Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 92

BOOK I: THE STATE AND ITS INHERENT POWERS Introduction know the elements of a STATE know the three

hree inherent powers of the STATE correlate the elements of a STATE with its inherent powers the result of the correlation will be discussed into three chapters and these are as follows: A. PEOPLE POLICE POWER (chapter 1) - The thesis of this first chapter is what is the relationship of the people with the State? - The thesis will be answered by the following applicable laws: (1) PRINCIPLES and STATE POLICIES: (a) Amendment and Revision: article 17 of the 1987 Constitution the basic concept of the constitution and the process of amendment and revision. (b) Declaration of Principles and State Polices: Article 2 of the 1987 constitution. The principles and state policies

(c) Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports: Article 14 of the 1987 constitution. (d) The Family: Article 15 of the 1987 constitution. (e) General and Transitory Provisions: Article 16 and 18 of the 1987 constitution.

(2) BILL OF RIGHTS: Article 3 of the 1987 constitution. (3) CITIZENSHIP: Article 4 of the 1987 constitution. (4) SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS LABOR: Article 13 of the 1987 constitution and The Labor Law of the Philippines.

B. TERRITORY, SOVEREIGNTY EXPROPRIATION POWER, PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW (chapter 2) The thesis of this second chapter is what are the two concepts of territory? The thesis will be answered by the following applicable laws: (1) Local/Domestic context: (a) National Territory: Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution. (b) National Economy and Patrimony: Article 12 of the 1987 Constitution. (c) Expropriation Proceedings: Rules of Court and Related Jurisprudence. (2) International context: (a) Principles and Rules on Public International Law: Public International Law.

C. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE POWER TO TAX (chapter 3) There are four thesis under the third chapter, these are as follows: o what are the two major structures of the Philippine Government? o who represents the people of the Philippine Government? o how does the Philippine Government administers the affairs of the State? o where does the Philippine Government gets its funds to protect the State? The thesis will be answered by the following applicable laws: (1) STRUCTURE OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT: (A) NATIONAL GOVERNMENT: (a) Legislative Department: Article 6 of the 1987 constitution. (b) Executive Department: Article 7 of the 1987 constitution. (c) Judicial Department: Article 8 of the 1987 constitution. (d) Constitutional Commissions and Other Governmental Bodies: Article 9 of the 1987 constitution.

(B) LOCAL GOVERNMENT:use beda reviwer (a) Barangay: Law on Municipal Corporations. (b) Municipality: Law on Municipal Corporations. (c) City: Law on Municipal Corporations. (d) Province: Law on Municipal Corporations.

(2) PUBLIC OFFICER: (A) ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS: Article 11 of the 1987 constitution. (B) ELECTION: (a) General Provisions (use beda reviewer) (b) Jurisdiction of COMELEC: (use beda reviewer) Article 9 of the 1987 constitution. (c) Election Procedure: (use tipon and audio sandoval) Omnibus Election Code. (d) Election of Public Officers: (use tipon) (d1) National Elective Officers (d2) Local Elective Officers (3) ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT INSTRUMENTALITIES AND AGENCIES: Administrative Law of the Philippines. (Sandoval audio)

(4) POWER OF TAXATION: (A) NATIONAL TAXATION: NIRC CODE AND TARRIF AND CUSTOMS CODE. (B) LOCAL TAXATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

Atty. Sandovals lecture: D. PEOPLE POLICE POWER (chapter 1)

I. PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES: 1.) JUDICIAL POWER -

Judicial Power section 1 article 8 second paragraph: (1) duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversy involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable; (2) duty of the courts to determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction of any part or instrumentality or agency of the government. (expanded power of judicial review: correlate with rule 65 special civil action for cetirorari. Political Law doctrine has been affected by this expanded power of the judiciary for the ground of grave abuse of discretion. This is also the extraordinary power of the judiciary.) Judicial Power <-> Political Questions doctrine ( questions of policy ): As a rule, courts cannot intervene to policy questions/political questions. Tanada v. Cuenco speaking for political question, these are questions to be raised by the people in their sovereign capacity by which vested upon to their representatives in the government through the public officers. Two types of political questions: (1) those to be decided by people in their sovereign capacity; (2) those that are full discretional powers are given to the executive and legislative department. Note: political question arose from the doctrine of separation of powers. Under this doctrine, the three important functions of the government, executive, legislative, judicial branch thus, executive power vested to the executive branch, legislative power vested to congress, judicial power vested to courts. Legislative and executive branch are the political branch of the government because the law are created by congress and the executive branch enforce it. These functions are questions of policy and involves wisdom of the said branch. On the other hand, if there is question of unconstitutionality, it is only the judicial who has power to intervene it under the justiciable questions. It is only the court who can say that a law is unconstitutional or not.

Illustration: Political Question Cases: First Type those questions where through the sovereign capacity of the people. (1) evardone v. Comelec, loss of confidence is a political question, thus, courts cannot intervene/intruded. In a recall, there is a special election to determine if the people in their sovereign capacity still have confidence on the said local elective public official.

Provisions on Recall, mode of removing a local elective public officer on ground of loss of confidence. The term of a local elective public officer is 3 years for 3 consecutive terms. If he is a bad local elective official you can remove him even before the end of his term. Grounds for Recall: Loss of confidence. Case: (2)Lawyers League v. Corazon Aquino Lawyers League through Atty Lozano filed a petition in the SC questioning the legitimacy of the Cory Aquino government. According to them the people who made the revolution were not really making a revolution. The SC denied petition, since we cannot inquire into the people on their motives in going to the rally in EDSA. In addition, the international community has already recognize the cory government. Thus, the cory government is considered a de jure government. This is not anymore subject to judicial review. Note: in contrast, let us consider the Estrada v. Dissierto case, after Estrada vacated malacanang, GMA as vice president assumed the presidents office. Estrada question the legitimacy of the assumption of GMA of the presidency. According to GMAs lawyers, her assumption in the office is a political question by citing lawyers league case. The SC did not agree because the lawyers league case is not applicable because in the latter case, the cory government was a result of a revolution by direct exercise of the people it is clear that it is clearly outside of judicial scrutiny. Thus, any government that was defied by a successful revolution and therefore it goes beyond the constitutional law because the people through their sovereign capacity took away the 1973 constitution and give a new constitution which is the 1987 constitution. On the other hand, in EDSA 2, GMA only assumed office under 1987 constitution because the revolution affected only the presidency office. In EDSA 1, cory Aquino assumed office because the revolution affected the whole 1973 constitution by throwing it away and not recognizing it anymore. The constitutional government once destroyed by the people through successful revolution then the constitution becomes not existing and therefore a new government is born and the courts can never question it anymore. In the EDSA 2, there is no new constitution that is form and no new government

that is born and therefore, the court can still intervene. Thus, the invocation of political question doctrine cannot prevail. Second Type Those question where full discretionary authority and power is given to the legislative and the executive branches. (1) IBP v. Zamora Due to the insurgency problems in Mindanao, there is a fear that there may be bombings in metro manila. Thus, president Estrada issued letters of instruction ordering marines to join the PNP to defy the insurgency. This power that he actually exercised is calling out power as commander of chief of the armed forces of the philippines under section 18 article 7 of the 1987 constitution. Note: there are 3 distinct powers under section 18 of article 7 of 1987 constitution ( calling out power, martial law power, power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus ). The martial law power and power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus are subject to judicial review, under section 18,3rd paragraph, article 7 of the 1987 constitution the SC may review in an appropriate proceeding filed by a citizen the martial power and the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Since these two powers are direct and actual curtailment and suppression of individual civil liberties. However, in this case of IBP v. Zamora, the calling out power of the president as commander chief of the armed forces of the Philippines, is a political question by virtue of the full discretionary power vested to the president by the constitution. Thus, the courts cannot intervene because this falls under the second type of political question. Courts therefore cannot issue a TRO to restrain the calling out power. However again! Hehe the court in this case, said that we can use our expanded judicial power if the calling out power was exercised in grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction on any part of the branch or instrumentality of the government. Thus, the general rule: calling out power is a political question. The exception rule: in the use of expanded power doctrine but must be proven by the petitioner that there is really a whimsicall and grave abuse of discretion. The petitioner must show burden of proof that there is whimsicall, unreasonable, despotic exercise of discretion.

(2) Randolph david v. Gloria macapagal arroyo When president GMA promulgated an order declaring a State of Emergency. Note: section 23 article 6 of the 1987 constitution, in times of war or national emergency, may by a law give emergency powers to the president. This is a delegated power made by congress. Thus, the president cannot invoke emergency powers without any law. In this case, there was no law granting emergency powers, and therefore, the power that GMA invoke is not an emergency power, neither martial law power. The grounds for martial power or suspend privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in cases of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it. Within 48 hrs after declaration, the president shall report to congress and if the latter is not in session, it may call a special session within 24 hrs after such declaration to determine the validity of it. In this case, there is no invasion nor rebellion. Therefore, it boils down to one power, she actually invoke calling out power in case of lawlessness, violence and invasion or rebellion in order to suppress. Thus, apply the IBP v. Zamora doctrine: where as a rule, calling out power is a political question unless there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction provided that the petitioner must show burden proof to rebut that there was really grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction. Thus, in this case, the SC sustain the constitutionality of the order made by the president. However, the acts committed by the authorities are unconstitutional such as arresting without any warrant of arrest, confiscating newspaper, prohibition mass demonstration and the like which are guaranteed by the bill of rights under the constitution. Take note that calling out power is not a restriction of civil rights and liberties. It does not involve the restriction of civil rights and liberties. Thus, while the order is constitutional, however, the acts of the authorities are unconstitutional in enforcing the said order of the president. Requisites for Judicial Review: There must be an Actual case or controversy; It must be raised by the proper party, locus/legal standing; The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest opportunity; The resolutioon must constitute the very lis mota very main issue of the entire controversy. There is no way that the court can dwell on other issues unless ruling the constitutionality of the case.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) Actual case or controversy existing case or controversy which ripe for judicial determination. Not hypotethical. Not mere antecepatory or conjectural. Note: Moot and Academic doctrine as held in the case of Randolph David v. GMA, the SC rule that if the case has been rendered moot and academic due to supervening events, the courts cannot anymore entertain the case, this is the general rule, the exceptions are as follows: a.1) there is a grave violation of the constitution; a.2) exceptional character of the situation, paramount public interest is involved; a.3) that the said constitutional question raised will give the court the opportunity to give principle that will guide the courts in future determination of cases; a.4) it is capable of repetition yet evading review. Reason: the courts are not supposed to make advisory opinion. In case of International Court of Justice, the latter can render advisory opinion which is expressly vested by its function through its charter. In contrast, Philippine courts are not supposed to render advisory opinion under the doctrine of actual case or controversy. (b) Must be raised by the proper party must have legal standing to question the act. Personal and substantial interest in the case such that the party has sustained or will sustain a direct injury as a result of the governmental act that is being challenged. As a rule, the court cannot decide if the party has no legal standing, however, in the case of IBP v. Zamora, the exception are as follows: b.1) paramount public interest is involved/issue of transcendental importance to the public the court can entertain the case. (c) The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest opportune time The constitutional question must be raise it in your pleadings in court of competent jurisdiction before any appeal. Thus, if you failed to raise it, you cannot raise it for the first time on appeal. (d)the constitutional question must first resolve the constitutional question raised before going to solve the other issues.

Illustration: There is this act of this government whether local or national that you want to oppose. In this case you file the petition to the proper court and the defendant will be the solicitor general which is the counsel for the government. The defendant Solicitor General will say the petition is a political question; or he will raise that the requisites of the judicial review was not complied with. Thus, to sustain your petition you must overcome and prepare for these defenses. ( for practical consideration ) 2.) RULE MAKING POWER Section 5, paragraph 5 article 8 of the 1987 constitution (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules concerning: for the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights; pleadings, Practice and procedure in all courts; Admission to practice of law; IBP; legal assistance to the underprivileged

note: The Rules of Court was enacted through this constitutional provision of the Rule Making Power of the courts. Also, the writ of amparo and writ of habeas data were created by the supremecourt also through the rule making power. Because of the inadequacy of writ of habeas corpus since the authorities may by general denial say that they do not know of any disappearance. In writ of amparo and habeas corpus, it is protection of the life, to liberty and security that has been violated or threatened that is involved.

3.) AMENDMENTS OR REVISIONS Charter Change under article 17 Amendment piecemeal change; Revision overhaul change of the whole constitution or the substantial change of it. Tests applied by the Supremecourt to know if there is amendment or revision: In lambino v. Comelec quantitative tests ( how many provision will be affected by the proposed change ) qualitative tests ( what kind of change that is proposed ). Thus, a change from a presidential form (separation of powers, the executive department was placed by the people) to parliamentary (union of the executive branch who is directly accountable to the legislative department, it is the legislative that placed him there) is a revision. While, the whole of the provision of the constitution will be affected then it is a revision. Two stages in amending and revising the constitution: (1) Proposal stage where one proposes for amendment or revisions there are three ways on how to propose : (a) Congress may directly propose amendment or revision through a of all its members. When congress meets in order to propose amendments they act as a constituent assembly ConAss; (b) Constitutional Convention ConCon by two ways: congress 2/3 votes of all of its members may call ConCon or by majority vote of all of its members by submitting the issue to the people on whether to call ConCon in a plebiscite; (c) Peoples Initiative PI done through a petition which must be signed by at least 12% of the registered voters provided that each legislative district there are at least 3% voters therein shall sign the petition. Not self executing provision (requires an implementing law). This is only limited only to proposal for amendment and not revision. Note: section 2, 2nd paragraph of article 17 of the 1987 constitution, the Congress shall provide for the implementing law that will implement the PI which is initiative and Referendum Act where in this law there is initiative on the constitution (declared unconstitutional by case of defensor Santiago v. Comelec thus has the effect of abrogating the right to propose amendment of constitution by the people), initiative on statutes, initiative on local legislation.

(2) Ratification stage with this the entire process is completed. This is submitted to a plebiscite to ratified by the majority of the people. 4.) ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS Oposa v. Factoran: petitioners were minors on behalf of the generation and generations that are yet to be born concept of intergenerational responsibility this is a class suit. They petition to stop issuing timber licenses to protect our economic and national resources. The right invoke by the minors was based on the right of the people to a balance and healthful ecology under article 2 section 16 of the 1987 constitution. This is a self executing provision as provided in the case of tano v. Sacrotes. Note: Bill of Rights: civil and political rights; while Rights of balance and healthful ecology: self preservation right. 5.) DOCTRINE OF STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT article 16, section 3 of the 1987 constitution The state may not be sued without its consent. The state may not be sued without its consent. Case: U.S v. Guinto even though that we cannot find the said doctrine in the constitution, this is actually a generally accepted principle of international law. Thus, the Philippines adopt the laws of international are automatically part of our laws therefore we do not need any law to implement it doctrine of incorporation. Therefore, the doctrine of state immunity which is an accepted general principle of international law is automatically adopted to our country. Note: this doctrine that the state cannot be sued without its consent applies also to foreign government unless the latter waives his right. This is in accordance of the doctrine of sovereign equality of States. An equal state cannot assume jurisdiction over an equal state, otherwise you will vexed the peace of nations.

Exceptions: waiver by the State (a) Express a.1) general law or special law case: In this case of Republic v. Purisima, the Supreme Court ruled that a mere lawyer of the government can not waive the state immunity because it is only the congress can waive it through a general or special law. The waiver is always strictly construed against the people sovereignty. Example: General Law Act no 3083 money claims against the government regarding contracts entered with it. Correlate the abovementioned law with the commonwealth act no. 327 as amend P.D 1445 general auditing law. Under this law, any money claim against the government, you must first file a claim with the commission on audit, and if refused by the latter, you can then file a suit before the Supreme Court. Illustration: X is a private contractor and entered into a contract for 30 million with the department of construction on bridge. Assuming you have finished it but up to the present time you have not yet been paid by the said government. Thus, you filed a suit before the RTC. Will mr. X petition prosper? No, the petition lacks cause of action. This should be dismissed. The case is premature, because the law provides that you must first file a claim against commission on audit, and it is only when the latter has refused to entertain your petition that you can file a suit before the supreme court. Special Law Article 2180 of the New Civil Code the State can be held liable for damages when acting through a special agent. Example: government ambulance, as a rule, it cannot be sued unless the said municipality has a charter that allows it to be sued. Once, the government has a provision in its charter that it can be sued, the next question is whether or not it is liable for damages. Thus, we apply article 2180 which provides that, the government is liable if it is acting through a special agent or if it is acting through its non governmental function.

Article 2189 of the NCC provinces, cities and municipalities may be held liable for damages due to defective maintenance of bridge, roads, streets under their supervision. Case: kiotico v. City of Manila, where kiotico fell on the manhole, he filed a suit against the city of manila for damages under article 2189. Gilatco v. City of Dagupan, same case where he also fell on the manhole, he filed a case against city of dagupan, but the latter defended that the manhole was a national road and therefore you must file against the national government. But the Supreme court said that ownership is immaterial but what the law requires is supervision and control and in this case it was proven that there was indeed supervision and control through the engineer of the city of dagupan. Section 24 of the local government code, local government units may be held liable for damage to properties and to injuries to persons. Charters of the government owned and controlled corporation where it is provided that it may be sued. (b) Impliedly There are two ways: b.1) when the state commences the litigation against a private person. Illustration: A civil action for damages was filed by the Government against Mr. A. The latter answered with a counterclaim. The government filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of state immunity. Will the motion prosper? No, because once the government commences an action against a private party, it impliedly waived its right to be sued by exposing itself to a counterclaim by the private party.

b.2) when the state enters into a contract with a private party. In this case, the government has step down equally to the level of the private party. But we have to qualify, in the case of U.S.A v. Ruiz, our Supreme court, said that not every contract entered into by the State is considered a waiver. We still have to distinguish if it is an act jure imperi and act jure gestonis. Thus, if the act is entered into by the government

in its governmental function act jure imperi the government can invoke state immunity. But once it enters into under its proprietary or commercial capacity act jure gestonis the government can be sued since it step down to the level equally with a private party.

Case: U.S.A v. Ruiz, under the military bases agreement with the U.S between the Philippines, where there is a contract entered into by the private contractor with the U.S government in subic, the nature of the construction was to construct a wharf. The construction was completed but he was not yet paid. Thus, he filed a simple collection suit for payment of the construction price. The foreign government filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of state immunity. But the private contractor, but the government waived its immunity from suit by entering into a contract with a private contractor. But the Supremecourt, said that not every contract entered by the state is a waiver from suit since the government entered into acting under its governmental function. In this case, the contract was for the construction of the wharf in subic and therefore it is for the governments duty to the public. Note: can the private contractor use the law that a government can be sued for money claim? No, for the simple that the Philippine law on money claim can not be invoke against the foreign government, it can only be invoke against our Philippine government. Then, what will be the remedy in this case? (go to the Department of Foreign Affairs, this is already a matter of Public International Law! Since it is already a state v. State matters) U.S.A v. Guinto, camp john hay was under the U.S government. Guinto was terminated by the camp john hay authorities because he gives jingle urine and therefore guinto went to the labor arbiter and filed an illegal dismissal case but the camp john hay authorities filed a motion to dismiss since they cannot be sued by virtue of state immunity. The supreme court said that there is a waiver since this is an act jure gestonis meaning the government entered into a contract under its proprietary capacity or commercial capacity. Thus, the case was remanded back to the labor arbiter. Note: Suits against governmental agencies and instrumentalities: can we sue a government agency? This will depend if it is an incorporated agencies ( agencies created by special laws, these are government agencies like GSIS, SSS, thus, they have separate personality from the government. Thus, we must check their charter, if it has a provision that it can be sued then by all means you can sue it, otherwise you can not sue it.) unincorporated ( it has no separate personality from the government. Example: BIR, Bureau of Customs. They have no legal personality separate and distinct from the government and therefore they cannot be sued because you are deemed suing the government itself too. Thus, you cannot sue it unless it waives it right to immunity from suit. )

Illustration: U.P can be sued because it has a charter provision which says that it can sue and be sued. Bureau of Customs was maintaining an arrastre service, it cannot be sued although it is a proprietary function, it is only incidental. Thus, they cannot be sued since the proprietary capacity is only incidental. Suability v. Liability According to the SC, suability by the State is only a way of waiving its immunity from suit; while, liability is a matter of the applicable law and the circumstances of the case. So that when the state allows a party to be sued, it only acknowledge that it may be sued but still the state may invoke provisions of law to avoid liability. Case: Municipality of san Fernando la union v. Judge firme, in this case a dum truck own by the said municipality, the dum truck was hawling gravel and was driven by the official driver of the said municipality and therefore you can not invoke article 2180 of the new civil code, because the latter applies only if the State is acting on its special agent, but in this case he was an official driver. This dum truck figured a collision with a jeepney and one of the passenger died. The heirs of the victim filed a case for damages against the municipality. The latter invoke state immunity. The charter of the municipality, expressly provides that it may sue and be sued. The judge in this case, proceeded with the trial and rendered the decision holding the municipality liable for damages for its charter provision that it can be sued. The case went up to the supreme court. The latter said that suability is only a matter of whether it can be sued. When the state expressly provides that it can be sued, it merely acknowledges that it can be sued but it may invoke legal valid defense for avoiding liability. In this case a valid defense that may be invoke by the municipality is that it is acting in its governmental function by hawling gravel for the municipality of san Fernando la union, so this is a clear case of damnum absque injuria meaning damage without injury. Thus, although it is true that you can sue a government, it is not necessarily that it is liable. Illustration: If in case a dum truck was hawling a lumber for the public market. The dum truck hit an person and died. The government has charter that it can be sued. In this case, the government can be sued. Also, it can be held liable since this is a business enterprise meaning a nongovernmental function.

In the matter of execution to satisfy the judgment against the State: Let us assume that you can sue the government. And hence, you sued it. A judgment was ruled in your favour. Meaning the government became liable. The award of damages was for 50 million. You now execute the judgment. Issue: can you now garnish the government funds? Levy the government property to satisfy the judgment of 50 million. Anwer: No, to do so will paralyze the operation of the government. Thus, that will require another law to apportion a certain amount of money for the satisfaction of the judgment. What is now the remedy if in case there is no law that allows you to apportion government funds for the satisfaction of your judgment ruled in favour for you. The waiver of the immunity of suit extends only up to the rendition of judgment, but as to execute the judgment that will require another waiver which is an enactment of an appropriations bill. Thus, the remedy is to make a necessary representation in the legislative branch to appropriate funds for you. What if the legislative authority refuses to enact that appropriations measure. Will mandamus lie? Mandamus is to compel authorities acting under ministerial duty. In this case, the duty to enact appropriations measure is discretionary. So does this mean that mandamus cannot prosper? We need to qualify, in this case, there was already a judgment which has already attain finality and therefore this becomes a legal obligation on the part of the government and therefore must now obey and follow and respect the decision of this courts, thus, what has been a discretionary power ( power to enact appropriations ) it was converted to a ministerial duty by virtue of the judgment. Suit against public officials: Case: Lansang v. Court of appeals, the doctrine of state immunity applies only to the acts done by the acts of the public officials acting under the governmental capacity since the public official is an agent of the state and therefore you cannot sue the public official for acts done in the performance of its public duties. However, the public officials may be sued in their personal capacity for acts committed by them in bad faith in performing their public function. Meaning they exceeded their authority given to them.

Amigable v. Cuence and Ministerial v. Cebu: Doctrine of state immunity cannot be used as a tool for injustice against the citizens, but take note that there are requisites to invoke this doctrine, these are as follows: (a) Land owner he woke up one morning the government is bulldozering his land without any notice or any notice of expropriation or whatsoever. After several years, the land owner filed a case against the government for payment for damages. The government filed a motion to dismiss invoking state immunity from suit. The SC ruled in favour of the poor land owner, the doctrine of state immunity cannot be used to perpetuate injustice or injury to citizens of the government. Thus, had the government exercised the proper expropriation proceedings, then he could have been avoided any injury and avoided this suit. Thus, to rule in favour of the government will cause injustice.

6.) ACADEMIC FREEDOM section 5 paragraph 2 of article 14 of the 1987 constitution. E,S,T,A,C,S ( Education, Science, Trade, Arts, Culture and Sports ) The right to school or college to decide for itself its aims and objectives free from outside coercion or interference except if there is overriding public policy calls for its restraint. The essential freedoms to determine for itself for academic grounds: (a) (b) (c) (d) Who may teach; What may be taught and what courses offered; How shall it be taught ; Who may be admitted to study.

Right to discipline <-> freedom on how shall it be taught Case: Miriam college doctrine, a school cannot function in a atmosphere of anarchy. Who may be admitted Illustration: You cannot file mandamus against a school who does not want you to admit to enter and study to their school. But once the school admitted you, it cannot just whimsically or arbitrarily expel a student or refuse to re admit the student because of the contract which is imbued with public interest. The removal must be for a just cause and due process to be considered valid.

Example: you have failing grades, and therefore, you cannot force the school to retain you. Or committed violation of school discipline. What if a student demonstrated for the schools tuition fee hike, in this case you cannot remove him for his is a right of the student freedom of expression. But what if during the demonstration violence was committed, and after investigation having been conducted by the school it found out that their student was responsible for the violation, the student can be removed. The duration of the contract: It is for the duration of the course. Note: U.P board of regents case v. Margaret Celine Margaret took up a course for a doctorate degree, during her defense in the thesis defense panel. There were questions regarding here dissertation materials. There were several investigation conducted. She was allowed to graduate and given the doctorate degree. Later on, based on the results, many of her dissertation materials was plagerized. U.P revoked her doctorate license. Issue: Can the U.P revoke her doctorate license. Answer: Yes, the Supreme court said that the school has the right who can determine who shall be its graduates provided it was done with investigation. The schools academic right of freedom does not end upon graduation but extends beyond it where it is shown that the conferment of such degree was obtain through fraud. 7.) ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES IS THE PROTECTOR OF THE PHILIPPINES This means that the AFP served for the interest of the people and not of the president. The doctrine does not apply to the Philippine National Police who are civilian in character wherein they are under the direct control and supervision of the president. 8.) DOCTRINE OF INCORPORATION pacta sunt servanda The rules and laws of international law form part of the land and no legislative action is required to implement them. The philippines adopt the general accepted principles of international law as part of the land. thus, by being a family of nations they are required to adopt the international principles and laws and shall not create a law that will be contradicting to the general accepted principles of international law.

9.) TREATY MUST BE CONCURRED BY 2/3 VOTES OF ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE OTHERWISE THE TREATY IS NOT VALID AND BINDING. 10.) FREEDOM FROM NUCLEAR WEAPONS. 11.) PHILIPPINE FLAG A law changing the design of the Philippine flag shall be unconstitutional since under the constitution the flag of the philippines shall be red, white, and blue, with three stars and the sun. Thus, it can only be changed through constitutional amendment. 12.) PRINCIPLE OF CIVILIAN SUPREMACY Under the constitution, civilian authority is at all time supreme over the military, by installing the president as the commander in chief means that civilian authority is supreme over the military. The military took oath that it will defend the constitution and the state of the philippines. insulation of the military from political influences and political parties. the 3 year term of the chief of staff. Also, the PNP is also civilian in character and it is also under the local executives. 13.) PRINCIPLE ON WOMEN, ECOLOGY, SYMBOLS OF STATEHOOD, CULTURAL COMMUNITIES, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Women constitution shall provide them healthy working conditions and for their safety. Ecology right to a balanced and healthful ecology. Symbols of Statehood the flag of the philippines shall be red, white and blue with three stars and a sun. The congress may by law, adopt a new name for the country, adopt a new national anthem or national seal that will truly be reflective of the symbolism of the people of the philippines. this shall only take effect upon ratification by the people in a national referendum. Indegenous cultural community the state shall recognize the rights and protection of indigenous cultural communites. Education, Science, Sports and Technology to foster patrionism and accelerate social progress and promote total human development. 14.) PRINCIPLE OF TRANSPARENCY ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST the 1987 Constitution provides for a policy of transparency in matters of public interest. Right of people to information and right of discolure of public records in case of public interest. Assets and liabilities of the public officers shall be disclosed before assumption of office.

II. BILL OF RIGHTS DOUBLE JEOPARDY: To raise a defense of double jeopardy three requisites must first be shown: (a) A first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second; (b) the first jeopardy must have terminated; (c) second jeopardy must be for the same offense as that in the first. Jepardy attaches upon a good indictment; before a competent court; after arraignment; after plea. Note: after having pleaded guilty, is allowed to present evidence in mitigation. The evidence presents, however, amounts to complete self-defense and the courts aquits him. Prosecuted a second time for the same offense, he pleads double jeopardy. The defense of second jeopardy is not proper because the presentation of evidence of complete selfdefense amounted to a withdrawal of his original plea. And since no new plea was entered, there was no first jeopardy. Note: motion to quash the complaint. defective complaint did not put the accused in jeopardy. Suppose the complaint is valid, can it be refilled? Yes, the motion to quash on the ground alleged was a waiver of the right against double jeopardy. Also, if the court has no jurisdiction no jeopardy that can be attached. When is jeopardy terminated? (a) By acquittal; (b) by final conviction;(c) by dismissal without express consent of the accused; (d) by dismissal on the merits. As a general rule, the dismissal or termination of the case after arraignment and plea of the defendant to a valid information shall be a bar to another prosecution for the offense charged, or for any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof, or for any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the complaint or information. However, an appeal by the prosecution from the order of dismissal (of the criminal case) by the trial court shall not constitute double jeopardy if (a) the dismissal is made upon motion, or with the express consent of the defendant accused; (b) the dismissal is not an acquittal or based on upon consideration of the evidence or of the merits of the case; and (c) the question to be passed upon by the appellate court is purely legal so that should the dismissal be found incorrect, the case would have to be remanded to the court of origin for further proceedings, to determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant. Note: if the accused filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of denial of right to speedy trial and if granted creates jeopardy because dismissal is on the merits and amounts to an acquittal. The dismissal must be written and final and signed by the judge. Thus, the dismissal contemplated by the law is that

one which finally disposes of the main case. But if the judge acted with grave abuse of discretion then there is no final judgment to speak of. As long as the crime has not yet prescribed the city fiscal can always conduct a reinvestigation. As regards to the motion to dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction the accused waives his right to double jeopardy. Same offense The same evidence test provides that the identity of offenses does not require one-to-one correspondence between the facts and law involved in the two charges. It is necessary that one offense is completely included in the other. Thus, while physical injury is not identical with attempted homicide, for purpose of double jeopardy physical injury is the same as attempted homicide (which alleges inflicted injury) because physical injury is necessarily included in such attempted homicide. Convicted physical injuries through reckless imprudence, accused was subsequently charged with damage to property through the same act of reckless imprudence, there is double jeopardy since the essence of criminal negligence is the imprudent or negligent act. Hence, the second jeopardy is for the same offense. Law and ordinance If an act is punished by a law and ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act. The offense need not be the same provided they flow from the same act. Theft of electricity punished under RPC and unlawful installation of electrical wiring punished by ordinance ( flows from the same act, one law and one ordinance: double jeopardy ) If two laws ( one RPC and one special law ) there is no double jeopardy. Supervening events The second offense was not in existence at the time of the first prosecution, thus there is no possibility for the accused during the firs prosecution to be convicted for an offense that was not existing. Thus, where, after the first prosecution, a new fact supervenes for which the defendant is responsible, which changes the character of the offense and together with the facts existing at the time, constitute a new and distinct offense, the accused cannot be said to be in second jeopardy. Illustration: A was charged with physical injuries (slight) but after 5-9 days a permanent scar was developed in the skin of the victim an amended return and a more serious charge was filed. In this case there is no double jeopardy since the scar and deformity were supervening facts not in existence at the time of the first charge and could not have been foreseen.

Appeal by prosecution an appeal by prosecution on a judgment of acquittal is not allowed. A judgment of acquittal is immediately final. As contra distinguished for a judgment for conviction where it only becomes final upon lapse of the period to appeal. Take note if the prosecution was not given opportunity to be heard then the acquittal is invalid. Appeal by accused this waives his right against double jeopardy. State witness the discharge of an accused in order to make him a state witness attaches jeopardy. Hence he cannot be prosecuted again, unless he refuse to take testimony. III. CITIZENSHIP article 4 of the 1987 constitution. Note: practice of all profession is resrved to Filipino citizens under article 12 section 14 2nd paragraph, save in cases prescribed by law. Public office is reserved only for citizens of the philippines. Structure There are only five sections: (a) Enumeration of who are citizens of the philippines; (b) Definition of natural born citizen; (c) That citizenship may be loss and reaquired as in the manner provided for by law; (d) The effect of marriage of a Filipino citizen to an alien ( will you lose your citizenship? No, you will not lose it unless by your act or omission you have to renounce your citizenship. ) (e) Dual allegiance is inimical to public interest Who are citizens? (section 1 of article 4 of the 1987 constitution ) a.1) Those who are citizens at the time of the ratification and adoption of this constitution ( after February 2, 1987 constitution );

a.2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines. ( thus, for as long as your mother or father is a Filipino citizen you are a Filipino citizen under the doctrine of jus sanguinis which is citizenship by blood relationship.)

Note: you were born in California USA but your parents are Filipino citizen. Are you a Filipino citizen? Yes, by jus sanguinis principle. And at the same time, you are also an American citizen under the American law under jus solis citizenship by place. Thus, the effect therefore, you will possess dual citizenship. Section 5 of article 4: dual citizenship v. Dual allegiance

a.3) Section 1 paragraph 3: those born before January 17, 1973 (date of effectivity of the 1973 constitution) of Filipino mothers who after attaining the age of majority they obtain Filipino citizenship, then they are considered Filipino citizens. Note: (1) if born during 1935 constitution ( before January 17, 1973 constitution ) if you are born of mother who is a Filipino citizen, then you must first obtain Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. Illustration: X was born here in manila on January 16, 1973, her mother was a Filipino and father is a Chinese. Is X a Filipino citizen? No, since he must first acquire Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. What if he was born January 17, 1973? Yes, because those whose mothers or father are Filipino citizens, the person is considered a Filipino citizen. Thus, no need for the election of citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. (2) If born during 1973 and 1987 constitution you are Filipino citizen provided your mother or father is a Filipino citizen. Note: thus, by virtue of citizenship by blood jus sanggunis if your mother is an alien and you are an illegitimate child of a Filipino, you are still a Filipino citizenship provided paternity and filiation is proven. Illegitimacy is not an issue in citizenship because what is necessary only is blood relationship. This is the case of Fernando poe jr. doctrine.

a.4) Those who were naturalized in accordance with law

Natural born citizens (section 2 of article 4 of the 1987 constitution) Bengzon III v. House of Representatives : in general there are only two kinds of citizens, its either natural born citizen or a naturalized. (b.1) Natural born a citizen from birth who did not undergone any naturalization procedure or those who were born of Filipino mothers who elect Filipino citizenship upon reaching the age of majority born during 1935 constitution ( before January 17, 1973 ) (b.2) Naturalized one who undergone naturalization procedure.

Philippine citizenship may be lost or reaquired in the manner provided by law (section 3 of article 4 of the 1987 constitution) Philippine citizenship may be loss or reaquired as in manner provided by law. (1) What are the ways on how to reaquire Philippine citizenship? (a) By naturalization; (b) By repatriation; (c) By direct act of congress. Note: Bengzon III v. House of Electoral tribunal effect of repatriation In this case, congressman is originally a natural born citizen, served in the armed forced of America. He was repatriated and reacquired his Filipino citizenship. There are two requisite for repatriation: (a) Take oath of allegiance of the philippines; (b) And record such oath in the register of deeds of the place of where he resides. He ran again for congressman, his petition was questioned on ground of citizenship. the supremecourt ruled in favour of congressman dela cruz, and said that under the law on repatriation, once repatriated he will recover his original nationality. Thus, if he was naturalized and then loss it, if he repatriated then he acquires again his naturalized citizenship; on the other hand, if he is a natural born citizen and then loss it, if he repatriated then he acquires again his natural born citizen status. Note: if a natural born person lost and reacquired his lost citizenship by act of congress it will not restore his original citizenship status but he will acquire only a status of a naturalized Filipino citizen. Mercado v. Edu Manzano on dual citizenship v. Dual allegiance Edu manzano was born in the U.S.A but parents are Filipinos. Is he a Filipino citizen? Yes, since his parents are Filipino. We follow the jus sanggunis principle. And at the same time he is already an American citizen. He possess dual citizenship. he ran for mayor. Is he disqualified? No, possession of dual citizen is acquired involuntarily by a person through the concurrent application of laws of two states. What the constitution and the law prohibits as what disqualifies a person to run for public office under the local government code is dual allegiance which is voluntary acquiring a citizen of another country. Thus, thus by voluntarily acquiring citizen of another of a foreign country through a positive act will automatically renounce your Filipino citizenship.

Thus, if you are a dual citizen upon filing a petition for certification of candidacy it automatically terminates their status as dual citizen. But if you are a dual allegiance, you are under a strict requirement meaning you must first reacquire Filipino citizenship by the modes provided by law such as repatriation, he must take oath and record the fact in the registry of receipt where he is residing. 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. Note: Vicente ching doctrine Vicente ching was born during 1964 under the 1935 constitution of mother Filipino and father Chinese. He passed CPA exam, he ran public office and elected sanggunian and won and became public officer. He finished his LLB course and pass the bar exam. But he was not allowed to take the oath. The supreme court said that he only elected Philippine citizenship after 14 years from the attainment of majority. Under the law, they must elect Filipino citizenship within reasonable time upon reaching the age of majority. Reasonable time must be within 3 years from the time of reaching the age of majority. In this case, Vicente ching only elected Filipino citizenship after 14 years which is way beyond the reasonable time allowed by law. Note: will it make a difference if his parents are not legally married during the 1935 constitution ( before January 17, 1973 ) ? Meaning if he is an illegitimate child will it affect the case. Yes, because in that case he will inherit the citizenship of his mother who is a Filipino. Thus, he can now be allowed to take the oath. Vallez v. Comelec Governor was born 1934 ( no 1935 constitution yet ). Born in Australian of Australian mother, while father who was born in camarines norte but her father was born 1897 ( during the Spanish conlony ). But as a result of the treaty of paris, spain ceded the philippines to the united states, through then we were govern by organic acts of the philippines through the jones law and under these organic acts, all subjects of Spain during Spanish colony are deemed to be Filipino citizen. Thus, following the jus sanggunis principle, governor acquire Filipino citizenship by blood because here father is a Filipino citizen. What if she was carrying Australian passport? Will it affect her citizenship? No, in the case of manzano doctrine, mere possession of foreign passport will not automatically renounce your citizenship. You must expressly renounce it to lose your citizenship. Fernando poe jr. doctrine Petitioner opposed the petition of Fernando poe jr for presidency. There was no proof that the father of Fernando poe resided in the philippines and became inhabitant during the Spanish

colony and therefore he cannot benefit from en mass Filipino citizenship. But the supreme court said that the petitioner also do not have any proof to impugne the citizenship of the father of Fernando poe jr. thus, through the death certificate of father of Fernando poe jr. it was indicated that he was inhabitant of san carlos philippines. thus, Fernando poe jr. acquires Filipino citizenship? Consider the fact that Fernando poe jr was an illegitimate child. Will this affect the case? Will it be an issue? NO! We follow the jus sangguinis principle, we follow citizenship by blood. Illegitimacy is not an issue.

Born during 1935 constitution ( before January 17, 1973 ) : The only time that the requirement of election Filipino citizenship upon attainment of majority age who are born during 1935 constitution ( before January 17, 1973 constitution ) and born of Filipino mother and he is a legitimate child. But once the child is an illegitimate child born of Filipino mother, the child is automatically becomes a Filipino citizen. No need for election. But if born of Filipino father and an alien mother but are not married, once paternity and filiation is established the child may be considered Filipino but if paternity not established then he follows the citizenship of his mother. Reason: tecson v. Comelec, where an illegitimate child born of Filipino mother and alien father acquires automatically the mother citizenship, the purpose to ensure and help the child and not discriminate him. Otherwise, the child will become stateless which is more prejudicial to the illegitimate child of an alien father and a Filipino mother. The latter therefore, has the duty to protect her. Born during 1973 and 1987 constitution: If born of Filipino mother and alien father, the child is Filipino citizen whether or not he is an illegitimate child by virtue of jus sanggunis. If born of alien mother and Filipino father, the child is Filipino citizen provided that paternity filiation with his father is established, otherwise he acquires citizenship of his mother who is an alien. Aliens who marry Filipino citizens ipso facto acquires Filipino citizenship under the revised naturalization law provided that she possess none of the disqualifications set forth under section 4 of the same law. ( moya lim doctrine ) R.A 9225: citizenship retention or reaquisition act of the philippines dual citizenship law

There are two important concepts to remember, these are retention and reaquisition.

(1) Reaquisition Under section 3 of RA 9225, any provision to the law notwithstanding, any former natural born citizen who have lost their citizenship by acquiring citizenship of

another foreign country through naturalization before the effectivity of this act, shall reaquire again Filipino citizenship upon taking oath of allegiance to the republic of the philippines before any authorize person to administer oath in the philippines. Note: the effects of reaquisition are as follows:

(a) this advantage will in effect make them again a Filipino citizen and therefore they are not anymore considered alien and therefore they can acquire lands again. While remaining to be a citizen of another country yet they are still Filipino citizen by reaquiring again his citizenship thus becomes dual citizen. (b) Also any of their unmarried children whether legitimate or illegitimate below 18 years old will acquire also the citizenship of their parents who reaquired Filipino citizenship thus derivative citizenship. (2) Retention Natural born citizen who shall acquire citizenship of another country after the effectivity of this act shall retain their Filipino citizenship upon taking the oath of allegiance before any officer authorized to administer oath in the philippines. in such a case, the person shall possess dual citizen status. Note: will you be qualified to run to any public office under this law? Yes, those who want to run must make a personal renounciation of your foreign citizen at the time of the filing of certificate of candidacy by taking oath. Those appointed to a public office shall take oath of renunciation of oath of allegiance of their foreign citizenship before assumption of office. Reason: to terminate dual citizen status ( dual allegiance ) since it is prohibited by law. Those who want to practice profession in the philippines but apply first to the proper authority to get a license to practice profession. Case: Edison so v. Republic On naturalization. Among those natural born citizen are those who also acquire it through naturalization through an act of adopting our Filipino citizenship and clothing the person of Filipino citizenship. How many ways by which an alien may become a Filipino citizen by naturalization: (a) Administrative naturalization this is not available to aliens, it is only available to aliens who are native born aliens who live here in the Philippines from the moment they were born and had showed love and loyalty to the philippines and affinity to the customs and traditions of the Philippines. example: parents are both aliens but they were born here in the philippines meaning they are native

born. Thus, if you are native born alien but you want to practice profession here, then you can avail of this process which is not stringent and not encumbersome; (b) Judicial naturalization; (c) Legislative naturalization Note: on the disqualification for lack of good moral character of an alien who was naturalized as a Filipino. His certificate may be cancelled any time without any prescription for as long as he commits lack of good moral character and irreproachable conduct such as tax evasion. Also, even if he is given tax amnesty it will not obliverate his lack of good moral character which is aground for cancelation of naturalization certificate. On citizenship requirements of repatriated Filipino citizens who wishes to run as elective officials: The citizenship requirement must be possessed at the time of the proclamation and at the start of the term of which he is elected. Under the local government code, It does not specify a time as to when a candidate must possess Filipino citizenship. ( frivaldo v. COMELEC ) Note: always correlate election law with citizenship requirement and residency requirement. Check if the requirement to qualify is natural born Filipino citizen or Filipino citizen only.

IV. SOCIAL JUSTICE ( LABOR LAW )

E. TERRITORY, SOVEREIGNTY EXPROPRIATION POWER, PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW (chapter 2) I. Local Context National Territory 1.) Archipelagic doctrine we draw baseline to the outermost portion of the island thereby unifying each archipelago into one unit which shall composed of the State of the philippines. under article 1 of the 1987 constitution all waters, around, between and connecting all the ilands shall for part of the Philippines. 2.) Contiguous zone v. Economic zone Contingous zone is the 12 nautical miles from territorial waters where coastal state may exercise control and prevent infringement of outside force, while economic zone is 200 nautical miles from baseline of the island of the philppines from which the philippines may have sovereignty and exercise

exploration and exploitation of natural resources. This economic zone is reserved for Filipinos. 3.) Flag State v. Flag convenience flag state means the vessel has the nationality of the flag which it carries provided it must establish a link between the said ship and the state flag, while flag convenience is that the it refers to the state where the vessel is registered. 4.) Territorial sea v. Internal Waters territorial sea adjacent belt of the sea with 12 nautical miles from the baseline of coastal island. All state has a right of innocent passage within the territorial sea; while internal waters are the waters, around and connecting the islands of the Philippine archipelago regardless of their breadth and dimension, this includes bays, lakes and rivers. There is no right of innocent passage within the internal waters. Note: you cannot make each island of the philippines a separate state since it will be violative of the sovereignty of the philippines as a single state under the constitution.

F. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE POWER TO TAX (chapter 3) I. STRUCTURE OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT (A) NATIONAL GOVERNMENT 1.) DOCTRINES RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE OF THE GOVERNMENT doctrine of separation of powers - thus, legislative power is vested to the congress ( power of the purse since it enact laws to appropriate funds ) ; executive power is vested to the executive department ( power of the sword since it enforce the law ); while judicial power is vested to the supremecourt and to other courts as may be provided by law ( power to declare a law unconstitutional ). Note: the legislative and executive are political branches since this is where the policies and laws are made and with this the political question is created. Doctrine of checks and balance power cannot be concentrated only on one department and therefore, each of the three departments exercises checks and balance. Doctrine of non delegation of powers what has been delegated by the constitution to the three department can no longer be delegated anymore. However, as an exception: PETAL

P delegation to the People through plebiscite and referendum; E delegation to the president through the exercise of Emergency power; T delegation to the president Tarrif powers; A delegation to Administrative agencies; L - delegation to the Local government officials.

(a) Delegation to the president through exercise of emergency power In times of war or other national emergency the congress by Law, authorize the president for a limited period may exercise emergency powers. There must be a law first to exercise this power.

The requisites are as follows: (a1) there must be war; (a2) delegation for a limited period time only; (a3) subject to restriction of congress; (a4) under a declared national policy. Note: Randolph david v. GMA the power exercised was not emergency power since there was no law authorizing the president but actually what was exercised by the president is the calling out power. (b) Delegation to administrative agencies What is delegated here is delegation of quasi legislative powers to administrative agencies. Note: power of an administrative agencies to promulgate rules and regulation pursuant to a law delegating to them such power to promulgate rules and regulation. This is what we call as Power of subordinate legislation pursuant to a legislative policy. This administrative rules and regulation cannot prevail over the law enacted by congress. These administrative rules and regulation are subordinate to the law. Illustration: Implementing Rules and Regulation which was promulgated by the secretary of labor of the Department of Labor by authority of the Labor Law. In this case, the secretary of labor exercised its quasi-legislative power.

The secretary of finance upon recommendation of the NIRC shall have the authority to promulgate rules and regulations concerning the policy of the NIRC.

(c) Delegation to Local governments Note: do the local government have inherent powers? No, because they are mere creatures of the congress. Whatever power they exercise is delegated to them by the law. With regard to power taxation: the constitution expressly delegated the power of taxation to each local government subject to limitation and guidelines as congress may provide. With regard to police power and power of eminent domain: it is the congress that delegated these powers to local governments. The delegation is found on their charters as well as in the local government code. With respect of the power of eminent domain: the power delegated by law under section 19 of the local government code. Thus, there must first be an ordinancd before you can exercise this power. Municipality of Paranaque case: The supreme court said that if a local government wants to exercise power of eminent domain there must be a law/ordinance enacted by congress/sanggunian members. A mere resolution is not enough. Ordinance v. Resolution an ordinance is a law while a resolution is just an expression of opinion a law making body on a specific matter. An ordinance is permanent, whereas resolution is temporary in nature. An ordinance is enacted with three readings, while resolution is not enacted by three readings,unless decided by majority of all the members of the sanggunian. With regard to police power: the delegation of it is found in section 16 under the general welfare clause. The tests of a valid delegation of power to determine if what has been delegated is exercised within the scope of its delegation There are two tests, these are as follows: (a) Completeness test the law itself must be complete so that when it reaches the delegate there is nothing left for the delegate to do but to implement and enforce the law. Thus, the delegate must not fill in the gaps of the incomplete law. (b) Sufficient standard test more often the congress cannot be excpected precisely know the problems that will arise, thus, the law must at least have limitations and standards that will limit the delegate and guide him in implementing the law.

2.) THREE DEPARTMENTS OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT The legislative power - is vested to the congress except to the extent reserved to the people through initiative and referendum ( to directly enact and propose laws ). This initiative and referendum are not self executing provisions. There must be an implementing law. Note: the people through initiative and referendum whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the congress or local legislative body after the registration of a petition therefore signed by at least 10 % of the total number of registered voters, of which every leglislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters. RA 6735: the initiative and referendum law which provides the system of initiative and referendum. (a) Initiative on constitution; (b) Initiative on statutes; (c) Initiative on local legislation. Bicameral Congress senate and house of representatives are co-equal bodies. No supremacy involved. Note: Bicameral Conference Committee Philippine judge association case: a bicameral conference committee which compromising the differences between the senate and the house of representatives. The version of a bill proposed by the senate which is difference with the proposed bill by the house of representatives. By the very nature of its function is capable of producing results which is a result which may exceed its mandate and duty. Thus, it may produce a new bill which is production of the two proposed bills. It may produce a totally new bill. Non legislative powers of congress (a) Congress acting as constituent assembly (b) Power to declare the existence of war

(c) In impeachment cases ( the house of representative shall act as a prosecutor body, while senate acts as impeachment court ) (d) Congress acts as national board of canvassers for canvassing president and vice president certificates of canvass (e) Inquiry in aid of legislation ( investigatory power of congress ) (f) Concurrence of the amnesty proclamation of the president (g) When acting as electoral tribunal (h) When senate concurs in treaties

Congressional oversight functions Macalintal v. Comelec: The concept and nature of congressional oversight and functions, the congress enactment of law does not end there, they are still interested on whether or not such law enacted by them is properly being administered and implemented. There are three categories congressional oversight functions: (a) Scrutiny there are two instances: first, budget hearing ( the president prepares budget and proposed the budget and transmit it to the house of representatives to make appropriation law to make the funds ) second, confirmation process by the commission on appointments ( the president submits his appointments for confirmation by the commission on appointment. Thus, in the case of matibag v. Benipayo, once the commission on appointment refuse to confirm your appointment it is a judgment on the merits and the president cannot appoint the said appointee, but this is not true if the appointment is by pass by commission on appointment. ) (b) Investigation two kinds: first, inquiry in aid of legislation ( arnault v. Nazareno the supreme court recognize that intrinsic under this power to enact good laws is the power to investigate in aid of legislation ) ; second, question hour ( this is a regular features of a parliamentary form of government, where the members of the parliamentary who elected the president is accountable to them and the latter is required therefore to answer question made by the parliamentary. However, under our law and constitution we have a presidential form of government where the president is elected by the people where he is accountable to them but the congress may question the president regarding the concerns of the policies of the state. ) (c) Supervision continuing awareness of the congress regarding executive operations in a given administrative area. The congressional screening committee may scrutinize the implementing rules and regulation promulgated by the administrative agencies.

Note: legislative veto the disapproval by congress by an administrative regulation promulgated by an administrative agency. SJS v. Secretary purisima: declared unconstitutional legislative veto, because the congress cannot encroach upon the implementing power of the executive department.

Composition of Congress Senate 24 senators House of Representatives 250 members coming from District Representatives and those Elected by Party List Representatives. Note: Ang Bagong Bayani OFW c. COMELEC case on the nature of party list system So that the marginilized and underrepresentative sectors of the society will have representative in the government. They come from the labor, peasent, urban poor, indigenous culture community, women, the youth sector and such sectors as may be provided by law. Social justice tool design not only to give more law on person who are less in life but gives them the active participation in the mainstream of representative democracy. Same opportunity in the party list elections. Because as we know the truth is that the marginalized and underrepresentative do not really have a voice in the congress since they do not have any economic and financial sources and therefore the ones who is dominant are those traditional political parties and traditional rich candidates who have resources to have voice in congress. Thus, we open up the political system to the underprivilege and marginalized and not to the traditional rich candidates and traditional political parties who are already part of the political system. Guidelines in screening the participants: (a) Must represent the marginalize and underrepresentative sectors; (b) Prohibition of Registration of a Religious sect or religious organization as a political party. They cannot be registered as a political party. ( thus, a priest can join in the party list election ); (c) It must not be an adjunct of the government or it must not be funded by it. Thus, must be outside from the support of the government; (d) The parties must comply with the requirements of the law and includes the nominees ; (e) The nominees themselves must be Filipino citizen who belong also to the marginalized or underprivilege sector.

Thus, party list participants are limited only to the marginalized and underprivileged sectors of the society. Since this is a social justice tool.

Immunities and privileges (1) Privilege from arrest of members of congress It applies only to crimes with imposable penalty of not more than 6 years and only when congress in session. in session refers not to the day to day but refers to the entire duration from its opening until its final adjournment. People v. Jalosjos: The immunity from arrest arises from a provision of the constitution the history of the provision shows that the privileges has been applied to a restrictive sense. It cannot be extended by equitable consideration. He can only invoke the immunity from arrest if the imposable penalty is not more than 6 years and only when congress is in session. Thus, since his case is rape, he can not invoke immunity from arrest. Jalosjos was convicted of rape by the RTC but he was able to appeal seasonably, can he be allowed to post bail? No, the fact that he has been convicted by the RTC that means it was proven already that the evidence guilt is wrong. Jalosjos raised the following issues: doctrine of the right to bail As to the issue of bail: When is the right to bail a matter of right? (1) MTC bail is always a matter of right before or after conviction. (2) RTC it depends. (a) Before conviction in the RTC Bail is a matters of right if: when charge for imposable penalty lower than reclusion perpetua. Example: homicide is reclusion temporal ( bail is a matter of right even if the evidence of guilt is strong. )

Bail is a matter of discretion if: reclusion perpetua to death ( bail is a matter of discretion. Thus, in this case you file a petition for bail and the court will now conduct hearing as to determine whether the evidence of guilt is strong. If the evidence of guilt is not strong, you can post bail. But if the evidence of guilt is strong, you cannot be allowed to post bail. ) (b) After conviction in the RTC but pending appeal Bail is discretionary if: after conviction of a crime with an imposable penalty for not less than 6 years but not more than 20 years. Example: Homicide convicted prision mayor medium to reclusion temporal medium 8 yrs to 10yrs. Thus, upon petition for bail, it is mandatory upon the court to conduct hearing to determine whether you are a recidivist, quasi recidivist, or if you might jump bail, or you might commit another crime, or if you may violate the conditional pardon. Bail is not allowed: after conviction of a crime in the RTC with an imposable penalty for more than 20 years. Example: convicted of murder in the RTC. Thus, petition of jalosjos is denied. disenfranchisement argument - As to the issue of can he be permitted to attend congressional meeting despite the fact that he was voted and won the election. Can he be allowed to attend congressional meetings outside the prison cell? The SC said that NO he cannot it will be a mockery to the correctionaly system. Also, he cannot invoke the defense that if he will not be able to attend congressional meeting, in effect you will be disenfranchising the voters that voted him. The SC said BULSSHIT KA JALOSJOS!!! =) tantado ka! Hehe you cannot blaim us for your people! Your voters! Has waived their rights because they voted you with full knowledge and awareness that you are criminal! And therefore they are stupid enough to vote you knowing that you are behind bars and cannot attend congressional meetings. Thus, petition of jalosjos is denied. doctrine of condonation the term of office of elective public officers is separate and distinct from each other so that when in his previous term he was charged administratively and thereafter he was reelected in his new term, his reelection serves as a condonation to whatever administrative offense so that in his new term he can not be penalized for administrative offense he had been punished in his previous term. The reason is that when the electorate voted him again with full knowledge that he had been charged administratively they condoned him with his past misconduct.

Note: this applies only to elective public officials who are charged administratively. Thus, his petition is denied.

(2)Privilege from freedom of speech and debate He cannot be held liable In any other place once the congressman delivered a speech during congressional meetings within congress. Congressman X while in the course of delivering his speech in congress he maligned a private person who was not in the congress. The private person filed a slander case. Will it prosper? No, a congressman while delivering a speech or debate in congress cannot be held liable for any libellous or slanderous speech in any other place which includes also any regular courts. Osmena v. Pendatun: Senator osmena during his speech in congress maligning the president of the philippines. can he be liable? Yes, although he cannot be held liable in any other place but in the congress he may be punished by his members by suspension or expulsion by 2/3 votes for his misconducts. Illustration: Peter cayetano during his speech during the deliberations in congress he maligned mr. FG. Thus, FG filed a case in the house ethics committee. During that hearing, peter cayetano was held liable by his members in the congress. Thus, for practical reasons, dont file in the regular courts but direct your cause of action in the congress itself to punish the erring member. ( obiter: Peter cayeetano was not punished since congress has adjourned in preparation for the next election, so what mr. FG did was to hire a person named peter cayetano and filed a certificate of candidacy so that congressman peter cayetano cannot invoke the equity of the incumbent rule which is regarding to the appreciation of ballots where two or more persons having the same name, only the first name or last name vote of which will be considered for the incumbent official. But if neither of them is incumbent they will not be voted and the votes will now be stray votes. In this case, congress man cayetanos term has ended and he was not an incumbent anymore and therefore his votes will now be considered stray votes. Congressman peter cayetano filed a disqualification for nuisance candidate and decision was granted but the decision was released three days before election hehe )

Case: borjal v. CA on freedom expression and libel. The SC said that the freedom of speech and debate for congressman are absolute privilege communication and therefore they are absolute defenses against cases for libel. Privilege communication is a good defense in an action for libel, slander or defamation. Is truth a defense in a case for libel? No, in libel it is presumed that there is actual malice or intent to defame a person and this will be completed by proving that it was published or made public. However, once the communication is privilege, presumption of actual malice or intent cannot apply. There are two types of privilege communication: (a) Absolute privilege communication not actionable, even if the author acted in badfaith. Example. The freedom of speech and debate among congress. (b) Qualified privilege communication- notactionable, unless it shall be shown that it is made in badfaith. Bodies attached to the congress (a) Commission on Appointments to act on presidential appointments. This is a check on the appointing power of the president. Members are 12 senators and 12 congressmen and 1 ex officio chairman which is the senate president. They shall be chosen by proportional representation from the political parties having members in the senate or house as the case may be. All of them are members of congress. (b) Electoral Tribunals b.1) Senate ET 9 members. 3 justices of the Supreme court and the senior is the chairmen. 6 comes from the senate and house chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties having members in the senate or house as the case may be. Note that their difference with Commission on Appointments is that the latter is composed of congressmane while in an electoral tribunal it composes of judicial components and congress components. b.2) HRET same with Senate ET. Note: where do we appeal the decision from the Electoral Tribunals? No appeal. They are the sole judge. Take note that appeal is not a constitutional right. This right is merely statutory. Thus, if there is no law granting appeal, you cannot appeal. So what is the remedy if ever? File an original action with the SC under Rule 65 based on grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction. You cannot use rule 45 because this is a mode of appeal which is not the remedy in this case. Case: Romualdez Marcos v. COMELEC She ran for election in leyte. Her residency qualification was question. So while the disqualification was pending. She won. But she was not immediately proclaimed during the pendency of the case in the COMELEC. So what she did is filed a motion to dismiss the case contending that since she won the COMELEC loses jurisdiction and the jurisdiction now is vested

with the HRET. Is her contention correct? No, comelec still has jurisdiction since it will only lose jurisdiction once a candidate is proclaim. In this case, Imelda marcos was not yet proclaimed so comelec still has jurisdiction. Thus, if you are not proclaim you are not yet a member in the said public office where you won. The HRET is the sole judge of their respective members. Thus, she is not yet a full pledge member of the congress hence she cannot be under the jurisdiction of the HRET. Note: effect of disqualification case that comelec or court as the case may be continues to have jurisdiction and continues to hear it despite the fact that the candidate won the election but it only continues up to his proclamation. Before proclamation, you may file a motion to suspend the proclamation of the winning candidate. Case: guerero v. Comelec ( correlate with Imelda case ) The governor was no longer qualified to run again for having served for 3 consecutive terms, thus, he run for congressman in ilocos norte, a disqualification case was filed, but pending the case, he won and was proclaimed and took oath and assumed office. The comelec dismissed the disqualification case. Was the act of the comelec valid or not? Yes, once the candidate is proclaimed, the jurisdiction of the comelec ends and the jurisdiction of the HRET begins. Case: bondoc v. Pineda ( independence of the HRET and Senate ET ) Congressman bondoc belong to the minority party whereas congressman pineda belong to the majority party. Pineda was proclaimed in the election. Bondoc filed election protest in the HRET. Among the members of the latter is congressman camasura which belong to the majority party where pineda belong. During the hearing of the protest. Camasura was convinced that bondoc won and voted in favour of bondoc as against his partymate pineda. Before the promulgation, camasura confided with ramon mitra about the incident. So they removed camasura for somebody who was loyal. So before the decision was promulgated, he was removed. So how can the decision be promulgated? So what happen it reached to the SC, the latter said that once this members become members of HRET they must act impartial and act as judges and therefore they must be accorded security of tenure so that an act of disloyalty with their party list member will not be a just cause for removal. Also, HRET Senate ET are independent from the congress since they are sole judge in election protest and contest. Process in Law making: FIRST STAGE: Initiatory Stage bills that must originate in the house of congress General rule: if you want to file a bill. If you are a congressman file it with house. But if you are senator file it with senate.

Except: APRTIL ( appropriations bill, private bill, revenue or tariff bill, bill authorizing increase of public debts, bill of local application ) these are required to originate exclusively from the house of representatives. But the senate may concur and make an amendments by substitution or may make a totally new bill. The only rule is that it must originate first from the house of congress. Case: tolentino v. Secretary of finance The bill originated from house congress but when it was passed as a law it was totally amended by the Senate. So the EVAT law was more of the senate version rather than the bill originated in house congress. The SC said that there was substantial requirement since the bill originally came from the house. Thus, once the senate received the bill it made a separate version. So eventually two version and thus presented to a bicameral committee but the senate version prevailed. The rule only requires that the bill must originate from house. There is nothing wrong with amendment by substitution. What is only required is the initiative of the bill coming from the house. one subject one title rule every bill passed by congress shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the title thereof. Purpose: to prevent hodgepodge or log rolling legislation, to prevent fraud or suprise upon legislature and to fairly apprise and notify people. To prevent rider provision which is totally unrelated to the subject matter which can be subjected to a separate piece of legislation. Note: the supreme court adopted a liberal rule by stating that there is substantial compliance for as long as the provisions of the law are germane to the title of the law. It must not be an indexed or catalogue thereof.

three readings on separate days no bill shall be come a law unless it has passed three readings on separate days and printed copies in its final form thereof given to its members three days before its passage. 1st reading: proposal of the bill by the author and the title shall be read and once approve it shall be calendared for second reading. 2nd reading: deliberation and interpellation and after which it will be calendared for third reading; 3rd reading: vote by yes or nays as to whether it shall be passed or not. The bill will undergo 6 readings ( 3 readings from senate; 3 readings from house ) Exception: if the president certify its necessity to its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency. Case: tolentino v. Secretary of finance

Once the president certify the necessity to the immediate enactment to meet a public calamity, there is no need to comply with the 3 reading on separate days. The question of what constitute public calamity is a political question which is the discretion of the president. Thus, courts cannot intrude therefrom. SECOND STAGE: Bicameral Committe and Enrolled Bill Stage Bicameral conference committe: if conflicting versions in both houses arise. It is capable of introducing unexpected result because of its nature. Once the bill has passed the bicameral conference committee, the bill will be sent back to both houses of congress. Both houses will vote through yes and nays and after voting the yes prevailed it will be certified and signed by senate president and speaker and certified by both secretaries of congress then it will now become an enrolled bill. But what if the votes prevailed are the nays vote, if this happens, then it is about time that another bicameral conference committee that will be convene, then the said bill will be sent back to another bicameral conference committe. Enrolled bill doctrine once become an enrolled bill, it will become conclusive upon the court as to its due enactment, so that the courts cannot determine whether it has undergone the three days requirement. It is deemed regularly enacted. This is because of separation of powers. Enrolled bill prevails over the journal. Except as to matters which are under the constitution are required to be put into journal so this matter are conclusive upon courts. They will prevail over enrolled bill. So what are matters required to be put into journal? These are as follows: (a) Yes and Nays of the third and final reading of the bill; (b) Yes and nays on any question upon request 1/5 members that are present; (c) The presidents objections that which he vetoed; (d) The yes and nays upon repassing a bill which a president has vetoed. These matters are required by constitution to be put into journal and therefore they are conclusive upon courts and therefore, the latter cannot question as to the regularity.

THIRD STAGE: Sending of Enrolled Bill to the President for approval.

From the congress the enrolled bill is sent to the president, the latter shall: (a) Sign the enrolled bill and the latter becomes a law; (b) She vetoes it, the bill does not become a law;

(c) If she does not act or sign upon it within 30 days from receipt, that automatically becomes a law by inaction. veto power of the president - in regard to the veto of president, the bill will be sent back to congress together with the veto and thereafter by 2/3 votes of both houses it will override the veto and it will become a law. Section 27 article 6 of the 1987 constitution provides that there are two kinds of presidential veto, these are as follows: (a) General veto of the president if she vetoes the bill it will not become a law. A president may not veto a provision in a bill without vetoing the whole bill. He must veto the bill in its entirety and cannot select what provision to veto. Its generally all or nothing. Its either he signs it in whole or veto it in whole. (b) Item or line veto of the president the president is allowed to veto by selection in appropriations bill, revenue, tarrif bill. This is the exceptions to the general rule that a president cannot veto by selection. Note: correlate with doctrine of inappropriate provision. Case: Gonzales v. Macaraig doctrine of inappropriate provision No provision or enactment shall be embrace in the general appropariations bill unless it relates to some specific appropriations therein. In otherwords, for a provision in a gen app bill it must relate specifically to some appropriations therein, otherwise it will become an inappropriate provision and therefore the effect of which is that it can now be considered as item and now subject to the selection veto or item veto of the president.

A general appropriations bill was submitted to the president however, there was a certain provision there which was for her objectionable. So she item vetoed that particular provision and approve the rest. The senator said she cannot item veto the particular item since the said provision is appropriate with the other specific appropriation provision of the said bill. In effect we have no budget now. Hehe so this will now re enact the previous appropriation law of the congress. The president through the solgen, said that this is an appropriation bill and therefore the president can veto an item he wants. But the senators countered, if you read the said provision that was veto, it was a provision of the bill, it was not an item. Thus, the supreme court said that for a particular provision to be valid it must relate to some particular provision therein and affects the general appropriation bill, otherwise if it is not related to any particular provision in the appropriation bill then it will now be considered as an item to which it can now be the subject of the selection veto of the president.

Thus, if you will note, the said inappropriate bill is also considered as a rider which should be struck down. Note: do the Local Chief Executives have veto power? It depends. Punong barangay no, since he is also a part of the law making process of the sangguniang barangay. Punong barangay is a person in authority in their territorial jurisdiction under the revised penal code. The sangguniang barangay members and the lupong tagapamayapa are persons in authority in their territorial jurisdiction under the Revised Penal Code. Governor and Mayor yes, it has veto power. What are the grounds for vetoing an ordinance? These are as follows: (a) Ultra vires; (b) Prejudicial to the public welfare. The local chief executive has line veto too. The ordinances covered are as follows: (a) appropriations ordinances; (b) adopting a local development plan or public inevestment program; (c) ordinance authorizing payment of money or creating liability.

2.)EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT Executive power under the doctrine of separation of powers, executive power is vested with the President. Take note of the faithful execution clause that the president as chief executive he shall ensure that the laws shall be faithfully executed. In connection with executive power, the president has his cabinet members and therefore we have the qualified political agency or what we call as alter ego doctrine so that in the regular performance of his cabinet members and the heads of the departments are deemed to be the acts of the president unless reprobated or disapprove by the president. Qualifications President, VPresident, Senator, Congressman natural born citizen, able to read and write and resident of the philippines. As regards to the age qualification: P and VP at least 40 yrs old; Senators 35 yrs old, congressman 25 yrs old ( on the day of the election. ) Residency requirement: P and VP must have resided at least 10 years immediately preceeding the election; Senators 2 years

The president shall not be eligible for any reelection. No person who has succeeded as president and served as such for more than 4 years shall be qualified for the presidential office. Example: the succeeding president has served starting January 20, 2001 to june 30, 2004.

Four instances in case of DDRR (death, permanent disability, removal from office, resignation of the president ) creating a permanent vacancy in the office of the president. In the case of ERAP, he was impeach ( meaning he was indicted/accused of..) but he was not removed because the impeachment trial was declared functus de officio. Take note a president can only be remove by impeachment. According to ERAP he did not resign but the SC said that he did resign as president by constructive resignation there was intent to resign and coupled by acts of relinquishment there is no formal requirement it can be oral or written, it can be express and implied. His acts before, during and after the incident of the facts (totality of circumstance test), manifested that he constructively resign. Example: He acknowledge the oath of the successor president. He left the malacanang to maintain peace.

Specific Powers of the President: (a) Appointing power of the president (b) Control Power over all executive department,bureau and offices ( but take note: president exercises only general supervision over local government. ) (c) Calling Out power (d) Martial law power (e) Power to suspend the privilege of writ of habeas corpus (f) Pardoning power, to grant reprieves, commutation, to remit fines and amnesty (g) Borrowing power (h) Treaty Making Power (i) Budgetary Power (j) Informing power ( during the regular opening of the session of congress ) SONA state of the nation address Other specific powers found elsewhere in the constitution: veto power, power of general supervision over local government, power to call speciall session in congress. Note: the president has residual power or what we call as residual power ( not stated in the constitution but which nonetheless the president may validly exercise. ) (a) Appointing power of the president

section 16 Article 7 of the 1987 constitution Will all appointments of the president require the confirmation of the president? No. Case: sarmiento v. Mison

Not all appointments of the president requires confirmation of the commission on appointments. The following are the appointive officers which requires the confirmation of the commission on appointments: (1) Heads of the executive department ( each cabinet member heads an executive department , with the exception of the vice president where he be appointed as cabinet member without confirmation by coa ); (2) Ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls; (3) Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colnel or naval captain ( note: officers of the PNP rank, manalo v. Sistoza officers of PNP do not belong to the said rank as like the AFP or navy, because the PNP is civilian in character they are civilian agency under the civilian department DILG administered by NAPOLCOM thus their appointment does not need confirmation; (4) Other officers which are vested in him by the constitution ( members of the constitutional commissions, regular members of the judicial and bar council requires confirmation by commission on appointments but take note: appointments of the supremecourt justices does not anymore require confirmation because the JBC nominates three and the president will choose among the three. This is to further strengthen the independence of the judiciary because the coa is composed of congressman. The composition of the JBC: chief justice ex officio chairman, a member of congress ex officio member, secretary of justice ex officio members, 4 regular members: retired justice of sc, representative IBP, law professor, representative of private sector, these 4 regular members are appointed by the president and needs confirmation of coa, clerk of the supremecourt as secretary ex officio of the JBC )

Appointive officers that do not require confirmation by coa: (1) All other officer of gov whose appointment not provided by law; (2) Those whom the president may be authorized by law to appoint; (3) Those officers lower in rank may by congress vest the appointment to the president.

Case: calderon v. Carale , manalo v. Sistoza The SC held that the list of officer appointed by the president that requires confirmation by coa are exclusive. Thus, the congress cannot amend or deduct the said list because it is provided by the constitution to be exclusive. Ad interim appointments appointment made by the president when congress is not in session. Note: when appointment was made when congress is in session is regular appointment. Reason for ad interim: the commission on appointments may only meet while congress is in session. Thus, if there is a vacancy in an office, if the commission on appointment cannot meet the president can still make appointment to prevent hiatus in the vacant office. Ad interim v. Regular as to effectivity, ad interim is immediately effective, thus the appointive official can assume officer right away subject to rejection by the coa. But regular appointment, the effectivity starts only upon confirmation by coa. Illustration: You are regional director then you were appointed as the new department secretary while congress is in recess, you can assume right away since this is an ad interim appointment, thereafter, when you assume an appointed office your appointment was by passed or disapproved by the coa, you will lose the appointed office and you can not come back to your former position as regional director since once you assume office you deemed to have abandoned your previous position. You cannot hold the two positions simultaneously in the government. You are regional director then you were appointed as the new department secretary while congress is in session, since this is a regular appointment you cannot assume right away and it requires confirmation by coa, what if the latter by passed or disapproved your appointment, you still remain your previous position as regional director. Thus, you will not lose your previous position. Practical reasons: do not accept an ad interim appointment so that you will not lose your current position. =) hehe Example: congressman mar roxas was appointed by president while congress is in recess, he did not assume office but he waited for congress to assume in session so that he will not lose his seat his in congress. Otherwise, he will lose his seat in congress because of incompatible office, once a congressman assumes an appointment he automatically forfeits his seat in congress. Case: matibag v. Benipayo Justice benipayo together with commissioner borja and tuazon they were appointed as comelec chairman and commissioners while congress is in recess, thus ad interim

appointment, the three immediately assumed office as chairman and commissioners of the comelec. Benipayo transferred matibag to the law department, later on the appointments by the three were by passed but thereafter were re appointed. Matibag opposed the appointment of the three commissioners and chairman comelec since it is not allowed by law to appoint commissioners and chairman of comelec in a temporary capacity. Matibag insist that ad interim appointment is a temporary appointment. Also, he further states that once the chairman and commissioner are appointed they cannot be re appointed again. the SC said as to the first issue: the SC said that an ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment citing the case of summers v. Ozayta because it takes effect immediately and it can not be revoke by the president once the appointee qualified into office and the fact that is subject to confirmation by coa will not alter the fact that it is permanent. An ad interim is a permanent appointment in the mean time the congress is not in session. As regards to the second issue: the SC said that they can still be reappointed if their ad interim appointments are by passed. The provision that prohibits reappointment of the comelec chairman: where an ad interim appointee after confirmation by coa has served his full 7 yrs term cannot be reappointed agains; or where the appointee after confirmation by coa, resigns before his term expires; or where appointee confirmed by coa and he served the unexpired term of someone who died or resign and finished its term; or where appointee serves less than 7 yrs and vacancy and death occurs. ( these four provisions presumes that the ad interim appointment had already been confirmed by the coa ). Thus, this not apply to a situation where the ad interim appointment was bypassed by coa. What if they were disapproved by coa? Can they still be reappointed? No, because once disapproved by coa, they can no longer be reappointed because a disapproval means it is a judgment on the merits regarding the qualification of the appointive officials by the commission exercising checks and balance function of the commission on appointment. Thus, the president cannot reappoint them. So, if it is only by passed, they can still be reappointed. Case: Pimentel v. Ermita President appointed cabinet members to the various departments but their appointments were only acting appointive officials during the congress while in session. The coa compels the president to make regular appointments. Can the coa compel the president to make regular appointment? No, the nature of appointment by the president is discretionary on her part. Thus, being discretionary it is not subject to mandamus. The SC distinguish an adinterim appointment from an appointment in an acting capacity. There are three important distinctions: (a) An ad interim appointment can be made only when congress is not in session, while in acting appionment may be made during or not during session; (b) Ad interim is permanent, while acting appointment is temporary;

(c) Ad interim requires confirmation by coa, while acting appointment does not need confirmation by coa.

Limitations on the appointing power of the president: (a) NEPOTISM - the president cannot appoint his spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the 4th civil degree of the president shall not during his ternure be appointed to members of consti commission, office of the ombuds, secretaries, undersecretaries, chairmen or heads of beaureas or offices including GOCCs and their subsidiaries. Illustration: president appoints his spouse to the commissioner of customs. Mr. X was appointed as commissioner of customs who is the first cousin of the first gentlemen. (by affinity relationship within the 4th degree relationship) If the president appointed mr. G as chairman of PAGCOR, mr. G was the nephew of the presidents sister. (b) APPOINTMENT FOR BUYING VOTE As a rule, two months before the presidential election, the president or acting president shall not make appointments in any positions. Except if temporary appointments to executive positions if public service or public safety is in danger requires as to prevent hiatus in the vacant office. It is made for purpose of buying votes so as to influence the outcome of the presidential election and is considered as offense in the election. Thus, these are appointments made two months before the presidential election. To determine we must look at the date if the appointment is made before the presidential election then this type of appointment applies. MIDNIGHT APPOINTMENT Appointment is made after the presidential election and up to the end of the term of the outgoing president. This clearly pre-empts the appointment prerogative of the newly and incoming president. This is for partisan consideration. Case : de rema v. CA A municipal mayor, she ran for re election, she lost, her term ends noon june 30. Before her term ends he made several permanent appointments, so that the new incoming mayor has no more to appoint. So what the incoming did was to recall the several appointments since according to him it is considered as a midnight appointment and therefore forbidden. However, the SC rule that the midnight appointments are applicable only to presidential appointments and not to local executive officials.

(c) The president, VP, members of cabinet, their deputies or assistants, unless otherwise provided by the constitution, shall not hold any other employment during their tenure. Example of the exception: the vice president may be appointed as cabinet member; secretary of justice may be appointed as ex officio member of the JBC; if they will hold the other office in an ex-officio capacity. Case: Civil liberties union v. Executive secretary The president issued EO allowing members of the cabinet may hold other offices in the government provided it does not exceed two. Pursuant thereof, she appointed them to the GOCCs such as SSS and PCSO. Thus, the said appointments were question because according to civil liberties union, the president and executive family are prohibited to hold any other office in the government. On the other hand, the solicitor general said that it is allowed since they are holding an appointive office and said that under article 9-B of the civil service of the constitution: no elective officials shall be eligible to for appointment in any capacity to any public office or position during his tenure, except if they will hold it in an ex officio capacity. Unless, otherwise provided by law or by the primary function of his position no appointive official ( those civil service employees ) shall hold any other office in the government. According to the solicitor general, the cabinet members are allowed if there is a law. However, the SC said that the civil liberties union are correct, because the provision under article 9-B is a general provision, while article 7 section 13 is a specific provision which specifically prohibits the executive family from holding any other office in the government unless allowed by the constitution or in an ex officio capacity. Case: public center v. Magdangal elma, in this case elma was appointed as presidential counsel and at the same time chairman of PCGG. Her appointments were opposed by public interest center since according to them it violated the provision that executive family shall not hold any other office in the government. The position of the chairman pcgg is a cabinet position it has the same rank of that of a cabinet secretary and therefore cannot hold any other office such as a presidential counsel. The SC said the public interest center is not correct, what is determinative is the nature of the function of a cabinet position such that it has a confidential nature or applying the proximity rule. Thus, although there are positions that are named as cabinet positions but the truth is the nature is not a cabinet position. However, elma still cannot hold office because of incompatible office. In the doctrine of incompatible office, the two positions are contrary to each other and therefore cannot be hold simultaneously. Example: a person appointed as treasurer and auditor; prosecutor at the same time judge.

(b) Control Power The president shall have control over all executive department, bureau and offices. These power of control is exercised by the president with respect to the executive department, bureau, and offices. E0 292 defining executive department ( any of the executive department created by law example: department of national defense, of finance, DENR, of justice, of education, of health, of DILG etc.. ) , bureau ( principal subdivision of a department example: under department of finance are the bureau of customs , bureau of internal revenue etc.. ; under DILG is the bureau of PNP ), and offices ( major functional unit of a department or bureau and covers the regional offices, example: regional office of the BIR ) Control the power of the superior officer to act directly on whenever a power is vested by law to a subordinate; to direct a performance of a duty; to restrain the commission of acts; to review, alter or modify the action of a subordinate; to substitute his own decision over that of a subordinate. However with respect to local government, the president exercises only power of supervision. Since the local government observes the autonomy of local governments. Thus, the president shall only exercise general supervision. General supervision simply means the power of the president to generally oversee just to see to it that the said local government functions in accordance with law. Thus it cannot control their acts. Example: city of manila enacted an ordinance, then the president said that you cannot enact ordinance since it will enact the economy. Can he do this? No, the president cannot interfere with the functions of the local government since they are under the principle of local autonomy.

(c) Calling out power to prevent and suppress lawlessness, invasion and rebellion. Martial law power invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it. Power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it. Limitations of Martial law power and power to suspend privilege of the writ of habeas corpus : Both are subject to judicial review. Martial law has a duration of 60 days; may be revoked by congress or extended upon initiative by the president, the president may within 48 after proclamation should report personally or not in writing; or the congress if not in session must within 24 hours after proclamation must meet in special session.

State of martial law does not suspend the operation of the constitution, it does not supplant the operation of suspend civil courts, it does not authorize the confer the jurisdiction on military tribunals over civilians where the civil courts are able to function oliger doctrine which is during the martial law times of marcos creating a military tribunal trying ninoy Aquino so the latter contested that he should not be tried by a military tribunal where the civil courts are in operation so during this time the supreme court ruled in favour of marcos, so oliger was a trained Filipinos in Arizona and when they returned to the philippines and made bombings and soon thereafter one of the co-conspirator got caught and oliger was also been caught and then marcos then again created another military tribunal but then came the EDSA revolution and so new supremecourt are created and then it was ruled that oliger should not be tried in a military tribunal during martial law where civil court are in function and operation, it does not automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Also, the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall only be applied to those who are charged rebellion or invasion also shall be judicially charged within 3 days otherwise they will be released and the right to bail shall not be impaired even if the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspend if the crime committed is bailable.

(d) Power to grant pardon, reprieves, commutation, remission of fine and amnesty Amensty v. The other condonations - amnesty requires the concurrence of the majority of all the members of congress but not the other. Also, in amnesty conviction by final judgment is not a requirement but not in the others ( pardon, reprieves, commutation or remission where in this case there must be a conviction of finality judgment so that if you filed an appeal there is no right to grant pardon since the conviction is not yet final so what you must do is to withdraw the appeal ). Pardon is not an official of the president ( thus, it is not a matter of judicial notice thus you must still prove that you are granted pardon ), this is the private act of condonation of the president, while the amnesty is an official act ( thus, it becomes a matter of judicial notice ). We remember that judicial confession and judicial admissions or confessions and judicial presumptions, official acts of the executive ( which includes amnesty ), judicial depart, legislative department are all a matter of judicial notice. Pardon is available to one convicted of administrative offense, as held in the Llamas doctrine. The reason is that there is no distinction of criminal and administrative offense in the provision of pardon. What is the effect of absolute pardon to a convict? Will he be reinstated in the same position? Will she be given backwages? In the case of monsato v. Factoran, she was convicted and was given absolute pardon, and she demanded that she be reinstated and with backwages, the supreme court denied

her contention, according to the supremecourt, it may mean forgiveness but not forgetfulness, so what was remitted only is the penalty imposed so that she will not serve sentence anymore but in the eyes of the law she is still a convict, pardon does not look back to the past but it looks to the future and because of this the supreme court said that she is not be entitled to reinstated and no backwages unless the pardon provides otherwise. Limitations: (a) It does not apply to impeachment cases; (b) There must be conviction of final judgment; (c) It does not apply in case of legislative contempt (congress conducts inquiries in aid of legislation you may be required to report but if you failed you may be cited legislative contempt. You may be sent to imprisonment. arnault v. Nazarenno doctrine, when you sent to imprisonment, you cannot be granted pardon by the president) in view of separation of powers; (d) No pardon, amnesty, parol or suspension of sentence for violation of election laws without the favourable recommendation of the comelec; (e) Where the supremecourt exercise disciplinary actions over its lower courts in view of the separation of powers and prohibition on encroachment of the power of other bodies. Reprieve it is the suspension of the execution of the death convict. Note: it may be true that death penalty law is repealed but the constitution still reserves the right to create a law on death penalty for heinous crimes. Case: echegaray doctrine Upon his execution, a TRO by the supremecourt was issued suspending the execution. Is this a valid act by the supremecourt? yes, although the power to grant reprieves is vested to the president, however the court after conviction is not precluded from controlling its execution of its judgment since after conviction, the death convict has collateral rights and the court may deemed it necessary to protect a death convict in circumstances such as when he becomes insane or when instances requires so. Thus, it is not encroachment upon the power of the president to grant reprieves. Commutation of sentence reduction of penalty. When death penalty was repealed, the convicts who are sentenced to death are automatically reduced to reclusion perpetua.

Remission of fines and penalty.

(e)Borrowing Power Note: just know the limitations, there are two important limitations, these are: Prior concurrence by the monetary board and limitations as the congress may provide.

(f) No treaty or international agreements shall be valid unless concurred by the 2/3 votes of the senate. ( their role is giving or withholding consent, but the power to ratify the treaty is vested to the president. ) Note: bayan v. Zamora the supreme court said that the power to ratify treaty is vested to the president. Executive agreement is not subject to the consent by the Senate. Thus, an executive agreement is an equally binding international obligation. In international law, there is no difference between the treaties and executive agreement in so far as they are equally binding effect upon nations in so far as they are within their scope of limitation. Take note that an executive agreement it is of a matter of municipal concern but international agreement is of international concern but they are both binding upon nation.

Case: abaya v. Abdaya jr. on exchange of notes regarding the philippines loan application to finance government construction projects. An exchange of notes is an executive agreement since it is considered as a municipal concern therefore no need for concurrence by the 2/3 of the senate. case: bayan v. Zamora on treaty with US visiting force agreement

in this case the treaty was transmitted by the president to the congrees. It was opposed by certain person, citing section 25 article 18, there must be a treaty duly concurred in by senate and when congress may require it must be ratified by the people in a referendum and it must also be considered by the other contracting as a treaty. Is the VFA a treaty or is it an executive agreement? VFA is a treaty. The president has a treaty making power and thus it should transmit it to the congress for concurrence. Section 21 article 7 applies according to the president. But is this correct? The SC said that as a rule a treaty should be concurred 2/3 votes of senate regardless of whatever the subject matter of the treaty is, however, a special provision in the constitution regarding treaty with foreign military bases troops or facilities should prevail over the general provision of 2/3 and therefore

section 25 of article 18 applies and not section 21 article 7 of the 1987 constitution therefore the requisites of section 25 article 18 of the 1987 constitution.

(g) Budgetary Power Following the doctrine of separation of powers, the power of appropriation is vested with congress power of the purse but take note that the power to propose budget and prepares it through the department of budget and management is vested with the president. Thus, the budget shall be transmitted to the congress and shall make the general appropriations law for the budget of the government. Illustration: A proposed budget was transmitted by the president to the congress. During the hearing, the proposed budget in the education was very lower as compared to the other departments. Thus, the congress opposed and they added the proposed budget for the department of education. Is the act of the congress correct in increasing the proposed budget? Section 25 article 6, the congress may not increase the appropriations budget proposed by the president it can only trim down or slash or deduct it. Take note that the form, content and manner of preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law through congress. (h) Informing power of the president SONA State of the nation address at the opening of the regular session of congress. He may also appear in congress at any time. When is the opening of the regular session of congress? Every 4th Monday of July. Illustration: Assuming the regular session of congress was open and thereafter the congress decided to adjourn its regular session with only 25 days of continous session. Is this allowed? Yes, the discretion is left with the congress on how many regular session they will hold but provided that the 30 day period before the next regular session they shall compulsory adjourn session. So they may hold a year round continous regular session but the only requirement is that they should adjourn 30 day period before the next regular session. Thus, the duration of the regular session is not fixed anymore the only requirement is that it shall adjourn 30 days before the next regular session. But take note that the power to call to a special session is vested with the president except where the congress may meet special session even without the call of president when: (a) not in session the congress may, within 24 hrs after proclamation of the martial law or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, meet in special session; (b) in impeachment cases;

(c) canvassing election in the election of the president or vice president acting as the electoral tribunal; (d) in cases where both the President and Vice President died and resulted to vacancy of the respective offices; (e) in case of the inability of the President or where the latter declared that he is inable and when the president say that he is able but the cabinet members disagree. 3.) JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

judicial power shall be vested with the supreme court and in such other lower courts as it may be provided by law. There is only one supreme court and it is only the sole constitutional court. Take note that sandiganbayan is not a constitutional court since it was created by a special law, it is only a constitutionally mandated court. Judicial power is vested with suprme court and with other lower court as provided by law. What are the judicial power of the lower court as provided by law? Judiciary reorganization act129 (a) Court of Appeals a lower collegeate court; (b) Regional Trial Courts courts of general jurisdiction; (c) Courts of limited jurisdiction ( first level courts ) Metropolitan trial courts, Municipal Trial courts in cities, municipal trial courts or municipal circuit trial courts; (d) Sandiganbayan co-equal with the court of appeals who hears the offenses of government officials that falls within its jurisdiction; (e) Court of tax appeals co-equal with the court of appeals; (f) Sharia courts two levels: sharia district courts (equivalent of RTC) and sharia circuit courts (equivalent of MTCs) the other sharia courts are not judicial courts they are more of administrative bodies. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction congress deemed it necessary to create specialized bodies that will hear and decide cases which is more exclusively to their technical skills and expertise. These specialized bodies and therefore they are not courts but they are administrative bodies. Thus, if a case is competently falls within their jurisdiction, instead of filing it with the RTC as general courts of jurisdiction the RTC will not hear it and it will remand the case to the specialized body who is more competent on the said matter. Power to appoint justices of the supreme court is vested with the president but the nomination of at least 3 nominees is the duty of the judicial bar council. Thus, no need for confirmation of commission on appointments. Who has the power to remove the judges?

In case of supreme court, it is only through impeachment; in case of other judges of lower courts, it is the supreme court that can remove them. Composition chief justice and 14 associate justices, it may sit enbanc or in division of 3,5 and 7. (note: cases decided by the supreme court enbanc)

4.) OTHER BODIES CONSTITUTIOONAL COMMISSIONS (a) Civil service commission 1 chairman and 2 members; (b) Comelec 1 chairman and 6 members ; (c) Commission on audit 1 chairman and 2 members. ( these are independent constitutional commissions , thus they cannot be appointed in an acting or temporary capacity) (B) LOCAL GOVERNMENT

II.

PUBLIC OFFICER: (C) ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS: Article 11 of the 1987 constitution.

On Appointment of officials: How is a public officer choses? By election By Appointment Appointment v. Designation Designation presupposes that he has been appointed but he is given additional duties and therefore he is acting temporary position and therefore no security of tenure over the designation. Nature of appointment is discretionary, in the case of luego v. Civil service commission, it is a political question involving consideration of wisdom of which the appointing authority possess so that when the appointive official possess the qualification then it cannot be question even with the SC.

Case: flores v. Drilon The case involves dick Gordon was the mayor of ollongapo city, then Subic Bay Metropolitan city was created then the charter provides that thre shall be a chairman. Thus, dick Gordon was holding an elective office and another office appointive office. This was question. And the supreme court said that, section 7 of article 9 B, no elective official shall be eligible for any appointment to any public office or position during his tenure, except if he will hold that appointive office in an exofficio capacity. In this case, the position of chairman is not an exofficio function of elective office. But dick said that but there is a law allowing me to hold it. Also, when the congress created SBMA it encroached upon the prerogative of the president to appoint in his discretionary power and therefore the said charter is unconstitutional. Section 7 of article 9 B (1) Elective official Holding elective office shall not hold any appointive office except in an exofficio capacity. Note: in this case, if the elective officer wants to take the aapointive office he should file a resignation letter or if he still wants the elective office he should remain in that office and shall not hold the appointive office since such appointment shall be considred as null and void. (2) Appointive official shall not hold in any other appointive office except when there is a law allowing them or if it is required by the primary function of his position.

(3) Next in rank rule If a vacancy is filled by promotion, the person holding the position next in rank thereto shall be considered for promotion. There is a certain government office and base from the plantilla of its office and the head office is the chief accountant, the next in rank is the deputy accountant, third in rank is the administrative officer. Let us assume that the chief accountant retired and leaving the permanent vacancy in the position. The next in rank deputy applied to that vacant position. Also, the administrative officer applied to that vacant position. Also, another chief accountant of another government agency. All of them qualified. May the deputy accountant validly complain that he is violated by the next in rank rule? No, since the next in rank rule applies only if there is a vacancy by promotion. But in this case the vacancy was made by lateral movement since all of them are of the same rank and position. Since there are several ways on filling up a vacancy which is by vertical movement through position, or by lateral movement by transfer, or by reappointment or reinstatement or even appointment coming from another government agency. Thus, in the above case, the one appointed was coming from the same rank who is also a chief accountant coming from another government agency having the same position of the said retired chief accountant. Assuming same set of facts, but the one who was appointed was the administrative officer, may the deputy who is holding the next in rank may validly complain? Yes, because this time was filled by promotion because he was by pass by the third rank. But can he insist? No, in the case of abilla v. Civil service commission, the SC said that next in rank rule is not absolute it applies only in cases of promotion but it can be disregarded imposed upon by the next in rank, there is no mandatory requirement to appoint the next in rank position. The appointing authority is given wide latitude of choices and discretion to fill up the vacant position. In taduran v. Civil service commission, thus, the person holding the next in rank position shall be entitled preference in consideration but it does not mean that he has the legal right to be seated on the vacant position if there is another available more qualified.

Qualifications to public office What is the nature to prescribe qualifications of public office and power to create public office? It is legislative in nature. But not the power of appointment. What are the limitations to prescribe qualifications? (a) If it is prescribe by the constitution exclusively then the congress can not amend or add some qualification, otherwise it shall be unconstitutional. (b) When the qualification to be prescribe must be germane to the nature of functions to be performed. (c) Must be expressed in general terms only so that the appointing authority shall not be limited in appointing to only one person. Qualification may be understood in two senses: (a) Qualification as an act consists of taking an oath or in case of accountable officers such as treasurers by posting a bond. Section 5 article 7 of the 1987 constitution, before they enter in the execution of his office the Prsident, Vpresdient, or acting president they shall take oath. Article 9 B, section of the 1987 constitution, all public officers and employees shall take oath and affirmation to uphold and defend the constitution. With regard to the armed forces of the philippines, all of them shall take an oath or affirmation to uphold and defend the constitution. Let us assume that you were elected in an elective office or appointed to an appointive office and began to do the functions of your office but you failed to take oath. Are your acts valid? Valid only as regards to third persons and of the public because you are holding such as a de facto officer. The defacto officer shall not be benefited by his own act. De facto officer in the case of state v. Carol, one who have a known valid appointment or election to an office however he failed to conform into a requirement before entereing into an office or by posting of bond. Or assumed office upon the knowledge that the law that appointed him is constitutional but turned out to be unconstitutional. Who is a de jure officer? Who is a de facto officer? Who is a userper? De jure has a lawful title. A de facto officer is one who merely a color of title of office, his title is imperfect but is in actual possession of such office. A usurper or intruder has no title to an office not even a color of title but he is in actual possession of the office.

What about the effects of their acts? De jure his acts are valid. A defacto officer are valid only inso far as third parties and general public are concern but he cannot benefit by his own acts. A usurper or intruder, his acts are entirely void because he has no title. Is a de facto officer lawfully entitled to salary to the de facto office? No, matter of public policy, when he assumed office he knows he is only acting by color of title and thus he cannot be benefited from his own acts. However, as an exception, he may be entitled if the assumption was done in good faith and there is no de jure officer claiming for the same salary. How do you challenge the office of a de facto officer? Can it be attack collaterally? No, it can only be attacked directly through the proceeding of quo warranto subject to the one year prescriptive period so that if for example the de jure officer who failed to file petition of quo warranto within 1 year from he being ousted then the action prescribed shall make the de facto officer a de jure officer. What are the requisites for a de facto officer to exists? (1) Existence of a de jure office (2) Color of title/colourable title (3) Actual physical possession of the office

(b) Qualification as an endowement One must possess certain properties, qualities or attributes like citizenship. Residence qualification which is true to elective official because you are required to serve certain constituency. One of the grounds for disqualification, those that acquired the immigrant status of the foreign country meaning permanent resisent of that foreign country, they will be disqualified to hold in any elective office unless they have waived such right before the election. Case: caasi has a green card ( proof that you acquired that you have the right to reside permanently in the foreign country meaning you are an immigrant ), he ran for mayor in his home town, his opponent filed a disqualification case against him on the ground of holding a green card. Thus, he is disqualified for residency requirement. When it reached the suprme court, caasi said that whatever defect i have at the time of my filing certificate of candidacy when i was voted the defect is deemed cured, the suprme court said anong deemed cured!!deemede deemd cureds!! Hehe bawal yang ago! Heeh you must possess all the qualification and non of the disqualification and this must be possessed continuously. Caasi said that i have waived my green card status by filing of certificate of candidacy, the sc said kanit na gago ka dapat may express renunciation muna walang implied waiver.

Residence v. Domicile: In civil law, yes they are different in civil law you can have several residence although only one domicile, but in political law, particularly in election law, it is the doctrine of animus revertendi, intent to return although absent. There are three kinds of domicile: (1) Domicile of origin is acquired by birth and continous until replace by acquisition of another domicile. It is the domicile childs parent at the time of birth and may not be the actual place of birth. (2) Domicile by choice an adult may change his domicile at will. Intention is a feature of this kind of domicile. Intention to remain in that place and actual physical presence in that locality and you have no intention of going back to your domicile of origin. No more animus revertendi on your domicile of origin. (3) Domicile by operation of law domicile given to a person independent of his will, this applies to infants or other persons suffering from disability and incompetent persons.

(D) ELECTION: (e) General Provisions (use beda reviewer) (f) Jurisdiction of COMELEC: (use beda reviewer) Article 9 of the 1987 constitution. (g) Election Procedure: (use tipon and audio sandoval) Omnibus Election Code. (h) Election of Public Officers: (use tipon) (d1) National Elective Officers (d2) Local Elective Officers

----

I.

Election Procedure: BEFORE ELECTION (1) PARTIES (a) Candidates Political Parties Registeration of political parties: the power to register is vested with the comelec. Thus, it is registration with the comelec that vest personality of the political parties. What organizations are not allowed to register as political parties: (1) Religious denominations and sects shall not be registered; (2) Those who seek violence and unlawfulness; (3) Those whose refuse or oppose to adhere the Philippine constitution; (4) Those who are supported by the foreign government Note: the constitution declares that financial contribution from foreign government and agencies to political parties related to election is considered as interference in national affairs. Thus, when accepted by the political parties their registration shall be cancelled and they shall incur penalty. Section 81 of the omnibus election code, one of the election offenses is the intervention of foreigners. Eligibility of Candidates and Certificate of Candidacy

(1) Election Period 90 ays before election and 30 days after the elctions. (2) Campaign Period It depends what position the candidate is running for but as a rule it begins after the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy ( but not in barangay election ), at any rate it always ends 1 day before the election. Thus, the day before the election until election day no one shall campaign or any partisan political activity is an election offense. Section 80 of omnibus election code provides that you can only engage in election campaign or any partisan political activity during the campaign period, except party conventions which it can be conducted even before the campaign period.thus, outside of this period is an election offense. What about the infomercials? If you have not yet filed certificate of candidacy you are not a candidate and therefore you can still engage in election campaign and partisan political activity which any activity to design to promote the election and defeat a candidate. Candidate: one who is aspiring for elective office and has filed his certificate of candidacy. Election campaign / partisan political activity: Any activity that aims to promote the election or defeat of a candidate or candidates. (3) Filing of Certificate of Candidacy Once filed certificate of candidacy you become a candidate. Thus, even if you campaign but if you did not file a certificate of candidacy you are not a candidate and therefore vote casted for you will not be counted. Section 76 of the OEC, it is the ministerial duty of the COMELEC to receive the certificate of candidacy of any person in an election for as long as the said certificate is regular and complete upon its face. Thus, any disqualification upon filing of the said certificate of candidacy is not proper but it shall belong to another tribunal for a disqualification case filed for that purpose. Section 73 of the OEC, you have to file certificate of candidacy within the period prescribed by law. Also, you can only file certificate of candidacy for only one office, you cannot file two certificate of candidacy for two or more different offices in that same election you are not a candidate of any of those office. You can withdraw your certificate of candidacy provided you submit a written declaration under oath of your withdrawal of your certificate of candidacy.

Case: monsale v. Nico Assuming march 31 is the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy and april 1 is the start of the campaign period. X filed his cert of candidacy for mayor march 30, so that march 31 he decided not to run by submitting a written declaration under oath withdrawing his candidacy, april 1 is the start of campaign period, april 2 he wanted again to run by withdrawing his withdrawal. Does his filing certificate for mayor reinstated? No, the SC said that the withdrawal of the withdrawal of the certificate of candidacy has the effect of filing a new certificate of candidacy which is in the said case filed out of time because it was filed after the last day of filing. What if you are the municipal treasure ( appointive office ) filed cert of candidacy for vice mayor, will you be considered as resigned? Yes, the moment you file a certificate of candidacy they are iposo facto resigned. No need for filing a resignation. Thus, if you decided to withdraw you certificate of candidacy you can no longer go back to your former appointive position. Under section 66 of OEC, any person holding a public appointive office or position, including active members of the armed forces of the philippines in the active service, and officers and employees in government owned or controlled corporations (it applies also to government corpo without original charters: according to the SC, section 66 of the OEC did not distinguish), shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy. What if you are a vice governor ( elective office ) then you filed a certificate of candidacy for sangguniang panglalawigan? What if you are congressman and filed a certificate of candidacy for senator? Under the fair election act, any elective official whether national or local who has filed certificate of candidacy for the same or any other office shall not be considered resign from their office. This repealed section 67. Thus, the mere filing of certificate of candidacy will not ipso facto make him resign from his current office. Thus, an official resignation letter is still required for him to be officially resign from his office.

Substitution of Candidates: what are the grounds for a valid substitution? A: In case of death, disqualification and withdrawal of a candidate.

May there be a valid substitution of candidates on the day of the election? Yes, after the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy until mid-day of election day substitution is allowed. Mario de guzman was candidate for mayor, 2 days before election while campaigning he died through heart attack, may he be substituted by his wife as a candidate for mayor who also is qualified and non of the disqualifications? It depends. If he did not belong to any political party, he may not be validly substituted not even by his wife because it is implied that this applies only to a candidate who must belong first to a political party and thereafter the substitiute must also belong to the same political party and there must be nomination from the said political party allowing the substitute to substitute the deceased candidate. Thus, it is clear that this provision applies only to candidates who is a member of a political party. Mario de guzman candidate for mayor belonging to lakas nucd a political party, two days before election died, was substituted by his son also a member of lakas nucd upon nomination by the lakas nucd he now filed his certificate of candidacy as a substitute for his father. On the day of the election, the voters still wrote the name of the deceased. Should you count the votes of the deceased candidate in favour of the substitute? As a rule, in case of valid substitution, the votes for the deceased candidate shall not apply in favour of the substitute because it is considered as a stray vote, except if the substitute has the same family name with the substituted candidate ( deceased candidate ). Case: Miranda v. Abaya Mayor Miranda of Santiago city isabela, not withdstanding that he already served for 3 consecutive terms, his opponent abaya questioned his candidacy because he had served for 3 consecutive years, the comelec ruled in favour abaya and disqualified Miranda and cancelled his certificate of candidacy. The son of Miranda filed a certificate of candidacy as a substitute for his father, abaya now again question the substitution but it was not decided right away. The son of Miranda won the election. When the petition for disqualification reached the SC the latter decided that there was no valid substitution because in this case the comelec cancelled his certificate of candidacy and therefore the votes cast in favour of the disqualified/substituted candidate shall not be considered as counted because a person whose certificate of candidacy is cancelled or no certificate of candidacy is considered as non candidate and has no right to be voted upon by the people. Thus, no one can substitute a person who is not a candidate at all. Thus, the substitute must have filed the substitution before the cancellation of certificate of candidacy of the substituted. Another issue, in this case, considering the son of the substituted has all the qualifications and non of the disqualification, can we not at least consider him as a candidate in his own right and not as a substitute? The SC said no way! Because he filed his certificate of candidacy long after

the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy. Thus, he filed his certificate of candidacy out of time. Another issue, abaya said in this case since no valid substitution, i obtain the second highest number of votes then i should be proclaimed as mayor! The SC said NO WAY! The winning votes of the disqualified candidate and the invalid substitution thereof cannot be transferred to repudiated loser, a second placer is just a second placer, he lost the election, he is not the choice of the electorate. doctrine of the rejection of the second placer. So who will now assume the mayor? Apply the rule on succession. The vice mayor will now become the mayor. Vice mayor amelita Navarro now assumes as the mayor. (Miranda v. Abaya) However, before the ruling of the supreme court in the above mentioned case of Miranda v. Abaya, The members of assembly of the Santiago city wanted for the recall election of vice mayor amelita Navarro. It was submitted to the comelec and thus called for special recall election for the vice mayor of the city. While pending. The Miranda case was ruled which made vice mayor amelita Navarro the mayor vacating the seat of vice mayor. Thus, she is not anymore the vice mayor and as an effect it will render the resolution for the special recall election as moot and academic. (Affiado v. Comelec)

(4) Disqualification cases that may be filed before elections (jurisdiction is with the COMELEC) Remedies that may be availed of by the opponent: section 68, 69, and 78 of OEC: (a) Section 68 Vote buying, over spending, terrorism, coercion, intimindation or any act that is violative of election laws and those who have acquired right to reside permanently in another country. (b) Section 69 In case of nuisance candidate, if a candidate appears to be a nuisance candidate. The comelec may act motu proprio, assuming the comelec did not act motu proprio, any person may file the petition for disqualication. Nuisance candidate he does not have that bona fide intention to run. His only purpose in filing is to confuse the voters. The period to be observed is within 5 days from the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy.

(c) Section 78 material misrepresentation as to any statement of fact in the certificate of candidacy. Thus, if a candidate declared that he is a citizen of the Philippines but in fact he is not. This is a ground to disqualify him. The period should be filed within 25 days from the date the candidate alleged to have committed that material misreprestation filed his certificate of candidacy. Case: loong v. Comelec

Loong was a candidate for vice governor in ARMM, there was this election but no proclamation, the opponent of loong that based from his registrar was not yet qualified to run for vice governor that he was underage, the opponent filed a disqualification cas pursuant to section 78 of the election code. The SC said it was filed out of time. It must be filed within 25 days from the date the candidate filed his certificate of candidacy. This period is a mandatory requirement of law. The opponent said that how can he be faulted where in fact he just discovered the material misrepresentation after the election. The SC said that the law said that it start from the date the candidate filed his certificate of candidacy and not on the day the opponent discovered the material misrepresentation. Effect of the disqualification case: (1) Section 6 of RA 6646 electoral reform law, provides that any candidate who has been declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted for and any votes casts for him shall not be counted. (There was a disqualification case before the election it has been decided with finality before the election, in which case he shall not be voted for and any vote counted in favour him shall not be counted)

Case: cayat v. Comelec Cayat is a priest and ran for mayor, his opponent filed a disqualification case against him with the comelec pursuant to section 40 of the local government code, which provides that the following are disqualified for running local elective position: those convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude or of an offense where the penalty imposed is imprisonment for not less than 1 year within 2 years after the service of their sentence ( partial disqualification ).

Because cayat was convicted of acts of lasciviousness and hence disqualified. The comelec ruled that cayat is disqualified with finality 2 weeks before the election. Cayat failed to receive the decision, but anyway an election continued and cayat won and proclaimed and took his oath in office. The SC removed his from his being mayor, any candidate who has been declared disqualified with finality before the election, he should not have been voted for and therefore any votes casts for him shall not be counted. So, in this case, who will now become the mayor? Will it be the opponent who obtain the second highest votes? The SC said YES! Hehe because the electorate were in bad faith by being aware that cayat was a bullshit convict but still they voted for him they were bad faith and thus waived their right. In this case, there was no second placer here since the disqualified candidate never became a winner since he was disqualified with finality long before the election day this has been an effect that he did not become a candidate.

(2) If for any reason is not declared by final judgment to be disqualified and received the winning votes, the court or commission shall continue to hear the case, and any petitioner or any opponent may file a petition for the suspension of the proclamation during the pendency of the case, if the evidence of guilt is strong. (there was a disqualification case filed before the election but it was not decided with finality before the election and during election he won during the pendency of the case, the court or commission shall continue to hear the case and still has jurisdiction and any person may file petition for the suspension of the proclamation if the evidence of guilt is strong.) Case: guerrero v. Comelec Governor farinas ran for congressman, a disqualification case was filed with the comelec, during the pendency, farinas won as congressman and proclaimed. The comelec then dismissed the case, and remanded the case to the house of electoral tribunal since once a candidate is proclaimed the comelec loses jurisdiction and the jurisdiction now is vested with the electoral tribunal who shall hold cases of disqualification and all election contests once a candidate is proclaimed this applies to their members who are already proclaimed and assume office.

(b) Voters Registration of Voters Qualifications: Article 5 on Suffrage (1) Citizen of the Philippines; (2) Not disqualified by law (3) 18 years old; (4) Resident of the philippines at least 1 year; (5) At least 6 months residence where he will vote Note: no literacy or property or other substantive requirement shall be imposed on the requirement of being a voter. The law regarding the provision in the omnibus election code penalizing non voters or failure to vote is already considered as superseded by the 1987 constitution. Thus, voting during the election is not anymore an obligation it is a right which may or may not be exercised.

Registration is merely is a condition precedent for the exercise of the right of suffrage. Registration is a regulation measure of the Police Power. Case: macalintal v. Comelec The SC there is now as an exception to the registration of voter with regard to overseas Filipino workers and permanent residence in a foreign country under the absentee voters act, they are allowed to register and vote before our Philippine embassy for the election of president, vp, senators and party list represetatatives provided that before they register they shall execute an affidavit that within 3 years after registration they will return to the philippines and shall resume residency in the Philippines.

II.

DURING ELECTION (1) Place ( Precincts and Polling Places ) (2) Officers ( Board of Election Inspectors; Watchers; and Board of Canvassers in the National and Local Level ) (3) Documents/Certificates ( Official Ballots and Election Returns ) (4) Casting of Votes on the Day of Election or Postponement or Failure of Election

Section 6 of OEC, if on account of force majure, violence, terrorism, fraud and other analogous causes. (a) No election took place; (b) Election was suspended; (c) Or it lead on the failure to elect on account of the said causes. (it become difficult to determine the will of the electorate) This should be filed COMELEC enbanc. The majority of the members may grant the petition on conduct special election. Case: mitmog v. Comelec There were three of them candidates for mayor in the municipality, the number of registered voters in that municipality 10,000 are voters, only 3,000 who voted. The candidates filed petition for declaration of failure of election in the entire municipality, should comelec act upon the petition? The SC said comelec should not, in this case, there was an election, for as long as there was an election despite the fact that not all of the registered voters voted. Thus, if it can be determined who voted and who won, we cannot disenfranchise the electorate.

(5) Election Offenses

III.

AFTER ELECTION (1) BEFORE PROCLAMATION/CANVASSING PROCESS (1.1) Canvassing of Votes in the Precinct/Voting Center by BEI and prepare the Election Returns then they will transfer it to the Municipal/City Board of Canvassers, the latter will canvass the election returns for the local elective position ( Governor,Vice-Governor, Mayor,Vice-Mayor, Barangay Chairman ) within their respective Municipality or City/Component City and thereafter proclaim the winning candidate within their municipality or city as the case may be then they will prepare the Certificate of Canvass ( each certificate of canvass represents one municipality/component city ) thereafter they will transfer the COC to the Provincial Board of Canvassers for canvassing of the COC. (1.2) Canvassing of Certificate of Canvass by the Provincial Board of Canvassers (1.3) Pre-Proclamation Controversy

This is a remedy after election but before proclamation of the candidate. The jurisdiction is vested with the comelec. So that after proclamation you now file election protest and you add the said disqualification case. This is not allowed in barangay election. Section 241, 242 and 243 of the OEC are the governing provision for pre-proclamation controversy. Section 241: the defnintion of a pre proclamation case; Section 242: the jurisdiction is vested with comelec; Section 243: issues that may be raised in a preproclamation case, these are as follows: illegality in the PTRCA (a) Preparation (b) Transmission (c) Receipt

(d) Custody and Appreciation of election returns or certificates of canvass. Election return it is the one canvassed by the city of canvassers. Each election return represents one voting center. After the election, voting center will count the votes, after counting the members of the voting center will prepare the elction returns in every voting centers. This will be transmitted to the municipal or city board of canvassers, they shall canvass the election return ( one voting center ). After canvass, there will be proclamation. After the proclamation of the winning municipal and city officials. Thereafter the city board of canvassers it will prepare certificate of canvass which will be transmtted to the provincial board of canvassers, each certificate of canvass represents one municipality. After canvassing, the provnicioal board of canvassers will now proclaim the wiinning provincial officer and includeing the wining congressman if the province happens to be a lone district. After canvassing, they will prepare the national certificate of canvass, in case of election for president and vice president it wiil be transferred to the congress acting as board of canvassers, on the other hand if it is for the election of senate it will be transmitted to the comelec who will act as board of canvassers. Board of canvassers it is the ministerial duty of the boc to proclaim the winning candidates once the canvass is complete. The moment boc it has proclaimed, the boc becomes functus de officio meaning they are automatically disbanded. It cannot convene against unless it is ordered by the comelec after the latter has nullified the proclamation. Note: If it is not related in the appreciation of the PTRCA of election returns and certificate of canvass or the illegal composition of the composition of board of canvassers, but it is about the ballot that is in issue such as ballot switching this issue cannot be raised in pre-proclamation case but it may be raised in the election protest after the proclamation of the candidate. However, after counting of votes while the boi is preparing the election return a lawless element came and intervened and forced to manipulated the returns the remedy can be raised in a preproclamation issue. Let us say you are the watcher of your party in the municipal board of canvasser. Voting center number 11, when the board of canvasser open the votes the result was a land slide vote 0 on your party while against your opponent 300. As watcher you should object to the inclusion of the inclusion in the canvass in election return coming from voting center number 11 on the ground that the particular election return was manufactured or not authentic. Your proof is that res ipsa loquitor the thing speaks for itself applying the doctrine of statistic improbability known as the lagumbay doctrine where the court held that where there exist similarities of tallies in favour candidates belonging to one poltical party has for example 300 votes while the

opposing candidate obtain 0 votes that is highly improbable and this is a ground that can be used in a pre proclamation return because it was prepared and obvsuously manufactured and not authentic. Thus, the remedy of the watcher is to contest the said manufactured returns otherwise it will be included in the canvassing. Because in the canvassing the only ones that will be canvass is to canvass only the uncontested returns.

Note: with respect to the elections of P, VP, Senators, congressman, the only issue that can be raised in the pre proclamation in the issue is the illegal composition of the board of canvassers or illegality in its proceedings, except if to correct manifest errors in the certiciate of canvass and election returns. It is available in the municipal officials, city officials and provincials all the issues in the preproclaimation case is available. In the barangay election, no preproclamation case!

(2) AFTER PROCLAMATION For Local Officials and Members of Congress: (2.1) The PBOC will now proclaim the duly elected local public officers as the duly elected winner and also they will include the proclamation of the congressman as a national elective officer with respect to the said province if the latter is a lone district; Election Protest or Quo Warranto a.) Election Protest and counter protest (you counter him by saying that he also cheated on other voting center then the said boi shall open the alleged cheated voting centers in order to protect your lead, filed within 5 days. In Kho v. Comelec, the period within which to avail of the remedy is 5 days only from the date of a receipt of the copy of the protest. This is jurisdictional so that the court or comelec is ousted of jurisdiction to entertain such counterprotest. If a counterprotest who jurisdictional defect but the comelec still erroneously assume jurisdiction then have it expunge from records but if the comelec still assume jurisdiction then file a petioon for special civil action for certiorari under rule

(2.2)

65 on grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction filed with the SC ); and b.) Quo Warranto

Election protest the issue to be resolved is who really won in the election ( was there vote buying, overspending, was there cheating, fraud, ballot box switching snatching ) while in quo warranto is the eligibility of the winning candidate or his disloyalty in the republic of the philippines ( is he really a citizen, is he disloyal to the republic ). Election protest only the person who has cause of action meaning the opposing candidate can raise the issue, while in quo warranot any registered voter can raise the said issue. In an election protest if the protestant wins then he will be proclaimed and assume office; while in quo warranto the candidate will be removed and follow rule on succession but if the seat is in congress the seat will remain and declared vacant and a special election will be held to fill such vacancy. Case: dumayas jr. v. Comelec The SC said that, a petition for quo warranto reaises the ineligibility of the winning candidate or his disloyalty, it is a proceeding to unseat the ineligibility but not necessarily to install the petitioner in the said office. In election protest, the issue is between the defeated and winning candidate on ground of fraud in the election and other causes that affected the election, it is actually a question on who really obtain the plurality of votes and therefore to hold the office. Jurisdiction on Elections: Before election Disqualification case COMELEC Petition to declare failure of election COMELEC ENBANC After Election Before proclamation: Preproclamation cases COMELEC Note: all election cases shall first be heard by a division by the COMELEC and upon motion for reconsideration it shall be heard EnBanc by the comelec. Reyes v. RTC of Mindoro it is the decision of comelec division you should and must file a motion for reconsideration with COMELEC enbanc then file certiorari with SC.

Jementiza v. COMELEC if what is involve is a mere interlocutory order of the comelec, the party may directly file with SC via certiorari and you may not file motion for reconsideration with comelec enbanc anymore. After proclamation: ELECTION PROTEST and QUO WARRANTO P and VP Supreme Court Enbanc (Presidential Electoral Tribunal) Senators - Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) (no appeal except with SC in case of grave abuse of discretion by special civil action certiorari 65) Congress House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) (no appeal except only special civil action certiorari with SC in case of grave abuse of discretion) Elective Regional,provnical, city officials COMELEC Elective municipal officials RTC genjuris( appeal with COMELEC ) Elective barangay officials (including SK officials) MTC acting on its limited jurisdiction ( appeal with COMELEC ) TECSON v. COMELEC in the jurisdiction of the SC enbanc in election of P and VP, the word contest consists of an election protest or quo warranto of the election returns and qualifications with the sole objective which is to unseat the said officer. This concept is similar with the jurisdiction of the HRET and SET and jurisdiction of the COMELEC and also jurisdiction of RTC and MTC. For National Officials ( President and Vice President; Senators ): (2.3) After the PBOC had proclaimed the local elective officials and the members of congress for each legislative district, they will prepare the National Certificate of Canvass for the Elective position for president and vice president and for the elective position of senators. The national certificate of canvass for the elective position for president and vice president shall be transferred to the Congress as BOC for the national certificate of canvass for the president and vice president position; on the other hand the national certificate of canvass for the seat in the Senate shall be transferred to the COMELEC as BOC. After the respective NBOC had finished the canvassing they will proclaim the national elective officials as duly elected national elective officers.

(2.4)

(2.5)

Election Protest or petition for Quo Warranto a.) election protest and counter protest b.) quo warranto

note: what if Mario and Jaime were candidates Mario won, Jaime filed election protest, during the pendency Jaime died, Mario filed a motion to dismiss since Jaime is already and said that the protest is now mooted. Is his motion to dismiss denied? Yes, in castro v. Comlec, the SC said that an election protest involves both of the private interest of the two candidates and the public interest in the final dtermination of the real choice of the electorate thus, it survives the death of the protestant or the protestee. An election protest is not really personal since it involves after all imbued with public paramount interest. In this case, the vice mayor may be allowed to intervene since he has legal interest in case the protestant wins and considering he is dead then the vice mayor by rule of succession he will now assume the said office. What if the protestant instead dying he instead ran for another elective office different from what he is protesting so that in this case the protestant won and assume office, the protest should be dismissed since it has rendered moot and academic. The protestant has deemed to abandoned his protest. III. ADMINISTRATION OF GOVERNMENT INSTRUMENTALITIES AND AGENCIES: Administrative Law of the Philippines. (Sandoval audio) Administrative disciplinary cases involving public officers and employees: As regards jurisdiction in administrative cases: (a) Civil service law If you want to file an administrative complaint against public official and government employee, under the civil service law, the oringal jurisdiction is with the secretary of the said aganecy of department/bureau, then we appeal with the civil service commission, from the civil service commission, we appeal with the court of appeals. Q: can we directly file a complaint with the civil service law? Yes, because it has original jurisdiction too with the public officials and govnt employees. (b) Local government code file it with local chief executive (original jurisdiction) (c) Ombudsman act the ombudsman has administrative disciplinary over all public officials elective appointive national or local except impeachable officers, members of congress and judiciary. Concurrent jurisdiction with the civil service commission and the other disciplinary authorities. From the decision of the ombudsman in the administrative case, we must appeal with the court of appeals.

Appeals in administrative cases: (appeal is not a constitutional right it is only a statutory right) (a) Civil service law if after investigation you were found guilty, and the penalty is dismissal, removal from office, demotion or suspension for more than 30 days or penalty of fine for more than 30 days salary, you can appeal. But if the suspension is not more thatn 30 days or fine of not more than 30 days salary or just censure or admonition, you can not appeal, because in such a case the decision becomes immediately final and executory. Illustration: You are a government employee and after investigation you were not found guilty. May the complainant file an appeal? In the case of paredes v. Civil service commission, the SC said that appeal is not a constitutional right so that if there is no law allowing appeal you can not appeal, so that under the civil service commission the party adversely affected by the decision is the respondent who was found guilty and not the complaint in case his case was not found meritorious. ( this was abandoned already by civil service commission v. Dacoycoy hhehe =D ) Civil service v. Dacoycoy: Dacoycoy was the head of a vocational school but his two sons were extended by permanent appointments but they were place under his office. A case was filed for nepotism, the civil service holding dacoycoy guilty and was penalized for dismissal. May dacoycoy appeal? Yes, so dacoycoy appealed with the CA and the latter ruled in favour of dacoycoy. So that can the complainant appeal from the reversed decision? No, in administrative case, the real party in interest is the government so that the complainaint cannot anymore appeal, however, in this case, the civil service commission is the one who is entitled so that it can appeal. So that it appealed with the SC and so the latter ruled in favour of the civil service commission. Thus, paredes doctrine is now abandoned. So that the phrase the party in interest who is adversely affected by the decision of the court of appeals means its either the respondent or the civil service commission. Nepotism in the case of civil service v. Dacoycoy, nepotism is the appointment of a relative within the 3rd degree of consanguity or affinity by the appointing authority, recommending authority, chief of the burau or office, person exercising immediate supervision. Note: in case of chief of burea or person exercising immediate supervision over the appointee it is immaterial who is the appointing authority. Such that in this case, dacoycoy fell on the situation that even if he is not the appointing authority the fact that the appointee fell on his office where he is exercising immediately supervision over the appointee.

Exceptions of nepotism under the civil service law: (1) Persons employed in the confidential capacity (2) Teachers (3) Physicians (4) Members of the armed forces (5) Members of a family who after having appointed in the said office contracted marriage in the same office and they were allowed to retain their employment. Note: the case of dacoycoy would have been a winning case if the appointment of his two sons were made co-terminous such that they were employed in the confidential capacity so that it fell on the exception to the rule. Case: de bolgado v. Civil service commission She was an employee in the government she was single and later on the mayor was also single, they became sweethearts and became couple, thus, she was promoted and thereafter opposing party said that they violated the law on nepotism. The appointing authority who is the husband said that it applies only to original appointments and not to promotional appointments. The SC said that the law did not distinguish as to the kinds of appointments we should not distinguish. Laurelda v. Civil service commission Governor laurel appointed his brother as civil security officer (body guard) which is confidential position, later on when a career position became vacant then governor laurel he designated his brother as acting position in the career position. The opposing party said you violated the law on nepotism. The governor said that i did not appointed him but i designated him so that i did not violate nepotism. The SC said that appointment and designation are two different animals so that in designation the person holding already appointment he is given additional duty, however, the SC said that for the purpose of the law on nepotism, the two animals are the same otherwise, there will be abuse so that what the law directly prohibits it shall be made indirectly. Note: provincial administrator is already a non career position so that it is considered a confidential nature so pasok siya sa exemption on nepotism. (b) Local government code the prohibited degree on the law on nepotism is within the 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity.

IV.

POWER OF TAXATION

PUBLIC OFFICERS

A. ACCOUNTABILITY National Government PO I. BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS a. GENERAL PRINCIPLES ( INCLUDE DISCUSSION OF BERNAS WITH NACHURA ) b. ELIGIBILITY AND QUALIFICATION c. DE FACTO OFFICERS COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS (use beda reviewer) a. Commencement of official relations 257-346 agpalo (continue audio record) b. Powers and Duties of PO 384-414 agplo c. Liabilities of PO 525-597 agplo d. Rights of PO 347-383 agplo TERMINATION OF OFFICIAL RELATIONSHIP (use beda reviewer and nachura) a. Modes of terminating official relationship 415-524 agplo Local Government PO I. BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONSHIP a.) Elective Local Official (use beda reviewer) > Qualifications and Disqualifications > Manner and Date of Election b.) Appointive Local Official (use nachura) Nature Who are the Officers that may be appointed in the Municipalities, Cities, and Provinces

II.

III.

II.

COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONSHIP (use beda reviewer) a.) Elective Local Official > Prohibitions > Term of Office > Rule on Succession > Compensation > Grievance Procedure > Disciplinary Actions against Elective Local Officials b.) Appointive Local Official (use nachura) Prohibitions Term of Office ( note: it is co-terminous with the term of the Appointing Authority ) Disciplinary Actions against Appointive Local Officials

III.

Termination of Official Relationship (use nachura and beda reviewer) a.) Elective Local Official Modes of terminating official relationship (take note: recall and resignation) b.) Appointive Local Official Modes of terminating official relationship

---------------------------------------------------

PUBLIC OFFICERS

B. ACCOUNTABILITY National Government PO I. BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS a. GENERAL PRINCIPLES


1. Definition of Public Office right, authority, duty created and granted by law + period + fixed by law or pleasure of creating power + individual vested with sovereign function which he exercised for benefit of the body politic. Elements of Public Office created by law or authority of law + delegation of a portion of sovereign function of govnt exercd for benefit of public + defined directly or impliedly by legislature or legislative authority + independently performed without control of superior power other thant hte law unless such is created with control of superior office + permanency or continuity. Characteristics of public office public trust; not property and is outside the commerce of man. It can not be the subject of contract. Difference of Public official with officers and employees of instrumentalities of the government public officer is officer of the government itself while the latter are officers only of instrumentalities of the government.

2.

3. 4.

b. ELIGIBILITY AND QUALIFICATION


1. Formal qualifications CARE APC ( citizen, age, residence, education; ability to read and write, political affiliation, civil service examination ) For Elective National and Local Government Officials: National Elective Officials Executive Branch a.1) President ( citizenship: NATURAL BORN CITIZEN; Age: 40 yrs old on the day of election; Registeration as voter: must be registered voter; Literacy requirement: able to read and write; Residency: resident of the Philippines at least 10 years immediately preceding the election ); a.2) Vice President ( same qualification as the president. He may be appointed member of the cabinet, it does not need confirmation by Commission on appointment ); Legislative Branch b.1) Senator ( citizenship: NATURAL BORN CITIZEN; age: at least 35 yrs old on the day of election,Registration as voter: must be a registered voter; Literacy requirement: able to read and write; Residency: resident of the Philippines for not less than 2 years immediately preceeding the day of election. ); b.2) Congressman ( citizenship: NATURAL BORN CITIZEN; age: at least 25 yrs old on the day of election; Registration as voter: must be registered voter of the district in which he shall be elected, except the party list representatives; Literacy requirement: able to read and write; Residency: resident of the said district for a period of not less than 1 year immediately preceeding the day of election.)

Local Elective Officials ( they are under the control and supervision of the executive department ) a.1) Citizenship: FILIPINO CITIZEN. Registration as voter: must be registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city, or province or, in the case of a member of sangguniang panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or sangguniang bayan, must be registered in the district where he intends to be elected; Residency: a resident therein for at least 1 year immediately preceeding teh day of the election; literacy requirement: able to read and write Filipino or any other local language or dialect; Age: if candidate for G,VG,SPllwgan,M,VM, members of Splungsod of HUC must at least be 23 years old on election day; ifM,VM of IIC ,component cities, municipalities 21 yrs old on election day; if members of Splungsod or Sangguinan Bayan 18yrsold on election day; if candidate for punong barangay or member of sangguniang barangay 18 yrs of age on election day; for SK 15 yrs old but not more than 21 yrs old on the day of election. For Appointive Officials ( just take note those appointive officials of the president and those which are under the confirmation authority of the Commission on appointments only for presidential appointees that needs confirmation by such board; and those Appointed by other officers vested with power of appointment which is subject to the CSC confirmation.) 2. Grounds to disqualification to hold office MMIRC HORE O ( mental or physical incapacity,misconduct or crime, impeachment, removal or suspension, consecutive terms; holding more than one office, office newly created or the emoluments increased, relationship with the appointing power, being an elective official or having been a candidate for any elective office; other grounds under the local government code. ) NOTE: the topics in Tipon Two concept of eligibility it is an endowment or qualities or attribute to qualify to office ex. Individual must possess the qualification at the time of the appointment or election and continuously for as long as the official relationship contines; it is an act of entering into the performance of functions of public office ex. Must take an oath as a qualifying circumstance for a public office. Upon taking oath, the position is considered plenary and complete. Otherwise, he has no right over the office but instead the holdover officer is the rightful occupant. Authority to prescribe qualification if constitution created the public office ( congress no right to increase or reduce,unless express by constitution ); if law creates po ( congress has plenary power to prescribe qualification provided : germane to the purpose of law and not too specific as to refer to one individual.

3.

4.

c. DE FACTO OFFICERS
1. 2. De facto officer reputation of being an officer hat he assumes to be but in the eyes of the law he is not an officer. Requisites valid existing office + Actual physical possession of said office + color of title ( repuatation or acquiescence, known and valid appointmen or election but officer failed to conform to a legal requirement such as not taking an oath, known appointment or election but void because of ineligibility of the officer or want of authority of the appointing authority or irregurity in appointment or election not known to public, known appointment or election pursuant to an unconstitutional law before declaration of its unconstitutionality. ). Duties and liabilities same as de jure officer. Legal effects of his acts valid as to third person if within scope of authority. Entitlement to salaries general rule: rightful incumbent may recover from a defacto officer the salary received by the latter during time of wrongful tenure even though he is good faith and under color of title. Exception: if there is no rightful incumbent or de jure officer during the time the de facto holds position, he is entitled to salaries for period of actually discharging functions. Also, in case de facto officer was ousted by virtue of election protest, he is still entitled to the compensation, emoluments and allowances. How to challenge a de facto officer only through direct proceeding of quo warranto. Cannot be collaterally attacked.

3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

De jure v. De factor; de facto v. Intruder de jure has lawful title while de factor only color of title, also, de jure cannot be ousted through direct proceeding while de facto can be directly challenge through quo warranto; de facto has color of title, while intruder no color of title but illegally occupies and takes an office without authority whatsoever, also de factos acts are valid to third person for as long as within scope authority while intruder the acts are always void, de facto is entitled to compensation, while intruder is not.

II.
a.

COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS


Commencement of official relations 257-346 agpalo 1. Two ways to commence official relation by appointment; by election. 2. Appointment selection by the appointing authority vested with such power of an individual who is to exercise the functions of a given office. The nature of appointment is discretionary upon the appointing authority provided that the appointee must possess all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications prescribed by law at the time of his appointment up to the period which he is holding such office till its termination. Thus, if appointee is qualified, the appointment cannot be faulted on the ground that there are others better qualified who should have been preffered. An appointment should be authenticated in a way that the public may know when and in what manner the duty has been performed. Thus, where there is no evidence of prior appointment, and all that the officer can show is a designation in an acting capacity to the disputed position, the fact that the officer took his oath and his supposed appointment was confirmed by the commission on appointment cannot prevail as against the appointment of another person to the same position. Thus, the designation being revocable and temporary in character, could not ripen into a permanent appointment, even if it was subsequently confirmed by the commission on appointments, because confirmation presupposes a valid nomination or recess appointment, of which there is no evidence required. 3. Appointment v. Designation appointment is the selection by proper authority of an individual who is to exercise the functions of a given office, while designation connotes merely the imposition of additional duties, usually by law, upon a person who is already in the public service by virtue of an earlier appointment or election. Designation refers to the assignment of a public officer to perform certain functions different from those of his position to which he has been appointed. By its nature it is temporary and it does not confer the designee a security of tenure in the position or office which he occupies in an acting capacity. He may thus be replaced at will by the appointing authority or his designation lapses upon the appointment of another person in his place. On the other hand, appointment connotes permanency while designation temporariness. 4. Nature of appointment the general rule: discretionary which is exercised by the appointing authority according to his best lights, the only condition being that the appointee should possess the qualifications required by law. This is a political question involving considerations of wisdom which only the appointing authority can decide. Exception rule: wehre the constitution or the law subjects the appointment to the approval of another officer or body like the commission on appointments. Thus, appointments by the president that needs confirmation must be confirmed by the COAppointmets otherwise the appointment shall be invalid. 5. Appointing authority officer or body vested by constitution or by law with the power to make appointments of public officers and employees to public offices or positions. They are the President of the Philippines, the courts, the heads of the departments, agencies, commissions, or boards, and such other officers as the power may be delegated by the legislature. 6. Appointment of constitutional officers SC officers ( chief justice and associate justices ) constitutional commission officers ( chairmen and members ) ombudsman office ( ombudsman and his deputies ); Qualifications for SC appointive officers ( natural born citizen, 45 yrs old, 15 yrs or more a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the philippines, must be person of proven competence, integrity, probity and indepence. ) for constitutional commission appointive officers ( CSC: natural born

citizen, at least 35 yrs old at time of appointment, with proven capacity for public administration, must not have been lame ducks =) ... meaning not have been candidates for elective position in the elections immediately preceding their appointment; COMELEC: natural born citizen, 35yrsold,college degree holder,not lame ducks,majority of them are members of Philippine BAR who are engaged in the practice of law for 10 years; COAudit: natural born citzn,35yrsold,CPA with not less than 10yrs auditing experience, or members of BAR practicing for 10 years lawyering, not lame ducks, at no time that all members shall belong to the same profession.) for Ombudsman and Deputies ( natural bornz citizen, 40yrsold, rrecognized probity and indepence, and not lame ducks, must have 10 years either in practice law or has been judged. 7. Appointment of Civil Servants the qualifications for entrance into civil service are prescribed by law. These includes age, citizenship,educational attainment for the specific positions, appropriate civil service eligibility, experience in specific fields, height and weight required by particular positions, physical fitness.

8.

Presidents appointing power there are four kinds of appointments that the president of the philippines may make as provided under section 16, article 7 of the 1987 constitution these are as follows: Those appointment/nomination that needs confirmation by the commission on appointment ( heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or officers of the armed forces from rank of colonel or naval captain, and other officers whose appointments are vested in him in this constitution ) note: observe the rule on ad interim appointment and regular appointment where ad interim is appointment made during recess and is a permanent appointment and it is made before such confirmation but it shall cease to be valid if disapproved by Commission on appointment or by passed by commission on appointments upon the next adjournment of congress, on the other hand a regular appointment is made during the session of congress and made only after the nomination and confirmation of commission on appointments and continues until the end of the term of the appointee once confirmed by the commission on appointment. Take note also that an officer whose ad interim appointment has been terminated by thte adjournment of congress without the commission on appointment acting thereon can be given another ad interim appointment extension by the president, the rule however is different if the commission on appointment has rejected the appointment in that case he can not be reappointed to the same position again; Appointments provided by law; Appointments not provided by law; The congress may, by law, vest the appointment of other officers lower in rank in the president alone, or in the courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or boards. General rule: appointing power is the exclusive prerogative of president, upon which no limitation may be imposed by congress, except: those requiring confirmation by COAppointment. Note: legislative grant of additional duties does not constitute encroachment on the presidents appointing power, because imposition of new duties constitutes neither creation of office nor appointment of an officer. Where the law is silent, president shall be the appointing authority.

Commission on appointment composed of: ex officio chairman (president of senate) members ( 12 senators and 12 members of house of rep ) the chairman shall act on all appointments submitted with it within 30 sessions days of the congress from their submission. They shall rule by majority. The commission shall constitute within 30 days after the senate and the house of representatives shall have been organized with the election of the president and the speaker. The coa shall meet only while congress is in session, at the call of its chairman or majority of all members to discharge such powers and functions as hereing conferred upon it.

Power to issue temporary designation temporary designate an officer already in the government service or any other competent person to perform their functions of an office in the executive branch, appointment to which is vested in him by law, when such person who is regularly appointed to the office is unable to perform his duties by reason of illness, absence or any other cause or there exists vacancy. Such designateion not exceed 1 year. The designated has right to compensation attached to said position, but if he is already in a government service he shall only be entitled additional compensation for the position where he is designated. Limitations on the presidents power to appoint (1) Appointments made by acting president appointments made shall remain effective unless revoked by the elected president within 90 days from his assumption or reassumption. After the 90 days period, the appointments become irrevocable and the appointees may only be removed depending upon the nature of their appointment or for cause and in accordance with the procedure laid down by law. (2) Midnight appointment as a rule: not allowed to appoint within 2 months before a presidential election, except: temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancy therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety. (3) Appointment of members of supreme court and judges of lower courts prsdent can only appioint from the list of at least 3 members for each position prepared and recommended by the judicial and bar council. (4) Appointment of officials and employees of judiciary president is precluded. Sc has sole authority in accordance with civil service law. (5) Appointment of another lame ducks not allowed to appoint losing candidates within 1 year after such election to any office in the government. (6) Appointment of ombudsman and its deputies president can only appoint from the list of at least 6 nominees prepared and recommended by the judicial and bar council. (7) Appointment of officials and eomployees of obmudsman President is precluded. Sole authority of ombudsman. (8) Appointment of officers and empmloyees of commission on human rights President is precluded. Sole authority of ombudsman. (9) Appointment of lower in rank officers the congress may vest it solely with the courts or heads of departments, agencies, commission or boards. (10) Linient Prohibition on eligibility for appointment or designation of an elective official to any position in the government As a rule: not allowed, except: allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position (11) Absolute Strict Prohibition the eligibility for appointment or designation of the Executive Family ( President, Vice-P, cabinet members, their deputies or assistance ) to any position in the government the law strictly prohibits the appointment of the executive family in any other position in the government, unless expressly provided by the Constitution example: the vice president may be appointed as cabinet member. Thus, while all other appointive officials in the civil service are allowed to hold other office and employment in the government during their tenure when such is allowed by law or by their primary functions of their positions, the members of the cabinet, their deputies and assistants may do so only when expressly authorized by the constitution itself.

9.) CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONS APPOINTING POWER (a) CSC it is the central personnel agency of the government. their purpose is to insure and promote the general mandate requiring appointments only according to merit and fitness. The civil service system boils down on the principle of merit and fitness instead of spoils system in the matter of appointment and tenure of office. They eradicate appointment to public office based on political considerations and to eliminate the element of partisanship and personal favouritism in making appointments. The basis of appointment is merit and fitness. To establish merit system in the selection of public officers and employees without regard to sex, color, social status or political affiliation.

They are composed of a chairman and two commissioners, appointed by the president with the consent of the commission on appointments for a term of 7 years without reappointment. (b) coverage civil service law shall embrace all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the government, including government owned or controlled corporations with original charters. Take note government owned or controlled corporations with original charters are those organized pursuant to special laws or original charters enacted by congress. Thus, government owned or controlled corporation without any original charter or those that are created under the general corporation code of the philippines whose shares of stock are owned or controlled by the government or by corporation with original charters fall outside the coverage of civil service laws. (c) system of appointment civil service appointment is as a rule based on merit and fitness system which is to be determined by competitive examination, except: policy determining positions, primarily confidential, or highly technical positions. Policy determinining ( one vested with power of formulating method of action for the govnt or its subdvsn) . Highly confidential ( one where duties are not merely clerical but are especially devolves upon the head of office, this requires skill, judgment, trust and confidence and involves the responsibility of the other which he represents). Highly technical ( it requires skill or training in the highest degree ). Note: entry to these positions does not require competitive examination or civil service eligibility. There are two kinds of positions in the Civil Service Law: Career and Non Career service positions ( elective officials and their personal or confidential staffs; department heads and other officials of cabinet rank who hold positions at the pleasure of the president and their personal or confidential staffs; chairman and members of commissions and boards with fixed terms of office and their personal or confidential staffs; contractual personnel or those employment in the govnt is in accordance with special contract to undertake a specific work or job requiring special and technical skills within a specific period which in no case shall exceed one year under his responsibility with minimum directions and supervisions from the hiring agency; emergency and seasonal personnel; note: political appointees who do not possess such qualifications and whose tenure is coterminous with the appointing authority or subject to his pleasure. Also all other officers and employees in the career and non career service are appointive officials, except elective officials.)

Career Service it has three characteristics ( entrance based on merit and fitness to be determined as far as practicable by competitive examinations or based on highly technical qualifications, opportunity for advancement to higher career positions, and security of tenure ). There are 7 positions under career service, these are as follows: ( open career this position requires prior qualifications in an appropriate examination; closed career this position are scientific or highly technical in nature. These includes academic staff of state colleges and universities or scientific or research institutions which establish their own merit systems; Career Executive Service positions undersecretary, assistant secretary, bureau director, assistant bureau director, regional director, assistant regional director, chief of department service and other officers of equivalent rank as may be identified by the CES board all of whom are appointed by the President. The CES positions where appointment to appropriate classes of rank in the career executive service are appointed by the President from a list of career executive eligibles recommended by the board. Take note that the president may in exceptional cases appoint any person who is not a career executive service eligible, provided that such appointee shall subsequently take the required career executive service examination and that he shall not be promoted to a higher class until he qualifies in such examination. A person appointed to a career position who is not eligible under the exception cannot claim that his appointment is permanent and guaranteed him security of tenure in said position; Career officers, other than in the CES who are appointed by the President ex: Foreign Service Officers in the ministry of foreign affairs; Commissioned officers and enlisted men of the armed forces which shall maintain a separate merit system.

Permanent labourers, whether skilled, semi-skilled, or unskilled. Note: there are 3 levels of position in the career service, first level - clerical, trades, crafts and custodial service positions involving non-professional or sub professional work in a nonsupervisory or supervisory capacity requiring only less than four years of collegiate studies; second level includes professional, technical and scientific positions involving professional, technical or scientific work in a non-supervisory or supervisory capacity requiring at least four years of college work up to division chief level; third level positions in the career executive service. These consists of undersecretary, assistant secretary, bureau director, assistant bureau director, regional director, assistant regional director, chief of department service and other officers of equivalent rank as may be identified by the CES board, all of which are appointed by the President. Note: entrance in the first and second level requires competitive examinations this means he must possess a civil service eligibility ex: must obtained a passing grade in a civil service examination or has been granted a civil service eligibility and whose name is accordingly entered in the register of eligibles. Take note that eligibility is a sine qua non to acquiring a permanent appointment, except those positions which are not required by law to be filled with civil service eligibles. while entrance in the third level shall be prescribed by the CES board and appointed by the president. 10.kinds of appointive officers presidential appointees (appointed by president by constitution or law. Their removal or suspension is a presidential prerogative and thus they may be removed with or without cause) non-presidential appointees ( appointed by the appointing authorities of government in accordance with civil service law. They can only be removed for just cause and after due notice and hearing if they are holding permanent positions, otherwise if they are holding temporary posisitions they can be removed any time without cause). 11. kinds of appointment permanent ( meets all requirements and civil service eligibility ) temporary ( in the absence of appropriate eligibles and it becomes necessary in the public interest to fill a vacancy, a temporary appointment acting capacity shall be issued to a person who meets all requirement for the position except appropriate civil service eligibility, this shall not exceed 12 months but he may sooner be replaced if a qualified civil service eligible becomes available. The guaranty of security of tenure is available only to permanent appointees, not to temporary appointee whose appointment ceases upon expiration of 12 months period; take note also of co-terminous employees whose entrance in the service is characterized by confidentiality by the appointing authority or that which is subject to his pleasure or co-existent with his tenure. A co-terminous status is further classified as co-terminous with the project or coterminous with the appointing authority or coterminous with the incumbent or coterminous with a specific period. ) 12. power of Civil Service Commission gen rule: appointments requires approval of CSCommission and the latters dissapprooves ineligibles. exception rule: presidential appointees, armed forces of the phil, policeforces, firemen, jailguards. Checks only if qualified or not. Gen rule: appointment once made is irrevocable and not subject to reconsideration. Exception rule: if it requires approval of body as provided by law or constitution. Appointment is complete where all requisites to enter and qualify are present and accepted by the appointee and if in case approval of board required then upon approval of such board. 13. permanent appointment all requisites including civil service eligibility. Otherwise he is only temporary. Permanent = security of tenure ( term as fixed by law or constitution which cannot be shortened unless for just cause ) Temporary = tenure ( revocable anytime without any just cause. Usually it does not exceed 1 year in cases of acting capacity. Take note in appointment of co-terminous employees we still need to check the nature of his appointment if it has a period then we respect the period, or if it is co-terminous with appointing authority then we follow it ).

The mere fact of position is career service does not automatically confer security of tenure we still need to check the nature of appointment whether it requires civil service eligibility or other requirement to make him a permanent appointee. An appointee who lacks civil service eligibility is merely temporary and without any definite term and dependent only upon the pleasure or period given to him by the appointing power. The fact that he acquired civil service eligigiblity did not convert the appointment into a permanent one. What is necessary is that there be a new appointment again. You must appoint him a new. 14. hold over concept in absence of any law prohibiting it, the officer is entitled to hold office until his successor is elected or appointed and has qualified. In such case, the effect is that the successors tenure is shortened. 15. temporary acting appointment the power of president to appoint includes the power to make temporary appointment if public necessity requires and to protect the public office in case there is no eligible officer that assumes a vacant office. It is a stop gap measure in case of vacancy in the public office. 16. promotional appointment the appointing authority has a prerogative to choose who is best qualified. 17. reinstatement issuance of a new appointment which is discretionary upon the appointing authority. 18. restriction on appointment nespotism favouritism in the appointment in the public servce in favour of a relative within the third degree either of consanguinity or affinity by the appointing or recommending authority. This is prohibited by the constitution. However, the following are not covered by the prohibition: persons employed in a confidential capacity, teachers, members of armed forces of the philippines, a person after his appointment marries another within the same office, those appointed in government owned or controlled corporations which are organized under the corporation law. 19. void appointments carries no right, except under the doctrine of de facto officer. 20. double appointment not prohibited as long as the positions involved are not incompatible, except that the officer cannot receive additional or double compensation unless specifically authorized by law. 21. primarily confidential positions follow the proximity rule. This rule means that mere confidentiality of position is not enough, it must be of a nature that primary close intimacy which insure freedom of intercourse without embarrassment of freedom from misgivings of betrayals of personal trust or confidential matters of state. It is the loss of confidence that is important and not the reason thereof. Note: the rule does not apply to the legal staff or assistant lawyers in the office of the city or provincial attorney because their positions are remote from that of the appointing authority. Thus, they cannot be removed except for a just cause provided by law. The term of primary confidential positions is based on confidence, thus loss of confidence is tantamount to expiration of a term. However, take note, demotion is not considered as expiration of a term. Hence, if removed by demotion, it is invalid. 22. appointment of next in rank rule it is like promotion however the scenario is different, there is a series of hierarchy of positions the position of the appointee is the next in rank position and it has a right of preferential treatment in case the higher position next to it becomes vacant. Take note this is a prerogative by the appointing authority and therefore, the qualified next in rank appointee cannot have any cause of action because this is the sole prerogative of the appointing authority. 23. Career Executive Service appointment to appropriate classes rank in the career executive service shall be made by the president from a list of career executive eligibles recommended by the board. The basis is rank and their tenure is attached to their rank wherever they may go. It does not attach the position or office. It attaches with his rank and therefore if he is removed from office he cannot protest on the ground that he was terminated from office since his tenure is never violated since it is attached to his rank itself wherever he may go. This concept is only applicable to the career executive office and it is not applicable in first and second level official position where their security of tenure is attached with the position they are currently holding. 24. quo warranto the proceeding to determine by what authority you are holding such office or position or holding such franchise.

Quo warranto in elective position v. Quo warranto in appointive office in the elective office, the issue is disloyalrty or ineligibility of winning candidate, it is a proceeding filed within 10 days to unseat the respondent from office but not to install the petition in his place; while in case in appointinve office, the issue is the legality of appointment and the protestant may be seated in the position if shown that he is entitled to such office. Quo warranto v. Mandamus in the former it tries disputed titles; while the latter enforce clear legal duties. Where the right to an office is doubtful you cannot invoke mandamus you must first have a clear legal right this holds true in quo warranto. These two are concurrent remedies, in quo warranto you oust the person seated; while in mandamus you compel the person who is excluding you to hold your office. Somehow, mandamus is directed to the appointing authority. Date when to file quo warranto must be filed witin 1 year from the the date petitioner is ousted from his position and not from the time the respondent began to discharge the duties of the office. If it lapses, the remedy is only administrative and the court can not anymore intervene except on grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction. Note: where the first remedy availed by the petitioner is administrative remedy, he must not await for the decision of the said body because he can file quo warranto anytime and this is proper since the prescriptive period of quo warranto is not tolled by the filing of administrative complaint. Also, the action for quo warranto can be waived by abandonment of his petition. As a general rule, a judgment against a public officer in regard to a public right binds his successor in office. However, this is not true in case of quo warranto because a judgment in quo warranto does not bind the respondents successor in office, even though such successor may trace his title to the same source. This follows from the nature of the writ of quo warranto itself. it is never directed to an officer as such, but always against the person to determine whether he is constitutionally and legally authorized to perform any act in, or exercise any function of the office to which he lays claim. Example: X ( respondent ) in the quo warranto case, during the pendency of the said case, has been promoted or removed from the disputed position, and another person has been appointed thereto, who was not a party in the case, a judgment in favour of petitioner cannot be executed against the person newly appointed, nor the latter be liable for the award of backwages for what was treshed out was solely against the respondent who, however, has vacated the position. Mendoza v. Allas doctrine!

b. Powers and Duties of PO 384-414 agplo

c. Liabilities of PO 525-597 agplo d. Rights of PO 347-383 agplo

d. ELECTION (A) General Principles (1) General Provisions (use beda reviewer) (2) Jurisdiction of COMELEC (use beda reviewer)

(3) Election Procedure (note: atty. Sandoval lecture and atty.Tipons lecture) STAGES OF ELECTION PROCESS IV. BEFORE ELECTION (2) PARTIES (c) Candidates Political Parties Eligibility of Candidates and Certificate of Candidacy (d) Voters Registration of Voters V. DURING ELECTION (6) Place ( Precincts and Polling Places (7) Officers ( Board of Election Inspectors; Watchers; and Board of Canvassers in the National and Local Level ) (8) Documents/Certificates ( Official Ballots and Election Returns ) (9) Casting of Votes on the Day of Election or Postponement or Failure of Election VI. AFTER ELECTION (3) BEFORE PROCLAMATION/CANVASSING PROCESS Canvassing of Votes in the Precinct/Voting Center by BEI and prepare the Election Returns then they will transfer it to the Municipal/City Board of Canvassers, the latter will canvass the election returns for the local elective position ( Governor,Vice-Governor, Mayor,ViceMayor, Barangay Chairman ) within their respective Municipality or City/Component City and thereafter proclaim the winning candidate within their municipality or city as the case may be then they will prepare the Certificate of Canvass ( each certificate of canvass represents one municipality/component city ) thereafter they will transfer the COC to the Provincial Board of Canvassers for canvassing of the COC. Canvassing of Certificate of Canvass by the Provincial Board of Canvassers

Pre-Proclamation Controversy (4) AFTER PROCLAMATION For Local Officials and Members of Congress: The PBOC will now proclaim the duly elected local public officers as the duly elected winner and also they will include the proclamation of the congressman as a national elective officer with respect to the said province if the latter is a lone district; Election Protest For National Officials ( President and Vice President; Senators ): After the PBOC had proclaimed the local elective officials and the members of congress for each legislative district, they will prepare the National Certificate of Canvass for the Elective position for president and vice president and for the elective position of senators. The national certificate of canvass for the elective position for president and vice president shall be transferred to the Congress as BOC for the national certificate of canvass for the president and vice president position; on the other hand the national certificate of canvass for the seat in the Senate shall be transferred to the COMELEC as BOC. After the respective NBOC had finished the canvassing they will proclaim the national elective officials as duly elected national elective officers. Election Protest

(B) Election of Officers (use tipon book) a.) National Elective Officials b.) Local Elective Officials

BOOK I: THE STATE AND ITS INHERENT POWER THESIS ON POLITICAL LAW 2010-2011
PREPARED BY: TUAZON, DANILO A. NOV. 5, 2011