Constitution of the Philippines

The Constitution of the Philippines (Filipino: Saligang Batas ng Pilipinas or Konstitusyon ng

Pilipinas, Spanish: Constitución de la República de Filipinas) is the constitutionor supreme law of the
Republic of the Philippines. Its final draft was completed by the Constitutional Commission on
October 12, 1986 and was ratified by a nationwide plebiscite on February 2, 1987.
Three other constitutions have effectively governed the country in its history: the 1935
Commonwealth Constitution, the 1973 Constitution, and the 1986 Freedom Constitution.
The earliest constitution establishing a "Philippine Republic," the 1899 Malolos Constitution, was
never fully implemented throughout the Philippines and did not establish a state that was
internationally recognized, due in great part to the ongoing American invasion during the time of its
adoption.

Saligang Batas ng Pilipinas

Konstitusyon ng Pilipinas
Constitución de la República de Filipinas

Jurisdiction Philippines

Created October 12, 1986

Presented October 15, 1986

Ratified February 2, 1987

Date effective February 2, 1987[1]

System Unitary presidentialconstitutional republic

Branches 3

Chambers Bicameral Congress

Executive President of the Philippines

Judiciary Supreme Court and in such lower courts

as may be established by law.

 First legislature July 27, 1987

First executive June 30, 1992

Amendments Proposed Constitutional amendments to

the 1987 Constitution

Location Legislative Archives, Library and

Museum, Batasang Pambansa

Complex, Quezon City

Commissioned by Revolutionary Government of Corazon

Aquino

Author(s) Constitutional Commission of 1986

Signatories 46 of the 50 commissioners

Supersedes Presidential Proclamation No. 3

Background of the 1987 Constitution[edit]

Ruling by decree during the early part of her tenure and as a president installed via the People
Power Revolution, President Corazon Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3 on March 25, 1986 which
abrogated many of the provisions of the then 1973 Constitution adopted during the Marcos regime
including the unicameral legislature (the Batasang Pambansa), the office of Prime Minister, and
provisions which gave the President legislative powers. Often called the "Freedom Constitution," this
constitution was only intended as a temporary constitution to ensure the freedom of the people and
the return to democratic rule. A constitutional commission was soon called to draft a new constitution
for the country.
The Constitutional Commission was composed of fifty members appointed by Aquino from varied
backgrounds including several former members of the House of Representatives, former justices of
the Supreme Court, a Roman Catholic bishop, and political activists against the Marcos regime. The
Commission elected Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, a former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, as its
president. Several issues were of particular contention during the Commission's sessions, including
the form of government to adopt, the abolition of the death penalty, the retention of the U.S. bases
in Clark and Subic, and the integration of economic policies into the constitution. Lino Brocka, a film
director and political activist who was member of the Commission, walked out before the
constitution's completion, and two other delegates dissented from the final draft. The Commission
finished the final draft on October 12, 1986 and presented it to Corazon Aquino on October 15. The
constitution was ratified by a nationwide plebiscite on February 8, 1987.
Structure and contents[edit]

Wikisource has original

text related to this
article:
Constitution of the
Philippines (1987)

The preamble and eighteen self-contained articles with a section numbering that resets for every
article.

Preamble[edit]
The preamble introduces the constitution and the source of sovereignty, the people. It follows the
pattern in past constitutions, including an appeal to God. The preamble reads:[2]
We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and
humane society and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote
the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity
the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice,
freedom, love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

Article I – National Territory[edit]

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting
of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the
insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the
islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal
waters of the Philippines.

Article II – Declaration of Principles and State Policies[edit]

Article II lays out the basic social and political creed of the Philippines, particularly the
implementation of the constitution and sets forth the objectives of the government. Some essential
provisions are:

 The Philippines is a democratic republic

 Renunciation of war as a form of national policy
 Supremacy of civilian over military authority
 Separation of church and state (inviolable)
 Pursuit of an independent foreign policy
 Abrogation of nuclear weaponry
 Family as the basic unit of the state
 Role of youth and women in nation-building
 Autonomy of local governments
 Equal opportunity for public services and the prohibition of political dynasties
Article III – Bill of Rights[edit]
Article III enumerates specific protections against the abuse of state power, most of which are similar
to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. Some essential provisions are:
 a right to due process and equal protection of law
 a right against searches and seizures without a warrant issued by a judge
 a right to privacy
 The right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and
the right to petition
 The free exercise of religion
 a right of abode and the right to travel
 a right to information on matters of public concern
 a right to form associations
 a right of free access to courts
 the right to remain silent and to have competent legal counsel
 a right to bail and against excessive bail conditions
 a right to habeas corpus
 the right to a speedy trial
 the right against self-incrimination
 the right to political beliefs and aspirations
 a prohibition against cruel, degrading, or inhuman punishment
 protection providing for no imprisonment for debt
 the right against double jeopardy
 prohibition of ex post facto laws and bills of attainder.
Similar to U.S. jurisprudence and other common law jurisdictions, the scope and limitations of these
rights have largely been determined by the Supreme Court through case law.

Article IV – Citizenship[edit]
Article IV defines the citizenship of Filipinos. It enumerates two kinds of citizens: natural-born
citizens and naturalized citizens. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens from birth without
having to perform any act to acquire or perfect Philippine citizenship. The Philippines follows a jus
sanguinis system where citizenship is mainly acquired through a blood relationship with Filipino
citizens.
Natural-born citizenship forms an important part of the political system as only natural-born
Filipinos are eligible to hold high offices, including all elective offices beginning with a representative
in the House of Representatives up to the President.

Article V – Suffrage[edit]
Article V mandates various age and residence qualifications to vote and a system of secret ballots
and absentee voting. It also mandates a procedure for overseas and disabled and illiterate Filipinos
to vote.

Article VI – Legislative Department[edit]

Article VI provides for a bicameral legislature called the Congress composed of the Senate and the
House of Representatives. It vests upon Congress, among others, the power of investigation and
inquiry in aid of legislation,[3] the power to declare the existence of a state of war,[4] the power of the
purse,[5] the power of taxation,[6] and the power of eminent domain.[7]

Article VII – Executive Department[edit]

Article VII provides for a presidential form of government where the executive power is vested on the
President. It provides for the qualification, terms of office, election, and power and functions of the
President. It also provides for a Vice President and for the presidential line of succession.
Article VIII – Judicial Department[edit]
Article VIII vests the judicial power upon the Supreme Court and other lower courts as may be
established by law (by Congress). While the power to appoint justices and judges still reside with the
President, the President may only appoint nominees pre-selected by the Judicial and Bar Council, a
body composed of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Secretary of Justice, the Chairs of
the Senate and House Committees on Justice, and representatives from the legal profession.

Article IX – Constitutional Commissions[edit]

Article IX establishes three constitutional commissions: the Civil Service Commission, the
Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Audit.

Article X – Local Government[edit]

Article X pursues for local autonomy and mandates Congress to enact a law for the local
government, now currently the Local Government Code.

Article XI – Accountability of Public Officers[edit]

Article XI establishes the Office of the Ombudsman which is responsible for investigating and
prosecuting government officials. It also vests upon the Congress the power to impeach the
President, the Vice President, members of the Supreme Court, and the Ombudsman.

Article XII – National Economy and Patrimony[edit]

Article XIII – Social Justice and Human Rights[edit]
Article XIV – Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and
Sports[edit]
Article XV – The Family[edit]
Article XVI – General Provisions[edit]
Article XVII – Amendments or Revisions[edit]
Article XVII establishes the methods by which the Constitution may be amended or revised.
Amendments may be proposed by either: a) a three-fourths vote of all Members of Congress (called
a Constituent Assembly), b) a Constitutional Convention, or c) a petition of at least twelve percent of
all registered voters, and at least three percent of registered voters within each district (called
a People's Initiative. All amendments must be ratified in a national referendum.

Article XVIII – Transitory Provisions[edit]

The Constitution also contains several other provisions enumerating various state policies including,
i.e., the affirmation of labor "as a primary social economic force" (Section 14, Article II); the equal
protection of "the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception" (Section 12, Article II);
the "Filipino family as the foundation of the nation" (Article XV, Section 1); the recognition
of Filipino as "the national language of the Philippines" (Section 6, Article XIV), and even a
requirement that "all educational institutions shall undertake regular sports activities throughout the
country in cooperation with athletic clubs and other sectors." (Section 19.1, Article XIV) Whether
these provisions may, by themselves, be the source of enforceable rights without accompanying
legislation has been the subject of considerable debate in the legal sphere and within the Supreme
Court. The Court, for example, has ruled that a provision requiring that the State "guarantee equal
access to opportunities to public service" could not be enforced without accompanying legislation,
and thus could not bar the disallowance of so-called "nuisance candidates" in presidential
elections.[8] But in another case, the Court held that a provision requiring that the State "protect and
advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology" did not require implementing
legislation to become the source of operative rights.[9]

Civil Code of the Philippines

The Civil Code of the Philippines is the product of the codification of private law in the Philippines.
It is the general law that governs family and property relations in the Philippines. It was enacted in
1950, and remains in force to date with some significant amendments.
The Philippine Civil Code is strongly influenced by the Spanish Código Civil, which was first enforced
in 1889 within the Philippines when it was still a colony of the Spanish Empire. The Código
Civil remained in effect even throughout the American Occupation; by 1940, the Commonwealth
Government of President Manuel Luis Quezon formed a Commission tasked with drafting a new
Code. The Commission was initially headed by Chief Justice Ramón Avanceña, but its work was
interrupted by the Japanese invasion and the Second World War. The Commission's records were
later destroyed by Allied bombing during the Battle of Manila in 1945.
In 1947, President Manuel Roxas of the Third Republic created a new Code Commission, this time
headed by the former Dean of the University of the Philippines College of Law, Jorge Bocobo.
Among the members of this new Commission were future Supreme Court Associate
Justice Francisco R. Capistrano, and future Vice-President Arturo Tolentino. The Code Commission
completed the final draft of the new Civil Code by December 1947, and this was submitted
to Congress, which enacted it into law through Republic Act No. 386. The Civil Code took effect in
1950.[1]
Due to its wide coverage and impact, the Civil Code is the subject of much study and extensive
commentary. Several legal luminaries developed reputations as experts on the Civil Code and
consequently enhanced their reputations in the field of Philippine law. These include Tolentino, who
himself had helped draft it, Supreme Court Associate Justices J. B. L. Reyes, Flérida Ruth P.
Romero, José Vitug, and Edgardo Paras.

Persons and Family relations[edit]

The Chapter 2 of the Civil code was formulated to indicate certain norms that spring from the
fountain of good conscience, that will serve as golden threads through society to the end of that law
may approach its supreme ideal which is sway and dominance of justice, the primary precept of this
portion is derived from Justinian's Institutes: iuris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non
laedere, suum cuique tribuere. (Inst. 1,1,3-4). (Translated into English: “the precepts of law are
these: to live honestly, to injure no one, [and] to give to each his own.”). Civil personality defines the
distinction between natural and juridical persons, as well as the difference between juridical
capacity and capacity to act.[2][3]

 Effect and Application of Laws

 Human relations
 Civil Personality
 Citizenship and Domicile
 Funerals
 Care and Education of Children
 Use of Surnames
 Absence
 Civil Register
The Family Code of 1988[edit]
In 1987, President Corazón Cojuangco Aquino enacted into law The Family Code of 1987,
which was intended to supplant Book I of the Civil Code concerning persons and family
relations. Work on the Family Code had begun as early as 1979, and it had been drafted by two
successive committees, the first chaired by future Supreme Court Justice Romero, and the
second chaired by former Supreme Court Justice J.B.L. Reyes. The Civil Code needed
amendment via the Family Code in order to alter certain provisions derived from foreign sources
which had proven unsuitable to Filipino culture and to attune it to contemporary developments
and trends.[4] The Family Code covers fields of significant public interest, especially the laws
on marriage. The definition and requisites for marriage, along with the grounds for annulment,
are found in the Family Code, as is the law on conjugal property relations, rules on
establishing filiation, and the governing provisions on support, parental authority, and adoption.

 Marriage
 Legal separation
 Spousal rights and obligations
 Marital property schemes
 The Family
 Paternity and filiation
 Adoption
 Maintenance (e.g. alimony, child support)
 Parental authority
 Emancipation and age of majority
 Summary judicial proceedings in family law
Property, Ownership and its Modifications[edit]
Focuses on property, which classifies and defines the different kinds of approporiable
objects, provides for their acquisitions and loss and treats the nature and consequences of
real right. Ownership is independent and general right of the person to control a thing
particularly in his possession, enjoyment, disposition, and recovery, subject to no restrictions
except those imposed by the state or private persons, without prejudice to the provisions of
the law. .[5][6]

 Classification of Property
 Ownership
 Co-Ownership
 Special Properties
 Possession
 Usufruct
 Easement and Servitudes
 Nuissance
 Registry of Property
Modes of Acquiring Ownership[edit]
Ownership is acquired by occupation and by intellectual creation. Ownership and other
real rights over property are acquired and transmitted by law, by donation, by testate
and intestate succession, and in consequence of certain contracts by tradition. They
may be also acquired by acquisitive prescription.[7]
  Occupation
 Intellectual creation
 Donation
 Succession
 Acquisitive prescription
Obligations and Contracts[edit]
Law of obligations is defined as juridical necessity to give, to do or not do. A
Contract is a meeting of the minds between two persons whereby one binds himself
with respect to the other to give something or to render some service[8][9]

 Obligations
 Contracts
 Special contracts encompasses several classes of contracts
as trusts, sales, barter, lease, loan, deposit, aleatory contracts,
compromises, guaranty, agency, pledges, mortgage, antichresis, and partnership
 Quasi-contract
 Quasi-delict
Torts and Damages[edit]
Developments in tort and damages law have been guided less by the Code
than by judicial precedents. Damages can be incurred when there is harm done
and what may be recovered arising from wrongful, unwrongful and tortuous act.
Damages can be actual or compensatory, moral, nominal, temperate or
moderate, liquidated and exemplary or corrective.[10]]

See also

Philippine criminal law

Philippine Criminal Laws is the body of law and defining the penalties thereof in the Philippines.

History[edit]
When the Spanish Colonizers conquered the Philippines, the Spanish Codigo Penal was made
applicable and extended to the Philippines by Royal Decree of 1870. This was replaced with the old
Penal Code which was put in place by Spanish authorities, and took effect in the Philippines on July
14, 1876. This law was effective in the Philippines until the American colonization of the Philippines.
It was only on December 8, 1930, when it was amended, under Act. No. 3815, with the enactment of
the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines (the “Revised Penal Code”).

The Revised Penal Code[edit]

Main article: Revised Penal Code of the Philippines

The Revised Penal Code took effect on January 1, 1932. It is composed of two parts – Book One of
the Revised Penal Code provides the general provisions on the application of the law, and the
general principles of criminal law. It defines felonies and circumstances which affect criminal liability,
justifying circumstances and circumstances which exempt, mitigate or aggravate criminal liability,
and defines the classification, duration, and effects of criminal penalties. Finally, it provides for the
extinction and survival of criminal and civil liabilities in crimes.
Book Two of the Revised Penal Code on the other hand defines the specific crimes and the
penalties imposable for each crime. Crimes are classified into crimes against national security (such
as treason, espionage and piracy), crimes against the fundamental laws of the state (rebellion, coup
d’etat, sedition and public disorders), crimes against public interest (counterfeiting of currency,
falsification of public documents), crimes against public morals, crimes committed by public officers,
crimes against persons (parricide, murder, physical injuries, rape), crimes against security
(kidnapping), and crimes against property (robbery, theft), among others. Criminal negligence is also
an offense under the Revised Penal Code. Under the Revised Penal Code, acts and omissions
punishable by law are called felonies. Thus, to be considered as a felony there must be an act
or omission.

Degree of Consummation of Crimes[edit]

Felonies can be consummated, frustrated, and attempted. A felony is consummated when all the
elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. It is frustrated when the
offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but
which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or overt acts,
and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it. Conspiracy can also be proven based on the idea of "unity of
purpose" and acts leading to a common design. There is proposal when the person who has decided
to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons. Conspiracy and
proposal to commit a felony are generally not punishable, except for conspiracy and proposal to
commit treason, coup d’Etat, and rebellion. Whilst not generally punishable, conspiracy can
determine the degree of participation in criminal offenses in order to determine criminal liability.

Circumstances that Affect Criminal Liability[edit]

The presence of certain circumstances have the effect of removing, mitigating or aggravating
criminal liability of persons. Persons who commit crimes when justifying circumstances are present
do not incur criminal or civil liability. Acting in self-defense is one of these justifying circumstances.
The presence of exempting circumstances on the other hand will exempt the perpetrator from
criminal liability but not from civil liability. Some of these exempting circumstances are imbecility or
youth. On the other hand, the presence of one or more mitigating circumstances when a crime is
committed, can serve to reduce the penalty imposed. An example is voluntary surrender.
Lastly, the presence of aggravating circumstances will increase the penalty imposed under the
crime, upon conviction. Some examples are contempt or insult to public authority.

Participation in Crimes[edit]
Under the Revised Penal Code, when more than one person participated in the commission of the
crime, the law looks into their participation because in punishing offenders, the Revised Penal Code
classifies them as principals, accomplices, or accessories. A persons can be liable as a principal for
(a) taking a direct part in the execution of the felony, (b) directly forcing or inducing others to commit
it, or (c) cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would not have
been accomplished. Accomplices are persons who, while not acting as a principal, cooperate in the
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.
Lastly, accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without
having participated therein, either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its
commission by: (a) profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime,
(b) concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to
prevent its discovery, or (c) harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of the
crime.
Principals are punished more severely than accomplices, who are punished more severely than
accessories. However, when there is conspiracy, there will no longer be a distinction as to whether a
person acted as a principal, accomplice or accessory, because when there is conspiracy, the
criminal liability of all will be the same, because the act of one is the act of all.

Murder[edit]
Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code defines murder as killing someone other than a family
member[1] with any of the following six circumstances:

1. With treachery [see below], taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed
men, or employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity;
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise;
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment
or assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the use of
any other means involving great waste and ruin;
4. On occasion of any calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other public calamity;
5. With evident premeditation;
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corps.[2]
Murder is punishable by reclusión perpetua (20 to 40 years' incarceration).[2] Without any of these six
aggravating circumstances, a killing is instead homicide punishable by reclusión temporal.[2] A
murder is committed “with treachery” by
employing means, methods, or forms in the execution, which tend directly and specially to insure its
execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
The essence of treachery is that the attack comes without a warning and in a swift, deliberate, and
unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed, and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or
escape. For treachery to be considered, two elements must concur: (1) the employment of means of
execution that gives the persons attacked no opportunity to defend themselves or retaliate; and (2)
the means of execution were deliberately or consciously adopted.[3]

Special Penal Laws[edit]

Apart from the crimes penalized in the Revised Penal Code, several other pieces of criminal
legislation have been passed, penalizing acts such as illegal possession and trafficking of
dangerous drugs, money laundering, and illegal possession of firearms. These laws are called
“Special Penal Laws” and they form part of Philippine Criminal Laws. There are certain differences
between crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code and Special Penal Laws.
Violations of the crimes listed in the Revised Penal Code are referred to as mala in se, which literally
means, that the act is inherently evil or bad or wrongful in itself. On the other hand, violations of
Special Penal Laws are generally referred to as malum prohibitum or an act that is wrong because it
is prohibited. Thus, no criminal intent is needed in order to find a person liable for crimes punished
under Special Penal Laws. As long as the act is committed, then it is punishable as a crime under
law.
 Note, however, that not all violations of Special Penal Laws are mala prohibita. While intentional
felonies are always mala in se, it does not follow that prohibited acts done in violation of special laws
are always mala prohibita.
There are some important distinctions between crimes punishable under the Revised Penal Code
and Special Penal Laws. One of them is that in crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the
moral trait of the offender is considered. This is why liability would only arise when there is criminal
intent or negligence in the commission of the punishable act. In crimes punished under Special
Penal Laws, the moral trait of the offender is not considered; it is enough that the prohibited act was
voluntarily done.

gov·ern·ment
/ˈɡəvər(n)mənt/
noun
1. 1.
the governing body of a nation, state, or community.
"an agency of the federal government"
synonyms: administration, executive, regime, authority, powers that
be, directorate, council, leadership, management; More
o
o
o
o
2. 2.
GRAMMAR
the relation between a governed and a governing word.

About The Government

The Philippines is a republic with a presidential form of government wherein power is equally divided

among its three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The government seeks to act in the best

interests of its citizens through this system of check and balance.

One basic corollary in a presidential system of government is the principle of separation of powers

wherein legislation belongs to Congress, execution to the Executive, and settlement of legal

controversies to the Judiciary.

The Legislative branch is authorized to make laws, alter, and repeal them through the power vested

in the Philippine Congress. This institution is divided into the Senate and the House of

Representatives.

The Legislative Branch enacts legislation, confirms or rejects Presidential appointments, and has the

authority to declare war. This branch includes Congress (the Senate and House of Representatives)

and several agencies that provide support services to Congress.

The Senate is composed of 24 Senators who are elected at large by the qualified voters of the

Philippines.
The House of Representatives is composed of about 250 members elected from legislative districts

in the provinces, cities, and municipalities, and representatives elected through a party-list system of

registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.

The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per cent of the total number of representatives

including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this

Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided

by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural

communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious

sector.
The Executive branch is composed of the President and the Vice President who are elected by direct

popular vote and serve a term of six years. The Constitution grants the President authority to appoint

his Cabinet. These departments form a large portion of the country’s bureaucracy.

The executive branch carries out and enforces laws. It includes the President, Vice President,

the Cabinet, executive departments, independent agencies, boards, commissions, and committees.

The President leads the country. He or she is the head of state, leader of the national government,

and Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines. The President serves a six-year term

and cannot be re-elected.

The Vice President supports the President. If the President is unable to serve, the Vice President

becomes President. He or she also serves a six-year term.

Cabinet members serve as advisors to the President. They include the Vice President and the heads

of executive departments. Cabinet members are nominated by the President and must be confirmed

by the Commission of Appointments.

The Judicial branch holds the power to settle controversies involving rights that are legally

demandable and enforceable. This branch determines whether or not there has been a grave abuse

of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part and instrumentality of the

government. It is made up of a Supreme Court and lower courts.

The judicial branch interprets the meaning of laws, applies laws to individual cases, and decides if

laws violate the Constitution. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such

lower courts as may be established by law.

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights,

which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a

grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
 instrumentality of the Government. The judicial branch interprets the meaning of laws, applies laws

to individual cases, and decides if laws violate the Constitution.

Each branch of government can change acts of the other branches as follows:

 The President can veto laws passed by Congress.

 Congress confirms or rejects the President's appointments and can remove the

President from office in exceptional circumstances.

 The Justices of the Supreme Court, who can overturn unconstitutional laws, are

appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The Constitution expressly grants the Supreme Court the power of Judicial Review as the power to

declare a treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,

instruction, ordinance or regulation unconstitutional.

Three Branches of Government

 The Legislative branch is authorized to make laws, alter, and repeal them through the
power vested in the Philippine Congress. This institution is divided into the Senate and
the House of Representatives.
 The Executive branch carries out laws. ...
 The Judicial branch evaluates laws.

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the

Philippines
The Chief Justice of the Philippines (Filipino: Punong Mahistrado ng Pilipinas) presides over
the Supreme Court of the Philippines and is the highest judicial officer of the government of the
Philippines. As of November 28, 2018, the position is currently held by Lucas Bersamin, who was
appointed by President Rodrigo Duterte following the mandatory retirement of his
predecessor Teresita Leonardo-de Castro in October 2018.
The Chief Justice, who was first named in June 11, 1901 in the person of Cayetano Arellano, is the
oldest existing major governmental office continually held by a Filipino, preceding the presidency
and vice presidency (1935), senators (1916, or as the Taft Commission, in September 1, 1901) and
the members of the House of Representatives (1907 as the Philippine Assembly).
Duties and powers
The power to appoint the chief justice lies with the president, who makes the selection from a list of
three nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council. There is no material difference in the
process of selecting a chief justice from that in the selection of associate justices. As with the other
justices of the Supreme Court, the chief justice is obliged to retire upon reaching the age of 70;
otherwise there is no term limit for the chief justice. In the 1935 constitution, any person appointed
by the president has to be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments; in the 1973 constitution,
the person whom the president has appointed won't have to go confirmation under the Commission
on Appointments.
The Constitution does not ascribe any formal role to the chief justice other than as an ex-
officio chairman of the Judicial and Bar Council and as the presiding officer in any impeachment trial
of the president. The chief justice is also required to personally certify every decision that is rendered
by the court. He or she carries only 1 vote out of 15 in the court, and is generally regarded, vis-a-vis
the other justices, as the primus inter pares rather than as the administrative superior of the other
members of the court.
Still, the influence a chief justice may bear within the court and judiciary, and on the national
government cannot be underestimated. In the public eye, any particular Supreme Court is widely
identified with the identity of the incumbent chief justice, hence appellations such as "The Fernando
Court" or "The Puno Court". Moreover, the chief justice usually retains high public visibility, unlike the
associate justices, who tend to labor in relative anonymity, with exceptions such as Associate
Justice J. B. L. Reyes in the 1950s to 1970s.
By tradition, it is also the chief justice who swears into office the President of the Philippines. One
notable deviation from that tradition came in 1986, and later again in 2010. Due to the exceptional
political circumstances culminating in the People Power Revolution, on February 25, 1986, Corazon
Aquino took her oath of office as President before then Associate Justice Claudio Teehankee in San
Juan just minutes before Ferdinand Marcos took his own oath of office also as President before
Chief Justice Ramon Aquino. Marcos fled into exile later that night. More than two decades
afterwards, Benigno Simeon Aquino III followed in his mother's footsteps (with almost similar
reasons) by having then Associate Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales (now the incumbent
Ombudsman) swear him in, rather than then Chief Justice Renato Corona (who was eventually
impeached halfway through Aquino's term). Six years later, in 2016, Rodrigo Duterte was sworn into
office by Associate Justice Bienvenido Reyes, his classmate at San Beda College of Law, instead of
Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno (who would eventually be removed thru quo warranto after it
was determined that she had been unlawfully holding office ab initio).
The Chief Justice also names the three justices each from the Supreme Court in the memberships of
the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal and the Senate Electoral Tribunal.
The chief justice is the chief executive officer of the Philippine judiciary system and together with the
whole Supreme Court, exercises administrative supervision over all courts and personnel.

Incumbent
Lucas Bersamin
since November 28, 2018

Style The Honorable (formal)

 Your Honor (when addressed directly in court)

 Presidential Electoral Tribunal

Member of
 Judicial and Bar Council

Appointer Presidential appointment upon nomination by

the Judicial and Bar Council

Term length Retirement at the age of 70

Inaugural Cayetano Arellano

holder

Formation June 11, 1901

Website Official Website

Test compositionEdit

The LSAT consists of five 35-minute multiple choice sections (one of which is an unscored
experimental section) followed by an unscored writing sample section. Modern tests have 99–
102 scored items in total. Several different test forms are used within an administration, each
presenting the multiple choice sections in different orders, which is intended to make it difficult
to cheat or to guess which is the experimental section.

Logical reasoningEdit
The LSAT contains two logical reasoning ("LR") sections, commonly known as "arguments",
designed to test the taker's ability to dissect and analyze arguments. LR sections each contain
24–26 questions.[19] Each question begins with a short argument or set of facts. This is followed
by a prompt asking the test taker to find the argument's assumption, to select an alternate
conclusion to the argument, to identify errors or logical omissions in the argument, to find
another argument with parallel reasoning, or to choose a statement that would weaken/strengthen
the argument.[citation needed]
Reading comprehensionEdit
The LSAT contains one reading comprehension ("RC") section consisting of four passages of
400–500 words, and 5–8 questions relating to each passage. Complete sections contain 26–28
questions. Though no real rules govern the content of this section, the passages generally relate
to law, arts and humanities, physical sciences, or social sciences. The questions usually ask the
examinee to determine the author's main idea, find specific information in the passage, draw
inferences from the text, and/or describe the structure of the passage.
In June 2007, one of the four passages was replaced with a "comparative reading"
question.[20] Comparative reading presents two shorter passages with differing perspectives on a
topic. Parallels exist between the comparative reading question, the SAT's critical
reading section, and the science section of the ACT. This section is regarded as being the hardest
to improve in.
Logic gamesEdit
Main article: Logic games

The current LSAT contains one logic games (LG) section, officially referred to as the "analytical
reasoning" section. One section contains four "games" falling into a number of categories
including grouping, matching, and ordering of elements. Each LG section has 22–24 questions.
Each game begins by outlining the premise ("there are five people who might attend this
afternoon's meeting") and establishing a set of conditions governing the relationships among the
subjects ("if Amy is present, then Bob is not present; if Cathy is present, then Dan is present...").
The examinee is then asked to draw conclusions from the statements ("What is the maximum
number of people who could be present?"). What makes the games challenging is that the rules
do not produce a single "correct" set of relationships among all elements of the game; rather, the
examinee is tested on their ability to analyze the range of possibilities embedded in a set of rules.
Individual questions often add rules or modify existing rules, requiring quick reorganization of
known information. The LG section is commonly regarded by LSAT takers as the most difficult
section of the test, at least at first, but it is also the section that can be most improved upon with
practice.
Unscored Variable sectionEdit
The current test contains one experimental section which Law Services refers to as the "Variable
section". It is used to test new questions for future exams. The performance of the examinee on
this section is not reported as part of the final score. The examinee is not told which section of
the exam is experimental, since doing so could skew the data. Previously, this section has always
been one of the first three sections of any given test, but beginning with the administration of the
October 2011 LSAT the experimental can be after the first three sections. LSAC makes no
specific claim as to which section(s) it has appeared as in the past, and what section(s) it may
appear as in the future.[citation needed] This section is regarded as harder than the scored sections.
Writing sampleEdit
The writing sample appears as the final section of the exam. The writing sample is presented in
the form of a decision prompt, which provides the examinee with a problem and two criteria for
making a decision. The examinee must then write an essay arguing for one of the two options
over the other. The decision prompt generally does not involve a controversial subject, but rather
something mundane about which the examinee likely has no strong bias. While there is no
"right" or "wrong" answer to the writing prompt, it is important that the examinee argues for
his/her chosen position and also argues against the counter-position.

LSAC does not score the writing sample. Instead, the essay is digitally imaged and sent to
admission offices along with the LSAT score. Between the quality of the handwriting and of the
digital image, some admissions officers regard the readability and usefulness of the writing
sample to be marginal. Additionally, most schools require that applicants submit a "personal
statement" of some kind. These factors sometimes result in admission boards disregarding the
writing sample. However, only 6.8% of 157 schools surveyed by LSAC in 2006 indicated that
they "never" use the writing sample when evaluating an application. In contrast, 9.9% of the
schools reported that they "always" use the sample; 25.3% reported that they "frequently" use the
sample; 32.7% responded "occasionally"; and 25.3% reported "seldom" using the sample.[21]
PreparationEdit
LSAC recommends advance preparation for the LSAT, due to the importance of the LSAT in
law school admissions and because scores on the exam typically correspond to preparation
time.[22] The structure of the LSAT and the types of questions asked are generally consistent
from year to year, which allows students to practice on question types that show up frequently in
examinations.
LSAC suggests, at a minimum, that students review official practice tests, called PrepTests,
before test day to familiarize themselves with the types of questions that appear on the
exams.[23] LSAC offers one free test that can be downloaded from their website.[24] For best
results, LSAC suggests taking practice tests under actual time constraints and representative
conditions in order to identify problem areas to focus on in further review.[23]
For preparation purposes, only tests after June 1991 are considered modern, since the LSAT was
significantly modified after this date. Each released exam is commonly referred to as a PrepTest.
The June 1991 LSAT was numbered as PrepTest 1, and the December 2013 LSAT was PrepTest
71.[25] Certain PrepTests are no longer published by LSAC (among them 1–6, 8, 17, 39, and 40),
despite the fact that they were in print at one time. However, these tests have been made
available through some of the test preparation companies, which have licensed them from LSAC
to provide only to students in their courses. For a few years, some prep companies sold digital
copies of LSAT PrepTests as PDFs, but LSAC revised its licensing policy in 2016, effectively
banning the sale of LSAT PDFs to the general public.[26]
Some students taking the LSAT use a test preparation company. Students who do not use these
courses often rely on material from LSAT preparation books, previously administered exams,
and internet resources such as blogs, forums, and mobile apps.[27]
ScoringEdit

CURRENT NEWS
President Rodrigo Duterte has plunged the Philippines into its worst human rights crisis
since the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos in the 1970s and 1980s. His “war on drugs,”
launched after he took office in June 2016, has claimed an estimated 12,000 lives of
primarily poor urban dwellers, including children.

Duterte has vowed to continue the abusive anti-drug campaign until his term ends in
2022. Throughout 2017 and the latter part of 2016, he engaged in harassment and
intimidation of individuals and agencies tasked with accountability—including United
Nations officials.
Duterte’s most prominent critic, Senator Leila de Lima, remained in detention on
politically motivated drug charges. Pro-Duterte lawmakers in 2017 sought to eliminate
budgetary funding for the official Commission on Human Rights as apparent retaliation
for its efforts to probe the anti-drug campaign. In the face of mounting international
criticism, the Duterte government has adopted a tactic of denying as “alternative facts”
well-substantiated reports by human rights and media organizations of high death tolls
linked to the “drug war.”

Violation of children’s rights, attacks on journalists and media, and government

policy failures contributing to the country’s worsening HIV epidemic persisted in
2017. Extrajudicial Killings
The Duterte administration’s “war on drugs” has resulted in the deaths of thousands of mostly
poor Filipinos. Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) data indicates that police
operations resulted in the deaths of 3,906 suspected drug users and dealers from July 1, 2016, to
September 26, 2017. But unidentified gunmen have killed thousands more, bringing the total
death toll to more than 12,000, according to credible media reports.

The government has frustrated efforts by media and other independent observers to maintain a
verifiable and transparent tally of such deaths by issuing contradictory data. In August, the
official Commission on Human Rights stated that the “[a]ctual number [of drug war killings] is
certainly higher than what is suggested” by police.

A Human Rights Watch investigation found that the Philippine National Police and its agents
have repeatedly carried out extrajudicial killings of drug suspects, and then falsely claimed self-
defense. Police have planted guns, spent ammunition, and drug packets on victims’ bodies to
implicate them in drug activities. Masked gunmen taking part in killings appeared to be working
closely with police, casting doubt on government claims that most killings have been committed
by vigilantes or rival drug gangs.

No one has been meaningfully investigated, let alone prosecuted, for any of the “drug war”
killings. Instead, Duterte has pledged to pardon policemen implicated in killings. In October,
responding to a public outcry against killings notably committed against children, Duterte
removed police from anti-drug operations, assigning the PDEA as the main agency to carry out
the drug war.

However, journalists who closely cover the anti-drug campaign say that although the killings by
uniformed police personnel have declined since that time, summary killings by “vigilantes” have
continued uninterrupted. On November 22, Duterte warned of an imminent lifting of the
suspension of police anti-drug operations, raising the likelihood of more extrajudicial executions
by police and their agents.
Attacks on Human Rights Defenders
The Duterte administration has widened its “war on drugs” to include critics and political foes.
Since February 2017, Senator Leila de Lima has been behind bars on politically motivated drug
charges filed against her in apparent retaliation for leading a Senate inquiry into the drug war
killings.

In August, Duterte encouraged police attacks against human rights groups and advocates,
instructing police, “If they are obstructing justice, you shoot them.”

Duterte has publicly condemned the Commission on Human Rights and threatened to abolish it.
He also repeatedly subjected United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings Agnes
Callamard to profanity-laced ridicule for her repeated efforts to secure an official visit to the
Philippines. In August, he responded to Callamard’s criticism of police extrajudicial killings of
children by calling her a “son of a bitch” and a “fool.”

Children’s Rights
In July, a Philippine children’s rights group published data indicating that police have killed 56
children since the start of the “drug war.” Most were killed while in the company of adults who
were the apparent target of the shooting. Both Duterte and Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II
have dismissed those child killings as “collateral damage.”

In February, public opposition prompted Congress to reject a bill that would have lowered the
age of criminal responsibility to nine from the current 15 years.

In August, the government approved mandatory drug testing for high school and college students
and applicants. This will effectively allow the police to extend their abusive anti-drug operations
to high schools and university campuses.

Child labor in small-scale gold mines remains a serious problem.

Attacks on Journalists
In March, unidentified gunmen killed newspaper columnist Joaquin Briones in the Masbate
province town of Milagros. In August, an unidentified gunman killed radio journalists Rudy
Alicaway and Leo Diaz in separate incidents on the southern island of Mindanao. The National
Union of Journalists estimates that 177 Filipino reporters and media workers have been killed
since 1986.

Duterte has publicly vilified media outlets whose reporters have exposed police culpability in
extrajudicial killings. In April, he threatened to block the renewal of the broadcasting franchise
of ABS-CBN network. In July, Duterte publicly threatened the Philippine Daily Inquirer with
tax evasion charges and falsely accused the media platform Rappler of being US-owned in an
apparent effort to undermine its credibility.

Journalists who report critically on the Duterte administration are also subjected to harassment
and threats online. In December 2016, the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines
issued a statement denouncing such attacks.

HIV Epidemic
The Philippines is facing the fastest-growing epidemic of HIV in the Asia-Pacific region.
According to the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), the number of new
HIV cases jumped from 4,300 to 10,000 between 2010 and 2016. Most new infections—up to 83
percent—are among men and transgender women who have sex with men. In August, the
government declared the situation a “national emergency.”

Despite recognition of the problem, the government is responsible for a legal and policy
environment hostile to evidence-based policies and interventions have proven to help prevent
HIV transmission, including the use of condoms and comprehensive sexuality education
targeting the young.

Human Rights Watch research shows that many sexually active young Filipinos have little or no
knowledge about the role of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted diseases because the
government fails to provide adequate school programs on safe-sex practices. A bill amending the
country’s main law on HIV/AIDS to boost the government’s response to the crisis remained
pending in Congress at the time of writing.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Students across the Philippines experience bullying and discrimination in school because of their
sexual orientation and gender identity. In late 2016, Human Rights Watch documented a range of
abuses against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students in secondary school.
They include bullying, harassment, discriminatory policies and practices, and an absence of
supportive resources that undermine the right to education under international law and put LGBT
youth at risk. These students often face ridicule and even violence, including by teachers and
administrators. In September, the House of Representatives passed House Bill 4982, a proposed
law against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression
(SOGIE).

Terrorism and Counterterrorism

On May 23, after Islamist rebels took over the predominantly Muslim city of Marawi, Mindanao,
the Philippine government launched a counterattack. The fighting destroyed the city and left at
least 1,112 people dead, mostly alleged rebels but also civilians and government soldiers, the
government said. The government’s figures could not be independently verified.
The fighting has displaced more than 400,000 residents of the city and nearby towns, many of
whom were living in overcrowded evacuation camps. Duterte declared martial law across the
entire Mindanao region in response to the fighting. The rebels, known as the Maute group, are
residents of Marawi and nearby provinces who linked with elements of the Abu Sayyaf armed
group, which had earlier pledged support for the extremist group Islamic State (ISIS).

Key International Actors

The escalation in unlawful killings associated with the “war on drugs,” and President Duterte’s
open defiance of international human rights standards and confrontational stance towards critics,
have roiled the Philippines’ relationships with its closest Western allies.

Duterte has repeatedly threatened to seek stronger ties with countries such as China and Russia,
which have not been critical of his drug-campaign abuses. Historically, the Philippines has had
close relationships with the United States and European Union countries.

In March, European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström warned that unless the Philippine
government addressed EU concerns about human rights abuses, the Philippines risks losing
tariff-free export of up to 6,000 products under the EU’s human rights benchmarks linked to the
Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+) trade scheme.

In April, US President Donald Trump signaled a break with the Obama administration’s criticism
of Duterte’s drug war killing campaign by praising it as a “great job” and inviting Duterte to the
White House. In May, US senators introduced a bill, the Philippines Human Rights
Accountability and Counternarcotics Act of 2017, which aims to restrict arms exports to the
Philippines, support human rights groups, and assist the Philippines in dealing with the drug
problem. The bill had been referred to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee at time of
writing.

The US remains a key source of military financial assistance, with the Trump administration
allotting US$180 million for 2017. Australia, whose officials have criticized the “drug war”
killings, has nevertheless promised to extend military aid to the Philippines, mainly for
counterterrorism.

In January 2017, Japan pledged to the Philippines a five-year, $800 million Japanese government
Overseas Development Assistance package to “promote economic and infrastructure
development.” Tokyo also promised financial support for drug rehabilitation projects in the
Philippines. China has pledged assistance to the Philippines of as much as US$24 billion-worth
of projects under Beijing’s “One Belt, One Road” program.

In August, the education secretary expressed her commitment to see the Philippines join the Safe
Schools Declaration, an intergovernmental political commitment to protect students, teachers,
and schools from attack during armed conflict, but did not give a timeframe for doing so.

In May, the Philippines underwent its Universal Periodic Review, which focuses attention on the
human rights record of each UN member state every four years. In its September response, the
Philippines rejected nearly every recommendation to bring an end to extrajudicial killings and to
ensure an independent investigation into the deaths. The High Commissioner for Human Rights
expressed grave concern at Duterte’s open support for a "shoot-to-kill” policy and the “apparent
absence of credible investigations.”

Iceland led a joint statement on behalf of 32 states at the June session of the Human Rights
Council, and another on behalf of 39 states at the council’s September session, condemning the
extrajudicial killings and calling for credible independent investigations into these deaths.

Philippines receives funding

to scrap mercury use in
mining ops
MANILA, Philippines–An international organization is pouring in $45 million to seven
countries – including the Philippines – to eliminate the use of mercury in artisanal and
small-scale gold mining (ASGM), the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) said.

This develops just after Environment Secretary Roy Cimatu said the Philippines is close
to ratifying the Minamata Convention on Mercury – a global treaty to protect human
health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury – which would give the
country protection from being a dumping ground for products containing the toxic
substance.

NATION


 

Philippines receives funding

to scrap mercury use in
mining ops
By: Karl R. Ocampo - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 10:53 AM May 08, 2019

DENR Secretary Roy Cimatu. (Photo by LYN RILLON / Philippine Daily Inquirer)

MANILA, Philippines–An international organization is pouring in $45 million to seven

countries – including the Philippines – to eliminate the use of mercury in artisanal and
small-scale gold mining (ASGM), the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) said.
This develops just after Environment Secretary Roy Cimatu said the Philippines is close
to ratifying the Minamata Convention on Mercury – a global treaty to protect human
health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury – which would give the
country protection from being a dumping ground for products containing the toxic
substance.
ADVERTISEMENT

RELATED STORIES:

DENR seeks return of trash to Korea

Canada’s trash ‘shipped out by May 15’
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) is partnering with DENR to embark on a five-
year project that aims to promote the legalization of ASGM and encourage miners to
extract gold using environment-friendly practices.

Mercury, also known as “quick silver,” is widely used in small-scale mining as a means
to extract gold. The practice, which is common in the northern part of the country,
exposes miners to toxics that could affect the nervous, immune, and digestive systems.

Project sites in the Philippines would include the towns of Maco in Compostela Valley,
T’boli in South Cotabato, and Rosario in Agusan del Sur, considering that the country’s
small-scale mining sites are concentrated in the regions of Caraga which has 38 sites,
while 78 exist in the Cordilleras.

Aside from the Philippines, other countries that would benefit from GEF’s project
include Peru, Colombia, Guyana, Indonesia, Kenya, Burkina Faso, and Mongolia. /jpv

‘Bikoy’ called to Senate

MANILA, Philippines — Sen. Panfilo Lacson on Tuesday summoned Peter Joemel
Advincula to a Senate inquiry, a day after the man who claimed he was the
whistleblower in the videos that linked members of President Rodrigo Duterte’s family
to the illegal drug trade came forward seeking legal help to take his case to court.
Lacson, chair of the Senate committee on public order and dangerous drugs, said he
sent an invitation to Advincula through the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP),
where Advincula, who claimed he was “Bikoy,” the whistleblower in the “True
Narcolist” video series, appeared on Monday and spoke to reporters.

But the senator said he had set a condition for Advincula’s appearance at the hearing,
which was initially set for Friday at 9 a.m.

“It will push through once Bikoy confirms his attendance with a sworn statement
ready,” Lacson told the Inquirer in a text message.

“In the meantime, we are doing some background investigation and record check on
him,” he said.

Advincula may not have received the invitation, as the IBP said on Tuesday that it was
not in custody of the whistleblower and did not know his whereabouts.

The IBP leadership also denied calling reporters on Monday to a news conference with
Advincula.

“I do not know how the press conference happened,” said Abdiel Elijah Fajardo,
outgoing IBP president.

“We are not the ones who called you here,” said June Ambrosio, director of the IBP
National Center for Legal Aid. “You would be the ones who could tell us who
contacted you.”

On Monday, Advincula said he had asked the IBP legal aid center for help in preparing
an affidavit and filing charges against the people he had linked to the narcotics trade in
the videos, including President Duterte’s son Paolo Duterte, son-in-law Manases Carpio
and former special aide Christopher “Bong” Go.

Ambrosio said on Tuesday that her group had not yet taken in Advincula as a client
because he had yet to pass a means and merit test.
She said Advincula appeared qualified for help as he was jobless, but she did not say
whether she believed his allegations.

“It’s entirely possible that another lawyer will volunteer to take this up. After all, he can
still consult other lawyers,” Fajardo said.

Lacson advised the IBP to be careful about helping Advincula, as it might be accused of
“engaging in political partisanship, which could punch a hole and deflate [its]
credibility.”

“As [for] the Senate, we will await his sworn statement and whatever supporting
evidence he has, after which we will evaluate and proceed from there,” he added.

No assessment

The IBP chapter in President Duterte’s hometown, Davao City, on Tuesday criticized
the group’s national office for allowing itself to be used as the “staging area” for
Advincula’s show, which it said it did not support.

Paolo Duterte, a former vice mayor of Davao City, also slammed the IBP national
office on Facebook, saying: “IBP found Bikoy’s allegation as believable. I’m losing
respect of the IBP, you’re supposed to be lawyers but how easy it is for you to take the
bait of a scammer who called himself Bikoy.”

Fajardo and Ambrosio, however, said neither of them issued a statement offering an
assessment of the substance of Advincula’s statements.

Fajardo reiterated that the group had not yet taken in Advincula as a client.

In a statement he read to reporters at the IBP national office in Pasig City on Monday,
Advincula repeated his allegations in the videos that Paolo Duterte, Carpio and Go were
members of an illegal drug syndicate who had amassed millions of pesos in
narcomoney.
He said he was ready to face a Senate investigation “to prove everything I have put
forth in the video series.”
Advincula said he decided to go public because he had received threats to his life.

In his Facebook post, Paolo Duterte dared Advincula to file charges against him in
court.

He also told Advincula to bring with him Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, the first to accuse
the former vice mayor of Davao City of involvement in the illegal drug trade.

Destabilization plot

Malacañang had tried to link the Bikoy videos to an alleged destabilization plot against
President Duterte hatched by certain journalists, news websites and activist lawyers.

On Tuesday, the Palace said Advincula could not be acting alone, and vowed to expose
the people who were operating behind the whistleblower.

Presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo said investigators were looking into the
identities of those people, adding that Advincula was merely a “pawn” in a “black
propaganda.”

“I can’t say it as of now, but it seems the investigators are looking at a potential
bombshell, from the way I look at it,” Panelo said.

In an earlier statement, Panelo dismissed Advincula’s report of threats to his life as part
of a “fraudulent act.”
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra on Tuesday warned Advincula that he faced
criminal charges if he could not prove his allegations.

In same boat as Jayme

“Peter Advincula can go to the NBI and present his evidence, if he has any,” Guevarra
said.

“If the NBI finds that Advincula had nothing to show by way of competent evidence, he
might find himself in the same boat as Rodel Jayme,” he said.
Jayme owned the YouTube channel through which the Bikoy videos were propagated
on the internet.

He was arrested last week and charged on Monday with inciting to sedition and
cyberlibel. The justice department had recommended P36,000 bail for him.

Police General Oscar Albayalde, the chief of the Philippine National Police, on
Tuesday told a news conference that investigators were looking into Advincula’s
background to see whether he was indeed Bikoy.

So far, they had found that Advincula’s claims that he had done time for illegal
recruitment and fraud for signing certain papers at VitaPlus health drink company
where he worked were true.

“So it seems he’s good in estafa and in talking. You could just imagine, to be charged
for large-scale illegal recruitment, that means he’s fooled a lot of people,” Albayalde
said.

Former seminarian
Investigators had also found that Advincula was a former seminarian.

“So maybe he uses that to fool people,” Albayalde said.

He said investigators were still looking into Advincula’s claim that he had worked for a
drug syndicate. —WITH REPORTS FROM MATTHEW REYSIO-CRUZ, JULIE M.
AURELIO, DONA Z. PAZZIBUGAN, JAYMEE T. GAMIL, MART SAMBALUD
AND ORLANDO B. DINOY