JUN.

22, 2013

SOCIAL CONTRACT agreement of the people.

-

HOW TO READ THE AGREEMENT

-

Supreme Court announces how we interpret the constitution.

RULES: verba legis, intent of the people as makers (as a whole),
as a whole.

CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION power and delegation of power.

-

People having the power, agreeing for the common good, to

establish a system of governance common good.
Concentration of power can lead to abuse. Counterbalance
check (rights)

Questions the GRANT of power.

People State through a government executive,
legislative, judiciary (for the purposes of efficiency and
counterchecks).
Conflict sources 1) WON it has been given to the government
(decision should come to the PEOPLE) 2) There be questions as
to which branch certain kinds of power rest.
WON such power has been delegated by the people. If yes, to
which branch?
FRAMEWORK: Judicial review.
o
What does the Supreme Court do? What was their
framework in resolving the particular issue?
o
JUDICIAL REVIEW usurpation? NO.
ANGARA VS. ELECTORAL COMMISSION Provision was not
there in the 1935 Constitution. Justice Laurel: Will it make a
difference? NO. The courts will still exercise the power due to
possibility of the arising of conflicts; it is their DUTY. Judiciary is
the CONSTITUTIONALITY ORGAN.
BECAUSE by looking at the framework of the Constitution (social
contract) decided by the people, and not by those who wrote it
DELEGATION and DISTRIBUTION outcome: separation of
powers (even if we do enumeration of powers, there will still be
conflicts).
The whole of the government for the service of the common
good. But pursuance of the common good ay require for a lot of
actions. Laurel: in moments of crisis, in great need.
o
We want a government that can act immediately.
Because of that expectancy, departments are HARDPRESSED to the point that in trying to address a
particular crisis, there is a tendency to go overboard.
Government is REACTIVE (because of the expectation of
the people demand action).
o
ISSUE: LOSS OF CONFIDENCE IN THE COURT
misuse of judiciary funds.
o
Impeachment is a political process. Anyone can be
impeached, even if you are the Chief Justice.
FRANCISCO VS. HOR: it is not within their jurisdiction.
o
Congress is challenging the issue.
o
Executive execute; Legislative enact; Judiciary to
adjudicate or resolve disputes.
o
Look at the acts Judiciary needs to resolve actual
cases (can result from within the constitution; interpreting
the boundaries) It is not reserved to the legislature
(political question) and it is still bound to be reviewed.
o
It is not a political question because resolution of the
question involves determining WON the requirements in
the Constitution have been complied with IT IS NOT
purely within the discretion of Congress, so it is subject
review.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

JUDICIAL SUPREMACY: there is no usurpation they

just wanted to solve the controversy, which is within the
power of the JUDICIARY.
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION: what the term
initiate means.
When we LITIGATE in a constitutional case, we are
exercising the power of JUDICIAL REVIEW by using the
Constitution as a standard.

SUMMARY: In the Constitution, we have agreed to delegate to the state

power government in the Constitution, the power was
DISTRIBUTED While there may be separation of powers, conflicts
may arise overlaps may arise in resolving the conflict, they
determine whether they are kept within their boundaries set by the
Constitution.
-

You will see the intention of people for keeping each branch in
such boundaries.
What is it people want? PREAMBLE, declaration of Principle and
State Policies.

PREAMBLE: states the purpose of the Constitution; statement of

purpose.
-

Describes the ideal society and the values that should be

promoted, as well as the structural requirements.
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT: the preamble serves as a guide for the
judicial branch to ascertaining the meaning of ambiguous
provisions.
Where can we see the intent of the framers: PREAMBLE.

DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLE AND STATE POLICIES

-

These are not immediately executory. It is only in the most

exceptional cases (Oposa vs. Factoran giving their standing
ONLY, not a REMEDY) that the declaration can be a basis of a
demand.
OBJECTIVE: serves a guide to the departments (legislature
legislative agenda; executive administrative policy; SC on
how it is going to read the constitution) of the government.

NOTE: my recitation on Vinuya vs. Romulo and PHAP vs. Duque.

HOW WE SITUATE THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES.
-

Section 2: adopts the generally accepted

international law as part of the law of the land.

principles

of

NATIONAL TERRITORY our Court can only exercise its power within
its territory:
A.

Philippine archipelago land, air, waters in between, baselines.

Philippine archipelago
a) Land
b) Air
c) Baselines we are an archipelago. The waters in
between our islands are international waters.
o
Straight baseline method (archipelagic
principle [UNCLOS]) not following the
curvature of the land.
1. Rectangular in nature.
2. International Tribunal on the Law
of the Sea in case of disputes
(overlaps).
d) Internal waters

Page 1 | Bantay

B.

C.

Historic Title treaties (Treaty of Par

Washington).
Batanes and some islands in the south are not included.
Where Philippines exercise its administrative jurisdiction under
the municipal law.

STATE IMMUNITY
-

INTERNATIONAL LAW: The state cannot be sued in another

sovereign.
o
Diplomatic officials
o
NO PROSECUTION
DOMESTIC LAW: immunity of the republic (the people who are
sovereign) and the immunity of the President (as a matter of
convenience; who prosecutes? The executive. We cannot tie his
hands).
It can only be sued if it WAVES ITS IMMUNITY FROM SUIT.
o
It can be sued to ask to pay for just compensation when
IT ENTERS A CONTRACT.
o
You can sue the secretaries, but not the President.
o
You cannot sue the Congress (people), but you can sue
the agencies.
o
Presidents can be sued AFTER his term, unless they are
still prescribed (based on the nature of the crime, periods
are given).

SC said it depends to the President.

AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION

Marriage inviolable special contract.
Constitution can be amended.
How can we go about the business of making changes in our
constitution?
-

JUN. 29, 2013

REVIEW:
-

VISION provided for in the PREAMBLE and the POLICY GUIDE

(declaration of principles and State policies) for construing the
meaning of the provisions of the Constitution.
Intent of the framers (not just the members of the ConCon but
also the framers being the people).
Aspirations are very significant in using it to construe. NATONAL
TERRITORY: The Constitution is the contract of the people we
need a territory.
o
Archipelagic doctrine (straight baselines), historical title
(occupation), uncontested exercise of jurisdiction.
STATE IMMUNITY:
o
International law based on the equality of states. States
are sovereign within their reigns. But because of
reciprocity, that sovereignty is acknowledged by other
states (principle of reciprocity).
o
Municipal and domestic law the state is immune from
suit. The state cannot be sued without its consent but if
the state has waived its immunity through expressed or
implied waiver provided for by the law (expressed);
when the republic exercise its propriety prerogative and
enters into contracts (implied). Example: Under the
procurement law: contract of sale the republic
represented by the agency or the head of the agency may
be sued.
Art VIII, Sec. 1: the SC can determine if there has
been a lack of jurisdiction; excess of discretion.
President as head of state and government is
immune from suit while his in office. The immunity
can only be lost after the term. The executive
branch is only made up of one person: President
whole executive branch will be paralyzed.
If it is a direct action against the president, we
have to wait for term or tenure to be over.
There is no prohibition of the President from
instituting of an action, if he so wishes. Example:
libel suit against Luis Beltran (Philippine Star).

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

Why the need to differentiate them? We want changes in the

agreement, the question is what kind of changes? THE
PROCEDURE. The courts can see WON we can comply with the
procedures of the amendment.
o
PUNO said they should mean the same thing. When you
say amendment, it will cover ALL kinds of changes.
o
AMENDMENT NON-STRUCTURAL.
i.
By the Congress (added action) acting as a
Constituent assembly to PROPOSE amendments:
by the vote of
People should ratify it after.
ii.
Constitutional Convention NOT the Congress. It
will be conflict of interest.
Creates a new office.
Elections for MEMBERS or DELEGATES.
iii.
Peoples Initiative by a petition signed by at
least 12% of all the registered voters and at least
3% of EACH legislative district.
All needs ratification by the people.
Not a springboard for structural changes
BECAUSE IN PEOPLES INITIATIVE, A
FULL TEXT SHOULD BE ATTACHED.
THE AMENDMENT SHOULD ONLY
CONTAIN ONE SUBJECT.
It does not include a DEBATE. They just
sign and sign. It is its inherent limitation,
not because we are depriving the people
because they can still act through their
chosen representatives who will debate for
YEARS.
Only fit in AMENDING just A FEW
provisions that are limited in scope.
More fit for LOCAL LEGISLATION and
laws of local application. Example:
changes of the charter of the City of
Baguio filed in Congress and approved by
the Senate and vetoed by the President.
o
REVISION most radical form of amendment.
STRUCTURAL CHANGE: distribution of powers.
Revisions have to be filtered and tested through
structured debates and does not require rigid
consultations systems.
1. Con Ass;
2. Con Con.
NOTE: NO PEOPLES INITIATIVE.

LAMBINO VS. COMELEC - REVISION

-

Qualitative Test The whole system of government will be

changed.
Quantitative Test 105 revisions will be affected.
What is required for a valid peoples initiative? A PROPOSAL
Page 2 | Bantay

AND HERE, THERE IS NONE.

Clearly specified. All the changes in the 105 sections should be
INCLUDED. Unless, it will be a form of GRAND DECEIT.
Court: The proposal must be very, very clear, unless it is NOT
VALID. It must expressly state how the change will be made,
provision by provision.
It cannot be just a number of signatories attached after the
proposal.

MAY THE ISSUE OF AMENDMENT BE THE SUBJECT OF JUDICIAL

REVIEW? YES.
-

Substance: NO. It is political, BUT

Can the Courts take cognizance of the amendments? Why? If it
has to do with PROCEDURE, they CAN. When the procedure is
provided for in the Constitution, as the branch of the government
that is called to see if there is a violation in the Constitution, the
SC has jurisdiction. It is their DUTY to tell if there is a violation
and or compliance of the procedures in the Constitution. The
constitution includes the LIMITATION on the power of the people.
o
Because it is a process that leads to the people making a
decision, it becomes political in that sense. But since the
Constitution provides procedures, it sets limitations.
o
The people can CHANGE THE PROCEDURE OF THE
AMENDMENT but it needs to undergo a process.
STEPS:
o
PROPOSAL

SANTIAGO VS. COMELEC

-

Is there a law providing for the amendment of the Constitution

through peoples initiative? NONE. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6735 is
INSUFFICIENT because there was nothing provided for. Only for
national and local amendment of laws.
The COMELEC filled in the GAP through Resolution no. 2300
IT IS AN ASURPATIONOF THE CONGRESSS POWER and
violate the separation of powers.

DEMETRIA VS. ALBA

-

SUBMISSION

TOLENTINO VS. COMELEC:

-

A proposal of reducing the voting age ahead of the ratification of

the proposal to the amendments of the Constitution.
DOCTRINE OF PROPER SUBMISSION submission of
piecemeal amendments is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
All the amendments must be submitted for ratification at ONE
PLEBICITE (general election) ONLY verba legis.
WHY? For the people to know they will vote ON. They would
have to be given a proper time frame of reference in arriving at
their decision.
IT MUST FIRST BE COMPLETE. It should be everything or
nothing.

PD: gave authority to the president to transfer funds from one

agency to another.
Issue: WON the president can do that? NO. This a power of
appropriation, which is for the Legislature and the Court has the
jurisdiction to review the validity of the PD.
o
Not in the 1935 Constitution, but in the 1987 Constitution.

ANGARA VS. ELECTORAL COMMISSION

-

Grant AND distribution of delegated power.

Laureta and Maravilla: ISSUE:
o
ISSUE: WON his decisions can even be subjected to an
indirect review by any other agencies.
o
Atty. Laureta counselled his client to file the case against
the
Supreme
Court
in
the
TANODBAYAN
(Sandiganbayan) for rendering an unjust decision.
o
The case is final. Even if its not, can it be subject to
review? NO because will result in the violation of the
Constitution. You can review on the basis of abuse of
discretion, but only through IMPEACHMENT (Legislative).
o
The constitution does not say EXACTLY that the decision
cannot be reviewed by anybody When the Constitution
divided the power, it meant EXPLICIT DIVISION. By the
very distribution of powers, it gave rise to:
A decision of the SC cannot be reviewed by any
other branch.
o
ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION: boundaries delineate the
POWER of each of the branches.
o
Components of the distribution:
Separation of the power
Inherent checks and balance an internal
mechanism to check that the branches are kept
only within each boundaries.

Angara, Sr. ran as an assembly man, his opponent filed a

protest.
Moot and academic the filing of the dates?
ELECTORAL COMMISSION members of the National
Assembly and pre-empts the National Commission.
ISSUE 1: Whose jurisdiction are we talking about? Supreme
Courts. WON the Court can take cognizance of the case. YES.

NOTE: This case gave the constitutional justification of judicial review.

LAUREL: The SC has jurisdiction over the ELECOM: separation of
powers granted by Constitution (through separate articles for each
branch) but check and balances maintain coordination among the
branches. When there are conflicts between the boundaries of powers
and functions of each branch, the Judiciary has the power to review and
resolve these conflicts through Judicial Review (referred to as Judicial
Supremacy). This however is limited to actual cases and controversies.

o
o

RATIFICATION

JUDICIAL REVIEW
-

CONTEXT and FOUNDATION of system of government provided

for our Constitution (by the people) where we have the
government, which is divided in 3 branches with 3 separate
powers.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

CONCEPCION (1987 CONSTITUTION) POWER to

DUTY.
EXPLANATION:
1) Delegation of power.
2) Separation of powers no branch of government
should be more powerful than other.
3) Check and balance: balance of power.
4) TO CHECK THE OTHER BRANCHES.

JUL. 06, 2013

Page 3 | Bantay

THE HEART OF CONSTITUTIONAL LITIGATION: JUDICIAL REVIEW

-

Basis: the fact that there was separation of powers implied one
branch to determine if some other department have kept within
their boundaries.
The constitution provided for the boundaries among the three
branches.
Possibility of allegations of a branch going beyond its boundaries
in responding to certain situations which will invariably affect
RIGHTS of individuals.
1. CONTEXT/ACTUAL CASE: Its not because there was an
ACTION, someone has to suffer an INJURY first so that
the person can bring the matters to the Court (actual case
of controversy that involves right and some right must be
prejudiced: allegation of excess or lack of jurisdiction).
o
There must be someone who has a right that has
been violated.
o
The judicial branch is the ONLY branch that can
naturally determine WON a right has been
violated.
2. JUDICIAL STANDING
3. ACTS OF GOVERNMENTS ARE PRESUMED
CONSTITUTIONAL: the constitutionality will only be
looked into if there are no other ways to resolve it (lis
mota).
4. MUST BE RAISED IN THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY:
estoppel because of inaction.
o
POLITICAL QUESTION: we, the sovereign
Filipino people: it is the matter of policy because
the people have to decide for it over and above
the government.
1. People can the only ones who can decide:
AMENDMENT (SUBSTANCE).
2. Duty of the Court is to determine if the
processes had been complied for and the
provision needs to be followed religiously.
o
LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE DUTIES:
Cannot be interfered by Courts.
o
WON the issue is justiciable or the issue is not
because it is a political question.

based on ECONOMIC POLICIES vis--vis the natural resources.

If there is a clear violation then basically, this is about
ECONOMIC POLICY (best left in the economic and trade
manager of the country [President] and not on the judges).
PANGANIBAN: This will all go down to the level of policy and the
courts are not equipped. Any resort to the courts will only resort
to circus. NO STABILITY because of the composition of the
Supreme Court.
You cannot determine [economic] POLICY through judicial
means. Actually, the judiciary has the most limited power (only on
actual controversies or if there is a grave excess or lack of
jurisdiction; MOST RESTRICTIVE).
o
The only law it can make are laws of procedure/courts,
and judicial decisions (Civil Code).
o
JUSTICIABLE because there is an actual case and
controversy. But even if there is a controversy, if it
political, it is outside of the purview of the judiciary.
o
NO MORE POLITICAL QUESTIONS because of the
provisions about grave abuses of discretions? Of course
not.

POLITICAL QUESTIONS - THOSE FOR THE PEOPLE LEFT TO

DECIDE, PREROGATIVE OF THE TWO OTHER BRANCHES, THOSE
WHICH THE COURTS ARE NOT EVEN COMPETENT TO DECIDE
(there are other more competent agencies).

REQUISITES (technical guidelines for convenience/filtering process that

was adopted by the Court in order to prevent it being flooded with cases,
which in its made, it should not even deciding):
A.

Actual case or controversy.

o
Premature or moot (temporal: only during a certain time
there is actually a case. BEFORE: premature; AFTER:
MOOT).
o
When there is an actual injury based on the violation
of a right; involving a (1) legally demandable right that is
(2) violated.

PACU VS. Secretary of Education:

-

No permit given to the school has been revoked.

Only an anticipation there is no right violated YET, thus no
issue.

MIRANDA VS. AGUIRRE (Executive Secretary)

-

ISSUE: WON it is a political question. JUSTICIABLE because it is

not as regards to the choice but to the PROCEDURE.
Who should participate in the plebiscite? Provided for by law.
If what were talking about WON they agree, THATS POLITICAL.
But if the issue is WON the procedure provided for in the
Constitution and Local Government Code followed.

VINUYA VS. ROMULO

-

Exclusive powers of the President. The right has not yet

blossomed to customary law.
Why are foreign relations POLITICAL IN NATURE?

MARIANO VS. COMMISSION:

-

Binay might run again. There is no case or controversy yet.

MONTECARLOS VS. COMELEC:

-

Proposed bill only. There is no right conferred in a bill.

It is only when it becomes a law.

o
LA-BUGAL VS. RAMOS
-

Mining Act has a provision about a policy allowing foreign-owned

companies (service contracts). FTAAs are not allowed in the
constitution.
POLITICAL QUESTION: It is not so much about the law, it is

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

EXCEPTION: if the issue is capable of repetition.

Logic behind it even though there is no actual
case or controversy: to be able to act proactively
by using technical rules of procedures.
There is a loophole: its a scheme to use the rules
of courts as shields.

Page 4 | Bantay

ATLAS VS. DAR:

Court does not want to embarrass Congress so they waited for a
while before taking action.
o
It was a mistake; they were not reading the laws they are
passing. The INTENTION is to exclude fishponds and
prawn farms. It is only after it passed that they realized
they made a mistake.
o
It gave them time to AMEND it to correct the mistake. So
it has become moot and academic.

Petitioners: employees of private concessionaires.

o
Concessionaires may do other business, but the
employees will be laid off and they will have no other
work to do.
o
They will feel more the economic lost.

CHREA VS. CHR WITH STANDING

Employees are challenging the use of the savings to upgrade the
salaries of LAWYERS because the Commission is having a
difficult time of finding good lawyers in investigating human
rights violations.
UNFAIR because there will be an increase for some workers but,
not the members of the UNION.
Discrimination against the union. Those who are technical and
highly confidential will get increases.
WON the union is a corporate entity. NO. Because they are not
registered as a mechanism to give standing. With that, the
court said they filed, not as a union, but as INDIVIDUAL
EMPLOYEES. BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE WILL BE DIRECT
INDIVIDUAL INJURY.
o
Court RULED AGAINST, due to distortion of salaries
(Salary Standardization Law). That is why it FOUND a
way to give the union members standing.

LACSON VS. PEREZ:

Proclamation of state of rebellion.
SC: Case is dismissed because the state of rebellion has already
been lifted. Hence, there is no more necessity to decide
MOOT AND ACADEMIC.
Exception: (Gutierrez) To the mind of the Court, there is still an
actual controversy. THE EXERCISE OF EXECUTIVE POWER
BY USING THE TECHINICAL PROCEDURES OF COURT AS A
SHIELD.
A. Capable of repetition but evading review. justifies the
Courts intervention, even if it will no longer qualify on the
rules set by the Court. The Court can easily go around
that, because they made it.
B. The doctrines of the SC cannot be repealed and
amended. Only by the Supreme Court en banc.

AUTOMOTIVE VS. ROMULO NO STANDING

EO that put the NLRC (adjudicatory) under the Executive Branch
(Department of Labor).
NLRC got a union to file the case against the government.
The union do not have standing BECAUSE EO will prejudice their
rights and interests. The union is under the Department of Labor.
The union will not suffer an injury under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Labor.

PIMENTEL VS. ERMITA:

There is still a need to resolve the issue.
Mooted because the appointments were already submitted to the
Commissions on Appointments.
But when Congress adjourns, there will be appointments issued.
SUBSTANTIVE THINGS: acting appointees a new kind of
appointees.
You file a case (1) in the guise of questioning something, but you
want the court to legitimize what you have done.
Sometimes, respondents had more to gain when a case is filed
against them.

C.
D.

Earliest opportunity
Lis mota

JUL. 20, 2014

B.

Standing
o
He/she has a right that has been violated and it
resulted to a direct injury to you.
o
The first thing you need to establish is to DEFINE what
kind of standing you have.
o
It is easier to say that you are the proper party if you
sustained direct injury (example: when you are
arrested without a warrant).
o
DIRECT INJURY:

JOYA VS. PCGG NO STANDING

-

The only way he can gain standing if the property is part of the
public domain or the national patrimony.
IF the paintings in question are made by a FILIPINO painter,
even if it was presumed to be a private estate, it will still be of
something of transcendental importance.

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW:

a.
b.

Actual case or controversy.

Standing a petitioner will have standing when there is an
allegation of a violation of his right that gives rise to an actual
case.
o
Certain people can file.
o
Classes of persons who can: How can they file a case IN
REPRESENTATION of others?
o
CITIZEN STANDING
When may a citizen file a petition as a citizen?
PUBLIC RIGHT: belong to all of citizens. Right of
everyone injures everyone.
Example: right to information, suffrage
INDIVIDUAL RIGHT: right to remain silent,
counsel, due process. Equal protection.
DUE PROCESS: you have to wait to be
injured before you can file. Example: due
process: you have to wait to be penalized
first, before you can file.

AGAN VS. PIATCO WITH STANDING

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

Page 5 | Bantay

o
TANADA VS. TUVERA
-

WON they have standing because they did not show any injury
(the PDs are not published, so they do not know).
By the very nature of the right, it is the duty of the government to
publish the issuances of general character. Otherwise, there is no
basis for their enforceability.
Art. 3 of CC: Ignorance of the law excuses no one.
It is only when there is publication that people can be held
accountable for the compliance of the provisions of the law. If it is
not published, people will not know violative of due process.
When someone files a case to compel publication, to compel
Executive branch to do its duties BASICALLY to comply with
the constitution.

o
o
o

Why does ITF have standing? YES. Filed by is individual

members of the ITF, and they are tax payers, with or
without tax payers.
Individual members enjoin the individual members of the
foundation, and they can qualify as tax payers.
Do they need to attach their ITR? NO, because ALL
PEOPLE ARE TAX PAYER and indirect tax payers
Consumers tax, VAT.
COMELEC should have DECLARED FAILURE OF
BIDDING and advertise for a new one again.

VOTERS STANDING

TOLENTINO VS. COMELEC

CHAVES VS. PEA
-

He has standing because of: 1) Right of citizens to information on

matters of public concern, 2) Equitable distribution of alieanable
lands of the public domain among Filipino citizens.
AS LONG AS ITS PUBLIC DOMAIN, which is owned by all of the
people in common. Its the citizens.
We have the right to be informed on the negotiations.
What if you went to the GSIS to demand information on loans
given by GSIS to high government officials because you want to
find out if the GSIS has been giving favourable treatment to high
government officials to the detriment of ordinary employees?
YES.
o
May the GSIS be compelled to give you that information?
YES.
o
Do you have the right to demand that information? YES.
o
RIGHT OF A CITIZEN TO INFORMATION ON
MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST INCLUDING FUNDS
HELD BY GOVERNMENT.
o
If he questions it under a member of GSIS, he will be a
proper party because he is part owner.

Alleged unlawful disbursement of funds: they granted the project

to the supplier who is not qualified.
o
Failed technical evaluation.
This is clearly illegal because the contract was awarded to the
company THAT DID NOT participate in the bidding.
o
The one who participated in the bidding did not have the
technical and financial capabilities
created a
consortium so they can provide the service.
o
It is illegal to award to a company that is different from the
ones who bid. That consortium needs to be repackaged.
Sadly, COMELEC has paid already when the Court decided on
this. In fact the supplier was trying to collect the balance because
it has delivered the hardware and software, which cannot even
be used.
o
Who are accountable: officials of the COMELEC.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

Former Senator Tolentino (Civil Law book) as one of the

petitioners.
People only voted for 12 and 13 were proclaimed.
When they sued as voters, they were suing for ALL of the voters.
The voters were not even given the chance for senator number
13. They did not even know they were voting for 13.
Petition is DISMISSED.
o
Doctrine applied: Constructive notice (legal fiction)
they should have known that they are voting for the 13th
senator with a 3-year term.
o
Law: in case there is a resolution, COMELEC should hold
an election for the election of candidates to fill in the
vacancies. What was missing was THE CALL.
o
Once there is vacancy, automatically, COMELEC is
supposed to hold an election. Even if they did not tell us,
the mechanism to address the law should have been
known to us.
o
No sense to nullify this to hold an election for a candidate
who will just stay for 3 years.
The proclamations are valid. There will not be much of a
difference if it is invalidated.

TAXPAYERS STANDING
When can they file a suit? Improper of illegal
disbursement of funds.
To find out whether a tax payer can file a suit,
there should be proof of illegal disbursement of
tax because they are being made to pay for
something that is illegal (example: illegal
contract).
There is no escape from taxation and anyone can
file as long as there is an allegation of unlawful
disbursement of public funds.

ITF VS. COMELEC

-

ASSOCIATIONAL STANDING
Association: an agroupation of individuals with
similar interests.
When can they file for or in behalf of they own
members? When members equally shared a right,
and because of a violation of it, they shared an
injury.
We are talking about the rights of the members.
The right and the injury are equally shared by the
members.
THEY
ARE
REPRESENTING
THE
ASSOCIATION.

KMU VS. GARCIA

-

Represents persons riding busses, trains.

LTFRB abdicated its functions and gave it to the bus companies.
The regulated becomes the regulator.
Why can KMU file the case? What is involved is a violation of a
common right and injury of its members.
The very charter of KMU mandates that the organization should
represent the interest of its members.

EXEC SEC VS. CA

-

Does ARCO-Phil have standing? It depends on the interest it is

Page 6 | Bantay

representing.
If it is representing the rights of the recruitment company
members from operating, IT HAS STANDING.
IT HAS NO STANDING because the injuries that are going to be
suffered by unskilled workers will not be suffered by its members.

IBP VS. ZAMORA

-

Marines were instructed by the President to patrol the shopping

malls. President eventually withdrew the order and the malls had
to hire their own security.
IBP filed a case and wanted to protect the rule of law. NO
STANDING. There was no allegation of a violation of any of its
members. They did not show any right, violation, injury to its
members. No one will stop them from going to the malls?
BUT because of its transcendental importance (real threat).

PEOPLE VS. VERA: Assailing the constitutionality and validity of the

PROBATION LAW.
-

Why? Because it constitutes undue delegation. That the law will

be effective in a province once there is an appointment of a
probation officer. The assembly delegated to the province WON
the law will be effective. Result: some provinces will have it,
some will NOT.
Granted that it might constitute undue delegation of power, why
should the government question its own law? Its the primary
duty of the government to abide by and protect the
Constitution. It is trying to uphold the constitution because it will
violate the separation of powers. National assembly delegated
power to local government violation.
Government cannot allow the violation of the Constitution.

KILOSBAYAN VS. GUINGONA

-

Standing? Not really.

Kilosbayan NGO but the contract s between the government
and a private entity.
o
The nature if a procedural requirement: the Court has
wide discretion when to apply it.
o
EXCEPTION: TRANSCENDENTAL IMPORTANCE:
WILL RESULT TO FOREIGN CONTROL OF THE
LOTTO / GAMBLING repercussions on morality,
economy.
o
The Court is worried on who will benefit from the
operation of the online lottery everything will be under
control of the company.
Lotto is the biggest source of revenue.
The court sees something to be tried in the case, so even if the
petitioner has no legal standing, they asserted the issue is of
transcendental importance.

LEGISLATIVE STANDING
When challenging a law is within petitioners
power.

FACIAL CHALLENGE when the validity of the statute

is challenged on its face (mere textual reading will clearly
show the invalidity of the act; void on its face).
A party can question the validity of a statute only
if, as applied to him, it is unconstitutional.
The only time a facial challenge to a statute is
allowed is when it operates in the area of freedom
of expression.
Only on two grounds:
Vagueness when even men of common
intelligence will not be able to understand;
when it is so incomprehensible that men of
common intellect cannot make sense of it.
Provisions are so contradictory to each
other VIOLATIVE OF DUE PROCESS.
When you use terms that are
incapable of comprehension.
In what cases:
Over-breadth when it so broad that it
impinges on constitutionally protected
rights.
Unconstitutional because they
violate the constitution itself (Art
III).
In
what
cases:
speech,
expression,
religion
(1st
amendment rights).

OPLE VS. TORRES

-

AO is a LAW. The substance is legislation and this should have

issued by Congress so he, as a member of Congress, should
have been one of those who participated in the deliberation.
The President has usurped his and other Congressmen and
Senators power to pass something like this.
o
This is a LIMITATION OF RIGHT OF PRIVACY.
o
He only body who can provide such limitation is only
Congress.
o
There is something that needs to be deliberated b the
representative of the people themselves, not just of one
person (President).
If the issuance is just an order for heads of agencies, t will not
violate Oples rights because it is ADMINISTRATIVE. BUT if you
require everyone to accomplish a bio data, that is a limitation of
their constitutional right.
For the purposes of affiliation, they can get information and they
can because of the safeguards.

GOVERNMENTAL STANDING

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

ESTRADA VS. SANDIGANBAYAN

-

c.
d.

RA 7080: An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime

CONSTITUTIONAL.
You cannot apply facial to penal laws penal laws have in
terorem effect that they are so severe, they will scare you in
committing them (chilling effect). The harshness is required to
scare you from committing them.
o
Penal laws are necessarily severe (fear of punishment,
fear of speed of process).
There is no vagueness at all. It is clear that he must have done 2
of the acts, otherwise there will be no combination (more than
one). If you commit one, it will fall in the RPC.

Earliest opportunity
Necessity

AUG. 03. 2013

Page 7 | Bantay

MIDTERMS (10 pts essay type questions [60%] and MCQ [4 choices:
40%; 5 pts each TOTAL of 8; stock knowledge of BASIC principle of the
provisions we are discussing]).
To be answered in well-written paragraphs.
LEGAL STANDING: one of the 4 technical requirements.
-

One is in representation of himself and others who share the

same right/interest/ensure proper appropriation and expenditure
of public funds and property/all voters whose right to suffrage has
been violated/legislator to protect his prerogative to
legislate/government/facial challenge.
FACIAL CHALLENGE: ANYONE can challenge because the law
is void on its face.
o
VAGUE: violative of the due process.
o
BROAD: impinges on right (speech/expression).
o
Not applicable in PENAL legislation because they have
interorem effect (chilling effect).
1. Its supposed to provide HIGH penalty.
2. DISSENT: PUNO: previously limited to violation of
rights, and does not exclude the application of
rule of facial where a penal law had been under
scrutiny.
3. LIMIT the application to cases which are covered
by the BILL OF RIGHTS on the preferred rights
(speech, expression, religion).
4. Raised by JUSTIC LEONEN: RP RH Arguments.
5. PETITIONERS:
WHOLE
LAW
IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, not specific provisions.

LIS MOTA: that the only way to resolve the case IS TO SOLVE THE
CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE.
-

EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY: WHEN do you raise the issue of

constitutionality?
-

Can you raise constitutionality in MTC? May MTC declare a law

unconstitutional? NO.
What is earliest opportunity? If you file the case directly in the
SC.
What is the lowest level will the court be able to decide the
constitutionality of the law? RTC/CFI.
Where do you bring the appeal? To the SC directly.
o
Not to CA because they only look at the facts.
When a law is declared unconstitutional by RTC, is it the end of
it? NO. It will be brought to the SC.
Do you have to file it directly to the SC? NO.
DIRECTLY: only when transcendentally important.
But if you are challenging the constitutionality of City of municipal
ordinance, where should you go? RTC because the law is of
local application.

OMBUDSMAN HAS JURISDICTION TO TRY

THE CASE.
o
Is there a constitutional issue because the President has
created a body at arrogate the function of Ombudsman.
Was it raised in the earliest consideration? NO. Since he filed
first in the RTC, it should have been raised on his first
pleading and his petition for prohibition with prayer for TRO.
In this case, he raised the issue only after there is ALREADY a
judgment against him so he came up with a new theory in his
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
When it is a CONSTITUTIONAL issue, it must be raised in the
EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY, so the Courts will know.
o
If clearly, the commission is unconstitutional, they dont
even have to go to the MERITS/FACTS of the case
because the output is already NULL AND VOID.
o
If AT A LATER TIME: you wasted the time of the Court.
o
JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE: has to be RESOLVED FIRST.
If it turns out there is no jurisdiction, THERE IS NO BASIS
TO PROCEED.
Court says: We cannot solve it anymore. You should have raised
it in the EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY.
HOWEVER, even if we resolve it, it is now MOOT AND
ACADEMIC.

Only when it is absolutely required that the constitutional issue be

resolve, that the COURT will resolve.
Without resolving the constitutionality, the case will NOT be
resolved.
Policy of AVOIDANCE: resolving the constitutional issue because
it involve sand act of other branched to be NULLIFIED.
There is NO OTHER CHOICE but to decide on the constitutional
issue.
If there is NO OTHER WAY, the courts will decide because it is
THEIR DUTY.

ACRCETA VS. MANGROBANG

-

Was the constitutionality the very lis mota because it is no longer

the lis mota of this case? Because the Court has already
decided in Lozada vs. Martinez.
Can they raise it again? No. It can no longer be raised AGAIN.
Even the supposed constitutional issue is no longer an issue. IT
has already been resolved by the Court.
Is it the very lis mota? No.
Does Court have to reiterate the ruling? No because it is
already PART OF THE LAW OF THE LAND. Otherwise, it will
give rise to instability because same issues will be raised.
Stability of Court requires that when the Court rules the
constitutionality of the case, thats already it.

UMALI VS. GUINGONA

-

What was being challenged? Unconstitutionality of the PCAGC.

It was the commission that investigated him. What is PETs
theory? HE cannot be dismissed by the investigation of that
commission because that omission is unconstitutional.
Why does the commission offend the constitution?
LEVELS OF PETS ARGUMENTS:
o
Hes arguing against jurisdiction (creation of that
commission was a violation of that commission).
ISSUE: WON he can even be investigated by the
body? If not, then the results are null and void.
PET that body is a violation of the Constitution
and the output must not be the basis of the
President to remove PET from office.
IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE UNDER
THE
CONSTITUION,
THE OFFICE
OF

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

MAYBE: FOR MIDTERMS, WE COULD INCLUDE WRITING THE

FIRST PART OF A PETITION (to establish the requirements of judicial
review).
AFTER REQUIREMENTS, SUBSTANCE IS NEXT: WON
particular branch kept on its power or went beyond it (abuse).
-

that

The Court never finds out, it never tries to determine its

unconstitutionality BECAUSE ALL ACTS ARE PRESUMED
CONSTITUTIONAL pursuant to the separation of powers.
Who has the burden of proving the constitutionality? The
petitioners.

Page 8 | Bantay

It is the burden of government, Sol. Gen. to show that the law is

constitutional? No.

CONGRESS: two branches that are co-equal: SENATE and HOR (Art.
VI).
-

The composition: SENATE 24 senators related at large (Sec. 2,

Art. VI).
o
QUALIFICATION: (Sec. 3) natural-born citizen, 35 years
of age, able to read and write, a registered voter, resident
of the country for at least 2 years.
o
TERM OF OFFICE: (Sec. 4) 6 years, not more than two
consecutive terms.
HOR: composed of district representative (legislative 80%; partylist 20%).
o
How many? Does not exceed 250, unless provided by
the law.
o
Congress can still create districts (2013 elections:
Camarines Sur, QC, Cavite.
o
1 district: at least 250,000 people.
o
QUALIFICATIONS: (Sec. 6) natural-born citizen, 25 years
old, able to read and write, registered voter in the district
in which he will be elected, resident of not less than 1
year.
o
TERM OF OFFICE: (Sec. 7) 3 years, not more than 3
consecutive years.
CHANGE IN TERM OF OFFICE: HOR: 4 years to 3 years.
o
In the case of President, there is no re-election. He will
not have to worry for re-election: political will AND plan for
action (heavy reliance on Presidents agenda).
o
If you are going to institute drastic projects, you will not
owe something for the 2nd part of your term.
o
BOTH houses are led by those in the same party as the
President.
o
CONGRESS: Each congress will have a term of 3 years.
Laws will have to be passed would have to be passed
during that time as compared to 4 years.
Does that make a difference? A lot. Half of each
year is allocated for (16th Congress) the BUDGET;
one-half for other matters to be considered by
Congress.
It is now difficult to pass BIG LAWS. After 1987,
the strategy is to divide the big laws into smaller
parts and have them passed (Example: laws
protecting children).
Revision of the Penal Code: UP (internally
funded): if they come up with their output, it
cannot be passed in 3 YEARS.
What do you think will happen to the bills passed by the Partylist? They became adjuncts of the traditional political parties.
o
NOW: The Party-list went to Belmonte and aligned
themselves WITH the government. LEFT-leaning
OPPOSITION (divided MARTIN ROMUALDEZ and
ZAMORA); swing vote (BAYAN).
Mainstreaming of the party-list instead of
representing their constituencies.
DISTRICTS: there are district representatives.
o
The constitution puts limits on the creation of districts.

SEMA VS. COMELEC

-

How does that impact on districts? At first look, it will only apply
on Art. X.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

How did Carpio build the analytical framework in this case? Art.
VII, 1973 Constitution. WON ARMM has the power to make
provinces and WON that will collide with the power to create
legislative districts. If it will, then, ARMM cannot create them.
It cannot create the province of SK because doing so will create a
NEW LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT because Congress may only
create a new district.
ARMM creation of ARMM (9054) creation of provinces,
THUS SK is validly created; part of regional autonomy.
CARPIO: Read the constitution as a WHOLE.
o
You have to take ART. X AND THE ARMM LAW as
limited by the other provisions of the Constitution.
o
Who may create legislative districts? Only the Congress.
Each province can only have 1 legislative district.
o
It should be read as a LIMITATION of the powers of the
Congress.
Why was SK created? To give Ampatuans their part.
What will happen if Cotabato City will be part of SK? Sema will
never win the election. Sema is at a disadvantage. He did not
even raise the issue of legislative districts and their creations.
ARMM created a new province.
To resolve the issue of Semas case, the lis mota is the
constitutionality of the act of the province (Art. VI).
Did the regional government have the power to create provinces?
No.
In the end, Sema could still have Cotabato. WINNER:
MANGUGADATU.

ACIAS VS. COMELEC

-

Issue is the creation of what? 1935 Constitution, no requirement

of population.
Why did the Court nullify the creation of new districts?
Will Congress be held liable for not following their own rules? No.
ENROLLED BILL DOCTRINE.
What is the primary reason? Does Congress have the power to
legislate additional districts? YES, but Congress was arbitrary.
o
In full accord of judicial review.
o
Was there grave abuse? YES. Determination was
arbitrary. It seems to have been done for political
considerations because there is no rhyme and reason
why the one with smaller population have more seats.
Court: there should be PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION.
Now fixed.

TAN VS. COMELEC

-

What was created? Negros del Norte (new district).

What is the problem with that? Why is it unconstitutional? That
for something like that, it is not enough that it is legislated, it
must also be ratified by a plebiscite by all of those affected.
It is the voters of the WHOLE province who shall have to vote.

PARTY-LIST: How many party-list Congressmen we are

supposed to have? 20% of the members of the HOR.
o
How do we find out? Everyone in the ballot may elect
ONE party-list. How do we know how many will have
seats?
1. How many they should be? FORMULA.
2. Such being the case, how do we now choose the
party-list representatives?
2% threshold: everyone who reaches 2%
will get one guaranteed seat.
Maximum of 3 seats per party. .
Page 9 | Bantay

Proportionate ranking (first party). What is

the effect of this ranking? Rank on the
basis of votes they received.
No. of seats still remaining.
Who can now form party-list?

ATONG PAGLAUM VS. COMELEC: SECTORAL parties representing

organized and underrepresented sectors; OLD RULE.
-

HELD: NEW RULE: SECTORAL: nation, regional and sectoral.

No
requirement
that
they
are
marginalized
and
underrepresented.
Requirement: How will we distinguish them from Congress? As
long as they do not represent districts.
Example: AKO BICOL [regional]? YES. ANG WARAY [ethnolinguistic group]? YES.
Can LP (MPP) register as party-list? No, BUT AN ARM OF IT.
Are political parties from registering? YES. By representing a
sector.
ANG LADLAD? YES. Sectoral.
IBP? No, created by the Court. Example: Association of Lawyers
in the Phil? YES.
Why did the court say the OLD RULE is wrong? The reason is in
the Constitution itself. This is required ONLY DURING THE
TRANSITION PERIOD. Constitution: In the first 2 elections, there
will be representative from sectors which are marginalized,
underrepresented; NATIONAL, REGIONAL, SECTORAL.
OLD RULE was only an exemption when there is no law yet on
the election of party-list.
COM. MONSOD: The rule is no longer the same. LP as it is, NO.
But LP-Youth, YES.
o
May political parties participate? YES, as long as they will
not field candidates for the districts.
NOW: open to everyone.

MARCOS VS. COMELEC

-

What will make you want to stay in that place? ANIMUS

MENENDI.
What if for instance I vote in Bulacan if I live in 4 th district
of QC, and my ancestral home is in 3rd district of QC?
YES, because that is my mothers hometown.

TORAYNO VS. COMELEC:

-

You intention to CONNECT in that place because of strong

interest.
NOT ACTUALLY RETURNING there.

Lets say I am the Governor of Pampanga, and my Son is

the Mayor, and I have Son no. 2, what will I do? I will
establish a new party-list. DO I even have to point to
marginalized and underrepresented? No.
o
Does the Congressman have to be poor even if it
represents the poor? NO, it is enough that you
represent the interest of the party.
Can COMELEC interfere with however they want
to use their budget? NO.
As long as they were nominated by the members
of the party-list.
o
QUALIFICATION: Same as district representatives.
o
Even coalitions in HOR are rewarded with Chairmanships
of committees. Why? Because there is a committee
budget.
RESIDENCY: What is meant by residency?
o
Do you expect district representative to LIVE in their
district? NO, they only have district offices. Its not where
he ACTUALLY lives?
o
The whole rational as what? Its because of your strong
ties (Imelda: home of her family).
o
Does it matter if your Congressman lives in Manila and a
resident of Pampanga? NO, not required by the
constitution. But since his family is rooted there, then he
is deemed to have strong ties there.

His substantive ties are in Tarlac, because he is an Aquino.

If he will not tell them why he moved, the court will assume that
he intends to return in Tarlac.
GATCHALIAN, CONGUANCO: where they established their (2)
business.

COURT: He registered in hometown but he now lives in CDO

(where he established his office as a governor for a while).
Lets take a look at the ties. Does he have ties in CDO? YES.
The proof of residency was sufficient that would legally sufficient
to constitute a change of his Domicile of birth.
Not return literally, but to CONNECT to that place.

ELECTION: 2nd Monday of May every 3 years.

SPECIAL ELECTION in case of vacancy, for a remaining
period of at least 1 year for a Senator.
o
If the period is less than 1 year, (in Senate: they dont do
anything) (Congress: Speaker of the House will appoint a
caretaker).
o
Two requirements:
1. There must be a declaration of a vacancy by the
body.
2. There must be a valid call for election.

TOLENTINO VS. COMELEC

-

Was there a declaration? Yes, Resolution No. 84. Is there a call

of the COMELEC? NONE. They forgot.
COURT: the voters deemed to have constructive notice for the
election of 13 candidates.
HONASAN: 10 million votes will be disenfranchised. Will there be
a right impeded for those who did not vote for him? No.

SENATE: OFFICERS:
o
Can the Court intervene in the election of officers of the
Senate? No.
o
SANTIAGO: The minority leader should come from them
(her and Tatad).

AUG. 10, 2013

AQUINO VS. COMELEC
-

Court: Why he has a condominium in Makati: it can be that he

just wanted to run.
They presumed he had to be with his wife (Manila).

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

The composition, qualification and terms of office of the Members of the

Congress. We looked at the allocation of districts, the matter of party-list
elections, and the primary requirement, which is residency.

Page 10 | Bantay

TODAY: the election, the organization and sessions, the salaries,

electoral tribunals.

NEXT WEEK: Midterms, 2 hours. DO NOT EXPECT TO GET HIGH

GRADES.
ELECTIONS: 2 kinds.

ORGANIZATION and SESSIONS of the CONGRESS.

Who are the officers of the Congress? ONLY the Speaker and
the Senate President: Constitutional provision. All the other
officers are to be provided by the rules determined by each
House.
All that the constitution requires are those to officers. Why?
Certification, succession, Sen. Pres. (Chair of COA). They hold
important offices so their positions are provided for in the
Constitution.
When we talk of separation of powers, it is within the separate
powers.

AVELINO V. CUENCO: What is the issue? WON 12 senators constitute

a quorum.
-

SANTIAGO VS. GUINGONA

-

In the Senate, there is a senate president. There are only 2 in the

minority, there is only Santiago and Tatad but Guingona was
appointed as minority leader.
Under the Rules of the Senate, the minority leader is ex oficio a
member of all the committees and he can stand up in all he
sessions to speak.
BOTH the MAJORITY and MINORITY are now effectively
controlled by the MAJORITY.
Did the Senate President act in grave abuse of discretion? NO.
Why not? In the Constitution, we can only intervene in relation to
the position of Senate President because that is the only thing
provided for in the Constitution.
Why would the Court intervene? NO because that goes beyond
what we can review. In the Rules of the Senate, there is even
nothing about the selection of the majority and minority leader.
THERES NOTHING.
REASON: Why did we, the people, leave it to the Senate or
House to choose their own officers? The matter of necessity
WON such officers are needed are actual matters of internal
affairs. Can they choose as many as they want or none? So, its
a matter of what? Can we even inquire of the necessity? NO
BECAUSE IT IS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE considering the
political realities they are facing now.
Court: NO RIGHT BY SANTIAGO BEING VIOLATED (Bill of
Rights).
Why did we, the people, allow that? Because in a later provision,
for us the people, there is only one output of the Senate
enrolled bill the only thing that is important and the only
limitation (requirements of the passage of the bill).
REALIZATION: Basically, its up to each chamber. Example:
Bicameral conference committee, do they meet? NO. What is
important is there is a report and there are signatures.
Court: Okay, so the minority is marginalized because a member
of the majority had been designated as the minority leader
THAT IS SOMETHING THEY SHOULD NEGOTIATE WITH THE
OTHER MEMBERS.
SENATE: constructivist opposition, if not, they can effectively be
shut out. So they cooperate so they can get committee
chairmanship, they can get their bills passed. Is that in violation
of the constitution? NO.
It is difficult to pass laws; thats why there are a lot of
NEGOTIATIONS, starting with the national budget.

What is the requirement of a quorum? Regular quorum is

MAJORITY (50% + 1), supermajority (2/3, ). But for ordinary
business, a quorum is just the majority.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

How many walked out? 10, leaving 12.

Why did they walk out? Because Sen. Tanada want the Senate
Pres. To be CHARGED. But when they left, there were 12 left,
and what did the 12 do? They voted for a president and president
voted all seats are vacant, and designated officials.
So what did the former Sen. Pres. Do and challenged the
quorum.
Is the matter of the quorum something the Court can inquire into?
No. Why not?
POLITICAL QUESTION. Can the Courts still do that under 1987
Constitution? It can. Because of the provision if there has been a
grave abuse of discretion.
So for the purposes of the quorum, the one outside the country
can NOT be counted. TOTAL: 23; QUORUM: 12.
It encouraged the parties to resolve the matters among
themselves because the Court is very, very hesitant.

RULES OF PROCEEDINGS: Each house may determine its own

house of proceedings. Is that absolute? (Sec. 16, 3). NO.

PACETE VS. COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS: NOT ABSOLUTE.

What is the limitation on the prerogative of the House in determining its
rules of proceedings? Rules of Proceedings should NOT VIOLATE ANY
RIGHT OF THE AN INDIVIDUAL.
-

Pacete was already appointed AND confirmed, and SOMEONE

filed a motion for reconsideration, which effectively NULLIFIED
his confirmation.
Under their rules, upon FILINF of the motion for reconsideration,
that will nullify/withdraw the confirmation. Can the Court review
that? IT IS IN THE RULES.
Does he already have a vested right? Does any of the officers
have a vested public right? NO.
But you can only be revoked for JUST CAUSE VIOLATVE OF
DUE PROCESS, with notice or hearing. In this case, there are
NONE.
THEY CAN COME UP WITH THEIR OWN RULES BUT IF THE
RIHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL (ART. III), THE COURT CAN STEP
IN AND NULLIFY THE ACT. Is there a violation of separation of
powers? NO because the Court is protecting the right
PROVIDED In the Constitution.

ARROYO VS. DE VENECIA: Wanted to question the quorum.

-

How do you determine a quorum? How can there be a

quorum if they are not there? In the Senate, the rules are
very simple. QUORUM: 13 senators. Sen. Pres. Calls for
the roll
usually 5 (Se. Pres., Majority Leader, Minority
Leader, author of the bill, opposition) only, hehe. Senate
IS STRICTER.
HOR: Mr. Speaker, I move for the dispense for the
calling of the roll. THERE SO MANY OF THEM.
What about the committees? That will depend on the
House. How do you determine the quorum in a hearing?
In the Senate, the only time they are mostly present:
PLENARY SESSION because there is TV coverage.

He was claiming there was a grave abuse of discretion and there

is a violation, not only of the process, but also of RIGHTS.
Will the Court intervene in favour of Joker? NO. Why not? He is
prevented from speaking!
o
Will the Court even look at the presence of the quorum?
NO.
o
The court will not intervene because? The Court
Page 11 | Bantay

intervened in FRANCISCO and OPLE.

What is the distinction? Why is the court being selective?
In the case FRANCISCO, it is in the prerogative of the
house with a limitation which is a provision on
impeachment provided for in the constitution.
o
THE ONLY LIMITATIONS ARE FOR THE DUE
ENACTMENT OF THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL.
Are the rules within the prerogative of the House? Yes. Is it
absolute? No. The constitution provides for the powers vis--vis
the rights. So what happens when you have the limitations of the
power that will give rise to the rights?
There are no rights impeded but it is NOTFOR THE COURT TO
DETERMINE.
o

DISCIPLINE: What is the rule of discipline? Each house can

penalized members by virtue of expulsion or suspension of NO
MORE THAN 60 days by 2/3 votes.
o
Whose interests are being pursued here? PEOPLE, NOT
OF THE ASSEMBLYMAN. For them expulsion is better
because you can elect them again.

suspension: PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION IS DISTINCT FROM

DISCIPLINARY ACTION OF THE CONGRESS.
TWO ACTS from different branches of the government by virtue
of their respective powers.

JOURNAL AND RECORD:

o
Journal: usually an abbreviated account of the daily
proceedings action taken, thats why you put the votes.
Is it conclusive? No. The only thing conclusive is the
enrolled bill. VALUE: evidence that the bill went through
the required proceedings of due enactment.
o
Record: a word for word transcript of the deliberations of
Congress. SC will not go beyond this. It will only check
the ENROLLED BILL. VALUE: it is considered when the
Court CONTRUES the law when it is trying to find the
INTENTION of the law-makers.
o
Why does the constitution provide for them?
o
ENROLLED BILL ALWAYS PREVAIL because that is the
final output.

CASCO VS. GIMENEZ: urea formaldehyde.

ALEJANDRINO VS. QUEZON
-

The Court said IT CANNOT review. Constitution provides:

expulsion and suspension which is the prerogative of the
Legislature.
Can you invoke rights because he was suspended after the
ethics community hearing? NO. Thus, he was suspended
indefinitely. In the absence of any limitations of rights being
invoked, can the Court do something? No, only to provide a cap
in the Constitution to avoid repetition.

Complete reverse of the intention.

Can it decide that what the Congress really intend was urea
formaldehyde ENROLLED BILL DOCTRINE CONTROLS
EVEN IF there was a mistake.
Can the Court correct the mistake? NO. Why? The court cannot
correct the mistake because it is bound by the enrolled bill. In
fact, the Court cannot go beyond that even if there is a very, very
obvious mistake.
It cannot use its power to adjudicate by correcting REMEDY:
curative legislation. Otherwise, they will be violating the
separation of powers.
Court said NO, they cannot acquire jurisdiction.

OSMENA VS. PANDATU: privilege speech attacking the President.

-

Osmena was suspended for 15 months. Can the Court

intervene? NO.
In fact congress can choose to discipline his members for
anything. The grounds for discipline are NOT provided for in the
Constitution itself. It is up to the Houses to determine WHAT
CONSTITUTE FOR DISORDERLY/UNRULY CONDUCT.
Even outside the session? YES, IN FACT. If there is a complaint,
there will be a hearing in the Ethics Committee. The only right
protected if the Congressmans right to DUE PROCESS.

US VS. PONS
-

SANTIAGO VS. SANTIGANBAYAN

-

SANDIGANBAYAN is the anti-graft court under the Judiciary.

They can order warrant of arrest and the preventive suspension
of the accused.
SANTIAGO was charged for acts WHEN SHE WAS IN THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH, but she was being suspended when she
was ALREADY PART of the Legislature. Would something like
that violate the Constitution? NO.
Shouldnt the Sandiganbayan (RA 3019) formally request to the
Senate Pres.? Or may it DIRECTLY ISSUE the order?
Once you are a public official, that accountability sticks even after
you have left a particular office as long as you are alive, even
your heirs.
What is the role of the judiciary? To adjudicate. It was just
adjudicating the provisions in the Anti-Graft and Corruption Law.
May the legislative ignore that? No, if it does, it will violate the
Constitution.
ISSUE: WON it is a question of power or rights. Is there an
intrusion in the power? NO.
So the judicial branch DOES NOT NEED to prove to the Ethics
Committee of the Congress that there is just cause for

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

PONS: the law was passed in violation of the Constitution. Why

did he say that? Because the session is supposed to end on Feb.
28 and the bill was passed on March 01.
Can the Court look at the RECORDS? NO because they are
bound by the RECORD.
When the journal says that the session finished on Feb.28, that is
the TRUTH.
CONSTUTIONAL PROVISION: Congress shall keep a journal of
proceedings solely within their power.
When the documentation says this is what happened, THAT IS
WHAT HAPPENED.

ENROLLED BILL TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE

JOURNAL, AND THE LATTER TAKES PRECEDENCE
OVER THE RECORD.

MORALES VS. SUBIDO

-

What happened: the one who typed it MADE A MISTAKE and no

one read it before signing and it resulted to an absurd situation
when a police officer cannot be a police officer :P
Why did the Court go beyond the enrolled bill? Did the Court
actually abandoned the enrolled bill?
Was there an enrolled bill in the first place? NO because of the
withdrawal of the signature? NONE. The Court followed the
hierarchy because there is no enrolled bill.
The enrolled bill STILL NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED.

Page 12 | Bantay

END
ASTORGA VS. VILLEGAS
-

The law is by-passing the vice-mayor, as in the law itself.

Can the Court go beyond the enrolled bill and go beyond the
journal? YES because no more enrolled bill.
There is no enrolled bill to speak of so they went to the journal.
WE FOLLOW THE HEIRARCHY IF WE PRESUPPOSES THAT
THERE IS AN ENROLLED BILL, BUT EVEN IF THERE ARE
MISTAKES, BUT THE ENROLLMENT ARE DONE REGULARY,
CAN THE COURT INTERVENE? NO. REMEDY
AMENDMENT.

SESSIONS: How many sessions the Congress have? 3. Starts in

July and 30 days before election.
o
SPECIAL SESSIONS: President calls it FOR WHAT
PURPOSE? Held when the Congress is otherwise
adjourned. Usually after the end of elections and by the
end of their terms TO PASS PRIORITY MEASURES, TO
PASS THE BUDGET before the end of the year.
PROBLEM: QUORUM. Often, they will not attend.
o
JOINT SESSION: two cases: (1) when Congress
convenes for the canvassing of the Presidential election
and o proclaim the next Pres. and VC, (2) declaration of
state of war (defensive, not of aggression).
SALARIES AND BENEFITS
o
Constitution can provide by the salary but can be
increased by the members of the Congress.
o
What is the MECHANISM? How does that work?
Congress can increase the salary but the increase will be
made effective upon the finishing of ALL the term of the
Congress.
o
To avoid pursuance of vested interest.
EXEMPTION FROM ARREST: OBJECTIVE: So the people will
not be deprived from representation. PARAMETERS: If the
sentence of the crime does not exceed by 6 years.

PEOPLE VS. JALOSJOS: Statutory rape: RECLUSION PERPETUA.

-

Does he enjoy exception? NO.

Can he attend the sessions? NO. That will violate equal
protection because everyone will have to serve their sentence.

SPEECH AND DEBATE:

o
What is the protection given to them? They cannot be
charged will libel. They can be delivered anywhere unless
they are performing their official duties.

JIMENEZ VS. CABANGBANG: he made an open letter; Chairman of the

National Defense Committee.
-

Shouldnt that be considered as privileged speech? NO because

it is an OPEN LETTER and is NOT DIRECTED TO ANYONE
whom someone can take action.
One of the requirements from privilege speech is YOU ARE
DOING IT PURSUANT TO A MORAL, SOCIAL DUTY. If the
open letter is privileged, he should have addressed it to someone
who can take action after it.

DISQUALIFICATION:
1. Holding of both offices.
2. Appearing as a counsel.
3. Exercising their profession.
4. There is no conflict of interest disclose.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 | AUF SOL 2013

Page 13 | Bantay