You are on page 1of 9

COURSE SYLLABUS IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II

AY 2018-2019
Atty. Vincent Joseph E. Cesista
USC Law
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. USC VISION AND MISSION

VISION

The University of San Carlos sees:

• a WORLD where the darkness of sin and the night of unbelief vanish before
the light of the Word and the Spirit of grace

• a SOCIETY where citizens are competent, noble in character and


community-oriented
- What they know, they apply justly and honestly…
- What they do not know, they seek to learn…
- What they do not have, they endeavor to acquire…
- What they have, they share.

MISSION

The University of San Carlos is a Catholic institution of learning that embodies


the principles of academic discipline of San Carlos Borromeo and the missionary
charism of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD).

We aim to develop competent and socially responsible professionals and


lifelong learners in an environment that fosters excellence in the academic core
processes of teaching-learning, research, and community extension service.

Our mission is to provide timely, relevant, and transformative academic


programs responsive to the needs of the local, national, and global communities
in a rapidly changing world.

B. CAROLINIAN LAW GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES

At the end of the law program, the Carolinian law graduate is expected to
be Witness to the Word and to embody the folllowing Graduate Attributes:
Scientia: A COMPETENT PROFESSIONAL
Critical thinker
Lifelong learner
Skilled researcher
Sound decision- maker
Innovative problem-solver
Effective and articulate communicator

Virtus: A VIRTUOUS EXEMPLAR


Incorruptible servant leader
Ethical and values-driven practitioner

Devotio: A DEDICATED ADVOCATE


Committed peacemaker
Culture- sensitive patriot
Socially- engaged citizen
Passionate worker for the marginalized

C. PROGRAM LEVEL LEARNING OUTCOMES1 (PLLO):

Upon completion of the Law program, Carolinian law graduates will


demonstrate the following:

PLLO 1: KNOWLEDGE
PLLO 2: ETHICS, PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, WITNESS TO THE
WORD
PLLO 3: THINKING SKILLS which include the skills to identify and
articulate legal issues; apply legal reasoning and research to generate
appropriate responses to legal issues; engage in critical analysis and make
a reasoned choice amongst alternatives; and think creatively in approaching
legal issues and generating appropriate responses.
PLLO 4: RESEARCH SKILLS
PLLO 5: COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION
PLLO 6: SELF-MANAGEMENT

D. COURSE LEVEL LEARNING OUTCOMES (CLLO)

Upon completion of the course Constitutional Law II, the students should
be able to:

CLLO 1: Explain the workings of the Philippine Government.

1 Based in part on ALTC’s Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Program, December 2010.
CLLO 2: Recognize and reflect upon the ethical issues that may arise
involving the exercise of the fundamental powers of the government;
recognize and reflect upon the professional duties of lawyers in promoting
justice, human rights, due process and fairness in the community; use
their knowledge in the course to be Witness to the Word.

CLLO 3: Examine the facts of a given case, find the relevant facts and the
key issues, identify and apply the legal rules and principles involved, and
generate appropriate responses.

CLLO 4: Find and use up-to-date primary and secondary legal sources in
support of their evaluation and synthesis of relevant factual and policy
issues involving powers of government or rights and freedoms.

CLLO 5: Communicate effectively and persuasively the key principles and


concepts involving the fundamental powers of the government and the basic
rights and freedoms; demonstrate the ability to use appriate means and
form of communication depending on the educational background and
needs of legal or non-legal audiences; render appropriate opinion after
demonstrating the use of active listening skills such as questioning,
summarizing and paraphrasing.

CLLO 6: Demonstrate ability to learn and work independently, as well as


the ability to work in groups or cooperatively with others.

E. COURSE DESCRIPTION
Course No. : LLB 128A
Credit : 3 units
Prerequisite Course : None
Course Instructor : Atty. Vincent Joseph E. Cesista
Consultation Hours : Saturdays, 2PM-5PM
Faculty Lounge (War Room), USC Law
Email addresses:
vincentjosephcesista@gmail.com
Vincent.Cesista@Romulo.com

Constitutional Law II is a major subject in Political Law and is considered


as a fundamental course that can be applied in related subjects such as
Remedial Law. The method of instruction is mainly Socratic, thus, case study,
graded recitations and lectures will be employed. Selected reading materials will
also be given to enhance certain important topics in Constitutional Law. Further,
students will likewise be exposed to different methods of outcomes-based
learning in compliance with USC Law’s trend towards OBE.

F. COURSE REQUIREMENTS

1. Passing grades in Summative tests


2. Regular Attendance
3. Class Participation in Oral Examinations and passing score in evaluative
exam, if any
4. Discussion Papers / OBE activities

G. EVALUATIVE MEASURES

1. Major Examinations 1 minor exam and three (3) major examinations


to be given by instructor, in two types: Multiple
Choice Questions (MCQ) and essay format and
application schemes; may also include evaluative
quizzes given by the instructor in the course of
the semester. Observance of the basic rules on
grammar will be made part of the assessment and
evaluation. Students are required to take note of
the rules governing conduct of major
examinations enforced in the USC College of Law,
and to comply with them.

2. Class Participation this will help monitor and evaluate the individual
students as they conduct self-studies with regard
to their reading assignments.

3. Discussion Paper a requirement to be submitted after participating


in symposia and/or lecture fora or after assigning
reading materials or after the required court or
legislative assemblies visits

4. OBE Activity an activity or activities where students will apply


their theoretical learning of Constitutional Law I.

H. LEARNING ACTIVITIES

Reading Assignments students will be asked to read various reading


materials consisting primarily of decisions of
Philippine Supreme Court containing pertinent
discussion related to the content of the course.

Interactive class discussion/ each reading assignment will be


substantiated by
Graded Oral Examinations interactive class discussion pioneered by
the students
themselves and facilitated by the instructor.

Class Interaction in addition to graded oral examinations, class


interactions may be had to allow students to
freely share their ideas about current political
issues relating to the course.

Research Undertaking students will be asked to do research studies that


may entail use of resources accessible in the
internet about pertinent issues in or affecting
powers and/or structure of Philippine
Government.

Attending Symposia/Lecture Fora the students may also be asked to hold or


organize or attend certain lecture fora and/or
symposia where they will then be required to
submit discussion papers containing their
concrete learnings out of their experienced
symposia/lecture fora

Legislative Assembly/ Court Visits to supplement theoretical learning, the


students may be asked to visit courts in or out of
Cebu, or various legislative bodies within the City
to observe the workings of the Judiciary and the
Legislative branch of government, and to enable
them to grasp the dynamics of judicial and
legislative power in the Philippines. The activity
will also be an opportunity for the students to
meet the key officials of the government and
directly inquire from them the essentials of
judicial and/or legislative powers in the
Philippines.

I. POLICY ON CLASS RECORDINGS AND COURSE MATERIALS

The course materials are all academic property of the course professor. A
student may not record any part of the class by any means, and in exceptional
cases that the student receives written faculty authorization to record a class,
the student may not copy or download such recording to a computer or any
device for distribution. All course materials are for the student’s personal
education and study. Unauthorized use of the course materials shall be treated
as violation of the University policy on honesty as well as infringement of
copyright laws.

TOPICS, CONCEPTS AND CASES

I. INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE: INTRODUCTORY CONCEPTS

A. General characteristics
B. Similarities
C. Differences

• Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of Social Welfare and


Development, G.R. No. 175356, [December 3, 2013]

D. Limitations

(See Carlo L. Cruz and Isagani Cruz, Constitutional Law, 2015 Edition or
a more updated version)

II. INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE

A. POLICE POWER

1. Definition, Nature, Scope, Function

• Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R. No. 14078, [March 7,


1919]
• Ichong v. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-7995, [May 31, 1957]
• Edu v. Ericta, G.R. No. L-32096, [October 24, 1970]
• Agustin v. Edu, G.R. No. L-49112, [February 2, 1979]
• JMM Promotion and Management, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 120095, [August 5, 1996]

2. Tax/Eminent Domain as Tools of Police Power

• Lutz v. Araneta, G.R. No. L-7859, [December 22, 1955]


• Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Edu, G.R. No. L-41383, [August 15,
1988]
• Planters Products, Inc. v. Fertiphil Corp., G.R. No. 166006, [March
14, 2008]
• Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. v.
Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. No. 78742, 79310, 79744,
79777, [July 14, 1989]
• Drugstores Association of the Philippines, Inc. v. National Council
on Disability Affairs, G.R. No. 194561, [September 14, 2016]
• City of Cagayan De Oro v. Cagayan Electric Power & Light Co.,
Inc., G.R. No. 224825, [October 17, 2018]

3. Who may validly exercise police power

• Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Bel-Air Village


Association, Inc., G.R. No. 135962, [March 27, 2000]
• Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Garin, G.R. No.
130230, [April 15, 2005]
• Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Trackworks Rail
Transit Advertising, Vending and Promotions, Inc., G.R. No.
179554 (Resolution), [December 16, 2009]
• Social Justice Society v. Atienza, Jr., G.R. No. 156052 (Resolution),
[February 13, 2008]

4. Tests/Elements for valid exercise

• Francisco, Jr. v. Fernando, G.R. No. 166501, [November 16,


2006]
• Binay v. Domingo, G.R. No. 92389, [September 11, 1991]
• City of Batangas v. Philippine Shell Petroleum Corp., G.R. No.
195003, [June 7, 2017]
• Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. v. City
Mayor of Manila, G.R. No. L-24693, [July 31, 1967]

5. Judicial Review

• White Light Corp. vs. City of Manila, GR No. 122846, January 20,
2009
• Private Hospitals Association of the Philippines, Inc. v. Medialdea,
G.R. No. 234448, [November 6, 2018]

B. EMINENT DOMAIN

Art. III, Sec. 9, 1987 Constitution

1. Definition, Nature and Function

• National Power Corp. v. Posada, G.R. No. 191945 , [March 11,


2015].
• Filstream Intl. Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 284 SCRA 716
• Republic v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 185091, [August 9, 2010]

2. When exercised by legislature or when exercised by local


government unit

• City of Manila vs. Chinese Community of Manila, 40 Phil 349


• Heirs of Alberto Suguitan vs. City of Mandaluyong, 328 SCRA 137
• Municipality of Cordova v. Pathfinder Development Corp., G.R. No.
205544, [June 29, 2016]
• Beluso v. Municipality of Panay (Capiz), G.R. No. 153974, [August
7, 2006]

3. Taking
• Republic v. Vda. de Castellvi, G.R. No. L-20620, [August 15, 1974],
157 PHIL 329-364)
• National Power Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 113194, [March
11, 1996]
• Republic v. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co., G.R. No. L-
18841, [January 27, 1969]
• Telecommunications and Broadcast Attorneys of the Philippines,
Inc. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 132922, [April 21, 1998],
352 PHIL 153-206)
• National Power Corp. v. Maruhom, G.R. No. 183297, [December 23,
2009]

4. Public use

• Sumulong v. Guerrero, G.R. No. L-48685, [September 30, 1987]


• Manosca v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 106440, [January 29,
1996]
• Jesus is Lord Christian School Foundation Inc. v. Municipality
(now City) of Pasig, G.R. No. 152230, [August 9, 2005]

5. Just compensation

• Republic vs. Mupas, GR No. 181892, September 8, 2015


• De Knecht vs. Court of Appeals, 290 SCRA 223
• Republic v. Lim, G.R. No. 161656 (Resolution), [June 29, 2005]
• Land Bank of the Phils. v. Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board, G.R. No. 183279, [January 25, 2010]

5.1. Damages and interest as part of just compensation


 Eusebio v. Luis, G.R. No. 162474, [October 13, 2009]
 Apo Fruits Corporation vs Land Bank, GR No. 164195, Oct.
12, 2010
 Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Esther Anson Rivera, et al.,
G.R. No. 182431, November 17, 2010
 Republic v. Macabagdal, G.R. No. 227215 (Resolution),
[January 10, 2018]

5.2. Rental
 Export Processing Zone Authority (now Philippine Economic
Zone Authority) vs. Estate of Salud Jimenez, G.R. No.
188995. August 24, 2011

5.3. Prescription
 Eusebio v. Luis, G.R. No. 162474, [October 13, 2009]
5.4. Allied provisions
 Art. XII, Sec. 17, 1987 Constitution
 Agan, Jr., et al. v. Phil. International Air Terminals Co., Inc.,
GR No. 155001, May 05, 2003

C. TAXATION

1. Definition, Nature, Purpose and Basis


• Antero Sison v. Ancheta, GR No. 59431, 25 July 1984
• Commissioner vs. Algue, L-28896, 17 February 1988

2. When exercised by legislature; when exercised by LGU


• Basco v. PAGCOR, 197 SCRA 52
• Art. X, Secs. 3, 5, 1987 Constitution

3. Elements for valid exercise


• Art. VI, Sec. 28, 1987 Constitution
• Art. VI, Sec. 29, par. 3, 1987 Constitution
• Pepsi- Cola vs. Mun. of Tanauan, 69 SCRA 460
• Tan vs. del Rosario, 237 SCRA 324
• Pascual vs. Sec. Of Public Works, 110 Phil 331
• Abra Valley vs. Aquino, 162 SCRA 106, L- No. 39086, 15 June
1988
• Herrera v. QC Assessment Board, 3 SCRA 186, GR No L-15270
• Gaston vs. Republic Planters Bank, 158 SCRA 626
• Lung Center of the Phil vs. Quezon City, GR No. 144104, June 29,
2004
• La Suerte Cigar and Cigarette Factory v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
Nos. 125346, 136328-29, 144942, 148605, 158197 & 165499,
[November 11, 2014]

4. Tax exemptions
• Art. XIV, Sec. 4 [3]
• Art. VI, Sec. 28 [3]; [4]