You are on page 1of 11

2013 SAMPLE BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS AND

ANSWERS
I
A bill, certified as urgent by the President, is introduced in and approved by a simple
majority of the Senate. It provides, among others, for the raising of funds to be reserved for
the use, by way of loan arrangements, of distressed public utility corporations so as to
enable them to continue providing the public with their services and facilities. Said bill
proposes the imposition of enforced contributions from manufacturers of sin products, such
as cigarettes and liquor. It authorizes the Department of Finance to promulgate rules for
purposes of determining the entities to be subjected to said enforced contributions as well
as the beneficiaries of the subject loan facilities in accordance with standards clearly
specified out in the bill, provided that said determinations shall be subject to the approval of
the Senates Committee on Finance.
The bill likewise authorizes the granting of
exemptions from the enforced contributions over and above those which may be granted by
the Department of Finance, provided that said exemptions shall be approved by a majority
of all the members of Congress.
Said bill, fully concurred in by the House of
Representatives, is forwarded to the President for appropriate action.
1. Would a presidential certification of a bill be subject to judicial review?
No, a presidential certification as to the urgency of a bill under Section 26 (2) of the
Constitution has generally been considered as a political question. [Datu Michael Abas Kida
v. Senate of the Philippines, G.R. No. 196271, October 18, 2011]
2. What effects, if any, would a presidential certification have on the legislative
process?
Such a certification would do away with the requirements that a bill can be approved
only after three readings on separate days and for the distribution of printed copies of said
bill in its final form three days before its passage. [Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, 235
SCRA 630]
3. Under what circumstances can this bill become a law?
Under Section 27 (1) of Article VI of the Constitution, a bill becomes a law when the
President approves and signs the same; when he vetoes it within thirty days from
presentment of the same to him, and his veto is overridden by two-thirds vote of the
Legislature; or when the President does not communicate his veto of the same within thirty
days from his receipt of the same.
4. Discuss the validity of this measure.
The measure is unconstitutional because it originated from the Senate, and not from
the House of Representatives, as required under Section 24 of the Constitution, which
specifies that all revenue or tariff measures, such as the bill subject of the problem, shall
originate exclusively from the House of Representatives.
II
Congressman Mel Makapal, a party-list representative, is serving his third term as a
representative of the Mandurugas Party. He resigns and changes his party seven months

before the expiration of his third term, and is now nominated by his new party for purposes
of the next party-list election.
1. What effect, if any, would his resignation from the Mandurugas Party have on his
tenure as a member of the House of Representatives?
Mel Makapal shall be considered as having forfeited his seat as a party-list
representative, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15 of RA 7941, which states that any
elected party-list representative who changes his political party or sectoral affiliation during
his term of office shall forfeit his seat.
2. Would his nomination by his new party be valid?
No, his nomination by his new party would be invalid because he has already served
three terms, and shall therefore no longer be qualified for a fourth consecutive term
[Constitution, Article VI, Section7; Abayon v. HRET, G.R. No. 189466, February 11, 2010]
III
Congressman Mas Makapal, an incumbent party-list representative representing the youth
sector of a political party, upon turning thirty years of age during the last six months of his
term, changes his sectoral affiliation, but remains a member of the same political party,
because of his anticipated disqualification to be nominated for re-election as his partys
youth sector representative for purposes of the next election. Would he be qualified for
nomination by his new sector?
He cannot be a nominee because he changed his sectoral affiliation within the final
six months of his term, as a youth representative. Under Section 15 of RA 7941, if a party-list
representative changes his political party or sectoral affiliation within six months before an
election, he shall not be eligible for nomination as a party-list representative under his new
party or organization. [Amores v. HRET, G.R. No. 189600, June 29, 2010]
IV
The Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act authorizes the Autonomous Region of Muslim
Mindanao to create provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays.
1. Is the law valid?
The law is unconstitutional to the extent that it authorizes the creation of provinces
and cities because the power to create them inherently involves the power to create
legislative districts, which only Congress possesses. It may, however, be authorized by law
to create municipalities and barangays. [Sema v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 177597, July 16, 2008,
558 SCRA 700]
2.
Would a plebiscite be required for the effectivity of all amendments of said
law, as provided for under Section 18 of Article X of the Constitution?
No, plebiscites under said provision of the Constitution would generally be required
for the effectivity of such amendments if the same would relate to (a) the basic structure of
the regional government; (b) the regions judicial system, i.e., the special courts with
personal, family, and property law jurisdiction; and, (c) the grant and extent of the
legislative powers constitutionally conceded to the regional government under Section 20,
Article X of the Constitution. [[Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, G.R. No.
196271, October 18, 2011]

V
A case is decided by the Third Division of the Supreme Court by a 3-2 vote. The motion for
reconsideration filed by the losing party is resolved by said Division with a vote of 2-2. May
said matter be referred to the Court En Banc for decision?
No, the motion may not be referred to the Court En Banc because only cases, and not
matters, not properly decided by a Division may be referred to and decided by the full Court.
[Fortich v. Corona, 312 SCRA 751]
VI
Dahlia Daldal was, before her appointment as a Clerk of Court, an employee of the Bureau
of Customs. During her incumbency as a Clerk of Court, administrative charges are
instituted against her before the Civil Service Commission for acts done by her while she
was still a Bureau of Customs employee. May said Commission properly take cognizance of
said administrative charges?
No, because it is only the Supreme Court, pursuant to its exclusive administrative
supervision over all courts and judicial personnel, which may oversee their compliance with
all laws, rules and regulations, regardless of whether the offense was committed before or
after employment in the Judiciary. [Ampong v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 167916,
August 26, 2008]
VII
Sammy Sugapa, who is on his third year as a Commissioner of the Civil Service Commission,
is appointed its Chairman, to replace Manny Mandaraya, who is impeached during his sixth
year in office. Would his appointment as such be constitutional? How long may he serve as
Chairman of the Commission?
His appointment would be valid but he would have a remaining term of only one year
as the Commissions Chairman. [Funa v. Chairman, Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 192791,
April 24, 2012]
VIII
Manny Mandirigma, who loses in the election following his first term as mayor, later
dislodges his opponent in a recall election. He serves out the remainder of the latters term,
and is thereafter elected to the same position for another term. Would he be qualified to
run again for the same office after his last term?
Yes, because his term, after the recall election, is not to be considered as a full term.
The period prior to his recall term, when his opponent held the office, constitutes an
interruption in Mandirigmas continuity of service. The winner in a recall election cannot be
charged or credited with the full term of three years for purposes of counting the
consecutiveness of an elective officials terms in office, within the context of the three-term
limit rule. [Adormeo v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 147927, February 4, 2002]
IX
Daniel Dilihensiya is appointed Ombudsman in January 2000, and resigns in July 2004. How
long, or up to what year, may his successor serve, assuming he is appointed in December
2004?

His successor shall serve until December 2011, pursuant to the provisions of Section
11 of Article XI of the Constitution, which states that the Ombudsman and his Deputies shall
serve for a term of seven years.
X
Mamerto Maitimbudhi is a appointed as the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon in 2010.
1. Until when may he serve as such?
He may serve as the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon until 2017. Under Section 11 of
Article XI of the Constitution, the Ombudsman and his Deputies shall serve for a term of
seven years.
2. After serving his term as such, may he be appointed as the Deputy Ombudsman
for Mindanao?
He may not be appointed as the Deputy Ombudsman for Mindanao after his term as
the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon. Under Section 11 of Article XI of the Constitution, Deputy
Ombudsmen may not be reappointed.
3. After his term as Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon, may he be appointed as the
Ombudsman?
It is submitted that he may be appointed as the Ombudsman. The situation would be
analogous to the case of Funa v. Chairman, Commission on Audit [G.R. No. 192791, April 24,
2012], where the Supreme Court said that a promotional appointment, from Associate
Commissioner to Chairman, would not be covered by the constitutional ban on
reappointment. In said case, the Court clarified that a reappointment would be a
movement to one and the same office. Here, the promotional appointment would be a
movement to a different position, i.e., from Deputy Ombudsman to Ombudsman.
Accordingly, said appointment to the Office of the Ombudsman would be a new
appointment, and not a reappointment barred under the Constitution.
4. May he be appointed as the Ombudsman during his fourth year as Deputy
Ombudsman for Luzon?
Yes, he may be so appointed because, as previously submitted, said appointment
would not be a reappointment, but a new appointment.
5. If so, how many years may he serve as the Ombudsman?
He may serve as such for seven years.
XI
A decision of the First Division of the Commission on Elections is appealed to its En Banc.
Three of its members inhibit themselves, leaving four, including the three members of its
First Division, to decide on said appeal. The latter three affirm their decision on, and
provide for the dismissal of the, appeal. The fourth member dissents. Is the vote supportive
of the dismissal of the appeal adequate?
No, the vote is not adequate. The Supreme Court declared in Marcoleta v. COMELEC
[G.R. No. 181377, April 24, 2009] that the majority vote requirement for decisions of the
Commission on Elections pertains to the majority of all the members of the Commission, and

not only those who participated and took part in the deliberations. Since only three of its
members voted in favor of the dismissal of the appeal, it cannot be said that said dismissal
had the support of the majority of the Commission En Banc.
XII
A law is passed on August 15, 2013 granting emergency powers to the President. Congress
adjourns on May 15, 2014, but is called to special session by the President on June 1, 2014.
Said special session ends on June 15, 2014. Congress meets again in session on July 24,
2014. The President promulgates Executive Orders on August 1, 2014, pursuant to his
emergency powers granted to him by Congress prior to its adjournment in May 2014. On
August 15, 2014, Congress passes a joint resolution withdrawing said emergency powers of
the President. Would the Presidents Executive Orders issued on August 1, 2014 be valid?
Yes, the Executive Orders issued by the President on August 1, 2014 would be valid.
His emergency powers did not cease upon the adjournment of the special session of
Congress. They expired when Congress passed a joint resolution withdrawing the same on
August 15, 2014. Had Congress not passed said joint resolution, said powers would have
terminated upon the adjournment of its regular session which commenced on July 24, 2013.
[See Article VI, Section 23 (2) of the Constitution and Araneta v. Dinglasan, 101 Phil. 368.]

XIII
The President extends an ad interim appointment in favor of Max Makapal. Thereafter,
Congress meets in special session for two weeks. It convenes again in regular session three
weeks later. The Commission on Appointments convoked during said session fails to
approve Makapals appointment until the adjournment of said regular session. When is his
ad interm appointment to be considered as having expired?
Makapals ad interim appointment expired upon adjournment of Congress special
session. [Guevara v. Inocentes, G.R. No. L-25577, March 15, 1966, 18 SCRA 379]
XIV
The National Housing Authority [NHA], in the exercise of its governmental functions, takes
over a parcel of land and converts it into a housing project. The owner of said parcel of land
sues for just compensation. The NHA moves to dismiss said action on the ground that it its
taking over of said property constitutes an act jure imperii and that it had not consented to
be sued. Rule on the motion to dismiss.
The motion to dismiss should be denied. The doctrine of state immunity cannot be
successfully invoked to defeat a valid claim or compensation arising from the taking without
just compensation and without the proper expropriation proceedings being first filed as
against the owner of the property. [Ministerio v. Court of First Instance of Cebu, 40 SCRA
464; Air Transportaton Office v. Ramos, G.R. No. 185685, February 23, 2011]
XV
A Regional Trial Court grants a money claim against the University of the Philippines and is
poised to issue a writ of execution against it. If you were counsel for the University, what
step, if any, can you take to prevent the enforcement of the courts judgment against your
client?

I would file a motion to suspend execution and to refer the judgment to the
Commission on Audit, which has exclusive jurisdiction to decide on the allowance or
disallowance of money claims against the government, including the University of the
Philippines. [Lockheed Detective and Watchman Agency, Inc. v. University of the Philippines,
G.R. No. 185918, April 18, 2012]
XVI
A flight attendant dismissed by an airline company because he had exceeded the allowable
weight for its flight personnel challenges his termination on the basis of the equal protection
clause. Rule on the challenge.
His dismissal is valid for being consistent with the companys rules. The equal
protection clause erects no shield against private conduct, however discriminatory or
wrongful. [Yrasuegui v. Philippine Air Lines, G.R. No. 168081, October 17, 2008]
XVII
Magulo Magmaneho is charged with two separate offenses, i.e., (1) Reckless Imprudence
Resulting in Slight Physical Injuries under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code and (2)
Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Damage to Property, arising from the same
vehicular under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code incident, also under Article 365 of the
Revised Penal Code. He pleads guilty to the first charge [Reckless Imprudence Resulting in
Slight Physical Injuries], then moves to quash the second information for Reckless
Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Damage to Property on the ground of double
jeopardy. Rule on his Motion.
The Motion should be granted. His plea of guilty to the first charge gives rise to
double jeopardy. Reckless imprudence under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code is a
single quasi-offense by itself and not merely a means to commit other crimes such that
conviction or acquittal for such quasi-offense bars a subsequent prosecution for the same
quasi-offense, regardless of its various resulting acts. [People v. Diaz, 94 Phil. 715; Ivler v.
Modesto-San Pedro, G.R. No. 172716, November 17, 2010]
XVIII
The Municipality of Meycauayan enters into a contract with Maynilad for the latter to supply
water to its residents for a period of 25 years. Meycauayan is thereafter converted or
transformed into a City. The new City Government of Meycauayan passes an ordinance
providing for its take-over of all of Maynilads facilities and services in its territory. Discuss
the validity of said ordinance.
The ordinance is valid. It constitutes a lawful exercise by Meycauayan of its power of
eminent domain. [See Long Island Water Supply Co., Inc. v. Brooklyn, 166 US 685]
XIX
Pedro Pusakal is charged with and pleads not guilty to homicide. After arraignment, the
Court orders the amendment of the information for purposes of correcting the designation of
the offense to murder, in view of the allegations in the information on the aggravating
circumstance of disregard of rank. Pedro moves to dismiss invoking his right to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him and on the ground of double
jeopardy. Rule on the motion.

The motion should be denied. The amendment is merely formal, and not substantial.
Accordingly, it does not place Pedro in double jeopardy. [Pacoy v. Cajigal, G.R. No. 157472,
September 28, 2007]
XX
What and whose vote would be required for the
a. approval of bills?
Simple majority vote of each House.
b. ratification of a proposed constitutional amendment made through a
peoples initiative?
Majority of the votes cast in the plebiscite called for the purpose.
c. declaration of the existence of a state of war?
Two thirds of both Houses, in joint session assembled, voting separately.
d. convening of a constitutional convention?
Two-thirds vote of all the members of Congress.
e. validity of a tax exemption?
Majority of all the Members of Congress.
INDICATE THE LETTER CORRESPONDING TO THE WORD, PHRASE OR SENTENCE
WHICH BEST COMPLETES THE STATEMENT, ANSWERS THE QUESTION OR APPLIES
TO THE FACTS.
I
The Archipelago Doctrine teaches that
A. straight lines are made to connect appropriate points on the coast without
departing radically from its general direction, and all waters up to twelve miles from the low
water mark of the coast shall form part of our territorial sea.
B. the area up to 200 miles from the low water mark of our coast shall form part of
our archipelagic waters.
C. the outermost point of our terrestrial domain are to be connected with straight
baselines and all waters enclosed thereby shall be considered as our territorial waters.
D. the outermost points of our terrestrial domain are to be connected with straight
baselines and all waters enclosed thereby shall be considered as our internal waters.
II

A state may exercise its jurisdiction


A.
B.
C.
D.

only within its territory.


even in the open seas.
only in its contiguous zone.
only over it exclusive economic zone.
III

The so-called Montevideo Convention


A. provides for the jurisdiction of States with respect to their territorial seas.
B. provides for the exclusive economic zones of States.
C. authorizes States to enforce their customs, fiscal, immigrations and sanitary laws
beyond their territorial seas and up to their contiguous zones.
D. provides for the basic elements of a State.
IV
Which of the following fundamenatal principles found in Article II of the Constitution have
been considered as self-executing?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Policy of public disclosure.


Maintenance of Peace and Order
The promotion of labor as a primary social economic force.
Social justice policy.

V
Internal self-determination is tantamount to
A.
B.
C.
D.

freedom.
autonomy.
independence.
cooperation.

VI

The principle of jus postliminium refers to the A. suspension of sovereignty during a belligerent occupation.
B. suspension of acts of sovereignty during a belligerent occupation.
C. restoration of the effectivity of political laws upon termination of a belligerent
occupation.
D. revival of legitimate government upon the end of a belligerent occupation.
VII
The commencement of the terms of Members of the House of Representatives and of
Senators may

A.
B.
C.
D.

be changed by law.
be changed only by constitutional amendment.
be changed even by initiative on amendment of the Constitution.
not be changed at all.
VIII

In the middle of a campaign, the party formally withdraws the name of its first nominee
because of basic policy differences.
A.
B.
C.
D.

Such withdrawal would be valid because a nomination may be changed or


withdrawn at any time prior to an election at the discretion of the nominating
political party.
Such withdrawal would be invalid because the nominee had neither died nor
become incapacitated.
Such withdrawal would be invalid because only a nominee may formally withdraw
his nomination.
Such withdrawal would be valid because a party would be entitled not to retain a
nominee whom it feels no longer represents its interests.
IX

A law requiring candidates to be certified illegal-drug free can be made applicable to a


person seeking election as a
A.
B.
C.
D.

Senator.
Congressman.
Party-List Representative.
Governor.

X
Which of the following would not be considered as among the so-called parameters in our
party-list election system?
A.

Twenty percent of the entire membership of the House of Representatives shall be


the maximum number of seats available to party-list organization.
B
Party-lists which garner at least two percent of the total votes casts shall have
guaranteed seats.
C.
The additional seats, or the seats remaining after the allocation of the guaranteed
seats, shall be distributed among those organizations that received at least
two percent of the total votes cast.
D.
Each party or organization shall have a maximum of three party-list seats.
Which of the following statements is correct?

XI

A. Each city is a legislative district.


B. All provinces need not have contiguous territory.
C. It is not necessary to reckon with the number of inhabitants for purposes of
constituting a province into a legislative district.
D. Each additional legislative district requires 250,000 inhabitants.

XII
The final version of a bill, as approved by the Legislatures Conference Committee,
A. must undergo another three readings in the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
B. need not undergo another three readings in the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
C. may be presented directly to the President for his approval.
D. would constitute a usurpation by said Committee of the legislative power of
Congress.
XIII
A legislative veto is
A.
B.
C.
D.

constitutional.
a consequence of the Legislatures power of inquiry.
violative of the rule on presentment.
consistent with the rule on presentment.
XIV

A proposed revision of the Constitution is subject to ratification in a plebiscite to be held


A. not earlier
B. not earlier
same.
C. not earlier
same.
D. not earlier

than thirty days nor later than sixty days after the approval of the same.
than forty-five days nor later than sixty days after the approval of the
than forty-five days nor later than ninety days after the approval of the
than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of the same.

XV
Which of the following statements is correct?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Treaties
Treaties
Treaties
Treaties

and
and
and
and

international
international
international
international

agreements
agreements
agreements
agreements

are
are
are
are

ratified by the Senate.


ratified by the President.
concurred in by Congress.
ratified by Congress.

XVI
The commencement of the term of the President may
A.
B.
C.
D.

be changed by law.
not be changed by law.
be changed only by constitutional amendment.
not be changed at all.

10

XVII
A first-term Vice-President succeeds the President who dies in office during his second year
in office. Said Vice-President may
A.
B.
C.
D.

run for Vice-President after his term as President ends.


thereafter run for President.
not run for Vice-President after his term as President ends.
thereafter not be elected as President or Vice-President after his terms as President
ends.
XVIII

The President may


A. make midnight appointments.
B. absolutely not make midnight appointments.
C.
make midnight appointments, but only with respect to executive positions in
the interest of national security.
D.
make midnight appointments, but only with respect to executive positions in
times of national emergency.
XIX
Which of the following appointments would require confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments?
A. Officers whose appointments are by law required to be confirmed by the Commission
on Appointments.
B. Officers whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law.
C. Officers whose appointments are vested in the President in the Constitution.
D. Officers whom the President may be authorized by law to appoint.

XX
Dual citizens under RA 9225 are
A.
B.
C.
D.

natural-born citizens.
naturalized citizens.
citizens of the Philippines by virtue of the jus soli principle.
citizens of the Philippines by virtue of the jus sangunis principle.

11