Art.

XIII Social Justice and Human Rights

1995
BAR

BAR
Question
s

Discuss the concept of social justice

under the 1987 Constitution.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Section 10, Article II of the 1987 Constitution provides. "The State shall promote social
justice
in all phases of national development". As stated in Marquez vs. Secretary of Labor, 171
SCRA 337, social justice means that the State should assist the underprivileged. Without
such help, they might not be able to secure justice for themselves. Since the provision on
social justice in the 1987 Constitution covers all phases of national development, it is not
limited to the removal of socio-economic inequities but also includes political and cultural
inequities. The 1987 Constitution elaborated on the concept of social justice by devoting an
entire article, Article XIII, to it.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a) Section 5, Article II of the 1935 Constitution provided, "The promotion of social justice to
Insure the well-being and economic security of all the people should bethe concern of the
State." While this provision embodied the concept of social justice as an obligation of
theState to alleviate the plight of the underprivileged by removing Inequities, it simply made
a general policy declaration and focused on social and economic inequities,
b) In the 1987 Constitution, Social Justice is conceptualized as a set of specific economic,
social and cultural rights.
c) The 1987 Constitutional provision on social justice includes all
development. It includes economic, political, social and cultural rights.

phases of national

1988
BAR

Hearings before the congressional committee have established that many

firms at the Bataan Export Processing Zone had closed down or pulled out
because of unstable labor conditions resulting in so many strikes. To remedy the situation
and inject vitality to the export expansion program, some congressional leaders and
business executives propose that strike-free zones be established.
Do you believe that
under the present Constitution, it is legally possible to put up a strike-free export processing
zone in the country? Why or why not?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The fact that many firms at the Bataan EPZA have been forced to close down by
unstable labor condition brought about by strike does not justify the ban on strike. The
Constitution guarantees the rights of workers to engage in "peaceful concerted activities,
including the right to strike in accordance with law." (Art. XIII, sec. 3). It is illegal strikes
which can be prohibited but not all strikes. For strike is labor's legitimate weapon. In the
absence of a compelling interest of the state (such as health and safety, e.g., the prohibition
of strike in hospitals and industries indispensable to the national interest) it cannot be
prohibited.

1993
BAR

Congressman Cheng says he is one of the co-authors of the Subic Bay

Metropolitan Authority Charter. He declares that the SBMA is the answer to
rapid economic growth and the attainment of the Presidents Philippine 2000 dream.
However, Cheng is worried that the foreign capital might be slow in coming in due to
unstable working conditions resulting from too many strikes. To remedy this situation,
Cheng proposes an amendment to SBMA law declaring it a strike-free zone or total ban on
strikes. Is this proposal legally defensible? Explain briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Art. XIII. sec. 3 of the Constitution guarantees the right of all workers to engage in peaceful
concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law. Thus, a law cannot
totally prohibit the right to strike but can only regulate the exercise thereof. His proposal to
ban strikes totally in the Subic Special Economic and Freeport Zone is, therefore
unconstitutional.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
While the Constitution guarantees to workers the right to engage inpeaceful concerted
activities, Including the right to strike, such right can only be exercised in accordance with
law. The phrase "in accordance with law" was Inserted precisely to Indicate that in some
exceptional cases workers would not have the right to strike if it is prohibited by law. Hence,
the proposal to ban strikes totally in the Subic Special Economic and Freeport Zone is
constitutional. (Social Security System Employees Association vs. Court of Appeals, 175
SCRA 686, July 28. 1989; Manila Public School Teachers Association v. Laguio, 200 SCRA 323
(1991)).

2011
BAR

MCQ. In the valid exercise of management prerogative consistent with the

company's right to protect its economic interest, it may prohibit its employees

from _____.
(A) joining rallies during their work shift.
(B) marrying employees of competitor companies.
(C) publicly converging with patrons of competitor companies.
(D) patronizing the product of competitor companies.

1994
BAR

In the desire to improve the fishing methods of the fishermen, the Bureau of
Fisheries, with the approval of the President, entered into a Memorandum of
Agreement to allow Thai fishermen to fish within 200 miles from the Philippine sea coasts on
the condition that Filipino fishermen be allowed to use Thai fishing equipment and vessels,
and to learn modern technology in fishing and canning.
(1) Is the agreement valid?
(2) Suppose the agreement is for a joint venture on the same area with a Thai oil
corporation for the exploration and exploitation of minerals with the Thai corporation
providing technical and financial assistance. Is the agreement valid?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1) No. the President cannot authorize the Bureau of Fisheries to enter into a memorandum
of agreement allowing Thai fishermen to fish within the exclusive economic zone of the
Philippines, because the Constitution reserves to Filipino citizens the use and enjoyment of
the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines. Section 2. Article XII of the Constitution
provides: The State shall protect the nation's marine part in its archipelagic waters,
territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment to Filipino
citizens." Section 7, Article XIII of the Constitution provides: "The State shall protect the
rights of subsistence fishermen,especially of local communities, to the preferential use of
the communal marine and fishing resources, both inland and offshore. It shall provide
support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and research, adequate financial,
production, and marketing assistance, and other services. The State shall also protect,
develop, and conserve such resources. The protection shall extend to offshore fishing
grounds of subsistence fishermen against foreign intrusion. Fishworkers shall receive a just
share from their labor in the utilization of marine and fishing resources.
2) The President can enter into a memorandum of agreement with a Thai oil corporation
involving technical and financial assistance for the exploration and exploitation of minerals,
but there should be no Joint venture. Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution authorizes the
President to enter into agreements with foreign-owned corporations involving technical or
financial assistance for the exploration, development, and utilization of minerals. However,
the same provision states the joint venture for the exploration, development and utilization
of natural resources may be undertaken only withFilipino citizens, or corporations or
associations at least sixty per cent of whose capital is owned by Filipino citizen.

1994
BAR

What is the state policy on working women?

Section 14, Article XIII of the Constitution provides: "The State shall protect WORKING
WOMEN by providing safe and healthful working conditions, taking into account their
maternal functions, and such facilities and opportunities that will enhance their welfare and
enable them to realize their full potential in the service of the nation."

MCQ. Bona fide associations of citizens which demonstrate capacity to

promote the public interest and with identifiable leadership, membership, and
structure are: _____.
(A) independent party-list organizations.
(C) independent indigenous organizations.
(B) independent sectoral organizations.
(D) independent people's organizations.
2012
BAR

1997
BAR

About a hundred people occupied a parcel of land in Quezon City belonging to

the city government and built shanties thereon which they utilized for
dwelling, sari-sari stores, etc. The City Mayor issued an order directing the occupants to
vacate the structures within five (5) days from notice, otherwise they would be evicted and
relocated and their shanties removed, in order that the parcel of land could be converted
into a park for public use and enjoyment. The inhabitants of the parcel of land complained
to the Commission on Human Rights urging that the Mayor of Quezon City be stopped from
doing what he has threatened to do. The Commission on Human Rights, after conducting an
investigation and finding that the shanties of petitioners were already being demolished by
them, ordered the Quezon City Mayor and persons implementing his order to cease and
desist from demolishing petitioners shanties under pain of contempt. What have you to say
on the validity of the actuation of the Commission on Human Rights in relation to that of the
Quezon City Mayor?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The actuation of the Commission on Human Rights is void. In Simon vs. Commission on
Human Rights, 229 SCRA 117. the Court held that the Commission on Human Rights has no
power to issue a restraining order or a writ of injunction and has no power to cite for
contempt for violation of the restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction. The cease
and desist order, according to the Court, is a semantic Interplay for a restraining order. Its
power to cite for contempt should be understood to apply only to violations of its adopted
operational guidelines and rules of procedure essential to carry out its investigatorial
powers, which it is constitutionally authorized to adopt.

2001
BAR

In order to implement a big government flood control project, the Department

of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and a local government unit (LGU)
removed squatters from the bank of a river and certain esteros for relocation to another
place. Their shanties were demolished. The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) conducted
an investigation and issued an order for the DPWH and the LGU to cease and desist from
effecting the removal of the squatters on the ground that the human rights of the squatters
were being violated. The DPWH and LGU objected to the order of the CHR. Resolve which
position is correct?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The position of the Department of Public Works and Highways and of the local government
unit is correct. As held in Export Processing Zone Authority v. Commission on Human Rights,
208 SCRA125 (1992), no provision in the Constitution or any law confers on the Commission
on Human Rights jurisdiction to issue temporary restraining orders or writs of preliminary
injunction. The Commission on Human Rights has no judicial power. Its powers are merely
investigatory.

2005

B A R Squatters and vendors have put up structures in an area intended for a

Peoples Park, which are impeding the flow of traffic in the adjoining highway. Mayor Cruz
gave notice for the structures to be removed, and the area vacated within a month, or else,

face demolition and ejectment. The occupants filed a case with the Commission on Human
Rights (CHR) to stop the Mayors move. The CHR then issued an order to desist against
Mayor Cruz with warning that he would be held in contempt should he fail to comply with the
desistance order. When the allotted time lapsed, Mayor Cruz caused the demolition and
removal of the structures. Accordingly, the CHR cited him for contempt.
(a) What is your concept of Human Rights? Does this case involve violation of human
rights within the scope of the CHRs jurisdiction?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the scope
of human rights includes "those that relate to an individual's social, economic, cultural,
political and civil relations... along with what is generally considered to be his inherent and
inalienable rights, encompassing almost all aspects of life." In the case at bar, the land
adjoins a busy national highway and the construction of the squatter shanties impedes the
flow of traffic. The consequent danger to life and limb cannot be ignored. It is paradoxical
that a right which is claimed to have been violated is one that cannot, in the first place,
even be invoked, if it is, in fact, extant. Based on the circumstances obtaining in this
instance, the CHR order for demolition do not fall within the compartment of human rights
violations involving civil and political rights intended by the Constitution. (Simon v.
Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No. 100150, January 5, 1994)
(b) Can the CHR issue an order to desist or restraining order?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The CHR may not issue an "order to desist" or restraining order. The constitutional provision
directing the CHR to provide for preventive measures to those whose human rights have
been violated or need protection may not be construed to confer jurisdiction on the
Commission to issue a restraining order or writ of injunction for, it that were the intention,
the Constitution would have expressly said so. Jurisdiction is conferred only by the
Constitution or by law. It is never derived by implication. (Export Processing Zone Authority
v. Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No. 101476, April 14, 1992)
(c) Is the CHR empowered to declare Mayor Cruz in contempt?
powers at all?

Does it have contempt

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The CHR does not possess adjudicative functions and therefore, on its own, is not
empowered to declare Mayor Cruz in contempt for issuing the "order to desist." However,
under the 1987 Constitution, the CHR is constitutionally authorized, in the exercise of its
investigative functions, to "adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite
for contempt for violations thereof in accordance with the Rules of Court." Accordingly, the
CHR, In the course of an investigation, may only cite or hold any person in contempt and
impose the appropriate penalties in accordance with the procedure and sanctions provided
for in the Rules of Court. (Carino v. Commission on Human Rights, G.R. No. 96681,
December 2, 1991)

2011

B A R MCQ. Since the Constitution is silent as to who can appoint the Chairman of

the Commission on Human Rights, the President appointed W to that position

without submitting his appointment to the Commission on Appointments for confirmation. Is
Ws appointment by the President valid? _____.
(A) No, since the position of Chairman of the Commission was created by statute, the
appointment of its holder requires the consent of Congress.
(B) Yes, since the power to appoint in the government, if not lodged elsewhere, belongs to
the President as Chief Executive.
(C) Yes, since the power to fill up all government positions mentioned in the Constitution has
been lodged in the President.
(D) No, because absent any express authority under the Constitution, the power to appoint
does not exist.

2012

B A R MCQ. The principal function of the Commission on Human Rights is: _____.

(A) issue writs of injunction/ restraining orders.

(C) quasi-judicial.

(B) investigatory.

(D) rule--making.