Quick and dirty Finals reviewer for Constitutional Law I (I-A)
while MINISTRANT FUNCTIONS are optional. (Bacani v.
Glenn Tuazon (2007)
[Note: best viewed in Helvetica]
N.B. I didn’t lock or e-protect this file on purpose, so feel free to add or amend
anything. Please share; don’t be a crab!
ARTICLE I: NATIONAL TERRITORY
• What national territory comprises:
o Philippine Archipelago and all islands and waters embraced
within
o All other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty
and jurisdiction
o Territorial sea, seabed, subsoil, insular shelves, submarine
areas
o FOR FIRST TWO: terrestrial, aerial, fluvial domains
• Constitution: municipal law; will only be binding internationally if
supported by other proof in international law.
• Military bases of the US are still part of Philippine territory, which is the
reason why it could cede part of the authority over this area to the US.
(Raegan v. Commissioner)
• Archipelagic principle
o Internal waters, irrespective of breadth and dimension, are part
of Philippine territory.
o Straight baseline method – to delineate territorial sea
o CONFLICT: Philippines considers water between islands as
internal waters (no innocent passage), whereas the 1982
Convention on the Law of the Sea considers it archipelagic
waters (allow innocent passage).
ARTICLE II: DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES
• Philippines: Democratic and Republican State; sovereignty resides in
the people
o Elements of a State: (a) people, (b) territory, (c) sovereignty,
(d) government
o LEGAL SOVEREIGNTY: supreme power to affect legal
interests by legislative, executive, or judicial action; POLITICAL
SOVEREIGNTY: sum of all legal and non-legal influences
which determine course of law
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
o CONSTITUENT FUNCTIONS of government are compulsory,
Nacoco)
o DE JURE government: established by authority of legitimate
sovereign; DE FACTO: in defiance of legitimate sovereign
o De facto governments: (a) usurpation by force, (b) established
by invading military forces, (c) secession (Co Kim Chan v.
Valdez Tan Keh)
o GMA government is de jure. Same with Cory government. (In
re Letter of Assoc. Justice Puno)
o There was no Constitution from Feb 25 to Mar 24 1986. There
was no Bill of Rights, but the UDHR and ICCPR were
operative. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan)
o The Philippines has always had a President form of
government. The Marcos government under the 1973
Constitution still had elements of a presidential government: (a)
separation of powers, (b) pre-eminence of President, even
over the PM. (Free Telephone Workers Union v. Minister of
Labor)
o Republican: all government authority emanates from the
people; Democratic: has aspects like initiative and referendum
• Renounce war as instrument of national policy; adopt generally
accepted principles of I-Law as part of the law of the land
o Aggressive war is denounce, not defensive
• Civilian authority is supreme over Military; AFP protects the people,
State sovereignty, and territorial integrity
• Primary duty of the Government: SERVE AND PROTECT THE
PEOPLE. Citizens may be called to provide military or civil service.
• Separation of Church and State
• Freedom from nuclear weapons – and also nuclear arms tests
o ALLOW nuclear energy
• Equally protect life of the mother and the unborn from conception.
o Does NOT assert that the unborn is a legal person
o Not EXACTLY same level of life as the mother, but if it can be
protected, protect it
o A denunciation of the Roe v. Wade principle
• Protect and advance the right of people to a balanced and healthful
ecology
o This is, surprisingly, an enforceable right. (Oposa v. Factoran)
(LLDA v. CA)
• State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service
 o NOT an enforceable right. State can limit national election o Ordering absorption is an invalid act of appointment
candidates to those who can wage national campaigns. (Mathay Jr. v. Court of Appeals)
(Pamatong v. COMELEC) • Includes GOCCs: created by special charter, not under Corporation
Code (ex. Local Water Districts under PD 198 and PAGCOR under
ARTICLE IX: CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS PD 1869)
o Upon privatization, ceases to fall under civil service
Common Provisions
• Appointments: by merit and fitness through competitive exams.
• Independent Exams waived for Policy-determining, Primarily Confidential, Highly
Technical positions – but still determined by merit and fitness.
• Cannot hold ANY OTHER OFFICE or EMPLOYMENT, business,
o PC: close intimacy between appointer and appointee
financial contract (DIRECTLY/INDIRECTLY)
which insures freedom of intercourse without
• Salary: fixed by law, cannot be decreased during tenure, can be
embarrassment (De los Santos v. Mallare)
increased
o NATURE of job, not description, determines if it is PD, PC,
• Fiscal autonomy – appropriations regularly and automatically released
or HT (Borres v. Court of Appeals)
o “No report, no release” is invalid (CSC v Dept of Budget)
o CSC may not disapprove appointments as long as the
• Promulgate rules EN BANC. Only limitation: cannot diminish, increase,
person is qualified. This is the ambit of the executive’s
or modify substantive rights.
discretion (Central Bank v. CSC)
o Supreme Court can’t change rules but may exercise judicial
o BUT if the person was already appointed, then the
review.
appointment is withdrawn: violation security of tenure.
o If in front of Commission, its rules prevail; if in front of court, the
CSC may reinstate (Aquino v. CSC)
Rules of Court prevail (Aruelo v. Court of Appeals)
o Career Civil Service: entrance based on merit and fitness,
o Congress CANNOT change rules made by CCs (Macalintal v.
security of tenure, opportunity for advancement;
COMELEC)
o Non-career Service: entrance on bases other than usual
• Decisions: majority of ALL MEMBERS, w/n 60 days of submission
tests merit and fitness, tenure limited by law, coterminous
o Made by persons no longer members upon promulgation are
with appointer or subject to his pleasure, or limited to
invalid (Ambil v COMELEC)
duration of purpose of appointment
• Appeal to SC w/n 30 days, unless provided otherwise by law
• Suspensions – only by cause provided by law; also applies to non-
o RA 7902 – may be appealed to CA w/n 15 days (Mathay Jr. v
competitive positions
CSC)
o PC: loss of trust = expiration of term of office; not a
o COMELEC – can only elevate cases re: ELECTIVE officials
removal violating security of tenure (Hernandez v.
(Garces v Court of Appeals)
Villegas) same with Foreign Service officials – tenure is
coterminous with appointer (Astraquillo v. Manglapus)
Civil Service Commission
o Transfer to another position w/o consent of employee and
• 1 chairman, 2 commissioners temporary transfers designed to lure away from
• Natural born, at least 35 years old, proven capacity for public permanent position: violates security of tenure (Gloria v.
admin, not candidates in immediately preceding elections CA)
o “Designated” officers do not have security of tenure
• Appointment: 7 years; President with approval of COA, Stagger: 7-
because they are not appointed per se (Binamira v.
5-3 for first appointees; no TEMPORARY or ACTING capacity for
Garrucho Jr)
appointees
o No security of tenure for unqualified for office (Dimayuga
o Feb 2, 1987 as common starting point (Gaminde v.
v. Benedicto II)
Commission on Audit) – applies to all CCs

R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
 o Abolition of office in GOOD FAITH does not violate CONSENT OF CONGRESS. Pensions or gratuities are not double
security of tenure; not for personal or political reasons, compensation.
and not in violation of law (Briones v. Osmena) o Additional compensation: twice for same office; double
o No reorganization if there is no revision in lines of control, compensation: two sets of compensation for two different
authority, membership, or consolidation/abolition of offices (Quimson v Ozaeta)
officers (Canonizado v. Aguirre)
o President has prerogative to “inactivate” officers in the Commission on Elections
executive department (Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB v.
Executive Sec.) • 1 chairman, 6 commissioners: natural born citizens, at least 35
o CSC’s sole function is to attest to qualification, not years old at time of appointment, holders of college degree, not
determine which appointee is better (Luego v. CSC) candidates for any elective position in the immediately preceding
elections; MAJORITY of 7 members must be members of Bar, with
• Cannot engage in any electioneering /partisan political campaign
at least 10 years in practice of law
(but may express interests)
o Practice of law: liberally construed (Cayetano v. Monsod)
o Does not apply to Dept. Secretaries (Santos v. Yatco)
o Choice of temporary chair falls in discretion of
• Right to self-organization
Commission, and may not be appointed by President
o But public school teachers, policemen, firemen, etc. may
(Brillantes Jr av Yorac)
not strike unless provided otherwise by law
• 7 years, Appointed by President with consent of COA, stagger 7(3)-
• Same protection to temporary employees
5(2)-3(2), Feb 2 ’87 as common starting point, no temporary
• CSC: Central Personnel Agency of the government; adopt
appointment
measures, merit and rewards system, HR development programs,
• Enforce and administer all laws and regulations re: Election,
personnel programs
Plebiscite, Initiative, Referendum, Recall (EPIRR)
o Just as the CSC may issue certificates of eligibility, they
o Implicitly, may promulgate rules and regulations (Gallardo
may revoke the same. Whether it needs trial or not
v. Tabamo Jr.)
depends on circumstances of the case. (Lazo v. CSC)
• ORIGINAL jurisdiction over ERQ of regional/provincial/city officials
• Compensation system: STANDARDIZED, but equality is NOT
and APPELLATE jurisdiction over ERQ of municipal/barangay
required
officials – trial courts have original jurisdiction. APPELLATE
• No LAME DUCK APPOINTMENTS (candidates who lost in election
decisions on municipal and barangay officials: FINAL AND
may not be appointed to govt. or GOCCs within ONE YEAR of loss)
EXECUTORY with no appeal, but certiorari is allowed.
• No elective official may be appointed in any public office during his
o May issue writs of certiorari, mandamus, quo warranto,
tenure. EXCEPT: VP appointed into Cabinet and Congressman
and habeas corpus in its APPELLATE function.
appointed to JBC.
COMELEC and SC have concurrent jurisdiction over
o Congressmen – automatically forfeit congressional seat,
these. (Relampagos v. Cumba)
but Other Elective Officials – cannot accept appointment
o Appeal period: 5 days (Antonio v. COMELEC)
without first RESIGNING (no forfeiture) (Flores et al. v.
o In municipal contests, even if COMELEC began hearing
Drilon and Gordon)
the case as pre-proclamation controversy, when there is
• Appointed officials cannot hold any other office in govt. UNLESS
proclamation, it becomes part of the RTC’s jurisdiction
PROVIDED OTHERWISE BY LAW, or as ex-officio chair by
(Arcenas v. COMELEC)
primary focus of position – ex. Sec of Finance is ex-officio chair of
o In pre-proclamation: administrative/quasi-judicial role; in
monetary board
proclamation controversies: judicial
• No public official can receive double compensation UPOBL, or
accept any present/title/office from foreign government WITHOUT

R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
 o EXCLUSIVE appellate jurisdiction on municipal/barangay
controversies. Laws giving appellate power to the RTC are
unconstitutional (Flores v. COMELEC)
o SK elections: under DILG, not COMELEC (Mercado v.
Board of Election Supervisors)
o Popular barangay elections, not for officers of a barangay
federation (Taule v. Secretary Santos)
• Decide all administrative issues in elections, except those involving
RIGHT TO VOTE.
o Cannot transfer municipalities (Montejo v. COMELEC)
o May annul an entire election based on post-election
terrorism, w/c makes them unable to tell honest from
fraudulent votes (Biliwang v. COMELEC)
• Deputize (with concurrence of President): law enforcement
agencies including AFP to ensure clean/honest/orderly elections
• Register political parties/coalitions/organizations – must present
platform. Accredit citizens’ arms of COMELEC. Disallow
RELIGIOUS, VIOLENT, ANTI-CONSTITUTION, and FOREIGN
GOVERNMENT-SUPPORTED organizations. May DQ parties that
receive financial contributions from foreign governments.
o For intra-party disputes, COMELEC may turn to Party
Constitution but need not resolve root of conlict (LDP v.
COMELEC)
o Ban is on religious denominations and sects, not lay
organizations with religious affiliations
• File for inclusion/exclusion of voters upon own initiative or upon
petition; investigate or prosecute election offenses – may deputize
fiscals, who are under COMELEC’s jurisdiction in performance of
this function
o When COMELEC as prosecutor files a case in the RTC,
the RTC gains exclusive authority, including ordering a re-
investigation (People v. Hon. Delgado)
o It is not the COMELEC’s duty to physically attain all
evidence as prosecutor; the complainant has to also prove
his asserted complaint (Kilosbayan v. COMELEC)
o COMELEC does not necessarily have to devolve
investigation to Provincial Prosecutor, but it may although
it has EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION (People v. Judge
Inting)
• Recommend to Congress measures to minimize election spending,
limitations on campaign material posting, and penalties for offenses
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
• Recommend to President removal or punishment of any
officer/employee deputized for violation of election conduct
• Submit to President and Congress comprehensive report for each
EPIRR
• May sit en banc or in two divisions. ALL ELECTION CASES
HEARD IN DIVISION. Motions for reconsideration: en banc.
o Any decision first rendered en banc is void (Soller v.
COMELEC)
o En banc for motions for reconsideration on DECISIONS,
not dismissals (Salazar, Jr. v COMELEC)
• During election period, may supervise or regulate (but not
confiscate) franchises and permits of transportation, public utilities,
media, and other government grants. Aim to ensure equal time,
space, opportunity, and fair rates for campaign
o Regulatory power extends to plebiscites and referenda
(Unido v. COMELEC)
o Regulation must extend to assure candidates equal
opportunity and access, not to prevent commentaries from
being issued (Sanidad v. COMELEC)
o May not compel media to allocate free services/space –
tantamount to taking of property without just compensation
(Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC)
• Pardon, amnesty, parole, suspension of sentence for violation of
election laws need to be with favorable recommendation of
COMELEC
• Free and open party system
o Registration: (1) confers juridical personality, (2) informs
public of party’s existence and ideals, (3) identifies party
and its officers for COMELEC regulation
• Votes cast for parties are invalid, except for those under the party-
list system (no block voting)
• Political parties not represented in Registration Boards, Election
Inspectors, Board of Canvassers. But they may appoint poll
watchers
o 1935 Constitution and 1971 Election Code: top two parties
had privilege of having representatives in such bodies
• Election period: 90 days before e-day until 30 days after
• Fiscal autonomy
Commission on Audit
• 1 chairman, 2 commissioners
 • Natural born citizens, 35 years old, CPAs with at least 10 years o Promulgate accounting/audit rules
experience OR members of the Bar engaged in practice of law for o Decide administrative cases involving use of public funds
at least 10 years, not candidates for any election immediately • No law may exempt any government entity from COA accounting
preceding appointment. Members should not all belong to just one • Submit report to President and Congress
profession.
• Appointment: 7 years without reappointment, 7-5-3 stagger, no ARTICLE X: LOCAL GOVERNMENT
temporary or acting capacity.
• Territorial and political subdivisions: provinces, cities,
• Pre-audit: examine, audit, and settle all accounts of government, its
municipalities, barangays
subdivisions, and GOCCs with original charters
o Subdivisions cannot be changed except by constitutional
o Commission not estopped from doing post-audit after pre-
amendment
audit (DBP v Commission on Audit)
o Can only settle LIQUIDATED accounts, not unfixed or • Autonomous regions: Muslim Mindanao and Cordillera
undetermined debts. (Compania General de Tabacos v. o Can only add a third one through constitutional
French and Unson) amendment
o May reduce submitted amounts on ground of o The Cordillera Administrative Region is not the Cordillera
excessiveness, disadvantaging government (Dincong v. AUTONOMOUS Region; the first one is simply an
Guingona, Jr.) administrative division by the executive to facilitate
regional development (Cordillera Board Coalition v.
• Post-audit: (1) Constitutional bodies with fiscal autonomy, (2)
Comm. on Audit)
autonomous state colleges and universities, (3) other GOCCs and
subsidiaries, (4) non-governmental entities receiving subsidy/equity • Subdivisions enjoy local autonomy.
directly or indirectly – BUT MAY ADOPT BY LAW special or pre- o Decentralization of ADMINISTRATION: central
audit if internal control systems are inadequate. government delegates administrative power to
subdivisions to broaden power base and facilitate
• EXCLUSIVE authority to define scope of audit and examination,
management of local affairs
establish techniques, promulgate rules, including those preventing
o Decentralization of POWER: abdication of political power
unnecessary, extravagant, or excessive (U,E,E) use of government
in favor of LGUs, allowing for autonomous determination
funds.
of its destiny, with minimum central government
o May not prevent payment of backwages because it is not
intervention (Bernas, “Brewing Storm Over Autonomy”)
an U,E,E use of government funds (Uy v. COA)
o DEFINITION OF AUTONOMY: LGUs have powers given
o Scope includes not just accountable officers but also other
by the Constitution that may not be curtailed by the
officers performing related functions (such as computers
national government, although LGUs may not pass
and evaluators) (Mamaril v. Domingo)
ordinances contrary to statute
o May determine if public bidding has failed to be fulfilled,
o Legislative power of LGUs is only delegated by Congress,
e.g. only one company presented a bid (Danville
so LGUs cannot prevent PAGCOR from operating casinos
Maritime v. Commission on Audit)
in their local unit by virtue of PD 1869 (Magtajas v. Pryce
o Only authority to promulgate rules is exclusive, so public
Properties)
corporations MAY employ private auditors. But COA’s
o Specific power granted by statute (to LLDA by PD 813)
accounting prevails over private accounting. (DBP v.
prevails over general power of LGUs, so the LLDA can
COA)
prevent LGUs from operating fish-pens near Laguna Lake
• Powers, in a nut-shell:
(LLDA v. CA)
o Examine and audit all forms of government revenues
o Examine and audit all forms of government expenditures
o Settle government account
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
 o Budget officer appointed by Department Head must be
among those recommended by LG head – condition sine
qua non of appointing authority (San Juan v. CSC)
o Commission on Audit may not reduce allowances given to
judges by the LG (Dadole v. COA)
• 1991 Local Government Code: called for by Sec. 3 of the 1987
Constitution
o 1991 LGC provides for initiative, referendum, and recall.
Initiative and referendum apply not only to ordinances, but
also to resolutions. (Garcia v. COMELEC)
o Congress has prerogative to determine how recall
elections may be best held, whether through direct action
of the people or through the Preparatory Recall Assembly
(PRA) (Garcia v. COMELEC)
• President has general supervision over local governments and has
direct supervision over regions, provinces, and independent cities.
o General supervision: power of superior officer to ensure
lower officers perform their functions. NO SUBSTITUTION
OF JUDGMENT.
o Secretary of Justice, under the LGC, can only determine is
local tax ordinance is constitutional, but cannot exercise
power of control over such (Drilon v. Lim)
o General supervision includes power to investigate and
remove. Autonomy does not turn LGUs into little
kingdoms. (Ganzon v. CA)
• Provinces supervise component cities and municipalities
• Cities and municipalities supervise component barangays
o Secretary of Local Government may not annul results of
Barangay federation officers (Taule v. Secretary Santos)
• LGUs have power to create its own sources of revenue and to levy
taxes, fees, charges; subject to guidelines and limitations of
Congress. TFCs accrue exclusively to LGs.
o Exemption of PAGCOR from taxation is valid (“subject to
guidelines and limitations of Congress”) (Basco v.
PAGCOR)
o Business taxes may not be imposed on condominium
corporations, without proving contemplation of business
(Yamane v. BA Lepanto Condominium)
o Administrative orders cannot limit LGUs’ power to raise
revenues – must issuances by CONGRESS (Philippine
Petroleum Corp. v. Municipality of Pililia) Same with
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
EOs, if there is no statute allowing for EOs' exemptions
(John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim)
o LGC allows LGUs to tax instrumentalities of the national
government; a company cannot rely on cases decided
prior to the LGC (Batangas Power v. Batangas City)
o Guidelines for local taxes: (a) taxpayers are not
overburdened; (b) LGU gets fair share of available
resources; (c) resources of national government are not
unduly disturbed; (d) taxes are uniform, fair, and just
(Manila Electric v. Province of Laguna)
• LGUs have just share in national taxes: AUTOMATICALLY
released to them
o Administrative Orders may not withhold the Internal
Revenue Allotment, because it must be automatically
released (Pimentel v. Aguirre)
o Prohibition against withholding applies to both executive
and legislative (Alternative Center v. Zamora))
• LGUs entitled to equitable share in proceeds of utilization of natural
resources in their respective areas
o Either have direct shares from revenues or direct benefits
(such as lower rates)
• FOUR SOURCES OF REVENUE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
o Local taxes, fees, charges
o Share in national taxes
o Share in proceeds of utilization of national resources in
their area
o Other sources of revenue in public or governmental
capacity, or private or proprietary capacity
• Terms of local officials are three years. Barangay officials =
provided by law. No more than THREE consecutive terms.
o To count for term limit, official must be ELECTED. If he
simply succeeded (e.g. Vice Mayor to dead Mayor), it
doesn’t count. (Borja Jr. v. COMELEC)
o Must be ELECTED and must FULLY SERVE the term.
o Elected a third term, but abandoned office after successful
election challenge by opponent. MAY run again.
(Lonzanida v. COMELEC)
o Lost for third term, but won in the recall election. MAY run
again because third term was not fully served. (Adormeo
v. COMELEC)
 o Completed three terms. Ran again in recall election after.
MAY run, because there was an interruption. (Socrates v.
COMELEC)
o Municipality converted into a city. After three completed
terms, mayor may not run again because there was no
change in constitution. (Latasa v. COMELEC)
o Local Autonomy Code: term of barangay officials is three
years. No prohibition against it being three years as well.
(David v. COMELEC)
• Sectoral representation in Legislative Bodies of LGUs, as
prescribed by law
o LGC: President appoints sectoral representatives – can do
it through Secretary of Local Government (Supangan Jr.
v. Santos)
• No province, city, municipality, barangay may be created, divided,
merged, merged, abolished, changed of its boundary unless: (a)
according to LGC criteria, (b) majority of votes cast in plebiscite of
ALL AREAS AFFECTED
o If barangay, affected city/municipality
o If municipality/component city, affected province
o If province, mother province (Tan v. COMELEC)
o Enactment of the LGC is not a condition sine qua non for
the creation of new LGUs; it just means that when there is
one, its criteria must hold (Torralba v. Municipality of
Sibagat)
• Special Metropolitan Subdivisions – may be created by Congress,
subject to plebiscite. Component cities and municipalities RETAIN
autonomy, local executives, and legislatives. METROPOLITAN
AUTHORITY: merely for basic services requiring coordination.
o MMDA: Development Authority for metro-wide services:
(a) development planning, (b) transport and traffic
management, (c) solid waste disposal and management,
(d) flood control and sewerage management, (e) urban
renewal, zoning, land use, (f) health and sanitation, (g)
public safety
o ADMINISTRATIVE, with no legislative powers or police
power. (MMDA v. Bel-Air Village)
o Power to confiscate drivers’ licenses – power provided to
MMDA by law (MMDA v. Garin)
• THREE KINDS OF CITIES:
o Highly urbanized cities
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
o Cities with charters prohibiting voters from voting in
provincial elections
o Component cities
• First two kinds of cities do not vote in provincial elections
o As corollary, candidates cannot run for the province either
(Abella v. COMELEC)
• LGUs may group themselves to coordinate efforts – does not
create a new juridical entity, and does not need enabling law
• Regional Development Councils: (a) LGU officials, (b) regional
heads of departments/government offices, (c) NGO representatives
Autonomous Regions
• Muslim Mindanao and Cordilleras – consisting of provinces, cities,
municipalities, geographic areas with common (a) historical and
cultural relevance, (b) economic and social structures, (c) other
relevant characteristics
o Not an independent nation within a nation – still within
framework of Constitution and national sovereignty
• President has GENERAL SUPERVISION over autonomous regions
• What autonomous regions have no power over: national defense
and security, foreign relations/trade, customs and tariff,
currency/monetary affairs/banking, transport, immigration,
citizenship and naturalization, auditing, among others
• Congress enacts Organic Act with assistance of Regional
Consultative Commission – needs majority of votes cast by
constituent units, with only those voting favorably being included in
the autonomous region
o Basic structure of government, with legislative and
executive both elective and representative of constituent
units
o Special Courts with jurisdiction over: PERSONAL,
PROPETY, and FAMILY law
o Organic Acts may not be amended by general or special
laws. Must always be through plebiscite. (Pandi v. CA)
o It may be possible for one cluster of municipalities or
barangays within one province to belong to an
autonomous region while other might not
o One province cannot constitute the entire autonomous
region – the wording is plural (Ordillo v. COMELEC)
o Tribal courts of the Cordillera Bodong Administration only
have advisory and conciliatory powers, and not judicial
 powers because of the failure of the plebiscite. (Spouses
Badua v. Cordillera Bodong Administration)
o Even if the Organic Act of Mindanao contradicts the Tripoli
Agreement, it is valid, because international law and
statutes are on the same level. Whatever comes later
supersedes the other. (Abbas v. COMELEC)
o No need for double majority. (Abbas v. COMELEC)
• First Congress has to preferably pass Organic Acts within 18
months of organizations (USELESS)
• Organic Act: provide legislative powers over:
o Administrative organization
o Sources of revenue
o Ancestral domain and natural resources
o Personal, family, property relations
o Regional, urban, rural planning development
o Economic, social, tourism development
o Educational policies
o Preservation/development of cultural heritage
o Promotion of general welfare
• Preservation of peace and order: local police agencies; defense
and security: national government
ARTICLE XI: ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
• Public office is public trust – accountable to people, serve with
utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, efficiency, act with patriotism
and justice, lead modest lives
o Officers are agents and not rules of the people, accept
office pursuant to provisions of the law, and hold office as
a trust for the people (Cornejo v. Gabriel)
o “Lead modest lives” – even if officer is wealthy, he must
live life in a manner that doesn’t flaunt it
• Who may be removed by impeachment (EXCLUSIVE LIST):
o President
o VP
o Members of Supreme Court
o Members of Constitutional Commissions
o Ombudsman
• Grounds for removal – conviction for:
o Culpable violation of the Constitution
o Treason
o Bribery
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
o Graft and Corruption
o Other high crimes
o Betrayal of public trust
• PROCEDURE:
o Only House of Representatives may initiate impeachment
o Verified complaint – filed by either Congressman or any
citizen with endorsement of any Congressman (w/n TEN
SESSION DAYS in order of business, referred to
Committee on Justice w/n THREE SESSION DAYS)
o Committee on Justice – submit report to house by majority
vote (w/n 60 SESSION DAYS, calendared for resolution in
TEN DAYS)
rd
o House votes – at least 1/3 to affirm or override
Committee resolution; each member’s vote is recorded
rd
o Trial by Senate – convicts on 2/3 vote; on
oath/affirmation – if President is on trial, CJ presides but
does not vote
o EFFECT: Removal from office only, but does not preclude
criminal prosecution
o No impeachment proceedings can be initiated against
same official more than once in a period of ONE YEAR
o “INITIATION” begins upon filing of a verified complaint and
referral to the Committee on Justice. (Francisco, et al. v.
House Speaker)
• Sandiganbayan (anti-graft court) continues to function and exercise
jurisdiction
o NOT a constitutional court – created by statute but
recognized by the Constitution
o Jurisdiction not limited to graft and corruption alone, but
also other offenses committed by public officers,
employees, and those in GOCCs IN RELATION TO
THEIR OFFICE (Mayos Lecaroz v. Sandiganbayan)
o Private individuals may be charged as co-principals,
accomplices, or accessories along with public
officers/employees. (Balmadrid v. Sandiganbayan)
o BIR designation of a private individual as custodian does
not make one a “public officer”; he is beyond
Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction (Azarcon v.
Sandiganbayan)
• Office of the Ombudsman:
o Ombudsman/Tanodbayan
o Over-all deputy
 o Deputies for Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao, and (optional)
Military
o Other officials and employees – appointed through Civil
Service
o The Ombudsman may delegate investigation of civilian
police to the military deputy (broad power) (Acop v.
Ombudsman)
o Ombudsman Act of 1989 allows Ombudsman to
investigate any illegal act of a public official, even if NOT
related to performance of functions (Deloso v. Domingo)
o Claim of confidentiality cannot bar Ombudsman from
investigating, except if military/diplomatic/national security
(Almonte v. Velasquez)
o May preventively suspend – not considered a penalty and
different from functions under Sec. 13 (Buenaseda v.
Flavier)
• Office of the Special Prosecutor – the Tanodbayan prior to 1987
Constitution: continues to exercise functions except those conferred
to Ombudsman by the Constitution
o The Special Prosecutor may only investigate and file
cases when authorized by the Ombudsman (Zaldivar v.
Sandiganbayan and Gonzales)
o The Ombudsman has primary power to investigate, but it
is not exclusive; may delegate it to Special Prosecutor
(Natividad v. Felix)
• Qualifications of Ombudsman and Deputies:
o Natural-born citizens of Philippines
o At least 40 years old
o Recognized probity and independence
o Members of the Philippine Bar
o Not candidates for any office in immediately preceding
election
o OMBUDSMAN: 10 years as judge or in practice of law
• Cannot hold ANY OTHER OFFICE or EMPLOYMENT, business,
financial contract (DIRECTLY/INDIRECTLY)
• First Ombudsman and deputies: appointed by president from list of
at least SIX NOMINEES prepared by the JBC;
o Thereafter: THREE NOMINEES
o NO CONFIRMATION by Commission on Appointments
o Fill vacancies w/n THREE MONTHS
o Same salary as Constitutional Commission chairman and
members
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
• SEVEN YEARS without reappointment
• Cannot run in election immediately after leaving office
• Ombudsman and Deputies acts promptly on complaints FILED IN
ANY FORM OR MANNER against public officers
o Definition of PUBLIC OFFICER: “one to whom some
sovereign functions of the government has been
delegated” / “executive function” implementation of
policies set forth by law (includes the National Centennial
Commission) (Laurel v. Desierto)
o Authority includes any illegal, unjust, improper, or
inefficient act of a public officer – EVEN MURDER
(Deloso v. Domingo)
o Even complaints sworn before notary publics and filed to
provincial fiscals falls in ambit of “complaints filed in any
manner” (Raro v. Sandiganbayan)
• POWERS OF OMBUDSMAN:
o Investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person of
any public official
o Direct any public official to perform or expedite any act or
duty required by law or to stop any abuse
o Direct officer to take appropriate action against any official,
and recommend sanctions
o Direct officer to furnish documents of contracts and
transactions, and direct irregularities to the Commission
on Audit
o Request any government agency for assistance in
discharge of responsibility
o Publicize matters covered by investigations
o Determine causes of inefficiency or corruption and
recommend changes
o Promulgate rules of procedure and perform other functions
APBL
• RA 6770 (OMBUDSMAN ACT)
o Allowed Ombudsman to conduct preliminary investigations
and directly undertake criminal prosecution. Basis is
“perform other functions APBL” (Art XI, Sec 13(8))
(Camanag v. Guerrero)
o Power to investigate is delegable (Honasan II v. Panel of
Investigators of the DOJ)
o Ombudsman may delegate fact-finding to the NBI prior to
its preliminary investigation (Raro v. Sandiganbayan)
 • Fiscal autonomy – appropriations automatically and regularly
released
• Right to recover properties unlawfully acquired cannot be barred by
prescription, laches, or estoppels (but crimes can prescribe)
• GOVERNMENT OWNED OR CONTROLLED BANKS/FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS cannot grant loans or guaranties to:
o EXEC: President, VP, Members of Cabinet
o LEG: Congress
o JUD: Supreme Court
o Constitutional Commissions and Ombudsman
o Any firm/entity where they have controlling interest
• ANY PUBLIC OFFICER declares net assets, liabilities, net worth
upon assumption of office or when law provides
• SPECIAL RULE – disclose to public assets, liabilities, and net
worth of:
o EXEC: President, VP, Members of Cabinet
o LEG: Congress
o JUD: Supreme Court
o Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional
offices
o Officers of Armed Forces with General or Flag rank
• Allegiance of public officers and employees: THIS constitution and
the State
o Punish by law those who seek to change citizenship or
acquire immigrants status DURING TENURE
o Applies to incumbents; for those who have attained green
cards or other nationalities, the rule is for them to waives
status as permanent resident of that country (Caasi v. CA
and Miguel)
ARTICLE XII: NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY
• Goals of national economy: (a) equitable distribution of
opportunities, income, wealth, (b) increase of wealth for the benefit
of people, (c) expand productivity to raise quality of life for all
• Promote industrialization and full employment based on sound
agricultural development
o Industrialization as result of releasing through CARP
capital locked up in land
o No prioritization of one over the other: flexible and rational
relationship
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
• Protect Filipino enterprises from unfair foreign competition and
trade practices
o The intention is NOT to protect local inefficiency
• State encourages private enterprises and corporations to broaden
their base of ownership
• REGALIAN DOCTRINE – what is owned by the state:
o All land of public domain
o POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ENERGY: Waters, minerals,
coal, petroleum, other mineral oils
o NATURAL RESOURCES: Fisheries, forests, timber,
wildlife, flora and fauna
o No alienation of natural resources EXCEPT agricultural
lands
• IMPERIUM: authority possessed by state, expressed in concept of
sovereignty; DOMINIUM: capacity of state to own/acquire property
o Jura regalia: all lands held from the Crown – transformed
into State. All ownership of portion of public domain must
be traced back to the state. (Lee Hong Kok v. David)
o EXCEPTION: Upon arrival of colonizers, if natives can
prove that a land has been held as far back as testimony
or memory goes, the land is deemed never to have been
public (Carino v. Insular Government)
• Lands of public domain become private through (a) PURCHASE or
(b) GRANT, (c) if it is possessed from time-immemorial even before
Spanish conquest, (d) prescription
o Requirement for prescription: open, exclusive, continuous,
undisputed possession for more than 30 years. Need
CONCLUSIVELY proof. (San Miguel Corp. v. CA)
o Must count period from time the land was public alienable
land, not when it was still forest/timber land (Almeda v.
CA)
o Does not apply to mining claims under the Old Mining Law
– it only segregates land, but does not confer ownership
(Director of Lands v. Kalahi Investments)
o Reclaimed land is inalienable public domain. To own it,
show: (a) it was classified as alienable, (b) proof of
acquisition (Republic v. Enciso)
o Public Estates Authority – to sell land, must: (a) have
legislative authority, and (b) follow Constitutional rules
(Chavez v. PEA and AMARI)
o Roppongi property in Japan – acquired through
Reparations Agreement with Japan. Must not be alienated
 because it is State property for the collective benefit and
enjoyment of everyone. (Laurel v. Garcia)
o Aliens may not lease lands of public domain.
o Aliens may lease private lands for a reasonable period.
(Krivenko v. Register of Deeds)
o Prohibition against aliens only in owning land. But they
may own immovable or real property. (J.G. Summit v.
CA)
• Exploration, development, utilization of natural resources may be
through: (a) direct undertaking by the State, (b) co-production, (c)
joint venture, (d) production-sharing
o Either with FILIPINO CITIZENS or AT LEAST 60%
FILIPINO-OWNED companies
o THEN: may be leased to Filipino citizens and corporations;
NOW: State must always be involved
o MINERAL AND FOREST LANDS: May NOT be leased.
Agricultural lands MAY be leased.
o Agreements should not exceed 25 years, renewable for
not more than 25 years as well
o For water rights for irrigation, fisheries, etc. OTHER THAN
DEVELOPMENT OF WATER POWER, measure and limit
of grant: BENEFICIAL USE, esp. to subsistence fishermen
o A company may be more than 40% foreign owned, but
they lose capacity to hold lands. (J.G. Summit v. CA)
• Rules on waters:
o In-land waters: treated like land – foreigners can’t enter
o Territorial waters (12 nautical miles): foreign vessels may
enter peacefully
o Exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
o ALL SUCH: exclusive to Filipino CITIZENS, not
corporations
• Agreements with foreign-owned corporations in exploration,
development, utilization of minerals, petroleum, mineral oils –
technical or financial assistance
o Entered into by President – notifies Congress of contracts
w/n THIRTY DAYS of their execution
o Promote use and development of local scientific and
technical resources
o ONLY FOR MINERAL, PETROLEUM, MINERAL OILS (La
Bugal B’laan Tribal Assoc. v. DENR)
o Contracts may includes managerial role for foreign corps
(“service contracts”) – “technical and financial” is not
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
restrictive; real standard is general welfare of the country.
Management is allowed, as long as it is incidental to the
financial and technical assistance agreements. (La Bugal
B’laan Tribal Assoc. v. DENR)
• Classification of public lands: (a) agricultural, (b) forest or timber,
(c) mineral lands, (d) national parks
o Agricultural lands may be further classified by law
o Only agricultural lands may be alienated
o Private corporations may only lease public lands for period
not more than 25 years, renewable by 25 years – up to
1000 hectares
o Private corporations may only acquire PRIVATE land
o Citizens: may acquire (up to 12 hectares) or lease (not
more than 500 hectares) public land
• Limits in size of public land allowed to be held – set by Congress,
based on (a) conservation, (b) ecology and development, (c)
agrarian reform
• EXECUTIVE classifies lands, as delegated by CA 141
o Need executive classification – no “automatic”
reclassification upon change in nature of the land
(Director of Lands v. Judge Aquino)
o No mixed classifications (Republic v. CA)
o If a person discovers minerals in his agricultural land,
State may reclassify the land as mineral land, take over its
ownership, and compensate the owner (Id.)
o Mangrove swamps are forest, not agricultural lands
(Director of Forestry v. Villareal)
• For Forest Lands and National Parks: Congress determines by law
the limits for conservation– cannot be increase or diminish
boundaries, except by law
• Protect rights of indigenous cultural communities to Ancestral
Lands – subject to Constitution and national development policies
o May allow customary law on property rights to determine
ownership and extend of ancestral domain
o Ancestral domain – all-encompassing concept of all areas
and natural resources used for subsistence and traditional
activities, and not necessarily occupied
o Ancestral lands – occupies, possessed, and utilized by
communities under individual or group ownership
o IPRA: constitutional because (a) land is not public, it was
held since immemorial by the indigenous tribes, (b) right
over natural resources is not ownership, but exploration to
 ensure protection, (c) priority right, not exclusive right
(DISSENT: abdication of ownership of the State of natural
resources) (Cruz v. Executive Secretary)
• Use of property: has social function; must be for common good
o Right to own and operate economic enterprises: subject to
(a) duty of state to promote distributive justice and (b)
intervention when common good demands it
o Cooperatives are subject to duty of state to intervene
when the common good demands it (La Union Electric
Cooperative v. Judge Yaranon)
• Private lands may be conveyed to: Filipino citizens, Corporations w/
more than 60% Filipino ownership, Aliens (ONLY FOR
HEREDITARY SUCCESSION), Natural born Filipino citizen who
lost citizenship (may be transferee)
o Aliens may have usufructuary rights over land (Ramirez v.
Vda. de Ramirez)
o Obiter dictum: “succession” must be intestate, not
testamentary (Id.)
o If one spouse is an alien, and the other Filipino, the
property is not conjugal – it is wholly owned by the Filipino
(Cheesman v. Intermediate Appellate Court)
o Under 1935 Constitution, Americans and American
corporations had same rights as Filipino citizens, and may
acquire lands. (Moss v. Director of Lands)
o Initially, Filipino vendor cannot recover land invalidly sold
to an American because they are in pari delicto. (Rellosa
v. Gaw Chee Hun) But in a subsequent case, pari delicto
does not apply when the original parties are dead, or when
it enhances public policy of preserving lands for Filipino
ownership. (Philippine Banking Corporation v. Lui She)
o If an alien who invalidly acquired land sells it to Filipino
citizen, the flaw is cured and title of transferee is valid.
(Halili v. CA)
o An alien cannot claim compensation for losing land he or
she was not capacitated to hold in the first place. (Frenzel
v. Catito)
o RA 8179: Rule on Natural Born Citizens who lost
citizenship: May own up to 5,000 sq. meters of urban land
or up to 3 hectares of rural land – may own up to 2 lands
as long as they don’t exceed maximum
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
• Independent economic planning agency: headed by President and
recommends to Congress programs for national development
(NEDA) – consult with public agencies, private sectors, LGUs
• FILIPINIZATION – reserve certain areas of investment for Filipino
citizens of Corporations w/ at least 60% Filipino ownership
o Done by Congress, with recommendation of NEDA, when
national policy calls for it
o UNNECESSARY PROVISION. Jurisprudence already
provides that Filipinization may be done without violating
the Equal Protection Clause (Ichong v. Hernandez)
o Different from nationalization – ownership reserved to the
State
• Grant of rights, privileges, concessions to national
economy/patrimony – favor qualified Filipinos
o Ruled as self-executory – a mandatory, positive command
that needs no further implementing laws for its
enforcement (Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS)
o SC upheld Constitutionality of GATT, w/c places aliens
and Filipinos in equal footing. Claimed that above
provision only applies to national economy and patrimony
(WEIRD: trade does); and that Congress may balance
provisions in Constitution (WEIRD: even if the provision is
supposedly mandatory) – may be a way to distance self
from Manila Prince decision (Tanada v. Angara)
• Franchises to OPERATE public utilities: only to Filipino citizens and
60% Filipino owned corporations – (a) non-exclusive (b) FIFTY
years maximum
o Subject to impairment of Congress for common good
o Foreign investors: limited to proportionate share in capital
o Managing officers: must all be Filipino citizens
o Definition of “public utility”: utility corporation that renders
service to the public for compensation – ESSENTIAL
FEATURE: open to an indefinite public (Iloilo Ice and
Cold Storage Co. v. Public Utility Board)
o A shipyard is a public utility, under CA 146. (J.G. Summit
Holdings v. CA)
o Foreigners may completely own public utilities, but
Filipinos must operate it (e.g. LRT) (Tatad v. Garcia)
o Power to issue franchises is legislative, but MAY BE
DELEGATED. (Associated Communications v. NTC0
• General stuff:
 o Preferential use of Filipino labor, materials, goods – make
them competitive
o Trade policy – serve general welfare and arrangements of
exchange on equality and reciprocity
o Promote manpower – scientists, entrepreneurs,
professionals, managers, etc.
o Practice of all professions in Philippines – limited to
citizens UPOBL
o Promote viability and growth of coops for social
justice/development
• Formation of corporations – only through General Law (Corporation
Code), while GOCCs – formed through special charters
o Presidential Decrees cannot dissolve and create a private
company (National Development Co. and New Agrix v.
Philippine Veterans Bank)
• NATIONAL EMERGENCY: State may temporarily take over
privately owned public utilities and businesses affected with public
interest
o President can only authorized take over when Congress
gives her emergency powers (David v. Ermita)
o Primary consideration: PUBLIC INTEREST. No need for
just compensation for temporary takeovers, but needed for
permanent takeovers (Agan, Jr. v. PIATCO)
• NATIONALIZATION: for public interest, upon just compensation,
transfer to government ownership and operation VITAL industries
o The government may compel a public utility to render
service in public interest – as long as there is just
compensation (Republic v. PLDT)
o “Public interest”: exercise of police power, for national
welfare. For the provision on NATIONAL EMERGENCY,
“public interest”: companies with characteristics of utilities
• ON MONOPOLIES: regulate or prohibit, when public interest
requires
o Cannot restrain trade or allow unfair competition
o State should encourage market economy (Energy
Regulatory Board v. CA)
o Definition of monopoly: only one seller/producer/service
provider, with no alternatives
o Constitution DOES NOT ABSOLUTELY PROHIBIT
monopolies, they may only be regulated – as long as no
restraint of competition from new players (Eastern
Assurance v. LTFRB)
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
• CENTRAL MONETARY AUTHORITY: provide policy direction in
money, banking, credit; supervise and regulate (APBL) operations
of banks
o Members are all natural-born Filipino citizens
o Of known probity, integrity, patriotism
o Majority: private sector
o Subject to qualifications and disqualifications by law
o UNTIL PROVIDED OTHERWISE: Central Bank performs
these
• FOREIGN LOANS: only according to law and with concurrence of
Monetary Board
• Circumventions: subject to criminal and civil sanctions
ARTICLE XVI: GENERAL PROVISIONS
• Philippine flag: may only be changed by Constitutional Amendment
• New name for country, national anthem, national seal
o Must be reflective and symbolic of ideals, history,
traditions
o CONGRESS enacts law, and PEOPLE ratify by
NATIONAL REFERENDUM
• The state may not be sued without its consent
o WHY? Theoretical – there is no legal right against that
which makes the law on which the right depends
(Kawananakoa v. Polyblank); Sacrifice individual rights
for “higher right” of government immunity, and they cannot
sue themselves, as a republic (Metran v. Paredes)
o WHY? Practical – loss of governmental efficiency; loss of
time and energy (Providence Washington Insurance
Co. v. Philippines)
o When a suit is against the State:
 Republic is sued by name
 Suit against unincorporated government agency
 Suit is against government officer, but ultimate
liability is government’s
o Public officials may be personally accountable for acts
ultra vires (outside of duty) or those done in bad faith
(Chavez v. Sandiganbayan) – but there is presumption of
good faith and regularity (Farolan v. Solmac Marketing
Corp.)
 o Test of liability of municipality is whether constituent is
performing governmental (not liable) or proprietary (liable)
function (Municipality of San Fernando v. Judge Firme)
o When state can be sued:
 EXPRESSLY
 IMPLIEDLY – (a) state enters into private
contract, unless incidental to governmental
function (Syquia v. Almeda-Lopez); (b) state
enters business operation, unless incidental to
governmental function (Mobil Philippines v.
Customs Arrastre Service); (c) when state sues
a private party (Froilan v. Pan Oriental
Shipping)
o Entry into propriety contracts waives immunity (Traders
Royal Bank v. Intermediate Appellate Court)
o Immunity applies to foreign states as well – sovereign
equality of states; submission to jurisdiction of foreign
state must be clear and unequivocal (Republic of
Indonesia v. Vinzon)
• REPARATIONS AGAINST THE STATE:
o There can be no disbursement of reparations without
Congress appropriating the amount (PHILROCK v. Board
of Liquidators)
o File money claims instead to Commission on Audit, which
shall decide within 60 days
o For property unlawfully taken by State by unauthorized act
of public officer – if it can be restored, damages against
the public officer (Festejo v. Fernando); if it cannot be
restored, court will decide
• Armed Forces of the Philippines – composed of citizen armed force
given military training, APBL. Keep regular force if necessary.
• MILITARY provisions:
o Oath/affirmation to uphold/defend Constitution
o State – strengthen patriotism, nationalism, respect for
rights
o Primary concern – professionalism and adequate
remuneration; isolate from partisan politics – except voting
o CANNOT BE APPOINTED TO ANY civilian position in
Government or GOCCs
o Laws on retirement on military service: cannot allow for
extension
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
o Recruit proportionately from all provinces and cities, as far
as practicable
o CHIEF OF STAFF: tour of duty can’t exceed THREE
YEARS. President may extend in times of war or national
emergency.
 May allow to finish tour of duty even beyond
compulsory retirement date, if COS.
• ONE Police Force: national in scope and civilian
o Controlled by National Police Commission
o Law provides authority of local executives over police units
o Philippine Constabulary was phased out.
o PNP falls under Civil Service, because it’s civilian.
(Mendoza v. PNP)
• WAR VETERANS, surviving spouses, and orphans – given due
care, assistance, DUE (not preferential) consideration for
disposition of agricultural lands
• Upgrade pensions and benefits from time to time of all employees
(government and private)
• Develop full Filipino capability and structures re: communication for
balanced flow of information; policy reflects freedom or speech and
of the press
o State has used this provision to require interconnection
from PLDT for public good (PLDT v. NTC)
• MASS MEDIA OWNERSHIP: Filipino Citizens and Corporations
(100% owned)
• ADVERTISING INDUSTRY: Filipino Citizens and Corporations
(70% owned)
o Participation of foreign investor limited to share
o All managing/executive officers must be Filipinos
• Congress – may create consultative body to advise President on
IPs; majority must come from IP communities
ARTICLE XVII: AMENDMENTS OR REVISIONS
• Propose AMENDMENTS or REVISIONS:
th
o 3/4 of members of Congress
o Constitutional Convention
o RATIFICATION: majority of votes in plebiscite (60-90 days
from approval of provision)
o Whether to have amendments or revisions by Congress or
Constitutional Convention is up to complete discretion of
Congress. (Gonzales v. COMELEC)
 o But the METHOD of calling it (numbers, etc.) is up for
judicial review, such as whether it met required number of
votes, or whether is was submitted properly to the people.
(Tolentino v. COMELEC)
o Congress as Con-Ass or Con-Con determines when the
plebiscite is held and all other details; if they do not,
Congress as ordinary legislative body does. (Imbong v.
COMELEC)
o Money of Constitutional Convention: only through
appropriations by Congress. Once they get it, they are free
to spend it.
o Under martial law and in the absence of a legislative
assembly, the President may propose amendments to the
Constitution, especially when validated in referenda.
(Sanidad v. COMELEC)
• Propose AMENDMENTS ONLY:
o Petition of 12% of all registered voters (with 3% of every
legislative district represented)
o Once every five years only
o Congress provides for implementation of the right
o RATIFICATION: majority of votes in plebiscite (60-90 days
from COMELEC certification of the petition)
o NOT SELF EXECUTORY. The Initiative and Referendum
law does not have a complete provision on Constitutional
amendments, so it still cannot be done. (Santiago v.
COMELEC)
• Calling a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION:
rd
o By 2/3 vote of all members of Congress
o Or by majority: submit to electorate question of calling CC
• Philippine Constitution is RIGID – cannot be changed by ordinary
legislation
• Legal sovereignty is on PEOPLE – need direct act of people to
change Constitution
• Constituent power: (a) formulate/amend/revise/ratify Constitution;
(b) SPECIAL POWER exercised by Congress (conferred by
Constitution) and the people by initiative and referendum; (c) does
not need approval of Chief Executive
• Legislative power: (a) pass/repeal/amend ordinary laws and
statutes; (b) ORDINARY POWER exercised by Congress and the
people through initiative and referendum; (c) needs approval of
Chief Executive
R Glenn T Tuazon 2007 
• Amendment – alteration of one of a few specific and isolated
provisions in the Constitution
• Revision – re-examination of the entire document or a cluster of
provisions, contemplating structural change
• Revolution – changing the Constitution with disregard to provisions,
since people are the ultimate legal sovereign (1973 and Freedom
Constitutions)
• Steps in amendment/revision: (a) proposal (b) submission (c)
ratification
o For Congress, nothing is said if both houses vote
separately or together
th
o Bernas – one house votes separately (3/4 ), then passes
to other house OR draft together, but vote separately
o Submission is ideally in a special election to maximize
attention of the electorate, but it may be done alongside a
general election nonetheless. (Gonzales v. COMELEC)
o Individual amendments in a revision may not be
separately submitted to the people, who will have no
frame of reference to base their judgment on the
amendment. (Tolentino v. COMELEC)
o No need for presidential proclamation for ratified
amendments to take effect, unless provided by the
amendment.
o ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS of a valid ratification: (a)
conducted under election law, (b) supervised by the
independent COMELEC, (c) only franchised voters take
part (Javellana v. Executive Secretary)
• ONLY limit to what cannot be changed in the Constitution are jus
cogens, or peremptory norms in International Law
ARTICLE XVIII: TRANSITORY PROVISIONS
• All existing Executive issuances upon ratification of the Constitution
are valid until repealed or amended.
• Those separated from jobs after reorganization under Proclamation
No. 3:
o Entitled to separation pay, or
o Retirement benefits, or
o May be reemployed in another government office
• Private armies and armed groups not recognized or consistent with
the Constitution – dismantled
 • After bases agreement of 1991: to renew agreement between the
Philippines and US regarding: (a) troops, (b) bases, (c) facilities:
o Need a TREATY concurred to by Senate
o Ratified by majority vote of people – IF CONGRESS
REQUIRES IT
o Recognized as a treaty by the other State – BOUND TO
ACCEPT DECLARATION OF OTHER STATE AS TRUE
o VFA: Needed ratification of Senate because the provision
does not just mention bases, but also TROOPS. (Bayan
v. Executive Secretary)
o Only American forces.
• For ill-gotten wealth:
o Sequestration – place under PCGG’s control said property
o Freeze Order – owner cannot transfer/convey/encumber
the property
o Provisional Takeover – take over not only physical
possession, but also its operation (only allowed with
regard to business enterprises taken over by
Marcos/cronies) (BASECO v. PCGG)
o Warrant: issued by judge and needs probable cause only;
Sequestration/free order: issued by administrative
authority, but needs prima facie evidence
• Effectivity of Constitution: Feb 2 1987 (when votes were cast) and
not Feb 11 1987 (upon proclamation) (De Leon v. Esguerra)

R Glenn T Tuazon 2007