You are on page 1of 1

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II

Sections 1B and 1D, Saturday 10AM-1PM

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.


This penalty can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgement
rendered by a competent court.

FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE


A. POLICE POWER
JMM Promotion and Management, Inc. v. CA (260 SCRA 319; August 5,
1996)
Lutz v. Araneta (98 PHIL. 148 [1955])
Asso. of Small Landowners v. Secretary of DAR (175 SCRA 343 [1989])
Lozano v. Martinez (146 SCRA 323 [1986])
Ynot v. Intermediate Appellete Court (148 SCRA 659 [1987])
City Govt of Quezon City v. Ericta (122 SCRA 759 *1983+)
White Light Corporation v. City of Manila (Jan. 20, 2009)
B. POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
City of Manila v. Chinese Community (40 PHIL. 349 [1919])
People v. Fajardo (104 PHIL. 443 [1958])
Republic v. Castelvi (58 SCRA 336 [1974])
Philippine Press Institute, Inc. v. Comelec (244 SCRA 272 [1995])
Sumulong v. Guerrero (154 SCRA 461 [1987])
EPZA v. Dulay (149 SCRA 305 [1987])
Manila Electric Company v. Pineda (206 SCRA 196 [1992])
Municipality of Paraaque v. V.M. Realty Corp. (292 SCRA 678 [July 20,
1998])
National Power Corporation v. Benjamin Ong Co (Feb. 10, 2009)
Mla Memorial Park et. al vs. Sec. of DSWD & DOF GR # 175356 Dec. 03,
2013
C. POWER OF TAXATION
Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works (110 PHIL. 331 [1960])
Punzalan v. Municipal Board of Manila (95 PHIL. 46 [1954])
Lladoc v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (14 SCRA 292 [1965)
Abra Valley College v. Aquino (162 SCRA 106 [1988])
Planters Products, Inc., v. Fertiphil Corporation (March 14, 2008)
Hierarchy of Rights
Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Phil. Blooming Mills
Co., Inc. (50 SCRA 189 [1973])
Due Process of Law
Ichong v. Hernandez (101 PHIL. 1155 [1957])
Phil. Phosphate Fertilizer Corp. v. Torres (231 SCRA 335 [1994])
Javier v. Comelec (144 SCRA 194 [1986])
Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court (148 SCRA 659 [1987])
Alonte v. SAVELLANO (287 SCRA 245 [1998])
Aniag, Jr. v. Comelec (237 SCRA 424 [1994])
Ang Tibay v. CIP (69 PHIL. 635 [1940])
Ateneo de Manila University v. Capulong (222 SCRA 644 [1993])
Read:
(1) Arts. 8, 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national
tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the
constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights
and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
(2) Arts. 6, par. 1-6 death penalty) of the International Covenant of Civil
and Political Rights (ICCPR)
Article 6
1. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be
protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.
2. In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of
death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance
with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime and not
contrary to the provisions of the present Covenant and to the

3. When deprivation of life constitutes the crime of genocide, it is


understood that nothing in this article shall authorize any State Party to
the present Covenant to derogate in any way from any obligation
assumed under the provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
4. Anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or
commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the
sentence of death may be granted in all cases.
5. Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by
persons below eighteen years of age and shall not be carried out on
pregnant women.
6. Nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the
abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present
Covenant.
(3) Arts. ll, sec. 11, 1987 Constitution
Section 11. The State values the dignity of every human person and
guarantees full respect for human rights.
Equal Protection of the Laws
Quinto and Tolentino v. Commission on Elections (GR No. 189698,
December 1, 2009)
Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth Commission (GR Nos. 192935 and 193036,
December 7, 2010)
Villegas v. Hiu Chiong Tsai Pao Ho (86 SCRA 270 [1978])
Dumlao v. Comelec (96 SCRA 392 [1980])
Philippine Association of Servive Exporters v. Drilon (163 SCRA 386 [1988])
Hinagan v. People (237 SCRA 538 [1994])
Ormoc Sugar Co., Inc. v. Treas. Of Ormoc City (22 SCRA 603 [1968])
League Of Cities Of Thr Philippines v. Commission On
Elections;Municipality Of Baybay, Etc. (November 18, 2008)
Manila Memorial Park Inc. et al vs. Sec. of DSWD & Sec of FINANCE G.R.
No. 175356 (Senior Citizens Law)
Read:
(1) Arts. 6 & 7 of the UDHR
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the
law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination
to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection
against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any
incitement to such discrimination.
(2) Art. 26 of the ICCPR
Article 26
All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any
discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law
shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and
effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race,
colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or
social origin, property, birth or other status.