You are on page 1of 9

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT excess jurisdiction on the part of any branch or

REVIEWER instrumentality of the government.”


- “To settle actual controversies involving rights
I. INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY which are legally demandable and enforceable”
To maintain the independence of the judiciary, the ff is the traditional concept of judicial power.
safeguards have been embodied in the Constitution: - “To determine whether or not there has been a
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
1. The SC is a constitutional body. It cannot be excess jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
abolished nor may its membership or the manner instrumentality of the government” represents a
of its meetings be changed by mere legislation. broadening of judicial power to enable the courts
2. The members of the SC may not be removed of justice to review what was before forbidden
except by impeachment. territory, to wit, the discretion of the political
3. The SC may not be deprived of its minimum departments of the government.
original and appellate jurisdiction as prescribed in
Art. 8, Sec 5, of the Constitution. IBP V ZAMORA
4. The appellate jurisdiction of the SC may not be
increased by law without its advice and - When the grant of power is qualified, conditional
concurrence. or subject to limitations, the issue of whether the
5. Appointees to the judiciary are now nominated prescribed qualifications or conditions or
by the Judicial and Bar Council and no longer limitations have been met or the limitations
subject to confirmation by the Commission on respected is justiciable – the problem being one
Appointments. of validity, not its wisdom.
6. The SC now has administrative supervision over all
DAZA V SINGSON
lower courts and their personnel.
7. The SC has exclusive power to discipline judges of - The issue presented is justiciable rather than
lower courts. political if it involves the legality and not the
8. The members of the SC and all lower courts have wisdom of the act complained of.
security of tenure, which cannot be undermined - Even if the nature is political in nature, it would still
by a law reorganizing the judiciary. come within the Court’s power of review under
9. They shall not be designated to any agency the expanded jurisdiction conferred upon it by Art
performing quasi-judicial or administrative 8, sec1 of the Constitution.
functions.
10. The salaries of judges may not be reduced during ATONG PAGLAUM INC V COMELEC
their continuance in office.
- The duty of the court includes the power to set
11. The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.
aside acts of government, even if not tainted with
12. The SC alone may initiate rules of court.
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
13. Only the SC may order the temporary details of
excess of jurisdiction.
judges.
14. The SC can appoint all officials and employees of MMDA V CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF MANILA BAY
the judiciary.
- Judicial power includes the power of the court “to
II. JUDICIAL POWER alter, modify, or set aside their decisions before
“The judicial power shall be vested in one they became final and unalterable.”
Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be - It covers as well the continuing authority of the SC
established by law. to enforce its final decisions because the
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of execution if its decisions is but an integral part of
justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which its adjacent function.
are legally demandable and enforceable, and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse III. JURISDICTION
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on “The Congress shall have the power to define,
the part of any branch or instrumentality of the prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the various
Government.” (Art 8, Sec 1) courts but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its
jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Section 5 hereof.”
- Judicial power shall be vested not only I the SC (Art 8, Sec 2(1))
but in such lower courts as may be established by
law. - Jurisdiction – authority by which courts take
- SC is the only constitutional court, all lower courts cognizance of and decide cases, the legal right
being of statutory creation. by which judges exercise their authority.
- Judicial department of our government: - Jurisdiction spoken of in Sec 2 are those cases
1. SC prescribed by the Congress subject to
2. CTA constitutional limitations.
3. Sandiganbayan - Although the appellate jurisdiction of the SC may
4. Sharia courts be increased by law, this may not be done now
- Under the new definition of judicial power, the except upon advice and with the concurrence of
courts of justice are authorized not only “to settle the SC itself.
actual controversies involving rights which are - No law may be passed depriving it of the power
legally demandable and enforceable” but also to review a life sentence.
“to determine whether or not there has been a
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
IV. APPOINTMENTS The Council shall have the principal function of
“The Members of the Supreme Court and judges recommending appointees to the judiciary. It may exercise
of lower courts shall be appointed by the President from a such other functions and duties as the Supreme Court may
list of at least three nominees preferred by the Judicial and assign to it.” (Art 8, Sec 8)
Bar Council for every vacancy. Such appointments need
no confirmation. Composition
For the lower courts, the President shall issue the
appointment within ninety days from the submission of the 1. Ex officio Chairman:
list.” (Art 8, Sec 9) a. Chief Justice
2. Ex-officio members:
QUALIFICATIONS a. Sec of Justice
“No person shall be appointed Member of the b. Representative of Congress
Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court unless he is a 3. Regular members:
natural-born citizen of the Philippines. A Member of the a. Representative of the IBP
Supreme Court must be at least forty years of age, and b. Professor of Law
must have been for fifteen years or more, a judge of a c. Retired member of SC
lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the d. Representative of private sector
Philippines.” (Art 8, Sec 7(1)) 4. Secretary de officio:
A Member of the Judiciary must be a person of a. Clerk of the SC
proven competence, integrity, probity, and
Term
independence. (Art 8, Sec 7(3))
- Regular members shall be appointed by the
- Qualifications may not be reduced or increased
President for a four-year term with the consent of
by the Congress through ordinary legislation.
the COA.
- In cases of judges of the lower courts, Congress is
permitted to add to the constitutional
- Nomination of the council, the judge does not
qualifications, the same being only minimum
need confirmation by the COA.
requirements.
- Judges may not be appointed in an acting or
The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of temporary capacity as this would undermine the
judges of lower courts, but no person may be appointed independence of the judiciary, temporary
judge thereof unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a appointments being essentially revocable at will.
member of the Philippine Bar. (Art 8, Sec 7(2)) And to prevent impairment of this same goal and
discontinue a notorious practice before.
- Natural-born citizen is not required for courts lower
than collegiate courts. “The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts
established by law shall not be designated to any agency
JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL performing quasi-judicial or administrative function.” (Art 8,
Sec 12)
- The council that will screen such appointments
and not the Commission, which is a highly political V. FISCAL AUTONOMY
body likely to be influenced by considerations “The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations
other than the merits of the candidate for judicial for the Judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature
office. below the amount appropriated for the previous year and,
- It is not infrequent in the past when persons after approval, shall be automatically and regularly
without credentials except their political released.” (Art 8, Sec 3)
affiliations and loyalty were able to infiltrate and
emasculate the judiciary. BENGZON V DRILON
“A Judicial and Bar Council is hereby created - Fiscal autonomy means freedom from outside
under the supervision of the Supreme Court composed of control.
the Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman, the Secretary of - Fiscal autonomy contemplates a guarantee of full
Justice, and a representative of the Congress as ex officio flexibility to allocate and utilize their resources with
Members, a representative of the Integrated Bar, a the wisdom and dispatch that their needs require.
professor of law, a retired Member of the Supreme Court, - Power and authority to levy, assess and collect
and a representative of the private sector. fees, fix rates of compensation not exceeding the
The regular members of the Council shall be highest rates authorized by law for compensation
appointed by the President for a term of four years with the and pay plans of the government and allocate
consent of the Commission on Appointments. Of the and disburse such sums as may be provided by
Members first appointed, the representative of the law or prescribed by them in the course of the
Integrated Bar shall serve for four years, the professor of discharge of their functions.
law for three years, the retired Justice for two years, and - Any law which provides for an exemption from
the representative of the private sector for one year. said fees would be constitutionally infirm for it
The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the impairs the Court’s guaranteed fiscal autonomy
Secretary ex officio of the Council and shall keep a record and erodes its independence.
of its proceedings.
The regular Members of the Council shall receive VI. COMPOSITION OF THE SUPREME COURT
such emoluments as may be determined by the Supreme “The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice
Court. The Supreme Court shall provide in its annual and fourteen Associate Justices. It may sit en banc or in its
budget the appropriations for the Council. discretion, in division of three, five, or seven Members. Any
vacancy shall be filled within ninety days from the a contrary rule would lead to confusion in our
occurrence thereof.” (Art 8, Sec 4(1)) jurisprudence, with the divisions contradicting
each other or even changing rulings laid down by
- The number of members of the full Court and of the full court.
the divisions is fixed by the Constitution and may
not be changed by statute. FORTICH V CORONA

DE CASTRO V JBC - The word “decided” refers to “cases,” while the


word “resolved” refers to “matters.”
- President may provide for appointments in the
Judiciary even within two months immediately VII. POWER OF JUDICIAL INQUIRY
before the next presidential election and up to
the end of his term. - No constitutional question will be heard and
- Prohibition against the President and the Acting decided by them unless there is compliance with
President making appointments within two months what are known as the requisites of judicial inquiry.
before the next presidential elections and up to
Requisites:
the end of the President’s or Acting President’s
term does not refer to the Members of the SC and 1. There must be an actual case or controversy
does not apply as well to all other appointments in 2. The question of constitutionality must be raised by
the Judiciary. the proper party
3. The constitutional question must be raised at the
EN BANC CASES
earliest possible opportunity
“All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty,
4. The decision of the constitutional question must
international or executive agreement, or law, which shall
be necessary to the determination of the case
be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all other
itself
cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be
heard en banc, including those involving the 1. ACTUAL CASE
constitutionality, application, or operation of presidential
decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, - Involves conflict of legal rights, an assertion of
and other regulations, shall be decided with the opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial
concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually resolution.
took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and - Case must not be moot and academic or based
voted thereon.” (Art 8, Sec 4(2)) on extra-legal or other similar considerations not
cognizable by a court of justice.
- Now, as few as five members of the Court can - There must be a contrariety of legal rights that
declare any of the measures unconstitutional, this can be interpreted and enforced on the basis of
number being a majority of the quorum of eight of existing law and jurisprudence.
the fifteen-member Court. - Controversy - one that is appropriate for judicial
determination
- Must be real and substantial controversy
KIDA V SENATE OF THE PHILIPINES
admitting of specific relief through a
- Regardless of how close the voting is, so long as decree that is conclusive in character.
there is a concurrence of the majority of members - Request for advisory opinion cannot come under
of the en banc who actually took part in the the category of an actual case or controversy
deliberations of the case, a decision garnering since the issue raised does not involve any conflict
only 8 votes out of 15 members is still a decision of in law that has assumed the proportions of a full-
the SC en banc and must be respected as such. blown dispute.
- Case is deemed an actual controversy where the
DIVISION CASES purpose is to solicit from the court a declaratory
“Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or judgment involving the interpretation of the rights
resolved with the concurrence of a majority of the and duties of a person under the provisions of a
Members who actually took part in the deliberations on deed, will, contract, or other written instrument or
the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no case a statute or ordinance.
without the concurrence of at least three of such
Members. When the required number is not obtained, the PIMENTEL V AGUIRRE
case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no doctrine
- When an act of the legislative department is
or principle of law laid down by the court in a decision
seriously alleged to have infringed the
rendered en banc or in division may be modified or
Constitution, settling the controversy becomes the
reversed except by the court sitting en banc.” (Art 8, Sec
duty of this Court.
4(3))
- By the mere enactment of the questioned law or
- There are now three divisions of the SC with five the approval of the challenged action, the
members each. dispute is said to have ripened into a judicial
- Where the necessary vote cannot be had in controversy even without any other overt act.
division, the case shall be referred to the Court en - Even a singular violation of the Constitution and/or
banc and decided in accordance with its own the law is enough to awaken judicial duty.
rules.
- Same action shall be taken where a doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the court en banc or
in division is sought to be modified or reversed, as
PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO V GRPPPAD sustain direct injury as a result of the governmental
act that is being challenged.
- That the law or an act in question is not yet - Being a mere procedural technicality,
effective does not negate ripeness. the requirement of locus standi may be
- When an act of the President, who in our waived by the Court in the exercise of its
constitutional scheme is a coequal of Congress, is discretion.
seriously alleged to have infringed the Constitution
and the laws, settling the dispute becomes the TAXPAYERS AS PROPER PARTY
duty and the responsibility of the courts.
- It is now permissible for an ordinary for an ordinary
PACU V SECRETARY OF EDUCATION taxpayer/s to raise the question of the validity of
an appropriation law.
- Mere apprehension that the Sec of Education - The transcendental importance to the public of
might, under the law, withdraw the permit of one these cases demands that they be settled
of the petitioners does not constitute a justiciable promptly and definitely, brushing aside, if we must,
controversy. technicalities of procedure.
- Taxpayers must make a claim of illegal
MADRIAGA V CHINA BANKING CORP
disbursement of public funds or that a tax
- When there is no more live subject of controversy, measure is unconstitutional, or deflected to an
the Court ceases to have a reason to render any illegal purpose, or that there is a wastage of
ruling or make any pronouncement. Courts public funds through the enforcement of an
generally decline jurisdiction on the grounds of invalid or unconstitutional.
mootness. - Requisites for a taxpayer’s suit to prosper:
1. Public funds derived from taxation are
JAVIER V COMELEC disbursed by a political subdivision or
instrumentality, and in doing so, law violated
- The SC is not only the highest arbiter but also the
or some irregularity is committed
conscience of the government.
2. Petitioner is directly affected by the alleged
- There are times when although the dispute has
act.
disappeared, it nevertheless cries out to be
- Taxpayer is considered to have the proper
resolved.
personality or standing to raise a constitutional
- Justice demands that we act then, not only for
issue when it is established that public funds from
the vindication of the outraged right, though
taxation have been disbursed in alleged
gone, but also for the guidance of and as a
contravention of the law or the Constitution.
restrain upon the future.
LEGISLATORS AS PROPER PARTY
DAVIDV ARROYO
- Legislators have been acknowledged as proper
- Moot and academic principle is not a magic
parties in suits involving claims that the official
formula that can automatically dissuade the
action complained of infringes upon their
courts in resolving a case.
prerogatives as such.
EXCEPTIONS TO MOOTNESS - Any act of the Executive that injures the institution
of Congress causes a derivative but nonetheless
1. There is a grave violation of the Constitution substantial injury that can be questioned by
2. The exceptional character of the situation legislators.
and the paramount public interest is involved - An organization of taxpayers and citizens was
3. When the constitutional issue raised requires held to be a proper party to question the
formulation of controlling principle to guide constitutionality of a law providing for special
the bench, the bar, and the public retirement benefits for members of the legislature.
4. The case is capable of repetition yet evading
preview TRANSCENDENTAL IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUE/S RAISED
REQUISITES OF TRANSCENDENTAL IMPORTANCE
GARCILLANO V HOR
1. Character of the funds (that it is public) o other
- Transcendental and paramount importance not assets involved in the case
only to the public but also to the bench and the 2. Presence of a clear case of disregard of a
bar, and should be resolved for the guidance of constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public
all respondent agency or instrumentality of the
government
2. PROPER PARTY 3. Lack of any party with a more direct and specific
interest in raising the questions being raised.
- One who has sustained or is in immediate danger
of sustaining an injury as a result of the act KILOSBAYAN INC V GUINGONA
complained of.
- Unless and unless such actual or potential injury is - Kilosbayan was acknowledge as a proper party in
established, the complainant cannot have the a suit questioning the eligibility of an appointee to
legal personality to raise the constitutional the SC on the ground of his alleged lack of
question. constitutional qualification natural-citizenship.
- LOCUS STANDI – personal and substantial interest - The Court allowed its petition, considering that it
in a case such that the party has sustained or will involved “an issue of utmost and far-reaching
constitutional importance, namely, the EFFECTS OF DECLARATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
qualification of a person to be appointed as a TWO VIEWS:
member of the SC.
1. Orthodox View
ANAK MINDANAO PARTY LIST V EXEC SEC 2. Modern View

- People’s or non-governmental organizations may ORTHODOX VIEW


not ventilate “generalized grievances” against
Executive Orders. - Unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no
rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection;
CONCERNED CITIZEN AS A PARTY has no legal effect; it creates no office; it is in
legal contemplation, inoperative, as if it had not
- There must be a showing that the issues raised by been passed.
them are of transcendental importance which - Considered never to have existed ever.
must be settled early.
- When the issue concerns a public right, it is MODERN VIEW
sufficient that the petitioner is a citizen and has an
interest in the execution of the laws. - Court in passing the constitutionality does not
annul or repeal the statute if it finds it in conflict
ORDINARY CITIZEN MAY BE CONSIDERED AS CLOTHED WITH with the Constitution
LOCUS STANDI AND WOULD SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF - Refuses to recognize and determines the rights of
PERSONAL INTEREST WHEN: the parties just as if such statute had no existence.
- Opinion or reason of the court may operate as a
1. When the proceeding involves the assertion of precedent for the determination of other similar
public right cases, but it does not strike the statute from the
2. When the right to information is invoked statute books; it does not repeal, supersede,
3. When freedom of expression, which has been revoke, or annul the statute.
considered as “an issue of overarching
significance to our society,” is involved DOCTRINE OF OPERATIVE FACT

CITIZEN CAN RAISE A CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION ONLY - Nullifies the effects of an unconstitutional law by
WHEN: recognizing that the existence of a statute prior to
a determination of unconstitutionality is an
1. He can show that he has personally suffered some operative fact and may have consequences
actual or threatened injury because of the which cannot always be ignored.
allegedly illegal conduct of the government - Applicable when a declaration of
2. The injury is fairly traceable to the challenged unconstitutionality will impose an undue burden
action on those who have relied on the invalid law.
3. A favorable action will likely redress the injury. - Applied to a criminal case when:
1. Declaration of unconstitutionality would put
3. EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY
the accused in double jeopardy;
- Constitutional questions must be raised at the 2. Would put in limbo the acts done by a
earliest possible opportunity, such that if it is not municipality in reliance upon a law creating
raised in the pleadings, it cannot be considered it.
at the trial, and, if not considered at the trial, it - Only applies as a matter of equity and fair play.
cannot be considered on appeal.
LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES V COMELEC
EXCEPTION:
1. In criminal cases, the constitutional question - Under the operative fact doctrine, the law is
can be raised at any time in the discretion of recognized as unconstitutional but the effects of
the court. the unconstitutional law, prior to its declaration of
2. In civil cases, the constitutional question can nullity, may be left undisturbed as a matter of
be raised at any stage if it is necessary to the equity and fair play.
determination of the case itself. - Invocation of the doctrine of operative fact is an
3. In every case, except where there is estoppel, admission that the law is unconstitutional.
the constitutional question may be raised at - The doctrine affects or modifies only the effects of
any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the the unconstitutional law, not the unconstitutional
court. law itself.
4. NECESSITY OF DECIDING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION PARTIAL UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
ZANDUETA V DE LA COSTA
- Courts hesitate to declare a law totally
- A person cannot question the validity of a law unconstitutional and, as long as it is possible, will
under which he had previously accepted salvage the valid portions thereof in order to give
benefits. effect to the legislative will.
- Declaration of partial unconstitutionality will be
GENERAL V URRO
valid if:
- If the petitioner fails to establish his cause of 1. Legislature is willing to retain the valid portions
action for quo warranto, a discussion of the even if the rest of the statute is declared
constitutionality of the appointments of the illegal;
respondents is rendered completely unnecessary.
2. The valid portions can stand independently PETITIONER ORGANIZATONS V EXEC SEC
as a separate statute.
- Legislative willingness to retain the valid portions - Where the issues raised are of paramount
may be expressed in separability clause. importance to the public, the court has the
- “If for any reason any section or provision discretion to brush aside technicalities of
of this Act is declared invalid or procedure.
unconstitutional, the remainder of the
2. APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Act shall not be affected by such
Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or
declaration.”
certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide,
- Note: Even without the separability
final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
clause, if the valid portion is independent
a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity
of the invalid portion, it may be fair to
of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presume that the legislature would have
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
enacted it by itself if it had supposed that
ordinance, or regulation is in question.
it could constitutionally do so.
b) All cases involving the legality of any tax,
VIII. POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in
relation thereto.
1. Original jurisdiction c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower
2. Appellate jurisdiction court is in issue.
3. Temporary assignment of judges d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed
4. Change of venue or place of trial is reclusion perpetua or higher.
5. Rule-making power e) All cases in which only an error or question of
6. Appointment of court personnel law is involved. (Art 8, Sec 5(2))
7. Administrative supervision of courts
Right to appeal not embraced in due process
1. Original Jurisdiction
Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting - As long as the parties have been given the
ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and over opportunity to be heard in the lower court, they
petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo cannot demand the right to appeal if the
warranto, and habeas corpus. (Art 8, Sec 5(1)) legislature sees fit to withhold it. (not absolute)
- Appellate jurisdiction of the SC is irreducible may
- Diplomats are not subject to the jurisdiction of the not be withdrawn from it by the Congress.
court of receiving state unless when immunity is - Appeals allowed in Section 5 are from the final
waived either expressly or impliedly. judgments and decrees only of LCs or judicial
- SC maintained that though its possession of tribunals and not administrative decisions.
original jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari, - Review of these decisions by the court of justice,
prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and including the SC, is not guaranteed by this
habeas corpus, which it shares with the LC, does provision.
not give parties “the complete liberty or discretion - On question of facts, it is entirely up to the
to file their petition in any of these courts. In the legislature to determine whether or not appeals
absence of special reasons, they cannot from such administrative decisions may be
disregard the doctrine of hierarchy of courts in our allowed; without its permission, appeal cannot be
judicial system by seeking relief directly from this taken as a matter of right.
court despite the fact that the same is available in - On question of law, courts of justice possess an
the lower tribunals in the exercise of their original underlying and inherent power to scrutinize the
concurrent jurisdiction. same as decided by administrative agencies. But
- Note: direct invocation of the original jurisdiction appeals on such questions are not covered in Sec
to the SC shall be allowed only when there are 5(2), Art 8, which is not applicable to
“special and important reasons therefor, clearly administrative agencies.
and especially set out in the petition” as for - As the SC is guaranteed appellate jurisdiction
instance “where the court believes that resolving where the case involves “only an error or question
the issue of constitutionality of a law or regulation of law,” it is permissible for the Congress to provide
at the first instance is of paramount importance that mixed questions of law and fact shall be
and immediately affects the social, economic, decided finally by a lower court.
and moral well-being of the people. - Appealed cases involving mixed questions of law
and fact are now under the jurisdiction of CA.
PRINCIPLE OF “JUDICIAL COURTESY”
Competence of lower courts to decide constitutional
- Applies where there is a “strong probability that
questions
the issues before the higher court would be
rendered moot and moribund as a result of the - LC can decide constitutional questions but is still
continuation of the proceedings in the LC or court subject to review by the SC.
of origin. - RTCs have the authority and jurisdiction to
consider the constitutionality of the statutes, EOs,
PRINCIPLE OF HIERARCHY OF COURTS
PDs and other issuances.
- Requires that recourse must be first made to the
lower-ranked court exercising concurrent
jurisdiction with a higher court.
BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO V CAMACHO 6. APPOINTMENT OF COURT PERSONNEL
Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in
- CTA’s jurisdiction is to resolve tax disputes in accordance with the Civil Service Law. (Art 8, Sec 5 (6))
general, however, this does not included cases
where the constitutionality of a law or rule is - Appointments made by the SC are, like all similar
challenged. appointments made by the other departments,
required to be in accordance with the Civil
3. TEMPORARY ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES Service Law.
Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations
as public interest may require. Such temporary assignment 7. ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION OF COURTS
shall not exceed six months without the consent of the The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision
judge concerned. (Art8, Sec 5(3)) over all courts and the personnel thereof. (Art 8, Sec 6)
MACEDA V VASQUEZ
- Will minimize if not altogether eliminate the
pernicious practice of the rigodon de jueces, or - Ombudsman cannot dictate to, and bind the
the transfer of judges at will to suit the motivations Court, to its findings that a case before it does or
of the chief executive. does not have administrative implications.
- Temporary assignments may be justified to - To do so is to deprive the court of the exercise of
arrange for judges with clogged dockets to be its administrative prerogatives and to arrogate
assisted by their less busy colleagues, or to provide unto itself a power not constitutionally sanctioned.
for the replacement of the regular judge who
may not be expected to be impartial in the FUENTES V OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN-MINDANAO
decision of particular cases.
- No other entity has competence to review a
judicial order or decision – whether final and
4. CHANGE OF VENUE OR PLACE OF TRIAL executory or not – and pronounce it erroneous so
Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a as to lay the basis for a criminal and administrative
miscarriage of justice. (Art 8, Sec 5(4)) complaint for rendering an unjust judgment or
PEOPLE V GUTIERREZ order. The prerogative belongs to the court alone.

- SC ordered the transfer on the basis of what is AMPONG V CSC


considered its inherent authority, rejecting the
- Only the SC can oversee the judges’ and court
argument that venue in criminal cases was
personnel’s compliance with all laws, rules and
jurisdictional.
regulation.
- May also be exercised in civil cases where it can
- Administrative jurisdiction over a court employee
be tried elsewhere by order of the SC to prevent
belongs to the SC, regardless of whether the
miscarriage of justice.
offense was committed before or after
5. RULE-MAKING POWER employment in the judiciary.
Promulgate rules concerning the protection and
CSC V ANDAL
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice,
and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice - In case of violation of the CS Law by a court
of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the personnel, the standard procedure is for the CSC
under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and to bring its complaint against a judicial employee
inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, before the OCA of the SC.
shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall
not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of GARCIA V MIRO
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall
- Ombudsman can take cognizance of criminal
remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme
cases, or purely criminal aspect of cases, against
Court. (Art 8, Sec 5(5))
judges especially when the administrative aspect
Limitations on the rule-making power of the SC:
thereof had been duly endorsed or referred to the
1. The rules must be uniform for all courts of the same SC for adjudication.
grade.
PEOPLE V SESBRENO
2. The rules must not diminish, increase or modify
substantive rights. - Power to administrative supervision includes the
authority to discipline a lawyer, as he “occupies
ECHEGARAY V SEC OF JUSTICE
what may be termed a quasi-judicial office since
- Rule-making power of the Court was expanded. he is in fact an officer of the court, and like the
- The Court was: court itself, an instrument or agency to advance
1. For the first time, given power to promulgate the ends of justice.”
rules concerning the protection and
IX. SALARIES OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
enforcement of constitutional rights
The salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate Justices
2. Granted for the first time the power to
of the Supreme Court, and of judges of lower courts shall
disapprove rules of procedure of special
be fixed by law. During the continuance in office, their
courts and quasi-judicial bodies.
salary shall not be decreased. (Art 8, Sec 10)
- New constitution took away the power of
Congress to repeal, alter, or supplement rules
concerning pleading, practice and procedure.
NITAFAN V COM OF BIR - Once agreement is arrived at by the required
majority, a member is assigned as the ponente of
- Salaries of judges should also be subject to the court.
income tax. - Other members may choose to write separate
concurring opinions which is required from any
X. TENURE OF JUDGES
dissenting justice, who shall state the reasons for
The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of the
his dissent.
lower court shall hold office during good behavior until
- Such dissent may be useful in future
they reach the age of seventy years or become
considerations of the same question and may
incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office. The
even be the basis of a new doctrine or ruling that
Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline
will overturn the existing precedent.
judges of lower courts, or order their dismissal by a vote of
- Requirement for consultation is now applicable
majority of the Members who actually took part in the
also to the CA, Sandiganbayan, and CTA.
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted in
- Certification is intended as an added guarranty
thereon. (Art 8, Sec 11)
that the consultation requirement will be
Judges may hold office until:
complied with by the court.
1. They reach the retirement age (70 yrs old)
XIII. DECISIONS OF THE COURT
2. Become incapacitated to discharge the duties of
No decision shall be rendered by any court without
their office
expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the
- Members of the judiciary may be removed only
law on which it is based.
after charges have been filed and proved against
No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a
them in a proper administrative proceeding
decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied
conducted or ordered by the SC.
without stating the legal basis therefor. (Art 8, Sec 14)
Security of Tenure is not a personal privilege of any
- Only applicable to decisions; mere orders are not
particular judge; the right of a judge to his full tenure is not
covered since they dispose only incidents of the
dependent alone upon his good conduct, but also upon
case. (exception: order of dismissal)
the contingency that the legislature may, for the public
good, in establishing the courts, from time to time consider Doctrine of RES JURIDICATA
his office unnecessary and abolish it.
- A final judgment or decree on the merits by a
Tenure of office presupposes the existence of the office. court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the
rights of the parties or their private in all late suits
Removal from the office v Abolition of the office on all points and matters determined in the former
suit.
- Removal from the office implies that the office
exists’ nothing remained of the office after its PRINCIPLE OF CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT
abolition.
- When a right of fact has been judicially tried and
No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it determined by a court of competent jurisdiction,
undermines the security of tenure of its Members. (Art 8, or when an opportunity for such trial has been
Sec 2(2)) given, the judgment of the court, as long as it
XI. PROHIBITION AGAINST DESIGNATION TO QUASI-JUDICIAL remains unreversed, should be conclusive upon
OR ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES the parties.
The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts - Bars the re-litigation in a second case of a fact or
established by law shall not be designated to any agency question already settled in a previous case.
performing quasi-judicial or administrative function. (Art 8,
Sec 12) LAW OF THE CASE DOCTRINE
XII. CONSULTATIONS OF THE COURT
- Where an appellate court has made a ruling on a
The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case
question on appeal and thereafter remands the
submitted to it for the decision en banc or in division shall
case to the lower court for further proceedings;
be reached in consultation before the case the case
the question settled by the appellate court
assigned to a Member for the writing of the opinion of the
becomes the law of the case at the lower court
Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief
and in any subsequent appeal.
Justice shall be issued and a copy thereof attached to the
record of the case and served upon the parties. Any DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS ET NON QUIETA MOVERE
Member who took no part, or dissented, or abstained from
a decision or resolution must state the reason therefor. The - To adhere to precedents, and not to unsettle
same requirements shall be observed by all lower things which are established.
collegiate court. (Art 8, Sec 13) - When this court has once laid down a principle of
law as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will
- As a collegiate court, SC is required to reach its adhere to that principle, and apply it to all future
conclusions after an exchange of ideas and full cases, where the facts are substantially the same.
deliberation among its members.
- Primary purpose of a collegiate court is precisely PRINCIPLE OF STARE DECISIS
to provide for the most exhaustive deliberation
- Enjoins adherence to judicial precedents.
before a conclusion is reached.
- Requires courts in a country to follow the rule
established in a decision of its SC.
- Once a question of law has been examined and XV. ANNUAL REPORT
decided, it should be deemed settled and closed The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the
to further argument. opening of each regular session of the Congress, submit to
the President and the Congress an annual report on the
DOCTRINE OF FINALITY OF JUDGMENT OR IMMUTABILITY OF operations and activities of the Judiciary. (Art 8, Sec 16)
JUDGMENT
- Annual report required can be the basis of
- Once a judgment has become final and appropriate legislation and government policies
executory, it may no longer be modified in any intended to improve the administration of justice
respect, even if the modification is meant to and strengthen the independence of the
correct an erroneous conclusion of fact or law, judiciary.
and regardless of whether the modification is
attempted to be made by the court rendering it
or by the highest court of the land.
- Two-fold purpose:
1. To avoid delay in the administration of justice,
and thus, procedurally, to make orderly the
discharge of judicial business;
2. To put an end to judicial controversies, at the
risk of occasional errors, which is precisely why
courts exists.
- Exceptions to the rule on the immutability of final
judgments are:
1. Correction of clerical errors;
2. Nunc pro yunc entries which cause no
prejudice to any party;
3. Void judgments; and
4. Whenever circumstances transpire after the
finality of the decision that render its
execution unjust and inequitable.

XIV. PERIODS FOR DECISION


All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this
Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-
four months from date of submission for the Supreme
Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve
months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for
all other lower courts.
A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision
or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or
memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the
court itself.
Upon the expiration of the corresponding period,
a certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice or
the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy
thereof attached to the record of the case or matter, and
served upon the parties. The certification shall state why a
decision or resolution has not been rendered or issued
within said period.
Despite the expiration of the applicable
mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such
responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence
thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or matter
submitted thereto for determination, without further delay.
(Art 8, Sec 15)

- If a judge is unable to comply with the period for


deciding cases or matters, he can ask for an
extension.
- The period shall start form the filing of the last
pleading, brief or memorandum required by the
Rules of Court or by the court itself.
- If the period exceeded, an explanation must be
made by either the Chief Justice or the presiding
judge in a certification to be served upon the
parties.