13.

Concurrent Appellate Jurisdiction of SC

With the CA: petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the RTC, quasi-judicial agencies
and NLRC (for NLRC and quasi-judicial agencies, this must first go to the CA.)

With the CA and RTC: petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts and
petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto.

With the RTC: Actions against ambassadors, public ministers and consuls.

14. P10M suit for ejectment for unpaid P10M rentals filed in MTC. Issue of ownership is questioned.
MTC dismissed case on ground of no jurisdiction. Where can you file petition for certiorari?

Under the Art VIII, Sec. 5, Par. 2 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court shall exercise appellate
jurisdiction in all cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.

26. Congress revokes prevention of suspension of writ of habeas corpus and declaration of martial law
on what grounds? Is it function of Congress or Courts?

The Constitution provides no grounds for the revocation of the suspension of writ of habeas corpus and
declaration of martial law. It only provides that the Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a
majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension,
which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. The Supreme Court can only review, in an
appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of
martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate
its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.

27. Provisions on Initiative and Referendum

- RA 6735 covers only initiatives on national and local legislation

- RA 6735s references to initiatives on the Constitution are few, isolated and misplaced, unlike in the
initiatives on national and local legislation, where RA 6735 provides a detailed, logical and exhaustive
enumeration on their implementation. In other words, RA 6735 does not specify the procedure how
initiative on the Constitution may be accomplished (Lambino vs COMELEC)

- The court added that, even assuming that RA 6735 is valid to implement the constitutional provision on
initiatives to amend the Constitution, the present initiative must first comply with Section 2, Article XVII
of the Constitution even before complying with RA 6735. But even then, the present initiative violates
the requirement that the petition for an initiative on the 1987 Constitution must have at least 12% of
the total number of registered voters as signatories and no petition embracing more than 1 subject shall
be submitted to the electorate.
28. Provisions on Separation of Powers exists

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

Art. VII, Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.

Art. VIII, Section 1. Section 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower
courts as may be established by law.

The Doctrine of Separation of Powers entails: first, the division of the powers of the government into
three, which are legislative, executive, and judicial; and second, the distribution of these powers to the
three major branches of the government, which are the Legislative Department, Executive Department,
and the Judicial Department. Basically, it means that the Legislative Department is generally limited to
the enactment of the law and not to implementation or interpretation of the same; the Executive
Department is generally limited to the implementation of the law and not to the enactment or
interpretation of the same; and the Judicial Department is generally limited to the interpretation and
application of laws in specific cases and not to the making or implementation of the same.

29. Grounds for Impeachment

The grounds for impeachment are:

1.) culpable violation of the Constitution

2.) treason
3.) bribery
4.) graft and corruption
5.) other high crimes
6.) betrayal of public trust

These grounds are exclusive and offenses not falling within these parameters shall not be sufficient for
impeachment purposes.

ESTRADA vs. SANDIGANBAYAN

- The Plunder law is not rendered uncertain and void merely because of the employment of general
terms or the failure to define the terms used therein. The validity of a law is sustained, so long as that
law provides some comprehensible guide as to what would render those subject to the said law liable
to its penalties. The petitioner cannot rely on the void-for-vagueness doctrine, since this doctrine does
not apply to laws that merely consist of imprecise language.
- The Bill of Rights guarantees the right of the accused in criminal prosecutions to be presumed innocent
until proven otherwise. Thus he is entitled to an acquittal unless the State succeeds in demonstrating
the guilt of the accused with proof beyond reasonable doubt. The contention that Sec. 4 of RA 7080
does away with proof of each and every component of the crime is a misconception. Rather than
 proving each and every criminal act done, it is enough that the prosecution proves beyond reasonable
doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of the crime as a whole.
- Plunder is a malum in se which requires proof of criminal intent. The legislative declaration in RA No.
7659 (which has been declared as constitutionally valid in a previous ruling) that plunder is a heinous
offense implies that it is a malum in se.

CORONA VS SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES

- According to the Constitution, the Senate is the sole judge of all impeachment cases.
- The impeachment is not an attack on the judiciary and the Constitution. Corona is not the
judiciary and the articles of impeachment are leveled against him and him alone.
- The impeachment seeks to strengthen the SC by removing Arroyos influence, restoring the
peoples faith in it.
- Coronas claim that the impeachment complaint was defective and not properly verified has no
merit based on the following:
a. The impeachment complaint, having been transmitted to the Senate, is sufficient to
proceed to trial. Any objections based on technicalities should no longer be entertained.
b. The number of congressmen who had not read the complaint is not enough to reduce
the number of complainants to less than the required 1/3 of all the members of the House.
c. Article 11 Section 3 (4) of the Constitution only requires filing of the complaint by at
least 1/3 of House members, not verification by all of them.
d. The verification requirements under the Rules of Court do not apply to the
impeachment process, as it is political and not strictly judicial in nature.
e. Those who have not read the complaint by now had sufficient time to evaluate it. If
they dont agree with it, then they can withdraw their signatures. But no one has withdrawn his
or her signature so far.

30. State Policy on Foreign Troops

Article XVIII, Sec. 25, of the 1987 Constitution provides: After the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement
between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America concerning military bases,
foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty
duly concurred in by the Senate and, when the Congress so requires, ratified by a majority of the votes
cast by the people in a national referendum held for that purpose, and recognized as a treaty by the
other contracting State.

In Lim and Ersando vs Honorable Executive Secretary, the Court held that neither the MDT nor the VFA
allow foreign troops to engage in an offensive war on Philippine territory. We bear in mind the salutary
proscription stated in the Charter of the United Nations, to wit:

The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance
with the following Principles. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or
use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner
inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
In the same manner, both the Mutual Defense Treaty and the Visiting Forces Agreement, as in all other
treaties and international agreements to which the Philippines is a party, must be read in the context of
the 1987 Constitution. Thus, in the Declaration of Principles and State Policies, it is provided that:

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

SEC. 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states the
paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the
right to self-determination.

SEC. 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom
from nuclear weapons in the country.

The foregoing premises leave us no doubt that US forces are prohibited from engaging in an offensive
war on Philippine territory.

31. State Policy on Neutrality

DEFINITION OF NEUTRAL COUNTRY

A neutral country in a particular war, is a sovereign state which officially declares itself to be neutral
towards the belligerents. A non-belligerent state does not need to be neutral. The rights and duties of a
neutral power are defined in Sections 5[1] and 13[2] of the Hague Convention of 1907. A permanently
neutral power is a sovereign state which is bound by international treaty to be neutral towards the
belligerents of all future wars.

Art. 2, Section 2 of 1987 Constitution (State Policy)

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

The Philippines is not a Neutral State

The States adoption of independent foreign policy is not equal to neutrality. The Philippines is not a
neutral State. The Hague Convention enumerates the rights and duties of a neutral power:

1.) Belligerents may not invade neutral territory and a neutral power's resisting any such attempt
does not compromise its neutrality
2.) A neutral power must intern belligerent troops who reach its territory but not escaped prisoners
of war
3.) Belligerent armies may not recruit neutral citizens, but they may go abroad to enlist
4.) Belligerent armies' personnel and material may not be transported across neutral territory, but
the wounded may be.
5.) A neutral power may supply communication facilities to belligerents, but not war material,
although it need not prevent export of such material.
 6.) Belligerent naval vessels may use neutral ports for a maximum of 24 hours, though neutrals may
impose different restrictions. Exceptions are to make repairsonly the minimum necessary to
put back to sea or if an opposing belligerent's vessel is already in port, in which case it must
have a 24-hour head start.
7.) A prize ship captured by a belligerent in the territorial waters of a neutral power must be
surrendered by the belligerent to the neutral, which must intern its crew

Effects if Philippines were to be Neutral:

Were the Philippines to become neutral, it would remove itself from the evolving conflict between China
on the hand and the US and Japan on the other. It would allow a policy of equidistance from the
competing Asia Pacific powers. This would enable it to develop an independent worldview and a foreign
policy that looks primarily to its own interests, rather than to those of its external patrons. For the first
time in its history, it would be compelled to stand on its own. It would also mean dismantling the
historic US-Philippine alliance, which has helped undergird the US security system in the Asia Pacific.

Neutral States

Switzerland, which adopted its permanent armed neutrality under the 1815 Treaty of Paris, is the oldest
neutral state in the world. Others include San Marino (since 1862), Leichtenstein (1868), Sweden (1918),
Austria (1920), Vatican (1929), Finland (1935), Costa Rica (1949), Malta (1980), Panama (1989),
Turkmenistan (1995).

Formerly neutral states include the United States, Belgium, Cambodia, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary,
Ireland, Laos, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and Ukraine.
Unlike Switzerland, which has adopted armed neutrality permanently, these countries had chosen to be
neutral in response to certain situations for certain periods only.

32.Art. 1 National Territory

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

33. Procedure of Bills of Local Application only

A Bill of Local Application, one which directly allots to local or municipal appropriation, is introduced only
by a member of the House of Representatives but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments.
The passage of a bill into law follows strictly the following procedure:

1.) First reading

2.) Second reading
3.) Floor Debates
 4.) Printing and Distributions
5.) Third reading
6.) Transmitted to the other house
7.) Submission to joint bicameral committee
8.) Approval of consolidated bill by both houses
9.) Submission to the President
10.) Veto power of the President

34. If a President vetoes a bill, what happens next?

If the bill is vetoed, the same, together with a message citing the reason for the veto, is transmitted to
the House where the bill originated. The message is included in the Order of Business. If the Congress
decides to override the veto, the House and the Senate shall proceed separately to reconsider the bill or
the vetoed items of the bill. If the bill or its vetoed items is passed by a vote of two-thirds of the
Members of each House, such bill or items shall become a law.