rivate# They may be given additional functions which are intimately related to their office# Ra*a!l 6& E87'oi"!'9 an" A33a'!l Cont'ol 5oa'" 0octrine @e do not thin> that because additional duties germane to the offices already held by them were devolved u"on them by the Act it was necessary that they should again be a""ointed by the President# It cannot be doubted that 3ongress may increase the "ower and duties of an e=isting office without thereby rendering it necessary that the incumbent should again be nominated and a""ointed# E'a3 an" t:! )ACC &ince the a""ointment of 4ra" to the PA33 which is not a 3abinet ran> office was not challenged this assumes that the "rohibition on other offices is meant to "revent the enhancement of the "owers of one who is already "owerful or the distraction of one who is already too busy with his duties# The 2ice President by the nature of his job is neither "owerful nor busy# The "rovision on relatives u" to the fourth civil degree to the "ositions of (embers of the 3onstitutional 3ommiussions the /ffice of the /mbudsman or as &ecretaries +ndersecretaries chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices including ,/33;s and their subsidiaries only a""lies to new a""ointments# S!2tion 14 A""ointments e=tended by an Acting President shall remain effective unless revo>ed by the elected President within ninety days from his assum"tion or reassum"tion of office# S!2tion 15 Two months immediately before the ne=t "residential elections and u" to the end of his term a President or Acting President shall not ma>e a""ointments e=ce"t tem"orary a""ointments to e=ecutive "ositions when continued vacancies therein will "rejudice "ublic service or endanger "ublic safety# The "rohibition here also a""lies to a""ointments to the judiciary# The "rovision in Article 2III which requires the President to ma>e a""ointments to the judiciary within ninety days covers the "eriod not covered by Article 2II &ection %D 5In re) A""ointment of 2alen-uela)# This 3onstitutional "rovision only a""lies to the President and does not e=tend to local e=ecutives 50e la Rama v# 3ourt of A""eals)#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! ++ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

S!2tion 16 The President shall nominate and with the consent of the 3ommission on A""ointments a""oint the heads of the e=ecutive de"artments ambassadors other "ublic ministers and consuls or officers of the armed forces from the ran> of colonel or naval ca"tain and other officers whose a""ointments are vested in him in this 3onstitution# ?e shall also a""oint all other officers of the ,overnment whose a""ointments are not otherwise "rovided for by law and those whom he may be authori-ed by law to a""oint# The 3ongress may by law vest the a""ointment of other officers lower in ran> in the President alone in the courts or in the heads of de"artments agencies commissions or boards# The President shall have the "ower to ma>e a""ointments during the recess of the 3ongress whether voluntary or com"ulsory but such a""ointments shall be effective only until disa""roved by the 3ommission on A""ointments or until the ne=t adjournment of the 3ongress# A""ointment to office is an e=ecutive function# The filling u" of that office is the im"lementation or e=ecution of that law# Go6!'n8!nt 6& S3'in(!' 0octrine &ince the "ower to a""oint is neither legislative nor judicial it must be e=ecutive# 5!'8u"!=> !t& al& 6& ED!2uti6! S!2'!ta'9> !t& al& 0octrine The "rovision in the Revised Administrative 3ode of %7A6 to the effect that Lall "rovincial and city "rosecutors and their assistants shall be a""ointed by the President u"on the recommendation of the &ecretaryM cannot be read as requiring the President to see> the recommendation of the &ecretary of Justice# The "ower to a""oint is given to the President# The &ecretary of Justice is under the control of the President# The law must be read as sim"ly allowing the &ecretary of Justice to advise the President# This should not be confused with the authority of the legislature to im"ose additional duties on e=isting offices# &ee Rafael v# 4mbroidery and A""arel 3ontrol 'oard# A" Int!'i8 A33oint8!nts The second "aragra"h of this "rovision allows the President to ma>e a""ointments while 3ongress is in recess whether this be a voluntary or com"ulsory recessd# !or a recess or ad9interim a""ointment to be effective it does not have to wait for action by the 3ommission on A""ointments# It becomes effective once it is delivered to and acce"ted by the a""ointee# There are two modes of terminating ad9interim a""ointments) disa""roval by 3ongress and adjournment of 3ongress "rior to the action of the 3ommission on the a""ointment#

0ati7a( 6& 5!ni3a9o 0octrine 'eni"ayo is the lawful 3hairman of the 3/(4L43 because he assumed office in accordance with the 3onstitution# An ad interim a""ointment is "ermanenent in nature because it ta>es effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the a""ointee has qualified into office# The fact that it is subject to confirmation by the 3ommission on A""ointments does not alter its "ermanent character# Co88ission on A33oint8!nts The restoration of the 3ommission on A""ointments restores an e=ecutive limit on the a""ointing authority of the President removed by the %76C 3onstitution# Sa'8i!nto 6& 0ison Do2t'in! The a""ointment of the 'ureau of 3ustoms director does not need the confirmation of the 3ommission on A""ointments because this is not mentioned in the first sentence of &ection %E This has come to be >nown as the (ison doctrine# 5autista 6& Salon(a Ruling The a""ointment of the 3hairman of the 3ommision on ?uman Rights li>ewise does not need confirmation of the 3ommission on A""ointments following the (ison doctrine# 4uintosCD!l!s 6& COA 0octrine ?owever sectoral re"resentatives need the confirmation of the 3ommission on A""ointments because it falls under the clause Land other officers whose a""ointments are vested in him under the 3onstitution#M Cal"!'on 6& Ca'al! 0octrine The 3onstitutional 3ommission radically narrowed the sco"e of the constitutional "ower of the 3ommission on A""ointments and reversed the sco"e of the authority of the 3ommission under the %7CD 3onstitution# This is the basis for the ruling in this case where the 3ourt said that 3ongress may not e="and the list of "ositions that require the a""roval of the 3ommission on A""ointments# Ta''o=a 6& Sin(son 0octrine The "osition of 3entral 'an> ,overnor li>ewise falls under the (ison 0octrine# A33oint8!nt o* )oli2! G!n!'als 0analo 6& Sisto=a

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +4 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

0octrine The officers referred to in &ection %E are officers of the Armed !orces of the Phili""ines# Police generals are civilian officers because of Article B2I &ection E which characteri-es "olice generals as civilian officers# Thus the 3ourt invalidated a "rovision in the P1P Law which required "olice generals to be confirmed by the 3ommission on A""ointments# S!2tion 1# The President shall have control of all the e=ecutive de"artments bureaus and offices# ?e shall ensure that the laws be faithfully e=ecuted# )o !' o* G!n!'al Su3!'6ision an" )o !' o* Cont'ol The President has the "ower of general su"ervision over local government and the "ower of control over the e=ecutive branch as well as ,/33s# The meaning of this "rovision may be found in juris"rudence from the %7CD 3onstitution# The President does not have the "ower of control over local governments# The "ower of control is the "ower of an officer to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what a subordinate officer had done in the "erformance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former for that of the latter# The President is e="ected to delegate some of his "owers of control to members of the 3abinet## Do2t'in! o* 4uali*i!" )oliti2al A(!n29 The acts of the 0e"artment &ecretaries are the aots of the President unless the President says otherwise# 5laBu!'a 6& Al2asi" 0octrine The President issued the order to regulate the grant of "roductivity incentive benefits and to "revent discontentment dissatisfaction and demorali-ation among government "ersonnel by committing limited resources of government for the equal "ayment of incentives and awards# The President was only e=ercising his "ower of control# The "ower to grant incentives was not the duty of the 3ivil &ervice 3ommission but that of the President# D! L!on 6& Ca'3io 0octrine The 0irector of the 1'I cannot ignore an order of the &ecretary of Justice because as the alter9ego of the President he has "ower of control over e=ecutive officials# The 1'I director must obey# La2sonC0a(allan!s Co& 6& )ano 0octrine 4=ecutive &ecretary Juan Pajo issued ruling for Pano and com"any under the authority of the President overturning the 0irector of Lands and &ecretary of Agriculture and 1atural Resources#

Do2t'in! o* ED:austi6! A"8inist'ati6! R!8!"i!s +nless your case reaches the 0e"artment &ecretary and you do not hear from the President you canQt bring your case to court# An(CAn(2o 6& Castillo &yno"sisAng9Angco was 3ollector of 3ustoms# After an investigation conducted by the /ffice of the President he was found LguiltyM of conduct "rejudicial to the best interest of the service and was Lconsidered resignedM effective from the date of the notice# The 3ourt had to resolve the "ower of control against the security of tenure that flows from the 3ivil &ervice Law# The 3ourt held that this was an e=ercise of disci"linary "ower which flows from the "ower to a""oint# It said in an obiter that the 4=ecutive could use the 3ivil &ervice Law to e=ercise its disci"linary "ower# Da"ol! 6& COA &yno"sisLocal government of (andaue issued allowance for judges of (andaue# 0enied by 0'(# This is an e=ercise of the "ower of control and ma>es the order invalid# NA0ARCO 6& A'2a &yno"sisAlthough 1A(AR3/ is a ,/33 and because it is a ,/33 it falls under the 4=ecutive and the 4=ecutive has "ower of control# A mista>e in judgment can be reversed but cannot be a ground for disci"linary action# Fait:*ul ED!2ution Claus! The second sentence of &ection %6 is the !aithful 4=ecution 3lause The faithful e=ecution of laws according to the 1eagle case in American juris"rudence includes not just the formal acts of legislature but any duty or obligation inferable from the 3onstitution and from statutes# The fli" side of the coin is the duty to carry the law out# The President cannot refuse to carry out a law because in his judgment it will not be beneficial to the "eo"le# S!2tion 1$ The President shall be the 3ommander9in93hief of all armed forces of the Phili""ines and whenever it becomes necessary he may call out such armed forces to "revent or su""ress lawless violence invasion or rebellion# In case of invasion or rebellion when the "ublic safety requires it he may for a "eriod not e=ceeding si=ty days sus"end the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us or "lace the Phili""ines or any "art thereof under martial law# @ithin forty9eight hours from the "roclamation of martial law or the sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us the President shall submit a re"ort in "erson or in writing to the 3ongress# The 3ongress voting jointly by a vote of at least a majority of all its (embers in regular or s"ecial session may revo>e such "roclamation or sus"ension which revocation shall not be set aside by the President# +"on the initiative of the President the 3ongress may in the same manner e=tend such "roclamation or sus"ension for a

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +5 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

"eriod to be determined by the 3ongress if the invasion or rebellion shall "ersist and "ublic safety requires it# The 3ongress if not in session shall within twenty9four hours following such "roclamation or sus"ension convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call# The &u"reme 3ourt may review in an a""ro"riate "roceeding filed by any citi-en the sufficiency of the factual basis of the "roclamation of martial law or the sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us or the e=tension thereof and must "romulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing# A state of martial law does not sus"end the o"eration of the 3onstitution nor su""lant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies nor authori-e the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function nor automatically sus"end the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us# The sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us shall a""ly only to "ersons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion# 0uring the sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us any "erson thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days otherwise he shall be released# Su3'!8a29 o* Ci6ilian Aut:o'it9& The President is the 3ommander9in93hief of the Armed !orces of the Phili""ines# ?owever his being the 3ommander9in93hief doesnQt ma>e him a member of the Armed !orces# This is a concrete e=am"le of the su"remacy of civilian authority# There are three military "owers that the President may call u"on in times of national crisis) Call out t:! A'8!" Fo'2!s The President may call out the Armed !orces to "revent or su""ress lawless violence invasion or rebellion# The 3onstitution "rovides that the President may call out the Armed !orces Rwhenever it becomes necessary#R +nli>e his "ower to sus"end the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us and his "ower to declare (artial Law the "ower to call out the Armed !orces is not subject to judicial review# The authority to decide whether the state of e=igency e=ists rests solely on the President and his conclusion is binding# A question regarding the calling out of the Armed !orces is justiciable only when it can be shown that the President acted with grave abuse of discretion leading to a lac> or e=cess of jurisdiction#

La2son 6& S!2'!ta'9 )!'!= !acts President ArroyoQs decision to declare (etro (anila under a Rstate of rebellionR is violative of the doctrine of se"aration of "owers since the judiciary has the "rerogative to determine or inter"ret 40&A III# This declaration cannot be an e=ce"tion to the rule# ?eld The 3I13 may call out the armed forces when necessary# In I'P v# Famora 5%C% &3A0 AJJ) the factual necessity for calling out the Armed !orces is something only the President can decide# The 3ourt may loo> into the sufficiency of the factual basis on the basis of its "ower to determine grave abuse of discretion# Sus3!n" t:! 3'i6il!(! o* t:! 'it o* :a7!as 2o'3us ?abeas 3or"us is an instrument for immediate release# There must be a reason for your detention# The writ of habeas cor"us always issues# It is the "rivilege of the writ that is sus"ended# The sus"ension a""lies only to those charged with rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion# Any "erson thus detained should be judicially charged within three days# @ithout this charge he will be set free# 0a'tial La (artial law can only be declared in cases of invasion or rebellion and when the "ublic safety requires it# These are the same grounds for the sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us# 1ormally "olice "ower is e=ercised by the legislative and im"lemented by the e=ecutive# +nder (artial Law "olice "ower is e=ercised by the e=ecutive with the aid of the military in "lace of Rcertain governmental agencies which for the time being are unable to co"e with e=isting conditions in a locality which remains subject to the sovereignty#R Two factual bases must e=ist before (artial Law can be declared) %# 4=istence of actual invasion or rebellion $# Public safety requires it# This "ublic necessity under which martial law is declared creates the vagueness under which we understand martial law# Con2lusions o* t:! 0a'2os Su3'!8! Cou't a7out 0a'tial La 5,umaua v# 4s"ino 7E &3RA 8JC) %# (artial law automatically sus"ends the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us# $# The President as enforcer or administer of martial law can "romulgate "roclamations orders and decrees during the "eriod of martial law# C# The President as legislator can create military tribunals to try civilian offenders for "articular offenses#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +6 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

1ote) These views are now obsolete# Sa*!(ua'"s un"!' t:! 1<$# Constitution Ti8! li8it o* 60 "a9s In cases of invasion or rebellion when the "ublic safety requires it for a "eriod not e=ceeding si=ty days sus"e d the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us or "lace the Phili""ines or any "art thereof under martial law# !or an e=tension President must as> 3ongress e=tension determined by 3ongress# Auto8ati2 '!6i! 79 Con('!ss @ithin 8A hours of the "roclamation the President in writing or in "erson shall submit to 3ongress a re"ort# A vote of at least majority of all its members voting jointly 5ma>es the whole thing easier) is required to revo>e (artial Law# If 3ongress is not in session it shall convene after $8 hours acc"rding to its rules without need of a call# )ossi7l! nulli*i2ation 79 t:! Su3'!8! Cou't The &3 may review in an a""ro"riate "roceeding filed by any citi-en the sufficiency of the factual basis of the "roclamation of martial law and the sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ# 0ecision within thirty days from filing# 0a'tial La as )oliti2al 4u!stion &ince the issue whether the declaration of martial law is a "olitical question is settled by this 3onstitution 5itQs not and the &3 has to decide within CJ days from the date of filing) the 3ourt may judicially review the "roclamation of martial law and the sus"ension of the "rivilege of the writ of habeas cor"us# S!2tion 1< 4=ce"t in cases of im"eachment or as otherwise "rovided in this 3onstitution the President may grant re"rieves commutations and "ardons and remit fines and forfeitures after conviction by final judgment# ?e shall also have the "ower to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the (embers of the 3ongress# E=!2uti6! Cl!8!n29 The President may grant re"rieves commutations or "ardons# ?e may also remit fines and forfeitures after conviction of final judgment# E2:!(a'a9 6& S!2'!ta'9 o* /usti2! &yno"sisPart of the "ower of the 3ourts is to control the e=ecution of their judgment# This control does not infringe u"on the "ower of the 4=ecutive to grant clemency# Li8itations on )o !' This "ower is withheld if the President is being im"eached# A grant of amnesty needs the concurrence of a majority of all the members of 3ongress# This "ower needs to go through the 3/(4L43 for election violations#

A8n!st9 ?e may also grant amnesty only with the concurrence of a majority of all the members of 3ongress# An accused must confess guilt of the crime before availing of amnesty as a defense 52era v# Peo"le 6 &3RA %D$) )u'3os! o* ED!2uti6! Cl!8!n29 Tacit admission of the im"erfection of human institutions and that there are infirmities in the administration of justice# It is an instrument for correcting harshness out of a too strict a""lication of the law# Fo'8s o* ED!2uti6! Cl!8!n29 R!3'i!6!s 99 "ost"ones the e=ecution of an offense to a day certain 5Peo"le v# 2era ED Phil# DE %%J) Co88utations 99 is a remission of a "art of the "unishment: a substitution of a less "enalty than the one im"osed 5Peo"le v# 2era ED Phil# %%%) )a'"ons 99 defined as QQan act of grace "roceeding from the "ower entrusted with the e=ecution of laws which e=em"ts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the "unishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed# It is the "rivate though official act of the e=ecutive magistrate delivered to the individual forwhose benefit it is intended and not communicated officially to the 3ourt#R 5+nited &tates v# @ilson 6 Pet# %DJ) R!8ittan2! o* *in!s an" *o'*!itu'!s 99 only refers to confiscated "ro"erty: does not refer to "ro"erty vested in third "arties or money in the "ublic treasury# A8n!st9 99 given to "olitical "risoners: abolishes the crime# 3an only be given with the concurrence of 3ongress# 3onviction is not required to obtain the benefits of amnesty# @hen amnesty is granted a commission is created# @hen you avail of amnesty you im"ly guilt# EDt!nsion to A"8inist'ati6! )!nalti!s The 3onstitution does not distinguish and ma>es no limitation with regard to the "ardoning "ower e=ce"t when the President is im"eached# 5Llamas v# /rbos ,# R# 1o# 77JC%) A7solut! )a'"on an" Con"itional )a'"on There is a distinction between absolute "ardon and conditional "ardon# @ith conditional "ardon the condition may be more onerous than the original "unishment so you can refuse the conditional "ardon 53abantag v# @olfe E Phil# $6C)# *ou cannot refuse an absolute "ardon# )a'"on an" R!instat!8!nt /ne who has been given absolute "ardon has no demandable right to reinstatement 5(onsanto v# !actoran# Jr# ,# R# 1o# 6A$C7) but if he is reinstated and there are no circumstances that warrant the diminuition of ran> then the "erson should be restored to full ran> 5&abello v# 0e"artment of 4ducation ,# R# A6EA6)# ?owever if a "ardon is given because one is innocent 5as in a "urely administrative "ardon) there should be bac> wages and reinstatement 5,arcia v# 3ommission on Audit $$E &3RA CDE)#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +# o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

)a'"on an" A33!al Pardon has no effect until the withdrawal of the a""eal allowing for the finality of the conviction 5Peo"le v# &alle EE &3A0 %7J) )'ison!'s an" A8n!st9 The "ro"er remedy for "risoners covered under an amnesty is to submit his case to the "ro"er amnesty board not file a "etition for habeas cor"us 50e 2era v# Animas L98A%6E) )a'"on 6s& A8n!st9 Pardon is granted by the 3hief 4=ecutive and as such it is a "rivate act which must be "leaded and "roved by the "erson "ardoned because the courts ta>e no notice thereof: while amnesty by Proclamation of the 3hief 4=ecutive with the concurrence of 3ongress is a "ublic act which the courts should ta>e judicial notice# Pardon is granted to one after conviction while amnesty is granted to classes of "ersons or communities who may be guilty of "olitical offense generally before or after the institution of criminal "rosecution and sometimes after conviction 5'arrioquinto v# !ernande- AD Phil# E8$) TaD A8n!st9 The President cannot grant ta= amnesty without the concurrence of 3ongress# S!2tion 20 The President may contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Re"ublic of the Phili""ines with the "rior concurrence of the (onetary 'oard and subject to such limitations as may be "rovided by law# The (onetary 'oard shall within thirty days from the end of every quarter of the calendar year submit to the 3ongress a com"lete re"ort of its decision on a""lications for loans to be contracted or guaranteed by the ,overnment or government9owned and controlled cor"orations which would have the effect of increasing the foreign debt and containing other matters as may be "rovided by law# Fo'!i(n Loans The President may contract or guarantee foreign loans with the "rior concurrence of the (onetary 'oard# The (' is to re"ort to 3ongress within CJ days from the end of every quarter of the calendar year# 3ongress cannot "ass a law requiring the President to submit all loan a""lications to 3ongress alone for a""roval# 3ongress may not use the "ower given to the (onetary 'oard# S!2tion 21 1o treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two9thirds of all the (embers of the &enate# Fo'!i(n R!lations The President has the following foreign relations "owers 5including but not limited to)) Power to negotiate treaties and other international agreements

Power to a""oint ambassadors and other "ublic ministers and consuls Power to receive ambassadors and other "ublic ministers accredited to the Phili""ines Power to contract and guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Re"ublic 5see "revious article) Power to de"ort aliens T'!ati!s Treaties do not become binding without ratification by two9thirds of all the members of the &enate# In the e=tradition treaty we have with the +nited &tates RAn e=tradition "roceeding is not a criminal "roceeding#R Therefore the due "rocess safeguards do not a""ly 5&ecretary of Justice v# Lantion %%J &3A0 %CA)# If there is a conflict between a treaty and a statute# A treaty though "arallel with a statute is both munici"al law and international law# If you are litigating in a domestic court the later law a""lies# The one that goes ahead becomes void# /nly the domestic character of the treaty is re"ealed# In International Law the munici"al law has no force# In some jurisdictions International Law is su"erior but not here# L!ss *o'8al t'!ati!s, -ost A('!!8!nts Less formal ty"es of treaties may be entered into without ratification by the &enate 5+&A!!4 2eterans Association Inc# v# Treasurer of the Phili""ines %JD Phil# %JCJ)# A ?ost Agreement falls into this category 5@?/ v Aquino $A &3RA $8$) 4uali*i!' In general if an agreement is "ermanent and original 5it creates new national "olicy) it requires a treaty and consequently &enate ratification# If it is an im"lementation of an e=isting treaty it does not need ratification# This is because that agreement is administrative in character# 1ew treaty signed to not bring anyone from the +nited &tates (ilitary before the International 3riminal 3ourt# The +nited &tates has not ratified the treaty creating the I33# *ou can force the issue with the I33 if your judiciary does nothing# @e have ratified it in the &enate# @e have not de"osited it in the +nited 1ations so it is not effective with res"ect to the Phili""ines yet# !or !r# 'ernas It is an e=tension of the 2!A and it does not need any ratification# The negotiation of treaties is a "urely administrative act# )o !' to D!3o't Ali!ns The President has the "ower to de"ort aliens# The "ower is lodged with him#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +$ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

S!2tion 22 The President shall submit to the 3ongress within thirty days from the o"ening of every regular session as the basis of the general a""ro"riations bill a budget of e="enditures and sources of financing including recei"ts from e=isting and "ro"osed revenue measures# 5u"(!t o* R!2!i3ts H ED3!n"itu'!s Pre"ared by the 0'( and is the source of the ,eneral A""ro"riations Act# 3ongress may not increase the allocation for the 4=ecutive 0e"artment# S!2tion 2+ The President shall address the 3ongress at the o"ening of its regular session# ?e may also a""ear before it at any other time# SONA &/1A given at the start of the regular session of 3ongress# The President may a""ear before 3ongress at any other time# Article 2III T:! /u"i2ial D!3a't8!nt S!2tion 1 The judicial "ower shall be vested in one &u"reme 3ourt and in such lower courts as may be established by law# Judicial "ower 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 a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac> or e=cess of jurisdiction on the "art of any branch or instrumentality of the ,overnment# &ince 3ongress has the "ower to create they have the "ower to dissolve courts# /u"i2ial )o !' There are two requirements for the a""lication of judicial "ower) There must be an actual controversy# The controversy should be decideable by the a""lication of law# ?y"othetical questions are not for the 3ourts to decide# 1or can they give advisory o"inions because advisory o"inions are hy"othetical in nature# The best way to decide controversies is through a fair a""reciation Political question) when the 3onstitution has given the resolution of the question to the "olitical de"artments or to the "eo"le in their sovereign ca"acity to decide# 5aA!' 6& Ca''

3onsidering &ection % of Article 2III whatis a "olitical questionV 5found in "age DJE of the large boo>) According to 3J 3once"cion it is the duty of the 3ourt to answer questions concerning grave abuse of discretion# 1ot a new "rovision# !ound in the 3ivil 3ode# U&S& 6& NiDon @ho decides e=ecutive "rivilegeV +& &u"reme 3ourt) we do# Although there may be confidential documents# The &u"reme 3ourt may see this behind closed doors# Judicial "ower is the right to determine actual controversies arising between adverse litigants duly instituted in courts of "ro"er jurisdiction 5(us>rat v# +nited &tates $%7 +& C8E) It is the authority to settle justiciable controversies or dis"utes involving rights that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice or the redress of wrongs for violation of such rights 5Lo"e- v# Ro=as %6 &3RA 6DE) The e=ercise of judicial "ower goes beyond the "romulgation of final decisions# In the 4chegaray case the &u"reme 3ourt issued a tem"orary restraining order delaying the e=ecution of the sentence# In that decision the 3ourt said that the "ower to control the e=ecution of its decision is an essential as"ect of jurisdiction# It cannot be the subject of substantial subtraction because the 3onstitution vests the entirety of judicial "ower in one &u"reme 3ourt and other such lower courts as may be established by law# As to the claim that such "ower was an intrusion into the e=ecutive the 3ourt said that the "residential "ower of "ardon cannot be inter"reted to mean that the courts are "owerless to enforce their decisions after their finality# An accused convicted of final judgment still "ossesses collateral rights and these rights can still be claimed in the a""ro"riate courtts# Thus the courts still have "ower over the e=ecution of a sentence# &ince what is given to the judiciary is only judicial "ower the courts may not do anything that is beyond the sco"e of judicial "ower 5(eralco v# Pasay Trans"ortation 3o# D6 Phil# EJJ)# Also found a""lication in 1oblejas v# Teehan>ee 5$C &3RA 8JD) where as 3ommissioner on Land Registration he claimed the same "rivileges and emoluments as a judge of a 3ourt of !irst Instance# The &u"reme 3ourt ruled that it had no administrative "ower over officials of the 4=ecutive 0e"artment# @hen a law says that dis"utes between government agencies shall administratively and the administrative decision shall have the effect decision of the courts of justice it means that recourse to courts is before the e=haustion of administrative remedies 5P?I2I043 v# 2eleA8$7D) be settled of a final "remature ,# R# 1o#

@hen a law "rohibits courts from issuing injunctions in cases involving infrastructure "rojects of the government such a "rohibition can only refer to administrative acts in controversies involving facts or the e=ercise of discretion in

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! +< o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

technical cases# /utside this and on issues involving questions of law the courts cannot be "revented from e=ercising "ower 5(alaga v# Penachos Jr# ,# R# 1o# AEE7D) G'a6! a7us! o* "is2'!tion &inon v# 3ivil &ervice 3ommission) is meant such car"ricious and whimsical e=ercise of judgement as is equivalent to lac> of jurisdiction# Ga'2ia 6& 5oa'" o* In6!st8!nts &yno"sis'/I abused authority when nothing was shown to justify the transfer of the "etrochem "lant to 'atangas e=ce"t blan>et discretion given to investors to choose the site or transfer it from their first choice# A"6iso'9 o3inions The recommendatory "owers of the 3ourts are limited to Article D of the RP3# 50irector of Prisons v# Ang 3ho Gio 7$ Phil 7JE)# An advisory o"inionis a res"onse to a legal issue "osed in the abstract# This is not a judicial act# D!2la'ato'9 R!li!* !our requirements for 0eclaratory Relief) there must be a justiciable controversy the controversy must be between "ersons whose interests are adverse the "arty see>ing relief must have an interest in the controversy the issue involved must be ri"e for legal determination A declaratory judgment involves real "arties with conflicting legal interests# A declaratory judgment is final and binding on the "arties# S!2tion 2 The 3ongress shall have the "ower to define "rescribe and a""ortion the jurisdiction of the various courts but may not de"rive the &u"reme 3ourt of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in &ection D hereof# 1o law shall be "assed reorgani-ing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its (embers# The &u"reme 3ourt has constitutional "owers and &tatutory "owers 5which is u" to 3ongress to allow)# The courts cannot injoin discretionary acts of e=ecutive bodies# 3ongress has the "ower to create new courts and to a""ortion jurisdiction among various courts# 3ongress may not im"air the inde"endence of the judiciary# &ection D deals with "owers that 3ongress may never ta>e away# In (antrust &ystems Inc# v# 3ourt of A""eals the restriction of an injuction against APT in connection with the dis"osition sale and acquisition of assets transferred to it or against any "urchaser of the assets sold by the Trust by means of a Presidential Proclamation does not im"air the judicial "ower of courts because the

"ower to "rescribe the "ower of the courts belong to the legislature and (arcos was T?4 legislature at that time# @hether or not courts of general jurisdiction have authority over administrative agencies de"end on the statutes governing the suibject# @here the statute designates the court having jurisdiction other than courts of general jurisdiction then courts of general jurisdiction have no authority# /therwise the general rule a""lies 5Lu"ango v# 3A %EJ &3RA A8A) The "ro"er e=ercise of judicial "ower requires "rior legislative action definining such enforceable and demandable rights and "rescribing remedies for violations of such rights and determining the court with jurisdiction to hear and decide controversies and dis"utes arising from legal rights# Jurisdiction is the authority of a court to e=ercise judicial "ower in a s"ecific case and is a "rerequisite of judicial "oower which is the totality of "owers a court e=ercises when it assumes jurisdicition and hears and decides a case 53orwin the 3onstitution of the +&A)# The authority of 3ongress to create courts of varying jurisdictions is subject only to the limitations that it may not reduce the jurisdiction of the &u"reme 3ourt and that it cannot create a second &u"reme 3ourt and confer additonal jurisdiction to the &u"reme 3ourt 5without its a""roval)# The "ower to create courts ta>es with it the "ower to abolish courts but 3ongress cannot abolish courts to remove unwanted judges# 3ongress can reorgani-e the judiciary but not the &3# S!2tion + The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy# A""ro"riations for the Judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount a""ro"riated for the "revious year and after a""roval shall be automatically and regularly released# The grant of fiscal autonomy to the judiciary assures its inde"endence# A""ro"riations may not be reduced beyond that given the year "rior and should be regularly and automatically released# The 0e"artment of 'udget and (anagement cannot tell the &u"reme 3ourt what >ind of equi"ment it may "urchase# The "rovision is not new# S!2tion +& Fis2al Autono89 Ra"io !alt: 6& A('!(ala"o Facts This case is about the "urchase and installation of PDAD worth of @ebster Teletal> machines model $JE(A and @ebster tele"hone s"ea>ers# The 3ler> of 3ourt certified the "urchase and installation of these machines on the $nd and Crd floor of (alacaWang Anne= which used to house the &u"reme 3ourt were of urgent character and necessary to "ublic service#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 40 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

3# L# 0acanay chairman of the Pro"erty Requisition 3ommittee a""ointed by the President disa""roved the "urchase and installation as contrary to 4/ CJ$ and the "olicy ado"ted by the cabinet discontinuing o"en mar>et "urchases as well as being violative of 4/ $7A# The Auditor9,eneral also refused to sign the treasury warrant to be able to "ay Radiowealth# Held In the requisition of fi=tures equi"ment and su""lies both the e=ecutive and judicial de"artments are on the same footing# The several 4/;s that the Auditor9,eneral gives as basis for refusing to sign the warrant are not based on e="ress legislation# 5!n(son 6& D'ilon Facts The issue is on the constitutionality of the veto by the President of certain "rovisions in the %77$ ,PA relating to the "ayment of the adjusted "ensions of retired justices of the &u"reme 3ourt# Held The attem"t to use veto "ower to set aside a resolution of the &u"reme 3ourt to de"rive retirees of benefits given them by RA %676 trenches u"on the fiscal autonomy of the judiciary granted by the 3onstitution# !iscal autonomy enjoyed by the judiciary 3&3 3/A 3/(4L43 /ffice of the /mbudsman and other constitutional commissions contem"lates a guarantee of full fle=ibility to allocate and utili-e resources with the wisdom and dis"atch that their needs require# The im"osition of restrictions and constraints on the manner the inde"endent constitutional offices allocates and utili-es funds for their o"eratons is anathema to fiscal autonomy# Notes !iscal autonomy is the "ower and authority to levy assess and collect fees fi= rates of com"ensation# This case was brought about by a misunderstanding of the conce"t of veto "ower# S!2tion 4 5%) The &u"reme 3ourt shall be com"osed of a 3hief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices# It may sit en banc or in its discretion in division of three five or seven (embers# Any vacancy shall be filled within ninety days from the occurrence thereof# 5$) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty international or e=ecutive agreement or law which shall be heard by the &u"reme 3ourt en banc and all other cases which under the Rules of 3ourt are required to be heard en banc including those involving the constitutionality a""lication or o"eration of "residential decrees "roclamations orders instructions ordinances and other regulations shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the (embers

who actually too> "art in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon# 5C) 3ases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority of the (embers who actually too> "art 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 (embers# @hen the required number is not obtained the case shall be decided en banc) Provided that no doctrine or "rinci"le of law laid down by the court in a decision rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed e=ce"t by the court sitting en banc# 3om"osed of one 3hief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices# A vacancy in the &u"reme 3ourt must be filled within 7J days# 3om"osition may not be changed by ordinary legislation# 0ivisions of u" to three five and seven members each three justices required to ma>e a decision otherwise it must be decided en banc# The divisions are as "rovided for in the Rules of 3ourt# Today there are three divisions of five each# The following must be heard en banc 3onstitutionality of a treaty international or e=ecutive agreement or law 3onstitutionality of "residential decreees "roclamations orders instructions ordinances and other regulations @here a majority in a division is not obtained Reversing or modifying a "rinci"le of law "reviously laid down in banc or in division Administrative cases where the vote is for a dsimissal of a judge of a lower court or the disci"line of one 4lection contests of either the President or the 2ice President 3ourt en banc is not an a""ellate court# 0octrinal decisions may only be overturned by court sitting en banc# @hen sitting en banc the case is decided by a majority of the number of justices who actually too> "art in the deliberations on the issues and voted thereon# 3ases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with a concurrence of a majority of the (embers who actually too> "art in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereonX means that the word decided must be a""lied to cases and the word resolved must be a""lied to matters a""lying the rule of reddendo singula singulis# The three vote rule does not a""ly when the required three votes is not obtained in see>ing a motion for reconsideration# The failure of the division to resolve the motion because of a tie in the voting does not leave the case undecided 5!ortich v# 3orona ,# R# 1o# %C%8D6) S!2tion 5 The &u"reme 3ourt shall have the following "owers)

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 41 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

%) 4=ercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors other "ublic ministers and consuls and over "etitions for certiorari "rohibition mandamus quo warranto and habeas cor"us# 5$) Review revise reverse modify or affirm on a""eal or certiorari as the law or the Rules of 3ourt may "rovide final judgments and orders of lower courts in) 5a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty international or e=ecutive agreement law "residential decree "roclamation order instruction ordinance or regulation is in question# 5b) All cases involving the legality of any ta= im"ost assessment or toll or any "enalty im"osed in relation thereto# 5c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue# 5d) All criminal cases in which the "enalty im"osed is reclusion "er"etua or higher# 5e) All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved# 5C) Assign tem"orarily judges of lower courts to other stations as "ublic interest may require# &uch tem"orary assignment shall not e=ceed si= months without the consent of the judge concerned# 58) /rder a change of venue or "lace of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice# 5D) Promulgate rules concerning the "rotection and enforcement of constitutional rights "leading "ractice and "rocedure in all courts the admission to the "ractice of law the integrated bar and legal assistance to the under9"rivileged# &uch rules shall "rovide a sim"lified and ine="ensive "rocedure for the s"eedy dis"osition of cases shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade and shall not diminish increase or modify substantive rights# Rules of "rocedure of s"ecial courts and quasi9judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disa""roved by the &u"reme 3ourt# 5E) A""oint all officials and em"loyees of the Judiciary in accordance with the 3ivil &ervice Law# Fo'ti2: 6& Co'ona Facts 3arlos !ortich was governor of 'u>idnon and Renato 3orona 5now &3 Justice) was the 0e"uty 4=ecutive &ecretary during the time of this case# The case deals with a "iece of land which was conveted from being a non9agricultural land to agricultural land under the Agrarian Reform Program# &ome farmers were contesting an earlier decision of the court through a motion of reconsideration# The $nd resolution ended with a vote of $9$#

The farmers inter"reted this "ursuant to the 3onstitutional "rovision that says cases or matters by a division shall be decided by a majority of the members who actually too> "art in the deliberations on the issues in the canse and voted thereon and in no case without a concurrence of at least three such members# @hen the required number is not obtained the case shall be decided en banc "rovided that no doctrine or "rinci"le or law laid down by the 3ourt in a decision rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed e=ce"t by the 3ourt sitting en banc# Held The framers distinguished between cases and matters# 3ases are decided and matters are resolved using reddendo singula singulis# It is clear that only cases are referred to the 3ourt en banc for decision whenever the required number of votes is not obtaned# In the case there is a $9$ vote on the motion for reconsideration# This means that the motion is lost and the assailed decision is not reconsidered and therefore deemed affirmed# 0a'7u'9 6& 0a"ison Held @hether an act re"ugnant to the 3onstitution can become the law of the land# The 3onstitution is the "aramount law of the land an act of legislature re"ugnant to the 3onstitution is void# It is the duty of the 3ourt to decide cases where laws are in conflict with each other# If a law is void because of its re"ugnance to the 3onstitution does it notwithstanding its validity bind courts and oblige them to give effectV It is the "rovince and duty of the judicial de"artment to say what the law is# Notes In cases where a law "assed by the legislature is contrary to the 3onstitution the 3onstitution ta>es "recedence# An(a'a 6& El!2to'al Co88ission !acts Angara was elected to the 1ational Assembly on 0ecember C %7CD# /n 0ecember 7 %7CD the 4lectoral 3ommission by resolution fi=ed that as the date of the last day of filing "rostests against elections returns and qualifications of members of the 1ational Assembly# ?eld The 1ational Assembly has in effect cut off the "ower of the 4lectoral 3ommission to entertain "rotests because the 4lectoral 3ommission has the sole "ower of regulating its "roceedings to the e=clusion of the 1ational Assembly The judicial de"artment has the obligation of inter"reting the 3onstitution and defining constitutional boundaries# The 3ourt has jurisdiction over the 4lectoral 3ommission and the subject matter of the case at bar for the "ur"ose of determining the character sco"e and e=tent of the 3onstitutional grant to the 4lectoral 3ommission as the sole judge of contests relating to the election returns and qualifications of the members of the 1ational Assembly#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 42 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Tan 6& 0a2a3a(al Facts 4ugene Tan &ilvestre /cam"o and Rogelio !ernande- of Ro=as 3ity filed for declaratory relief as ta="ayers assailing the validity of the Laurel9Leido resolution dealing with the range of authority of the %76% 3onstitutional 3ommission Issues @hether or not the "etitioners have the standing to sue# @hether or not the 3ourt has jurisdiction to sayIinterfere with the 3oncom Held The "erson who im"ugns the validity of a statute must have a "ersonal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of its enforcement The case must be ri"e for adjudication which in this case it is not# The judiciary must leave the 3on3om to fulfill its res"onsibility# As long as the "ro"osed amendments are still unacted there is no room for the inter"osition of a judicial oversight# /nly after the amendment is ratified can the a""ro"riate case be instilled# )ACU 6& S!2& o* E"u2ation Facts PA3+ requests that Act 1o# $6JE as amended by Act 1o# %AJ be declared unconstitutional because A# It de"rives owners of schools and colleges as well as teachers and "arents of liberty and "ro"erty without due "rocess of law '# It de"rives "arents of their natural right and duty to rear their children for civic efficiency 3# Their "rovisions conferring on the &ecretary of 4ducation unlimited "ower to "rescribe rules and standards is an unlawful delegation of legislative "ower# Issue @hether or not the &3 has jurisdiction Held @hen a law has been treated as constitutional the 3ourt may refuse to consider an attac> on its validity# The "etitioners here have suffered no wrong from the enforcement of the critici-ed statutes# Judicial "ower is limited to actual cases and controversies# The 3ourt does not sit to adjudicate mere academic questions to satisfy scholarly interest#

constructing a national theater and music hall an arts building and facilities to awa>en the "eo"le;s consciousness in our cultural heritage and to encourage assistance in its "reservation# The res"ondents contend that the "etitioner has no "ersonality to contest the case since the funds to construct the 33P came from donations and gifts and not from ta=ation# Issue (eanwhile President (arcos issued P0 %D and %67 creating the 33P defined its functions and since the P0;s were issued during (artial Law the constitutionality of 4/ CJ is rendered moot and academic# LOCUS STANDI Tol!ntino 6& S!2& o* Finan2! Facts 2AT is issued on the sale barter or e=change of goods and "ro"erties as well as on the sale or e=change of services# It is equivalent to the %J "ercent of the gross selling "rices of gross value in money of goods or "ro"erties sold bartered or e=changed or from the gross recei"ts from the sale or e=change of services# RA 66%E see>s to widen the ta= base of the e=isting 2AT system and enhance its administration by amending the 1IR3 role# The substantive issues raised in some of the cases are "resented in abstract and hy"othetical form because of lac> of concrete record# Held The 3ourt has no "ower to render advisory o"inions or even jurisdiction over "etitions for declaratory judgment# In the case at bar the 3ourt is being as>ed to sit as a Crd legislative chamber to view the law# Soli2ito' G!n!'al 6& 00A Facts In 0TC 6& Gonon( the 3ourt held that the confiscation of license "lates of motor vehicles for traffic violations was not among the sanctions that could be im"osed by the (etro (anila 3ommission unless the vehicles were stalled and obstructing the "ublic streets# 4ven the confiscation of licences is not allowed# /n (ay %77J the ((A issued an ordinance authori-ing itself to detach the license "lates tow and im"ound attended unattended abandoned motor vehicles that are illegally "ar>ed# The &olicitor ,eneral notes that the conflict between the ,onong decisions and the ((A ordinance has created confusion among motiorists# ?e also said that the sanctions arer illegal violative of law and should be sto""ed# The ((A argued that there was no conflict between the ,onong decision and the ((A ordinance because the ordinance was su""osed to su""lement not su""lant the ,onong decision# The decision itself said that the conficscation of licenses was invalid in the absence of a valid law or ordinance which was why /rdinance II was

Gon=al!s 6& 0a'2os !acts ,on-ales raised a constitutional question regarding an im"ermissible encroachment of President (arcos on the legislative "rerogative# The issue is centered on the validity of the creation of 4/ CJ a trust for the benefit of the !ili"ino "eo"le under the name and style of the 33P entrusted with the tas> of

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 4+ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

enacted# The ((A "ointed out that the ordinance could not be attac>ed collaterally but only in a direct action concerning its validity# Held The court decided to address the "roblem because of lac> of clarity in the law# The court rela=ed "rocedural rules in e=ercise of its inherent "ower because of the im"ortance to the "ublic# /o9a 6& )CGG !acts CD Petitioners in the s"ecial civil action for "rohibition and mandamus and "reliminary injunction to sto" the P3,, from "roceeding with the auction sale scheduled on January %% %77% by 3hristie;s of 1ew *or> of the /ld (asters Painting and %Ath and %7th century silverware sei-ed from the (arcoses# Issue Held @hether or not the 3ourt had the "ower to review the case In this case the 3ourt ?eld

0a'iano> /'& 6& CO0ELEC Facts Petitioners assailed the constitutionality of &ec# D% Art# B of RA 6AD8# The "resent elective officials of the (unici"ality of (a>ati will continue as officials of the 3ity of (a>ati and e=ercise their "owers and functions until a new election is held and the new officials have qualified or assumed their office# The "etitioners contend that this is against &ection A Art# B and &ection 6 Article 2I of the 3onstitution which "rovides that the term of office of elective local officials as three years 5e=ce"t barangay officials whose terms are defined by law) none having more than three consecutive terms# The "etitioners said that the section of RA 6AD8 restarts the term of the "resent munici"al elective officials of (a>ati and disregards the term "reviously served by them "articularly favoring (ayor 'inay who already has three consecutive terms# Held The 3ourt cannot entertain the case# They are "resenting a hy"othetical issue that (ayor 'inay will run again Also "etitioners are residents of Taguig and are not the "ro"er "arties to raise the abstract issue# O3osa 6& Fa2to'an Facts The "laintiffs are all minors duly re"resented and joined by their "arents# Im"leaded as an additional "laintiff is the Phili""ine 4cological 1etwor> Inc# The original defendant was the then &ecretary of 4nvironment and 1atural Resources !ulgencio !actoran Jr# now re"laced by Angel Alcala# The "laintiffs want the 041R to cancell all e=isting timber license agreements and to cease and decist in receiving all timber licenses and a""roving new timber licenses# The defendants said the "laintiffs have no cause of action and the issue raised by the "laintiffs is a "olitical question# Issue @hether the "etitioners have a cause of action to "revent misa""ro"riation or im"airment of Phili""ine rainforests Held Petitioners instituted a class suit# The subject matter of the com"laint is the general interest of all citi-ens of the Phili""ines# The "etitioner minors assert that they re"resent their generation and the generations yet un>nown# Their "ersonality to sue in behalf of succeeding generations is based on the conce"t of intergenerational res"onsibility# 4very generation has a res"onsibility to the ne=t to "reserve the rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced ecology#

%# The "aintings and the silverware are not "ublic "ro"erty# The "aintings were donated to the (etro"olitan (useum# The silverware was sei-ed from the (arcoses# $# The writ of mandamus cannot "ros"er because the "etitioners are not after the fulfillment of a "ositive duty in light of an enforceable right# C# It cannot "ros"er also as a ta="ayer suit because the artwor> and the silverware were not "urchased with "ublic funds# 8# There is no actual case because the auction ha""ened already# The case is moot# 0a2asiano 6& N-A Facts (acasiano sought to have &ec# $A and 88 of RA 6$67 5+rban 0ev;t and ?ousing Act of %77$) declared unconstitutional# ?is locus standi was based on his being a consultant of the 0P@? and his being a ta="ayer# The "rovisions in question "rovide for rules regarding eviction and demolition# It discourages eviction and demolition and "rovides for a moratorium of C years# (acasiano says that the "rovisions are unconstitutional because they de"rive the government and "rivate "ro"erty owners of their "ro"erty without due "rocess# Issue @hether the court can review the case

Held There is no actual controversy# The "etitioner did not claim that the "rovsions actually "revented him from "erforming his duties as a consultant and e=ercising his rights as a "ro"erty owner# ?e has no locus standi# Requisities for declaratory relief are) %# justiciable controversy $# adverse litigants C# the "arty see>ing relief must have legal interest Petition dismissed#

@ilos7a9an 6& Guin(ona> /'& !acts This case see>s to "rohibit and restrain the im"lementation of a 3ontract of Lease e=ecuted by the P3&/ and P,(3 in connection with the online lottery system also >nown as the lotto#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 44 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Gilosbayan a nonstoc> demestic cor"oration com"osed of civic9s"irited citi-ens nuns "riests "astors and lay leaders are suing in their ca"acity as ta="ayers and concerned citi-ens# &enators !reddie @ebb and @igberto TaWada and Re"resentative Jo>er Arroyo are suing as members of 3ongress and as ta="ayers# Public res"ondents allege that the "etitioners have no standing to maintain the instant suit# Held A "arty;s standing before the 3ourt is a "rocedural technicality which it may in the e=ercise of its discretion set aside in view of the im"ortance of the issues raised# Juris"rudence li>ewise shows that the &3 entertains cases of "aramount im"ortance to "ublic interest even if it a""ears that "etitioners have no locus standi# The instant "etition in the case at bar is of "aramount "ublic interest and the ramifications of such issues immeasurably affect the social economic and moral well9being of the "eo"le even in the remotest barangays and the counter "roductive and retrogressive effects staggering as it is e="ected to raise billions of "esos# 5oa'" o* O3to8!t'9 6& Col!t !acts The "etitioners see> to set aside and restrain the enforcement of RA AJDJ an act regulating the "ractice of o"tometry 5Revised /"tometry Law of %77D) The "etitioners argue that RA AJDJ derogates and violates the fundamental right of every !ili"ino to reasonable safeguards against de"rivation of life liberty and "ro"erty without due "rocess of law# Issue @hether the 3ourt has jurisdiction over the 3onstitutional case

Tata" 6& Ga'2ia !acts The "etition is to "rohibit res"ondents from im"lementing and enforcing the Revised and Restated Agreement to build and lease and transfer a LRT &ystem for 40&A# The "etitioners !rancisco Tatad &erge /smeWa III and Rodolfo 'ia-on are suing as members of the &enate and as ta="ayers# The res"ondent Jesus ,arcia is the incumbent &ecretary of Trans"ortation while "rivate res"ondent 40&A LRT 3or"# is a ?ong Gong based com"any# The Agreement "rovided for the ca"tiali-ation and construction of the 40&A LRT III# The "rivate res"ondent shall construct the LRT III and then the 0/T3 will run it# The 0/T3 will give monthly rentals to the "rivate res"ondent to recover its ca"ital ta>en from the earnings of the rail line# After $D years the 0/T3 shall have com"leted the "ayment and the ownershi" of the "roject shall be transferred to the latter# Issue @hether or not the res"ondents have the standing to file the case

Held The "revailing doctrrines in ta="ayer suits are to allow ta="ayers to question contracts entered into by the national government and in government owned and controlled cor"orations allegedly in contravention of the law and to disallow the same when only munici"al contracts are involved# ?owever following the Gilosbayan ruling the &u"reme 3ourt has no choice but to give locus standi to the "etitioners# &e"arate /"inion 5(endo-a) As members of 3ongress because they allege no infringement of "rerogative as legislators# % As ta="ayers because "etitioners allege neither an unconstitutional e=ercise of the ta=ing or s"ending "owers of 3ongress nor an illegal disbursement of "ublic money# As ta="ayers the suit must s"ecifically "rove that he has sufficient interest in that he will sustain a direct injury as a result of the illegal e="enditure of "ublic money raised by ta=ation# It is not sufficient that he has merely a general interest common to all members of the "ublic# In that case a local government '/T contract for a "ublic mar>et did not involve a disbursement of "ublic funds so there was no locus standi# In order that citi-ensQ actions may be allowed a "arty must show that he "ersonally has suffered some actual or threatened injury as a result of the allegedly illegal conduct of the government: the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action: and the injury is li>ely to be redressed by a favorable action# TodayQs holding that a citi-en qua citi-en has standing to question a government contract unduly e="ands the sco"e of "ublic actions and swee"s away the case and controversy requirement so carefully embodied in Art# 2III YD in defining the

Held There is the unbending rule in 3onstitutional Law that courts will not assume jurisdiction over a 3onstitutional question unless the following requisites are satisfied) %# There must be an actual case or controversy invoving a conflict of rights suce"tible to judicial determination# 2& T:! 2onstitutional Bu!stion 8ust 7! 'ais!" 79 t:! 3'o3!' 3a't9 C# The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest "ossible o""ortunity 8# The resolution of the constitutional question must be necessary to the solution of the case# An actual case or controversy means an e=isting case that is a""ro"riate or ri"e for adjudication# There is no actual case involving any or all of the "rivate res"ondents hence this case is just for declaratory relief# The "erties have no locus standi in this case since they are not licensed o"tometrists and not even juridical "ersons#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 45 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

jurisdiction of this 3ourt# The result is to convert the 3ourt into an office of ombudsman for the ventilation of generali-ed grievances# @ilos7a9an 6& 0o'ato !acts As a result of the decision in Gilosbayan v# ,uingona the P3&/ and P,(3 entered into a new agreement that would be consistent with the P3&/ charter and conformable with the 3ourt;s decision# /n January $D %77D the "arties signed an 4qui"ment Lease Agreement 54LA) whereby the P,(3 leased online lottery equi"ment and accessories to the P3&/ in consideration of a rental agreement equivalent to 8#CU of tic>et sales# The term of the lease is A years starting from the start of the commercial o"eration of the lottery equi"ment# /n !ebruary %77D a suit was filed see>ing to declare the 4LA invalid because it was substantially the same as the old lease contract# If ever it was different it should be considered void because it violated the P3&/ charter and the decision of this 3ourt# The P3&/ maintains that the 4LA is a different lease contract and that it did not have the funds to "urchase its own lottery equi"ment# Res"ondents question the right of the "etitioners to bring the suit on the ground that not being "arties to the contract of lease they have no "ersonal and substatntial interest li>ely to be injured by the enforcement of the contract# ?eld The "etition was dismissed 69E but was later overturned when some of the judges who voted in favor of the P3&/ retired# The "etition was then sustained A9D 5a(atsin( 6& Co88itt!! on )'i6ati=ation !acts 'agatsing is assailing the validity of the contract entered into by the government selling 8AU shares in Petron for violating the rights of members of 3ongress or im"ermissibly intruding into the domain of the Legislature# Petitioners also claim that the business of oil refining is a "ublic utility and should not be sold to foreigners in this case a 0utch com"any# Issue @hether or not the "etitioners have legal standing to sue as members of 3ongress and as ta="ayers ?eld They have no legal standing as members of 3ongress because they failed to show that the contract im"aired them as members of 3ongress# ?owever they can still sue as ta="ayers because of the ruiling in Gilosbayan v# ,uingona that ta="ayers may sue if there is a misa""ro"riation of "ublic funds contrary to law#

In this case the &3 still ruled in favor of P1/3 since they found that P4TR/1 is not involved in the buisiness of oil refining and therefore is not a "ublic utility# TELE5A)> G0A# 6& CO0ELEC !acts Telecommunications and 'roadcast Attorneys of the Phili""ines with ,(A 6 challenged the validity of RA EE8E which "rovided for the sale of "rint radio and T2 ads to the 3/(4L43 during elections for free# T4L4'AP is suing as ta="ayers and citi-ens and ,(A is suing as a franchise holder# Issue @hether or not the "etitioner have locus standi to file the case

Held The T4L4'AP although a grou" of lawyers in the media industry does not have standing to sue since they did not show that they had a "ersonal and substantial interest in the case and that they were unjustly afffected by the act# ,(A however has the ca"acity to sue since they showed that in granting the ads for free they stand to lose "rofits# In this case however the &3 ruled in favor of the 3/(4L43 since 3/(4L43 Time will inform the "ublic and the right of the "eo"le to information is "aramount to the autonomy of the broacdcast media and to affirm the validity of RA EE8E bears a social function that is for the common good# Gon=al!s 6& Na'6asa !acts Ramon ,on-ales in his ca"acity as a citi-en and ta="ayer assails the constituionality of the creation of the P33R and of the "ositions of "residential consultants and advisers by e=ecutive order# The P33R is tas>ed to review "ro"osed amendments to the %7A6 3onstitution# Issue @hether or not ,on-ale- has the locus standi to sue

?eld A citi-en acquires standing only if he can establish that he has suffered some actual or threatened injury as a result of the allegedly illegal conduct of the government# In this case "etitioner has not shown that he has sustained or is in danger of sustaining "ersonal injury attributed to the creation of the P33R# If at all it is only 3ongress not "etitioner that can claim any injury in this case# A ta= "ayer has standing to raise a constitutional issue when it is established that "ublic funds have been disbursed in alleged contravention of the law# San"o6al 6& )AGCOR Facts PA,3/R a ,/33 organi-ed and requested for legal advice from the &ecretary of Justice whether or not it is authori-ed by its charter to o"erate and manage Jai Ailai frontons in the country# The &ecretary of Justice said that PA,3/R was allowed to o"erate frontons under its charter#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 46 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Petitioner 0el (ar filed a "etition to "revent PA,3/R from managing and o"erating the jai9alai games on the grounds that it violated the PA,3/R charter and the 3onstitution# PA,3/R entered into an agreement with 'elle 3or"oration where 'elle will ma>e available to PA,3/R the required infrastructure facilities without any financial outlay from PA,3/R while PA,3/R handles the actual management and o"eration of jai alai# &andoval also sought to "revent PA,3/R from managintg the jai alai games by itself or in joint venture for being "atently illegal and having no basis in the law# 0el (ar and &andoval are suing as ta="ayers and in their ca"acity as members of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives# Issue @hether or not &andoval and 0el (ar had real "arty interest to bring the case for review Held The "etitioners have no legal standing to sue as ta="ayers since no "ublic funds were used byt the court ado"ted a liberal "olicy on locus standi when a case involves an issue of transcendental significance to society so the 3ourt decided to declare the Re"resentatives as having legal standing to file the "etition# I5) 6& Ia8o'a Facts President 4strada de"loyed (arines to hel" the P1P in "atrolling malls after the Ri-al "ay LRT bombings# The I'P challenged the validity of the 4=ecutive /rder as unconstitutional# The 4=ecutire &ecretary contends that the res"ondents have no standing because they have no QQreal "artyR interest in the case# Issue @hether or not the I'P has locus standi in the case#

Issue @hether 'A*A1 and the other Re"resentatives have standing to contest the validity of the 2!A# Held The 3ourt found that the "etitioners had no standing to have the case heard because as members of the Lower ?ouse they were not "arty to the ratification of the treaty# They also failed to show any direct injury if the treaty was to be im"lemented# ?owever the 3ourt too> cogni-ance of the case because of its transcendental significance to the "eo"le# Lian( 6& )!o3l! Facts Jeffrey Liang is a 3hinese national em"loyed as an economist with the Asian 0evelo"ment 'an># ?e is charged with allegedly uttering defamatory words to Joyce 3abal a member of the clerical staff of the A0'# /n A"ril %C %778 the (T3 of (andaluyong acting "ursuant to the 0!A that Liang enjoyed immunity from legal "rocesses dismissed an earlier criminal case against him# The RT3 of Pasig however set aside the order of the (T3 hence the a""eal# Issue The issue is whether or not Jeffrey Liang has a "olitical "ersonality and therefore the court cannot resolve the issue because it is a "olitical question Held The &3 also said that the case did not involve a "olitical question becauese the 3ourt can find legal standards for resolving the issue# This is the inverse of the functional ty"e of "olitical question as defined in 'a>er v# 3arr# The 3ourt ruled that the immunity granted to officers and staff of the A0' is not absolute and is limited to acts "erformed in an official ca"acity# &lander or oral defamation cannot be considered as an official act# 0a'2os 6& 0an(la3us !acts The case is about whether or not President Aquino can "rohibit the (arcoses from returning to the Phili""ines in the e=ercise of her "owers granted by the 3onstitution# The President is constrained to u"hold and defend the 3onstitution and she has the obligation to "rotect the "eo"le "romote their welfare and advance the national interest# The Presidential "owers are not limited merely to e=ercising the 3ommander9in9 3hief "owers in terms of emergency or to leading the &tate against e=ternal and internal threats to its e=istence# The President is not only clothed with e=traordinary "owers in times of emergency but is tas>ed with attending to the day9to9day "roblems of maintaining "eace and order# Held The framers of the 3onstitution believed that the free use of the "olitical question doctrine allowed the 3ourt during the (arcos years to fall bac> on

Held I'P has no locus standi but the 3ourt brushed aside the rule following Gilosbayan v# ,uingona: where it was held that locus standi is merely "rocedural Z the courts may ta>e a liberal a""roach and brush aside the rule if the case is "aramount to "ublic interest# 5A.AN 6& ED!2uti6! S!2'!ta'9 Facts 'A*A1 is a "olitical "arty in the "arty9list seat in the ?ouse of Re"resentatives# Together with Re"s# Aquino TaWada and Arroyo challenged the validity of the 2isiting !orces Agreement as ta="ayers and as members of 3ongress# The res"ondents contend that the "etitioners have no standing but they still heard the case because itis of transcendental im"ortance to the "ublic interest#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 4# o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

"rudence institutional difficulties com"le=ity of issues momentousness of consequences or a fear that it was e=travagantly e=tending judicial "ower in the cases where it refused to e=amine and stri>e down an e=ercise of authoritarian "ower# The %7A6 3onstitution "recludes the &u"reme 3ourt by its mandate from refusing to invalidate a "olitical use of "ower through a convenient recourse to the "olitical question doctrine# @e are com"elled to decide what would have been non9 justiciable under our decisions inter"reting earlier fundamental charters# Da=a 6& Sin(son Facts The ?ouse of Re"resentatives "ro"ortionally a""ortioned its %$ seats in the 3ommission on a""ointments among the several "olitical "arties# The "etitioner Raul 0a-a was chosen to re"resent the L0P# Later the L0P was reorgani-ed# $8 members from the LP resigned from the "arty and joined the L0P swelling its number and reducing the LP to only %6# The ?ouse revised the re"resentation in the 3ommission of A""ointments withdrawing the "etitioner;s seat# 0a-a challenged the validity of his removal# ?e said his seat was "ermanent and the L0P was not a duly registered "olitical "arty and has not yet attained stability# Re"resentative &ingson who too> 0a-a;s seat claimed that the &3 has no jurisdiction as this is a "olitical question# Held The ?ouse has the authority to change its re"resentation in the 3/A to reflect any changes that may trans"ire in "olitical alignments# It is understood that such changes must be "ermanenet and do not include tem"orary alliances not involving severance of "olitical loyalties or formal disa""lication# The 3ourt said that the question was in the legality and not the wisdom of the act of the chamber therefore it is not a "olitical question# RULE 0A@ING )OWER 5ustos 6& Lu2!'o !acts 'ustos is charged with a criminal offense and he wanted to confront his accusers during the "reliminary investigation# The "rosecutor objected invo>ing Ruloe %JA &ection II of the Rules of 3ourt which "rovide the rights of a defendant after arrest# It is contended that &ection %% of Rule %JA infringes section %C Article 2III of the 3onstitution which says that the &u"reme 3ourt shall have the "ower to "romulgate rules concering "leading "ractice and "rocedure in all courts and the admission to the "ractice of law# These rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade and shall not diminish increase or modify substantive rights# It is said that the rule in question im"airs substantive rights of the accused#

Held Rule %JA &ection II is an adjective law and not a substantive law or substantive right# A""lied to criminal law substantive law declares what acts are crimes and "rocedural law "rovides and "rocedural law "rovides or regulates the ste"s by which the the guilty "arty is "unished# Preliminary Investigations are eminently and essentially remedial as it is the first ste" in a criminal "rosecution# @hile &ection %% Rule %JA denies to a defendant his right to cross9e=amine during a "reliminary investigation his right to "resent witnesses remains unaffected and his constitutional rights to be informed of the charges against him both at such investigation and at the trial are unchanged# It is difficult to draw a line in any "articular case beyond which legislative "ower over remedy and "rocedure can "ass without touching u"on the substantive rights of "arties affected as it is im"ossible to fi= that boundary by general condition# It is inevitable that the &u"reme 3ourt in ma>ing rules should ste" on substantive rights and the 3onstitution must be "resumed to tolerate it if not to e="ect such incursion as does not affect the accused in a harsh and arbitrary manner or de"rive him of a defense but o"erates only ina limited and unsubstantial manner to his disadvantage# The motion is denied# Fa7ian 6& D!si!'to !acts Teresita !abian was engaged by 1elson Agustin then the 0istrict 4ngineer of the !irst (etro (anila 4ngineering 0istrict in an amorous relationshi"# 0uring the course of this relationshi" he showered !abian;s com"any with "ublic wor>s contracts and interceded it in his office# Later when their relationshi" soured Agustin resisted !abian;s attem"ts to leave# !ed u" !abian filed an administrative case with the /ffice of the /mbudsman# The 0e"uty /mbudsman eventually acquitted Agustin of all charges# !abian claims that according to &ection $6 of RA E66J a""eals to decisions of the /mbudsman go directly to the &u"reme 3ourt# Agustin says that the bar on administrative case a""eal based on the /mbudsman;s rules on "rocedure must be binding# 4ven though no "arty raised the issue the &3 ordered the "arties to loo> into the constitutionality of &ection $6 of RA E66J# biter Issue If &ection $6 of RA E66J is declared unconstitutional what are !abian;s remediesV ?eld &ection $6 of RA E66J is indeed unconstitutional but since that &ection $6 hints at a""ellate jurisdiction which being substantive in nature cannot be disregarded by the 3ourt under its rule9ma>ing "ower# The test for whether a rule "rescribed by the &u"reme 3ourt for the "ractice and "rocedure of the lower courts abridges enlarges or modifies any substantive right

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 4$ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

is whether the rule regulates 3'o2!"u'! ; the judicial "rocess for enforcing rights and duties recogni-ed by substantive law and for justly administering remedy and redress for a disregard or infraction of them# If the rule ta>es away a vested right it is not "rocedural# If the rule creates a right such as the right to a""eal it may be classified as a substantive matter# I f it o"erates as a means of im"lementing an e=isting right then the rule deals merely with "rocedure# A transfer by the &u"reme 3ourt in t:! !D!'2is! o* its 'ul!C8aAin( 3o !' of "ending cases involving a review of decisions of the /ffice of the /mbudsman in administrative disci"linary actions to the 3ourt of A""eals relates to "rocedure only# The instant "etition is hereby referred and transferred to the 3ourt of A""eals for final dis"osition# In R!, Cunanan F5a' FlunA!'sG !acts This case tal>s about the 'ar !lun>ers Act of %7DC# +nder the Rules of 3ourt governing admission to the bar Lin order that a candidate may be deemed to have "assed his e=amination successfully he must have obtained a general average of 6DU in all subjects without failing below DJU in any subject# !eeling themselves fully qualified to "ractice law some unsuccessful candidates who obtained averages a few "ercentages lower than those admitted to the 'ar agitated for and secured in %7D% the "assage of &enate 'ill 1o# %$ which reduced the "assing general average in bar e=ams to 6JU effective since %78E# The President requested the views of this court and the court submitted written comments and shortly thereafter the President vetoed the bill and 3ongress did not override the veto# The President allowed the bill to become law without his signature# Held +nder the 3onstitution the &3 has the "ower to "romulgate rules concerning "leading "ractice and "rocedure in all courts and the admission to the "ractice of law# The 3ongress is also given the "ower to re"eal alter or su""lement the rules "romulgated by this Tribunal concerning admission to the "ractice of law# The 3onstitution does not say or mean that 3ongress may admit sus"end disbar or reinstate directly attorneys9at9law9or a determinate grou" of individuals to the "ractice of law# Its "ower is limited to re"eal modify or su""lement e=isting rules on the matter if according to its judgment the need for a better service or legal "rofession requires it# RA 76$ is unconstitutional and therefore void without any force or effect# /a6!llana 6& D!3a't8!nt o* Int!'io' !acts Atty# 4rwin Javellana was an elected city councilman of 'ago 3ity 1egros /ccidental# /n /ctober D %7A7 the 3ity 4ngineer 4rnesto 0ivinagracia filed Administrative 3ase 1o# 39%J7J against Javellana for violation of the 3ode of

3onduct and 4thical &tandards for Public /fficials and 4m"loyees and for o""ression misconduct and grave abuse of authority# 0ivinagracia alleged that Javellana while being an incumbent member of the 3ity 3ouncil has continuously engaged in the "ractice of law without authority from the Regional 0irector# Javellana a""eared as counsel in a case against the 3ity 4ngineer 0ivinagracia for Illegal 0ismissal and Reinstatement with 0amages# Javellana filed a "etition for certiorari "raying that the new Local ,overnment 3ode be declared unconstitutional because it infringes on the right of the &3 to "rescribe rules on the "ractice of law# ?eld The case was dismissed for lac> of merit# Javellana;s contention that &ection 7J of the Local ,overnment 3ode entrenched in the "ower of the &u"reme 3ourt to "rescribe rules on the "ractice of law is off tangent# The L,3 sim"ly "rescribes rules of conduct for "ublic officials to avoid conflict of interest between the discharge of their duties and "rivate "ractice of their "rofession# 0ania(o 6& CA !acts The offended "arty in a criminal case did not file to reserve the right to bring a se"arate civil action based on the same accident against the driver or the driver;s em"loyer Ruben (aniago# (aniago argues that the civil action against him im"liedly instituted in the criminal action "reviously filed against his em"loyer because the "rivate re"sondent did not reserve his right to file an inde"endent action# @hile the case was "ending the 3riminal action was dismissed for failure of the "rosecution to file a formal offer of evidence# Issue @hether des"ite the absence of a reservation res"ondent may nevertheless bring a se"arate action for damages against (aniago as s"ecified in the 3ivil 3ode# @hether the dismissal of the criminal case brings with it the dismissal of the attendant civil action# Held The question on whether the criminal action and the action for recovery of a civil liability must be tried on a single "roceeding has always been regarded as a matter of "rocedure and since the rulema>ing "ower has been conferred by the 3onstitution on this 3ourt it is in the >ee"ing of the 3ourt# The requirement of reservation does not im"air diminish or defeat substantive rights but only regulates the e=ercise in the general interest of orderly "rocedure# 0a2!"a 6& VasBu!= !acts (aceda was the "residing judge of the RT3 5Antique) when he was charged by 1a"oleon Abiera of the PA/ for allegedly falsifying his 3ertificates of &ervice

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 4< o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

dated !ebruary E %7A7 by certifying that all civil and criminal cases that have been submitted for decision or determination for a "eriod of 7J days have been determined and decided on or before January C% %7A7 in truth there are cases waiting for a decision# Abiera further alleges that (aceda similarly falsified 3ertificates of &ervice for a total of %6 months# The re"sondent sought the hel" of the /ffice of the /mbudsman and the /mbudsman ordered that (aceda file his counteraffidavit and other controverting evidence# The /mbudsman also denied the e=9"arte motion to refer to the &3 filed by "etitioner Petitioner contends that /mbudsman has no jurisdiction over the case since the offense charged rose from a judge;s "erformance of his officail duties which is under the control and su"ervision of the &u"reme 3ourt and that the /mbudsman;s investigation constitutes an encroachment into the &3Ms constitutional duty of su"ervision over all inferior courts# Issue @hether the /ffice of the /mbudsman could entertain a criminal com"laint for alleged falsification of a judge;s certification submitted to the &3 and assuming it can whether a referral should first be made to the &3# Held The investigation of the /mbudsman encroaches on the 3ourt;s "ower of administrative su"ervision over all courts and its "ersonnel in violation of the doctrine of se"aration of "owers# @here a criminal com"laint against a judge or other court em"loyees arises from their administrative duties the /mbudsman must defer action on said com"laint and refer the same to the &u"reme 3ourt for determination on whether a judge or court em"loyee acted within the sco"e of his administrative duties# )!o3l! 6& Ga2ott> /'& !acts Judge 4ustaquio ,acott filed a motion for reconsideration when he was rebuffed by the &u"reme 3ourt through the annulment of his order dismissing a criminal case com"lemented with a re"rimand and a fine of P%J JJJ#JJ for gross ignorance of the law# ,acott relies on the second sentence of Article 2III &ection %% which says that the &u"reme 3ourt en banc shall have the "ower to disci"line judges of lower court or order dismissal by a vote of majority of the members who actually too> "art in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon# ?e argues that the adverbial "hrase en banc refers to a full court and not a division thereof# In %77C a 3ourt en banc resolution was ado"ted which clarified the &3 Rules and Regulations noting that en banc cases are contem"lated when the "enalty im"osed is dismissal or if the sus"ension is more than one year with a fine e=ceeding P%J JJJ#JJ Issue @hether or not ,acott could be administratively disci"lined by a mere division of the &3 and not the 3ourt en banc

Held To require the entire 3ourt to deliberate u"on and "artici"ate in all administrative matters regardless of the sanction im"robable or im"osed would result in congested doc>ets and undue delay in adjudication of cases in 3ourt# In cogni-ance of the need of a thorough and judicious evaluation of serious charges against members of the judiciary only when the "enalty im"osed does not e=ceed sus"ension or does not need a fine of P%J JJJ or both the administrative matter may be decided in division# This is a way to e="edite the decision and resolution of cases of matters "ending before the &3# Ga'2ia 6& )!o3l! !acts The Petitioners are sentenced to reclusion "er"etua for murdering Jose 4strella# They filed a "etiiton for mandamus com"elling the RT3 in Iloilo to forward the records of the criminal case to the &3 for automatic review# Issue @hether the &3 must automatically review a trial court;s decision convicting the accused of a ca"ital offense sentencing him to reclusion "er"etua# Held The 3ourt only admits cases where the actual "enalty im"osed is death# As the "etitioners did not file a notice of a""eal or otherwise indicate their desire to a""eal from the decision convicting them of murder the decision became final and una""ealable# /u"(! Fu!nt!s 6s& O87u"s8an Facts Pursuant to an act constructing the first flyover in 0avao the 0P@? e="ro"riated land under the right of eminent domain# ?owever as of (ay %778 the government still had an outstanding debt to the landowners affected by the construction# the 0P@? decided to auction off all scra" and iron jun> found in the 0P@? de"ot in Panacan# 0avao 3ity# Ale= 'acquial won the bidding and attem"ted to withdraw the auctioned "oo"erties but was "revented by the 3ity 4ngineer because he sand there were still serviceable "ro"erties there due for rehabilitation# 'acquial filed an e= "arte motion for the issuance of a brea> through order to effect the withdrawal of the auctioned "ro"erties# The motion was granted by Judge !uentes# The 3ity 4ngineer filed a criminal case against Judge !uentes for grave abuse of discretion with the office of the /mbudsman# Judge !uentes filed this "resent "etition to enjoin the /mbudsman from "roceeding with the case and to order the same to remand the case to the &u"reme 3ourt# Held The &u"reme 3ourt as granted in the 3onstitution has the sole "ower to administratively su"ervise all courts and court "ersonnel and ta>e the "ro"er administrative action against them# /u"(! Caoi7!s 6s& O87u"s8an

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 50 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Facts Judge Alumbres filed a criminal com"laint with the /ffice of the /mbudsman against Judge 3aoibes for "hysical injuries malicious mischief and assault u"on a "erson in authority# Judge Alumbres also filed an administrative case with the &u"reme 3ourt "raying for the dismissal off the "etitioner for grave misconduct unbecoming of a judicial officer# Judge 3aoives contended that the &u"reme 3ourt not the /ffice of the /mbudsman has the authority to ma>e "reliminary determination of the res"ective cul"ability of the "etitioner and res"ondent9judge who both being members of the bench are under its e=clusive su"ervision and control# Issue @hether or not the /mbudsman should defer action on the 3riminal 3ase "ending resolution of the Administrative case# Held The /mbudsman should dismiss the criminal case# /nly the &3 can oversee the judges; and court "ersonnel;s com"liance wioth all laws and to ta>e the "ro"er administrative action against them# 1o other branch of government may intrude into this "ower# Cou't A"8inist'ato' 6& 4uiEanola !acts The /ffice of the 3ourt Administrator conducted a "hysical and judicial inventory of cases "ending before the (T3 of &an Pedro Laguna# They found a lot of cases "ending beyond the reglamentary "eriod in the sala of Judge .uiWanola Judge .uiWanola countered that due to a stro>e he suffered he could not do his duties as efficiently as he suffered from a cerebral hematoma# The /3A said that the Judge falsified his 3ertificates of &ervice and that if he indeed was of "oor health he should have as>ed for assistance which in fact he did not# Held The Judge was remiss in his duties and his faliure to e="editiously decide cases within the constitutionally allotted 7J day "eriod constitutes gross inefficiency and warrants administrative sanctions# !ined PhP 8J JJJ#JJ S!2tion 6 The &u"reme 3ourt shall have administrative su"ervision over all courts and the "ersonnel thereof# S3!2i*i2 )o !'s Judicial Powers of the &u"reme 3ourt 5%9$) 9 these are the only "rovisions that s"ea> of jurisdiction# These include original jurisdiction for cases affecting di"lomatic re"resentatives and over "etitions for certiorari "rohibition mandamus quo warranto and habeas cor"us as well as a""ellate jurisdiction over enumerated cases# Au=iliary Administrative Powers of the &u"reme 3ourt 5C9E) they include the "owers to issue tem"orary assignments of judges to order a change of venue to "romulgate rules of "rocedure and enforcement of constitutional rights integration

of the bar leagal assistance and admission to the "ractice of law to a""oint its em"loyees and to have administrative su"ervision over all courts# 3ongress may merely diminish the statutory jurisdiction of the &u"reme 3ourt but not the jurisdiction granted by the 3onstitution itself# /u"i2ial R!6i! Judicial review necessitates the search for an a""licable law# The lower court must decide on the constitutionality of a statute 5from Art# D of the 3ivil 3ode)# 'ut it is binding only on the "arties involved# It only becomes binding when the &u"reme 3ourt says so# Esss!ntial R!Buisiti!s The "ower of judicial review is merely an as"ect of judicial "ower# The first requisite for the e=ercise of judicial review before the court is an actual case calling for the e=ercise of judicial "ower# The question before it must be ri"e for adjudication 9 the governmental act being challenged must have an adverse effect on the "erson challenging it 5PA3+ v# &ecretary of 4ducation 76 Phil AJE) and the "erson challenging the act must have locus standi to challenge 9 he must have a "ersonal or substantaial interest in the case such that he has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of its enforcement 5Peo"le v# 2era ED Phil# DA) AuDilia'9 R!Buisiti!s As a general rule the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest o""ortunity so that if not raised by the "leadings it may not be raised at the trial and so on# There are e=ce"tions though# 5Id# AA) The court will not touch constitutionality unless it is unavoidable or the lis mota 5&otto v# 3/(4L43 'oard of /"tometry v# 3olet) In (ariano v# 3/(4L43 the &3 shut down the "etition as "remature because the elections for the mayor of the 3ity of (a>ati are three years away# The elections would have e=tended his term of office beyond the constitutional limit of three consecutive terms# The rule that the 3ourt can only decide on a question of law when there is an actual case or controversy is not a hard and fast rule# The e=ce"tions occur when for instance lac> of clarity may be creating a great confusion detrimental to "ublic order li>e the ((0A confiscating license "lates and drivers licenses for traffic violations# The requirement of locus standi may be waived when the "etitioner is able to craft an issue of transcendental im"ortance to the "eo"le 5I'P v# Famora) TaD3a9!' Suits In cases involving the e="enditure of "ublic funds it must be shown that) It must be established that there is an e=ercise of 3ongress by its ta=ing or s"ending "ower# The ta="ayer has a sufficient interest in "reventing the illegal e="enditure of money raised by ta=ation there will be a direct injury as a result of the enforcement of the statute

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 51 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

)oliti2al 4u!stions Political questions are those questions which under the 3onstitution are decided by the "eo"le in their sovereign ca"acity or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislature or e=ecutive branch of the government# ,uidelines in distinguishing whether an issue is a "olitical question or not 5'a>er v# 3arr)) te=tual question) Lthere is a te=tually demonstrable commitment of the issue to a "olitical de"artmentM ) functional ty"e) Lthere is a lac> of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it or the im"ossibility of deciding without an initial "olicy determination of a >ind clearly for non9judicial discretion#M ) &antiago v# ,uingona 5election of minority floor leader) "rudential) where there is the im"ossibility of a courtQs underta>ing inde"endent resolution without e="ressing lac> of res"ect due coordinate branches of govbernment or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a "olitical decision already made 5re"eated by &ection %) or the "otentiality of embarassment from multifarious "ronouncements by various de"artments on a question# ) whether or not we recogni-e 3hina# E**!2t o* "!2la'ation o* un2onstitutionalit9 The &u"reme 3ourt has rejected the view that an unconstitutional act confers no rights im"oses no duties and affords no "rotection whatsoever# The 3ourt has ado"ted the view that before an act is declared unconstitutional it is an o"erative fact which can be the source of rights and duties# It was a""lied in the case of 0e Agbayani v# P1' where the "eriod before a moratorium law was declared unconstitutional wa9 is not allowed to toll "rescri"tive "eriod of the right to foreclose a mortgage# &ince the "ower of judicial review flows from judicial "ower and since inferior courts are "ossessed of judicial "ower it may be inferred that "ower of judicial review is not e=clusive to the &u"reme 3ourt# This conclusion may be inferred from Article 2III &ection D5$) which confers to the &u"reme 3ourt a""ellate jurisdiction 5a""ellate review) overjudgments and decrees of inferior courts in all cases in which constitutionality or validity of any treaty international agreement law "residential decree or regulation is in question# &tanding is a substantive requirement) Justice (endo-a# It is discretionary on a 3ourt to recogni-e the standing of a tae"ayer# &ame thing with matters of transcendental im"ortance# Lawma>ers have standing if it affects the integrity of the legislative act# ,on-ales vs# 1arvasa disallowed ta="ayer suit because there was no new money given out# Gilosbayan I'P and Lacson cases show cases of transcendental im"ortance# &tate of rebellion sim"ly means that a rebellion is going on# ItQs just a declaration of fact#

There is no need for the concurrence of 3ongress to declare (artial law# S!2tion 6 The &u"reme 3ourt shall have administrative su"ervision over all courts and the "ersonnel thereof# S!2tion #& 5%) 1o "erson shall be a""ointed (ember of the &u"reme 3ourt or any lower collegiate court unless he is a natural9born citi-en of the Phili""ines# A (ember of the &u"reme 3ourt 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 "ractice of law in the Phili""ines# 5$) The 3ongress shall "rescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts but no "erson may be a""ointed judge thereof unless he is a citi-en of the Phili""ines and a member of the Phili""ine 'ar# 5C) A (ember of the Judiciary must be a "erson of "roven com"etence integrity "robity and inde"endence# S!2tion $& 5%) A Judicial and 'ar 3ouncil is hereby created under the su"ervision of the &u"reme 3ourt com"osed of the 3hief Justice as e= officio 3hairman the &ecretary of Justice and a re"resentative of the 3ongress as e= officio (embers a re"resentative of the Integrated 'ar a "rofessor of law a retired (ember of the &u"reme 3ourt and a re"resentative of the "rivate sector# 5$) The regular members of the 3ouncil shall be a""ointed by the President for a term of four years with the consent of the 3ommission on A""ointments# /f the (embers first a""ointed the re"resentative of the Integrated 'ar shall serve for four years the "rofessor of law for three years the retired Justice for two years and the re"resentative of the "rivate sector for one year# 5C) The 3ler> of the &u"reme 3ourt shall be the &ecretary e= officio of the 3ouncil and shall >ee" a record of its "roceedings# 58) The regular (embers of the 3ouncil shall receive such emoluments as may be determined by the &u"reme 3ourt# The &u"reme 3ourt shall "rovide in its annual budget the a""ro"riations for the 3ouncil# 5D) The 3ouncil shall have the "rinci"al function of recommending a""ointees to the Judiciary# It may e=ercise such other functions and duties as the &u"reme 3ourt may assign to it# S!2tion < The (embers of the &u"reme 3ourt and judges of the lower courts shall be a""ointed by the President from a list of at least three nominees "re"ared by the Judicial and 'ar 3ouncil for every vacancy# &uch a""ointments need no confirmation#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 52 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

!or the lower courts the President shall issue the a""ointments within ninety days from the submission of the list# S!2tion 10& The salary of the 3hief Justice and of the Associate Justices of the &u"reme 3ourt and of judges of lower courts shall be fi=ed by law# 0uring their continuance in office their salary shall not be decreased# S!2tion 11& The (embers of the &u"reme 3ourt and judges of lower courts shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of seventy years or become inca"acitated to discharge the duties of their office# The &u"reme 3ourt en banc shall have the "ower to disci"line judges of lower courts or order their dismissal by a vote of a majority of the (embers who actually too> "art in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon# S!2tion 12& The (embers of the &u"reme 3ourt and of other courts established by law shall not be designated to any agency "erforming quasi9judicial or administrative functions# S!2tion 1+& The conclusions of the &u"reme 3ourt in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in division shall be reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a (ember for the writing of the o"inion of the 3ourt# A certification to this effect signed by the 3hief Justice shall be issued and a co"y thereof attached to the record of the case and served u"on the "arties# Any (embers who too> no "art or dissented or abstained from a decision or resolution must state the reason therefor# The same requirements shall be observed by all lower collegiate courts# S!2tion 14& 1o decision shall be rendered by any court without e="ressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based# 1o "etition 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# )!o3l! 6& Li=a"a !acts The case is an automatic review of the decision of the RT39(anila finding Li-ada guilty of four counts of ra"e meting him the death "enalty for each count# Li-ada is the live9in "artner of Rose /rillosa mother of Analia the victim# Li-ada denied ever having ra"ed Analia# ?e claimed that he loved the children of Rose as if they were his own children# Li-ada contends that Analia was coached by her mother because Rose wanted control of the business they set u"#

Held The &3 did not a""reciate the contention of Li-ada that he should be acquitted# They found him guilty of two counts of sim"le ra"e and acts of lasciviousness# They reduced his sentence to reclusion "er"etua# R!, )'o7l!8 o* "!la9s in 2as!s 7!*o'! t:! San"i(an7a9an Facts There was a com"laint regarding some delays in the resolution of cases before the &andiganbayan# 'ecause of the inherent 3onsitutional right to a s"eedy trial the 'oard of ,overnors of the I'P decided that &3 Administrative 3ircular %J78 be made a""licable to the &andiganbayan in regard to the "ending cases under its jurisdiction# The I'P ,overnors also recommend to the &3 an inquiry into the causes of delay in the resolution of cases before the &andiganbayan# After an inquiry made the 3ourt found that there are are a totla of 8%D cases left undecided beyond the reglementary "eriod# There are two views regarding the reglementary "eriod of deciding cases before the &andiganbayan# /ne view maintains that the cases should be decided according to Article 2III &ection %D 5%) and 5$) which says that all cases or matter filed to the Llower collegiate courts; shall be decided within %$ months from the date of submission# The second view howver contends that since the &andiganbayan is a trial court they are required to decide cases within C months from the date of submission# Issues @hat is the reglementary "eriod within which the &andiganbayan must decideIresolve cases within its jurisdictionV Is the &u"reme 3ourt Administrative 3ircular 1o# %J78 which directs all trial judges to ma>e a "hysical inventory of the cases in their doc>ets a""licable to the &andiganbayanV If it is should Judge ,architorena be liable for the delays because of a lac> of an efficient filing system to monitor the flow of casesV Held The "rovision in Article 2III &ection %D of the %7A6 3onstitution which says that cases or matters filed must be decided by Llower collegiate courtsM within %$ months does not a""ly to the &andiganbayan# The "rovision refers to regular courts of lower collegiate level which is the 3ourt of A""eals# The &andiganbayan is a s"ecial court on the same level as the 3ourt of A""eals "ossessing all inherent "owers of a court of justice with the same functions of a trial court# The &andiganbayan being a s"ecial court shall have the "ower to "romulgate its own rules# In fact it "romulgated its own rules regarding the reglementary "eriod of undecided cases under its jurisdiction# In its own rules it says that judgments on "ending cases shall be rendered within C months# Also the law creating the &andiganbayan is also clear with the C month reglementary "eriod# The &andiganbayan in a sense acts li>e a trial court therefore a C month and not a %$ month reglementary "eriod shall a""ly# The Administrative 3ircular shall a""ly to the &andiganbayan and its chairman is liable# Judge !rancis ,architorena is fined P$J JJJ for inefficiency and gross neglect of duty# ?e is also relieved of duty as 3hairmain of the &andiganbayan and as a

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 5+ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

"residing judge to devote himself e=clusively to decision writing in all the "ending cases in his sala and those "ending without a "onente which he shall write are decided and resolved# ARTICLE 10 LOCAL GOVERN0ENTS SECTION <, Legislative bodies of local governments shall have &ectoral re"resentation as may be "rescribed by law &u"angan Jr# vs# &antos ,#R# A8EEC $8 August %77J !acts) The "etitioners are attac>ing the authority of the &ecretary of Local ,overnment to designateIa""oint membersI&ectoral re"resentatives to the local legislative bodies on the ground that it violates &ection 7 of the Art# B of the 3onstitution# (oreover the "etitioners contend that the "ower to a""oint belongs to the President and cannot be delegated to the &ecretary of the 0e"artment of local ,overnment# Issues) a) @I1 the &ecretary of local ,overnment can a""oint or designate &ectoral re"resentatives to the local legislative bodies# b) @I1 the President or the &ecretary can ma>e designationIa""ointment without any enabling law "ursuant to &ection 7# c) @I1 the designations made by the &ecretary are null and void# 0ecision) &ection 7 of Art B "rovides that legislative bodies of local governments shall have &ectoral re"resentation as may be "rescribed by law# +nder the Local ,overnment 3ode 5'P CC6) the "ower to a""oint &ectoral is conferred u"on the President of the Phili""ines but the secretary of Local ,overnment may by authority of the "resident inform the &ectoral re"resentatives of their a""ointments# It is the "resident who a""oints and the secretary is merely the transmitter# @ith regards the second issue the court held that the "hrase Nas may be "rescribed by lawM is not "ros"ective in character# &ection 7 commands that there shall be a""ointed legislative bodies of local government whether or not a law e=ists or has still to be "assed# In this case there is a law 5'P CC6) which is still o"erative and not inconsistent with the 3onstitution# 'P CC6 requires that before the "resident may a""oint members of the local legislative bodies there must be a determination made by the &anggunian itself that said sectors are made of sufficient number in the city or munici"ality to warrant re"resentation after consultation with associations and "erson belonging to the sector concerned# In cases wherein the &anggunian has not yet determined whether there is a need of re"resentation of a "articular sector in their city then there is no basis for the designationsI a""ointments#

@ith regards qualifications the court held that the minimum requirement is that the re"resentatives must at least belong to the sector they are re"resenting# SECTION 10, Tan 6s& CO0ELEC %8$ &3RA 6$6 5%% July %7AE)

!acts) Petitioners are residents of the "rovince of 1egros /ccidental# /n 0ecember %7AD they filed a case for "rohibition for the "ur"ose of sto""ing res"onded 3/(4L43 from conducting "lebiscite# The "etitioners were assailing the constitutionality of 'P AAD which is an Act 3reating a 1ew Province in the Island of 1egros to be >nown as the Province of 1egros del 1orte on the ground that it is a violation of the constitution# Res"ondents on the other hand insist on the validity of the law and argues that the remaining cities and munici"alities of the Province of 1egros /ccidental not included in the area of the new "rovince of 1egros del 1orte do not fall within the meaning of the sco"e of the term unit or units affected thus the "lebiscite should only cover the units affected or those "laces that will be covered by the new of 1egros del 1orte# Issue) @I1 the term Lareas affectedM refer only to "laces covered by the new "rovince where the "lebiscite should be limited# 0ecision) A reading of the constitution would give us an idea that the "rovisions made it im"erative that there be first obtained Lthe a""roval of a majority of votes in the "lebiscite in the unit or units affectedM whenever a "rovince is created divided or merged and there is substantial alteration of boundaries such as in the "resent case# Areas affected refer to both "laces that are covered by the new "rovince and those other areas of the Province of 1egros /ccidental since the remaining areas are also affected# As "rovided in the dissenting o"inion of Justice Abad &antos in the case of Paredes vs# 4=ecuting &ecretary when the constitution s"ea>s of the unit or units affected t means all of the "eo"le of the munici"ality if such is to be divided or all the "eo"le of two or more munici"alities if there be a merger# &uch ruling is a""licable in the case at bar# )a"illa /'& 6s& CO0ELEC ,R# 1o# %JCC$A %7 /ctober %77$

!acts) A "lebiscite was held throughout the (unici"ality of Labo for the creation of the (unici"ality of Tulay 1a Lu"a 5in 3amarines 1orte) in "ursuant to RA 1/ 6%DD# After the "lebiscite the board of canvassers declared the rejection ad disa""roval o an inde"endent (unici"ality of Tulay na Lu"a# The ,overnor of 3amarines 1orte 5the "etitioner) see>s to set aside the "lebiscite conducted and "rays that a new one be underta>en# ?e contends that there is a failure because the results that were obtained were invalid and illegal since the "lebiscite should have been conducted only in the units affected 5the %$

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 54 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

baranggays) com"rising the new (unici"ality of Tulay na Lu"a# It is the contention of the "etitioner that the ruling on Tan vs 3/(4L43 was already "ass[ with the new constitution which deleted the words Lunit orM thus the ruling in Paredes vs# 4=ecutive &ecretary should be reinstate# Issue) @I1 the 3/(4L43 committed grave abuse of discretion in conducting the "lebiscite in the remaining areas of the mother (unici"ality of Labo instead of only the %$ baranggays affected# 0ecision) The deletion of the "hrase Lunit orM in &ection %J Article %J of the constitution does not affect the ruling in Tan vs# 3/(4L43# The reason that when the law states that the "lebiscite shall be conducted in the "olitical units directly affected it means that residents of the "olitical entity who would be economically dislocated by the se"aration of a "ortion thereof should have a right to vote in the said "lebiscite# Those who are affected include not only the %$ baranggays but also those living in the "arent (unici"ality of Labo# The "etition was dismissed# SECTION 12, A7!lla 6s& CO0ELEC ,R# 1o# %JJ6%J JC &e"tember %77%

Co'"ill!'a 5'oa" Coalition 6s& COA ,R 1/# A$$%6 $7 January %77J

!acts) The "etitioners are assailing the constitutionality of 4/ $$J which created the 3ordillera Administrative Region on the ground that it "re9em"ts the enactment of an organic act by the 3ongress and the creation of the autonomous region in the 3ordilleras through a "lebiscite# 4/ $$J was brought about by negotiations between the 3PLA 53ordillera Peo"le;s Liberation Army) headed by !r# 'alwed and the Aquino government# It created the 3ordillera Administrative Region 53AR) which covers "rovinces from Abra to 3ity of 'aguio# It was ho"ed that 3ar would accelerate the economic and social growth in the region and "re"are it for the establishment of the autonomous region of 3ordilleras to be su"ervised by the field offices of the de"artments of the 1ational ,overnment# Issue) %) $) @I1 4/ $$J is unconstitutional @I1 3AR is a territorial and "olitical subdivision

!acts) Adelina Larra-abal is a registered voter of /rmoc 3ity and she wishes to run for governor of the "rovince of Leyte# /rmoc 3ity is not yet a highly urbani-ed com"onent city yet it is considered as an inde"endent of the "rovince of Leyte to which it is geogra"hically attached and its charter "rohibits its voters from voting for the "rovincial elective officials# It is the contention of the "etitioner that while a 3om"onent 3ity;s charter "rohibits its voters from "artici"ating in the elections for "rovincial office there is nowhere in the charter that "rohibits said voters from running for the "rovincial office# Issue) @I1 a voter of /rmoc who is "rohibited from electing "rovincial officials can li>ewise run for "rovincial office# 0ecision) 3om"onent cities li>e /rmoc city whose charters "rohibit their voters from voting for "rovincial elective officials are treated li>e highly urbani-ed cities which are outside the su"ervisory "ower of the "rovince to which they are geogra"hically attached# &uch inde"endence carries with it the "rohibition directed to registered voters not to vote and be voted for the "rovincial elective offices# The "hrase Nshall not be qualified and entitled to vote in the members of the "rovincial board of the Province of Leyte connotes two "rohibitions) one is from running and second is from voting for any "rovincial elective officials# SECTION 14 an" SECTION 1$)

0ecision %) 4/ $$J envisions the consolidation and coordination of the delivery of services in the area covered by the administrative region as a ste" "re"aratory to the grant of autonomy to the 3ordilleras# It does not create an autonomous region contem"lated in the 3onstitution# It merely "rovides for transitory measures in antici"ation of the enactment of an organic act that would create the 3ordillera Autonomous Region# The transitory nature of 3AR does not necessarily mean that it is and interim autonomous region in the 3ordilleras for an autonomous region is com"osed of an elective e=ecutive and legislature and s"ecial courts with "ersonal family and "ro"erty law jurisdiction which is not established by 4/ $$J 5&ection %A)# (oreover the cordillera e=ecutive board which is com"osed of the mayor of 'aguio and "rovincial governors merely serve as an im"lementing body# $) @ith regards the $nd issue again 3AR is not an autonomous nor even an interim autonomous region# It did not create new territorial and "olitical subdivisions or merge e=isting ones into a larger division# It is not even a "olitical subdivision that has a se"arate juridical "ersonality# 3AR is merely an administrative region created under the Reorgani-ation Plan# 3onsidering the control and su"ervision e=ercised by the President over 3AR and the offices created under 4/ $$J 3AR may be considered at most as a regional coordinating agency if the 1ational ,overnment which is similar to the regional develo"ment councils which the "resident may create under &ection %8# The "etitions were dismissed# SECTION 1$,

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 55 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

A77as 6s& CO0ELEC %67 &3RA $A6 5%7A7)

!acts) The "etitioners are assailing the validity of RA E6C8 an act "roviding for an organic act for the creation of the Autonomous Region of (uslim (indanao# They are "raying that the court would enjoin 3/(4L43 from conducting the "lebiscite and the &ecretary of 'udget and (anagement from releasing funds to the 3/(4L43 for said "ur"ose# They contend that RA E6C8 unconditionally creates an autonomous region in (indanao which is contrary to the "rovision of the 3onstitution on the autonomous region which ma>e the creation of such region de"endent u"on the outcome of the "lebiscite# !urthermore "etitioners assail RA E6C8 for according to them this is in conflict with the Tri"oli agreement# Issue) @I1 RA E6C8 is unconstitutional and @I1 it conflicts with the Tri"oli Agreement# 0ecision) RA E6C8 in constitutional# 4ven is we assume that it is in conflict with the Tri"oli agreement the standard for the validity of said act is "rovided by the constitution thus RA E6C8 will "revail# (oreover granting that the Tri"oli agreement is "art of the law of the land it will be of the same class as RA E6C8 which is a statute# The rule is that the Later law "revails thus RA E6C8 will "revail over the older Tri"oli agreement# As "rovided in the constitution the creation of the autonomous region is made effective u"on the a""roval Nby a majority votes cast by the constituent units in a "lebiscite;# 'y majority the constitution means that it should be de"endent not on the total majority vote in the "lebiscite but on the will of the majority in each constituent units# @ith regards the issue on the constituent units the "etitioner;s contention that by including areas which do not strictly share the same characteristics as the other the 3ongress unlawfully e="anded the sco"e of the region# &uch a contention was not given any merit by the court for the congress may determine what areas should com"rise the autonomous region# @ith regards the question on the "ower of the "resident to merge e=isting regions the court held that the "resident has the "ower to do so because what is being merged are administrative regions which are mere grou"ings of contiguous "rovinces for administrative "ur"oses# Administrative regions are not territorial and "olitical subdivisions and the "ower to merge them is traditionally lodged on the "resident to facilitate the e=ercise of general su"ervision over local governments# The "etition was dismissed# Co'"ill!'a R!(ional Ass!87l9 6s& CO0ELEC ,R 1/# 7CJD8 J8 0ecember %77J

!acts) A "lebiscite was held on January CJ %77J in "ursuant to RA E6EE for creation of the 3ordillera Autonomous Region# According to the results only "rovince of Ifugao ratified the /rganic Act# The "etitioners were claiming that (emorandum of the &ecretary of Justice to the "resident saying that 3AR legally and validly constitute 3AR is unconstitutional#

the the the can

Issue) @I1 the "rovince of Ifugao being the only "rovince which voted favorable for the creation of the 3AR ca alone validly and legally constitute such region# 0ecision) 1o# It is e="ressly "rovided in the constitution that the autonomous region shall be com"osed of "rovinces cities munici"alities etc# In other words the term LregionM used should mean two or more "rovinces# (oreover RA E6EE never intended that a single "rovince may constitute the autonomous region other wise there would be absurd situations li>e there would always be two sets of officials the "rovincial officials and the regional officials# This is too much considering the si-e of the area# (oreover a huge amount of %J( would be allocated to the region which is again too much considering that it is com"osed of Ifugao alone# The ruling in Abbas vs# 3/(4L43 is not a""licable in this case because the ruling in said case clearly state that the word majority means majority of the votes by constituent units# There is nothing in the Abbas case which dea>s wutg te issue of whether an autonomous region could e=ist des"ite the fact that only one "rovince constitute it# The "etition was granted# L!ono' 6s& Co'"ill!'a 5o"on( A"8inist'ation ,R 7$E87 %8 !ebruary %77%

!acts) 0ue to the fact that the 3ordillera Autonomous region did not come into e=istence since only Ifugao ratified RA E6EE as a consequent the 3ordillera 'odong Administration which was created in "ursuant to section %C of 4/ $$E the indigenous and s"ecial courts for the indigenous cultural communities of the 3ordillera region and the 3PLA as the regional "olice force do not legally e=ist# The (aeng Tribal 3ourt was not constituted as an indigenous or s"ecial court hence it only e=ists under the customs and traditions of an indigenous cultural community# &uch courts are not "art of the judicial system and do not "ossess judicial "ower# The decisions of conciliation "anels as advisory and conciliatory bodies has the force and judgment of the courts by it can be enforced only through the local city or munici"ality# The decisions of tribal courts on com"romise or arbitration may be enforced or set aside by regular courts only# ARTICLE %I

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 56 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

ACCOUNTA5ILIT. OF )U5LIC OFFICERS SECTION 1 -I)OLITA VS& 0ERGAS A#(# 1o# P97J98%$ %% (arch %77%

@I1 the rules of court were unconstitutional in so far as it vest a majority of all the members to overrule an im"eachment com"laint endorsed by %ID of the 'atasan# 0ecision) The rules are constitutional# @hen the 'atasan denied the motion of Ramon (itra to recall from the archives of resolution and the com"laint for im"eachment it in effect confirmed the action of the committee on justice human rights and good government in dismissing said resolutions and com"laint on im"eachment# The 'atasan by a majority as "rovided for the rules of court can dismiss the com"laint for im"eachment because there would not be any use of "roceeding further if the required $IC would not be obtained# &uch act of the 'atasan as a body is an e=ercise of "owers that have been vested u"on it by the 3onstitution beyond the "ower of the court to review# (oreover the rules are always within the "ower of the 'atasan to modify change or re"lace any time# These rules are merely "rocedural and not substantive# The "etition was dismissed# IN RE GONIALES %EJ &3RA 66% 5%7AA)

0ecision) A de"uty sheriff as officer of the court whose duties firm an integrated "art of the administration of justice may be "ro"erly "unished even "unishment short of dismissal or sus"ension from office for violation of Rules of 3ourt which im"edes the fair and just administration of justice# 4ven if the offense is not very serious the nature of the "osition amounts the acts as malfeasance# ?e is bound virtute officii to bring to the discharge of his duties# Public &ervice requires utmost integrity and strictest disci"line# The yardstic> of "ublic service is honesty and integrity both im"rinted in the %76C and the %7A6 constitution# SECTION 2 RO0ULO VS& .NIGUEI %8% &3RA $EC 5%7AE)

0ecision) A "ublic officer who under the constitution is required to be a member if the Phili""ines 'ar as a qualification for the office held by him and who may be removed from office by im"eachment cannot be charged with disbarment during the incumbency of such "ublic officer# &uch "ublic officer during his incumbency cannot be charged before the &andinganbayan or any other court with the offence which carries with it "enalty of removal from office or any "enalty service of which would amount to removal from office# The reason why the com"laint for disbarment here must be dismissed is that members of the &u"reme 3ourt as members of the Phili""ine 'ar may be removed from office only by im"eachment because to grant a com"laint for disbarment of a member of the court during the member;s incumbency would in effect be to circumvent and hence to run afoul to the constitutional mandate that members of the 3ourt may be removed from office only by im"eachment for and conviction of certain offenses listed in the constitution# In Lecaro- vs# &andiganbayan it was held that the court has jurisdiction over "ublic officers and em"loyees including government owned and controlled cor"oration e=ce"t constitutional officers that can be removed only by im"eachment which includes the "resident the members of the &3 and the members of the constitutional commissions# The "arty convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to "rosecution trial and "unishment in accordance with law after being im"eached# It is im"ortant to ma>e clear that the court is not here saying that its members or the other constitutional officers are entitled to immunity from liability for "ossible criminal acts or for misbehavior# !undamental "rocedural requirement must first be observed before such liability may be determined or enforced#

!acts) The "etitioners re"resenting more than %ID of all the members of the 'atasan called for the im"eachment of President (arcos together with a verified com"laint for im"eachment &aid resolution was referred to the &"ea>er to the 3ommittee on Justice ?uman Rights and ,ood ,overnment unfortunately said committee found the com"laint insufficient of substance to warrant its further consideration and dismissed the charges# The "etitioners filed the "resent case "raying that section 8 D E and A of the 'atasan Rules on Im"eachment be declared unconstitutional for it amends section C of the %76C 3onstitution by vesting in a smaller body to su""lant and overrule the im"eachment com"laint endorsed by %ID of all the members# &uch "ower was vested only in the 'atasang Pambansa as a collegiate body which has the "ower to initiate try and decide all cases of im"eachment# &ection A of the rules of court was also said to be unconstitutional because by requiring a majority vote of all the members of the 'P for a""roval of the resolution setting forth the Articles of Im"eachment the rules im"oses an unconstitutional and illegal condition "recedent in order that com"laint for im"eachment can "roceed to trial Issue)

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 5# o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

SECTION 4 NUNEI VS& SANDIGAN5A.AN %%% &3RA 8$$ 5%7A$)

%EJ &3RA A8C 5%7AA)

0ecision) The "rovision on the &andiganbayan was a constitutional recognition of the continuing need to combat graft and corru"tion already recogni-ed in earlier anti9 graft laws# The creation of the &andiganbayan was "recisely aimed for curtailing and minimi-ing the o""ortunities for official corru"tion and maintaining a standard of honesty in "ublic service#

!acts) 4nrique Faldivar governor of the "rovince of antique sought to restrain the &andiganbayan and Tanod 'ayan Raul ,on-ale- from "roceeding with the "rosecution and hearing of cases filed against him since the new constitution e="ressly "rovided that it is only the /mbudsman who has the authority to file cases with the &andiganbayan# Issue) @I1 the Tanodbayan under the %76C 3onstitution and continued as such even after the ratification of the new constitution# (ay he conduct "reliminary investigation and file cases against government officials# 0ecision) *es# The Tanodbayan 5&"ecial Prosecutor) and /mbudsman have different duties# The former shall be >nown as the /ffice of the &"ecial Prosecutor and shall continue to function as may have been "rovided for by law e=ce"t those conferred on the /ffice of the /mbudsman created under the 3onstitution# The latter shall have the duty to investigate on its own any act or omissions of any "ublic official when such act or omission a""ears to be illegal unjust im"ro"er or inefficient# +nder the "resent constitution Raul ,on-ale- is mere subordinate of the /mbudsman and can investigate cases only u"on the latter;s authority# The incumbent Tanodbayan 5&"ecial Prosecutor) is clearly without authority to conduct "reliminary investigations and to direct the filling of criminal cases with the &andiganbayan e=ce"t u"on orders of the /mbudsman# Petition was granted#

0A.OR LECAROI VS& SANDIGAN5A.AN %$A &3RA C$8 5%7A8)

!acts) The "etitioner who was the mayor of &ta# 3ru- (arinduque was charged with the crime of grave coercion for willfully unlawfully and feloniously ta>en over the o"eration and control of the gasoline station owned by a certain Par# The "etitioner was said to have used "olice forces in order to control the gasoline station therefore de"riving Pedro Par of the "ossession and e=ercise of a lawful trade and occu"ation# The "etitioned contends that the &andiganbayan has no jurisdiction over the case and that his case should have been filed with the ordinary courts where the alleged crime was committed# Issue) @I1 the jurisdiction of the &andiganbayan is limited to criminal and civil cases involving graft and corru"t "ractices of "ublic officers# 0ecision) broad "owers were given to the sandiganbayan which includes all other civil and criminal "ractices involving "ublic officers of the court# &ection 8 Article BIII of the 3onstitution "rovides for the creation of a s"ecial as the &andiganbayan which has jurisdiction cases involving such other offenses committed by "ublic officers and em"loyees including those in government9owned and controlled cor"orations in relation to their office as may be determined by law# It is clear in the "etition that the "etitioner has used his "osition in order to gain advantage of Par# Thus the sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over his case# The "etition was dismissed# SECTION 5C# IALDIVAR VS& SANDIGAN5A.AN

F'an2is2o et. al& 6& -ous! o* R!3'!s!ntati6!s FDa6i"! I83!a2:8!ntG G&R& No& %EJ$E%

@!9 o'") &e"aration of "owers between the e=ecutive legislative and judiciary branch of government# Fa2ts) %) /n July $$ $JJ$ the ?ouse of Re"resentatives ado"ted a Resolution s"onsored by Re"resentative !eli= @illiam 0# !uentebella which directed the 3ommittee on Justice Lto conduct an investigation in aid of legislation on the manner of disbursements and e="enditures by the 3hief Justice of the &u"reme 3ourt of the Judiciary 0evelo"ment !und 5J0!)#M $) /n June $ $JJC former President Jose"h 4# 4strada filed an im"eachment com"laint 5first im"eachment com"laint) against 3hief Justice ?ilario ,# 0avide Jr# and seven Associate Justices of this 3ourt for Lcul"able violation of the 3onstitution betrayal of the "ublic trust and other high crimes#M The com"laint was endorsed by Re"resentatives Role= T# &u"lico Ronaldo '# Famora and 0idagen Piang 0ilangalen and was referred to the ?ouse 3ommittee on Justice on August D $JJC in accordance with &ection C5$) of Article BI of the 3onstitution which reads)

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 5$ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

&ection C5$) A verified com"laint for im"eachment may be filed by any (ember of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives or by any citi-en u"on a resolution of endorsement by any (ember thereof which shall be included in the /rder of 'usiness within ten session days and referred to the "ro"er 3ommittee within three session days thereafter# The 3ommittee after hearing and by a majority vote of all its (embers shall submit its re"ort to the ?ouse within si=ty session days from such referral together with the corres"onding resolution# The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the ?ouse within ten session days from recei"t thereof# C) The ?ouse 3ommittee on Justice ruled on /ctober %C $JJC that the first im"eachment com"laint was Lsufficient in form M but voted to dismiss the same on /ctober $$ $JJC for being insufficient in substance# 8) !our months and three wee>s since the filing on June $ $JJC of the first com"laint or on /ctober $C $JJC a day after the ?ouse 3ommittee on Justice voted to dismiss it the second im"eachment com"laint was filed with the &ecretary ,eneral of the ?ouse by Re"resentatives ,ilberto 3# Teodoro Jr# D) 5!irst 0istrict Tarlac) and !eli= @illiam '# !uentebella 5Third 0istrict 3amarines &ur) against 3hief Justice ?ilario ,# 0avide Jr# founded on the alleged results of the legislative inquiry initiated by above9mentioned ?ouse Resolution# This second im"eachment com"laint was accom"anied by a LResolution of 4ndorsementIIm"eachmentM signed by at least one9third 5%IC) of all the (embers of the ?ouse of Re"resentatives E) Thus arose the instant "etitions against the ?ouse of Re"resentatives et. al. most of which "etitions contend that the filing of the second im"eachment com"laint is unconstitutional as it violates the "rovision of &ection D of Article BI of the 3onstitution that LSnTo im"eachment "roceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a "eriod of one year 6) Res"ondent ?ouse of Re"resentatives through &"ea>er Jose 3# 0e 2enecia Jr# andIor its co9res"ondents by way of s"ecial a""earance submitted a (anifestation asserting that this 3ourt has no jurisdiction to hear much less "rohibit or enjoin the ?ouse of Re"resentatives which is an inde"endent and co9 equal branch of government under the 3onstitution from the "erformance of its constitutionally mandated duty to initiate im"eachment cases# /n even date &enator Aquilino .# Pimentel Jr# in his own behalf filed a (otion to Intervene 5 !" #budante Cautela) and 3omment "raying that Lthe consolidated "etitions be dismissed for lac> of jurisdiction of the 3ourt over the issues affecting the im"eachment "roceedings and that the sole "ower authority and jurisdiction of the &enate as the im"eachment court to try and decide im"eachment cases including the one where the 3hief Justice is the res"ondent be recogni-ed and u"held "ursuant to the "rovisions of Article BI of the 3onstitution#M 'riefly stated the "osition of res"ondents &"ea>er 0e 2enecia et# al# that im"eachment is a "olitical action which cannot assume a judicial character# Issu!s)

&ub issue) %) @hether or not the "ower of judicial review e=tends to those arising from im"eachment "roceedings# (ain issues) %) @hether or not the filing of the second im"eachment com"laint against 3hief Justice ?ilario ,# 0avide Jr# with the ?ouse of Re"resentatives falls within the one year bar "rovided in the 3onstitution: and $) @hether or not the resolution thereof is a "olitical question < has resulted in a "olitical crisis#

Rulin() Su7 issu! *es judicial review e=tends to those arising from im"eachment "roceedings# Petitioners "lead for this 3ourt to e=ercise the "ower of judicial review to determine the validity of the second im"eachment com"laint# This 3ourt;s "ower of judicial review is conferred on the judicial branch of the government in &ection % Article 2III of our "resent %7A6 3onstitution) &43TI/1 %# The judicial "ower shall be vested in one &u"reme 3ourt and in such lower courts as may be established by law# /u"i2ial 3o !' in2lu"!s t:! "ut9 of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable and to "!t!'8in! :!t:!' o' not t:!'! :as 7!!n a ('a6! a7us! o* "is2'!tion a8ountin( to la2A o' !D2!ss o* ?u'is"i2tion on t:! 3a't o* an9 7'an2: o' inst'u8!ntalit9 o* t:! (o6!'n8!nt& 54m"hasis su""lied) &uch "ower of judicial review was early on e=haustively e="ounded u"on by Justice Jose P# Laurel in the definitive %7CE case of #ngara v. !lectoral Commission$ to wit) = = = the 3onstitution is a definition of the "owers of government# Who is to determine the nature, scope and extent of such powers? The Constitution itself has provided for the instrumentality of the judiciary as the rational way. And when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not assert any superiority over the other departments% it does not in reality nulli&y or invalidate an act o& the legislature$ but only asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to determine conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the rights which that instrument secures and guarantees to them. This is in truth all that is involved in what is termed 'judicial supremacy' which properly is the power of judicial review under the Constitution# =#=#= And the judiciary in turn, with the upreme Court as the final arbiter, effectively chec!s the other departments in the exercise of its power to determine the law, and hence to declare executive and

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 5< o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

legislative acts void if violative of the Constitution. There e=ists no constitutional basis for the contention that the e=ercise of judicial review over im"eachment "roceedings would u"set the system of chec>s and balances# 2erily the 3onstitution is to be inter"reted as a whole and Lone section is not to be allowed to defeat another#M 'oth are integral com"onents of the calibrated system of inde"endence and interde"endence that insures that no branch of government act beyond the "owers assigned to it by the 3onstitution# 0ain issu!s) Issue \ % *es the filing of the second im"eachment com"laint against 3hief Justice ?ilario ,# 0avide Jr# with the ?ouse of Re"resentatives falls within the one year bar "rovided in the 3onstitution# ?aving concluded that the initiation ta>es "lace by the act of filing of the im"eachment com"laint and referral to the ?ouse 3ommittee on Justice the initial action ta>en thereon the meaning of &ection C 5D) of Article BI becomes clear# /nce an im"eachment com"laint has been initiated in the foregoing manner another may not be filed against the same official within a one year "eriod following Article BI &ection C5D) of the 3onstitution# In fine considering that the first im"eachment com"laint was filed by former President 4strada against 3hief Justice ?ilario ,# 0avide Jr# along with seven associate justices of this 3ourt on June $ $JJC and referred to the ?ouse 3ommittee on Justice on August D $JJC the second im"eachment com"laint filed by Re"resentatives ,ilberto 3# Teodoro Jr# and !eli= @illiam !uentebella against the 3hief Justice on /ctober $C $JJC violates the constitutional "rohibition against the initiation of im"eachment "roceedings against the same im"eachable officer within a one9year "eriod# Issue \ $ 1o the resolution thereof is not a "olitical question < it has not resulted in a "olitical crisis# The "ossibility of the occurrence of a constitutional crisis is not a reason for this 3ourt to refrain from u"holding the 3onstitution in all im"eachment cases# Justices cannot abandon their constitutional duties just because their action may start if not "reci"itate a crisis# @hat lies in here is an issue of a genuine constitutional material which only this 3ourt can "ro"erly and com"etently address and adjudicate in accordance with the clear9cut allocation of "owers under our system of government# !ace9to9face thus with a matter or "roblem that squarely falls under the 3ourt;s jurisdiction no other course of action can be had but for it to "ass u"on that "roblem head on# The claim therefore that this 3ourt by judicially entangling itself with the "rocess of im"eachment has effectively set u" a regime of judicial su"remacy is "atently without basis in fact and in law# !acts) ,overnor 0eloso of Fambales see>s to sto" res"onded (anuel 0omingo 0e"uty /mbudsman for Lu-on from conducting a "reliminary investigation of the charge of multi"le murder against him# ?e contends that the /mbudsman has no jurisdiction over the case because it only has the "ower to investigate acts and omissions that are connected to his duties as governor and that the Tanodbayan has no jurisdiction to "rosecute the murder case against the "etitioner# Issue) @I1 the ombudsman has jurisdiction to investigate the charge of multi"le murder allegedly committed by the "etitioner as "rovincial governor# 0ecision) *es# The constitution em"owers the ombudsman to investigate any act or omission of any "ublic official without any qualification that said act or omission must have been committed or incurred in relation to his office# The /mbudsman and his de"uties are tas>ed to "rotect the "eo"le through acting "rom"tly on com"laints filed in any form or manner against "ublic officials or em"loyees of the government as well as investigate on its own any com"laint by any "erson any act or omission of any "ublic official em"loyees office or agency when such at or SECTION # 5IR VS& O05UDS0AN ,R# %%D%JC %% A"ril $JJ$

Fa2ts, The office of the ombudsman received an information from an Linformer9for9rewardM regarding alleged anomalous grant of ta= refunds to La Tondena 0istilleries and 0istillera Limtauco and 3o# u"on recei"t of information /mbusdman issued a sub"oena duces tecum addressed to the Legal 0e"artment of the 'IR and later on to 3ommissioner 3hato ordering them to a""ear before the /mbudman and to bring the com"lete original case doc>ets of the refunds granted to limtauco and la tondena# It is the contention of 'IR that the /mbudsman has no jurisdiction over the case since to review the same was lodged with the court of A""eals and not the /mbudsman# (oreover it was the contention of 'IR that before a sub"oena duces tecum is issued there must first be a "ending action# Petitioner further o"ines that the fact9finding investigation by the /mbudsman is not the "ro"er case for it is only ste" "reliminary to the filing of recovery actions on the ta= refunds granted to Limtauco and La Tondena# Issue) @I1 the actions of the /mbudsman is correct# SECTION 11 an" 12 DELOSO 6s& DO0INGO ,4 1o# 7JD7% $% 1ovember %77J

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 60 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

omission a""ears to be illegal unjust im"ro"er or inefficient# 5&ection %$ and %C of Art BI)# The clause Lany illegal act or omission; of any "ublic official is broad enough to embrace any crime committed by a "ublic official# !urthermore the /mbudsman act ma>es "erfectly clear that the jurisdiction of the /mbudsman encom"asses all >inds of malfeasance that have been committed by any officer or em"loyee during his tenure of office# The murder of C "ersons is no doubt an illegal act and since this was committed by a governor the crime lies within the jurisdiction of the /mbudsman;s investigative authority# The /mbudsman Act of %7A7 vests in the /mbudsman "rimary jurisdiction over cases cogni-able by the &andiganbayan# A murder charged against the "etitioner carries the "enalty of reclusion tem"oral in its ma=imum "eriod to death hence it is cogni-able by the &andiganbayan and the /mbudsman has "rimary jurisdiction to investigate it# The "etition was dismissed for lac> of merit#

de"artments and other agencies the "reventive sus"ension of officials and em"loyees facing administrative investigation conducted by his office thus he cannot order the sus"ension himself# The ombudsman invo>es &ection $8 of RA 1o# E66J which "rovided that the ombudsman or his de"uty may "reventively sus"end any officer or em"loyee under his authority "ending an investigation# Res"ondents also argue that the "ower to sus"end is contem"lated by section %C 5A) of the constitution which "rovides that the /mbudsman shall e=ercise such other functions or "erform such functions or duties as may be "rovided by law# Issue) @I1 the /mbudsman has the "ower to sus"end government officials and em"loyees wor>ing in offices other than the /ffice of the /mbudsman "ending investigation of the administrative com"laint filed against said officials and em"loyees# 0ecision# The /mbudsman has the "ower to sus"end government officials and em"loyees "ending investigation# The court held in 1era vs# ,arcia that sus"ension is just a "reliminary ste" in an administrative investigation# The "ur"ose of RA E66J 5/mbudsman Act of %7A7) is to give the /mbudsman such "owers as he may need to "erform efficiently the tas> committed to him by the 3onstitution# Any inter"retation that will ham"er the wor> of the /mbudsman should be avoided# (oreover it can be concluded that the 3ongress by deleting the words LsubordinateM and Lin his bureauM leaving the "hrase to read Lsus"end any officer or em"loyee under his authority "ending investigation intended to em"ower the /mbudsman to "reventively sus"end all officials and em"loyees under investigation by his office# The moment a criminal or administrative com"laint is filed with the ombudsman the res"ondent is deemed to be in his authority and he can "roceed to determine whether said res"ondent should be "laced under "reventive sus"ensions#

SECTION 1+ CRUI 6s& San"i(an7a9an ,R# 1o# 78D7D $E !ebruary %77% Issue) @I1 the res"ondent P3,, 5Presidential 3ommission on ,ood ,overnment) has the authority to conduct "reliminary investigation and file the information with the &andiganbayn for violation of the Anti9,raft and 3orru"t "ractices act# 0ecision) *es# The e=clusive jurisdiction of the Tanod 'ayan to conduct "reliminary investigation was modified by 4/ % which constituted and created the P3,,# &ection C of 4/ 1o % "rovides that the commission shall have the "ower to conduct investigations as may be necessary# +nder 4/ %8 it is further "rovided that the P3,, shall be em"owered to file in the &andiganbayan and "rosecute all cases investigated by it under 4/ no# %# @ith the ratification of the constitution the office of the /mbudsman was created under Article BI the authority of P3,, was maintained# The authority of the /mbudsman is not e=clusive but is concurrent with other similarly authori-ed agencies of the government li>e the P3,,# 5UENSADA VS& FLAVIER GR No& 106#1< 21 S!3t!87!' 1<<+

NATIVIDAD 6s& FELI% ,R 1o# %%%E%E J8 !ebruary %778

!acts) The "etitioners were "reventively sus"ended by the /mbudsman "ending investigations filed against them# It is the contention of the "etitioners that the action of the /mbudsman is an abuse of discretion for according to &ection %C 5C) of the %7A6 consitution the /mbudsman can only recommend to the heads of the

!acts) The "etitioner is the (unici"al (ayor of Ramos Tarlac and he was charged for the >illing of &everino Aquino a robbery and 1PA sus"ect while the latter was in investigation at the "olice station# The P1P requested the Tarlac Provincial Prosecutor to investigate the "etitioner for the death of the victim# Petitioner wrote to the secretary of justice requesting the "reliminary investigation be done in (anila but this was denied# The "etitioner then moved to remand his case for "reliminary investigation contending that res"ondent judge has no jurisdiction over the case because it was the /mbudsman and not the "rovincial "rosecutor who has jurisdiction to conduct the investigation# res"ondent judge denied the "etition# Issue) @I1 the "rovincial "rosecutor of Tarlac has authority to conduct a "reliminary investigation of the offense allegedly committed by the "etitioner# 3ase

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 61 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

0ecision) In 0eloso vs# 0omingo it was said that the /mbudsman has the "ower to conduct "reliminary investigation on any illegal act or omission of any "ublic official which is broad enough to encom"ass any crime committed by a "ublic official# ?owever loo>ing at the latest law on the &andiganbayan &ection 8 of said law "rovided that the &andiganbayan shall e=ercise e=clusive jurisdication in all cases involving) a) offenses or felonies bu "ublic officers and em"loyees in relation to their office and b) "enalty "rescribed be higher than "rison correctional or im"risonment for E years or fine of Ph" E JJJ#JJ# In the case at bar the second requirement was met but the first is wanting# (oreover 0eloso vs 0omingo has already been re9e=amined in the case of Aguinaldo vs# 0omagas and &anche- vs# 0emetriou which both "rovided that the authority of the /mbudsman is not an e=clusive authority but rather a shared or concurrent authority in res"ect of the offense charged# Accordingly the /mbudsman may ta>e over the investigation of such case at any stage from any investigative agency of the ,overnment# Also a careful reading of &ection %D of the /mbudsman act would give us an idea an idea that the /mbudsman;s investigatory "owers are but directory in nature# The "etition was dismissed for lac> of merit#

0ecision) 1o# The /mbudsman seen to have "re9em"ted the e=ercise of discretion by the 'oard of Trustees of the (@&& since the recommendation to award the contract a""ears to be yet "ending consideration and action of the (@&& 'oard# The (@&& is government owned and controlled cor"oration which has discretion on matters that can be best discharged by it# It was said in Ra-on vs# PPA that neither the court nor congress and "erha"s the /mbudsman could be e="ected to have the technical e="ertise to loo> into matters of this nature# The discretion to acce"t or reject a bid and award contract is vested on government agencies# 3ourts will not interfere unless it is a""arent that it is used as a shield to a fraudulent award# LASTI0OSA VS& VAS4UEI ,R# %%EAJ% JE A"ril JE %77D

!acts) Petitioner is the Assistant Provincial "rosecutor of 3ebu# &he and the Provincial Prosecutor refused to file a criminal charge of attm"eted ra"e against (ayor Ilustrisimo# Thus the /mbudsman filed an administrative com"laint against them for grave misconduct insubordination gross neglect of duty refraining from "rosecuting# The two were "laced under "reventive sus"ension# It was the contention of the "etitioner that the /mbudsman has no jurisdiction over the case of the mayor thus they cannot be forced to file the case against Ilustrisimo# Issue) @I1 the /ffice of the /mbudsman has the "ower to call on the "rovincial "rosecutor to assist it in the "rosecution of the case for attem"ted ra"e against (ayor Ilustrisimo# 0ecision) *es# In the e=ercise of his "owers the /mbudsman is authori-ed to call in "rosecutors for assistance as "rovided for in &eciton C% of the /mbudsman Act of %7A7 5RA E66J)# @hen a "rosecutor is de"uti-ed he comes under the su"ervision and control of the /mbudsman meaning he is subject to the "ower of the /mbudsman to direct review a""rove reverse and modify his decision# Petitioner cannot legally act on her own and refuse to "re"are and file the information as directed by the /mbudsman# The "reventive sus"ension is also valid in "ursuant to &ection $8 of the /mbudsman act which e="ressly "rovided that the "reventive sus"ension shall continue until the case is terminated by the /ffice of the /mbudsman but not more than si= months without "ay# Petition was dismissed) 1ote) Preventive &us"ension) 3ivil &ervice 57J days) <grounds) sim"le showing that the charge involves dishonesty o""ression or grave misconduct neglect in the "erformance of duty or if there are reasons to believe that the res"ondent is guilty of charges# /mbudsman 5E months) < ground) same as the grounds under the civil service decree "lus an additional requirement that the evidence of guilt is strong and that

CONCERNED OFFICILS OF 0WSS 6s& VAS4UEI ,#R# 1o# %J7%%C $D January %77D

!acts) The /mbudsman in its /ctober %77$ order directed the 'oard of Trustees of (@&& to 5a) set aside the recommendation of the Pre9qualification 'ids and Awards 3ommittee that a (@&& contract be given to a contractor offering fiberglass "i"es and b) to instead award the contract to a com"lying and res"onsive bidder# The "etitioners sought to annul these orders contending that) a) the res"ondent acted without jurisdiction in issuing these said orders b) res"ondent committed grave abuse of discretion by ca"riciously inter"reting the decision of (@&& which is a s"eciali-ed agency of government# The res"ondent on the other hand contents that the authority of the /mbudsman is sufficiently broad enough to cloth it with sufficient "ower to loo> into the alleged irregularities in the bidding that was conducted in the (@&&# The ombudsman can call for investigation of any act or omission of any "ublic official em"loyee office or agency when such act a""ears to be illegal unjust im"ro"er or inefficient# Res"ondent further argues that the /mbudsman has investigatory "owers "rosecutory "owers "ublic assistance functions authority to inquire and obtain information and function to ado"t institute and im"lement "reventive measures thus the act of the /mbusdman is well within its "owers# Issue) @I1 the /mbudsman has the "ower to issue said orders#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 62 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

the res"ondent;s continued stay in the office may "rejudice the case filed against him# Local ,overnment 3ode 5EJ days) < "reventive sus"ension can be ordered only after the issues are joined meaning all the "reliminary requirements and e=changes had been com"leted res"ondent has already filed his counter affidavit and the case is ready for resolution#

Petition was dismissed# SECTION 1$ CAASI VS& COURT OF A))EALS ,R AAAC% JA 1ovember %77J

AL0ONTE 6s& VAS4UEI ,#R# 7DCE6 $C (ay %77D

!acts) The /mbudsman received anonymous letters alleging that funds re"resenting saving from unfilled "ositions in the 4conomic Intelligence and Investigation 'ureau has been illegally disbursed thus it launched an investigation and issued sub"oena duces tecum requiring the "etitioners to "roduce all documents relating to the Personal &ervice !unds in the year of %7AA# Petitioners refused to com"ly with the orders saying that the 0'( only released funds for the 786 "lantilla "ositions which were filled# (oreover the "etitioners were alleging that the documents being as>ed by the /mbudsman are confidential in nature thus they cannot be forced to "resent them# Issue) @I1 the /mbudsman can investigate a case brought about by an undersigned and unverified letter and @I1 4II' can invo>e confidentiality against the /mbudsman# 0ecision) The "rivilege of confidentiality is recogni-ed only on matters relating to military di"lomatic and other national security secrets# If the claim of confidentiality does not rest on these matters the "rivilege cannot be invo>ed# @hat is being as>ed by the /mbudsman do not "ertain to di"lomatic nor military secrets# The fact that the said documents were already e=amined by 3/A gives the /mbudsman more right to e=amine them because there is no reason why said documents may be allowed to be e=amined by one agency of government and be considered as confidential by another# If the documents are really confidential then they can always be e=amined in strict confidence of the /mbudsman himself# The contention of the "etitioners that the /mbudsman can only act in a""ro"riate cases and subject to such limitation as may be "rovided by law does not mean that the /mbudsman cannot investigate a case brought by unverified source# As a matter of fact the /mbudsman Act of %7A7 "rovides that the /mbudsman shall receive com"laints from any source in whatever form concerning official act and omission# The general investigation in the /mbudsman;s office is "recisely for the "ur"ose of "rotecting those against whom a com"laint is filed against hasty malicious and o""ressive "rosecution as much as securing the state from useless and e="ensive trials#

!acts) (erito (iguel is the munici"al mayor of 'olinao Pangasinan# ?is rival (ateo 3aasi was contending that (iguel should have been disqualified to run for the "osition of mayor on the account of his being a green card holder filed the "resent "etition# (oreover the "etitioner contends that section %A of Article BI which states that Public officers and em"loyees who see> to change their citi-enshi" or acquire the statues of an immigrant of another country during his tenure shall be dealt with by law a""lies to this case# According to (iguel he merely obtained the green card in order that he may freely enter the +nited &tates for his "eriodic chec>9u" and to visit his children# (iguel further argues that he is a "ermanent resident of 'olinao Pangasinan and that he voted during the "revious elections# 3/(4L43 ruled that the "ossession of a green card does not sufficiently establish that (iguel abandoned his residence in the Phili""ines# Issues) a) @I1 section %A a""lies to this case b) @I1 a green card holder is "roof that the holder is a "ermanent resident of the +&# 0ecision) In the a""lication for Immigrant 2isa and Alien registration (iguel said that he inteded to stay "ermanently in the +&# Thus his immigration to the +& in %7A8 constitute an abandonment of his domicile and residence in the Phili""ines because he entered the +& with the intention to live there "ermanently as evidenced by his a""lication for an immigrant;s visa# To assume otherwise would mean that he a""lied for immigration to the +& under false "retenses# ?owever &ection %A does not a""ly to this case because (iguel acquired the status of an immigrant before he was elected to "ublic office and not during his tenure as mayor# 1onetheless &ection EA of the /mnibus 4lection 3ode a""lies to him# &aid law states that any "erson who is "ermanent resident of or an immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office under this code unless he has waived his status# (iguel;s filing of his candidacy does not constitute a waiver of his status thus he remains to be an immigrant# 3onsequently he is disqualified from running in "ublic office# The decision of 3/(4L43 and 3ourt of A""eals were set aside# SECTION 1+ -ONASAN VS& DE)ART0ENT OF /USTICE ,R 1o# %D7686

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 6+ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

!acts) ,regorio ?onasan and several others were charged with violation of Article %C89A of the RP3 for the offense of cou" d;etat# The "anel of investigating "rosecutors of the de"artment of justice sent a sub"oena to the "etitioner for "reliminary investigation# The "etitioner questions the jurisdiction of 0/J over the case asserting that the im"uted acts were committed in relation to his "ublic office thus it must be the /mbudsman not the 0/J that has the jurisdiction to conduct the "reliminary investigation# ?e further contends that he should be charged in the &andiganbayan and not in the regular courts since he is a "ublic official and that the /('90/J joint circular is unconstitutional# Res"ondent on the other hand contends that the 0e"artment of Justice Panel of investigators has jurisdiction to conduct the "reliminary investigation over the charge in "ursuant to the Revised Administrative 3ode of %7A6# (oreover the /mbudsman has the "ower to de"uti-e 0/J "rosecutors as "rovided in the constitution# Issue) @I1 the 0/J has jurisdiction over the case# 0ecision) The authority of the res"ondent 0/J is not based on the /('90/J 3ircular but rather on the "rovisions of the %7A6 Administrative 3ode which "rovides that the 0/J shall have the "ower to investigate the commission of crimes "rosecute offenders and administer the "robation and correction system# The office of the /mbudsman is conferred with the "ower to investigate on its own or on com"laint by any "erson any act or omission of any "ublic official em"loyee or agency when such act or omission a""ears to be illegal unjust im"ro"er or inefficient# &uch "ower does not e=clude other government agencies tas>ed by law to investigate and "rosecute cases involving "ublic officials# Accordingly the /mbudsman Act of %7A7 "rovides that the &andiganbayan in the e=ercise of this "rimary jurisdiction may ta>e over at any stage from any investigatory agency of the government the investigation of such cases# /mbudsman cases involving criminal offenses may be subdivided into two classes) %) those cogni-able by the &andiganbayan 5under the direct control of the /mbudsman) and $) those falling under the jurisdiction of regular courts 5the control and su"ervision by the ombudsman is only in /mbudsman cases < com"laints filed in or ta>en cogni-ance of by the /ffice of the /mbudsman charging any "ublic officer or em"loyee)# The "ower to investigate or conduct "reliminary investigation on any /mbudsman case may be e=ercised by an investigator or "rosecutor of the /ffice of the /mbudsman or by any Provincial or 3ity Prosecutor in their regular ca"acity or as de"uti-ed /mbudsman "rosecutors# &ection %D of the /mbudsman Act state that the /mbudsman has the "ower to investigate and "rosecute any illegal act or omission of any "ublic official however as held in the case of Aguinaldo vs# 0omagas this authority is not e=clusive authority but rather a shared or concurrent authority in res"ect of offense charged# This means that the /mbudsman has no e=clusive jurisdiction to investigate offenses committed by "ublic officers or em"loyees for such "ower is concurrent with other investigating agencies such as "rovincial and state "rosecutors# 'ut in its e=ercise of its "rimary jurisdiction over cases cogni-able by the &andiganbayan the /mbudsman may ta>e over at any stage the investigating of such cases# In other words 0/J is not "recluded from conducting any investigation of cases involving "ublic officers involving violations of "enal laws but if the case falls under the e=clusive jurisdiction

of the &andiganbayan then res"ondent /mbudsman may in the e=ercise of its "rimary jurisdiction ta>e over at any stage# The "etition was dismissed# SECTION # LAUREL VS& DISIERTO ,#R# %8DCEA %$ A"ril $JJ$

!acts) The 1ational 3entennial 3ommission was constituted for the "re"aration of the 1ational 3entennial 3elebration in %77A with former vice9"resident &alvador Laurel as 3hair"erson# &ometime on August %77A &enator 3oseteng delivered a s"eech in the &enate denouncing alleged anomalies in the construction and o"eration of the centennial e="osition "roject# +"on motion of &enator 0rilon the s"eech was referred to the 3ommittee on Accountability of Public /fficer# In %777 "resident 4strada formed an ad hoc inde"endent citi-ens committee to investigate al the facts and circumstances surrounding the Phili""ine 3entennial "rojects including its com"onent activities to be headed by former &enator Rene saguisag# The &aguisag 3ommittee recommended the further investigation by the /mbudsman and indictment in "ro"er cases of 133 chair &alvador laurel# Petitioner in this "resent case assails the jurisdiction of the /mbudsman on the ground that he is not a "ublic officer because the 133 was not a "ublic office# ?e contends that he is not a "ublic officer as defined under the anti9graft and corru"t "ractices act# Issue) @I1 the "etitioner is a "ublic official and @I1 the /mbudsman has jurisdiction over the case# 0ecision) The "ower to investigate and "rosecute by the /mbudsman "ertains to any act or omission of any "ublic officer or em"loyee when such an act or omission a""ears to be illegal unjust im"ro"er or inefficient# The law does not ma>e any distinction between cases cogni-able by the &andiganbayan and those cogni-able by regular courts# Thus the clause Nany illegal act or omission of any "ublic official is broad enough to embrace any crime committed by a "ublic officer or em"loyee# @hether or not the /mbudsman has jurisdiction over this case would de"end on whether or not 133 is a "ublic office and consequently its chairman a "ublic official# It was held by the court that 133 "erforms e=ecutive functions and was "recisely created to e=ecute the law moreover it has a role in the country;s economic develo"ment es"ecially the in the central Lu-on# Thus 133 "erforms sovereign functions which is one of the characteristics of a "ublic office# ?aving "erformed sovereign functions it is therefore a "ublic office and the "etitioner a "ublic officer# The fact that "etitioner did not receive any com"ensation is of little consequence the office of the "etitioner may be characteri-ed then as an honorary office as o""osed to lucrative one or an office of "rofit but it is "ublic office nonetheless# The office of the ombudsman has jurisdiction over the case# Petition was dismissed

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 64 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

SECTION 4

AIARCON VS& SANDIGAN5A.AN ,R 1o# %%EJCC $E !ebruary %776

/mbudsman# /mbudsman Investigator set the fact9finding investigation of the matter and issued a &ub"oena 0uces Tecum to the 3hief of the 'IR Personnel 0ivision# Petitioner see>s the declaration of nullity of &ections %D and %6 of the /mbudsman Act 5R#A# 1o# E66J) insofar as it em"owers the /mbudsman to conduct "reliminary investigations and to directly underta>e criminal "rosecutions# Issue) @I1 the "ower of the /mbudsman to conduct "reliminary investigations is a violation of the constitution# 0ecision) 1o# The the /mbudsman# under the %7A6 3onstitution "articularly under "aragra"h A# &ection %C Article BI#7 may be validly em"owered with "rosecutorial functions by the legislature and this the latter did when it "assed R#A# 1o# EE6J which gave the /mbudsman among 7 others the "ower to investigate and "rosecute individuals on matters andIor com"laints referred or filed before it# (oreover the /ffice of the /mbudsman is a distinct constitutional body whose duties and functions are "rovided for by the 3onstitution itself# 3onsidering that the "ower of the /mbudsman to investigate and "rosecute criminal cases emanates as it does from the 3onstitution itself "articularly under "aragra"h A &ection %C Article BI which em"owers the /mbudsman to Re=ercise such other "owers or "erform such other functions or dutiesR as 3ongress may "rescribe through legislation it cannot be argued that such "ower or the e=ercise thereof is unconstitutional or violative of the "rinci"le of se"aration of "owers enshrined in the 3onstitution# The case was dismissed# A'ti2l! %II, National E2ono89 an" )at'i8on9 S!2tion 2 Ali!nation o* natu'al '!sou'2!s SANTA ROSA 0INING CO& VS& LEIDO> /R& 156 SCRA 1 1<$#

!acts) Petitioner A-arcon in his ca"acity as administrator of "ro"erties de"osited by the 'ureau of Internal Revenue was accused of malversation of "ublic funds for allowing Jaime Acla his subcontractor to ta>e "ossession of the "ro"erties owned by the latter which was sei-ed due to his ta= liabilities# Petitioner alleges that he was not a "ublic officer hence he should not have been charged with malversation of "ublic funds# ?e also contends that the &andiganbayan has no jurisdiction over the crimes committed solely by "rivate individuals# A-arcon "oints out that he cannot be considered as a "ublic because there is no "rovision in the 1ational Internal revenue 3ode which authori-es the 'ureau of Internal revenue to a""oint him as one# Issue) @I1 the &andiganbayan have jurisdiction over a "rivate individual who is charged with malversation of "ublic funds as a "rinci"al after the said individual had been designated by the 'IR as a custodian of the distrained "ro"erty# 0ecision) The court held that in accordance with &ection 8 of P0 1o#%EJE the &andiganbayan can only e=ercise jurisdiction over a "rivate individual when the com"laint charges the "rivate individual either as a co9"rinci"al accom"lice or accessory of a "ublic officer or em"loyee who has been charged with a crime within its jurisdiction# A-arcon also cannot be considered a "ublic officer for Article $JC of the RP3 defines "ublic officers as) %) one who is ta>ing "art in the "erformance of "ublic functions in the government and $) that his authority to ta>e "art in the "erformance of "ublic functions or to "erform "ublic duties must be by direct "rovision of the law by "o"ular election or by a""ointment by com"etent authority# The "etitioner;s designation by the 'IR as a custodian of the "ro"erties does not ma>e him a "ublic officer# 3onsequently the &andiganbayan had no jurisdiction over the controversy and therefore its decisions are null and void#

CA0ANAG VS& GUERRERO ,R1 %$%J%6 !ebruary %6 %776

!acts) &ometime in %77C the Professional Regulations 3ommission 5PR3) issued the Table of Results of those who failed the (ay %77C 3ertified Public Accountant 53PA) Licensure 4=aminations where "etitioner /livia '# 3amanag was listed as having failed with a general average of DJ#JJU# The following year an anonymous letter was sent to PR3 3hairman ?ermogenes P# Pobre Qclaiming that certain 'IR em"loyees allegedly "assed the 3PA Licensure 4=ams under anomalous circumstances and 3hairman Pobre immediately referred the situation to the

Fa2ts, The "etitioner &anta Rosa (ining 3om"any Inc# is assailing the constitutionality of Presidential decree 1o %$%8 and see>s to enjoin the res"ondent "ublic officials from enforcing# Petitioner contends that it is a holder of fifty mining claims situate in 3amarines 1orte acquired under the "rovisions of Act if the +& 3ongress of %7J$ or the Phili""ine 'ill# The contested law "rovided that all mining claims located under the "rovisions of the Phili""ine bill should file a mining lease a""lication within % year from the a""roval of the decree which the "etitioners com"lied with under "rotest# It was the contention of the res"ondents that the "etition should fail since "etitioners failed to e=haust administrative remedies before filing the "etition in court citing the "ending a""eal filed with the /ffice of the President# Issu!, @I1 the "etitioners are legitimate owners of the mining claims and @I1 the P0 %$%8 is valid#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 65 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

D!2ision, The court held that whatever right that was vested over the mining claims before P0 %$%8 were merely "ossessory right which can be lost through abandonment or forfeiture or may be revo>ed for valid legal grounds# (oreover the "etitioner was wrong in citing ,old ,ree> (ining 3or" vs# Rodrigue- because the issue in this case was the right to a "atent over a mining claim after com"liance with all the legal requirements for a "atent# &uch in not the issue in the "resent case# Thus the "etitioners cannot claim ownershi" over the mining claims# P0 %$%8 is constitutional because it is a valid e=ercise of the sovereign "ower of the state as owner over lands of the "ublic domain of which the "etitioner;s mining claim are still form a "art and over the "atrimony of the nation of which mineral de"osits are a valuable asset# (ere location does not mean absolute ownershi" over the affected land or the mining claim# It merely segregates the located land or area from the "ublic domain by barring other would9be locators from locating themselves in the area# The "etition was dismissed# SAN 0IGUEL COR)ORATION VS& COURT OF A))EALS 1$5 SCRA #22 F1<<0G

G&R& No& <$++2 16 /anua'9 1<<5

Fa2ts, The "etitioners are assailing the validity of Administrative /rder 1os D6 and A$ which were issued by the 0e"artment of 4nvironment and 1atural Resources in order to im"lement the legislative acts of the "resident which regards the e="loration develo"ment and utili-ation of minerals# Administrative /rder 1o# D6 "rovides that all e=isting mining leases which were granted after the effectivity of the %7A6 constitution e=ce"t small scale mining leases shall be converted into "roduction9sharing agreements within one year from the effectivity of the (ining ,uidelines# A/ 1o# A$ on the other hand "rovides that entities listed there 5mining com"anies) must within two years from the effectivity of the 041R A/s submit a letter of intent and mineral Production &haring Agreement# Petitioners contend that these A/s im"air the contracts "reviously entered into for it "re9terminates e=isting mining leases# Issu!) @I1 the said orders are valid# D!2ision) A/ D6 and A$ are valid# +"on the effectivity of the %7A6 constitution the state assumed a more dynamic role in the utili-ation e="loration and develo"ment of the natural resources# The constitution e="ressly "rovided that utiliation may be underta>en by means of direct act of the state or it may o"t to enter into co9"roduction joint venture or "roduction sharing agreements# The A/ did not "re9terminate e=isting mining leases in general# !or one it does not a""ly retroactively before the effectivity of the %7A6 constitution but rather only to all e=isting mining leases or agreements which were granted after the effectivity of the %7A6 constitution# It is a well settled doctrine that mining leases and agreements granted by the state are subject to alteration through reasonable e=ercise of "ower of the state# The orders intended to secure the "aramount interest of the "ublic their growth and welfare# The "etition was dismissed# SECTION + Classi*i2ation o* lan"s DIRECTOR OF LANDS VS& /UDGE A4UINO G&R& +16$$ 1# DECE05ER 1<<0

Fa2ts, &an (iguel 3or"oration see>s the reversal of the 3ourt of A""eals decision denying its a""lication for registration of a "arcel of land since it was not able to show entitlement to the said land which was "urchased by the com"any from a certain &everino Pere-# &olicitor ,eneral o""osed the a""lication contending that &(3;s claim of ownershi" in fee sim"le cannot be granted# &everino Pere- contest ownershi" of the land on the basis of ta= declarations and &"anish title which he could not avail of because the E9month "eriod from !ebruary %76E that was "rescribed by P0 A7$ has already ela"sed# (oreover the land is "art of "ublic domain thus &(3 as a "rivate cor"oration is disqualified from owning it as "rovide by the constitution# Issu!, @I1 &everino Pere- owns the land and thereby has the right to sell it to &(3 D!2ision, The court held that o"en e=clusive and undis"uted "ossession of alienable "ublic land for the "eriod "rescribed by the law which in this case is CJ years creates a legal fiction whereby the land u"on com"letion of the requirement i"so jure ceases to be "ublic land# The ta= declarations were insufficient to "rove ownershi" or right of "ossession of the land# It only comes as strong evidence if there is actual "ossession which was not been "roven by the "redecessor9in9trust# The decisions of the 3A were affirmed#

"tili#ation of natural resources 0INERS ASSOCIATION 6s& FACTORAN /'&

Fa2ts, Petitioner contends that the limestone rich land of 'ucay Abra which was "urchased by Abra Industrial 3or"oration is within the 3entral 3ordiallera !orest reserve# The director of lands further "oints out that the land being denuded does not affect its classification# (oreover while the land could be classifies as mineral land under the 'ureau of mines the "rocess of e=clusion from the 3ordillera forest reserve had not yet been underta>en thus the said land was still "art of the forest -one which was inalienable under the constitution#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 66 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

Issue) @I1 the lower court was wrong in granting the a""lication fore registration of the "arcels of land not withstanding its finding that they were within the forest -one# 0ecision) *es# The lower court erred# The district forester;s failure to object the e=clusion of the area sought to be registered from the forest reserve is not a justification for registration (oreover the "ower to e=clude the area from the forest -one belongs to the President of the Phili""ines u"on recommendation of the &ecretary of Agriculture and 1atural resource and not the district !orester or even the 0irector of !orestry# The rule in 0irector of !orestry vs (uno- which "rovide that the forest lands or forest reserves are inca"able of "rivate a""ro"riation and "ossession# This ruling is "remised on the regalian doctrine# Pursuant to the constitution a >ind must first be released from its classification as forest land in accordance with the certification of the 0irector of !orestry# 3lassification of lands is an e=clusive "rerogative of the e=ecutive de"artment# (oreover a "ositive act of the government is needed to declassify a forest land into alienate or dis"osable# The fact that the land is denuded does not affect its classification# The decision was reversed and set aside# RE)U5LIC VS& COURT OF A))EALS 160 SCRA 22$ F1<$$G

owners however will be com"ensated "ursuant to the (ining Laws# 'enguet and Ato> have e=clusive rights to the "ro"erty in question by virtue of their res"ective mining claims# The land could not have been transferred to the "rivate res"ondents by virtue of "rescri"tion nor could it be used simultaneously by them and the mining com"anies# The decision of the trial court was reinstated#

Ri(:t o* 2o'3o'ation to o n lan"s DIRECTOR OF LANDS VS& INTER0EDIATE COURT OF A))EALS 146 SCRA 50< F1<$6G

Fa2ts, The 0irector of Lands filed a "etition questioning the judgment of the Intermediate A""ellate 3ourt which ordered the registration in favor of Acme Plywood and 2eneer 3o# of the five "arcels of land acquired by it from (ariano and Acer Infiel# The "etitioner contends that the registration "roceeding should be governed by the %76C constitution which "rovides that the "rivate cor"oration may not lease more than %JJJ hectares of land# This "rovision is not found in the %7CD constitution which was in force in %7E$ when Acme "urchased the land from the Infiels# Issu!, @#1 the cor"oration may acquire the whole "arcel of land considering that it is beyond the %JJJ limit "rovided by the new constitution# @I1 the Acme validly acquired the land# D!2ision) The court held that the com"any may acquire the whole "arcel of land 58A% C7J sq meters) because the validity of the acquisition is determined as of the time the land was acquired# The limit "rovided in the %76C constitution is found in the %7CD constitution and since it is the constitution in force at the time of acquisition that which will be followed the acquisition is valid# The Infiels are not disqualified from acquiring and owning the said land because "ursuant to the Public Land Act national cultural minorities who "ossessed and occu"ied the same for more than CJ years are given the right to e=ercise ownershi" over said lands# Thus they can sell it to a cor"oration li>e Acme# The rule is that alienable "ublic land held by a "ossessor "ersonally through his "redecessors in interest o"enly continuously and e=clusively for the "rescribed "eriod of time 5CJ years) is converted to "rivate "ro"erty by mere la"se or com"letion of said "eriod# The acquisition of Acme then was valid# The court ruled in favor of the res"ondents#

!acts) Jose de la Rosa and his children a""lied for registration of a "arcel of land in the 'enguet "rovince# The a""lication was o""osed by the 'enguet 3onsolidated Inc 5as to Lots %9D) Ato> 3or"oration 5as to Lots E97) and the Re"ublic of the Phili""ines as to lots %97# In su""ort of the a""lications the original owners who sold the lots to 0e la rosa testified that they acquired the lots by virtue of "rescri"tion# 'enguet and Ato> on the other hand contends that Lots %9D and E97 res"ectively were sold to them by their successors in interest sometime in %7C8 and %7J7# The 'ureau of !orestry inter"osed its objection on the ground that Lots %97 was covered by the 3entral 3ordillera !orest Reserve under P0 1o# $%6# According to 'enguet and Ato> the claims were "erfected "rior to the %7CD constitution thus the "ro"erties were already considered "rivate and thus the successors in interest can transfer the same to the com"anies# The court of a""eals ruled in favor of de la Rosa saying that there is no conflict of interest between the owners of the surface rights and the owners of the sub9surface rights# +nder such ruling the surface was classified as agricultural while the land beneath as mineral# Issue) @I1 the com"anies have e=clusive rights to the "ro"erty in question# @I1 the 3A was correct in their contention# 0ecision) The court held that the 3A was incorrect by stating that the surface can be agricultural land while the subsurface mineral because classification must be categorical# The land must either be agricultural or mineral# In the instant case it can be observed that the land which was originally classified as forest land ceased to be so and became mineral once the mining claims were "erfected# /nce minerals are discovered in the land whatever its use to which it is being devoted such use may be discontinued by the state to enable it to e=tract the mineral therein# The

SECTION # -ALILI VS& CA G&R&11+5+< 12 0a'2: 1<<$

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 6# o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

!acts) The "etitioners are assailing the constitutionality and validity of the two conveyances between ?elen de ,u-man and 0avid Rey ,u-man 5?elen;s son) and between 0avid and 4miliano 3ataniag# ?elen is an American citi-en who inherited real "ro"erties from her deceased husband &imeon de ,u-man also an American citi-en# &ometime on %7A7 ?elen e=ecuted a quitclaim transferring all her "ro"erties two of which she inherited from &imeon to her son# 0avid later on sold the "ro"erties in 'ulacan to a certain 4milio 3ataniag# It is the contention of the "etitioners that the conveyance from ?elen to 0avid both American citi-ens was illegal because it was a violation of &ection 6 article %$ of the constitution thus the same should be declared null and void# 5note) the "etitioners are claiming that they have right of redem"tion over the land sold by 0avid that is why they are contending the validity of he conveyance# Art %E$% of the civil code "rovides that owners of adjoining land shall have right of redem"tion when a "iece of rural land is alienated# In order for the "etitioners to be able to e=ercise right of redem"tion the contested land must be rural land# The trial court and 3A declared the land as urban thus the "etitioners cannot invo>e right of redem"tion# These issues however are not im"ortant in our discussion) Issue) @I1 the conveyance is illegal thus should be declared null and void# 0ecision) The court held that the sale of the subject land to 4miliano 3ataniag a !ili"ino citi-en renders moot any question on the constitutionality of the "rior transfer made by ?elen to 0avid# It is true that ?elen;s deed of quitclaim 5which transferred the "ro"erty to 0avid) collided with the constitution s"ecifically &ection 6 of Art BII# The court cited the case of Griven>o vs# Register of deeds which discussed the issue as to who are qualified to own "ublic and "rivate lands in the Phili""ines# It was held in that case that alienation of agricultural lands is limited to !ili"ino citi-ens# &ection D 5now section 6) of Article BII closes the only remaining avenue through which agricultural resources may lea> into alien hands because it would be futile to "rohibit the alienation of "ublic agricultural lands to aliens if after all they may be freely alienated u"on becoming "rivate agricultural lands in the hands of !ili"ino citi-ens# The ca"acity to acquire "ublic lands is made de"endent u"on the ca"acity to acquire or hold lands of "ublic domain# Private land may be transferred only to individuals qualified to acquire lands of the "ublic domain 5!ili"ino individuals and cor"orations with at least EJU of the ca"ital owned by !ili"ino citi-ens)# 3onsequently the only way aliens can acquire "rivate lands or a land of the "ublic domain is through legal succession# Although the transfer from ?elen to 0avid is illegal transferring the land to a citi-en of the Phili""ines cured the flaw of the original transaction# In such cases title of the transferee will be rendered valid# Through this action the object of the constitution < which is to >ee" our land in !ili"ino handsK will be served# The "etition was denied# FRENIEL VS& CATITO ,#R# 1o# %8C7DA %% July $JJC

since %7A% they were already legally se"arated# &ometime in %7AC !ren-el met 4derlina in Australia# The latter was also married to a ,erman national but she concealed this fact from !ren-el# The two had an amorous relationshi" and the !ren-el "ersuaded 4derlina to go bac> to the Phili""ines where they can engage in a business# +"on going bac> to the Phili""ines !ren-el bought a "ro"erty under the name of 4derlina# ?e also hel"ed the girl set u" a "arlor business# &ometime in %7A8 !ren-el discovered 4derlina;s marriage but the latter assured the former that she will be getting a divorce soon# 0uring this time !ren-el continued buying "ro"erties under 4derlina;s name thin>ing that said "ro"erties would be conjugal anyway when they get married# +nfortunately 4derlina;s divorce was o""osed by her husband twice# 'y %7AD !ren-el and 4derlina;s relationshi" started deteriorating until they se"arated that same year# !ren-el demanded the return of all the amounts and "ro"erties 4derlina acquired from him# &hortly thereafter !ren-el filed a com"laint in the RT3 contending that during the "eriod of their common9law relationshi" he acquired solely through his own efforts the "ersonal "ro"erties# Issu!, @I1 the "ro"erties should be returned to !ren-el# D!2ision, The court ruled that 4derlina is the "urchaser of the contested "ro"erties and even if !ren-el was the buyer he has no cause of action against the former because he was an alien thus disqualified from acquiring lands in the Phili""ines# (oreover a""lying "ari delicto the "etitioner was "recluded from recovering the "ro"erties from the res"ondent since he himself is still married to his former !ili"ina wife# &ection %8 5now &ection 6) of Article BI2 5now BII) of the %76C constitution "rovides that lands of "ublic domain which include "rivate lands may be transferred or conveyed only to individuals or entities qualified to acquire or hold "rivate lands or lands of "ublic domain# Aliens whether individual or cor"orations are disqualified from acquiring lands# 4ven if the "etitioner is the real vendee the transactions are a violation of the 3onstitution hence null and void and "roduce no legal effect# /ne who loses his money or "ro"erty by >nowingly engaging in a contract or transaction which involves his own moral tur"itude may not maintain an action for his losses# This rule is e="ressed in the ma=ims 4B 0/L/ /RIT+R A3TI/1 and I1 PARI 04LI3T/ P/TI/R 4&T 3/10ITI/ 04!410I&# The sale is illegal "er se and to allow the "etitioner to recover the "ro"erties would be subversive of "ublic "olicy# The "etition was dismissed#

SECTION 10 0ANILA )RINCE -OTEL VS& GSIS ,#R# 1o# %$$%DE JC !ebruary %776

Fa2ts, !ren-el an Australian citi-en of ,erman descent filed a com"laint against the res"onded 4derlina 3atito a fili"ina# !ren-el was married to another !ili"ina but

!acts) Petitioner invo>es the !ili"ino !irst Policy enshrined in the %7A6 constitution in its bid to acquire D%U of the share of the (anila ?otel 3or"oration 5(?3)

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 6$ o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

formerly owned by the ,&I&# The said "olicy "rovides that the &tate shall give "reference to qualified !ili"inos in the grant of rights "rivileges and concessions covering the national economy and "atrimony 5&ection %J of Article BII)# The issue arose when ,&I& decided to sell its (?3 shares through "ublic bidding# In a close bidding Renong 'erhad a (alaysian firm "laced a bid higher than the "etitioner# Pending the declaration of Renong 'erhad as the winning bidder the "etitioner matched the bid "rice at P?" 88#JJ "er share which was tendered by the (alaysian com"any# (anila Prince then "etitioned to the court to enjoin the res"ondents from "erfecting and consummating the sale to the (alaysian firm contending that (anila hotel is "art of national "atrimony thus !ili"inos should be given "reference during the bid# Res"ondents on the other maintain that &ection %J is not a""licable based on the following grounds) %# &ection %J of Art BII of the constitution is not a self9e=ecuting "rovision and requires an im"lementing legislation $# granting that the "rovision is self9e=ecuting manila hotel does not fall under the term Nnational "atrimony; which only refers to lands of "ublic domain and natural resources C# granting manila hotel is "art of the national "atrimony the "rovision invo>ed is still ina""licable since what is being sold is only the shares not the hotel building or the land where it stands# 8# ,&I& rules "rovide that qualified bidders can only match the highest bid if the former cannot be awarded the bloc> of shares Issue) @I1 the (anila Prince ?otel should be given "reference in acquiring the D%U share of (?3# 0ecision) The court held that the argument of the res"ondent that &ection %J is not self9e=ecuting is flawed# &ection %J is a mandatory and "ositive command which is com"lete in itself and needs no further guidelines or im"lementing rules for its enforcement# @hen the constitution mandates that in granting of rights and "rivileges and concessions covering national economy and "atrimony the state shall give "reference to qualified !ili"inos it means that qualified !ili"inos shall be "referred# Patrimony "ertains to heritage and refers not only to natural resources of the Phili""ines# (anila hotel is a living testimonial of Phili""ine heritage for more than A decades it has bore witness to the trium"hs and failures of the !ili"inos# 3onsequently res"ondent;s claim cannot be sustained# The !ili"ino !irst "olicy must mean that the state shall give "reference to qualified !ili"inos but this "rovision does not mandate the "am"ering and "referential treatment of incom"etent !ili"ino citi-ens or cor"orations# 1onetheless while the !ili"ino first "olicy bestows "reference on qualified !ili"inos the mere tending of highest bid is not an assurance that the highest bidder will be declared the winning bidder# &ince the "etitioner already matched the bid "rice tendered by the (alaysian firm there is no reason why it should not be declared the winning bidder# The res"ondent was ordered to acce"t the matching bid of the "etitioner# 0issenting /"inion) Puno J#

&ection %J is "ro9!ili"ino but it is not anti alien for it does not absolutely bar aliens in the grant of rights "rivileges and concession covering national "atrimony# In the absence of qualified !ili"inos the state is not "rohibited from granting these rights to aliens if the act will "romote the welfare of the nation# The right of "reference of the "etitioner only arises if it tied the bid of Renong 'erhad during the bid# The "etitioner has no right to match the bid after the bidding closed because doing so would be unfair

TANADA VS& ANGARA ,#R# 1o# %%A$7D J$ (ay %776

!acts) Res"ondent Ri-alino 1avarro then secretary of 0TI re"resenting the government of RP signed the final act embodying results of the +ruguay Round of (ultilateral Trade 1egotiations# 'y signing the said act the Phili""ines agreed to submit to the @T/ agreement# The "etitioners assail the @T/ agreement for violating the mandate of the %7A6 3onstitution to develo" a self9reliant and inde"endent national economy effectively controlled by !ili"inos and to give "reference to qualified !ili"inos to "romote the "referential use of !ili"ino labor domestic materials and locally "roduced goods# They also "ray for the nullification of said agreement because %) the @T/ requires the Phili""ines to "lace nationals and "roducts of member9countries on the same footing as !ili"inos and local "roducts Ft:! national t'!at8!nt an" 3a'it9 3'o6isions in t:! WTO A('!!8!ntG and $) that the @T/ intrudes limits and im"airs the constitutional "owers of both congress and the su"reme court# Issues) %# @I1 the "rovision of the Agreement 4stablishing the @T/ contravene the "rovisions of the 3onstitution "articularly &ection %J and %$ Article BII of the %7A6 constitution# 5There are 6 issues in this case only the C rd issue is useful in our discussion) $# @I1 the senate may ratify the Phili""ine concurrence in the @T/ 0ecision) &ection %J and %$ of Article BII should be read and understood in relation to the other sections of the said article s"ecifically &ections % and %C# &ection %C "rovides that the state shall "ursue a trade "olicy that serves the general welfare and utili-es all forms and arrangements of e=change on the basis of equality and reci"rocity# Through this section the 3onstitution ta>es into account the realities of the outside world# The constitution indeed mandates a bias in favor of !ili"inos 5(anila Prince ?otel vs# ,&I&) but it also recogni-es the need for business e=change with the rest of the world on the cases of equality and reci"rocity# In other words the constitution did not intend to "ursue an isolationist "olicy for it does not shut out foreign investments goods and services in the develo"ment of the Phili""ine economy# @hat the constitution frowns u"on are unfair com"etition and trade "ractices#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! 6< o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

The constitutional "olicy of a self reliant and inde"endent national economy does not rule out the entry of foreign investments goods and services# (oreover the constitution encourages industries that are Lcom"etitive in both domestic and foreign mar>etsM# ,iven a free trade environment es"oused by the @T/ !ili"ino entre"reneurs will be able to demonstrate ca"acity to grow# Loo>ing at the constitution it can be surmised that there are enough balancing "rovisions in the fundamental law that would allow the senate to ratify the Phili""ine concurrence in the @T/ agreement 5&ection % and %C)# The ratification then was constitutional# Petitions were dismissed# ILOILO ICE AND COLD STORAGE CO0)AN. VS& )U5LIC UTILIT. 5OARD ,#R# 1o# %7AD6 J$ (arch %7$C

a)

b)

it is contem"lated in the constitution that in the elections wherein the draft constitution is submitted for ratification only qualified citi-ens are "ermitted to vote whereas in 3iti-en;s Assemblies even %D year olds can vote# 4lections "lebiscites contem"lated in the constitution have "rovisions for secrecy citi-en;s assemblies have none#

Issu!s, @I1 P0 6C and AE and consequently the ratification of the constitution is valid# D!2ision, 'efore the court decided on this case P0 %%J$ was issued by President (arcos announcing that the !ili"ino "eo"le has ratified the constitution "ro"osed by the %76% constitutional convention# 0ITRA /R& VS& CO0ELEC %J8 &3RA D7 5A"ril 8 %7A%)

!acts) The "etitioner is a cor"oration organi-ed under the Phili""ine law# &ometime in %7$% the secretary of Public utility investigated the o"eration of the ice "lants in Iloilo and he re"orted that the "etitioner should be considered a "ublic utility# Thereafter the Public +tility 'oard issued a decision holding the "etitioner a "ublic utility and as such subject to the control and jurisdiction of the Public +tility 3ommissioner# Petitioner rejected said decision# Issue) @I1 the "etitioner is a "ublic utility# 0ecision) A Public utility is a utility cor"oration which renders service to the general "ubic# Its essential feature is that its service is not confined to "rivileged individuals but is o"en to an indefinite "ublic# The "ublic or "rivate character of a utility does not de"end on the number of "ersons who avail of its services but on whether or not it is o"en to serve all members of the "ublic who may require it# 4vidence shows that the "etitioner is o"erating a small ice "lant and that there was no attem"t made to su""ly the needs of all who may a""ly to e="and the "lant# (oreover sales have been made to selected customers only# The fact that the "etitioner has no com"etitor in the field does not ma>e it a "ublic utility# Iloilo ice is not a "ublic utility and should not submit to the jurisdiction of the board ARTICLE 1# )LANAS 6s& CO0ELEC 4< SCRA 105 F1<#+G

!acts) The "etitioners assail the ratification of the %76C constitution contending that it is not in force an effect believing that in the event the said constitution is rejected the %7CD constitution which according to "etitioners was merely sus"ended by the establishment of (artial Law could be once more o"erative# Issue) @I1 the ratification of the %76C constitution is unconstitutional 5based on the %7CD constitution) 0ecision) The court dismissed the case basing its decision in the ruling in Javellana vs# 4=ecutive &ecretary# In said case the new constitution was held to be in force and effect by si= justices while four dissented from the majority view# &ince the case was dismissed the validity of the ratification of the constitution was u"held one of the basic "ostulates being the "resum"tion of validity# (oreover the o"inion of then 3hief Justice Roberto 3once"cion while in dissent ac>nowledged that even without a valid ratification a new constitution could come into effect by the acquiesce of the "eo"le to whom sovereignty resides# 'esides the referendum in %76C there were other instances when the "eo"le went to "olls to show their acquiesce in the constitution namely during the %76E amendments and two elections held under the "resent constitution# There is no question that the %76C constitution is in force and effect thus the "resent case was dismissed# &+((AR* /! T?4 J+&TI34&; /PI1I/1 /1 T?4 JA24LLA1A vs# 4B43+TI24 &43R4TAR* 3A&4 5@?I3? R4&/L240 T?4 RATI!I3ATI/1 I&&+4) /riginally there where a total of seven Justices who o"ined that the requirements of the %7CD constitution for a valid ratification namely) a) Ratification of amendments must be held in an election conducted under the election law b) &u"ervised by the 3/(L43 c) @here only franchised voters ta>e "art

Fa2ts, Petitioner "rays for the annulment of P0 6C in so far as it calls for a "lebiscite for the ratification or rejection of the "ro"osed constitution and Presidential 0ecree 1o# AE which organi-ed the 3iti-en;s Assemblies to be consulted on certain "ublic questions on the ground that these decrees are either void or no in effect# It is the contention of the "etitioner that P0 6C has no effect because the "ower to call a "lebiscite is lodged e=clusively in congress while calling for 3iti-en;s Assemblies is illegal since it contravenes with Article B2 of the %7CD constitution on the following grounds)

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! #0 o* #1

Constitutional La

Not!s an" Cas!s

have not been followed# A# 3hief Justice 3once"tion the amendatory "rocess "rovided in the %76C constitution was not followed because it was "recisely "rovided that only qualified coed under Article 2 of the %7CD constitution are allowed to "artici"ate in the "lebiscite '# (a>alintal and 3astro the citi-ens; assemblies were not limited to qualified let alone registered voters but included all citi-ens from the age of %D 1o official ballets were used in the voting for it was done only by acclamation or show of hands There was no secrecy as one of the essential features of election "rocess 1o set of rules were observed 3/(4L43 did no "art in the elections thus the %7CD constitutional requirements were not followed# 3# Faldivar 5same as above) 0# !ernando 5same as above) 4# Teehan>ee

two if the essential requisites for ratification through election namely the "artici"ation of enfranchised "erson only and administration of the 3/(4L43 are missing thus there is an irregularity in the ratification#

!# 'arredo 9 The referendum falls short of the requirements "rovided by the %7CD constitution but the result of the referendum 5votes of the "eo"le) is sufficient basis for declaring that the 1ew 3onstitution has been ratified# Those who originally dissented 54sguerra (a>aisar and Antonio) believed that L"eo"le aloneM should determine whether the constitution was ratified or not# &ince the majority of the "eo"le ratified the constitution it is should be considered in force# (oreover since there is no "rovision on LrevisionM in the %7CD constitution the %76% constitutional convention was called by the direct authority of the "eo"le and not by the authority of the constitution# ?owever C justices voted to dismiss the case 5(a>alintal 3astro 'arredo) including the dissenters# They all believed that whether or not the requirements in the %7CD constitution were com"lied with is irrelevant in the face of the acce"tance of the constitution by the "eo"le#

V!na V& V!'(a

)a(! #1 o* #1