Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Anticipated Topics for Political Law

Anticipated Topics for Political Law

Ratings: (0)|Views: 126|Likes:
Published by hotjurist

More info:

Published by: hotjurist on Mar 28, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





1.Citizenshipa.Who are citizens of the Philippines.
Natural borne Filipino citizen –
Dual citizenship vs. Dual allegiance; suffrage (
Lewis vs. Comelec 
)- Dual citizens may vote even without one year residency
Repatriation (
Tabasa vs. CA; Willaims vs. Enriquez 
) who are entitled:(1)Filipino woman who lost citizenship by marriage to a foreigner (2)Natural borne Filipinos, including their minor children who lost Filipino citizenship onaccount of political or economic necessity.2.Eminent domain.a)Elements
Adequacy of compensation – deposit is 100% of the market value or BIR Zonal valuation,whichever is higher (RA 8974;
Republic vs. Guingoyon
, Dec. 19, 2005)2)Necessity of the taking
Public use – public character of the taking – beneficiary may not be a private entity(members of the Association not the residents) and there is alternative recreation facility.(
Masikip vs. City of Pasig 
, Jan. 23, 2006)
Valid offer previously made but not accepted (
Jesus is Lord 
, Aug. 2, 2005)
Republic vs. Guingoyon
, Feb. 1, 2006The fact that PIATCO have obligations to other parties which are yet unproven maynot overturn the final decision requiring the Government to pay PIATCO Php3.02 Billionbefore it may acquire physical possession over the facilities. This provisional payment prior totaking possession is not yet final but sufficient under RA 897 to take possession of theexpropriated property.Justice and equity dictates that owners of expropriated property are entitled toreconveyance or repurchase of the expropriated property after the public purpose for theexpropriation is abandoned by the Government even without an express proviso for suchright of reconveyance or repurchase normally stipulated in negotiated sale. (
Moreno vs.Mactan Cebu International Airport 
, Aug. 5, 2005)3.Warrantless search and seizure
Plain view doctrine (
United Laboratories, Inc. vs. Isip
, June 28, 2005)
Customs search when riding a motor vehicle (
Salvador vs. People
, July 15, 2005)4.Privacy of communications and correspondence
Persons under lawful detention have limited privacy rights. Their letters and othecommunications may be opened and read to secure their safety and prevent their escape(
Trillanes vs. Cabuay 
, Aug. 26, 2005)b)Anti-wire tapping law (RA 4200)
Freedom of Expression (
Bayan vs. Ermita
, per Azcuna, April 26, 2006)CPR (Calibrated Pre-emptive Response) policy to disperse rally is unconstitutional.BP 880 and Maximum tolerance upheld.6.Freedom of Religion
Living in without the benefit of lawful marriage by a married woman with a married man andbegetting a child by him while the legal husband is still alive but living with another womanfalls within the freedom of religion because it is sanctioned by her religious organizationJehovah’s Witness. (
Estrada vs. Escritor 
, June 22, 2006).b)Muslim employees in the RTC of Iligan City requested
Notes of 
in foroconscientiae
1)To work from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. without break during Ramadan.2)Be excused from work from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. every Friday to allow them to attendMuslim Prayer Day.Held:The first request is granted, being sanctioned by a presidential decree.The second request is denied. The free exercise clause of the Constitution, theright to religious profession and worship, has two fold aspect (1) freedom to believe; and(2) freedom to act on one’s belief. The first is absolute within the realm of thought. Thesecond is subject to regulation when the belief is translated into external acts that affectthe public welfare. The observance of office hours must apply to all government servants,Muslims or Christians (
Request of Muslim Employees
, Dec. 14, 2005)
Respondent Judge’s practice of reading verses from the Bible during hearings is an exerciseof his freedom of religion (
Trial Lawyer’s of Mla vs. Veneracion
, April 26, 2006)7.
Writ of Habeas Corpus vs. Writ of Amparo
What is the
Writ of Amparo
?It is a Writ for the Protection of Constitutional rights. It is more powerful and more effectivethan the Writ of Habeas Corpus which is limited only to questioning the legality of detention in thecustody of the respondent. Under the Writ of Amparo, search may be ordered by the Court tolocate the whereabout of the subject, even if custody is denied by the respondent.8.E.O. 465 – Executive PrivilegeQuestion hour vs. in aid of legislation (
Senate vs. Ermita
, April 20, 2006)
The charter of the CCP providing that the Board may fill up a vacancy is an unconstitutionaldelegation of the appointing power of the President, which is allowed under the Constitution onlyfor appointment of “officers lower in rank” and not of equal rank of the delegated appointed power (Sec. 16, Art. VII;
Rufino vs. Endriga
, July 21, 2006)
KMU vs. Director General 
, April 19, 2006E.O. 420 – Uniform Government I.D. System
Under Sec. 20, Art. VII of the Constitution, the President may contract and guarantee foreignloans (
Constantino vs. Cuisia
, Oct. 13, 2005)
The power to ratify a treaty is vested in the President, subject to the concurrence of the Senate(Sec. 21, Art. VII). (
Pimentel vs. Executive Secretary 
, July 6, 2005)
Didipio vs. Gozun
, March 30, 2006 reiterating La Bugal for large scale exploration, developmentand utilization of minerals, petroleum and other mineral oils, foreign management and operationsof mining enterprises are allowed. Foreign participation is not limited to technical and financialagreements only.
David vs. Arroyo
, May 3, 2006PD 1017 – Declaration of National Emergency. The president may not take over public utilities intimes of national emergency without an enabling act of Congress.
Lambino vs. Comelec 
, Oct. 25, 2006People’s Initiativea)The people must first see the proposed amendments and must sign the Petitionb)Applicable only to amendment, not to revision.
Notes of 
in foroconscientiae

Activity (12)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Rheneir Mora liked this
pinkangel0405 liked this
Max Arce liked this
iris7curl liked this
blaksquid liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->