DRAFT*

Political Law Review Dean Eduardo Sanson

First Semester, 2017-2018 Judge Edilwasif Baddiri

Required Textbook

Bernas S.J., Fr. Joaquin (2011) The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A Comprehensive
Reviewer, Manila: Rex Book Store, Inc.
Bernas S.J., Fr. Joaquin (2003) The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A
Commentary, Manila: Rex Book Store, Inc.
Nachura, Antonio (2015) Outline Reviewer in Political Law, Quezon City: VJ Graphil Arts,
Inc.

Classroom Policies

Students are expected to have read the assigned materials for the class sessions and will be
called for recitation.

University rules governing absences are observed.

Cell phones and other electronic devices must be kept in silent mode. Students must refrain
from using these devices during classroom sessions.

Plagiarism and cheating are grave offenses of intellectual dishonesty and are punishable by
university rules.

Consultation and discussion is available upon request of the student. Email me:
ebaddiri@gmail.com

1
INTRODUCTION

Political Law
People v. Perfecto, 43 PHIL 887
Macariola v. Asuncion, AM No. 133-J, May 31 1982

Scope of Political Law

Constitutional Law
Administrative Law
Public Corporations/Local Government Code
Law on Public Officers
Election Laws

A. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1

Constitution
Definition
Classification
Qualities of a Good Written Constitution

Phillipine Constitution
Essential Parts
Interpretation/Construction
Francisco v. House of Representatives GR No. 160261, Nov. 10, 2003
Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary GR No. 83896, Feb 22, 1991
(Self Executing v. Non Self Executing Provisions)
Gamboa v. Teves, GR No. 176579, June 28, 2011
Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, GR No. 122156, Feb 3, 1992
Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy
Manila Prince Hotel

Constitutional History
Malolos Constitution
Treaty of Paris, December 10, 1898
McKinleys Instructions, April 7, 1900
Spooner Amendment, March 2, 1901
Philippine Bill, July 1, 1902
Philippine Autonomy Act, August 29, 1916
Philippine Independence Act (Tydings-McDuffie Act) March 24, 1934
1935 Constitution (Three Amendments)
Japanese Occupation
1973 Constitution
Provisional Freedom Constitution, Proclamation No. 3, March 25, 1986
1987 Constitution, Feb 2, 1987, De Leon v. Esguerra, Aug 31, 1987

Important Principles
Separation of Powers Principles
Principle of Checks and Balances
Principle of Comity

2
 Hierarchy of Laws
Power of Judicial Review
Doctrine of Operative Fact
Political Questions Doctrine
Inherent Powers of Government
Immunity from Suit
Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency
Non-Delegation of Power
Power of Control and Supervision

Preamble

Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano, re: Holding of Religious Rituals at the Halls of Justice
Building in Quezon City, AM No. 10-4-19-SC, March 7, 2017
(Include Dissenting Opinion of Justice Leonen)

Article I: The National Territory

R.A. 5446 (Sabah)

PD 1596, June 11, 1978 (Kalayaan Island Group)
Reagan v. Commissioner, 30 SCRA 968
People v. Gozo, 53 SCRA 476
R.A. 9522, The New Baselines Law of 2009
Magallona v. Ermita, 655 SCRA 476
1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
Most Rev Pedro Arigo v. Scott Swift, GR 206510, Sept 16, 2014
The South China Sea Arbitration: Philippines v. China, July 12, 2016
The South China Sea Dispute: Philippine Sovereign Rights and Jurisdiction in the West
Philippine Sea (Justice Carpios Ebook)

Article II: Declaration of Principles and State Policies

Legal Value of Article II

Tondo Medical v. CA, 527 SCRA 746 (2007)
Bases Conversion and Development Authority v. Commission on Audit, 580 SCRA 295

Section 1. Philippines as a Democratic and Republican State

Lawyers League for a Better Philippines . Corazon Aquino, GR 73748, May 22, 1986
In re Letter of Associate Justice Puno, 210 SCRA 588
Republic v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 104768, July 21, 2003
Co Kim Cham v. Valdez Tan Keh, 75 PHIL 113 (1945)
ACCFA v. CUGCO, 30 SCRA 649 (1969)
PHHC v Court of Industrial Relations, 150 SCRA 296
Spouses Fontanilla v. Hon. Maliaman, GR Nos. 55963, February 27, 1991
Shipside Inc v. CA, GR 143377, Feb 20, 2001
PVTA v. CIR, GR L-32052, July 25, 1975
People v. Gozo, 53 SCRA 476 (1973)

3
Rosas v. Montor GR 204105, October 14, 2015
People v. Perfecto, 43 Phil 887
Vilas v. City of Manila, 229 US 345
Laurel v. Misa, 77 Phil 856

Section 2. Generally Accepted Principles of International Law

Article 2, UN Charter
Doctrine of Incorporation
Doctrine of Transformation
Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195
JBL Reyes v. Bagatsing, GR No. 65366, October 25, 1983
Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)
Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10, 2000
Lim v. Executive Secretary, GR 151445, April 11, 2002
Mijares v. Ranada, GR 139325, April 12, 2005
Shangri-La v. Developers, GR 159938, March 31, 2006
Pharmaceutical v. DOH, GR 173034, October 9, 2007
SOJ v. Lantion, GR 139465 *In the Philippines, statutes and treaties may be invalidated if
they conflict with the Constitution.
Philip Morris v. CA, GR 91332, July 16, 1993 *While international law is made part of the
law of the land, it does not imply primacy of international law over national law.
Vinuya v. ES, GR 162230
Saguisag v. ES, GR 212426
Bayan v. DND Sec. Gazmin, GR 212444

Section 3. Civilian Supremacy and AFP Role

Alih v. Castro, GR 69401, June 23, 1987
IBP v. Zamora, 338 SCRA 81 (2000)
Kulayan v. Tan, 675 SCRA 482

Section 4. Duty of Government to the People

People v. Tranquilino Lagman, GR L-45892
People v. Primitivo De Sosa, GR L-45893, July 13, 1938
PD No. 1706, The National Service Law, Aug 8, 1980

Section 5. Maintenance of Peace and Order

Section 6. Separation of Church and State

United Church of Christ in the Philippines v. Bradford United Church of Christ, 674 S 92

Section 7. Independent Foreign Policy

Lim v. Executive Secretary, GR 151445, April 11, 2002
Saguisag v. ES, GR 212426
Bayan v. DND Sec. Gazmin, GR 212444

Section 8. Freedom from Nuclear Weapons

Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10, 2000
Lim v. Executive Secretary

4
Section 9. Social Order

Section 10. Social Justice

Calalang v. Williams, 70 Phil 726

Section 11. Personal Dignity and Human Rights

Section 12. Family Life; Mother; Unborn

Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 US 390 (1922)
Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 262 US 510 (1925)
Wisconsin v. Yoder 40 LW 4476 (1972)
Ginsberg v. New York, 390 US 629 (1968)
Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014: The RH Law does not violate the right of an
unborn child as guaranteed in S12, A2. The question of when life begins is a scientific and
medical issue that should not be decided without proper hearing and evidence. The framers of
the Constitution intended conception as fertilization and protection is given upon
fertilization. Not all contraceptives are ban. Only those that kill or destroy the fertilized
ovum are prohibited. The intent of the framers was to prevent the Legislature from passing a
measure that would allow abortion. The IRR redefinition of abortifacient in S4a of the RH
Law is violative of S12, A2. S7 of the RH Law which excludes parental consent in cases
where a minor undergoing a procedure is already a parent or has had a miscarriage is anti-
family and is violative of S12, A2.
Orceo v. COMELEC, GR 190779, March 26, 2010

Section 13. Vital Role of Youth

Basco v. PAGCOR, 197 SCRA 252
Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, June 7, 2011
Section 14. Role of Women and Equality of Men and Women

Section 15. Right to Health

Imbong v. Ochoa: The RH Law does not violate S15. It does not do away with RA 4729
(Regulation of Contraceptive Drugs and Devices) and RA 5921 (Regulation of Pharmacy)
laws that prohibit the sale and distribution of contraceptives without prescription,

Section 16. Right to a Balanced and Healthful Ecology

Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792 (1993)
C&M Timber v. Alcala, GR 111088, June 13, 1997
LLDA v. CA, 231 SCRA 292 (1994) and 251 SCRA 42 (1995)
MMDA v. Residents of Manila Bay, GR No. 171947, December 18, 2008
Boracay Foundation Inc v. Province of Aklan, 674 SCRA 555
Paje v. Casino, GR 207267, Feb 3, 2015
Internation Service v. Greenpeace Southeast Asia, GR 209271 and GR 209430

Section 17. Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports
Guingona v. Carague
Philconsa v. Enriquez: S5, Art14 which provides for the highest budgetary priority to
education is merely directory.

Section 18. Labor Protection

5
JMM Promotion v. CA, GR 120095, Aug 5, 1996
PASE v. Drilon

Section 19. Self-Reliant and Independent National Economy

Garcia v. BOI, 191 SCRA 288 (1990)
Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)
Association of Philippine Coconut Dessicators v. PCA, GR 110526, Feb 10, 1998
Pharmaceuticals v. Duque, Oct 9, 2007: Free enterprise does not call for the removal of
protective regulations.

Section 20. Role of Private Sector

Marine Radio v. Reyes, 191 SCRA 205
Boracay Foundation v. Province of Aklan

Section 21. Promotion of Comprehensive Rural and Agrarian Policy

Gamboa v. Teves, June 28, 2011 Dissent of J Abad *S21 is not self-executing

Section 22. Promotion of Rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities

Section 23. Community-Based Private Organizations

Section 24. Vital Role of Communications

PLDT v. NTC, 190 SCRA 717

Section 25. Local Economy

Rodolfo Navarro v. Executive Secretary Ermita, GR 180050, April 12, 2011
Belgica v. ES, 2013 *With PDAF, a Congressman can simply bypass the local development
council and initiate project on his own. Thus, insofar as individual legislators are authorized
to intervene in purely local matters and thereby subvert genuine local autonomy, the 2013
PDAF Article and similar forms are deemed unconstitutional.

Section 26. Equal Access to Political Opportunities and Political Dynasties

Pamatong v. COMELEC, 427 SCRA 96 (2004)
Belgica v. ES *It was not demonstrated how the Pork Barrel System can propagate political
dynasties.

Section 27. Honesty and Integrity in Public Service

Section 28. Full Public Disclosure

Neri v. Senate, GR 180643, March 25, 2008
Garcia v. Teves
Briccio Pollo v. Karina Constantino-David, Oct 18, 2011
Philippine Savings Bank and Pascual Garcia III v. Senate Impeachment Court, Feb 9, 2012
In Re: Production of Court Records, Feb 14, 2012

Article VI: The Legislative Department

Section 1. Legislative Power; Non-Delegation

Araneta v. Gatmaitan, 101 PHIL 328 (1957)
Rubi v. Provincial Board, 39 PHIL 660 (1918-1919)

6
People v. Maceren, 79 SCRA 450 (1977)
Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA, 166 SCRA 533 (1988)
Tablarin v. Gutierrez, 152 SCRA 730 (1987)
Cebu Oxygen Acetylene Co. v. Drilon, 176 SCRA 24 (1989)
Osmena v. Orbos, 220 SCRA 703
Chiongbian v. Orbos, 245 SCRA 253 (1995)
Rodrigo v. Sandiganbayan, 309 SCRA 661
People v. Vera, 65 PHIL 56 (1937-1938)
Solicitor General v. MMA, 204 SCRA 837 (1991)
Abakada Guro Party List v. Purisima, 562 SCRA 251
United States v. Ang Tang Ho, 43 Phil 1
Employers Confederation v. National Wages and Productivity Commission, GR No. 9619
People v. Rosenthal, 68 PHIL 328
Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 1
Ynot v. IAC, 148 SCRA 659
United States v. Panlilio, 28 PHIL 608
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Interport Resources Corporation, 567 SCRA 354
Gerochi v. DENR, GR No. 159796, July 17, 2007
PSL Inc., v. LLDA 608 SCRA 442
People v. Que Po Lay, 94 Phil 640
People v. Dacuycuy, 173 SCRA 90 (1989)
Carbonilla v. Board of Airlines Representatives, 657 SCRA 775

Section 2. Senate Composition

Section 3. Qualifications of Senator

Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, March 8, 2016

Section 4. Senator: Term of Office; Voluntary Renunciation

Section 5. Composition of the House of Representatives; Apportionment; Party List

Tobias v. Abalos, 239 SCRA 106 (1994)
Mariano v. COMELEC, 242 SCRA 211 (1995)
Sema v. COMELEC, GR No. 177597, July 16, 2008
Bagabuyo v. COMELEC, GR No. 176970, December 8, 2008
Aquino III v. COMELEC, GR No. 189793, April 17, 2010
Aldaba v. COMELEC, GR No. 188078, January 25, 2010
Ocampo v. HRET, GR No. 158466, June 15, 2004

Party List
Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC, 359 SCRA 698 (2001)
VC Cadangen, et al v. COMELEC, GR No. 177179, June 5, 2009
Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC, 342 SCRA 244 (2000)
Partido v. COMELEC, GR No. 164702, March 15, 2006
Lokin, Jr. v. COMELEC, GR Nos. 179431-32, June 22, 2010
Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 203766, April 2, 2013
PGBI v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 190529, April 29, 2010
Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 190582, April 8,2010
ANAD v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 206987, September 10, 2013

7
Coalition of Associations of Senior Citizens v. COMELEC, G.R. 206844-45, July 23, 2013
Bello v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 191998, December 7,2010
ABC v. COMELEC, GR. No. 193256, March 22, 2011
Abang Lingkod Party-List v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 206952, October 22, 2013
Cocofed-Philippine Coconut Producers Federation, Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207026,
August 6, 2013
Milagros Amores v. HRET, G.R. No. 189600, June 29, 2010

Section 6. Qualifications of Representatives

Aquino v. COMELEC, 243 SCRA 400 (1995)
Marcos v. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 300 (1995)
Domino v. COMELEC, GR 134015 (July 19, 1999)
Maquera v. Borra, 15 SCRA 7
Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board, GR No. 157870, November 3, 2008

Section 7. Term of Representatives

Dimaporo v. Mitra, 202 SCRA 779
Farinas v. Executive Secretary, GR 147387 (Dec. 10, 2003)
Quinto v. COMELEC, GR No. 189698, December 1, 2009

Section 8.Regular Elections

Codilla v. De Venecia GR No. 150605, December 10, 2002

Section 9. Special Elections

Tolentino v. COMELEC, GR 148334, January 21, 2004

Section 10. Salaries

Philconsa v. Mathay, 18 SCRA 300 (1966)

Section 11. Privilege from Arrest; Parliamentary Freedom of Speech

People v. Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689
Jimenez v. Cabangbang, 17 SCRA 876 (1966)
Antonino v. Valencia, 57 SCRA 70
Pobre v. Defensor Santiago, AC No. 7399, August 25, 2009

Section 12. Disclosure of Financial and Business Interests

Section 13. Prohibitions on Members of Congress

Liban v. Gordon, GR No. 175352, July 15, 2009

Section 14. Prohibitions Related to the Practice of Profession

Puyat v. De Guzman, 113 SCRA 31

Section 15. Regular Session; Special Session

Section 16. Officers of Congress; Quorom; Discipline; Journal/Records

(par. 1) Defensor-Santiago v. Guingona, GR 134577 November 18, 1998
(par. 1) Avelino v. Cuenco, 83 PHIL 17 (1949)
(par. 2) People v. Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689

8
(par. 3) Arroyo v. De Venecia, 277 SCRA 268 (1997)
(par. 3) Osmena v. Pendatun, 109 PHIL 863 (1960)
(par. 3) Santiago v. Sandiganbayan, 356 SCRA 636
(par. 4) US v. Pons, 34 PHIL 729 (1916)
(par. 4) Casco Phil Commercial Co. v. Giminez, 7 SCRA 347 (1963)
(par. 4) Astorga v. Villegas, 56 SCRA 714 (1974)
(par. 4) Philippine Judges Association v. Prado, 227 SCRA 703
(par. 4) Abakada Guro Party List v. Ermita, 469 SCRA 1
Pimentel v. Senate Committeee of the Whole, 644 SCRA 741

Section 17. Electoral Tribunal

Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 PHIL 134 (1936)
Vera v. Avelino, 77 PHIL 192 (1946)
Chavez v. COMELEC, 211 SCRA 315 (1992)
Aquino v. COMELEC, 243 SCRA 400 (1995)
Abbas v. SET, 166 SCRA 651 (1988)
Bondoc v. Pineda, 201 SCRA 792 (1991)
Robles v. HRET, 181 SCRA 780 (1990)
Arroyo v. HRET, 246 SCRA 384 (1995)
Pimentel v. HRET, GR 141489 May 29, 2002
Aggabao v. COMELEC, GR No. 163756, January 26, 2005
Limkaichong v. COMELEC, GR No. 178831, April 2009
Banat v. COMELEC, GR No. 177508, August 7, 2009
Drilon, et al v. Speaker, GR No. 180055, July 31, 2009
Guerrero v. COMELEC, GR No. 137004, July 26, 2000G
Garcia v. HRET, GR No. 134792, August 12, 1999
Lazatin v. HET, GR No. 84297, December 8, 1988

Section 18. Commission on Appointments

Daza v. Singson, 180 SCRA 496 (1989)
Coseteng v. Mitra, 187 SCRA 377 (1990)
Guingona v. Gonzales, 214 SCRA 789 (1992); MR, 219 SCRA 326 (1993)
Drilon, et al v. Speaker, GR No. 180055, July 31, 2009

Section 19. Constitutions of the Electoral Tribunal and the Commission on Appointments

Section 20. Records and Books of Accounts

Section 21. Inquiries in Aid of Legislation

Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, 203 SCRA 767
Standard Charter v. Senate, GR No. 167173, December 27, 2007
Arnault v. Nazareno, 87 PHIL 25 (1990)
Sabio v. Gordon, 504 SCRA 704 October 17, 2006
Senate Blue Ribbon Committee v. Majaducon, GR 136760 July 29, 2003
Senate v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1, GR 169777, April 20, 2006
Neri v. Senate, 549 SCRA 771
Neri v. Senate, 564 SCRA 152
Garcillano v. House of Representatives, GR No. 170338, December 23, 2008
Negros O II Elec. Coop v. Sangguniang Panlungsod, 155 SCRA 421 (1991)

9
Section 22. Appearance of Heads of Departments in Congress

Section 23. Declaration of a State of War; Emergency Powers

Section 24. Bills Originating in the House of Representatives

Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630 (1994)
Alvarez v. Guingona, GR No. 118303, January 31, 1996
Guingona Jr. v. Carague, 196 SCRA 221 (1991)

Section 25. Limits on Power to Appropriate

(par. 2) Garcia v. Mata, 65 SCRA 517 (1975)
Demetria v. Alba, 148 SCRA 208 (1987)
DPWH v. Quirino, GR No. 183444, October 12, 2011
(par. 5) Philconsa v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506 (1994)
(par. 5) Sanchez v. COA, 552 SCRA 471
(par. 5) Goh v. COMELEC GR No. 212584, November 25, 2014

Section 26. Subject and Title of Bills; Three Readings

(par. 1) Cordero v. Cabatuando, 6 SCRA 418 (1962)
(par. 1) Philconsa v. Gimenez, 15 SCRA 479 (1965)
(par. 1) Insular Lumber Company v. CTA, 104 SCRA 710 (1981)
(par. 1) Philippine Judges Association v. Prado, 227 SCRA 703 (1993)
Alalayan v. NPC, 24 SCRA 172 (1968)
Tio v. Videogram Regulatory Board, 151 SCRA 208 (1987)
(par. 2) Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630 (1994)
Tobias v. Abalos, 239 SCRA 106 (1994)
Banat v. COMELEC, GR No. 177508, August 7, 2009
Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, G.R. No. 196271, October 18, 2011

Section 27. Passage of bills; Item Veto

CIR v. CTA, 185 SCRA 329 (1990)
Bolinao Electronics v. Valencia, 11 SCRA 486 (1964)
(par. 2) Gonzales v. Macaraig, 191 SCRA 452 (1990)
(par. 2) Philconsa v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506 (1994)
(par. 2) Bengzon v. Drilon, 208 SCRA 133
Tanada v. Tuvera, 146 SCRA 446 (1986)

Section 28. Power of Taxation; Limitations; Exemptions

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Lingayen Gulf Electric Power Co., Inc, 164 SCRA 27
Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 27
Garcia v. Executive Secretary, GR 101273, July 3, 1992
CIR v. Santos, GR No. 119252, August 18, 1997
Southern Cross v. Philippine Cement GR No. 158540, July 8, 2004
(par. 3) Abra Valley College v. Aquino, 162 SCRA 106 (1988)
Lladoc v. CIR, 14 SCRA 292
Central Mindanao University v. DAR, GR 100091, October 22, 1992
Commissioner v. CA, GR 124043, October 14, 1998
John Hay v. Lim, GR 19775, October 24, 2003

10
Systems Plus Computer College v. Caloocan City, GR No. 146382, August 7, 2003
Lung Center v. Quezon City, GR No. 144104, June 29, 2004
Planters Products Inc v. Fertiphil Corp, GR No. 166006, March 14, 2008

Section 29. Fiscal Powers of Congress; Limitations; Special Funds

Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works, 110 PHIL. 331, 1960-61
Guingona v. Carague, 196 SCRA 221, 1991
Gaston v. Republic Planters Bank, 158 SCRA 626, 1988
Araullo v. Aquino III, GR No. 209287 (2014)

Section 30. Appelate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

First Lepanto Ceramics v. CA, 237 SCRA 519, 1994

Section 32. Initiative and Referendum

Garcia v. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 279, 1994

Article VII: Executive Department

Section 1. Executive Power; Privileges; Immunities

Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668, 1989; MR, 178 SCRA, 1989
Laurel v. Garcia 187 SCRA 797, 1990
Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452, 2001; MR, 356 SCRA 108, 2001
Balao v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR No. 186450, December 13, 2011
Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR No. 191805, November 15, 2011
Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393, 1988
Senate v. Ermita, G.R. 169777, April 20, 2006
Akbayan v. Aquino, G.R. 170516, July 16 2008
Neri v. Senate, G.R. 180643, March 25, 2008; MR, Sept. 4, 2008
Province of North Cotabato v. Government, G.R. No. 183591, Oct. 14, 2008
Philippine Constitution Association v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506
Webb v. De Leon, 247 SCRA 652
Senate v. Ermita, GR No. 169777, April 20, 2006
Neri v. Senate, GR No. 180643, March 25, 2008, September 4, 2008

Section 2. Qualifications
Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004
Poe-Llamanzares v.COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, March 8, 2016

Section 3. Vice President

Section 4. Election and Canvass

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR No. 157013, July 10, 2003
Lopez v. Senate and House, GR No. 163556, June 8, 2004
Pimentel v. Joint Canvassing Committee, June 22, 2004
Macalintal v. PET, GR No. 191618, November 23, 2010
Fernando Poe, Jr. v. Arroyo, PET Case No. 002, March 29, 2005
Legarda v. De Castro, PET Case No. 003, March 31, 2005
Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos, PET Case No. 001, February 13, 1996

11
Section 5. Oath

Section 6. Official Residence; Salary

Section 7. Vacancy at the Beginning of the Term of the Presidency

Section 8. Vacancy During the Term of the Presidency

Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452, 2001; MR, 356 SCRA 108, 2001
Lozano, et al v. Macapagal-Arroyo, February 6, 2001

Section 9. Vacancy in the Vice Presidency

Section 10. Vacancies in Both the Presidency and the Vice Presidency

Section 11. Incapacity of the President

Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452, 2001; MR, 356, SCRA 108, 2001

Section 12. Serious Illness of the President

Section 13. Prohibitions

Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, 194 SCRA 317, 1991
Doromal v. Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 354, 1989
Flores v. Drilon, 223 SCRA 568, 1993
Bitonio v. COA, G.R. no. 147392, March 12, 2004
Public Interest Group v. Elma, GR No. 138965, June 30, 2006
Espiritu v. Del Rosario, GR. No. 204964, 738 SCRA 464, 2014

Section 14. Appointments of Acting President

Section 15. Prohibited Appointments

In Re Appointments of Valenzuela and Vallarta, AM No. 98-5-01-SC, Nov. 9, 1998
De la Rama v. CA, G.R. No. 131136, Feb. 28, 2001
De Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council, GR No. 191002, April 20, 2010 and May 1, 2010
Velicaria-Garafil v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 20337, June 16, 2015

Section 16. Power to Appoint; Commission on Appointments

Government v. Springer 50 PHILS 259, 1927
Bermudez v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 131429, August 4, 1999
Flores v. Drilon, 223 SCRA 568, 1993
Bautista v. Salonga, 172 SCRA 1260, 1989
Sarmiento v. Mison, 156 SCRA 549, 1987
Quintos-Deles v. Commission on Appointments, 177 SCRA 259, 1989
Calderon v. Carale, 208 SCRA 254, 1992
Manalo v. Sistoza, GR No. 107369, August 11, 1999
Matibag v. Benipayo, GR No. 149036, April 2, 2002
Rufino v. Endriga, 496 SCRA 13
Pimentel, Jr. v. Ermita, GR No. 164978, October 13, 2005
Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR No. 196271, October 18, 2011

12
Section 17. Power of Control

Lacson-Magallanes v. Pano 21 SCRA 395, 1967

Maceda v. Macaraig, Jr 197 SCRA 771
Roque v. Director of Lands, L-25373, July 1, 1976
Ang-Angco v. Castillo 9 SCRA 619, 1963
NAMARCO v. Arca 29 SCRA 648, 1969
Drilon v. Lim 235 SCRA 135, 1994
Jason v. Torres 290 SCRA 279, 1998
Dadole v. COA, GR No. 125350, Dec. 3, 2002
DENR v. DENR Employees, GR No. 149724, Aug. 19, 2003
Villaluz v. Zaldivar, 15 SCRA 710
Tondo Medical Center Employees v. CA, GR No. 167324, July 17, 2007
Malaria Employees v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 160093, July 31, 2007
Orosa v. Roa, GR No. 14047, July 14, 2006
Phillips Seafood v. BOI, GR No. 175787, February 4, 2009
Biraogo v. Truth Commission, GR No. 192935, December 7, 2010
Banda v. Executive Secretary Ermita, G.R. No. 166620, April 20, 2010
Prospero Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs, G.R. No.
196425, July 24, 2012
Hontiveros-Baraquel v. Toll Regulatory Board, GR No. 181293, 2015
Datu Zaldy Uy Ampatuan v, Hon. Puno, G.R. No. 190259, June 7, 20122
Province v. COA, G.R. 182573, September 28, 2010.

Section 18. Presidents Powers as Commander in Chief

Lansang vs. Garcia, 42 SCRA 448
Aberca v. Ver, 160 SCRA 590
IBP v. Zamora, GR 141284, August 15, 2000
Lacson v. Perez, GR 147780-81, 147799 and 1477810, May 10, 2001
Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 159085, February 3, 2004
David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR 171396, May 2006
David v. Ermita, GR No. 171409, May 3, 2006
Gudani v. Senga, GR No. 170165, April 15, 2006
Ampatuan v. Puno, 651 SCRA 228
Vinuya v. The Hon. Executive Secretary, GR No. 162230 (2014)

Section 19. Executive Clemency

Cristobal v. Labrador, 71 PHIL 34
Llamas v. Orbos 202 SCRA 844, 1991
People v. Salle 250 SCRA 581, 1995
Drilon v. CA, 202 SCRA 378, 1991
Torres v. Gonzales 152 SCRA 272, 1987
Monsanto v. Factoran, 170 SCRA 190, 1989
Sabello v. Department of Education, GR No. 87687, December 26, 1989
People v. Salle, Jr GR No. 103567, December 4, 1995
Garcia v. COA, 226 SCRA 356, 1993
Echegaray v. Sec. of Justice, GR No. 132601, Jan 19, 1999
Risos-Vidal v. Comelec, GR No. 206666, 747 SCRA 210, Jan. 21, 2015

13
Section 20. Foreign Loans
Spouses Constantino v. Cuisia, GR 106064, October 13, 2005

Section 21. Foreign Relations: Senate Concurrence in International Agreements

USAFFE Veterans Association v. Treasurer, 105 PHIL 1030, 1959
World Health Organization v. Aquino, 48 SCRA 242
Bayan v. Executive Secretary Zamora, 343 SCRA 449, 2000
Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, 2005
Lim v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 151445, April 11, 2002
Secretary of Justice v. Judge Lantion, GR No. 139465, Oct. 17, 2000
Vinuya v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 162230, April 28, 2010
Bayan Muna v. Romulo, 641 SCRA 244
Saguisag v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 212426
Bayan v. Department of National Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin, G.R. No. 212444

Article VIII: Judicial Department

Section 1. Judicial Power

Santiago v. Bautista, 32 SCRA 188 (2970)
Noblejas v. Teehankee, 23 SCRA 405
Manila Electric Company v. Pasay Transportation Company, 57 PHIL 600
Director of Prisons v. Ang Cho Kio, 33 SCRA 494
In Re Laureta, 148 SCRA 382
Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668 (1989); MR, 178 SCRA 760 (1989)
US v. Nixon, 418 US 683 (1974)
Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452 (2001); MR, 356 SCRA 108 (2001)
Arroyo v. De Venecia, 277 SCRA 268 (1997)
Infotech Foundation v. COMELEC, GR No. 159139, January 13, 2004
Mattel, Inc. v. Francisco, GR No. 166886, July 30, 2008
Villarosa v. HRET, GR No. 144129, September 14, 2000
Vinuya v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 162230, April 28, 2010
Garcia v. Board of Investments, GR No. 92024, November 9, 1990
Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, GR No. 132601, January 19, 1999
Torrecampo v. MWSS, 649 SCRA 482
Liban v. Gordon, 639 SCRA 709
Bayan Muna v. Romulo, 641 SCRA 244
Magallona v. Ermita, 655 SCRA 476
Hacienda Luisita v. PARC, GR No. 171101, November 22, 2011
Sana v. CESB, GR No. 192926, November 15, 2011
Gamboa v. Teves, 652 SCRA 690
Madrigal v. DOJ GR No. 168903, 726 SCRA 544, June 18, 2014

Section 2. Role of Congress

Mantruste Systems v. CA, 179 SCRA 136 (1989)
Malaga v. Penachos, 213 SCRA 516 (1992)
Lupangco v. CA, 160 SCRA 848 (1988)

14
Section 3. Fiscal Autonomy
Radiowealth v. Agregado, 86 SCRA 429 (1950)
Bengzon v. Drilon, 208 SCRA 133 (1992)

Section 4. Composition; En Banc and Division Cases

Fortich v. Corona, 312 SCRA 751 (1999)
People v. Dy, GR 115236-37, Jan. 16, 2003
People v. Ebio, GR 147750, Sept. 29, 2004
Firestone Ceramics v. CA, GR No. 127245, June 28, 2000

Section 5. Powers of the Supreme Court

Tano v. Socrates, 278 SCRA 154 (1997)

Judicial Review
Lina v. Purisma, 82 SCRA 344 (1978)
Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 PHIL 139 (1936)
Macasiano v. NHA, 224 SCRA 236 (1993)
Tan v. Macapagal, 43 SCRA 678 (1972)
PACU v. Secretary of Education, 97 PHIL 806 (1955)
Gonzales v. Marcos, 65 SCRA 624 (1975)
Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792 (1993)
Joya v. PCGG, 225 SCRA 568 (1993)
Kilosbayan v. Morato, 246 SCRA (1995)
Anti Graft League of the Philippines, 260 SCRA 250 (1996)
Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)
Bayan v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 138570, October 10, 2000
Automotive Industry Workers v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 157509, January 18, 2005
White Light Corp v. City of Manila, GR No. 122846, January 20, 2009
Gonzales v. Narvasa, GR No. 140835, August 14, 2000
Sandoval v. PAGCOR, GR No. 138982, November 29, 2000
Chavez v. PCGG, 299 SCRA 744 (1998)
IBP v. Zamora, 342 SCRA 449 (2000)
Francisco v. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44
De Agbayani v. PNB, 38 SCRA 429 (1971)
David v. Arroyo, 489 SCRA 162
People v. Mateo, 433 SCRA 540
Mariano Jr. v. COMELEC, GR No. 118577, March 7, 1995
Dumlao v. COMELEC, 95 SCRA 392
Solicitor General v. Metropolitan Manila Authority, GR No. 102782, December 11, 1991
Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap v. Jessie Robredo, GR No. 200903, 730 SCRA 322, July
22, 2014
Gov. Villafuerte, Jr. v. Hon. Robredo GR No. 195390, December 10, 2014
UDK-15143, January 21, 2015
Republic of the Philippines v. Transunion Corporation, G.R. No. 191590, 2014,

Administration of Justice; Rule-Making

PNB v. Asuncion, 60 SCRA 321
Santero v. CFI Cavite, 153 SCRA 728
Damasco v. Lagui, 166 SCRA 214
People v. Lacson, 400 SCRA 262

15
St. Martin Funeral Homes v. NLRC, 295 SCRA 494
People v. Gutierrez, 36 SCRA 172 (1970)
In Re Cunanan, 94 PHIL 534 (1953-1954)
Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, January 19, 1999
Bustos v. Lucero, 81 PHIL 648 (1948)
In Re Admission to the Bar: Argosino Bar Matter 712, 246 SCRA 14 (1995)
Fabian v. Desierto, GR 129742, September 16, 1998
In Re: De Vera (2003)
Baguio Markets Vendor v. Judge, GR No. 165922, February 26, 2010
Republic v. Gingoyon, GR No. 166429, February 1, 2006
Maniago v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 104392, February 20, 1996.
Javellana v. DILG, GR No. 102549, August 10, 1992
Bar Matter No. 1222, February 4, 2004
Garrido v. Garrido, AC No. 6593, February 4, 2010
In re Letter of the UP Law Faculty, 644 SCRA 543

Section 6. Supervision of Courts

Maceda v. Vasquez, 221 SCRA 464 (1993)
Caoibes v. Ombudsman, GR 132177, July 19, 2001
Escalona v. Padillo, AM P-10-2785, September 21, 2010

Section 7. Qualifications of Members of the Supreme Court; Lower Courts

In re JBC v. Judge Quitain, JBC No. 013, August 22, 2007
Kilosbayan v. Ermita, GR No. 177721, July 3, 2007
Topacio v. Ong, GR No. 179895, December 15, 2008

Section 8. Judicial and Bar Council; Membership

Section 9. Appointments of Members of the Supreme Court and Judges of Lower Courts

Section 10. Fixed Salary

Nitafan v. CIR, 152 SCRA 284 (1987)

Section 11. Security of Tenure; Power to Discipline

Vargas v. Rilloraza, 80 PHIL 297 (1948)
De La Llana v. Alba, 112 SCRA 294 (1982)
People v. Gacott, 246 SCRA 52 (1995)

Section 12. Prohibition to Be Designated to Any Agency Performing Quasi-Judicial or

Administrative Functions
In re Judge Manzano, 166 SCRA 246

Section 13. Conclusions of the Supreme Court How Reached?

Consing v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 78272, August 29, 1989

Section 14. Contents of Decision; Petition for Review; Motion for Reconsideration
People v. Escober, 157 SCRA 541 (1988)
Air France v. Carrascoso, 18 SCRA 155 (1966)
People v. Bravo, 227 SCRA 285 (1993)

16
Hernandez v. CA, 208 SCRA 429 (1993)
Nicos v. CA, 206 SCRA 127 (1992)
Borromeo v. CA, 186 SCRA 1 (1990)
Francisco v. Pernskul, 173 SCRA 324 (1989)
Velarde v. Social Justice Society, GR 159357, April 28, 2004

Section 15. Period for Making Decisions

Re: Problem of Delays in Cases Before the Sandiganbayan AM No. 00-8-05-SC, Nov. 28,
2001
Edano v. Asdala, AM No. RTJ-06-2007, December 6, 2010
Sesbreno v. CA, GR No. 161390, April 16, 2008

Section 16. Submission of Annual Report

Article IX: Constitutional Commissions

A. Common Provisions

Section 1. Independent Commissions

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR 157013, July 10, 2003
Ombudsman v. Civil Service Commission, GR No. 159940, February 16, 2005

Section 2. Prohibition on Members

Section 3. Salary

Section 4. Power to Appoint

Section 5. Fiscal Autonomy

CSC v. DBM, 482 SCRA 233

Section 6. Promulgation of Rules

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR No. 157013, July 10, 2003

Section 7. Decisions of the Commissions

Filipinas Engineering and Machine Shop v. Ferrer, 135 SCRA 25
Saligumba v. CA, 117 SCRA 669
Cua v. COMELEC, 156 SCRA 582 (1987)
Estrella v. COMELEC, GR No. 160465, May 27, 2004
Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445 (1990)
Ambil v. COMELEC, 344 SCRA 358 [2000]
Mateo v. CA, GR No. 113219, August 14, 1995
Reyes v. Regional Trial Court, GR No. 108886, May 5, 1995
ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, 323 SCRA 611
Aguilar v. COMELEC, GR No. 185140, June 30, 2009
Garces v. CA, GR. No. 114 795, July 17, 1996
Dumayas v. COMELEC, GR Nos. 141952-53, April 29, 2001
The Law Firm of Laguesma Magsalin Consulta and Gastardo v. COA GR No. 185544, 2015

17
Section 8. Other Functions

B. Civil Service Commission

Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; Term

Gaminde v. COA 347 SCRA 655 (2000)
Mathay Jr. v. CA, GR No. 124374, December 15, 1999

Section 2. Scope
Paragraph 1
EIIB v. CA, GR No. 129133, Nov. 25, 1998
NASECO v. NLRC, GR No. 100947, May 31, 1993
MWSS v. Hernandez, 143 SCRA 602
Philippine Fisheries Development Authority v. NLRC and Odin Security Agency, GR No.
94825, September 4, 1992
PAGCOR v. CA, GR No. 93396, September 30, 1991
Agyao v. CSC, 639 SCRA 781
Funa v. Duque III, G.R. No. 191672, November 25, 2014
Barcelona v. LIM, G.R. No. 189171, June 3, 2014

Paragraph 2
De los Santos v. Mallare, 87 PHIL 289
Santiago Jr. v. CSC, GR No. 81467, October 27, 1989
Central Bank v. CSC, GR No. 80455-56, April 10, 1989
CSC v. Salas, 274 SCRA 414
CSC v. Javier, 546 SCRA 485
Grino v. CSC, 194 SCRA 458

Paragraph 3
Briones v. Osmena, 104 PHIL 588
Abakada Group Party List v. Purisima, 562 SCRA 251
CSC v. Sojor, 554 SCRA 160
PCSO Board of Directors v. Lapid, 648 SCRA 546

Classifications and Appointments

CSC v. PAGCOR, GR No. 123708, June 1997
Samson v. CA, 145 SCRA 654 (1986)
Achacoso v. Macaraig, 195 SCRA 235 (1991)
Binamira v. Garrucho, 188 SCRA 154 (1990)
Luego v. CSC, 143 SCRA 327 (1986)
Santiago v. CSC, 178 SCRA 733 (1989)
Astraguillo v. Manglapus, 190 SCRA 280 (1990)
Aquino v. CSC, GR No. 92403, April 22, 1992
Lampinid v. CSC, GR No. 96298, May 14, 1991
Nazareno, et al v. City of Dumaguete, GR No. 181559, October 2, 2009
CSC v. Cortes, GR No. 200103, 723 SCRA 629 (2014)

Security of Tenure and Abolition of Office

18
Canonizado v. Aguirre, GR No. 133132, Jan. 25, 2000
Secretary Gloria v. CA, GR No. 119903, August 14, 2000
Yenko and Mayor Estrada v. Gungon, GR No. 165450, August 13, 2009
Buklod v. Executive Secretary, GR Nos. 142801-02, July 10, 2001
Dimayuga v. Benedicto II, GR No. 144153, Jan. 16, 2002
Miranda v. Carreon, GR No. 143540, April 11, 2003
Hernandez v. Villegas, 14 SCRA 544 (1965)
Briones v. Osmena, 104 Phil 588 (1958)
Mayor v. Macaraig, 194 SCRA 672 (1991)
Roque v. Ericta, 53 SCRA 156
Mama, Jr. v Court of Appeals, GR No. 86517, April 30, 1991
UP Board of Regents v. Rasul, GR No. 91551, August 16, 1991
Kawaning EIIB v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 142801, July 10, 2001
A.M. No. 2008-23-SC, November 10, 2014

Partisan Political Activity; Self-Organization; Temporary Employees

People v. De Venecia, 14 SCRA 864 (1965)
SSS Employees v. CA, 175 SCRA 686 (1989)
Jacinto v. CA, 281 SCRA 557 (1997)
Gloria v. CA, 338 SCRA 5 (2000)
Seneres v. COMELEC, GR No. 178678, April 16, 2009

Right to Organize
Social Security System v. CA, GR No. 85279, July 28, 1989
Manila Public School Teachers Association v. Secretary of Education, GR No. 95445, August
6, 1991

Section 3. Purpose of a Civil Service System

Lazo v. CSC, 236 SCRA 469
LRTA v. Aurora Salvana, GR No. 192074, 726 SCRA 141

Section 4. Oath or Affirmation

Section 5. Standardization of Compensation

Section 6. Prohibition of Appointment of Lame Ducks

People v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 164185, July 23, 2008

Section 7. Prohibitions; Appointments; Office; Employment

Flores v. Drilon 223 SCRA 568 (1993)
In re Eduardo Escala, 653 SCRA 141

Sec. 8 Prohibitions; Compensation; Foreign Gift/Office/Title

Peralta v. Mathay 38 SCRA 296 (1971)
Santos v. CA GR No. 139792, Nov. 22, 2000
Cabili v. CSC, GR No. 156503, June 22, 2006
Benguet State University v. Colting, GR No. 169637, June 8, 2007
Herrera, et al v. NPC, GR No. 166570, December 18, 2009

C. Commission on Elections

19
Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; Term
Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 (1991)
Brillantes v. Yorac, 192 SCRA 358 (1990)
Matibag v. Benipayo, 380 SCRA 49
Hayudini v. Comelec, GR No. 207900, 723 SCRA 223, April 22, 2014
Naval v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207851, July 8, 2014
Timbol v. Comelec, G.R. No. 206004, February 24, 2015
Jalover v. Osmena, G.R. No. 209286, September 23, 2014

Section 2. Powers and Functions

Pangilinan v. COMELEC, 228 SCRA 36
Flores v. COMELEC, 184 SCRA 484 (1990)
Galido v. COMELEC, 193 SCRA 78 (1991)
People v. Inting, 187 SCRA 788 (1990)
Corpus v. Tanodbayan, 149 SCRA 281 (1987)
Tan v. COMELEC, GR No. 112093, Oct. 4, 1994
Kilosbayan v. COMELEC, GR No. 128054, Oct. 16, 1997
Alvarez v. COMELEC, GR No. 142527, March 1, 2001
Carlos v. Judge Angeles, GR No. 142907, November 29, 2000
Buac v. COMELEC, GR No. 155855, Jan. 26, 2004
LDP v. COMELEC, GR No. 161265, Feb. 24, 2004
Atienza v. COMELEC, GR No. 188920, February 16, 2010
Antonio v. COMELEC, GR No. 135869, September 22, 1999
Aggabao v. COMELEC, GR NO. 163756, January 26, 2005
Flores v. COMELEC, GR No. 89604, April 20, 1990
Alunan III v. Mirasol, GR No. 108399, July 31, 1997
Taule v. Secretary Santos, GR No. 90336, August 12, 1991
Baytan v. COMELEC, GR No. 153945, February 4, 2003
Balindong v. COMELEC, GR No. 1539991, October 16, 2003
Aguilar v. COMELEC, GR No. 185140, June 30, 2009
People v. Honorable Delgado, GR No. 93419, September 18, 1990
Banat v. COMELEC, GR No. 177508, August 7, 2009
People v. Judge Inting, GR No. 88919, July 25, 1990
Ejercito v. Hon. Comelec, GR No. 212398, 742 SCRA 210, Nov. 25 2014
Cerafica v. COMELEC GR No. 205136, December 02, 2014
Hayudini v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207900, April 22, 2014
Cerafica v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 205136, 2014

Section 3. Decisions
Sarmiento v. COMELEC, 212 SCRA 307
Salazar Jr. v. COMELEC, 184 SCRA 433 (1990)
Baytan v. COMELEC, GR No. 153954 , Feb. 4, 2003
Balindong v. COMELEC, GR Nos. 153991-2, Oct. 16, 2003
Liberal Party v. COMELEC, GR No. 191771, May 6, 2010
Alvarez v. COMELEC, GR
No. 142527, March 1, 2001
Villarosa v. COMELEC GR No. 212953, August 05, 2014

20
Section 4. Supervision/Regulation of Public Utilities, Media Grants, Privileges
Unido v. COMELEC, 104 SCRA 17
Sanidad v. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 529 (1990)
Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, GR No. 119654, May 22, 1995
ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, GR No. 133486, Jan. 28, 2000
SWS v. COMELEC, GR No. 147571, May 5, 2001

Section 5. Favorable Recommendation for Pardon, Amnesty, Parole or Suspension of

Sentence

Section 6. Free and Open Party System

Liberal Party v. COMELEC, GR No. 191771, May 6, 2010

Section 7. No Block-Voting

Section 8. Prohibition on Political Parties

Section 9. Election Period

Section 10. No Harassment and Discrimination

Section 11. Funds

D. Commission of Audit
Section 1. Qualifications; Term
Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445

Section 2. General Function; Powers

Philippine Operations, Inc. v. Auditor General, 94 PHIL 868
Euro-Med Laboratories, Phil, Inc. v. Province of Batangas, 495 SCRA 601
Ramos v. Aquino, 39 SCRA 236
Blue Bar Coconut Philippines v. Tantuico, 163 SCRA 716
NHA v. COA, 226 SCRA 55
Dingcong v. Guingona, 162 SCRA 782 (1988)
Danville Maritime v. COA, 175 SCRA 701 (1989)
Mamaril v. Domingo, 227 SCRA 206 (1993)
Sambeli v. Province of Isabela, GR No. 92279, June 18, 1992
Osmena v. COA, GR No. 98355, March 2, 1994
Bustamante v. COA, GR No. 103309, Nov. 27, 1992
Caltex v. COA, 208 SCRA 726 (1992)
Polloso v. Gangan, 335 SCRA 750 (2000)
DBP v. COA, 231 SCRA 202
Strategic Alliance v. Radstock Securities, GR No. 178158, December 4, 2009
Uy, et al v. COA, GR No. 130685, March 21, 2000
Davao City Water District v. CSC and COA, GR No. 95237, September 13, 1991
Parreno v. COA, GR No. 162224, June 7, 2007
Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA, 651 SCRA 146
Espinas v. COA, GR No. 198271, 720 SCRA 302, April 1, 2014
Maritime Industry Authority v. COA GR No. 185812, January 13, 2015

21
The Law Firm of Laguesma Magsalin Consulta and Gastardo v. COA GR No. 185544, 2015
Maritime Industry Authority v. COA, G.R. No. 185812, January 13, 2015

Section 3. COA Jurisdiction

Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) v. COA, G.R. No. 209219, 2014

Section 4. Annual Report to the President and to Congress

Article X. Local Government

Section 1. Territorial and Political Subdivisions of the Philippines

Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 79956, January 26, 1990

Section 2. Local Autonomy

Limbona v. Conte Mangelin, et al, GR No. 80391, February 28, 1989
San Juan v. CSC, 196 SCRA 69 (1991)
Magtajas v. Pryce Properties, GR No. 111097, July 20, 1994
Leynes v. COA, GR No. 143596, Dec. 11, 2003
Batangas CATV v. CA and Batangas City, GR No. 138810, September 29, 2004
City of General Santos v. COA, GR No. 199439 (2014)

Section 3. Local Government Code

Garcia v. COMELEC, 227 SCRA 100 (1993)
Malonzo v. COMELEC, 269 SCRA 380 (1997)
OSG v. CA, Gr No. 199027 , 725 SCRA 469, 2014
Umali v. Comelec, GR NO. 203974 (2014)
Kasamaka-Canlubang, Inc. v. Laguna Estate Development Corp, GR No. 200491 (2014)
Holy Trinity Realty & Development Corp v. Dela Cruz, GR No. 200454 (2014)

Section 4. Supervision by the President

Ganzon v. CA, 200 SCRA 271
Joson v. Torres, 290 SCRA 279
Drilon v. Lim, 235 SCRA 135 (1994)
Province of Negros v. COA, GR No. 182574, September 28, 2010
Gov. Villafuerte, Jr. v. Hon. Robredo GR No. 195390, December 10, 2014

Section 5. Power of Taxation by Local Government

LTO v. City of Butuan, 322 SCRA 805
Lina v. Pano, 364 SCRA 76 (2001)
Petron v. Mayor, GR No. 158881, April 16, 2008
Yamane v. BA Lepanto Condominium, GR No. 154993, October 25, 2005
Philippine Petroleum v. Municipality of Pililla, GR No. 90773, June 3, 1991
John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR No. 119775, October 24, 2003
Manila Electric v. Province of Laguna, GR No. 131359, May 5, 1999
Batangas Power v. Batangas City, GR No. 152675, April 28, 2004
Smart Communications v. City of Davao, GR No. 155491, September 16, 2008
City of Manila v. Judge Colet, GR No. 12005, 2014

Section 6. Share in National Taxes

22
Pimentel v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA 201 (2000)
Province of Batangas v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 152774, May 27, 2004
Alternative Center v. Zamora, GR No. 144256, June 8, 2005
League of Cities v. COMELEC August 24, 2010

Section 7. Equitable Share in the National Wealth

Section 8. Term of Local Officials

Borja v. COMELEC, 295 SCRA 157
Lozanida v. COMELEC, GR No. 135150, July 28, 1999
Adormeo v. COMELEC, GR No. 147927, February 4, 2002
Socrates v. COMELEC, 391 SCRA 457 (2002)
Latasa v. COMELEC, GR No. 154829, Dec. 10, 2003
David v. COMELEC, 271 SCRA 90 (1997)
Montebon v. COMELEC, 551 SCRA 50
Ong v. Alegre, GR No. 163295, January 23, 2006
Dizon v. COMELEC, GR No. 182088, January 30, 2009
Alboin v. COMELEC, GR No. 184836, December 23, 2009
David v. COMELEC, GR No. 127116, April 8, 1997
Naval v. COMELEC GR No. 207851, July 08, 2014

Section 9. Sectoral Representatives

Supangan Jr. v. Santos, GR No. 84662, August 24, 1990

Section 10. Creation, Abolition, Change of Boundaries

Tan v. COMELEC, 142 SCRA 727 (1986)
League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC, GR 176951, Nov. 29, 2008
Sema v. COMELEC, 558 SCRA 700
Camid v. Office of the President, GR No. 161414, January 17, 2005
Navarro v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 180050, February 10, 2010

Section 11. Metropolitan Political Subdivisions

MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association Assoc., GR No. 135962, March 27, 2000
MMDA v. Garin, GR No. 130230, April 15, 2005
Gancayco v. City Government of Quezon City, 658 SCRA 853

Section 12. Highly Urbanized Cities, Component Cities

Abella v. COMELEC, GR No. 100710, September 3, 1991

Section 13. Local Government Units Grouping Themselves

Section 14. Regional Development Councils and Other Similar Bodies

Section 15. Autonomous Regions

Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR No. 196271, October 18, 2011

Section 16. General Supervision of the President

Section 17. Powers Not Vested to the ARMM

23
Sections 18 and19. Organic Act for Autonomous Regions
Abbas v. COMELEC, 179 SCRA 287 (1989)
Ordillos v. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100 (1990)
Badua v. CBA, 194 SCRA 101 (1991)
Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 82217, Jan. 29, 1990
Pandi v. CA, GR No. 116850, April 11, 2002
Sema v. COMELEC, GR No. 177597, July 16, 2008

Section 20. Legislative Powers of the Autonomous Regions

Province of North Cotabato v. Government of the Philippines Peace Panel, 568 SCRA 492

Section 21. Preservation of Peace and Order

Article XI. Accountability of Public Officers

Section 1. Public Office

Bornasal, Jr. v. Montes, 280 SCRA 181 (1997)
Eijansantos v. Special Presidential Task Force 156, G.R. No. 203696, 2014
Development Bank of the Philippines v. COA, G.R. No. 202733, 2014
A.M. No. 2010-21-SC, September 30, 2014
Office of the Ombudsman v. De, G.R. No. 205433, 2015
Republic of the Philippines v. Arias, G.R. No. 188909, September 17, 2014
Office of the Ombudsman v. Bueno, G.R. No. 191712, 2014
CSC v. Arandia, G.R. No. 199549, April 7, 2014
A.M. No. P-15-3296,February 17, 2015
CSC v. Andal, A.M. No. SB-12-19-P, November 18, 2014
Velasco v. Obispo, A.M. No. P-13-3160, November 10, 2014,
CSC v. Pagaduan, et al., G.R. No. 206379, November 19, 2014
CSC v. Vergel De Rios, G.R. No. 203536, February 04, 2015
LAGOC vs. MALAGA, G.R. No. 184785, July 9, 2014
OMBUDSMAN vs. CABEROY, G.R. No. 188066
CSC v. Cortes, G.R. No. 200103, April 23, 2014

Section 2. Officers Subject to Removal by Impeachment

Section 3. Procedure for Impeachment

In re Gonzales, 160 SCRA 771 (1988)
Romulo v. Yniguez, 141 SCRA 260 (1986)
Francisco v. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44
Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452 (2001); MR, 356 SCRA 108 (2001)
Gutierrez v. Committee on Justice, 643 SCRA 198

Section 4. Sandiganbayan
Lecaroz v. Sandiganbayan, 128 SCRA 324 (1984)
Defensor-Santiago, 356 SCRA 636 (2001)
Balmadrid v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 58327, March 22, 1991
Azarcon v. Sandiganbanyan, GR No. 116033, February 26, 1997

24
Section 5. Ombudsman
Carandang v. Desierto, 639 SCRA 293
Lacson v. ES, 649 SCRA 142
People v. Morales, 649 SCRA 182
Quarto v. Marcelo, 658 SCRA 580
Office of the Ombudsman v. Quimbo, G.R. No. 173277, February 25, 2015
Office of the Ombudsman v. CA and Binay, G.R. Nos. 217126-27, November 10, 2015

Section 6. Appointments
Ombudsman v. CSC, GR No. 162215, July 20, 2007
Laud v. People, et al., G.R. No. 199032,November 19, 2014
Sabijon v. De Juan, A.M. No. P-14-3281, 2015
Casimiro v. Rigor, G.R. No. 206661, 2014
Airlift Asia Customs Brokerage, Inc. v. Court Of Appeals, G.R. No. 183664, 2014
Buena, Jr v. Benito, G.R. No. 181760, October 14, 2014

Section 7. Tanodbayan as Special Prosecutor

Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, 160 SCRA 843 (1988)
Acop v. Ombudsman, GR No. 120422, September 27, 1995
Deloso v. Domingo, 191 SCRA 545
Almonte v. Vasquez, GR No. 95367, May 22, 1995
Buenasada v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645
Macalino v. Sandiganbayan, 376 SCRA 452
BIR v. Ombudsman, GR No. 115103, April 11, 2002
Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002
Azarcon v. Guerrero, GR No. 121017, Feb 17, 1997
Azarcon v. Guerrero , GR No. 116033, Feb 26, 1997

Section 8. Qualifications
Argel v. Gov. Singson, G.R. No. 202970, 2015

Section 9. Appointments

Section 10. Rank

Section 11. Term

Section 12. Prompt Action on Complaints

Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002
Almonte v. Vasquez, 244 SCRA 286 (1995)
Roxas v. Vasquez, 358 SCRA 636 (2001)
Uy v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 105965, March 20, 2001

Section 13. Powers; Functions; Duties

Khan, Jr. v. Ombudsman, GR No. 125296, July 20, 2006
Ombudsman v. Estandarte, GR No. 168670, April 13, 2007
Ombudsman v. Lucero, November 24, 2006
Ombudsman v. CA, GR No. 169079, July 17, 2007
Sangguniang Barangay v. Punong Barangay, GR No. 170626, March 3, 2008
Perez v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 166062, September 26, 2006

25
Buencamino v. CA, GR No. 175895, April 4, 2007
Medina v. COA, GR No. 176478, February 4, 2008
Villas Nor v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 180700, March 4, 2008
Honasan II v. Panel of Investigating Prosecutors GR No. 159747, April 13, 2004
Ombudsman v. Rodriguez, GR No. 172700, July 23, 2010
Garcia v. Miro, GR No. 148944, Feb 5, 2003
Rare v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 108431, July 14, 2000
Office of the Ombudsman v. Quimbo GR No. 173277, February 25, 2015

Section 14. Fiscal Autonomy

Section 15. Right to Recover Properties Unlawfully Acquired

Section 16. Loan, Guaranty or Other Form of Financial Accommodation

Section 17. Declaration of Assets and Liabilities

Section 18. Allegiance of Public Officers

Caasi v. CA, 191 SCRA 229 (1990)

Article XII. National Economy and Patrimony

Section 1. Threefold Goal of the National Economy

Section 2. Regalian Doctrine

Lee Hong Kok v. David, 48 SCRA 372
Carino v. Insurer Government, 41 PHIL 935
Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, 347 SCRA 128 (2000)
Sta. Rosa Mining v. Leido, 156 SCRA 1 (1987)
San Miguel Corporation v. CA, 185 SCRA 722 (1990)
Almeda v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 85322, April 30, 1991
Director of Lands v. Kalahi Investments, Inc, GR No. 48066, January 31, 1989
Republic v. Enciso, GR No. 160145, November 11, 2005
Chavez v. PEA, GR No. 133250, July 9, 2002
Laurel v. Garcia, 187 SCRA 797 (1990)
Miners Association v. Factoran, 240 SCRA 100 (1995)
Republic v. Rosemoor, GR No. 149927, March 30, 2004
La Bugal-Blaan Tribal Assn. v. DENR, GR127872, Jan 27, 2004, MR GR 127882, Dec. 1,
2004
Philippine Geothermal v. Napocor, GR No. 144302, May 27, 2004
JG Summit v. CA, GR No. 124293, January 31, 2005
Republic v. Domingo Espinosa, G.R. No. 176885, July 5, 2010
Hontiveros-Baraquel v. Toll Regulatory Board, G.R. No. 181293, February 23, 2015
Spouses Antonio and Erlinda Fortuna v. Republic, G.R. No.173423, March 5, 2014
Gaerlan v. Republic, G.R. No. 192717, March 12, 2014
Peza v. Carantes, G.R. 181274, June 23, 2010

Section 3. Lands of the Public Domain

Director of Lands v. Aquino, 192 SCRA 296 (1990)
Republic v. CA, 160 SCRA 228 (1988)

26
Apex Mining v. Southeast Mindanao Gold, Inc, GR No. 152613, June 23, 2006
Dir. of Lands v. IAC, 146 SCRA 509 (1986)
Ten Forty Realty v. Lorenzana, GR No. 151212, Sept. 10, 2003
Chavez v. PEA, GR No. 133250, July 9, 2002

Section 4. Specific Limits of Forest Lands and National Parks

La Bugal-Blaan Tribal Assn. v. DENR, GR127872, Jan 27, 2004, MR GR 127882, Dec. 1,
2004

Section 5. Ancestral Lands and Domain

Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, 347 SCRA 128 (2000)

Section 6. Common Good

Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)

Section 7. Private Lands

Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567
Zaragosa v. CA, GR No. 106401, September 29, 2000
Ramirez v. Vda. De Ramirez, 111 SCRA 704 (1982)
Halili v. CA, 287 SCRA 465 (1998)
Lee v. Republic, 366 SCRA (2001)
Frenzel v. Catito, GR No. 143958, July 11, 2003
Mulller v. Muller, GR No. 149615, August 29, 2006
Matthews v. Taylor Spouses, GR No. 164584, June 22, 2009
Hulst v. PR Builders, GR No. 156364, September 25, 2008

Section 8. Exception for Former Filipino Citizens

Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567 (1994)

Section 9. Independent Economic and Planning Agency

Section 10. Filipinization

Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, 267 SCRA 408 (1997)
Army and Navy Club v. CA, 271 SCRA 36 (1997)
Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)

Section 11. Public Utilities

Bagatsing v. Committee, 246 SCRA 344 (1995)
Albano v. Reyes, 175 SCRA 36 (1997)
Tatad v. Garcia, 243 SCRA 436 (1995)
Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)
JG Summit Holdings v. CA, 345 SCRA 143 (2000)
Associated Communications v. NTC, GR No. 144109, February 17, 2003
Eastern Telecom v. Telecom Technologies, GR No. 135992, July 23, 2004
Gamboa v. Teves, 652 SCRA 690
PAGCOR v. BIR, 645 SCRA 338
Hontiveros-Baraquel v. Toll Regulatory Board, GR No. 181293, 2015

Section 12. Filipino First Policy

Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)

27
Section 13. Trade Policy

Section 14. Development and Practice of Professions

Section 15. Agency to Promote Cooperatives

Section 16. Corporations

NDC v. PVB, 192 SCRA 257 (1990)

Section 17. Temporary Take-Over

Agan v. PIATCO, 420 SCRA 575
David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR No. 171396, May 2006

Section 18. Nationalization

Republic v. PLDT, 26 SCRA 620 (1968)
PLDT v. NTC, 190 SCRA 717 (1990)

Section 19. Monopolies and Combinations

Energy Regulatory Board v. CA, GR No. 113079, April 20, 2001
Garcia v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 132451, December 17, 1999
Tatad v. Secretary of Energy, 281 SCRA 330
Eastern Assurance v. LTFRB, GR No. 149717, Oct. 7, 2003
Avon v. Luna, GR No. 153674, December 20, 2006

Section 21. Foreign Loans

Section 22. Acts Inimical to the National Interest

Artcile XVI. General Provisions

Section 1. Flag of the Philippines

Section 2. Name, National Anthem or a National Seal

Section 3. Immunity From Suit

Republic v. Feliciano, 148 SCRA 424 (1987)
Metran v. Paredes, 79 Phil 819 (1947-1948)
NAC v. Teodoro, 91 Phil 203 (1952)
Mobil Philippines v. Customs Arrastre, 18 SCRA 120 (1966)
PNR v. IAC, 217 SCRA 401 (1993)
Ministerio v. CFI, 40 SCRA 464 (1971)
Municipality of San Fernando v. Firme, 195 SCRA 692
Lansang v. CA, GR No. 102667
Traders Royal Bank v. IAC, 192 SCRA 305 (1990)
Republic v. Sandoval, 220 SCRA 124 (1993)
DA v. NLRC, 227 SCRA 693 (1993)
EPG Construction v. Vigilar, GR No. 131544, March 16, 2001
Philrock v. Board of Liquidators, 180 SCRA 171 (1989)

28
Republic of Indonesia v. Vinzon, GR 154705, June 26, 2003
Shell Philippines v. Jalos, GR No. 179918, September 8, 2010
Vigilar v. Aquino, 639 SCRA 772
ATO v. Ramos, 644 SCRA 36
Heirs of Diosdado Mendoza v. DPWH, GR No. 203834, 729 SCRA 654, July 9, 2014
Hermano Oil Manufacturing & Sugar Corporation v.Toll Regulatory General Considerations
Board, G.R. No. 167290, November 26, 2014

Section 4. AFP

Section 5. AFP Requirement and Goals

Section 6. Police Force

Quilonia v. The General Court Martial GR No. 9660, March 4, 1992
Carpio v. Executive Secretary 206 SCRA 290 (1992)
Department of Budget v. Manilas Finest, GR No. 169466, May 9, 2007
Mendoza v. PNP, GR No. 139658, June 21, 2005

Section 7. War Veterans

Section 8. Pensions and Benefits for Retirees

Section 9. Protection of Consumers from Trade Malpractices

Section 10. Development of Filipino Capability and Communication Structures

Section 11. Ownership and Management: Mass Media and Advertising

Section 12. Consultative Body for Indigenous Cultural Communities

Article XVII. Amendments or Revisions

Section 1. Amendment or Revision

RA 6132, Constitutional Convention Act of 1970
Imbong v. COMELEC, 35 SCRA 28 (1970) * Constituent v. Legislative Power
Lambino v. COMELEC, 505 SCRA 160 *distinction between Amendment and Revision

Section 2. Initiative
RA No. 6735, An Act Providing for a System of Initiative and Referendum
Defensor-Santiago v. COMELEC, 270 SCRA 106 (1997); MR (1997)
Lambino v. COMELEC, 505 SCRA 160 (2006) *SC declared RA 6735 as sufficient and
adequate for a peoples initiative, effectively abandoning the ruling in Defensor-Santiago v.
COMELEC.

Section 3. Constitutional Convention

RA 6132, Constitutional Convention Act of 1970
Tolentino v. COMELEC, GR L-34150, October 16, 1971

29
Section 4. Ratification
Gonzales v. COMELEC, 21 SCRA 774 (1967)
Tolentino v. COMELEC, 41 SCRA 702 (1971)
Javellana v. ES, GR L-36142, March 31, 1973

Article XVIII Transitory Provisions

Section 26. Ill-Gotten Wealth; Sequestration/Freeze Orders

Cojuangco v. Roxas, 195 SCRA 797 (1991)

Section 27. Effectivity

De Leon v. Esquerra, 152 SCRA 602 (1987)

30
B. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II

Article III Bill of Rights

Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law
nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the law.

1. Purpose of the Bill of Rights

2. Three Great Powers of Government
3. Police Power
Lozano v. Martinez, GR No. L-63419, December 18, 1986
DOH v. Philip Morris Philippines Manufacturing, Inc., G.R. No. 202943, March 25, 2015
Kabataan Party-List v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 221318, December 16, 2015
Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan, 737 SCRA 145 (2014)
Ferrer, Jr. v. Bautista, G.R. No. 210551, June 30, 2015

4. The Seat of Police Power

MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association, etc GR No. 135962, March 27, 2000

5. Primacy of Human Rights

Republic v. Sandiganbayan GR 104768, July 21, 2003
Mijares v. Ranada, GR 139325, April 12, 2005

6. Hierarchy of Rights: Life, Liberty, Property

Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine Blooming Mills Co. Inc.,
51 SCRA 189
Salonga v. Pano, GR No. L-59524, February 18, 1985
Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union, GR No. L-25246, Sept. 12, 1974
Social Justice Society, et al v. Atienza, Jr., GR No. 156052, February 13, 2008

7. Due Process: In General

Tupas v. CA, 193 SCRA 597
Asilo v. People, 645 SCRA 41
Phil. Amusement Gaming Corp. v. De Guzman, GR No. 208261,744 SCRA 153, 2015
Cudia v. The Superintendent of The Philippine Military Academy, 751 SCRA 469, G.R. No.
211362, February 24, 2015
Jardeleza v. Sereno, 733 SCRA 279, G.R. No. 213181, August 19, 2014
Ray Shu v. Dee, G.R. No. 182573, April 23, 2014
Disini v. Secretary of Justice, GR No. 203335, 2014
Villanueva v. Judicial and Bar Council, G.R. No. 211833, April 7, 2015
Imbong v. Ochoa, Jr. 721 SCRA 146 (2014)

8. Procedural Due Process

In General
Banco Espanol Filipino v. Palanca 37 P 921
Macapagal-Arroyo v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 220598, July 21, 2016

Aspects of the Proceedings

31
Galvez v. CA 237 SCRA 685
State Prosecutor v. Muros 236 SRCA 505-
Martinez v. CA 237 SCRA 395
Espeleta v. Avelino 62 SCRA 395
Rabino v. Cruz 222 SCRA 493
Ysmael v. CA 273 SCRA 165
Carvajal v CA 280 SCRA 351
People v. Castillio 289 SCRA 213
Cosep v. PEO 290 SCRA 378
Rodrigo v. Sandiganbayan GR 125498 Feb. 18, 1999
People v. Huli 338 SCRA 2000
People v. Cabiles 341 SCRA 2000
Gozum v. Liangco 339 SCRA 253
Soriano v. Angeles 339 SCRA 253
Villanueva v. Malaya 330 SCRA 278
Almendras v. Asis 330 SCRA 69
Dayot v. Garcia 353 SCRA 280
People v. Hapa GR 125698 July 19, 2001
Aguirre v. people GR 144142 August 23, 2001
Puyat v. Zabarte 352 SCRA 738
Baritua v. Mercader 350 SCRA 86
Barbers v. Laguio 351 SCRA 606
People v. Herida 353 SCRA 650
People v. Medenilla GR 1311638 Mar. 26, 2001
People v. Rivera GR 139180 July. 31, 2001
People v. Basques GR 144035 Sept. 27, 2001
Cooperative Development v. DOLEFIL GR 137489 May 29, 2002
Garcia v. Pajaro GR 141149 July 5, 2002
Briaso v. Mariano, GR 137265, Jan. 31, 2003
Macias v. Macias GR 1461617, Sept. 3, 2003
Albior v. Auguis, AM P-01-1472, June 6, 2003
Republic v. Sandiganbayan, GR 152154, Nov. 18, 2003
Ty v. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank, 422 SCRA 649
People v. Larranaga, 412 SCRA 530
R. Transport v. Philhino 494 SCRA 630
Trans Middle East v. Sandiganbayan 499 SCRA 308
Uy v. First Metro 503 SCRA 704
Deutsche Bank v. Chua 481 SCRA 672
People v. Santos 501 SCRA 325
Victoriano v. People 509 SCRA 483
Santos v. DOJ 543 SCRA 70
DBP v. Feston 545 SCRA 422
Ruivivar v. OMB 565 SCRA 324
Borromeo v. Garcia 546 SCRA 543
Cesar v. OMB 553 SCRA 357
DAR v. Samson 554 SCRA 500
Hilano v. People 551 SCRA 191
Pastona v. CA 559 SCRA 137
Bibas v. OMB 559 SCRA 591
Espina v. Cerujano 550 SCRA 107

32
 Geronga v. Varela 546 SCRA 429
OMB v. Magno GR 178923, Nov. 27, 2008
Avenido v. CSC 553 SCRA 711
Romuladez v. COMELEC 553 SCRA 370
Multi-Trans Agency v. Oriental 590 SCRA 675
Siochi v. BPI 193872, October 18, 2011
Catacutan v. People 656 SCRA 524
Mortel v. Kerr 685 SCRA 1 (clear violation and errors of counsel)
Gravides v. COMELEC 685 SCRA 382 (error of counsel)

Publicity and T.V. Coverage

Webb v. de Leon 247 SCRA 652
People v. Teechankee 249 SCRA 54
People v. Sanchez GR 121039-45 Jan. 25, 1999
People v. Sanchez GR 121039 Oct. 18, 2001
Perez v. Estrada A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC June 29, 2001
Perez v. Estrada A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC Sept. 13, 2001
People v. Roxas- 628 SCRA 378

Administrative; Quasi-Judicial Proceedings; Arbitration

1. In General Administrative due process

Ang Tibay v. CIR 69 P 635
Dazon v. Yap - 610 SCRA 19
Estrada v. Ombudsman, GR No. 212140-41, 748 SCRA 1, Jan. 21, 2015
In re: Allegations made under oath at the senate blue ribbon committee against
Associate Justice Gregory S. Ong, Sandiganbayan, September 26, 2013

2. Judges and Disciplinary Process

OCA v. Pascual 259 SCRA 125
Valenzuela v. Bellosillo 322 SCRA 536

3. Aspects of the Proceedings

Lumiqued v. Exevea 282 SCRA 125
Fabella v. CA 282 SCRA 256
Joson v.Exec. Sec. 290 SCRA 279
Busuego v. CA GR 95325 Mar. 11, 1999
CSC v. Lucas GR 127838 Jan. 21, 1999
NPC v. Bernabe 332 SCRA 74
Summary Dismissal v. Torcita 330 SCRA 153
Velayo v. Comelec 327 SCRA 713
Ramoran v. Jardine 326 SCRA 208
Immam v. Comelec 322 SCRA 866
Villarosa v. Comelec GR 133927 Nov. 29, 1999
Go v. Comelec GR 147741 May 10, 2001
Mollaneda v. Umacob R 140128 June 6, 2001
Cruz v. CSC GR 144469 Nov 27, 2001
Condilla v. De Venecia GR 150605 Dec 10, 2002
Associated Communication v. Dumlao GR 136762 Nov. 21, 2002

33
 Velllarosa v. Pomperada, AdminCase No. 5310, Jan. 28, 2003
Alauya v. Comelec, GR 152151-52, Jan. 22, 2003
Spouses Casimiro v. CA 135911, Feb. 11, 2003
Sy v. CA, GR 147572, Feb. 27, 2003
Namil v. Comelecc, GR 15040, Oct. 28, 2003
Bautista v. Comelec, GR 154796-97, Oct. 23, 2003
Office of OMB v. Coronel 493 SCRA 392
Erece v. Macalingay 552 SCRA 320
Marcelo v. Bungubung 552 SCRA 589
SEC v. Interport 567 SCRA 354
Calinisan v. Roaquin 630 456
IBP v. Atienza 613 SCRA 518
Domingo v. OMB 577 SCRA 476
Zambales v. CAstellejos 581 SCRA 320
OMB v. Evangelista 581 SCRA 350
Phil Export v. Pearl City 608 SCRA 280
Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary 677 SCRA 408
Arroyo v. DOJ 681 SCRA 181

4. Extradition Proceedings
Sec, of Justice v. Lantion 343 SCRA 377
Cuevas v. Munoz GR 140520 Dec. 18, 2000
Govt. of U.S.A v. Purganan GR 148571 Sept. 24, 2002
Rodriguez v. Presiding Judge, 483 SCRA 290
Govt. of Hong Kong v. Olalia, GR 153675 April 19, 2007

5. Arbitration
RCBC v. Banco de Oro 687 SCRA 583

Academic Discipline

1. In General
Angeles v. Sison 112 SCRA 26
Malabanan v. Ramento 129 SCRA 359
Guzman v. NU 142 SCRA 699
Alcuaz v. PSBA 161 SCRA 7
Non v. Judge Dames 185 SCRA 523
ADMU v. Capulong 222 SCRA 644
U.P. v. Ligot-Telan 227 SCRA 342
Go v. Colegio De San Juan de Letran 683 SCRA 358

Deportation Proceeding

1. In General
Lao Gi v. CA 180 SCRA 756
Domingo v Scheer, 421 SCRA 468

Regulations: Fixing of Rates and Regulation of Profession

34
 1. Rates
Philcomsat y. Alcuaz 180 SCRA 218
Randiocom v. NTC 184 SCRA 517
Maceda v. ERB 199 SCRA 454
Globe Telecom c. NTC, 435 SCRA 110

2. Profession
Corona v. UHPAP 283 SCRA 31

Dismissals, Suspension, Reinstatement etc.

1. Dismissals in Government Boards and Commissions

Abalos c. CSC 196 SCRA 81
GSIS v. CSC 201 SCRA 661
Macayayong v. Ople 204 SCRA 372
Gonzales v. CSC 226 SCRA 66
Go. V. NPC 271 SCRA 447
CHR v. CSC 227 SCRA 42
Uy v. COA 328 SCRA 607
Lameyra v. Pangilinan 322 SCRA 117
NPC v. Zozobrado, 487 SCRA 16
PAGCOR v. CA, GR 185668, December 13, 2011

2. Dismissals in Private Sector

Hellinic v. Siete 195 SCRA 179
Salaw v. NLRC 202 SCRA 7
Conti v. NLRC, GR 119253 April 10, 1997
Aparente v. NLRC, GR 117652
Lopez v. Alturas 647 SCRA 566

3. Preventive Suspension
Alonzo v. Capulong 244 SCRA 80
Castillio Co v. Barbers 290 SCRA 717
Bacsasar v. CSC 576 SCRa 787
Carabeo v. CA 607 SCRA 390
Villasenor v. OMB, GR. No. 20230, 725 SCRA 230

Ordinance/Status/Memo Cir/Rules
People v. Nazario 165 SCRA 136
Franscisco v. CA 199 SCRA 595
Misamis Or. V. DOF 238 SCRA 63
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan GR 148560 Nov. 19, 2001

Motion for Reconsideration

Mendenilla v. CSC 194 SCRA 278
Mendenilla v. CSC 221 SCRA 295
Rodreguez v. Proj. 6 247 SCRA 528
Lazo v. CSC 236 SCRA 469
Salonga v. CA 269 SCRA 534

35
 Bernardo v. CA 275 SCRA 413
Casuela v. Ombudsman 276 SCRA 635
Cordenillio v. Executive Secretary 276 SCRA 652
Chua v. CA 287 SCRA 33
De la Cruz v. Abelle 352 SCRA 691
Rodreguez v. CA GR 134275 August 7, 2002
Gonzales v. CSC 490 SCRA 741
Berboso v. CA 494 SCRA 583
Pontejos v. Desierto 592

I. Suretyship
Stronghold Insurance v. CA 205 SCRA 605

J. Tariff and Customs Code

Feeder v. CA 197 SCRA 842
K. Appeal
Alba v. Deputy Ombudsman 254 SCRA 753
Telan v. CA 202 SCRA 246
Rivera v. CSC 240 SCRA 43
Singson v. NLRC 274 SCRA 358
Building Care v. Macaraeg 687 SCRA 643

L. Closure Proceeding
CB v. CA 220 SCRA 536
Rural Bank v. CA 162 SCRA 288
Phil. Merchants v. CA GR 112844 June 2, 1995

M. Biddings

Concerned Officials v. Vasquez, 240 SCRA 502

N. UDHA RA 7279

Perez v. Madrona 668 SCRA 696

O. Cancellation of Property Rights/Privileges

American Inter-Fashion v. OP, 197 SCRA 409

Alliance of DFLO v. Laguesma, 254 SCRA 565
ABAKADA v. Ermita, 469 SCRA 1
British American Tobacco v. Camacho 562 SCRA 511, 585 SCRA 36

P. Administrative and Preliminary Investigation-Ombudsman

Roxas v. Vasquez GR 114944 June 19, 2001
Ocampo v. Ombudsman 322 SCRA 17
Serapio v. Sandiganbayan GR 148468 Jan. 28, 2003

9. Substantive Due Process

US v. Toribio 15 Phil. 85
Churchill v. Rafferty 32 Phil. 580

36
People v. Fajardo 104 Phil. 443
Ermita-Malate Hotel & Operator v. City of Manila 20 SCRA 849
Ynot v. Intermediate Court of Appeals 148 SCRA 659
Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195
Balacuit v. CFI 163 SCRA 182
National Development Co. and New Agrix v. Phil. Vet. Bank 192 SCRA 257
Maranaw Hotel v. NLRC 238 SCRA 190
Magtajas v. Pryce Properties 234 SCRA 255
Bennis v. Michigan No. 94-8729 March 4, 1996
Cruzan v. Dir. Missouri No. 88-1503 June 25 1990
JMM Promotion and Management Inc. v. CA 260 SCRA 319
Corona v. United Harbor 283 SCRA 31
Kelly v. Johnson 425 US 238
Chavez v. Romulo 431 SCRA 534 (2004)
Cruz v. Flavier, GR 135385, December 6, 2000
Smith Kline v. CA, GR 121267, October 23, 2001
Pareno v. COA 523 SCRA 390
Esponcilla v. Bagong Tanyag 529 SCRA 654
BF v. City Mayor 515 SCRA 1
St. Lukes v. NLRC 517 SCRA 677
Carlos v. DSWD 526 SCRA 130
Perez v. LPG 531 SCRA 431
MMDA v. Viron 530 SCRA 341
Sec. of DND v. Manalo 568 SCRA 42 (Amparo)
SJS v. DDB 570 SCRA 410
SJS v. Atienza 545 SCRA 92
SEC v. Interport 567 SCRA 354
People v. Siton 600 SCRA 476
White Light v. City of Manila 576 SCRA 416
CREBA v. Romulo 614 SCRA 605
Southern Hemisphere v. ATC 632 SCRA 146
Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo 630 SCRA 211
Meralco v. Lim 632 SCRA 195
Pollo v. Karina Constantino. GR 181881, October 8, 2011
Sto. Tomas v. Paneda 685 SCRA 245

10. Equal Protection of the Law

REQUISITES of VALID CLASSIFICATION:

It must rest on Substantial distinctions
It must be germane to the purpose of the law.
It must not be limited to existing conditions only.
It must apply equally to all members of the same class.

Standards of Judicial Review

a) Rational Basis Test: described as adopting a deferential attitude towards legislative
classifications. It applies to legislative classifications in general, such as those pertaining to
economic or social legislation.

37
b) Strict Scrutiny Test: A legislative classification which impermissibly interferes with the
exercise of a fundamental right or operates to the peculiar disadvantage of a suspect class is
presumed unconstitutional, and the burden is upon government to prove that the classification
is necessary to achieve a compelling state interest and that it is the least restrictive means to
protect such interest. This is used on issues of speech, gender, and race.

c) Intermediate Scrutiny Test: government must show that the challenged classification serves
an important state interest and that the classification is at least substantially related to serving
that interest.

People v. Cayat 68 PHIL. 12, 18

Ichong v. Hernandez 101 PHIL. 1155
Villegas v. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho 86 SCRA 270
Dumlao v. COMELEC 96 SCRA 392
Goesart v. Cleary - 335 US 464
Ormoc Sugar Central v. Ormoc City Feb. 7, 1968
Sison, Jr. v. PAGCOR May 14, 1991
Republic v. Sandiganbayan 230 SCRA 711
Himagan v. People 237 SCRA 538
Almonte v. Vasquez 244 SCRA 286
Telebap v. COMELEC 289 SCRA 337
Tiu v. CA GR 127410 Jan. 20, 1999
Aguinaldo v. COMELEC GR 132774 June 21, 1999
De Guzman v. COMELEC 336 SCRA
People v. Mercado GR 116239, Nov. 29, 2000
People v. Jalosjos 324 SCRA 689
People v. Piedra 350 SCRA 163
International School v. Quisumbing June 1, 2000
Central Bank Employees Assn. v. BSP 446 SCRA 299
Ycasuegi v. PAL 569 SCRA 467
SJS v. Atienza 545 SCRA 92
Gobenciong v. CA 550 SCRA 302
MIAA v. Olongapo 543 SCRA 269
Nicolas v. Romulo 578 SCRA 438
League of Cities v. COMELEC 608 SCRA 636
Quinto v. COMELEC 613 SCRA 385
CREBA v. Romulo 614 SCRA 605 (supra)
NPC v. Pinatubo 616 SCRA 611
Biraogo v. PTC 637 SCRA 78
League v. COMELEC 643 SCRA 149
PAGCOR v. BIR 645 SCRA 338
Gancayco v. Quezon City 658 SCRA 853
Mendoza v. People, GR 183891, October 19, 2011
Bureau of Customs v. Teves, GR 181704, December 6, 2011
Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary (supra)
Alvez v. People 677 SCRA 673
Garcia v. People 677 SCRA 750
Arroyo v. DOJ
Sto. Tomas v. Paneda 685 SCRA 245
Republic v. Daisy Yahon, GR No. 201043, 726 SCRA 437, June 16, 2014

38
Section 2. The right to of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects
against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be
inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause
to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be
searched and the persons or things to be seized.

1. Purpose of Section 2

2. Scope of the Protection

Moncada v. Peoples Court, 80 PHIL 1
Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 383
People v. Marti, 193 SCRA 57
Waterous Drug Corp. v. NLRC, GR 113271, Oct 16, 1997
People v. Mendoza, GR 109279, Jan 18, 1999
People v. Bongcarawan, GR 143944, July 11, 2002

3. Requisites for a Valid Warrant

A. Probable Cause

I. Definition
Henry v. US, 361 US 98

For Arrest:
People v. Syjuco, 64 Phil 667
Alvarez v. CFI , 64 Phil 33
Webb v. De Leon, GR 121234, August 23, 1995

For Search:
Burgos v. Chief of Staff, 133 SCRA 800
Prudente v. Dayrit, 180 SCRA 69
United States v. Jones, January 23, 2012

II. Who Determines Probable Cause?

People v. CA, GR 126005, Jan 21, 1999

III. Kind of Evidence Needed to Establish Probable Cause

Microsoft Corp. v. Maxicorp, GR 140946, Sept. 13, 2004

IV. In General
Nala v. Barroso, GR 153087 Aug. 7, 2003
Betoy v. Judge AM NO. MJJ-05-1108, Feb 26, 2006
20th Century Fox v. CA, 162 SCRA 655
Columbia Pictures v. CA, 262 SCRA 219

B. Personally Determined by the Judge

Placer v. Villanueva, 126 SCRA 463
Lim v. Judge Fenix, 194 SCRA 292

39
People v. Inting, 187 SCRA 788
People v. Delgado, 189 SCRA 715
Allado v. Diokno 232 SCRA 192
Gozos v. Tac-an GR 123191, Dec. 17, 1998
Flores v. Sumaljag 290 SCRA 568

C. Personal Examination (After Examination Under Oath or Affirmation the Complainant and
the Witnesses He May Produce)
Bache & Co. v Ruiz 37 SCRA 823
Soliven v. Makasiar, GR 8287, Nov. 14 1981
Luna v. Plaza, 26 SCRA 310
Kho v. Judge Makalintal, GR 94902-06, April 21, 1999
Alvarez v. Court, 64 Phil 33
Bache v. Cruz, 37 SCRA 823
Borlongan v. Pena, GR 143591, Nov. 23, 2007
People v. Mamaril, GR 147607, Jan 22 2004
Ortiz v. Palaypayon 234 SCRA 391

D. Particularity of Description
People v. Veloso 48 Phil 169
Alvarez v. CFI 64 Phil. 33
Corro v. Lising 137 SCRA 541
Pangandaman v. Casar, 159 SCRA 599 (1988)
Stonehill v. Diokno (1967)
People v. Martinez 235 SCRA 171
Microsoft Corp. v. Maxicorp (2004)
Burgos v. Chief of Staff, AFP 133 SCRA 890
Frank Uy v. BIR , 344 SCRA 36
Yousex Al-Ghoul v. CA GR 126859 Sept. 4 , 2001
People v. CA 291 SCRA 400
Paper Industries v. Asuncion, GR 122092 May 19, 1998
Malalaon v. CA, 232 SCRA 249
People v. Estrada GR 124461, June 26, 2000

4. Only a Judge May Issue a Warrant

Salazar v. Achcoso, 183 SCRA 145
Republic (PCGG) v. Sandiganbayan, 255 SCRA 438
Morano v. Vivo, 80 SCRA 562
Sy v. Domingo
Tron Van Nyhia v. Liway, 175 SCRA 318
Board of Commissioners v. Judge De La Rosa, 197 SCRA 853
Harvey v. Santiago 162 SCRA 840
Ho vs. People 280 SCRA 365

*Administrative Arrest (Exceptions to the rule that only a judge may issue a warrant):
Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation may issue warrants to carry out a final finding
of a violation. (Board of Commissioners v. Judge De La Rosa, 197 SCRA 853) It is issued
after a proceeding has taken place.

5. Of Whatever Nature and for Any Purpose

40
Material Distributions v. Judge, 84 Phil 127 (1989)
Oklahoma Press v. Walling, 327 US 186
Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 US 523 ( 1967)

6. Warrantless Searches and Seizures

A. General Rule: Get a Search Warrant.

People v. Aminuddin, 163 SCRA 402
People v. Valdez, 341 SCRA 85
People v. Oliver Edano, GR No. 188133, 729 SCRA 255, July 7, 2014
Dale Grady v. North Carolina, March 30, 2015 (Use of GPS Tracker)

B. When is a search a search?

Valmonte v. General de Villa 178 SCRA 211 (Main) and 185 SCRA 655 (MR)
Guazon v. De Villa 181 SCRA 623

C. No Presumption of Regularity in Search Cases

People v. Tudtud, GR 144037, Sept 26, 2003
Sony Music v. Judge Espanol, GR 156804, March 14, 2005

D. Instances of Warrantless Searches and Seizures

List: People v. Sevilla 339 SCRA 625

i. Incidental to a Lawful Arrest

Sec. 12 Rule 16, Rules of Court

Two Requisites:
1. Item to be searched was within the arrestees custody or area of immediate control.
2. Search was contemporaneous with an arrest.

Padilla v. CA, GR 121917 March 12, 1997

Espano v. CA 288 SCRA 558 (1998)
People v. De Lara 236 SCRA 291
People v. Leangsiri 252 SCRA 213
People v. Cuenco GR 128277, Nov. 16, 1998
People v. Che Chun Ting 328 SCRA 592
People v.Chi Chan, G.R. No. 189272, January 21, 2015

ii. Plain View

Requisites:
1. Prior valid intrusion
2. Evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police
3. Illegality of the evidence is immediately apparent; and
4. Noticed without further search.

People v. Evaristo, 216 SCRA 413

People v. Tabar, 222 SCRA 144 (1993)
Roan v. Gonzales, 145 SCRA 687

41
United Laboratories v. Isip GR 163858 (June 28, 2005)
People v. Doria GR 125299, Jan. 22, 1999
Del Rosario v. People, GR 142295, May 31, 2001

iii. Moving Vehicle

There must be a highly reasonable suspicion amounting to probable cause that the occupant
committed a criminal activity.

Hizon v. Court of Appeals, 265 SCRA 517 (1996)

Bagalihog v. Fernandez 198 SCRA 614
Aniag, Jr v. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 424 (1994)
People v. Aminuddin, 163 SCRA 402
People v. Malmstedt, GR 91107, June 19, 1991
People v. Lo Ho Wing, GR 88017, Jan 21, 1991
People v. Saycon 236 SCRA 329
People v. CFI 101 SCRA 86
People v. Barros 231 SCRA 557
Mustang Lumber v. CA 257 SCRA 430
People v. Lacerna 278 SCRA 561

iv. Consent/Waiver

Requisites:
1.It must appear that the right exists.
2. The person involved had knowledge, either actual or constructive, of the existence of the
right.
3. The person had actual intention to relinquish the right.

De Garcia v. Locsin, 65 PHIL 689

Caballes v. Court of Appeals, GR 136292, Jan 15, 2002
People v. Agbot, 106 SCRA 325
Lopez v. Commissioner of Customs, 68 SCRA 320 (1975)
People v. Damaso, 212 SCRA 457
People v. Asis, GR 142531, October 15, 2002
Spouses Veroy v. Layague, GR 95632, June 18, 1992
People v. Omaweng, 213 SCRA 462
People v. Correa, 285 SCRA 679
People v. Ramos, 222 SCRA 557
People v. Tudtud, GR 144037, Sept 26, 2003
People v. Tabar 222 SCRA 144
People v. Encinada 280 SCRA 72
People v. Aruta 288 SCRA 626

v. Customs Search
Papa v. Mago, 22 SCRA 857
Pacis v. Pamaran, 56 SCRA 16
People v. Gatward, 267 SCRA 785
People v. Susan Canton, GR 148825, December 27, 2002
People v. Johnson 348 SCRA 526

42
vi. Stop and Frisk Situation
Malacat: Where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to
conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the person
with whom he is dealing may be armed and that the person with whom he is dealing may be
armed and presently dangerous, where in the course of investigation of this behavior he
identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the
initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others
safety, he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully
limited search of the outer clothing of such person in an attempt to discover weapons which
might be used to assault him.

Malacat (1997): Probable cause is not required. However, mere suspicion or a hunch is not
enough. Rather, a genuine reason must exist, in light of the police officers experience and
surrounding conditions, to warrant the belief that the person detained has weapons concealed
about him.

Terry v. Ohio 392 US 1

Posadas v. CA, GR NO. 89139, August 2, 1990
People v. Solayao 202 SCRA 255 (1996)
Malacat v. CA 283 SCRA 159 (1997)
Manalili v. CA, GR 113447, October 7, 1997
People v. Aruta, 288 SCRA 626 (1998)
People v. Sy Chua, GR 136066, February 4, 2003
People V. Victor Cogaed Y Romana, G.R. No. 200334, July 30, 2014

vii. Exigent and Emergency Circumstances

People v. De Gracia, 233 SCRA 716 (1994)

*Drug, Alcohol and Blood Tests

Requisites to be valid:
1. It must be random, and
2. It must be suspicionless.

Laserna v. DDB, GR 158633, Nov. 3, 2008: The constitutional validity of the mandatory,
random, and suspicionless drug testing for students emanates primarily from the waiver of
their right to privacy when they seek entry to the school, and from their voluntary submitting
their persons to the parental authority of school authorities.
In case of private and public employees, the constitutional soundness of the mandatory,
random and suspicious drug testing proceeds from the reasonableness of the drug test policy
and requirement.
However, there is no valid justification for mandatory drug testing for persons accused of
crimes punishable with at least 6 years and one day imprisonment as they are singled out and
impleaded against their will. The operative concepts in the mandatory drug testing are
randomness and suspicionless.

Pimentel, Jr v. COMELEC, GR 161658, November 3, 2008: The mandatory drug test

requirements as a pre-condition for the validity of a certificate of candidacy of electoral
candidates not established under the Constitution, e.g. local government positions, is valid.

43
7. Warrantless Arrests

Rule 113, Section 5. A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, arrest a
person:

a. When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or
attempting to commit an offense;
b. When an offense has in fact been committed, and he has personal knowledge of facts
indicating that the person to be arrested has committed it; and
c. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or
place where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while his case is pending or
has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another

A. In Flagrante Delicto

People v. De La Cruz, GR 83260, April 18, 1990

People v. Doria, GR 125299, January 22, 1999
Espiritu v. Lim, GR 85727, October 3, 1991
Umil v. Fidel Ramos, GR 81567, July 9, 1990
People v. Sucro, 195 SCRA 388
People v. Rodrigueza, 205 SCRA 791
People v. Yap, 229 SCRA 787
People v. Alolod, 266 SCRA 154
People v. Mengote 210 SCRA 174
People v. Elamparo 329 SCRA
Rizaldy Sanchez Y Cajili v. People, G.R. No. 204589, November 19, 2014

B. Hot Pursuit

Two Requisites:
1. An offense had just been committed.
2. The person making the arrest has probable cause to believe, based on his personal
knowledge of facts and circumstances, that the person to be arrested committed it.
*There must be immediacy between the time the offense is committed and the time of the
arrest.

Go v. CA 206 SCRA 138

People v. Manlulu, 231 SCRA 701 (1994)
People v. Rodrigueza, 205 SCRA 791 (1992)
People v. Enrile, 222 SCRA 586
People v. Jayson, 282 SCRA 166 (1997)
People v. Del Rosario, GR 127755, April 14, 1999
People Samus, GR 135957, April 14, 1999
People v. Cubcubin, GR 136267, October 2, 2001
People v. Gorente, 219 SCRA 756
Padilla v. CA, GR 121917, March 12, 1997
People v. Burgos 144 SCRA 1
People v. Sucro 195 SCRA 388
People v. Briones 202 SCRA 708
People v. Sequino 264 SCRA 79

44
People v. Nazareno 260 SCRA 256
People v. Mahusay 282 SCRA 80
People v. Alvario 275 SCRA 529
Larranaga v. CA 287 SCRA 521
People v. Olivarez GR 77865, Dec. 4, 1998
Cadua v. CA 312 SCRA 703
People v. Cubcubin 360 SCRA
People v. Compacion 361 SCRA 540
Posadas v. Ombudsman 341 SCRA
People v. Acol 232 SCRA 406

C. Escaped Prisoner

D. Waiver

E. Procedural Rules

People v. Rabang 187 SCRA 682

People v. Lopez 246 SCRA 95
Velasco v. CA 245 SCRA 677
People v. Buluran 325 SCRA 476

Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except
upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as
prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible
for any purpose in any proceeding.

Cybercrime Law- R.A. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012): The State recognizes the
vital role of information and communications industries such as content production,
telecommunications, broadcasting electronic commerce, and data processing, in the nations
overall social and economic development. The State also recognizes the importance of
providing an environment conducive to the development, acceleration, and rational
application and exploitation of information and communications technology (ICT) to attain
free, easy, and intelligible access to exchange and/or delivery of information; and the need to
protect and safeguard the integrity of computer, computer and communications systems,
networks, and databases, and the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and
data stored therein, from all forms of misuse, abuse, and illegal access by making punishable
under the law such conduct or conducts. In this light, the State shall adopt sufficient powers
to effectively prevent and combat such offenses by facilitating their detection, investigation,
and prosecution at both the domestic and international levels, and by providing arrangements
for fast and reliable international cooperation.

Disini v. The Secretary of Justice, GR No. 203335, February 11, 2014

Scope: Tangible and Intangible Objects.

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 437 (1967): the US Supreme Court held that the act of FBI
agents in electronically recording a conversation made by petitioner in an enclosed public
telephone booth violated his right to privacy and constituted a search and seizure. Because
the petitioner had a reasonable expectation of privacy in using the enclosed booth to make a

45
personal telephone call, the protection of the Fourth Amendment extends to such area. In the
concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Harlan, it was further noted that the existence of privacy
right under prior decisions involved a two-fold requirement: first, that a person has exhibited
an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy; and second, that the expectation be one that
society is prepared to recognize as reasonable (objective).
Riley v. California, June 25, 2014
U.S. v. Graham, August 05, 2015

Factors to Determine Violation of the Right to Privacy

In the matter of the Petition for Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Corpus of Camilo I. Sabio,
GR 174340, October 17, 2006: In evaluating a claim for violation of the right to privacy, a
court must determine whether a person has exhibited a reasonable expectation of privacy and,
if so, whether that expectation has been violated by unreasonable government intrusion.
Briccio Pollo v. Chairperson Karina David, GR 181881, October 18, 2011
Anonymous Letter-Complaint against Atty. Miguel Morales, Clerk of Court, Metropolitan
Trial Court of Manila, A.M. Nos. P-08-2519 and P-08-2520, November 19, 2008, 571 SCRA
361.
Synhumliong v. Rivera, GR 200841, June 4, 2014

RA No. 4200, Anti-Wiretapping Law

Ramirez v. CA, 248 SCRA 590: Private communication in Section 1 of RA 4200 is deemed
to include private conversations.
Navarro v. CA, GR 121087, August 26, 1999: The Anti-Wiretapping Law prohibits the
overhearing, intercepting, or recording of private communications. Thus, a tape recording of
an altercation or verbal exchange between a policeman and a radio reporter at a police station
is admissible in evidence.

Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data, AM 08-1-16-SC

Writ of Habeas Data: the remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life,
liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official
or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting, or
storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the
aggrieved party.

Not Covered
Alejano v. Cabuay, 468 SCRA 188
In Re: Wenceslao Laureta, 148 SCRA 382
People v. Albofera, 152 SCRA 123
Dr. Lee v. P/Supt. Ilagan, GR No. 203254, October 08, 2014
Gamboa v. P/Supt. Chan, GR No. 193636, July 24, 2012

Exclusionary Rule
Gaanan v. IAC 145 SCRA 112
Salcedo-Ortanez v. CA 235 SCRA 111
Zulueta v. CA 253 SCRA 699
Ople v. Torres 293 SCRA 141
Waterous Drug Corp v. NLRC, GR 113271, October 16, 1997
People v. Marti 193 SCRA 57
People v. Artua 288 SCRA 626

46
Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the
press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances.

Content-based Regulation: Restraint is aimed at the message or idea of the expression. Apply
the Strict Scrutiny Test and the challenged act must overcome the clear and present danger
rule.

Content-neutral Regulation: Restraint is aimed to regulate the time, place or manner of the
expression in public place without any restraint on the content of the expression. Apply the
Intermediate Approach Test wherein a regulation is justified if it is : within the constitutional
power of government, furthers an important or substantial government interest, government
interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression, and the incident restriction on the
alleged freedom of speech and expression is no greater than is essential to the furtherance of
that interest. Here, it only requires substantial government interest for validity.

Facial Challenge Concept: A facial challenge is an exception to the rule that only persons
who are directly affected by a statute have legal standing to assail the same. This is only
applicable to statutes involving free speech, impeached on the grounds of overbreadth or
vagueness. Here, the litigants are permitted to challenge a statute not because their own rights
of free expression are violated, but because of a judicial prediction or assumption that the
statutes very existence may cause others not before the court to refrain from constitutionally
protected speech or expression.

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014: While this Court has withheld the application
of facial challenges to strictly penal statues, it has expanded its scope to cover statutes not
only regulating free speech, but also those involving religious freedom, and other
fundamental rights. The underlying reason for this modification is simple. For unlike its
counterpart in the U.S., this Court, under its expanded jurisdiction, is mandated by the
Fundamental Law not only to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable, but also to determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government.

Overbreadth Doctrine: A ground to declare a statute void when it offends the constitutional
principle that a government purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject to
state regulations may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and
thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.

Tests for Valid Government Interference to Freedom of Expression

1.Clear and Present Danger Test
2.Dangerous Tendency Test
3.Balancing of Interest Test

State Regulation of Different Types of Mass Media

1.Broadcast and Radio Media: It is subject to dual regulation: First, procure a legislative
franchise. Second, register and be subject to regulations set by the NTC.
(Divinagracia v. CBS, Inc GR 162272, April 7, 2009)
2.Print Media

47
The freedom of television and radio broadcasting is lesser in scope that the freedom accorded
to newspapers and print media. (Eastern Broadcasting Corp v. Dans Jr)

Private vs. Government speech

Hecklers Veto: This involves situations in which the government attempts to ban protected
speech because it might provoke a violent response.

1. Prior Restraint: Refers to official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms
of expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination.

Valid Prior Restraint:

1. Movies, television, and radio broadcast censorship in view of its access to numerous
people.
2. Pornography
3. False or misleading commercial statement
4. Advocacy of imminent lawless action
5. Danger to national security (Chavez v. Gonzales)

Near v. Minnesota 238 US 697

Freedman v. Maryland 380 US 51
New York Times Co. v. US 403 US 713
Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance GR 115444, Oct. 30, 1995
Alexander v. US 113 S. Ct. 2766, 125 L. Ed. 2d. 441
INC v. CA, 259 SCRA 529 (1996)
SWS v. COMELEC, GR 147571, May 5, 2001
Chavez v. Gonzales, GR 168338, February 15, 2008
Newsounds Broadcasting v. Dy, GR 170270 and 179411, April 2, 2009
MTRCB v. ABS-CBN, GR 155282, January 17, 2005
Re: Request for Radio-TV Coverage of the Estrada Trial, AM No. 01-4-03-SC, June 29, 2001
Soriano v. Laguardia, GR 164785, April 29, 2009
The Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec, GR No. 205728, 747 SCRA 1, Jan 21, 2015
GMA Network, Inc. v. Comelec, G.R. No. 205357, September 2, 2014
Davao City Water District v. Aranjuez, G.R. No. 194192, June 16, 2015
1-United Transport Koalisyon (1-Utak) v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 206020, April 14, 2015
Social Weather Stations, Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 208062, April 7, 2015

2. Subsequent Punishment
People v. Perez 45 Phil. 599
Espiritu v. General Lim, GR 85727, October 3, 1991
Dennis v. US 341 US 494
Gonzales v. COMELEC 27 SCRA 835
Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans, Jr. 137 SCRA 628
Ayer Prod. PTY. LTD. V. Judge Capulong 160 SCRA 865
Kelley v. Johnson 425 US 238
Brandenburg v. Ohio 395 US 444
Miriam College Foundation v. CA, GR 127930, December 15, 2000

3. Speech and the Electoral Process

Sanidad v. COMELEC 181 SCRA 529

48
National Press Club v. COMELEC 207 SCRA 1
Adiong v. COMELEC March 31, 1992
Osmena v. COMELEC 288 SCRA 447
ABS-CBN v. COMELEC 323 SCRA 811
SWS v. COMELEC 357 SCRA 496
Penera v. COMELEC, GR 181613, November 25, 2009

4. Commercial Speech
Rubin v. Coors Brewing 131 L. Ed. 2d 532
Cincinnati v. Discovery Network 123 L. Ed. 2d 99
Central Hudson Gas v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 US 557
Pharmaceutical v. Secretary of Health, GR 173034, October 9, 2007
City of Laduc v. Gilleo 129 L. Ed. 2d 36
Disini v. Secretary of Justice, GR No. 203335, 2014

5. Libel (Unprotected Speech)

Policarpio v. Manila Times 5 SCRA 148
Lopez v. CA 34 SCRA 116
New York Times Co. c. Sullivan 376 US 254
Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc. 403 US 254
Gerts v. Robert Wlech 418 US 323
Hustler v. Magazine 485 US 46
In Re Jurado AM No. 90-5-2373, 4 LR 19 Aug09
In Re Jurado 243 SCRA 299
Vasquez v. CA GR 118971 Sept. 15, 1999
Borjal v. CA GR. 126466 Jan. 14, 1999
Vicario v. CA GR 124491 June 1, 1999
Pader v. People 325 SCRA 117
Fermin v. People, GR 157643, March 28, 2008

6. Obscenity (Unprotected Speech)

Miller v. California 37 L. Ed. 2d 419
Gonzales v. Kalaw-Katigbak 137 SCRA 717
Pita v. CA 178 SCRA 362
Barnes v. Glen Theater 498 US 439
FCC v Pacifica Foundation 438 US 726
Renton v. Playtime Theater 475 US 41
Bethel School District v. Fraser 478 US 675
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier 484 US 260
Fernando v. CA, GR 159751, December 6, 2006
Soriano v. Laguardia, GR 164785, April 29, 2009

7. Assembly and Petition

Navarro v. Villegas 31 SCRA 73
PBM Employees v. PBM 51 SCRA 189
JBL Reyes v. Mayor Bagatsing 125 SCRA 553
PCIB v. Philnabank Employees, 105 SCRA 314
Malabanan v. Ramento 129 SCRA 359
De la Cruz v. CA, GR 126183, March 25, 1999
Bangalisan v. CA, GR 124678, July 23, 1997

49
Ruiz v. Gordon, 126 SCRA 233
BAYAN v. Ermita GR 169838, April 25, 2006
GSIS v. Kapisanan, GR 170132, December 6, 2006
In Re Valmonte, 296 SCRA
In Re Petition to Annul 98-7-02 SC

Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the

free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship,
without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be
required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

Purpose

I. Non-Establishment Clause
Aglipay v. Ruiz, 64 Phil 201
Garces v. Estenzo, 104 SCRA 510
School District v. Schempp, 394 RS 203
Board of Education v. Allen, 392 US 236
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 US 602
Tilton v. Richardson, 403 US 672
Country of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 57 LW 504
Zobrest v. Catalina, No. 92-94 June 18, 1993
Capitol Square Review Board v. Pinetter & Ku Klus Klan, US No. 94-780, June 29, 1995
Lee v. Welsman, US No. 90-1014, June 24, 1992
Manosca v. CA, 252 SCRA 412
Islamic Dawah v. ES, GR 153888, July 9, 2003
Taruc v. Dela Cruz, 453 SCRA 123
UCCP v. Bradford, 674 SCRA 92
Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

II. Free Exercise of Religion

Tests
a) Clear and Present Danger Test: When words are used in such circumstance and of such
nature as to create a clear and present danger that will bring about the substantive evil that the
State has a right to prevent.

b) Compelling State Interest Test: When a law of general application infringes religious
exercise, albeit incidentally, the state interest sought to be promoted must be so paramount
and compelling as to override the free exercise claim. Three-step test:
1. Has the statute or government action created a burden on the free exercise of religion?
2. Is there a sufficiently compelling state interest to justify this infringement of religious
liberty?
3. Has the state in achieving its legitimate purposes used the least intrusive means possible so
that the free exercise is not infringed any more than necessary to achieve the legitimate goal
of the state? (Estrada v. Escritor)

c) Conscientious Objector Test: Persons who are conscientiously opposed to participation in

war in any form by reason of religious training and belief may be exempted from combat
training and service in the armed forces. Religious training and belief means an individuals

50
belief in relation to a Supreme Being involving duties superior to those arising from any
human relation, but does not include essentially political, sociological or philosophical views
or a merely personal code.

Victoriano v. Elizalde, 59 SCRA 94

Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 US 296
US v. Ballard 322 US 78
American Bible Society v. City of Manila 104 Phil. 386
Ebranilag v. Divison Superintendent 219 SCRA 256; (MR) 251 SCRA
Wisconsin v. Yoder 406 US 205
Goldman v. Weinberger 54 LW 4298
German v. Baranganan 135 SCRA 514
Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance 249 SCRA 628
Centeno v. Villalon-Pornillos 236 SCRA 197
Church of the Lukumi v. City of Hialeach No. 91-948, June 11, 1993
Lambs Chapel v. School Disctrict No.91-2024, June 7, 1993
In re Request of Muslim Employees in the Different Court of Iligan City, 477 SCRA 648
Estrada v. Escritor AM P-021651, August 4, 2003 (Compelling State Interest Test)
Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

III. No Religious Test

Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 SCRA 488
Pamil v. Teleron 86 SCRA 413
McDaniel v. Paty 435 US 618
Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC, GR 190582, April 8, 2010

IV. Ecclesiastical Matters

Austria v. NLRC, 310 SCRA 293

Long and Almeria v. Basa, GR 134963, September 7, 2001
Taruc v. Dela Cruz, 453 SCRA 123
UCCP v. Bradford, 674 SCRA 92

Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law
shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be
impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be
provided by law.

Article 13 (2) Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 12 (4) Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Watch-list, hold departure orders and lookout order

Reyes v. CA, GR 182161, December 3, 2009

Return to Ones Country

Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668

Liberty of Abode and Right to Travel

Villavicencio v. Lukban, 39 Phil 778
Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro

51
Silverio v. CA 195 SCRA 760
Santiago v. Vasquez 217 SCRA 633
Marcos v. Sandiganbayan 247 SCRA 127
Yap v. CA, GR 141529, June 6, 2001
Mirasol v DPWH, 490 SCRA 318
OAS v. Judge Macarine, 677 SCRA 1

Human Security Act, Section 26: In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong, and the
person charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is entitled to
bail and is granted the same, the court, upon application by the prosecutor, shall limit the
right of travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where he resides or where the
case is pending, in the interest of national security and public safety. Travel outside said
municipality or city, without the authorization of the court, shall be deemed a violation of the
terms and conditions of his bail, which shall then be forfeited under the Rules of Court.

Section 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be
recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official
acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for
policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be
provided by law.

(FOI) E.O. signed by Pres. Duterte on peoples constitutional right to information and the
state policies of full public disclosure and transparency in the public service: Section 3.
Access to information- Every Filipino shall have access to information, official records,
public records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for public-document.

Right to Information

Scope of the Right

Chavez v. PEA, GR 133250, July 9, 2002

Limitation on the Right

Chavez v. PCGG, GR 130716, Dec. 9, 1988: No right to information in the following:
1. National security matters and intelligence information
2. Trade secrets and banking transactions
3. Criminal matters
4. Other confidential information which includes diplomatic correspondence, closed door
Cabinet meetings and executive sessions of either Houses of Congress, and the internal
deliberations of the Supreme Court.

In Re: Production of Court Records, 14 February 2012

In General: Access to court records, Government contract negotiations, Diplomatic

negotiations, etc.

Legaspi v. CSC, 150 SCRA 530

Bantay Republic Act v. COMELEC, GR 177271, May 4, 2007
Valmonte v. Belmonte, Jr., 170 SCRA 256
Aquino-Sarmiento v. Morato, 203 SCRA 515

52
Echegaray v. Sec. of Justice, GR 132601, Oct. 12, 1988
Gonzales v. Narvasa, GR 140835, August 14, 2000
RE: Request for Radio-TV Coverage, 365 SCRA 248
RE: Request for Live Radio-TV Coverage, 365 SCRA 62
Hilado v. Reyes, 496 SCRA 282 (Access to Court Records)
Sabio v. Gordon, 504 SCRA 704
Bantay v. COMELEC, 523 SCRA 1
Berdin v. Mascarinas, 526 SCRA 592
Chang v. NHA, 530 SCRA 335
Senate v. Ermita GR 169777, April 20, 2006
Suplico v. NEDA, GR 178830, July 14, 2008
Neri v. Senate GR 180643, March 25, 2008; MR Sept. 4, 2008
Akbayan v. Aquino GR 170516, July 16, 2008
Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Peace Panel, 568 SCRA 402
Guingona v. COMELEC, 620 SCRA 448
Antolin v. Domondon, 623 SCRA 163
Center for People v. COMELEC, 631 SCRA 41
Francisco v. TRB, 633 SCRA 470
Initiatives v. PSALM, 682 SCRA 602
Belgica v. Executive Secretary, GR 208566, November 19, 2013
Gov. Villafuerte, Jr. v. Hon. Robredo GR No. 195390, December 10, 2014

Section 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors,
to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be
abridged.

Scope
Volkschel Labor Union v. Bureau of Labor Relations, 137 SCRA 42

Right to Association
Occena v. COMELEC, 127 SCRA 404
UPCSU v. Laguesma 286 SCRA 15
Bel-Air Village Association v. Dionisio, 174 SCRA 589
Padcom Condominium Association v. Ortigas Center Association, Inc, 382 SCRA 222

Government Employees (Right to Strike)

TUCP v. NHC, 173 SCRA 33
SSS Employees v. CA, 175 SCRA 686
MPSTA v. Secretary of Education, GR 95445, August 6, 1991
Jacinto v. CA, GR 124540, November 4, 1997
GSIS v. Kapisanan, GR 170132

Membership in the Philippine Bar

In Re: Edillon, 84 SCRA 554

Section 9. Private Property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.

Expropriation in General
Heirs of Alberto Suguitan v. City of Mandaluyong, March 14, 2000
NHA v. Heirs of Isidro Guivelondo, GR 15441, June 19, 2003

53
Mactan v. Lozada, 613 SCRA 618 (Reversion)
Vda De Ouna v. Republic, 642 SCRA 384 (Reversion)

Power to Undertake Expropriation Case

Iron and Steel Authority v. CA, 249 SCRA 538
Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, 244 SCRA 272
Telebap v. COMELEC 289 SCRA 337
Estate of Heirs v. City of Manila, 422 SCRA 551
Lagcao v. Labra, GR 155746, October 13, 2004

Rights of Owner Before Expropriation

Greater Balanga v. Municipality of Balanga, 239 SCRA 436
Velarma v. CA, 252 SCRA 406
Solanda v. CA, 305 SCRA 645
Republic v. Salem, 334 SCRA 320 (Title not cancelled until paid)

1. Elements of Taking
Republic v. Vda. De Castelvi 58 SCRA 336
Garcia v. CA 102 SCRA 597
City of Government v. Judge Ericta 122 SCRA 759
US v. Causby 328 US 256
People v. Fajardo 104 Phil 443
Republic v. PLDT 26 SCRA 620
NPC v. Jocson 206 SCRA 520
Penn Central Transportation v. NY City 438 US 104
Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto 467 US 986
NPC v. Manubay 437 SCRA 60
NPC v. San Pedro 503 SCRA 333
NPC v. Tianco 514 SCRA 674
LBP v. Imperial 515 SCRA 449
NCP v. Bongbong 520 SCRA 290
Tan v. Republic - 423 SCRA 203
NPC v. Ibrahim 526 SCRA 149
NPC v. Purefoods 565 SCRa 17
NPC v. Capin 569 SCRA 648
PNOC v. Maglasang 570 SCRA 560 (lease not basis for taking)
NPC v. CO 578 SCRa 243
NPC v. Villamor - 590 SCRA 11
NPC v. Maruhom 609 SCRA 198
OSG v. Ayala 600 SCRA 617 (free parking spaces in malls)
NPC v. Tuazon 653 SCRA 84

2. Public Use
Sumulong v. Guerrero 154 SCRA 461
Phil. Columbian Assn. v. Hon. Panis 228 SCRA 668
Manosca v. CA 252 SCRA 412
Province of Camarines Sur v. CA 222 SCRA 173
Lagcao v. Judge Labra GR 155746, Oct. 13, 2004
Reyas v. NHA, GR 147511, Jan 20, 2003
Masikip v. Pasig, 479 SCRA 391

54
Didipio v. Earth Savers v. Guzon, 485 SCRA 586
Barangay v. CA, 581 SCRA 649
Manapat v. CA, 536 SCRA 32
Mactan v. Tudtud, GR 174012, November 14, 2008
City of Manila v. Tan Te, 658 SCRA 88(socialized housing)
Republic of the Philippines v. Heirs of Borbon, GR No. 165354, 745 SCRA 40, Jan 12, 2015

3. Just Compensation
City of Manila v. Estrada 25 Phil 208
Manila Railroad v. Paredes 31 Phil. 118
Santos v. Land Bank GR 137431, Sept. 7, 2000
Municipality of Daet v. CA 129 SCRA 665
NPC v. CA 129 SCRA 665
EPZA v. Dulay 149 SCRA 305
Maddumba v. GSIS 182 SCRA 281
Berkenkotter v. CA 216 SCRA 584
Meralco v. Pineda 206 SCRA 196
NPC v. CA 254 SCRA 577
Land Bank v. CA 249 SCRA 149; (MR) 258 SCRA 404
Panes v. VISCA 264 SCRA 708
Republic v. CA 263 SCRA 758
NPC v. Henson GR 129998, December 29 1998
Santos v. Landbank, GR 137431, Sept. 7, 2000
Sigre v. Ca, GR 109568, Aug. 8 2002
NHA v. Heirs of Isidro, GR 154411, June 19 2001
Mactan v. Urgello 520 SCRA 515
San Roque v. Republic 532 SCRA 493
Land Bank of the Philippines v. Peralta, G.R. No. 182704, April 23, 2014
Land Bank of the Philippines v. Eusebio, Jr., G.R. No. 160143, July 2, 2014
Department of Agrarian Reform v. Sta., G.R. No. 183290, July 9, 2014
Department of Agrarian Reform v. Beria, G.R. Nos. 183901 & 183931
Department of Agrarian Reform v. Susie Irene Galle, G.R. No. 171836,August 11, 2014

4. Judicial Review
De Knecht v. Bautista 100 SCRA 660
Manotoc v. NHA 150 SCRA 89
Republic v. De Knecht 182 SCRA 141
Militante v. CA, GR 107040, April 12, 2000
Imbong v. Ochoa, Jr. G.R. No. 204819, April 8, 2014

Section 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.

Clemens v. Nolting, 42 Phil 702, 1922

Home Building and Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell 290 US 398
Rutter v. Esteban 93 Phil. 68
Del Rosario v. De los Santos L-20589-90
Abella v. NLRC 152 SCRA 140
Phil. Vet. Bank Employees v. Phil. Vet. Bank 189 SCRA 14
Presley v. Bel-Air Village Association 201 SCRA 13
Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance 235 SCRA 630

55
Siska Development v. Office of the President 231 SCRA 674
Miners Association v. Factoran 240 SCRA 100
Juarez v. CA 214 SCRA 475
FPIB v. CA 252 SCRA 259
CMMA v. POEA 243 SCRA 666
PNB v. O.P. 252 SCRA 5
Eugenio v. Drilon 252 SCRA 106
Meralco v. Province of Laguna 306 SCRA 750
Lim v. Pacquing 240 SCRA 649
Ortigas v. Feati Bank 94 SCRA 533
Juarez v. CA 214 SCRA 475
FPIB v. CA 252 SCRA 259
CMMA v. POEA 243 SCRA 106
JMM v. CA (supra)
PNB v. OP 252 SCRA 5
Eugenio v. Drilon 252 SCRA 106
JMM v. CA (supra Substantive)
C & M Timber v. Alcala 273 SCRA 402
Republic v. Agana 2269 SCRA 1
Producers v. NLRC GR 118069, November 16, 1998
Blaquera v. Alcala GR109406, September 11, 1998
Philreca v. Sec. of DILG, GR 1543076, June 10, 2003
Republic v. Rosemoor Mining and Development Corp. 426 SCRA 517
Chavez v. COMELEC 437 SCRA 415
Alvarez v. PICOP - 508 SCRA 498
Lepanto v. WMC 507 SCRA 315
Republic v. Caguioa 536 SCRA 193
Land Bank v. Republic 543 SCRA 453
Serrano v. Gallant 582 SCRA 254
Alvarez v. PICOP 606 SCRA 444
Surigao v. ERC - 632 SCRA 96
Hacienda Luisita v. Pac 653 SCRA 154

Section 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance
shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.

Indigent Party: One who is authorized by the court to prosecute his action or defense as an
indigent upon an ex parte application and hearing showing that he has no money or property
sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for himself and his family.
(Rules of Court, Rule 3, Section 21)

Legal Provisions on Free Access

1. RA 6035: stenographers are required to give free transcript of stenographic notes to
indigent and low-income litigants.
2. Rules of Court, Rule 3, Section 21
3. Constitution, Article 3, Section 12: the court appoints a counsel de officio for an accused
who cannot afford to engage the service of a counsel de parte.
4. Rule on the Writ of Amparo, Section 4: No docket or other lawful fees shall be required for
the filing of the petition.

56
5. Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data, Section 4: No docket and other lawful fees are required
from indigent petitioner.

Section 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have
the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent
counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he
must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the
presence of counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which violate the free
will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other
similar forms of detention are prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be
inadmissible in evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as
compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.

I. Custodial Investigation, In General

A. Definition
People Pavillare, GR 129970, April 5, 2000
People v. Bandula - 232 SCRA 566
Navallo v. Sandiganbayan - 234 SCRA 175
Sebastian v. Garchitorena, GR 114028, October 18, 2000
OCA v. Sumulong, 271 SCRA 316
People v. Almanzor, GR 124918, July 11, 2002 (no need for counsel)
People v. Valdez, GR 129296, September 25, 2000
People v. Marra - 236 SCRA 565
People v. Labtan, G.R. No. 127493, December 8, 1999
Manuel v. NC Construction 282 SCRA 326
People v. de la Cruz, GR 137405, Sept. 27, 2002
*People v. Camat- 256 SCRA 52
People v. Evangelista - 256 SCRA 611
People v. Andan 269 SCRA 95
People v. Artellero, GR 129211, October 2, 2000
People v. De Jesus 213 SCRA 345
People v. Legaspi, GR 117802, April 27, 2000

B. Rationale
Miranda v. Arizona 384 US 436
People v. Canton, GR 148825, Dec. 27, 2002

II. Instances of Custodial Investigations

People v. Isla- 278 SCRA 47
People v. Salazar 266 SCRA 607
People v. Casimiro, GR 146277, June 20, 2002
People v. Castro 274 SCRA 115
People v. Bolanos 211 SCRA 262
People v. Lim - 196 SCRA 809

III. Rights When Under Custodial Investigations

57
A. Procedural Requirements
*Miranda v. Arizona- 384 US 436
People v. Mahinay GR 122485 February 1, 1999
People v. Camat - 256 SCRA 52

B. Duty of an Officer During Custodial Investigation

People v. de la Cruz, GR 137405, Sept. 27, 2002
People v. Salcedo 273 SCRA 473

C. When the Rights of Custodial Investigation May Be Invoked

People v. Loveria - 187 SCRA 47
Sebastian v. Garchitorena, GR 114028, October 18, 2000
People v. Tan 286 SCRA 207

D. The Right to Remain Silent

People v. Bandin 226 SCRA 299
People v. Lacbanes 270 SCRA 193
People v. Morico 246 SCRA 214
People v. Ang Chun Kit 251 SCRA 660
People v. De Las Marinas 196 SCRA 504
People v. Castro 274 SCRA 115
People v. Enriquez 204 SCRA 674
People v. De Castro, G.R. No. 171672

E. The Right to Counsel

a. When to Invoke
People v. Sunga, GR 126029, Mar. 29, 2003
People v. Labtan, G.R. No. 127493, December 8, 1999
People v. Sapal, GR 124526, March 17, 2000
People v. Lamsing - 248 SCRA 471
People v. Maqueda - 242 SCRA 565
People v. Macam 238 SCRA 306
People v. De Jesus 213 SCRA 345
People v. Dimaano 209 SCRA 819
People v. Compil - 244 SCRA 135
People v. Loveria - 187 SCRA 47

b. When Presence of Counsel is Required

People v. Rodriguez - 232 SCRA 227
Estacio v. Sandiganbayan 183 SCRA 12
People v. Bandula - 232 SCRA 566
People v. Isla- 278 SCRA 47
People v. Jimenez - 204 SCRA 719
People v. Cortes, 323 SCRA 131
People v. Rous - 242 SCRA 732
People v. Espanola 271 SCRA 689

58
People v.Zuela, 325 SCRA 589
People v. Macabalang 508 SCRA 282
Almendras, Jr. v. Almendras, GR No. 179491, 2015

c. Effective and Vigilant Counsel Defined

*People v. Sunga, GR 126029, March 27, 2003
People v. Velarde, GR 139333, July 18, 2002
People v. Culala, GR 83466, October 13, 1999
People v. Gerolago 263 SCRA 143
People v. Paule 261 SCRA 649
People v. Delmo, GR 130078, Oct. 4, 2002
People v. de la Cruz, GR 137405, Sept. 27, 2002
People v. Lucero - 249 SCRA 425
People v. Espanola 271 SCRA 689
People v. Bacor GR 122895 April 30, 1999
People v. Sahagun 274 SCRA 208
People v. Taliman, GR 109143, October 11, 2000
People v. Espiritu GR 128287 February 2, 1999
People v. Barasina - 229 SCRA 450
People v. Alegria - 190 SCRA 122
People v. Suarez 267 SCRA 119
People v. Parojinog - 203 SCRA 673
People v. Baello 224 SCRA 218
Galman v. Pamaran 138 SCRA 295
People v. Jerez 285 SCRA 393
People v. Ranis, GR 129113, Sept. 17, 2002
People v. Dumalahay, 380 SCRA 37
People v. Pamon 217 SCRA 501
People v. Cabiles 284 SCRA 199
People v. Gallardo, 323 SCRA 318
People v. Base, GR 109773, March 30, 2000
People v. Obrero, GR 122142, May 17, 2000
Cariaga v. People 626 SCRA 231

d. Independence
People v. Porio, 376 SCRA 596

e. Competence
People v. Suela, supra, 373 SCRA 163
Uyboco v. People Of The Philippines, G.R. No. 211703, December 10, 2014

f. Assistance After Start of Custodial Investigation

People v. Matigunas, 379 SCRA 56
People v. Suela, supra.

g. Valid Confession with Counsel

People v. Tablon, 379 SCRA 280
People v. Principe, GR 135862, May 2, 2002

59
People v. Oranza, GR 127748, July 25, 2002
People v. Canicula, GR 131802, Aug. 6, 2002
h. Confession Without Counsel
People v. Casimiro, GR 146277, June 20, 2002
People v. Ochate, GR 127154, July 30, 2002
People v. Mendez, GR 147671, Nov. 21, 2002 (reiterates P. v. Morada)
*People v. Lauga 615 SCRA 548
Lumanog v. People 630 SCRA 42
People v. Tumaco 610 SCRA 350l
People v. Bokingo 655 SCRA 313
*People v. Uy 649 SCRA 236

i. Failure to Object to Confession Made Without Counsel

People v. Gonzales, GR 142932, May 29, 2002
People v. Tamayo, GR 137856, July, 30, 2002
People v. Samus, GR 135957, Sept. 17, 2002
People v. Avendano, GR 137407, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Mole, GR 137366, Nov. 27, 2003

j. Right to Be Informed
People v. Manriquez, GR 122510-11, March 17, 2000
Magtoto v. Manguera - 63 SCRA 4
*People v. Camat- 256 SCRA 52
People v. Alegria - 190 SCRA 122
People v. Sabban 260 SCRA 630
People v. Barlis - 231 SCRA 426
People v. Agustin - 240 SCRA 541
People v. Samolde, GR 128551, July 31, 2000
People v. Sevilla, GR 124077, September 5, 2000
People v. Muleta GR 130189 June 25, 1999
People v. Tizon, GR 133228, July 30, 2002
People v. Llenaresas - 248 SCRA 629
People v. Cajara, GR 122498, September 27, 2000
People v. Manriquez, GR 122510-11, March 17, 2000
People v. Samolde, GR 128551, July 31, 2000

IV. Waiver of Rights

A. Requisites of a Valid Waiver

a. Must Be in Writing and in the Presence of Counsel
People v. Taliman, GR 109143, October 11, 2000
People v. Gomez 270 SCRA 432
People v. Cabintoy 247 SCRA 442
People v. Corullo 289 SCRA 481
People v. Olivarez GR 77865 December 4, 1998
People v. Ruelan - 231 SCRA 650
People v. Simon - 234 SCRA 555
Malacat v. CA (supra, Warrantless Arrests)
People v. Bacor, 306 SCRA 522
People v. Quidato GR 117160 or 6 October 1, 1998

60
b. Must Be Voluntary, Knowing and Intelligent
People v. Nicolas - 204 SCRA 191
People v. Agustin - 240 SCRA 541

V. Extrajudicial Confessions
A. Difference Between Admission and Confession
Ladiana v. People, GR 144293, Dec. 4, 2002
People v. Maqueda - 242 SCRA 565

B. Requisites for Valid Extrajudicial Confession

People v. Dano, GR 117690, September 1, 2000
People v. Pagaura 267 SCRA 17
People v. Calvo 269 SCRA 676
People v. Tan 286 SCRA 207
People v. Olivarez GR 77865 December 4
People v. Base, GR 109773, March 30, 2000
People v. Continente, GR 100801-02, August 25, 2000
People v. Naag, 322 SCRA 710
People v. Fabro 277 SCRA 19
People v. Sinoc 275 SCRA 357
People v. Alicando - 251 SCRA 293
People v. Maneng, GR 123147, October 13, 2000
People v. Llanes, GR 140268, September 18, 2000
People v. Deang, GR 128045, August 24, 2000
People v. Avendano, GR 137407, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Espanola 271 SCRA 689
People v. Nicolas, GR 135877, Aug. 22, 2002
People v. Sabalones 294 SCRA 751
People v. Mahinay, 302 SCRA 455
People v. Lising 285 SCRA 595
People v. Obrero, GR 122142, May 17, 2000
People v. Capitle 639 SCRA 373
Jesalva v. People 640 SCRA 253
People v. Capitle 639 SCRA 373

C. Voluntariness
People v. Santos 283 SCRA 443
People v. Alvarez, GR 140388-91, Nov. 11, 2003
Astudillo v. People - 509 SCRA 302
Jesalva v. People 640 SCRA 253

D. Presumptions
People v. Alicando - 251 SCRA 293
People v. Camat- 256 SCRA 52
People v. Figueroa, GR 134056, July 6, 2000
People v. Dano, GR 117690, September 1, 2000
People v. Maneng, GR 123147, October 13, 2000
People v. Vallejo, GR 144656, May 9, 2002
People v. Sahagun 274 SCRA 208

61
People v. Sabban 260 SCRA 630
People v. Ranis, GR 129113, Sept. 17, 2002
People v. Rous - 242 SCRA 732
People v. Parojinog - 203 SCRA 673
People v. Montiero 246 SCRA 786
People v. Ruelan - 231 SCRA 650
People v. Aquino GR 123550-51 July 19, 1999
People v. Tolentino, 423 SCRA 448
People v. De Vera, G.R. No. 128966, August 18, 1999
People v. Santos 283 SCRA 443
Santos v. Sandiganbayan, GR 71523-25, December 8, 2000
People v. Magdamit 279 SCRA 423
People v. Aquino, GR 130742, July 18, 2000
People v. Hernandez (supra, Warrantless Arrests)
People v. Sabalones 294 SCRA 751
People v. Calvo 269 SCRA 676
People v. del Rosario, G.R. No. 131036, June 20, 2001

E. To Whom Such Confession Can Be Used Against

People v. Lising 285 SCRA 595
Santos v. Sandiganbayan, GR 71523-25, December 8, 2000
Tan v. People, G.R. No. 134298, August 26, 1999

F. Lawyer Given by Police Investigator; Valid Confession

Aquino v. Paiste, 555 S 255

G. Exceptions
VI. When Custodial Investigations May Not Apply
A. Preliminary Investigation
People v. Judge Ayson - 175 SCRA 216

B. Voluntary Surrender
People v. Taylaran 108 SCRA 373

C. Audit Examination
Navallo v. Sandiganbayan - 234 SCRA 175
Kimpo v. Sandiganbayan - 232 SCRA 53

D. Administrative Investigation
Manuel v. NC Construction 282 SCRA 326
Remolona v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No.13747, August 2, 2001
Sebastian v. Garchitorena, GR 114028, October 18, 2000
Escleo v. Durado, AM no. P-99-1312, July 31, 2002

E. Not in Police Custody

People v. Tobias 266 SCRA 229
OCA v. Sumulong, 271 SCRA 316

F. Police Line-up
General Rule

62
People v. Piedad, GR 131923, Dec. 5, 2002 (no need for counsel)
People v. Lamsing 248 SCRA 471
People v. Frago - 232 SCRA 653
*Gamboa v. Judge Cruz - 162 SCRA 675
People v. Salvatierra 276 SCRA 55 (supra, Warrantless Arrests)
Dela Torre v. CA 294 SCRA 196
People Pavillare, GR 129970, April 5, 2000
People v. Timple - 237 SCRA 52
People v. Dimaano 209 SCRA 819
People v. Loveria - 187 SCRA 47
People v. Tolentino, 423 SCRA 448
People v. Martinez, 425 SCRA 525
People v. Sultan, GR 130594, July 5, 2000
People v. Escordial, 373 SCRA 585 (line- up after custodial investigation starts,
requires counsel)

Exceptions
People v. Hatton 210 SCRA 1
People v. Gamer, 326 SCRA 660
*People v. Teehankee, Jr. 249 SCRA 54 (supra, Procedural)
People v. Meneses 288 SCRA 95

G. Spontaneous Statements
People v. Barrientos 285 SCRA 221
Arroyo v, CA - 203 SCRA 750
People v. Andan 269 SCRA 95
People v. Dumantay, 307 SCRA 1
People v. Morada GR 129723 May 19, 1999
People v. Dano, GR 117690, September 1, 2000
People v. Ulit, 423 SCRA 374

H. Marked Money
*People v. Linsangan 195 SCRA 784

I. Booking Sheets

*People v. Ang Chun Kit 251 SCRA 660

J. Paraffin Test
People v. Gamboa 194 SCRA 372

K. When Body of the Accused is Examined

People v. Sinoc 275 SCRA 357
People v. Piedad, GR 131923, Dec. 5, 2002 (no need for counsel)
Gutang v. People, GR 135406, July 11, 2000
People v. Paynor 256 SCRA 611

L. Taking of Pictures
People v. Gallarde, 325 SCRA 835

63
M. Incident to a Lawful Arrest
People v. Enriquez 204 SCRA 674
Marcelo v. Sandiganbayan GR 109242 January 26, 1999

VII. The Exclusionary Rule

A. Violation of Rights
People v. Simon - 234 SCRA 555
People v. Hermoso, GR 130590, October 18, 2000
People v. Pinlac - 165 SCRA 675
People v. Bacamante - 248 SCRA 47
People v. Andan 269 SCRA 95
People v. Montes GR 117166 December 13, 1998
People v. Salcedo 273 SCRA 473
People v. Macoy 275 SCRA 1
People v. Arceo - 202 SCRA 170
People v. Atrejenio GR 120160 July 13, 1999
Tan v. People, G.R. No. 134298, August 26, 1999
People v. Binamira 277 SCRA 232
People v. Turingan 282 SCRA 424
People v. Pagaura 267 SCRA 17
People v. Quidato GR 117401 October 1, 1998
People v. Sequino 264 SCRA 79
People v. Alicando - 251 SCRA 293
People v. Agustin - 240 SCRA 541
People v. Paglinawan, 324 SCRA 97
People v. Alegria - 190 SCRA 122
People v. Bravo, GR 13562
People v. Bariquit, GR 122733, October 2, 2000
People v. Malimit 264 SCRA 167
People v. Rivera 245 SCRA 421
People v. Meneses 288 SCRA 95
People v. Figueroa, GR 134056, July 6, 2000
People v. Paburada, GR 137118, December 5, 2000
People v. Lapitaje, GR 132042, Feb. 19, 2003

B. Immunity against Self-Incrimination

*Galman v. Pamaran (supra, Custodial Investigation)

C. Re-enactments
People v. Suarez 267 SCRA 119

D. Applicability to Aliens
People v. Wong Chuen Ming - 256 SCRA 182

E. Verbal Confessions
People v. Deniego 251 SCRA 626
People v. Bonola 274 SCRA 238
People v. Suela, 373 SCRA 163 (confession to private party)
People v. Taboga, 376 SCRA 500 (confession to private party)

64
People v. Baloloy, GE 140740, Apr. 12, 2002 (res gestae)
People v. Guillermo, 420 S 326
F. Co-Accused not Bound
People v. Camat- 256 SCRA 52

G. Who May Raise the Question

People v. Balisteros - 237 SCRA 499

H. When Must the Objection Be Raised

People v. Samus, GR 135957, Sept. 17, 2002
People v. Montilla 285 SCRA 703
People v. Salvatierra 276 SCRA 55
Gamboa v. Judge Cruz - 162 SCRA 675
Macasiray v. People 291 SCRA 154

I. Admissible Evidence
People v. Espiritu, 302 SCRA 533
People v. Lumandong, 327 SCRA 650

VIII. Rights After Custodial Investigation

People v. Alicando - 251 SCRA 293
People v. De Guzman - 194 SCRA 191

Section 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua
when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or
be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be
impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail
shall not be required.

I. Right to Bail
Lavides v. CA, 324 SCRA 321
People v. Gako, GR 135045, December 15, 2000
*Yap v. CA, GR 141529, June 6, 2001
Fortuna v. Sitaca, AM No. RTJ-01-1633, June 19, 2001
Jinggoy Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2002
Govt of USA v. Hon Purganan, GR 148571, Sept. 24, 2002
Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, GR 148468, Jan. 28, 2003
*Govt of Hongkong v. Hon. Olalia, April 19, 2007
People v. Sandiganbayan 529 SCRA 764
Juan Ponce Enrile v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015
Jinggoy Estrada v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. Nos. 212140-41, January 21, 2015

II. Waiver of the Right

People v. Judge Donato & Rodolfo Salas 198 SCRA 130
People v. Mapalao - 197 SCRA 79

III. Excessive Bail

*De La Camara.v. Enage - 41 SCRA 3
Chu v. Dolalos 260 SCRA 309
Magsucang v. Judge Balgos, AM no. MTJ- 02- 142, Feb. 27, 2003

65
IV. Right to Bail of Military Personnel
Commendador v. Gen. de Villa - 200 SCRA 80

V. Aspects of the Right to Bail

Sule v. Biteng - AM MTJ-95-1018, 243 SCRA 524
Paderanga v. CA 247 SCRA 741
Asst. Provincial Prosecutor Chin v. Judge Gustilo, et al. "AM No- RTJ-94-1243,
247 SCRA 175
People v. Nitcha 240 SCRA 283
Padilla v. CA 260 SCRA 155
Parada v. Veneracion 269 SCRA 371
Obosa v. CA 266 SCRA 281
Moslares v. CA 291 SCRA 440
Catiis v. CA 482 SCRA 71

Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process
of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to
meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of
witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may
proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified
and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

Due Process
People v. Boras, GR 127495, December 22, 2000
People v. Horio, GR 137842, August 23, 2001
Macapagal-Arroyo v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 220598, July 21, 2016

Military Tribunal
Olaguer v. Military - 150 SCRA 144
Tan v. Barrios - 190 SCRA 685

Presumption of Innocence
*United States v. Luling - 324 PHIL. 725
People v. Mingoa - 92 PHIL. 856
*Dumlao v. COMELEC - 95 SCRA 392
Pamintuan v. People - 234 SCRA 63
Marquez v. COMELEC 243 SCRA 538
Hizon v. CA 265 SCRA 517
People v. Caranguian, GR 124514, July 6, 2000
People v. Aquino, GR 130742, July 18, 2000
People v. Guillermo, GR 111292, July 20, 2000
People v. Balacano, GR 127156, July 31, 2000
People v. Mansueto, GR 135196, July 31, 2000
Soriano v. Angeles, GR 109920, August 31, 2000
People v. Fajardo, GR 128583, November 22, 2000
Rueda v. Sandiganbayan, GR 129064, November 29, 2000

66
People v. Baulite, G.R. No. 137599, October 8, 2001
!24

Right to Be Heard and to Production of Evidence

Maliwat v. CA - 256 SCRA 718
People v. Buemio 265 SCRA 582
People v. Ramilla GR 127485 July 19, 1999
Marquez v. Sandiganbayan 641 SCRA 175
Suyan v People, GR No. 189644, 729 SCRA, 1 July 2, 2014
Ejercito v. Hon. Comelec, GR No. 212398, 742 SCRA 210, Nov. 25 2014
Nacion v. COA, March 17, 2015

Right to Counsel
*People v. Holgado - 86 PHIL. 752
United v. Ash - 413 U. S. 300
People v. Rio 201 SCRA 702
Salaw v. NLRC - 202 SCRA 7
Carillo v. People - 229 SCRA 386
People v. Macagaling - 237 SCRA 299
De Guzman v. Sandiganbayan - 256 SCRA 171
People v. Cuizon - 256 SCRA 329
People v. Cabodoc 263 SCRA 187
People v. Echegaray 267 SCRA 682
Reyes v. CA 267 SCRA 543
People v. Serzo 274 SCRA 553
Dans v. People 285 SCRA 504
Amion v. Chiongson AM No. RTJ-97-1371 January 22, 1999
People v. Ambray GR 127177 February 25, 1999
People v. Bolatete GR 127570 February 25, 1999
People v. dela Cuesta GR 126134 March 2, 1999
People v. Lakindanum GR 127123 March 10, 1999
People v. Cantos GR 129298 April 14, 1999
People v. Alba GR 131858-59 April 14, 1999
People v. Onabia GR 128288 April 20, 1999
People v. Bermas GR 120420 April 21, 1999
People v. Pedres GR 129533 April 30, 1999
People v. Acala GR 127023-25 May 19, 1999
People v. Puertollano GR 122423 June 17, 1999
People v. Bonghanoy GR 124097 June 17, 1999
People v. Larena GR 121205-09 June 29, 1999
People v. Nuez GR 128875 July 8, 1999
People v. Ramilla GR 127485 July 19, 1999
People v. Sesbreno, G.R. No. 121764, September 8, 1999
People v. Santoclides, G.R. No. 109149, December 21, 1999
People v. Salonga, G.R. No. 131131, June 21, 2001
People v. Bagas, G.R. No. 104383, July 12, 2001
People v. Liwanag, G.R. No. 120468, August 15, 2001
People v. Bernas, 377 SCRA 391
People v. Caralipio, GR 137766, Nov. 27, 2002
Sia v. People 504 SCRA 507

67
Briones v. People 588 SCRA 362
Villanueva v. People 644 SCRA 356

Absence of Violation
People v. Aquino, GR 129288, March 30, 2000
Villanueva v. People, GR 135098, April 12, 2000

Presence of Violation
People v. Nadera, 324 SCRA 490
Callangan v. People 493 SCRA 269

Right to Be Informed
*People v. Regala 113 SCRA 613
Enrile v. Salazar - 186 SCRA 217
People v. Taguba - 229 SCRA 188
People v. Barte - 230 SCRA 401
People v. Vitor - 245 SCRA 392
Sabiniano v. CA 249 SCRA 24
People v. Reyes - 242 SCRA 264
People v. Legaspi - 246 SCRA 206
People v. Ramos - 245 SCM 405
People v. Namayan - 246 SCRA 646
Pecho v. People 262 SCRA 518
People v. Laurente - 255 SCRA 543
People v. Rosare 264 SCRA 398
People v. Evangelista - 256 SCRA 611
People v. Cruz 259 SCRA 109
People v. De Guzman 265 SCRA 228
Salud Imson-Souweha v. Rondez 279 SCRA 258
People v. Manansala 273 SCRA 502
People v. Palomar 278 SCRA 114
People v. Ortega 276 SCRA 166
People v. Antido 278 SCRA 425
People v. Sadiosa 290 SCRA 92
People v. Villamor GR 12444 October 7, 1998
People v. Rosare 264 SCRA 398
People v. Llaguno 285 SCRA 124
People v. Bugayong GR 126518 December 2, 1998
People v. Manalili 294 SCRA 220
People v. Dimapilis GR 128619 December 17, 1998
People v. de Guzman 289 SCRA 470
People v. Quitlong 292 SCRA 360
People v. Perez GR 122764 September 24, 1998
People v. Renido 288 SCRA 369
People v. Venerable 290 SCRA 15
People v. Lozano GR 125080 September 25, 1998
People v. Padilla GR 126124 January 20, 1999
People v. Acosta, G.R. No. 142726, October 17, 2001
People v. de la Pena G.R. No. 138358-59 Nov. 19, 2001
People v. Abino, G.R. No. 137288, December 11, 2001

68
People v. Tan, GR 116200-02, June 21, 2001
People v. Tagana, GR 137608-09, July 6, 2001
People v. Alcalde, GR 139225, May 29, 2002
People v. Mejeca, GR 146425, Nov. 21, 2002
People v. Esurina, 374, SCRA 429
People v. Togud, 375 SCRA 291
People v. Espejon, 377 SCRA 412
People v. Lavador, 377 SCRA 424
People v. Hermanes, 379 SCRA 190
People v. Portugal, 379 SCRA 212
People v. Baluya, 380 SCRA 533
People v. Arofo, 380 SCRA 663
People v. Cana, GR 139229, June 6, 2002
People v. Soriano, GR 135027, July 3, 2002
People v. Radam, GR 138395, July 18, 2002
People v. Abala, GR 135858, July, 23, 2002
People v. Romero, GR 137037, Aug. 5, 2002
People v. Magtibay, GR 142985, Aug. 6, 2002
People v. Miclat, GR 137024, Aug. 7, 2002
People v. Guardian, GR 142900, Aug. 7, 2002
People v. Ocampo, GR 145303, Aug. 7, 2002
People v. del Ayre, GR 139788, Oct. 3, 2002
People v. Caliso, GR 131475, Oct. 14, 2002
People v. Buado, GR 137341, Oct. 28, 2002
People v. Alemania, GR 146221, Nov. 13, 2002
People v. Terible, GR 140635, Nov. 18, 2002
People v. Victor, GR 127904, Dec. 5, 2002
People v. Velasquez, 377 SCRA 219
People v. Lachica, GR 143677, May 9, 2002
People v. Sajolga, GR 146684, Aug. 21, 2002
People v. Ramos, GR 142577, Dec. 27, 2002
People v. Mascarinas, GR 144034, May 28, 2002
People v. Sanchez, 375 SCRA 355
People v. Abayon, GR 142874, July, 31, 2002
People v. Gavina, GR 143237, Oct. 28, 2002
People v. Orbita, GR GR 136591, July 11, 2002
Dado v. People, GR 131421, Nov. 18, 2002
Santos v. People, GR 14761, Jan. 20, 2002
People v. Bon, GR 149199, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Llanto, GR 146458, Jan. 20, 2003
People v. Migrante, GR 147606, Jan. 14, 2003
People v. Dy, GR 115326-37, Jan. 16, 2003
People v. Lapitaje, GR 132042, Feb. 19, 2003
People v. Ostia, GR 131804, Feb. 26, 2003
People v. Ganete, GR 142930, Mar. 28, 2003
Garcia v. People, GR 144785, Sept. 11, 2003
People v. Villanueva, GR 138364, Oct. 15, 2003
!26
Burgos v. Sandiganbayan, GR 123144, Oct. 15, 2003
People v. Rote, GR 146188, Dec. 11, 2003

69
People v. Rata, GR 145523-24, Dec. 11, 2003
Andaya v. People 493 SCRA 539
People v. Estrada 583 SCRA 302
People v. Abella 610 SCRA 19
People v. Pangilinan GR 183090, November 14, 2011

Relationship
People v. Cepedon, 542 S 550
People v. Talan, GR 177354, November 14, 2009
People v. Estrada 610 SCRA 222
People v. Corpuz 577 SCRA 465
People v. Regino 582 SCRA 189

Nature of Offense: Different Offense; Same Offense;

People v. Paglinawan, 324 SCRA 97
People v. Paramil, GR 128056-57, March 31, 2000
Evangelista v. People, GR 108135-36, August 14, 2000
People v. Puzon, GR 123156-59, August 29, 2000
People v. Valdesancho, G.R. NO. 137051-52, May 30, 2001
People v. Dawisan, G.R. No. 122095, September 13, 2001
Mapas v. People, 544 S 85
Pactolin v. Sandiganbayan, 554 S 136
People v. Hu, 567 S 697

Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

People v. Ronato, G.R. No. 124298, October 11, 1999
People v. Bayron, G.R. No. 122732, September 7, 1999
People v. Abella, G.R. No. 131847, September 22, 1999
People v. Gallo, G.R. No. 124736, September 29, 1999
People v. Panique, G.R. No. 125763, October 13, 1999
People v. Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 130784, October 3, 1999
People v. Tabion, G.R. No. 132715, October 20, 1999
People v. Torio, G.R. No. 132216, November 7, 1999
People v. Alfanta, G.R. No. 125633, December 9, 1999
People v. Flores, G.R. No. 123599, December 13, 1999
People v. Ramon, G.R. No. 130407, December 15, 1999
People v. Villar., 322 SCRA 390
People v. Bernaldez, 322 SCRA 762
People v. Flores, 322 SCRA 779
People v. Palanco, 322 SCRA 790
People v. Bacule, 323 SCRA 734
People v. Bartolome, 323 SCRA 836
People v. Bayona, 327 SCRA 190
People v. Siao, 327 SCRA 231
People v. Bayzo, 327 SCRA 771
People v. De los Santos, GR 121906, August 5, 2000
People v. Fraga, GR 134130-33, April 12, 2000
People v. Licanda, GR 134084, May 4, 2000
People v. Sabredo, GR 126114, May 11, 2000
People v. Alicante, GR 127026-27, May 31, 2000

70
People v. Traya, GR 129052, May 31, 2000
People v. Mamac, GR 130332, May 31, 2000
People v. Decena, GR 131843, May 31, 2000
People v. Lomibao, GR 135855, August 3, 2000
People v. Canonigo, GR 133649, August 4, 2000
People v. Cruz, GR 128346-48, August 14, 2000
People v. Watimar, GR 121651-52, August 16, 2000
People v. Gabiana, GR 123543, August 23, 2000
People v. Banihit GR 132045, August 25, 2000
People v. Gutierrez, GR 132772, August 31, 2000
People v. Villanueva, GR 135330, August 31, 2000
People v. Melendres, GR 133999-4001, August 31, 2000
People v. Mendez, GR 132546, July 5, 2000
People v. Alarcon, GR 133191-93, July 11, 2000
People v. Baybado, GR 132136, July 14, 2000
People v. Surilla, GR 129164, July 24, 2000
People v. Campaner, GR 130500, July 26, 2000
People v. Balacano, GR 127156, July 31, 2000
People v. Villaraza, GR 131848-50, September 5, 2000
People v. Baniguid, GR 137714, September 8, 2000
People v. Bali-Balita, GR 134266, September 15, 2000
People v. Cajara, GR 122498, Sepember 27, 2000
People v. Nogar, GR 133946, September 27, 2000
People v. Magtrayo, GR 133480-82, October 4, 2000
People v. Taguba, GR 112792-93, October 6, 2000
People v. De la Cuesta, GR133904, October 5, 2000
People v. Arves, GR 134628, October 13, 2000
People v. Baldino, GR 137269, October 13, 2000
People v. Baltazar, GR 130610, October 16, 2000
People v. Francisco, GR 136252, October 20, 2000
People v. Sarmiento, GR 134768, October 25, 2000
People v. Gallarde, 325 SCRA 835
People v. Crispin, 327 SCRA 167
People v. Paramil, GR 128056-57, March 31, 2000
People v. Gallego, GR 130603, August 15, 2000
People v. Tejada. G.R. No. 126166, July 10, 2001
People v. Lalingjaman, G.R. No. 132714, September 6, 2001
People v. Mercado, G.R. No. 139904, October 12, 2001
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan G.R. No. 148560, Nov. 19, 2001
People v. Marahay, GR 120625-29, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Montemayor, GR 124474, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Delim, GR 142773, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Acosta, GR 140402, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Caloza, GR 138404-06, Jan. 28, 2003
People v. Layoso, GR 14773-76, Jan. 22, 2003
People v. Baldogo, GR 128106-07, Jan. 24, 2003
People v. De la Cruz, GR 175954, December 16, 2008
People v. De la Cruz, GR 174371, December 11, 2008
Andres v. People 588 SCRA 830
Sambilon v. People 591 SCRA 405

71
Valenzuela v. People 596 SCRA 1

Difference of Commission of Crime

People v. Capinpin, GR 118608, October 30, 2000

Number of Offenses
People v. Tresballes, G.R. No. 126118, September 21, 1999
People v. Gerona, G.R. No. 126169, December 21, 1999
People v. Pambid, GR 124453, March 15, 2000
People v. Alvero, GR 134536, April 5, 2000
People v. Guiwan GR 117324-8, April 27, 2000
People v. Surilla, GR 129164, July 24, 2000
People v. Rama, 379 SCRA 477
People v. Cuyugan, GR 146641, Nov. 18, 2002
People v. Montinola, 543 SCRA 412

Date of Commission of Crime

People v. Narito, G.R. No. 132058, October 1, 1999
People v. Magbanua, G.R. No. 12888, December 3, 1999
People v. Ladrillo, G.R. No. 124342, December 8, 1999
People v. Ferolino, GR 131730-31, April 5, 2000
People v. Gianan, GR 135288-93, September 15, 2000
People v. Trelles, GR 137659, September 19, 2000
Sumbang v. General Court Martial PRO- Region 6, GR 140188, August 3, 2000
Arambulo v. Laqui, GR 138596, October 12, 2000
People v. Tagana, G.R. Nos. 137608-09, July 6, 2001
People v. Bidoc 506 SCRA 481
People v. Ceredon, 542 SCRA 550
People v. Pascual, 569 SCRA 534
People v. Aure, 569 SCRA 836
People v. Diocado, GR 170567, November 14, 2008
People v. Canares 579 SCRA 582
People v. Aboganda 585 SCRA 1
People v. Jimenez 586 SCRA 580
People v. Lazaro 596 SCRA 587

No Violation
People v. Escoro, 376 SCRA 670
People v. Pascual, 379 SCRA 235
People v. Conde, 380 SCRA 159
People v. Miranda, GR 142566, Aug. 8, 2002
People v. Roque, GR 130569, Aug. 14, 2002
People v. Segovia, GR 138974, Sept. 29, 2002
People v. Caralipio, GR 137766, Nov. 27, 2002
People v. Cantomayor, GR 145522, Dec. 5, 2002
People v. sarazan, GR 123269-72, Jan. 22, 2003
People v. Taperla, GR 142860, Jan. 16, 2003
People v. Lizada, GR 143468-71, Jan. 24, 2003
People v. Dy, GR 115326-37, Jan.16, 2003

72
Batulanan v. People 502 SCRA 35
People v. Corpuz 482 SCRA 435
Soledad v. People 644 SCRA 258
Torres v. People 655 SCRA 720

Right to Speedy Trial

People v. Sesbreno, G.R. No. 121764, September 9, 1999
Tai Lim v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 131483, October 26, 1999
*Conde v. Rivera - 45 PHIL. 650
Nepomuceno v. Sec. of National Defense - 108 SCRA 658
People v. Gines - 197 SCRA 481
Abadia v. CA - 236 SCRA 676
Gonzales v. CA - 232 SCRA 667
Cadalin v. POEA 238 SCRA 721
People v. Tampal 244 SCRA 202
Dacanay v. People - 240 SCRA 490
Guerrero v. CA - 257 SCRA 703
Dizon v. Lopez 278 SCRA 483
Luzarraga v. Meteoro, AM 00-1572, August 3, 2000
Solar Entertainment and People v. Hon. How, GR 140863, August 22, 2000
De Zuzurregui v. Rosete, GR AM no. MTJ-02-1426
People v. Dy, GR 115326-37, Jan. 16, 2003
Lumanlaw v. Peralta 482 SCRA 396
Padilla v. Apas 487 SCRA 29
People v. Hernandez 499 SCRA 688
Uy v. Adriano 505 SCRA 625
Benares v. Lim 511 SCRA 100
Gaas v. Mitmug, 553 SCRA 535
Albert v. Sandiganbayan 580 SCRA 279
Tan v. People 586 SCRA 139
Tallo v. People 588 SCRA 520
Olbes v. Buemio 607 SCRA 336
Jacob v. Sandiganbayan 635 SCRA 94
Barcelona v. Lim, G.R. No. 189171, June 3, 2014

Right to Impartial Trial

*Mateo. Jr, v. Villaluz - 50 SCRA 18
People v. CA 262 SCRA 452
Maliwat v. CA 256 SCRA 718
Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan 268 SCRA 332
People v. Adora 275 SCRA 441
Cosep v. People 290 SCRA 378
People v. Castillo 289 SCRA 213
People v. Vaynaco GR 126286 March 22, 1999
People v. Estrada, GR 130487, June 19, 2000

Impartiality of a Judge
Soriano v. Angeles, GR 109920, August 31, 2000
Almendra v. Asis, AM RTJ-1550, April 6, 2000
People v. Zheng Bai Hui, GR 127580, August 22, 2000

73
People v. Genosa, GR 135981, September 29, 2000
Uy v. Judge Flores, RTJ-12-2332, 2014

Right to a Public Trial

In Re Oliver -333 U. S. 237
Garcia v. Domingo - L-30104
Jaylo v. Sandiganbayan (First Division) G.R. No. 183152-54, January 21, 2015

Compulsory Process
Fajardo v. Garcia - 98 SCRA 514
People v. Yambot, GR 120350, October 13, 2000
Relative to CA, G.R. SP NO. 108807 OCA IPI No. 14-220-CA-J, March 17, 2015

Right to Confrontation, to Cross-Examine, or to Meet Witness Face to Face

*Tampar v. Usman - 200 SCRA 652
People v. Digno - 250 SCRA 237
People v. Miyake 279 SCRA 180People v. Narca 275 SCRA 696
People v. Quidato GR 117401 October 1, 1998
People v. Crispin, 327 SCRA 167
People v. Libo-on, G.R. NO. 136737, May 23, 2001
Carriaga v. C.A., G.R. No. 143561, June 6, 2001
People v. Rivera, G.R. No. 139180, July 31, 2001
People v. Monje, GR 146689, Sept. 27, 2002
Victorino v. People 509 SCRA 483
Herrera v. Sandiganbayan 579 SCRA 32
Ho Wai Pang v. People GR 1716229, October 19, 2011

Trial in Absentia; Right to Be Present

*Carredo v. People - 183 SCRA 273
People v. Ravelo - 202 SCRA 655
People v. Rivera - 242 SCRA 26
People v. Tabag 268 SCRA 115
Parada v. Veneracion (supra, Right to Bail)

Admissibility of Evidence
People v. Morial, G.R. No. 129295, August 15, 2001
People v. Tulin, G.R. No. 111709, August 30, 2001

Section 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases
of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it.

Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all
judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies

Right to Speedy Disposition of Cases

People v. Sesbreno, G.R. No. 121764, September 9, 1999
*Binay v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 120681, October 1, 1999
Gonzales v. Sandiganbayan - 199 SCRA 299 (no violation)
Socrates v. Sandiganbayan - 253 SCRA 773 (no violation)

74
Bolalin v. Occiano 266 SCRA 203 (violation)
Angchangco v. Ombudsman 268 SCRA 301 (violation)
Lambino v. De Vera 275 SCRA 60
Duterte v. Sandiganbayan 289 SCRA 721(preliminary investigation, violation)
Marcos v. Sandiganbayan GR 126995 October 6, 1998 (violation)
Roque v. Ombudsman GR 129978 May 12, 1999 (violation)
Cervantes v. Sandiganbayan GR 108595 May 18, 1999 (violation)
Dansal v. Fernandez, 327 SCRA 145 ( no violation )
Domingo v. Sandiganbayan, 322 SCRA 655 (no violation)
Castillo v. Sandiganbayan, GR 109271, March 14, 2000 (no violation)
Raro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000
Dela Pena v. Sandiganbayan, G. R. No. 144542, June 29, 2001
Lopez v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 140529, September 6, 2001
Lee v. People, Gr137914, Dec. 4, 2002
People v. Monje, GR 146689, Sept. 27, 2002
Ty-Dazo v. Sandiganbayan, 374 SCRA 200
Guiani v. Sandiganbayan, GR 146897, Aug. 6, 2002 (delay in preliminary
investigation)
Avilla v. Reyes 479 SCRA 334
Enriquez v. Office of OMB, 545 SCRA 618
OMB v. Jurado, 561 SCRA 135
Perea v. People, 544 SCRA 532
Gaas v. Mitmug, 553 SCRA 335
Roquera v. Chancellor 614 SCRA 723
Lumanog v. People 630 SCRA 42

Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

Right Against Self-Incrimination

*United States v. Navarro - 3 PHIL. 143 (rationale)
*United States v. Tan Teng - 23 PHIL.145
*United States v. Ong Siu Hong - 36 PHIL. 73 (discharge)
*Villaflor v. Summers - 41 PHIL. 62 (pregnancy test)
!30
*Beltran v. Samson - 53 PHIL. 570 (writing)
Bermudez v. Castillo - 64 PHIL. 483
Chavez v. CA L- 29169, Aug.19, 1968
*Cabal v. Kapunan, Jr. - L-19052
**Pascual, Jr. v. Board of Medical Examiners - L-25018
People v. Gamboa - 194 SCRA 372 (paraffin test)
People v. Canceran - 229 SCRA 581 (paraffin test)
People v. Tranca - 235 SCRA 455 (x-ray, not a violation)
Almonte v. Vasquez 244 SCRA 286
People v. Go 237 SCRA 73
Regala v. Sandiganbayan 262 SCRA 122
People v. Malimit 264 SCRA 167
Galman v. Pamaran (supra, Custodial Investigation)
People v. Banihit, GR 132045, August 25, 2000 (relate to Tan Teng)
People v. Besonia, 422 SCRA 210
Sabio v. Gordon 504 SCRA 704

75
Benares v. Lim 511 SCRA 100
**Standard Chartered v. Senate 541 SCRA 546
Dela Cruz v. People of the Phil. GR No. 200748, July 23 2014

Section 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and
aspirations.
(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.

Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons
involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any
prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman
conditions shall be dealt with by law.

Cruel, Degrading or Inhuman Punishment; Excessive Fines

*People v. Estoista - 93 PHIL. 647
People v. Dapitan - 197 SCRA 378
Baylosis v. Chavez - 202 SCRA 405 (modified by Robin Padilla)
People v. Munoz - 170 SCRA 107
People v. Amigo - 252 SCRA 43
*People v. Echegaray 267 SCRA 682 (death penalty)
People v. Tongko 290 SCRA 595
Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice 12 LR 32 N98
Padilla v. CA (supra, Right to Bail)
People v. Alicante, GR 127026-27, May 31, 2000
Lim v. People, GR 149276, Sept. 27, 2002
People v. Gabiana, GR 123543, August 23, 2000
People v. Horio, GR 137842, August 23, 2001
Pagdayawon v. Sec. of Justice, GR154569, Sept. 23, 2002
Perez v. People, 544 SCRA 532

Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

Imprisonment for Debt

**Lozano v. Martinez - 146 SCRA 323 (check)
Caram Resources v. Contreras - 237 SCRA 724 (check).
Tiomico v. CA GR 122539 March 4, 1999 (trust receipt)
Recuerdo v. People, GR 133036, Jan. 22, 2003 (Check)

Section 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If
an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall
constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.

Dismissal at Preliminary Investigation; No Jeopardy

76
Attachment of jeopardy
*People v. Ylagan - 58 PHIL. 851
People v. Balisacan - L-26376
Cinco v. Sandiganbayan - 202 SCRA 726
People v, Vergara - 221 SCRA 560
Navallo v. Sandiganbayan - 234 SCRA 175
Galvez v. CA - 237 SCRA 685
Cunanan v. Arceo - 242 SCRA 88
People v. Tampal - 244 SCRA 202
People v. Montesa - 248 SCRA 641
De La Rosa v. CA 253 SCRA 499
People v. Leviste - 255 SCRA 238
People v. Cawaling 293 SCRA 267
Cudia v. CA 284 SCRA 173
Tecson v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 123045, November 16, 1999
Dimatulac v. Villon GR 127107 October 12, 1999
People v. Maquiling GR 128986 June 21, 1999
People v. Nitafan GR 707964-66 February 1, 1999
!31
Binay v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 120681, October 1, 1999
Limpangog v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 134229, November 26, 1999
Flores v. Joven, GR 129874, Dec. 27, 2002
Miranda v. Tuliao 486 SCRA 377
Cabo v. Sandiganbayan 491 SCRA 264
Romualdez v. Marcelo 497 SCRA 89
People v. Terrado, 558 SCRA 84 (acquittal not reviewable)
People v. CA 626 SCRA 352
People v. CA, G.R. No. 183652, 2015

Termination of Jeopardy; Existence; Non-Termination

*Bulaong v. People - 17 SCRA 746
Bustamante v. Maceren - 48 SCRA 155
People v. Obsania - L-24447
Rivera, Jr. v, People - 189 SCRA 331
Dizon-Pamintuan v. People - 234 SCRA 63
COMELEC v. CA - 229 SCRA 501
People v. Bans - 239 SCRA 48
State Prosecutors v. Muro - 236 SCRA 505
People v. Bellaflor - 233 SCRA 196
Guerrero v. CA - 257 SCRA 703
Teodoro v. CA - 258 SCRA 603
Cuidia v. CA 284 SCRA 173
People v. Lising 285 SCRA 595
People v. Araneta, GR 125894 December 11, 1998, 95 OG 4556
Cuison v. CA 289 SCRA 159
People v. CA, GR 128986 June 21, 1999
People v. Serrano, G.R. No. 135451, September 30, 1999
Barangan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 123307, November 29, 1999
People v. Velasco, GR 127444, September 13, 2000
Tupaz v. ULEP, G.R. No. 127777, October 1, 1999

77
People v. Verra, GR 134732
Merciales v. CA, 379 SCRA 345
Poso v. Mijares, AM No. RTJ-02-1693, Aug. 21, 2002
People v. Alberto, GR 132374, Aug. 22, 2002
Condrada v. People, GR 141646, Feb. 28, 2003
People v. Romero, GR144156, March 20, 2003
People v. Espinosa, GR 153714, Aug. 15, 2003
Oriente v. People 513 SCRA 348
Pacoy v. Cajigal 534 SCRA 338
Summerville v. Eugenio 529 SCRA 274
Herrera v. Sandiganbayan 579 SCRA 32
Javier v. Sandiganbayan 599 SCRA 324
Co v. Lim 604 SCRA 702
Lejano v. People 639 SCRA 760
Bangayon v. Bangayon, GR 172777, October 19, 2011
Goodland v. Co, GR 196685, December 18, 2011

Rule on Supervening Facts

*Melo v. People - 85 PHIL. 766
*People v. Buling - 107 PHIL. 712

Same Offenses
*People v. Tiozon - 198 SCRA 368
Lamera v. CA - 198 SCRA 186
Gonzales v. CA - 232 SCRA 667
People v. Turda - 233 SCRA 702
People v. Manungas - 231 SCRA 1
People v. Deunida - 231 SCRA 520
People v. Fernandez - 239 SCRA 174
People v. Quijada 259 SCRA 191
People v. Ballabare 264 SCRA 350
People v. Calonzo 262 SCRA 534
People v. Benemerito 264 SCRA 677
People v. Tobias 266 SCRA 229
People v. Manoyco 269 SCRA 513
People v. Tan Tiong Meng 271 SCRA 125
People v. Sadiosa 290 SCRA 92
People v. Sanchez 291 SCRA 333
People v. Saley 291 SCRA 715
!32
People v. Juego GR 123162 October 13, 1998
People v. Ganadin GR 129441 November 27, 1998
People v. Balasa GR 106357 September 3, 1998
Paluay v. CA 293 SCRA 358
People v. Mercado 304 SCRA 504
People v. Yabut, G.R. No. 115719, October 5, 1999
People v. Ong, 322 SCRA 38
People v. Meris, GR 117145-50, March 28, 2000
People v. Logan, G.R. No. 135030-33, July 20, 2001.
Potot v. People, GR 143547, June 26, 2002

78
People v. CA, 423 SCRA 605
Ramiscal v. Sandiganbayan 499 SCRA 375
People v. Comila 517 SCRA 153
Diaz v. Davao 520 SCRA 481
Merencillo v. People 521 SCRA 31
Lapasaran v. People 578 SCRA 658
*Ivler v. Modesto 635 SCRA 191
People v. Ocden 650 SCRA 124
People v. Lalli, GR 195419, October 12, 2011 (trafficking in person)

No Appeal from Acquittal; Instances of Void Acquittal

People v. Sandiganbayan, 376 SCRA 74

Yuchengco v. CA, 376 SCRA 531
San Vicente v. People, GR132081, Nov. 26, 2002
People v. CA, GR 132396, Sept. 23, 2002
People v. Sandiganbayan 491 SCRA 185
People v. CA 516 SCRA 383
People v. Laguio 518 SCRA 393
People v. Dumlao 580 SCRA 409 (void acquittal)
Tiu v. CA 586 SCRA 118
People v. De Grano 588 SCRA 550
People v. Nazareno 595 SCRA 438
People v. Duca 603 SCRA 159 (void acquittal)
*Mupas v. People, GR 189365, October 12, 2011 (void order on demurrer)

Parties
Metrobank v. Meridiano, G.R. No. 118251, June 29, 2001
Ordinance and Statute
*People v. Relova - 148 SCRA 292

Applied to Impeachment
*Estrada v. Desierto, GR 146710-15 and GR 146738, March 2, 2001and MR-GR
146710-15 and 146738, April 3, 2001
People v. Logan, G.R. No. 135030-33, July 20, 2001.

Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

Ex Post Facto Laws and Bills of Attainder

*People v. Ferrer - 48 SCRA 382
*Virata v. Sandiganbayan - 202 SCRA 680
Trinidad v. CA - 202 SCRA 106
People v. Taguba - 229 SCRA 188
People v. Sandiganbayan 211 SCRA 241
Co v. CA 227 SCRA 444
Rosales v. CA - 255 SCRA 123
Subido v. Sandiganbayan 266 SCRA 379
Sesbreno v. CBAA 270 SCRA 360
People v. Burton 268 SCRA 531
*Lacson v. Executive Secretary, GR 128096 January 20, 1999

79
People v. Nitafan, GR 107964-66 February 1, 1999
Fajardo v. CA, GR 128508 February 1, 1999
People v. Valdez, GR 127663 March 11, 1999
People v. Ringor, G.R. No. 123918, December 9, 1999
People v. Magbanua, G.R. No. 128888, December 3, 1999
Republic v. Desierto, GR 136506, Aug. 23, 2001
People v. Torres - 501 SCRA 591
Salvador v. Mapa - ____SCRA 34 [2008]
Republic v. Eugenio - 545 SCRA 384
Valeroso v. People - 546 SCRA 450
Presidential v. Desierto - 548 SCRA
Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) v. Carpio Morales, 740 SCRA 368
(2014)

Article IV. CITIZENSHIP

Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:

1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship
upon reaching
the age of majority; and
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

Valles v. COMELEC, GR 137000, August 9, 2000

Ong Chia v. Republic, GR 127240, March 27, 2000

Children of Filipino fathers or mothers

*Gatchalian v. Board of Commissioners 197 SCRA 853
*Tecson v. Comelec, 423 SCRA 277
Go v. Ramos 598 SCRA 266
Gonzales v. Rennisi 614 SCRA 292
Cabiling v. Fernandez 625 SCRA 566

Paragraph (3)
*Co. v. Electoral Tribunal - 199 SCRA 692
*Republic v. Sagun 666 SCRA 321

Paragraph (4)
So v. Republic 513 SCRA 267
Go v. Republic, G.R. No. 202809, 729 SCRA 138, July 2 2014
Republic of the Philippines v. Huang Te Fu, G.R. No. 200983, 2015

Loss of Citizenship
*Yu v. Defensor-Santiago - 169 SCRA 364
Frivaldo v. COMELEC - 174 SCRA 245
*Frivaldo v. COMELEC 257 SCRA 727
Labo, Jr, v. COMELEC - 176 SCRA 1

80
*Labo, Jr, v. COMELEC 211 SCRA 297
Aznar v. Osmena - 185 SCRA 703
*Mercado v. Manzano GR 135083 May 26, 1999
Tabaso v. CA 500 SCRA 9
David v. Agbay, G.R. No. 199113, March 18, 2015
Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, March 8, 2016

No Collateral Attack
Vilando v. HRET 656 SCRA 17

Section 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth
without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those
who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be
deemed natural-born citizens.

Bengson v. HRET GR 142840, May 7, 2001

In re Mallare 59 SCRA 344
Chen Teck Lao v. Republic 55 SCRA 1
Cordero v. COMELEC 580 SCRA 12

Section 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law.

Section 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless
by their act or
omission they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.

Section 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt
with by law.

RA 9225 An Act Making the Citizenship of Philippine Citizen who Acquire Foreign
Citizenship Permanent
*AASJS-Calilung v. Datumanong, G.R. No. 160869, May 11, 2007

Article V. SUFFRAGE

Section 1. Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines not otherwise
disqualified by law, who are at least eighteen years of age, and who shall have resided in the
Philippines for at least one year and in the place wherein they propose to vote for at least six
months immediately preceding the election.No literacy, property, or other substantive
requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of suffrage.

Section 2. The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the
ballot as well as a system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.
The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterates to vote without
the assistance of other persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws
and such rules as the Commission on Elections may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the
ballot.

*Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR 157013, July 10, 2003

*Nicolas-Lewis v. COMELEC 497 SCRA 649

81
Labo, Jr, v. COMELEC (supra, Citizenship)
Romualdez v. RTC 226 SCRA 408
The Diocese of Bacolod v. Comelec, GR No. 205728, 747 SCRA 1, Jan 21, 2015

Special Registration Before General Elections

Akbayan v. COMELEC, GR 147066, March 26, 2001

Article XIII. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1. The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect
and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and
political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and
political power for the common good.
To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of
property and its increments.

Policy to Remove Inequities

*International School Alliance of Educators v. Quisumbing, GR 128845, June 1, 2000

Section 2. The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic
opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.

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

Eagle Security v. NLRC - 173 SCRA 479

SSS Employees v. CA (supra, Right to Form Association)
De Vera v. NLRC 200 SCRA 439
Republic v. CA - 180 SCRA 428
MPSTA v. Laguio (supra, Right to Form Association)
Union v. Nestle 192 SCRA 396
Jacinto v. CA 281 SCRA 657
Telefunken Employees Union v. CA, GR 143013-14, December 18, 2000
Lanzaderas v. Amethyst Security, GR 143604, June 20, 2003
Standard Chartered Bank Employees v Confesor, GR 114974, June 16, 2004
Agabon v. NLRC, GR 158693, Nov. 17, 2004

82
Agrarian Reform
Section 4. The State shall, by law, undertaken an agrarian reform program founded on the
right of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the
lands they till or in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof.
To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural
lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may
prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and
subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall
respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary
land-sharing.

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

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

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

Section 8. The State shall provide incentives to landowners to invest the proceeds of the
agrarian reform program to promote industrialization, employment creation, and privatization
of public sector enterprises. Financial instruments used as payment for their lands shall be
honored as equity in enterprises of their choice.

*Assn. of Small Landowners v. Sec. of Agrarian Reform - 175 SCRA 343

Tanaka v. Japan - 7 Minshui 1523
*Luz Farms v. Sec. of Agrarian Reform 192 SCRA 51
Natalia v. DAR 225 SCRA 278
Phil. Veterans Bank v. CA, GR 132767, January 18, 2000
Daez v. CA, GR 133507, February 17, 2000
Bautista v. Araneta, GR 135829, February 22, 2000
Corpus v. Grospe, GR 135297, June 8, 2000
Heirs of Santos v. CA, GR 109992, March 7, 2000
Padunan v. DARAB, GR 132163, Jan. 28, 2003
*Hacienda Luisita v. PARC GR No. 171101, July 5, 2011

83
Urban Land Reform
Section 9. The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with
the private sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make
available at affordable cost decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and
homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas. It shall also promote adequate
employment opportunities to such citizens. In the implementation of such program the State
shall respect the rights of small property owners.

Dee v. CA, GR 108205, February 15, 2000

Reyes v. NHA, GR 147511, Jan. 20, 2003

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

Macasiano v. NHA 224 SCRA 236

Jumawan v. Eviota 234 SCRA 524
Filstream v. CA 284 SCRA 716
**People v. Leachon GR 108725 September 25, 1998 (just and humane
manner)
Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap v. Jessie Robredo, GR No. 200903, 730 SCRA 322, July
22, 2014

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

*CHR Employees v. CHR 496 SCRA 226

Section 18. The Commission on Human Rights shall have the following powers and
functions:
(1) Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations
involving civil and political rights;
(2) Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for
violations thereof in accordance with the Rules of Court;
(3) Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons
within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive
measures and legal aid services to the underprivileged whose human rights have been
violated or need protection;

84
(4) Exercise visitatorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities;
(5) Establish a continuing program of research, education, and information to enhance respect
for the primacy of human rights;
(6) Recommend to the Congress effective measures to promote human rights and to provide
for compensation to victims of violations of human rights, or their families;
(7) Monitor the Philippine Government's compliance with international treaty obligations on
human rights;
(8) Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of
documents or other evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any
investigation onducted by it or under its authority;
(9) Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of
its functions;
(10) Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with law; and
(11) Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law.

Section 19. The Congress may provide for other cases of violations of human rights that
should fall within the authority of the Commission, taking into account its recommendations.

Powers of the Commission on Human Rights

*Carino v. CHR - 204 SCRA 483 (no adjudicating power, no contempt)
EPZA V. CHR, et. al. 208 SCRA 125 (no injunctive power)
*Simon v. CHR 229 SCRA 117 (no injunctive power)

Article XIV Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports

Section 1. The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at
all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all.

Natural and Primary Right of Parents

Meyer v. Nebraska - 262 US 390
Pierce v. Society of Sisters - 262 US 510
Wisconsin v. Yoder - 406 US 205
Ginsberg v. New York - 390 US 629

Quality and accessibility of educational system

*DECS v. San Diego - 180 SCRA 534
Non v. Judge Dame - 185 SCRA 523

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

85
Duty of Institutions
*Miriam College v. CA, GR 127930, December 15, 2000

Section 5. (1) the State shall take into account regional and sectoral needs and conditions and
shall encourage local planning in the development of educational policies and programs.
(2) Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.

Cudia v. PMA GR No. 211362, February 24, 2015

(3) Every citizen has a right to select a profession or course of study, subject to fair,
reasonable, and equitable admission and academic requirements.
(4) The State shall enhance the right of teachers to professional advancement. Non-teaching
academic and non- academic personnel shall enjoy the protection of the State.
(5) The State shall assign the highest budgetary priority to education and ensure that teaching
will attract and retain its rightful share of the best available talents through adequate
remuneration and other means of job satisfaction and fulfillment.

Academic freedom of institutions of higher learning".

*Garcia v. Faculty Admission, 68 SCRA 277
BME v. Judge Alfonso - 176 SCRA 304
Lupangco v. CA - 160 SCRA 848
*University of San Carlos v. CA - 166 SCRA 570
Capitol Medical Center v CA - 178 SCRA 493
Reyes v. CA 194 SCRA 402
Tan v. CA 199 SCRA 212
Camacho v. Coresis, GR 134372, Aug. 22, 2002
Civil Service Commission v. Sojor 554 SCRA 160
Regino v. Pangasinan Colleges of S&T, GR 156109, Nov 18, 2004

Language

Section 6. The national language of the Philippines is Filipino. As it evolves, it shall be

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

Section 8. This Constitution shall be promulgated in Filipino and English and shall be
translated into major regional languages, Arabic, and Spanish.

Section 9. The Congress shall establish a national language commission composed of

representatives of various regions and disciplines which shall undertake, coordinate, and
promote researches for the development, propagation, and preservation of Filipino and other
languages.

86
Science and Technology

Section 10. Science and technology are essential for national development and progress. The
State shall give priority to research and development, invention, innovation, and their
utilization; and to science and technology education, training, and services. It shall support
indigenous, appropriate, and self- reliant scientific and technological capabilities, and their
application to the country's productive systems and national life.

Section 11. The Congress may provide for incentives, including tax deductions, to encourage
private participation in programs of basic and applied scientific research. Scholarships,
grants-in-aid, or other forms of incentives shall be provided to deserving science students,
researchers, scientists, inventors, technologists, and specially gifted citizens.

Section 12. The State shall regulate the transfer and promote the adaptation of technology
from all sources for the national benefit. It shall encourage the widest participation of private
groups, local governments, and community-based organizations in the generation and
utilization of science and technology.

Section 13. The State shall protect and secure the exclusive rights of scientists, inventors,
artists, and other gifted citizens to their intellectual property and creations, particularly when
beneficial to the people, for such period as may be provided by law.

Arts and Culture

Section 14. The State shall foster the preservation, enrichment, and dynamic evolution of a
Filipino national culture based on the principle of unity in diversity in a climate of free
artistic and intellectual expression.

Section 15. Arts and letters shall enjoy the partronage of the State. The State shall conserve,
promote, and popularize the nation's historical and cultural heritage and resources, as well as
artistic creations.

Section 16. All the country's artistic and historic wealth constitutes the cultural treasure of the
nation and shall be under the protection of the State which may regulate its disposition.

Section 17. The State shall recognize, respect, and protect the rights of indigenous cultural
communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions. It shall
consider these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies.

Section 18. (1) The State shall ensure equal access to cultural opportunities through the
educational system, public or private cultural entities, scholarships, grants and other
incentives, and community cultural centers, and other public venues.
(2) The State shall encourage and support researches and studies on the arts and culture.

Sports

Section 19. (1) The State shall promote physical education and encourage sports programs,
league competitions, and amateur sports, including training for international competitions, to
foster self-discipline, teamwork, and excellence for the development of a healthy and alert

87
citizenry.
(2) All educational institutions shall undertake regular sports activities throughout the country
in cooperation with athletic clubs and other sectors.

ARTICLE XV THE FAMILY

Section 1. The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation.
Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total development.

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

Ronulo v. People GR No. 182483

Section 3. The State shall defend:

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

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

88