Constitutional

Construction
Group 9: Carsula, Trazona, Villanueva
 What is the
constitution?
Cooley: that body of rules and maxims in accordance with which
the powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised
CONSTITUTION DEFINED
Legaspi v. Ministry of Finance: Lopez v. De los Reyes:

a fundamental law which sets up a A fundamental law or basis of government, established by

form of government and defines the people in their sovereign capacity to promote their
and delimits the powers thereof and happiness and to secure their rights, property,
those of its officers, reserving to the independence and common welfare
people themselves plenary
A written charter enacted and adopted by the people by
sovereignty
which a government for them is established

An instrument of a permanent nature, intended not

merely to meet existing conditions, but to govern the
future
CONSTITUTION DEFINED

Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS:

▣ A system of fundamental laws for the governance and administration of a nation
▣ The fundamental and paramount law of the nation
□ Prescribes the permanent framework of a system of government
□ assigns to different departments their respective powers and duties
□ Establishes certain fixed principles on which government is founded
▣ Supreme, imperious, absolute and unalterable except by the authority which it
emanates
▣ A supreme law to which all other laws must conform and in accordance with which all
private rights must be determined and all public authority administered
History of the Philippine Constitution

Commonwealth Freedom
Constitution Constitution

1935 1986

1973 1987

1973 Constitution 1987 Constitution

Purpose of the Constitution

to protect and enhance the people’s

interests, as a nation collectively and as
persons individually
Purpose of Constitutional Construction

to ascertain the intent or purpose of the framers of the

constitution as expressed in its language and thereafter
to assure its realization
The constitution must be construed
as a dynamic process.

It should be construed in the light of what actually is,

a continuing instrument to govern not only the present but

also the unfolding events of the indefinite future.
The Constitution must be viewed as a
continuously operative charter of government.

Courts should always strive to give an interpretation that would make

the constitutional provision consistent with reason, justice, and public
interest.
Proscriptions in constitutional construction

1. It should not change with emergencies and conditions.

2. It should not be inflexible.
3. It should not be interpreted narrowly or pedantically.
Constitutional Construction Process

Extraneous
aids

Language of the
Constitution itself
Constitutional Construction Process

Its words should be Where words used in a A word or phrase in one part
given their ordinary of the constitution is to
constitution have both
meaning.
restricted and general receive the same

XPN: Technical terms meanings, the general interpretation when used in

are employed prevails over the restricted. every other part.

XPN: A word or phrase in one part

XPN: The context in which they
of the constitution is to receive
are employed clearly indicates
the same interpretation when
that the limited sense is intended
used in every other part
Illustrative Cases

Ordillo v. COMELEC

● whether the sole province of Ifugao can be validly constituted in the

Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR) under Section 15, Article X of the 1987
Constitution
● NO. The keywords -- provinces, cities, municipalities and geographical areas
connote that a “region” consists of more than one constituent unit. In its ordinary
sense, “region” means two or more provinces; hence, the province of Ifugao
cannot solely constitute the CAR.
Illustrative Cases

Lozada v. COMELEC

● The term “Batasang Pambansa,” which means the regular national assembly,
found in many sections of the 1973 Constitution refers to the regular, not to the
interim Batasang Pambansa
● Rule: Words which have acquired a technical meaning before they are used in
the constitution must be taken in that sense when such words as thus used
are construed.
Extraneous Aids

● history or realities existing at the time of the adoption of the constitution

● proceedings of the convention
● changes in phraseology
● prior laws and judicial decisions
● contemporaneous constructions
● consequences of alternative interpretations
Realities existing at the time of
adoption, object to be accomplished

RULE

if the language used in the constitutional provision is simple and plain, it is

not necessary to resort to extrinsic aids

EXCEPTION

when the framers’ idea of concept does not show in the statement or if it has
multiple construction.
Proceedings of the convention

a In construing statutes, contemporaneous construction are entitled to

great weight however when it comes to the constitution it has no
weight and will not be allowed to change in any way its meaning.
b Writings of delegates – has persuasive force but it depends on two
things:
if opinions are based on facts known to them and not
established it is immaterial

on legal hermeneutics, their conclusions may not be a shade

better in the eyes of the law.
Contemporaneous construction and
writings

A Framers of the constitution is presumed to be aware of prevailing judicial

doctrines concerning the subject of constitutional provisions. THUS when courts
adopt principles different from prior decisions it is presumed that they did so to
overrule said principle ascertain the intent or purpose of the provision as
approved
B HOWEVER mere deletion, as negative guides, cannot prevail over the positive
provisions nor is it determinative of any conclusion.
C Certain provisions in our constitution (from 1935 to the present) are mere
reenactments of prior constitutions thus these changes may indicate an intent
to modify or change the meaning of the old provisions.
Previous laws and judicial rulings

A Before a constitution is ratified it undergoes a lot of revisions and

changes in phraseology (ex. deletion of words) and these
changes may be inquired into to
Changes in phraseology

● Our current Constitution has undergone changes with revisions and

changes in the phraseology prior to the adoption of the final draft.
● The said changes are used to ascertain the intent and purpose of the
provision as finally approved.
Consequences of alternative
constructions
That construction or
interpretation which would
lead to absurd, impossible or
mischievous consequences
must be rejected.
e.g. directory and mandatory
interpretation: Art. 8 Sec 15(1) requires
judges to render decisions within
specific periods from the date of
submission for decision of cases
(construed as directory because if
otherwise it will cause greater injury to
the public)
Constitution construed as a whole

“The construction of a provision in the constitution should not be

isolation”

“conjunction with all other provisions, unless the contrary is provided.”

“One section is not to be allowed to defeat one another and the court
must harmonized them”

e.g.:

1. Article VI, Section 24 of the 1987 Constitution in re: Tolentino v. Secretary of

Finance
Mandatory or directory

Constitutional provisions are to To not leave the legislature any

discretion to obey or ignore the
be construed as mandatory.
provisions of the constitution
Exceptions:

Express Examples:

Different intention Article X, Section 6 of the 1987

Constitution in re: ACORD v. Zamora
Prospective or retroactive

The constitution should Example:

operate prospectively only.

Article IV, Section 1, paragraph 3 of the
1987 Constitution - “those having been
Exception: The words born before January 271, 1973 of

employed clearly show that it Filipino Mothers..”

should have a retroactive

effect.
Applicability of rules of statutory
construction

Rules in statutory construction can be applied in constitutional construction. In the appropriate

case, they may be used to construe provisions in the constitution.

Eg:

1. Sarmiento v. Mison - Applying the fundamental principle which is to give effect

to the intent of the framers of the constitution and the people adopting it.
Article VII, Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution was construed to function as a
provision that requires the first group of appointments to have the confirmation
of the Commission on Appointments while it allows the president to appoint
other officers without such confirmation. The deliberations of the 1986
Constitutional Framers support this construction.
Generally, constitutional
provisions are self executing
It is the established rule that Example:
constitutional provisions are Article XII, Section 10 of the
self-executing. 1987 Constitution in re: Manila
Exceptions:
Prince Hotel v. GSIS.

Expressly provided

From their language or tenure, they are

merely declarations of policies and
principles.
Three maxims employed as aids to
contrue constitutional provisions

Verba Legis - Plain Meaning Rule

Ratio Legis Est Anima - When in doubt, what was their

intention?

Ut Magis Valeat Quam Pereat - Interpreted as a whole

Constructions of US Constitutional
provision adopted in 1987 Constitution

Provisions were patterned over the US Constitution. The Bill of

Rights in our constitution was also patterned in the same manner
as well.

It is a settled rule that it is proper for the courts to take into

consideration the construction of the provisions by the country
from which they are taken. Our Supreme Court have already cited
US Supreme Court decisions regarding constitutional issues that
involved provisions that were patterned from the US Constitution.
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction
Office of Ombudsman v. Masing, G. R. No. 165416, January 22, 2008
▣ Issue: Whether or not R.A. 4670 confers an exclusive disciplinary authority on the DECS
over public school teachers and prescribes an exclusive procedure in administrative
investigations involving them
▣ Held: NO. It is basic that the 1987 Constitution should not be restricted in its meaning
by a law of earlier enactment; The statement in Fabella that Section 9 of R.A. No. 4670
“reflects the legislative intent to impose a standard and a separate set of procedural
requirements in connection with administrative proceedings involving public school
teachers” should be construed as referring only to the specific procedure to be followed
in administrative investigations conducted by the Department of Education, Culture
and Sports (DECS).
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction
Francisco, Jr. v. House of Rep. G.R. NO. 160261. November 10, 2003
▣ Impeachment against the Chief Justice; Supreme Court clarified the meaning and
scope of impeachment and ruled that the 2nd impeachment complaint against the
Chief Justice is covered by the one-year ban
▣ Resolution of the issue hinges on the interpretation of the term “initiate”
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction
Francisco, Jr. v. House of Rep. G.R. NO. 160261. November 10, 2003
▣ Father Bernas: When Section 3 (5) says, “No impeachment proceeding shall be initiated
against the same official more than once within a period of one year,” it means that no
second verified complaint may be accepted and referred to the Committee on Justice
for action
□ The interpretation is founded on the common understanding of the meaning of
“to initiate” which means to begin.
□ The Constitution is ratified by the people, both ordinary and sophisticated, as they
understand it; and that ordinary people read ordinary meaning into ordinary
words and not abstruse meaning, they ratify words as they understand it and not
as sophisticated lawyers confuse it.
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction

Lambino v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 174153, October 25, 2006

▣ Issue: Whether or not the initiative petition is sufficient compliance with the
constitutional requirement on direct proposal by people.
▣ Held: NO. Initiative petition does not comply with Sec. 2 Art. XVII on direct proposal by
people. Sec. 2 Art. XVII is the governing provision that allows a people’s initiative to
propose amendments to the constitution. While the provision does not expressly state
that the petition must set forth the full text of the proposed amendments, the
deliberations of the framers of our constitution clearly show that the framers intended
to adopt relevant American jurisprudence on people’s initiative and in particular, the
people must sign a petition containing such full text.
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction

David v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006

▣ Issue: Whether or not PP 1017 and G 05 is constitutional.
▣ Held: No. The issue cannot be considered as moot and academic by reason of
the lifting of the questioned PP. It is still in fact operative because there are
parties still affected due to the alleged violation of the said PP. Hence, the SC
can take cognition of the case at bar. The SC ruled that PP 1017 is constitutional
in part and at the same time some provisions of which are unconstitutional.
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction
La Bugal-B Laan Tribal Association, Inc. v. Ramos G.R. No. 127882, December 1, 2004
▣ Issue: Whether or not the authorization of service contract, as a mode of the
exploration, development, utilization and processing of mineral resources, under the
provisions of Republic Act. No. 7942, the Mining Law, is unconstitutional

▣ Held: NO. The Court held that all of the provisions regarding the aforesaid issue are
constitutional. Verba legis is not applicable to the terms of the constitution which
state that the “ agreements involving either technical or financial assistance” under
paragraph 4, section 2 of Article XII of the 1987 Constitution. The omission of the term
“service contracts” does not mean to ban service contracts per se. By specifying the
phrase, “agreements involving assistance”, there is implied assent to everything that
these agreements necessarily entailed provided that Philippine Sovereignty over
natural resources and full control over the enterprise undertaking the exploration,
development, and utilization activities remain firmly in the State. The deliberations of
the Constitutional Commission are also of the idea that they were not about to ban or
eradicate service contracts.
Illustrative cases in
constitutional construction

Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita G.R. No. 169777, April 20, 2006
▣ Issue: Whether or not Executive Order No. 454, which bars the appearance of
executive officials from appearing and being asked questions before legislative
bodies or committee without presidential consent, is constitutional.
▣ Held: NO. The Court held that the Executive Order is unconstitutional since it
allows the executive branch to evade congressional requests for information
without need of clearly asserting a right to do so and /or proffering its reasons
therefor. The power of congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation is
frustrated.