grounds for cancellation of treaties, about re refugees para di sila ibalik sa bansa nila,

senate concurrenc of treay

Period and grounds to file Petition to Deny Due Course and Cancel COC

PETITION TO DENY DUE COURSE TO OR CANCEL CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY

1. A verified petition to deny due course or to cancel certificate of candidacy may be
filed by any person within five (5) days from the last day for the filing of certificate of
candidacy but not later than twenty-five (25) days from the filing of certificate of
candidacy under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC); 2. The petition shall
be filed in ten (10) legible copies, personally or through a duly authorized
representative, by any :person of voting age or a duly registered political party,
organization, or coalition of political parties exclusively on the ground that any material
representation contained therein as required under Section 74 of the OEC is false.,

Grounds for the filing of Petition for Quo Warranto

Rule 21 - Quo warranto

Sec. 1. Petition for Quo Warranto. - Any voter contesting the election of any
regional, provincial or city official on the ground of ineligibility or of disloyalty to
the Republic of the Philippines may file a petition for quo warranto with the
Electoral Contests Adjudication Department.chanrobles virtual law library
Sec. 2. Period Within Which to File. - A petition for quo warranto may be filed
within ten (10) days from the date the respondent is proclaimed.chanrobles
virtual law library

Conversion of component city to highly urbanized city

Requirements

Article 12. Conversion of a Component City Into a Highly-Urbanized City. — (a)

Requisites for conversion — A component city shall not be converted into a highly-
urbanized city unless the following requisites are present:

xxxx
(b) Procedure for conversion —

(1) Resolution — The interested component city shall submit to the Office of the
President a resolution of its sanggunian adopted by a majority of all its members
in a meeting duly called for the purpose, and approved and endorsed by the city
mayor. Said resolution shall be accompanied by certifications as to income and
population.

(2) Declaration of conversion — Within thirty (30) days from receipt of such
resolution, the President shall, after verifying that the income and population
requirements have been met, declare the component city as highly-urbanized.

(3) Plebiscite — Within one hundred twenty (120) days from the declaration of
the President or as specified in the declaration, the COMELEC shall conduct a
plebiscite in the city proposed to be converted. Such plebiscite shall be preceded
by a comprehensive information campaign to be conducted by the COMELEC
with the assistance of national and local government officials, media, NGOs, and
other interested parties.

(c) Effect of Conversion —

The conversion of a component city into a highly-urbanized city shall make it

independent of the province where it is geographically located.13

Cabanatuan City is not the first city to apply for conversion from a component city into a
highly urbanized city. In 2007, Lapu-Lapu City in the Province of Cebu held a plebiscite
for its conversion. The Commission on Elections issued Resolution No. 7854 14 dated
April 3, 2007. Section 7 of Resolution No. 7854 states:

Sec. 7. Who may vote. – All qualified voters of Lapu-Lapu City duly registered as of the
January 8-12, 2007 hearings of the Election Registration Board (ERB) are entitled to
vote in the plebiscite.

The EO of Lapu-Lapu City shall prepare the lists of voters for use in the plebiscite in
accordance with Section 11 hereof.15

In 2008, Tacloban City conducted a plebiscite for its conversion from a component city
into a highly urbanized city. The Commission on Elections then issued Resolution No.
851616 dated November 12, 2008. With regard to the qualified voters for the conduct of
the plebiscite, Resolution No. 8516 states:

Sec. 7. Who may vote. – All qualified voters of Tacloban City during the October 29,
2007 Barangay and SK Elections are entitled to vote in the plebiscite.

The EO of Tacloban City shall prepare the lists of voters for use in the plebiscite in
accordance with Section 11 hereof.17
is conversion considered interruption of service

Latasa v. Commission on Elections13 presented the novel question of whether a

municipal mayor who had fully served for three consecutive terms could run as city
mayor in light of the intervening conversion of the municipality into a city. During the
third term, the municipality was converted into a city; the cityhood charter provided that
the elective officials of the municipality shall, in a holdover capacity, continue to exercise
their powers and functions until elections were held for the new city officials. The Court
ruled that the conversion of the municipality into a city did not convert the office of the
municipal mayor into a local government post different from the office of the city mayor
– the territorial jurisdiction of the city was the same as that of the municipality; the
inhabitants were the same group of voters who elected the municipal mayor for 3
consecutive terms; and they were the same inhabitants over whom the municipal mayor
held power and authority as their chief executive for nine years. The Court said:

This Court reiterates that the framers of the Constitution specifically included an
exception to the people’s freedom to choose those who will govern them in order to
avoid the evil of a single person accumulating excessive power over a particular
territorial jurisdiction as a result of a prolonged stay in the same office. To allow
petitioner Latasa to vie for the position of city mayor after having served for three
consecutive terms as a municipal mayor would obviously defeat the very intent of the
framers when they wrote this exception. Should he be allowed another three
consecutive terms as mayor of the City of Digos, petitioner would then be possibly
holding office as chief executive over the same territorial jurisdiction and inhabitants for
a total of eighteen consecutive years. This is the very scenario sought to be avoided by
the Constitution, if not abhorred by it.14

Quasi Legislative Power and Quasi Judicial Power of Administrative Agency

Powers of Administrative Agencies

1. Quasi-legislative power / Power of subordinate legislation
2. Quasi-judicial power/Power of adjudication
3. Determinative powers (Note: Senator Neptali Gonzales calls them incidental
powers)
Definition of “Quasi-legislative power”

It is the authority delegated by the law-making body to the administrative body to adopt
rules and regulations intended to carry out the provisions of a law and implement
legislative policy.
Distinctions between Quasi-legislative power and legislative power
1. LEGISLATIVE power involves the discretion to determine what the law shall be.
QUASI-legislative power only involves the discretion to determine how the law
shall be enforced.
2. LEGISLATIVE power CANNOT be delegated. QUASI-legislative power CAN be
delegated.
Tests of Delegation (applies to the power to promulgate administrative
regulations )
1. COMPLETENESS test. This means that the law must be complete in all its terms
and conditions when it leaves the legislature so that when it reaches the delegate,
it will have nothing to do but to enforce it.
2. SUFFICIENT STANDARD test. The law must offer a sufficient standard to specify
the limits of the delegate’s authority, announce the legislative policy and specify
the conditions under which it is to be implemented.
Definition of Quasi-Judicial Power

It is the power of administrative authorities to make determinations of facts in the

performance of their official duties and to apply the law as they construe it to the facts
so found. The exercise of this power is only incidental to the main function of
administrative authorities, which is the enforcement of the law.

Determinative Powers
1. ENABLING powers

Those that PERMIT the doing of an act which the law undertakes to regulate and would
be unlawful without government approval.

Ex. Issuance of licenses to engage in a particular business.

2.DIRECTING powers

Those that involve the corrective powers of public utility commissions, powers of
assessment under the revenue laws, reparations under public utility laws, and awards
under workmen’s compensation laws, and powers of abstract determination such as
definition-valuation, classification and fact finding

3. DISPENSING powers
Exemplified by the authority to exempt from or relax a general prohibition, or authority to
relieve from an affirmative duty. Its difference from licensing power is that dispensing
power sanctions a deviation from a standard.

4. SUMMARY powers

Those that apply compulsion or force against person or property to effectuate a legal
purpose without a judicial warrant to authorize such action. Usually without notice and
hearing.

Ex. Abatement of nuisance, summary destraint, levy of property of delinquent tax

payers

5. EQUITABLE powers

Those that pertain to the power to determine the law upon a particular state of facts. It
refers to the right to, and must, consider and make proper application of the rules of
equity.

Ex. Power to appoint a receiver, power to issue injunctions

Kinds of Administrative Regulations

DISTINCTIONS LEGISLATIVE INTERPRETATIVE

1. Capacity that
administrative
agency is acting in Legislative Judicial
2. What It supplements the
administrative statute by filling in It says what the
agency is doing the details statute means
Legislative
regulations have
the force and
effecr of law Merely
immediately upon persuasive/Received
going into effect. by the courts with
Such is accorded much respect but
by the courts or not accorded with
3. Force and effect by express finality
 provision of
statute.
Requisites of a Valid Administrative Regulation
1. Its promulgation must be authorized by the legislature.
2. It must be within the scope of the authority given by the legislature.
3. It must be promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
4. It must be reasonable
Need for Previous Notice and Hearing
1. General Rule: Administrative rules of GENERAL application do NOT require
previous notice and hearing.
2. Exception: When the legislature itself requires it and mandates that the regulation
shall be based on certain facts as determined at an appropriate investigation.
3. If the regulation is in effect a settlement of a controversy between specific parties,
it is considered an administrative adjudication, requiring notice and hearing.
Prescribing of Rates

It can be either:

1. LEGISLATIVE

If the rules/rates are meant to apply to all enterprises of a given kind throughout the
country.

No prior notice and hearing is required.

2. QUASI-JUDICIAL

If the rules and rates imposed apply exclusively to a particular party, based upon a
finding of fact. Prior notice and hearing is required.

Requirement of Publication
Administrative Regulations that MUST be published:
1. Administrative regulations of GENERAL application.
2. Administrative regulations which are PENAL in nature.
Administrative regulations that do NOT NEED to be PUBLISHED:
1. Interpretative regulations
 2. Internal rules and regulations governing the personnel of the administrative
agency.
1. Letters of instruction issued by administrative superiors concerning guidelines to
be followed by their subordinates. (Tanada v. Tuvera)
Special Requisites of a Valid Administrative Regulation with a PENAL sanction
1. The law itself must make violation of the administrative regulation punishable.
2. The law itself must impose and specify the penalty for the violation of the
regulation.
3. The regulation must be published.
Requisites for Proper Exercise of Quasi-Judicial Power
1. Jurisdiction
2. Due process
Administrative Due Process : Requirements
1. Right to Notice, be it actual or constructive
2. Reasonable opportunity to appear and defend his rights and to introduce
witnesses
3. Impartial tribunal with competent jurisdiction
4. Finding or decision supported by substantial evidence
Exceptions to the Notice and Hearing Requirement
1. Urgency of immediate action
2. Tentativeness of the administrative action
3. Right was previously offered but not claimed
4. Summary abatement of a nuisance per se
5. Preventive suspension of a public servant facing administrative charges
6. Padlocking of filthy restaurants/theaters showing obscene movies
7. Cancellation of a passport of a person sought for criminal prosecution
8. Summary distraint and levy of properties of a delinquent taxpayer
9. Replacement of a temporary or acting appointee
Questions Reviewable on Judicial Review:
1. Questions of FACT

The general rule is that courts will not disturb the findings of administrative agencies
acting within the parameters of their own competence so long as such findings are
supported by substantial evidence. By reason of their special knowledge, expertise, and
experience, the courts ordinarily accord respect if not finality to factual findings of
administrative tribunals.

2. Question of LAW

Administrative decision may be appealed to the courts independently of legislative

permission.

It may be appealed even against legislative prohibition because the judiciary cannot be
deprived of its inherent power to review all decisions on questions of law.

Doctrine of Finality

Courts are reluctant to interfere with action of an administrative agency prior to its
completion or finality, the reason being that absent a final order or decision, power has
not been fully and finally exercised, and there can usually be no irreparable harm.

EXCEPTIONS: Interlocutory order affecting the merits of a controversy; Preserve

status quo pending further action by the administrative agency; Essential to the
protection of the rights asserted from the injury threatened; Officer assumes to act in
violation of the Constitution and other laws; Order not reviewable in any other way;
Order made in excess of power
Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction
1. This doctrine states that courts cannot or will not determine a controversy which
requires the expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of the proper
administrative bodies because technical matters of intricate questions of fact are
involved.
2. Relief must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before a remedy will
be supplied by the court even though the matter is within the proper jurisdiction of
a court.
Doctrine of Prior Resort

When a claim originally cognizable in the courts involves issues which, under a
regulatory scheme are within the special competence of an administrative agency,
judicial proceedings will be suspended pending the referral of these issues to the
administrative body for its view.
Note: The doctrines of primary jurisdiction and prior resort have been considered to be
interchangeable.

Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

1. Under this doctrine, an administrative decision must first be appealed to the
administrative superiors up to the highest level before it may be elevated to a
court of justice for review.
1. Reasons :
1. to enable the administrative superiors to correct the errors committed
by their subordinates.
2. courts should refrain from disturbing the findings of administrative.
bodies in deference to the doctrine of separation of powers.
3. courts should not be saddled with the review of administrative cases
4. judicial review of administrative cases is usually effected through special
civil actions which are available only if their is no other plain, speedy
and adequate remedy.

3. Exceptions

a. when the question raised is purely legal, involves constitutional questions

b. when the administrative body is in estopped
c. when act complained of is patently illegal
d. when there is urgent need for judicial intervention
e. when claim involved is small
f. when irreparable damage is involved
g. when there is no other plain, speedy , adequate remedy
h. when strong public interest is involved
I. when the subject of controversy is private land
1. in quo warranto proceedings
2. When the administrative remedy is permissive, concurrent
3. utter disregard of due process
4. long-continued and unreasonable delay
5. amount involved is relatively small
6. when no administrative review is provided
7. respondent is a department secretary (DOCTRINE OF QUALIFIED POLITICAL
AGENCY – ALTER EGO DOCTRINE)
Substantial evidence – defined to mean not necessarily preponderant proof as required
in ordinary civil cases but such kind of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion.

legal maxims

Erga Omnes Obligation - An obligation of every State towards the international

community as a whole.

Jus Cogens - Literally means “compelling law”. A norm accepted and

recognized by the international community of States as a
whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted
and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of
general international law having the same character
(Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 53). Also referred to as ‘peremptory
norm of general
international law’

Ex Aequo Et Bono - The concept of ex aequo et bono literally means

“according to the right and good” or “from equity and
conscience”.

A judgment based on considerations of fairness, not on

considerations of existing law, that is, to simply decide
the case based upon a balancing of the equities

Doctrine of Incorporation

It means that the rules of international law form part of

the law of the land and no further legislative action is
needed to make such rules applicable in the domestic
sphere.

Doctrine of Transformation

It provides that the generally accepted rules of

international law are not per se binding upon the state
but must first be embodied in legislation enacted by the
lawmaking body and so transformed into municipal law.
Pacta Sunt Servanda (2000 Bar)

International agreements must be performed in good

faith. A treaty engagement is not a mere moral obligation
but creates a legally binding obligation on the parties. A
state which has contracted a valid international
agreement is bound to make in its legislation such
modification as may be necessary to ensure fulfillment of
the obligation undertaken.

Principle of Auto-Limitation (2006 Bar)

Any State may by its consent, express or implied, submit

to a restriction of its sovereign rights. There may thus
be a curtailment of what otherwise is a plenary power
(Reagan v. CIR, G.R. No. L-26379, Dec. 27, 1969).

The Subjective Element – opinion juris sive

necessitates To assume the status of CIL the rule in question must be
regarded by States as being binding in law, i.e. that they
are under a legal obligation to obey it. The main
purpose of the opinion juris sive necessitates is to
distinguish between customary rule and mere usage
followed out of courtesy or habit.

Hard law (2009 Bar)

Means binding laws; to constitute law, a rule, instrument

or decision must be authoritative and prescriptive. In
international law, hard law includes treaties or
international agreements, as well as customary laws.
These instruments result in legally enforceable
commitments for countries (states) and other

international subjects.

Soft law (2009 Bar)

These are non-binding rules of international law. Soft law

is of relevance and importance to the development of
international law because it:
 has the potential of law-making, i.e. it may be a
starting point for later ‘hardening’ of nonbinding

provisions (e.g. UNGA resolutions may

be translated into binding treaties);
may provide evidence of an existing customary
rule;
may be formative of the opinio juris or of State
practice that creates a new customary rule;
may be helpful as a means of a purposive
interpretation of international law;
may be incorporated within binding treaties
but in provisions which the parties do not
intend to be binding;
may in other ways assist in the development
and application of general international law.

de lege ferenda
: being on the basis of new law

Doctrine of Equality of States

All states are equal in international law despite of their

obvious factual inequalities as to size, population, wealth,
strength, or degree of civilization (Sarmiento, 2007).

Doctrine of Association (2010 Bar)

It is formed when two states of unequal power

voluntarily establish durable links. In the basic model,

A: The power to ratify treaties does not belong to theSenate.

Under the Constitution the power to ratify is vested in

the President subject to the concurrence of the Senate. The
President has the discretion even after the signing of the
treaty by the Philippine representative whether or not to
ratify a treaty. The signature of the representative does
not signify final consent, it is ratification that binds the
state to the provisions of the treaty and renders it
effective.
The role of the Senate is limited only to giving or
withholding its consent, concurrence to the ratification.
It is within the President to refuse to submit a treaty to
the Senate or having secured its consent for its
ratification, refuse to ratify it. Such decision is within the
competence of the President alone, which cannot be
encroached by this Court via writ of mandamus
(Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 158088, July 6,
2005).

The House of Representatives (HoR) cannot take active

part in the conduct of foreign relations, particularly in
entering into treaties and international agreements. As
held in US v. Curtiss Wright Export Corporation (299 US
304), it is the President alone who can act as
representative of the nation in the conduct of foreign
affairs. Although the Senate has the power to concur in
treaties, the President alone can negotiate treaties and
Congress is powerless to intrude into this.

Doctrine of rebus sic stantibus

It states that a fundamental change of circumstances

which determined the parties to accept a treaty, if it has
resulted in a radical transformation of the extent of the
obligations imposed by it, may under certain conditions,
afford the party affected a ground to invoke the
termination of the treaty.

The change must have increased the burden of the

obligations to be executed to the extent of rendering
performance essentially different from the original
intention.

Refugee

Any person who is outside the country of his nationality

or the country of his former habitual residence because
he has or had well-founded fear of persecution by reason
of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a political
group or political opinion and is unable or, because of
such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of
the government of the country of his nationality, or, if he
has no nationality, to return to the country of his former
habitual residence.

Elements before one may be considered as a refugee

(ONPer)

1. The person is Outside the country of his nationality,

or in the case of Stateless persons, outside the
country of habitual residence;
2. The person lacks National protection;
3. The person fears Persecution in his own country.

NOTE: The second element makes a refugee a Stateless

person. Only a person who is granted asylum by another
State can apply for refugee status; thus the refugee
treaties imply the principle of asylum.

Principle of Non-Refoulment

Posits that a State may not deport or expel refugees to

the frontiers of territories where their life or freedom
would be put in danger or at risk (Magallona, 2005).