Professional Documents
Culture Documents
POLITICAL LAW I CASE DIGEST Final PDF
POLITICAL LAW I CASE DIGEST Final PDF
Issue: Whether or not the Board members and and damaging marine resources, in violation of
full-time consultants are entitled to the year-end relevant constitutional provisions; and lastly,
benefit because President Ramos approved the that the classification of the Kalayaan Island
granting and that they have been receiving it Group (KIG), as well as the Scarborough Shoal
since 1997. (bajo de masinloc), as a ―regime of islands‖
pursuant to UNCLOS results in the loss of a
Ruling: No. The State is not estopped from large maritime area but also prejudices the
correcting a public officer‘s erroneous livelihood of subsistence fishermen.
application of a statute, and an unlawful practice,
no matter how long, cannot give rise to any Issue: Whether or not the contentions of the
vested right. petitioners are meritorious.
baselines of the main archipelago (which is the from its status as a binding international
Philippine Island group). Nevertheless, agreement or treaty recognized by the said State.
Philippines still continue to lay claim over these
regimes of islands.
Shipside Inc. v. Court of Appeals
funds are in the nature of public funds. R.A. No. AFP military retirement system. It is similar to
8249 states that the Sandiganbayan has exclusive GSIS and SSS. The Supreme Court has ruled
jurisdiction over offenses committed by that the character and operations of AFP-RSBS
presidents, directors, trustees or managers of are imbued with public interest and thus the
government owned or controlled corporations same is a government entity and its funds are in
and over offenses committed by public officers the nature of public funds and that it is also a
and employees in relation to their office, GOCC. Furthermore, it is the position held and
whether simple or complexed with other crimes. not the salary grade which determines the
The charge against petitioner is estafa through jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. Petitioners
falsification of public document in the Alzaga et. al‘s ranks were Vice Presidents and
performance of his duties and in relation to his Assistant Vice President, though not specifically
position as president of the AFP-RSBS. enumerated in the law, are even higher than
―manager‖ and are therefore within the
jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan.
Alzaga v. Sandiganbayan
Issue: Whether or not Sandiganbayan has Issue: Whether or not petitioner is a public
jurisdiction. officer
Ruling: Yes. AFP-RSBS was established to Ruling: Yes. NBDB is a statutory government
guarantee continuous financial support to the agency created by R.A. No. 8047. Petitioner
performs public functions in pursuance of the Under Section 133(o) of the Local Government
objectives of R.A. No. 8047, verily, she is a Code, MIAA as a government instrumentality is
public officer who takes part in the not a taxable person because it is not subject to
performance of public functions in the "taxes, fees or charges of any kind" by local
government whether as an employee, agent, governments. The real properties of MIAA are
subordinate official, of any rank or classes. owned by the Republic and thus exempt from
Notwithstanding that petitioner came from the real estate taxes.
private sector to sit as a member of the NBDB,
the law invested her with some portion of the
sovereign functions of the government, so that Phil. Society v. COA
the purpose of the government is achieved.
534 SCRA 112; September 25, 2007
Topic: Government
MIAA v. CA
Facts: Philippine Society for the Prevention of
495 SCRA 591; July 20, 2006 Cruelty to Animal was incorporated as a
Topic: Government juridical entity by virtue of an act over a
hundred years ago. An audit team from
Facts: Manila International Airport Authority respondent Commission on Audit (COA)
(MIAA) operates Ninoy Aquino International visited the office of the petitioner to conduct an
Airport (NAIA) under the MIAA Charter. The audit survey. Petitioner demurred on the ground
Office of the Government Corporate Counsel that it was a private entity and is not under the
(OGCC) issued Opinion No. 061 stating that jurisdiction of COA
the Local Government Code of 1991 withdrew
the exemption from real estate tax granted to Issue: Whether or not petitioner qualifies as a
MIAA under Section 21 of the MIAA Charter. government agency, subject to COA‘s auditing
City of Parañaque, through its City Treasurer, authority.
issued notices of levy and warrants of levy on Ruling: No. A reading of petitioner‘s charter
the Airport Lands and Buildings. It then posted shows that it is not subject to control or
notices of auction sale. supervision by any agency of the State, unlike
Petitioner averred that Airport Lands and government-owned and -controlled
Buildings are owned by the Republic. Justifying corporations. Furthermore, the fact that a
the exemption, petitioner invoked the principle certain juridical entity is impressed with public
that the government cannot tax itself. interest does not necessarily make them a public
corporation. CA is therefore enjoined from
Issue: Whether or not properties of MIAA is investigating, examining, and auditing the
subject to real estate taxes under existing laws. petitioner‘s fiscal and financial affairs.
Ruling: No. Introductory Provisions of the
Administrative Code states that MIAA is a
government instrumentality and not a
government-owned or controlled corporation.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 6
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
542 SCRA 224; January 22, 2008 G.R. No. 104768; July 21, 2003
Facts: Petitioner Hannah Eunice Serana was Facts: President Corazon C. Aquino issued
appointed as a student regent of the University E.O. No. creating the Presidential Commission
of the Philippines-Cebu. Petitioner, with her on Good Government (PCGG) which is
siblings and relatives, registered with the primarily tasked to recover all ill-gotten wealth
Securities and Exchange Commission the of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, his
Office of the Student Regent Foundation, Inc. immediate family, relatives, subordinates and
(OSRFI). One of its projects was the renovation close associates. AFP Anti-Graft Board was
of the Vinzons Hall Annex, in which President created to investigate reports of unexplained
Joseph Estrada gave Php 50, 000, 000 as wealth and corrupt practices by AFP personnel.
financial assistance. However, the renovation Respondent Maj. Gen. Josephus Rama was
failed to materialize. The succeeding regent and found having ill-gotten and unexplained wealth.
secretary general of the university‘s system-wide The Solicitor General filed an Amended
alliance of student councils filed complaint for Complaint which prayed for, among others, the
Malversation of Public Funds and Property with forfeiture of respondents‘ properties, funds and
the Office of the Ombudsman which was later equipment in favor of the State. Sandiganbayan
on filed to Sandiganbayan as a crime of estafa. dismissed the Amended Complaint.
Petitioner argued that as a student regent, she Issue: Whether or not PCGG has jurisdiction
was not a public officer and Sandiganbayan had to investigate and cause the filing of a forfeiture
no jurisdiction over her case. petition against private respondents.
Issue: Whether or not petitioner UP student Ruling: No. There are two categories of AFP
regent is a public officer personnel under Sec. 2 of E.O. 1 which the
PCGG can investigate: (1) AFP personnel who
Ruling: Yes. Delegation of sovereign functions have accumulated ill-gotten wealth during the
is essential in the public office. An investment administration of former President Marcos by
in an individual of some portion of the being the latter‘s immediate family, relative,
sovereign functions of the government, to be subordinate or close associate, taking undue
exercised by him for the benefit of the public advantage of their public office or using their
makes one a public officer. The administration powers, influence or (2) AFP personnel
of the UP is a sovereign function in line with involved in other cases of graft and corruption
Article XIV of the Constitution. provided the President assigns their cases to the
PCGG. Since it was not claimed that the
President assigned Ramas case to PCGG, his
case falls under the first category. However,
Ramas was not a ―subordinate‖ of former
President Marcos under E.O. 1. Mere position
held by a military officer does not automatically Sequestration and Return of Sequestered
make him a ―subordinate‖. Shares/Dividends", praying that his shares of
stock be released from sequestration and
returned, delivered or paid to him as part of the
parties‘ Compromise Agreement.
Facts: The PCGG issued writs placing under In fact, by entering into a Compromise
sequestration all business enterprises, entities Agreement with private respondent Benedicto,
and other properties, real and personal, owned petitioner Republic thereby stripped itself of its
or registered in the name of private respondent immunity from suit and placed itself in the same
Benedicto, or of corporations in which he level of its adversary. When the State enters into
appeared to have controlling or majority interest. contract, through its officers or agents, in
Among the properties thus sequestered and furtherance of a legitimate aim and purpose and
taken over by PCGG fiscal agents were the 227 pursuant to constitutional legislative authority,
shares in NOGCCI owned by him and whereby mutual or reciprocal benefits accrue
registered in his name. Following the and rights and obligations arise there from, the
sequestration process, the Board of Directors of State may be sued even without its express
NOGCCI passed a resolution increasing the consent, precisely because by entering into a
monthly membership due of P150.00 to contract the sovereign descends to the level of
P250.00 for each NOGCCI share. The PCGG the citizen. Its consent to be sued is implied
failed to pay the corresponding monthly from the very act of entering into such
membership due. On account thereof, the 227 contract,26 breach of which on its part gives the
sequestered shares were declared delinquent to corresponding right to the other party to the
be disposed of in an auction sale. In a agreement.
Compromise Agreement entered into by the
petitioner Republic and the private respondent,
they agreed to lift the sequestration on the 227
NOGCCI shares and recognition by petitioner
Republic that the subject shares of stock could
not have been ill-gotten. Private respondent
Benedicto filed a "Motion for Release from
petitioners EPG Construction Co.,et. al. By patent on its face, and allow itself to be an
reason of the verbal request and assurance of instrument in the perpetration thereof. Justice
DPWH Usec. Canlas that additional funds and equity sternly demand that the State‘s cloak
would be available and forthcoming, petitioners of invincibility against suit be shred in this
agreed to undertake and perform ―additional particular instance, and that petitioners–
constructions‖ for the completion of the contractors be duly compensated – on the basis
housing units, despite the absence of of quantum meruit– for construction done on
appropriations and written contracts to cover the public works housing project.
subsequent expenses for the ―additional
constructions.‖ But it was not issued by the REPUBLIC v. HIDALGO
DPWH. Petitioners sent a demand letter to the
DPWH Secretary. The DPWH Auditor did not A.M. NO. RTJ-05-1959; DECEMBER 9, 2005
object to the payment subject to whatever
action COA may adopt. Through the request of TOPIC: Doctrine of State Immunity
then DPWH Sec. De Jesus, the DBM released
the amount for payment but Sec. Vigilar denied FACTS: Tarcila Laperal Mendoza filed
the money claims prompting petitioners to file a an action for the annulment or
petition for mandamus. Among others, declaration of nullity of the title and deed of
respondent-secretary argues that the state may sale, reconveyance and/or recovery of
not be sued invoking the doctrine of non- ownership and possession of a 4,924.60 sq. m.
suability of the State also known as Royal property against the Republic of the Philippines
Prerogative of Dishonesty. in the RTC Manila. The property in question is
located at 1440 Arlegui Street, San Miguel,
ISSUE: Whether or not the respondent may Manila. It is also known as the Arlegui
invoke the doctrine of non-suability or Royal Residence which housed two (2) Philippine
Prerogative of Dishonesty. presidents and which now holds the Office of
the Press Secretary and the News Information
RULING: No. It may not validly invoke Bureau. The case was intially dismissed by the
the Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty and presiding Judge of the RTC Manila on the
conveniently hide under the State‘s cloak of ground of state immunity. But the case was re-
invincibility against suit, considering that this raffled to the Manila RTC with respondent
principle yields to certain settled Judge Vicente A. Hidalgo as presiding Judge. In
exceptions. True enough, the rule, in any case, an order, he declared that the Republic in
is not absolute for it does not say that the state default for failure of the Solicitor general, to file
may not be sued under any circumstance. ―The the required answer within the period prayed
doctrine of governmental immunity from suit for in his motion for extension. It is contended
cannot serve as an instrument for perpetrating that the respondent Judge violated the
an injustice on a citizen.‖ fundamental rule that the government funds are
exempt from execution of garnishment against
As the staunch guardian of the citizens‘ rights the issuance of the writ of execution against the
and welfare – cannot sanction an injustice so Republic.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Republic of the Garnishment, contending that the funds being
Philippines can invoke immunity from suit. subjected to garnishment at PNB are
government/public funds. UP further argued
RULING: It is settled that when the State gives that as public funds, cannot be disbursed except
its consent to be sued, it does not thereby pursuant to an appropriation required by law.
necessarily consent to an unrestrained execution
against it. When the State waives its immunity, ISSUE: Whether or not University of the
all it does, in effect, is to give the other party an Philippines can invoke immunity from suit.
opportunity to prove, if it can, that the State has
a liability. RULING: UP is a juridical personality separate
and distinct from the government and has the
The functions and public services rendered by capacity to sue and be sued. Thus, also like
the State cannot be allowed to paralyzed or NEA, it cannot evade execution, and its funds
disrupted by the diversion of public funds from may be subject to garnishment or levy. However,
legitimate and specific objects, as appropriated before execution may be had, a claim for
by law. payment of the judgment award must first be
filed with the COA. Under Commonwealth
Act No. 327, as amended by Section 26 of P.D.
LOCKHEED DETECTIVE AND
No. 144, it is the COA which has primary
WATCHMAN AGENCY, INC., v.
jurisdiction to examine, audit and settle ―all
UNIVERSITY OF THE PHIILIPPINES
debts and claims of any sort‖ due from or
owing the Government or any of its
G.R. No. 161657; October 4, 2007
subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities,
including government-owned or controlled
TOPIC: Doctrine of State of Immunity
corporations and their subsidiaries. With
respect to money claims arising from the
FACTS: Petitioner Lockheed Detective and
implementation of Republic Act No. 6758, their
Watchman Agency, Inc. entered into a contract
allowance or disallowance is for COA to decide,
for security services with respondent University
subject only to the remedy of appeal by petition
of the Philippines. In 1998, several security
for certiorari to this Court.
guards assigned to UP filed separate complaints
against Lockheed and UP for payment of MINUCHER v. COURT OF APPEALS
underpaid wages, 25% overtime pay, premium G.R. No. 142396. February 11, 2003
pay for rest days and special holidays, holiday
pay, service incentive leave pay, night TOPICS: Doctrine of State Immunity
shift differentials, 13th month pay, refund of
cash bond, refund of deductions for the Mutual FACTS: Petitioner Khosrow Minucher, Iranian
Benefits Aids System (MBAS), unpaid wages national and one Abbas Torabian was charged
from December 16-31, 1998, and attorney‘s fees. for violation of Section 4, RA No. 6425
The Labor Arbiter rendered a decision declaring ―Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972” This was followed
that UP is solidarily liable with Lockheed in the by a ―buy-bust operation‖ conducted by the
payment of the rests of the claims covering their Philippine Police Narcotic agents in the house
service contract. UP filed a Motion to Quash
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 11
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
of Minucher, where a quantity of heroin, was who possesses an acknowledged diplomatic title
said to have been seized. The narcotic agents and ―performs duties of diplomatic nature.‖
were accompanied by private respondent
Arthur Scalzo who became one of the principal CHINA NATIONAL MACHINERY &
witnesses for the prosecution. Presiding Judge EQUIPMENT CORP. (Group) v.
Eutropio Migrino rendered a decision acquitting SANTAMARIA
the two accused. Minucher filed a case against
the private respondent Scalzo on account of G.R. No. 185572; February 7, 2012
what he claimed to have been trumped-up
charges of drug trafficking. Private respondent TOPIC: Doctrine of State Immunity
Scalzo asserted his diplomatic immunity.
According to him, being a special agent of the FACTS: The petitioner, China National
US Drug Enforcement Administration, he is Machinery & Equipment Corp. (Group) ,
entitled to diplomatic immunity. designated by the Republic of China as its prime
contractor for the Northrail Project of the
ISSUE: Whether or not Arthur Scalzo is Republic of the Philippines, as certified by its
entitled to diplomatic immunity. Chinese Ambassador, claimed sovereign
immunity in connection with a suit against it
RULING: Arthur Scalzo, an agent of the based on its Memorandum of Understanding
United States Drug Enforcement Agency with the North Luzon Railways Corporation. It
allowed by the Philippine government to contends that it performs governmental
conduct activities in the country to help contain functions.
the problem on the drug traffic, is entitled to
the defense of state immunity from suit. ISSUE: Whether or not CNMECG can invoke
immunity from suit.
Only "diplomatic agents," under the terms of
RULING: Even assuming arguendo that
the Vienna Convention, are vested with blanket
CNMEG performs governmental functions,
diplomatic immunity from civil and criminal
such claim does not automatically vest it with
suits. Indeed, the main yardstick in ascertaining
immunity. Its designation as the Primary
whether a person is a diplomat entitled to
Contractor does not automatically grant it
immunity is the determination of whether or
immunity, just as the term ―implementing agency‖
not he performs duties of diplomatic nature.
has no precise definition for purposes of
ascertaining whether GTZ was immune from
Vesting a person with diplomatic immunity is a
suit. Although CNMEG claims to be a
prerogative of the executive branch of the
government-owned corporation, it failed to
government. The government of the United
adduce evidence that it has not consented to be
States itself, which Scalzo claims to be acting for,
sued under Chinese law. Thus, following this
has formulated its standards for recognition of a
Court‘s ruling in Deutsche Gesellschaft, in the
diplomatic agent. The State Department policy
absence of evidence to the contrary, CNMEG is
is to only concede diplomatic status to a person
to be presumed to be a government-owned and -
controlled corporation without an original
charter. As a result, it has the capacity to sue and by the Zurich court. It made then
be sued under Section 36 of the Corporation representation before the Office of the Solicitor
Code. General and Presidential Commission on Good
Governance for them to officially advise the
By the terms of the Contract Agreement, Swiss Federal Office to unfreeze their assets.
Northrail is a government-owned or -controlled The PCGG required Officeco to present
corporation, while CNMEG is a corporation evidence to support their petition. Instead of
duly organized and created under the laws of the complying with the requirement, Officeco
People‘s Republic of China. Thus, both Northrail instituted a civil case before public respondent
and CNMEG entered into the Contract Sandiganbayan with a prayer that Officeco‘s
Agreement as entities with personalities distinct account be unfreezed and excluded from
and separate from the Philippine and Chinese sequestration. The PCGG and OSG appealed
governments, respectively. before the Sandiganbayan but such was denied.
Neither can it be said that CNMEG acted as
agent of the Chinese government. Amb. Wang ISSUE: Whether or not Act of State Doctrine
described CNMEG as a ―state corporation‖. It may be invoked by PCGG.
did not mean it was to perform sovereign
functions on behalf of China. That label was only RULING: The parameters of the use of the act
descriptive of its nature as a state-owned of state doctrine were clarified in Banco Nacional
corporation, and did not preclude it from de Cuba v. Sabbatino. There, the U.S. Supreme
engaging in purely commercial or proprietary Court held that international law does not
ventures. require the application of this doctrine nor does
it forbid the application of the rule even if it is
PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON claimed that the act of state in question violated
GOOD GOVERNANCE v. international law. Moreover, due to the
SANDIGANBAYAN doctrine‘s peculiar nation-to-nation character, in
practice the usual method for an individual to
G.R. No. 124772; August 14, 2007 seek relief is to exhaust local remedies and then
repair to the executive authorities of his own
TOPICS: Act of State Doctrine state to persuade them to champion his claim in
diplomacy or before an international tribunal.
FACTS: The case at bar emanates from a letter
Even assuming that international law requires
of the Office of the Solicitor General to the
the application of the act of state doctrine, it
Federal Office for Police Matters in Bene,
bears stressing that the Sandiganbayan will not
Switzerland regarding the sequestration and
examine and review the freeze orders of the
restitution of the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the
concerned Swiss officials in Civil Case No. 0164.
Marcoses. The Office of the District Attorney
The Sandiganbayan will not require the Swiss
in Zurich respond to such request and as an
officials to submit to its adjudication nor will it
effect, the Banker‘s Trust A.G. (BTAG) of
settle a dispute involving said officials. In fact,
Zurich froze the accounts of Officeco Holdings,
as prayed for in the complaint, the
N.V. Officeco appealed but such was dismissed
Sandiganbayan will only review and examine the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 13
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
propriety of maintaining PCGG‘s position with proprio dismissing the two criminal cases without
respect to Office‘s accounts with BTAG for the notice to the prosecution, the latter‘s right to
purpose of further determining the propriety of due process was violated. It should be noted
issuing a writ against the PCGG and the OSG. that due process is a right of the accused as
Everything considered, the act of state doctrine much as it is of the prosecution. The needed
finds no application in this case and petitioners‘ inquiry in what capacity petitioner was acting at
resort to it is utterly mislaid. the time of the alleged utterances requires for its
resolution evidentiary basis that has yet to be
LIANG v. PEOPLE presented at the proper time. At any rate, it has
been ruled that the mere invocation of the
G.R. No. 125865. January 28, 2000 immunity clause does not ipso facto result in the
353 SCRA 125 (2001) SEPARATE OPINION dropping of the charges.
enjoy "functional" immunities, that is, only only pertain to the cleaning of specific pollution
those necessary for the exercise of the functions incidents and do not cover cleaning in general.
of the organization and the fulfillment of its
purposes. ISSUE: Whether or not cleaning Manila Bay is
the ministerial act of the petitioners that can be
induced by mandamus.
- Officials and employees of the ADB are subject
Whether or not Section 17 and 20 of the PD
to the jurisdiction of the local courts for their
1152 only pertain to the specific cleaning of
private acts, notwithstanding the absence of a
pollution and not general cleaning.
waiver of immunity.
- If the immunity does not exist, there is nothing
to certify by the DFA. RULING: The cleaning and rehabilitation of
Manila Bay can be compelled
by mandamus. Petitioners claimed that it is not
their ministerial duty to clean up the bay
D. STATE PRINCIPLES AND because for them it is a discretionary duty which
POLICIES cannot be compelled by mandamus. According to the
Supreme Court, the obligations to perform the
METROPOLITAN MANILA duties (as defined by law) of the petitioners and
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY et.al. v. on how they carry out such duties are two
CONCERNEDRESIDENTS OF MANILA distinct concepts. The former pertains to the
BAY discretionary duties of the petitioners while the
latter is their ministerial duty. As for this case, it
G.R. Nos. 171947-48; December 18, 2008 is the discretion of the petitioners to choose not
to perform or to perform their duties as defined
TOPIC: State Principles and Policies by law. And when they have chosen to perform
their duties, the way they carry out those duties
FACTS: The 12 government agencies did not are called ministerial acts.
take notice of the present danger to public It is very clear in their charters that aside from
health and the depletion and contamination of performing their main function as an agency,
the marine life of Manila Bay. According to the they are also mandated to perform certain
concerned residents of Manila Bay, the functions relating directly or indirectly to the
condition of Manila Bay did not match to clean-up, rehabilitation, protection,
intended SB level standard of water quality in and preservation of the Manila Bay.
such a way that recreational activities were
already not allowed. Thus, RTC Manila ordered Section 17 and 20 of P.D. 1152 include cleaning
the government agencies to participate in the in general. Section 17 provides that in case the
cleaning the Bay. It was said that the water quality has deteriorated, the government
government agencies violated the PD 1152 or agencies concerned shall act on it to bring back
the Philippine Environment Code. The the standard quality of water. On the other hand,
petitioners argued that PD 1152‘s provisions Section 20 also mandates the government
agencies concerned to take action in cleaning-up they are only guidelines for legislative or
in case the polluters failed to do their part. In executive actions.
the succeeding section 62(g) and (h) of the same
Code, provide that oil spilling is the cause of The State has the right to have an order and
pollution that should be done in clean-up objective election. It is the reason why the
operations. COMELEC has the power of their own will to
declare a candidate as a nuisance. The
PAMATONG v. COMELEC qualifications for being a candidate were not
created to discriminate any person. The
G.R. No. 161872; April 13, 2004 impediments to run for office were initiated to
all aspiring candidate and so the ―equal access to
TOPIC: State Principles and Policies public service‖ was not to be violated.
FACTS: Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong filed his Bayan Muna v. Romulo
CoC where the COMELEC had not given its GR No. 159618; February 1, 2011
due course. From the parties involved in the Topic: On Executive Agreement
approval of the certificate, only two
commissioners had voted in favor of the Facts: In 2003, then President Arroyo,
petitioner for the reason that he has his party to represented by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs
back him up. concluded the RP-US Non-Surrender
A Motion for Reconsideration was then filed by Agreement via Exchange of Notes with then
Pamatong which the COMELEC had process. Ambassador Francis J. Ricciardione of the US
The respondent declared that Pamatong is a Embassy. Petitioner parlays the notion that
nuisance candidate who does not have the the Agreement is of dubious validity, partaking as
means to campaign for the national scale. it does of the nature of a treaty; hence, it must
be duly concurred in by the Senate.
A Writ For Certiorari was filed by the petitioner,
praying for a reversal of the previous Issue: Whether or not the agreement needs the
declaration of the respondent. The petitioner concurrence of the Senate to be binding and
contended that his right secured by Section 26 effective.
of Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution was Held: No. The Constitution vests in the
violated. President the power to enter into international
agreements, subject, in appropriate cases, to the
ISSUE: Whether or not COMELEC violated required concurrence votes of the Senate. But
Section 26 of Article 2 of the Constitution. executive agreements may be validly entered
into without such concurrence. As the
RULING: No, there is no law that would grant President wields vast powers and influence, her
such right and that what he only has is a conduct in the external affairs of the nation is,
privilege to run for public office. as Bayan would put it, ―executive
The provisions of the Article 2 of the 1987 altogether.‖ The right of the President to enter
Constitution are not self-executory and that
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 16
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
into or ratify binding executive agreements has Held: Yes. The holding of the Balikatan 02-1
been confirmed by long practice. must be studied in the framework of the treaty
antecedents to which the Philippines bound
Lim v. Executive Secretary itself, the Mutual Defense Treaty to which the
Visiting Forces Agreement seeks to
GR No. 151445; April 11, 2002 reaffirm. the VFA gives legitimacy to the
Topic: Executive Agreement current Balikatan exercises. It is only logical to
assume that ―Balikatan 02-1,‖ a ―mutual anti-
Facts: In the year 2002, personnel from the terrorism advising, assisting and training
armed forces of the United States of America exercise,‖ falls under the umbrella of sanctioned
started arriving in Mindanao to take part, in or allowable activities in the context of the
conjunction with the Philippine military, in agreement. Both the history and intent of the
―Balikatan 02-1.‖ These so-called ―Balikatan‖ Mutual Defense Treaty and the VFA support
exercises are the largest combined training the conclusion that combat-relatedactivities — as
operations involving Filipino and American opposed to combat itself — such as the one
troops. In theory, they are a simulation of joint subject of the instant petition, are indeed
military maneuvers pursuant to the Mutual authorized.
Defense Treaty, a bilateral defense agreement
entered into by the Philippines and the United Shangri-La International Hotel
States in 1951. The entry of American troops Management Ltd. V. Development Group
into Philippine soil is proximately rooted in the of Companies
international anti-terrorism campaign declared
by President George W. Bush in reaction to the GR No. 159938; March 31, 2006
tragic events that occurred on September 11, Topic: On Conflict Between Municipal Law
2001. Petitioners attack the constitutionality of and International Law
the Balikatan on the ground that the Mutual
Defense Treaty only provides for mutual Facts: At the core of the controversy are the
military assistance in accordance with the Shangri-La mark and S logo. Respondent DGCI
constitutional processes of each country only in claims ownership of said mark and logo in the
the case of an armed attack by an external Philippines on the strength of its prior use
aggressor, meaning a third country against one thereof within the country pursuant to RA 166.
of them and by no stretch of the imagination The petitioners accused DGCI of appropriating
can it be said that the Abu Sayyaf bandits in and illegally using the "Shangri-La" mark and
Basilan constitute an external armed force that "S" logo, adding that the legal and beneficial
has subject the Philippines to an armed external ownership thereof pertained to SLIHM and that
attack to warrant US Military assistance under the Kuok Group and its related companies had
the MDT of 1951. been using this mark and logo since March 1962
for all their corporate names and affairs. In this
Issue: Whether or not the Balikatan regard, they point to the Paris Convention for
Exercise is within the activities authorized the Protection of Industrial Property as
by the MDT of 1951. affording security and protection to SLIHM's
exclusive right to said mark and logo. They Philip Morris, Inc. v. Fortune Tobacco
further claimed having used, since late 1975, the Corporation
internationally-known and specially-designed
"Shangri-La" mark and "S" logo for all the GR No. 158589; June 27, 2006
hotels in their hotel chain. Topic: On Conflict Between Municipal Law
and International Law
Issue: Whether or not municipal law in the
Philippines is subordinate to an international Facts: Petitioner Philip Morris, Inc., a
agreement. corporation organized under the laws of the
State of Virginia, United States of America, is,
Held: No. Following universal acquiescence per Certificate of Registration No. 18723 issued
and comity, our municipal law on trademarks on April 26, 1973 by the Philippine Patents
regarding the requirement of actual use in Office (PPO), the registered owner of the
the Philippines must subordinate an trademark "MARK VII" for cigarettes. On the
international agreement inasmuch as the other hand, respondent Fortune Tobacco
apparent clash is being decided by a municipal Corporation, a company organized in the
tribunal. Withal, the fact that international law Philippines, manufactures and sells cigarettes
has been made part of the law of the land does using the trademark "MARK."
not by any means imply the primacy of The legal dispute between the parties
international law over national law in the started when the herein petitioners, on the claim
municipal sphere. Under the doctrine of that an infringement of their respective
incorporation as applied in most countries, rules trademarks had been committed, filed a
of international law are given a standing equal, Complaint for Infringement of Trademark and
not superior, to national legislative enactments. Damages against respondent Fortune Tobacco
Trademark is a creation of use and, Corporation.
therefore, actual use is a pre-requisite to
exclusive ownership; registration is only an Issue: Whether or not municipal law in the
administrative confirmation of the existence of Philippines is subordinate to an international
the right of ownership of the mark, but does agreement.
not perfect such right; actual use thereof is the
perfecting ingredient. As between actual use of Held: No. Admittedly, the registration of a
a mark without registration, and registration of trademark gives the registrant, such as
the mark without actual use thereof, the former petitioners, advantages denied non-registrants
prevails over the latter. For a rule widely or ordinary users, like respondent. But while
accepted and firmly entrenched, because it has petitioners enjoy the statutory presumptions
come down through the years, is that actual use arising from such registration ,i.e., as to the
in commerce or business is a pre-requisite to the validity of the registration, ownership and the
acquisition of the right of ownership. exclusive right to use the registered marks, they
may not successfully sue on the basis alone of
their respective certificates of registration of
trademarks. For, petitioners are still foreign
corporations. As such, they ought, as a
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 18
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
customary rules accepted as binding result from land and therefore the DOH may implement
the combination two elements: the established, them through the RIRR.
widespread, and consistent practice on the part
of States; and a psychological element known as Issue: Whether or not the pertinent
the opinion juris sive necessitates (opinion as to law international instruments adverted to by
or necessity). Implicit in the latter element is a respondents are part of the law of the land.
belief that the practice in question is rendered
obligatory by the existence of a rule of law Held: Under the 1987 Constitution,
requiring it. international law can become part of the sphere
of domestic law either
2. Yes. Notably, the amount paid as docket by transformation or incorporation. The
fees by the petitioners on the premise that it transformation method requires that an
was an action incapable of pecuniary estimation international law be transformed into a
corresponds to the same amount required for domestic law through a constitutional
―other actions not involving property.‖ mechanism such as local legislation. The
incorporation method applies when, by mere
Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association constitutional declaration, international law is
of the Philippines v. Duque III deemed to have the force of domestic
law. ―Generally accepted principles of
GR No. 173034; October 9, 2007 international law‖ refers to norms of general or
Topic: State Principle: The customary international law which are binding
Philippines…adopts the generally accepted on all states, i.e., renunciation of war as an
principles of international as part of the law instrument of national policy, the principle of
of the land… sovereign immunity, a person's right to life,
liberty and due
Facts: Petitioners seek to nullify Administrative process, and pacta sunt servanda, among others.
Order (A.O.) No. 2006-0012 entitled, Revised For an international rule to be considered as
Implementing Rules and Regulations of customary law, it must be established that such
Executive Order No. 51, Otherwise Known rule is being followed by
as The “Milk Code,” Relevant International states because they consider it obligatory to
Agreements, Penalizing Violations Thereof, comply with such rules
and for Other Purposes (RIRR) for allegedly (opinio juris). Respondents have not presented
going beyond the provisions of the Milk Code, any evidence to prove that the WHA
thereby amending and expanding the coverage Resolutions, although signed by most of the
of said law. The defense of the DOH is that member states, were in fact enforced or
the RIRR implements not only the Milk Code practiced by at least a majority of the member
but also various international instruments states; neither have respondents proven that any
regarding infant and young child nutrition. It is compliance by member states with said WHA
respondents' position that said international Resolutions was obligatory in
instruments are deemed part of the law of the nature. Consequently, legislation is necessary to
transform the provisions of the WHA
Resolutions into domestic law. The provisions endowed with the power to call upon the armed
of the WHA Resolutions cannot be forces at his own bidding. In issuing the assailed
considered as part of the law of the land that proclamation, Governor Tan exceeded his
can be implemented by executive agencies authority when he declared a state of emergency
without the need of a law enacted by the and called upon the Armed Forces, the police,
legislature. and his own Civilian Emergency Force. The
calling-out powers contemplated under the
Kulayan v. Tan Constitution is exclusive to the President. An
exercise by another official, even if he is the
GR No. 187298; July 3, 2012 local chief executive, is ultra vires, and may not
Topic: On Calling Out Powers of the be justified by the invocation of Section 465 of
President the Local Government Code.
Facts: Governor Tan issued Proclamation No. United Church of Christ in the Philippines
1, Series of 2009 declaring a state of emergency Inc. v. Bradford United Church of Christ
in the province of Sulu citing the kidnapping
incident as a ground for the said declaration. In GR No. 171905; June 20, 2012
the same proclamation, respondent Tan called Topic: The State and Ecclesiastical Affairs
upon the PNP and the Civilian Emergency
Force to set-up checkpoints and chokepoints, Facts: UCCP has three (3) governing bodies
conduct general search and seizures including namely: the General Assembly, the Conference
arrests and other actions necessary to ensure and the Local Church, each having distinct and
public safety. Governor Tan invoked Section separate duties and powers. As a UCCP local
465 of the Local Government Code of 1991 church located in Cebu, BUCCI belonged to the
which bestows on the provincial governor the Cebu Conference Inc. (CCI) with whom it
power to carry out emergency measures during enjoyed peaceful co-existence until late 1989
man-made and natural disasters and calamities when BUCCI started construction of a fence
and to call upon the appropriate national law that encroached upon the right-of way allocated
enforcement agencies to suppress disorder and by UCCP for CCI and Visayas jurisdiction.
lawless violence. Petitioners contend that such BUCCI then disaffiliated itself form UCCP and
declaration is ultra vires and void on the ground the SEC approved the same. UCCP filed a
that it is the sole authority of the President to protest alleging that such separate incorporation
exercise emergency powers and calling-out and registration is not allowed under the
powers as the chief executive of the Republic Constitution and Bylaws of the UCCP. SEC
and commander in chief of the armed forces. defended the right of BUCCI to disassociate
itself from UCCP in recognition of its
Issue: Whether or not a provincial governor constitutional freedom to associate and
may validly exercise the calling out powers. disassociate. In its motion for reconsideration,
UCCP maintains that the issue on whether the
Held: No. Respondent provincial governor is disaffiliation of respondents is valid is purely an
not ecclesiastical affair. It asserts that it has the sole
thereof. All that is required is that the line agency of departments that are included in
regulation should be germane to the objects the National Budget. The BSP believes that an
and purposes of the law; that the regulation ―attached agency‖ is different from an ―agency.‖
be not in contradiction to, but in conformity Agency, as defined in Section 2(4) of the
with, the standards prescribed by the law. Administrative Code, is defined as any of the
Evidently, the COMELEC had the various units of the Government including a
authority to promulgate Resolution No. 8714 department, bureau, office, instrumentality,
pursuant to Section 35 of R.A. No. 7166. It was government-owned or controlled corporation
granted the power to issue the implementing or local government or distinct unit therein.
rules and regulations of Sections 32 and 33 of
R.A. No. 7166. Under this broad power, the Issue: Whether or not the BSP is a government
COMELEC was mandated to provide the instrumentality for it to fall under the
details of who may bear, carry or transport jurisdiction of the COA.
firearms or other deadly weapons, as well as the
definition of ―firearms,‖ among others. These Held: The BSP is a public corporation or a
details are left to the discretion of the government agency or instrumentality with
COMELEC, which is a constitutional body that juridical personality, which does not fall within
possesses special knowledge and expertise on the constitutional prohibition in Article XII,
election matters, with the objective of ensuring Section 16, notwithstanding the amendments to
the holding of free, orderly, honest, peaceful its charter. The BSP still remains
and credible elections. an instrumentality of the national
government. It is a public corporation created
Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. by law for a public purpose, attached to the
Commission on Audit DECS pursuant to its Charter and the
Administrative Code of 1987. It is not a private
GR No. 177131; June 7, 2011 corporation which is required to be owned or
Topic: On Government Instrumentalities controlled by the government and be
economically viable to justify its existence under
Facts: COA issued Resolution 99-011 with the a special law. Not all corporations, which
subject ―Defining the Commission’s policy with respect are not government owned or controlled,
to the audit of the Boy Scouts of the Philippines” to are ipso facto to be considered private
conduct an annual financial audit of the Boy corporations as there exists another distinct
Scouts of the Philippines in accordance with class of corporations or chartered institutions
generally accepted auditing standards. The which are otherwise known as ―public
BSP contends that it is not a government entity corporations.‖ These corporations are treated
administering special funds. It is not even by law as agencies or instrumentalities of the
included in the DECS National Budget. BSP government which are not subject to the tests
maintains that it is not an ―agency‖ of the of ownership or control and economic viability
Government. The 1987 Administrative Code, but to different criteria relating to their public
merely referred the BSP as an ―attached agency‖ purposes/interests or constitutional policies and
of the DECS as distinguished from an actual objectives and their administrative relationship
law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from with administrative cases. Executive Labor
an office, trust or station in connection with the Arbiter (ELA) found Padao‘s dismissal valid.
enforcement or violation of an environmental Padao appealed to the NLRC, which, in
law rule or regulation or a right therein, or its Resolution reversed and set aside the ELA
unlawfully excludes another from the use or Decision and declared Padao‘s dismissal to be
enjoyment of such right and there is no other illegal. He was thereby ordered reinstated to his
plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the previous position without loss of seniority rights
ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved and PNB was ordered to pay him full
thereby may file a verified petition in the proper backwages and attorney‘s fees equivalent to ten
court, alleging the facts with certainty, attaching percent (10%) of the total monetary award.
thereto supporting evidence, specifying that the PNB‘s Motion for Reconsideration was denied
petition concerns an environmental law, rule or by the NLRC in its Resolution dated December
regulation, and praying that judgment be 27, 2002.
rendered commanding the respondent to do an Issue: Whether or not Padao‘s dismissal is valid
act or series of acts until the judgment is fully on the ground that his position is one imbued
satisfied, and to pay damages sustained by the with trust and confidence.
petitioner by reason of the malicious neglect to
perform the duties of the respondent, under the Held: Yes, the dismissal is valid. While the 1987
law, rules or regulations. The petition shall also Constitution provisions on social justice and the
contain a sworn certification of non-forum protection of labor underscore the importance
shopping. and economic significance of labor, Article II,
Section 18 characterizes labor as a ―primary
Philippine National Bank v. Dan Padao social economic force,‖ and as such, the State is
bound to ―protect the rights of workers and
GR No. 180849 and 187143 promote their welfare,‖ the case at bar involves
November 16, 2011 dismissal by PNB for gross and habitual neglect
Topic: On the Protection of Labor of duties under Article 282 (b) of the Labor
Code. The role that a credit investigator plays in
Facts: On January 10, 1997, after due the conduct of a bank‘s business cannot be
investigation, PNB found Padao guilty of gross overestimated. Padao‘s repeated failure to
and habitual neglect of duty and ordered him discharge his duties as a credit investigator of
dismissed from the bank. Padao appealed to the the bank amounted to gross and habitual
bank‘s Board of Directors but after almost three neglect of duties under Article 282 (b) of the
(3) years of inaction on the part of the Board, Labor Code. He not only failed to perform what
Padao instituted a complaint against with the he was employed to do, but also did so
Labor Arbitration Branch of the NLRC repetitively and habitually, causing millions of
Regional Arbitration pesos in damage to PNB. Thus, PNB acted
for Reinstatement; Backwages; Illegal Dismissal; within the bounds of the law by meting out the
and Treachery/Bad Faith and Palpable penalty of dismissal, which it deemed
Discrimination in the Treatment of Employees appropriate given the circumstances.
Held: Mere legal title is insufficient to meet the Issue: Whether or not the Court must
60 percent Filipino-owned ―capital‖ required in recognize too the country‘s adherence to the
the Constitution. Full beneficial ownership of Geneva Convention and respect the unique
60 percent of the outstanding capital stock, status of the PNRC in consonance with its
coupled with 60 percent of the voting rights, is treaty obligations.
required. The legal and beneficial ownership of Ruling: Yes. The Geneva Convention has the
60 percent of the outstanding capital stock must force and effect of law. Under the Constitution,
rest in the hands of Filipino nationals in the Philippines adopts the generally accepted
accordance with the constitutional mandate. principles of international law as part of the law
Otherwise, the corporation is ―considered as of the land. This constitutional provision must
non-Philippine national[s].‖ be reconciled and harmonized with Article XII,
To construe broadly the term ―capital‖ Section 16 of the Constitution, instead of using
as the total outstanding capital stock, including the latter to negate the former.
Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA 588 SCRA 234; July 14, 2008
expands the requirements provided for under Dacanay. Although he is also deemed never to
R.A. No. 2382. have terminated his membership in the
Philippine bar, no automatic right to resume law
practice accrues.
Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of
Law, Benjamin M. Dacanay
488 SCRA 1; April 20, 2006 537 SCRA 373; October 22, 2007
Facts: In the exercise of its legislative power, Facts: Rommel Silverio was registered as ―male‖
the Senate of the Philippines conducts inquiries but he alleged that he is a male transsexual.
in aid of legislation which calls for the Consequently, he underwent sex reassignment
attendance of various officials and employees of surgery. He then sought for the change of his
the executive department. President Gloria first name from ―Rommel‖ to ―Mely‖ and his
Macapagal-Arroyo enacted E.O. 464 requiring sex from ―male‖ to ―female‖ in his birth
that all department heads of the Executive certificate which was granted by the trial court.
Branch of the government shall secure the Republic of the Philippines alleged that there is
consent of the President prior to appearing no law allowing the change of entries in the
before either House of Congress to ensure the birth certificate by reason of sex alteration.
observance of the principle of separation of
powers. Issue: Whether or not the Court can engage in
judicial legislation.
Issue: Whether or not E.O. 464 is
unconstitutional in contravening the power of Ruling: No. The duty of the Court is to apply
inquiry vested in the Congress or interpret the law, not to make or amend it. It
is for the legislature to determine what
Ruling: Yes. E.O. 464 bars the appearance of guidelines should govern the recognition of the
executive officials before the Congress, effects of sex reassignment. The Court cannot
depriving the Congress of the information in enact a law where no law exists.
the possession of these officials. The power of
inquiry, a power vested in the Congress, is
expressly recognized in Sec. 21 of Article VI of Office of the Court Administrator v. Reyes
the Constitution. A legislative body cannot
legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of 621 SCRA 511; June 23, 2010
information respecting the conditions which the
Topic: Separation of Powers
legislation intended to affect or change. The
power of inquiry is co-extensive with the power Facts: Rene De Guzman is a clerk at the RTC
to legislate. Branch 31, Guimba, Nueva Ecija. He was
allegedly using illegal drugs which manifested in
his irrational and queer behaviour at work. The
Office of the Court Administrator conducted a
drug test on De Guzman in which he tested
positive. OCA recommended his dismissal from
service immediately which was adopted by the
Supreme Court.
R.A. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drug a public statement entitled Abad: Releases to
Act) states that sustainable programs of Senators Part of Spending Acceleration Program,
rehabilitation and treatment must be explaining the funds had been released to
considered in light of this Court‘s constitutional senators had been part of the Disbursement
power of administrative supervision over courts Acceleration Program, a program designed by
and court personnel. the DBM to ramp up spending to accelerate
economic expansion. He further explained that
Issue: Whether or not R.A. 9165 limits the the DAP were usually taken from (1) unreleased
Courts exercise of disciplinary actions over the appropriations under Personnel Services; (2)
members of the judiciary department unprogrammed funds; (3) carry-over
Ruling: Yes. The Constitution provides that appropriations unreleased from the previous
the Supreme Court shall have the administrative year; and budgets for slow-moving items or
supervision over all courts and the personnel projects that had been realigned to support
thereof. The legislative power imposing policies faster-disbursing projects.
through laws is not unlimited and is subject to Nine petitions assailing the constitutionality of
the substantive and constitutional limitations DAP and issuances relating to DAP were filed.
that set parameters both in the exercise of the
power itself and the allowable subjects of Issue: Whether or not the DAP violates the
legislation. As such, it cannot limit the Court‘s doctrine of separation of powers
power to impose disciplinary actions against
erring justices, judges and court personnel or be Ruling: Yes. Though the President is allowed
used to restrict the Court‘s power to preserve by the Constitution to make realignment of
and maintain the Judiciary‘s honor, dignity and funds, such transfer or realignment should only
integrity and public confidence that can only be be made ―within their respective offices‖. Thus,
achieved by imposing strict and rigid standards no cross-border transfers/augmentations may
of decency and propriety governing the conduct be allowed. But under the DAP, this was
of justices, judges and court employees. violated because funds appropriated by the
General Appropriations Act for the Executive
were being transferred to the Legislative and
other non-Executive agencies.
Maria Araullo v. Benigno Simeon Aquino
to all members of the SSS and GSIS, as well as must necessarily include the power to amend,
their employers. However, membership is revise, alter, or repeal the same.
voluntary for employees earning less
than P4,000.00 a month. Yazaki Torres SEMA v. COMELEC
Manufacturing, Inc. applied and was granted by G.R. No. 178628 July 16, 2008
the HDMF a waiver from the Fund coverage
for the period from January 1 to December 31, TOPIC: Permissible Delegation
1995. The HDMF found that petitioner‘s
retirement plan for its employees is superior to FACTS: RA 9054 was passed amending
that offered by the Fund. HDMF Chief ARMM‘s Organic Act and vesting it with power
Executive Officer disapproved petitioner‘s to create provinces, municipalities, cities and
application on the ground that its retirement barangays. Pursuant to this law, Shariff
plan is not superior to that provided by the Kabunsuan was created, comprised of the
Fund. Petitioner contends that the Court of municipalities of the 1st district of Maguindanao
Appeals acted with grave abuse of discretion in with the exception of Cotabato City. For the
denying its application for renewal of waiver of purposes of the 2007 elections, COMELEC
the Fund membership coverage; and in initially stated that the 1st district is now only
confirming the authority of the HDMF to made of Cotabato City (because of MMA 201).
amend the implementing Rules of the Fund. It But it later amended this stating that status quo
claims that Section 5 of R.A. No. 7742 does not should be retained however just for the
grant HDMF the power to amend the purposes of the elections, the first district
implementing Rules and Regulations, should be called Shariff Kabunsuan with
contending that ―the power to make laws does Cotabato City. Sema was a congressional
not necessarily include the power to alter or candidate for the legislative district of S.
repeal the same.‖ . Kabunsuan with Cotabato (1st district). Later,
she was contending that Cotabato City should
ISSUE: Whether or not the HDMF has the be a separate legislative district and that votes
power to amend the Implementing Rules and therefrom should be excluded in the voting.
Regulations, of RA No. 7742. Moreover, upon creation of a province (S.
Kabunsuan), that province automatically gains
RULING: Yes. The legislative power is granted legislative representation and since S.
pursuant to Section 1, Article VI of the Kabunsuan excludes Cotabato City – so in
Constitution. effect Cotabato is being deprived of a
representative in the HOR. COMELEC
The law delegated to the HDMF the rule- maintained that the legislative district is still
making power since this is necessary for the there and that regardless of S. Kabunsuan being
proper exercise of its authority to administer the created, the legislative district is not affected
Fund. Following the doctrine of necessary and so is its representation.
implication, this grant of express power to
formulate implementing rules and regulations ISSUE: Whether or not ARMM can create
validly LGUs.
RULING: No. The power to create a province administrative complaint. Contending that he
or city inherently involves the power to create a and his witnesses attended the Preliminary
legislative district. Only Congress can create Investigation, without the assistance of counsel,
provinces and cities because the creation of they were examined through a prepared set of
provinces and cities necessarily includes the questions handed to them by the stenographer.
creation of legislative districts, a power only The respondent judge was not present then.
Congress can exercise under Section 5, Article The complainant also states that right after the
VI of the Constitution and Section 3 of the preliminary investigation, he was immediately
Ordinance appended to the Constitution. The arrested and was imprisoned for three days.
ARMM Regional Assembly cannot create a Respondent explained that the Court
province without a legislative district because Stenographer has a prepared sheet of questions
the Constitution mandates that every province during the preliminary examination because the
shall have a legislative district. Moreover, the undersigned prepares her questions for
ARMM Regional Assembly cannot enact a law preliminary examination based on the affidavits
creating a national office like the office of a of the complaining witnesses and the counter
district representative of Congress because the affidavits of the accused. Furthermore, it will be
legislative powers of the ARMM Regional easier for the Stenographers to take/print the
Assembly operate only within its territorial transcript of the proceedings. Also, this is
jurisdiction as provided in Section 20, Article X convenient when more than one preliminary
of the Constitution. Thus, we rule that MMA examination is scheduled for the day. After the
Act 201, enacted by the ARMM Regional witnesses are briefed, the stenographers take
Assembly and creating the Province of Shariff over since the prepared sheets are given to them
Kabunsuan, is void. so they could propound the questions and the
answers are typed directly.
MAGO v. PEÑALOSA-FERMO
ISSUE: Whether or not Judge Fermo can
A.M. No. MTJ-08-1715; March 19, 2009 delegate to the Court Stenographer the power
to conduct of Preliminary Investigation.
TOPIC: Permissible Delegation
RULING: No. An officer to whom discretion
FACTS: Mago filed before the MTC Labo, is entrusted cannot delegate it to another, the
Camarines Norte a complaint for grave presumption being that he was chosen because
coercion against Sheriff Alex Rodolfo Angeles he was deemed fit and competent to exercise
of the DAR Adjudication Board. Sheriff that judgment and discretion, and unless the
Angeles filed a counter-charge for grave threats power to substitute another in his place has
against complainant and his sons. Alleging that been given to him, he cannot delegate his duties
Presiding Judge of the MTC Labo, Camarines to another.
Sur Judge Aurea G. Peñalosa-Fermo committed A personal examination of the complainant in a
gross ignorance of the law and bias in the criminal case and his witnesses was
disposition of his complaint and of the counter- required. Thus, under Section 4, Rule 112 of
charge against him, complainant filed the the Revised Rules of Court before its
amendment, the ―investigating fiscal‖ was
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 33
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
required to ―certify under oath that he, or as some of the officers and directors of IRC
shown by the record, an authorized officer, entered into transactions involving IRC shares
has personally examined the complainant and in violation of Section 30, in relation to Section
his witnesses . . . ‖ 36, of the Revised Securities Act. IRC alleged
that the SEC had no authority to investigate the
By respondent‘s delegation of the examination subject matter, since under Section 8 of PD No.
of the sheriff-complainant in the grave threats 902-A, as amended by PD No. 1758,
case to the stenographer, and worse, by allowing jurisdiction was conferred upon the Prosecution
the witnesses to ―read/study the written and Enforcement Department of the SEC.
questions‖ to be propounded to them and
to ―write their answers thereto‖ upon ISSUE: Whether or not PED of the SEC is
respondent‘s justification that the scheme was authorized to file a suit against IRC for
for the convenience of the stenographers, violations of the Revised Security Act.
respondent betrayed her lack of knowledge of
procedure, thereby contributing to the erosion RULING: The law creating PED empowers it
of public confidence in the judicial system. to investigate violations of the rules and
regulations promulgated by the SEC and to file
SEC v. INTERPORT RESOURCES CO. and prosecute such cases. It fails to mention
any adjudicatory functions insofar as the PED is
G.R. No. 1 35808; October 6, 2008 concerned. Thus, the PED Rules of Practice
and Procedure need not comply with the
TOPIC: Permissible Delegation provisions of the Administrative Code on
adjudication. Even assuming that these are
FACTS: The Board of Directors of IRC adjudicative functions, the PED, in the instant
approved a Memorandum of Agreement with case, exercised its investigative powers; thus,
Ganda Holdings Berhad, saying that a press respondents do not have the requisite standing
release announcing the approval of the to assail the validity of the rules on adjudication.
agreement was sent through facsimile
transmission to the Philippine Stock Exchange SOCIAL JUSTICE SOCIETY v.
and the SEC, but SEC averred that it received DANGEROUS DRUGS BOARD
reports that IRC failed to make timely public
disclosures of its negotiations with GHB and 570 SCRA 354 (2008)
that some of its directors, respondents herein,
heavily traded IRC shares utilizing this material TOPIC: Permisible Delegation
insider information. For this reason, SEC
required all principal officers of IRC to appear FACTS: Before the Court are 3 consolidated
before the SEC to explain its failure to petitions assailing the constitutionality of
immediately disclose the information as Section 36 of RA 9165 or the Comprehensive
required by the Rules on Disclosure of Material Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 insofar as
Facts. Unsatisfied with the explanation, SEC it requires mandatory drug testing of candidates
issued an order finding that the IRC violated the for public office, students of secondary and
Rules on Disclosure of Material Facts and that tertiary schools, officers and employees of
public and private offices, and persons charged to meet such additional qualification, the
before the prosecutor‘s office with certain COMELEC, to be sure, is also without such
offenses. According to Aquilino Pimentel Jr., a power. The right of a citizen in the democratic
senator of the RP and a candidate for re- process of election should not be defeated by
election in May 2004 elections, said mandatory unwarranted impositions of requirement not
drug testing imposes an additional qualification otherwise specified in the Constitution.
for Senators beyond that which are provided by
the Constitution. No provision in the Beltran v. Secretary of Health
Constitution authorizes the Congress or the
COMELEC to expand the qualification G.R. No. 133640; November 25, 2005
requirements of candidates for senator. Topic: Delegation to Administrative Bodies
ISSUE: Whether or not the Constitution Facts: Republic Act No. 7719 or the National
authorizes the Congress or COMELEC to Blood Services Act of 1994 was enacted into
expand the qualification requirements of law on April 2, 1994. The Act seeks to provide
candidates for senator. an adequate supply of safe blood by promoting
voluntary blood donation and by regulating
RULING: Section 36(g) of RA 9165 is blood banks in the country. Administrative
unconstitutional. It is basic that if a law or an Order No. 9, Series of 1995, constituting the
administrative rule violates any norm of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of said law
Constitution, that issuance is null and void and was promulgated by respondent Secretary of the
has no effect. The Constitution is the basic law Department of Health (DOH). Section 23 of
to which all laws must conform; no act shall be Administrative Order No. 9 provides: ―Section
valid if it conflicts with the Constitution. In the 23. Process of Phasing Out. -- The
discharge of their defined functions, the three Department shall effect the phasing-out of all
departments of government have no choice but commercial blood banks over a period of two
to yield obedience to the commands of the (2) years, extendible for a maximum period of
Constitution. Whatever limits it imposes must two (2) years after the effectivity of R.A. 7719.
be observed. The substantive constitutional The decision to extend shall be based on the
limitations are chiefly found in the Bill of Rights result of a careful study and review of the blood
and other provisions, such as Sec. 3, Art. VI of supply and demand and public safety.‖
the Constitution prescribing the qualifications
of candidates for senators. Petitioners assail the constitutionality of the
questioned legal provisions, namely, Section 7
In the same vein, the COMELEC cannot, in the of Republic Act No. 7719 and Section 23 of
guise of enforcing and administering election Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1995, on
laws or promulgating rules and regulations to the following ground that the questioned
implement Sec. 36(g), validly impose provisions of the National Blood Services Act and
qualifications on candidates for senator in its Implementing Rules represent undue delegation
addition to what the Constitution prescribes. If if not outright abdication of the police power of
Congress cannot require a candidate for senator the state.
Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency 2. Whether or not the placing the Presidential
Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP) under
Under the doctrine of qualified political agency, the supervision and control of the DAR, and
department secretaries are alter egos or assistants of the National Commission on Indigenous
the President and their acts are presumed to be those of Peoples (NCIP) under the DAR as an attached
the latter unless disapproved or reprobated by him. agency are valid.
for policy and program coordination, and those that are provisions of the Milk Code, but not those of
not placed by law or order creating them under any subsequent WHA Resolutions, can be validly
special department. implemented by the DOH through the subject
RIRR.
Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association
of the Philippines v. Duque III Jose Jesus Disini v. Secretary of Justice
GR No. 173034; October 9, 2007 G.R. No. 203335; February 11, 2014
Topic: On Implementing Agencies Topic: On Delegation of Legislative Power
Facts: Petitioners seek to nullify Administrative Facts: Petitioners seek to declare several
Order (A.O.) No. 2006-0012 entitled, Revised provisions of Republic Act (R.A.) 10175, the
Implementing Rules and Regulations of Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012,
Executive Order No. 51, Otherwise Known unconstitutional and void.
as The “Milk Code,” Relevant International Sec. 26. Powers and Functions.– The
Agreements, Penalizing Violations Thereof, CICC shall have the following powers and
and for Other Purposes (RIRR) for allegedly functions:
going beyond the provisions of the Milk Code, (a) To formulate a national cybersecurity plan
thereby amending and expanding the coverage and extend immediate assistance of real time
of said law. The defense of the DOH is that the commission of cybercrime offenses through a
RIRR implements not only the Milk Code but computer emergency response team (CERT); x
also various international instruments regarding x x.
infant and young child nutrition. Petitioners mainly contend that
Petitioners contend that Congress invalidly delegated its power when it
respondent officers of the DOH acted without gave the Cybercrime Investigation and
or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse Coordinating Center (CICC) the power to
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of formulate a national cybersecurity plan without
jurisdiction, and in violation of the provisions any sufficient standards or parameters for it to
of the Constitution in promulgating the RIRR. follow.
Issue: Whether or not the DOH acted with Issue: Whether or not the Congress invalidly
grave abuse of discretion in promulgating the delegated its power when it gave the
RIRR. Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating
Center (CICC) the power to formulate a
Held: Since legislation is necessary to transform national cybersecurity plan without any
the provisions of the WHA Resolutions into sufficient standards or parameters for it to
domestic law. The provisions of the WHA follow.
Resolutions cannot be considered as part of the
law of the land that can be implemented by
executive agencies without the need of a law Held: No. The cybercrime law is complete in
enacted by the legislature. Thus, only the itself when it directed the CICC to formulate
and implement a national cybersecurity plan. health services and methods. It is the only
Also, contrary to the position of the petitioners, government entity empowered to render such
the law gave sufficient standards for the CICC services and highly proficient to do so. It should
to follow when it provided a definition of be understood that health services and methods
cybersecurity. fall under the gamut of terms that are associated
with what is ordinarily understood as "health
Cybersecurity refers to the collection of tools, products." the functions, powers and duties of
policies, risk management approaches, actions, the FDA are specific to enable the agency to
training, best practices, assurance and carry out the mandates of the law. Being the
technologies that can be used to protect cyber country's premiere and sole agency that ensures
environment and organization and user‘s assets. the safety of food and medicines available to the
This definition serves as the parameters within public, the FDA was equipped with the
which CICC should work in formulating the necessary powers and functions to make it
cybersecurity plan. effective. Pursuant to the principle of necessary
implication, the mandate by Congress to the
James Imbong v. Hon. Ochoa FDA to ensure public health and safety by
permitting only food and medicines that are safe
GR No. 204819; April 8, 2014 includes "service" and "methods." From the
Topic: On Delegation of Legislative Power declared policy of the RH Law, it is clear that
Congress intended that the public be given only
Facts: Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10354, those medicines that are proven medically safe,
otherwise known as the Responsible legal, non-abortifacient, and effective in
Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of accordance with scientific and evidence-based
2012 (RH Law), was enacted by Congress on medical research standards.
December 21, 2012.
The petitioners question the delegation by
Congress to the FDA of the power to TESTS OF DELEGATION
determine whether or not a supply or product is Gerochi v. DOE
to be included in the Essential Drugs List
(EDL). GR No. 159796; July 17, 2007
Topic: Tests of Delegation
Issue: Whether or not the delegation by
Congress to the FDA of the power to Facts: Petitioners Romeo P. Gerochi, Katulong
determine whether or not a supply or product is Ng Bayan (KB), and Environmentalist
to be included in the Essential Drugs List Consumers Network, Inc. (ECN) (petitioners),
(EDL) is valid. come before this Court in this original action
praying that Section 34 of Republic Act (RA)
Held: Yes. The delegation is valid. The Court 9136, otherwise known as the ―Electric Power
finds nothing wrong with the delegation. The Industry Reform Act of 2001‖ (EPIRA),
FDA does not only have the power but also the imposing the Universal Charge, and Rule 18 of
competency to evaluate, register and cover the Rules and Regulations (IRR) which seeks to
implement the said imposition, be declared adequate guidelines or limitations in the law to
unconstitutional. determine the boundaries of the delegate's
Petitioners assail the constitutionality of authority and prevent the delegation from
a provision of the law and its IRR which sought running riot.
to implement the same on the ground that the The Court finds that the EPIRA, read
universal charge provided for under Sec. 34 of and appreciated in its entirety, in relation to Sec.
the EPIRA and sought to be implemented 34 thereof, is complete in all its essential terms
under Sec. 2, Rule 18 of the IRR of the said law and conditions, and that it contains sufficient
is a tax which is to be collected from all electric standards.
end-users and self-generating entities. The Moreover, contrary to the petitioners‘
power to tax is strictly a legislative function and contention, the ERC does not enjoy a wide
as such, the delegation of said power to any latitude of discretion in the determination of the
executive or administrative agency like the ERC Universal Charge. Sec. 51(d) and (e) of the
is unconstitutional, giving the same unlimited EPIRA clearly provides:
authority. The assailed provision clearly
provides that the Universal Charge is to be SECTION 51. Powers. — The
determined, fixed and approved by the ERC, PSALM Corp. shall, in the
hence leaving to the latter complete performance of its functions and
discretionary legislative authority. for the attainment of its
objective, have the following
Issue: Whether or not there is undue delegation powers:
of legislative power to tax on the part of the xxxx
ERC. (d) To calculate the amount of
the stranded debts and stranded
Held: No. There is no undue delegation in the contract costs of NPC
case. which shall form the basis for
ERC in the determination of
All that is required for the valid exercise the universal charge;
of this power of subordinate legislation is that (e) To liquidate the NPC
the regulation be germane to the objects and stranded contract costs,
purposes of the law and that the regulation be utilizing the proceeds from
not in contradiction to, but in conformity with, sales and other property
the standards prescribed by the law. These contributed to it, including
requirements are denominated as the the proceeds from the
completeness test and the sufficient standard universal charge.
test. Thus, the law is complete and passes the
Under the first test, the law must be first test for valid delegation of legislative power.
complete in all its terms and conditions when it As to the second test, this Court had, in
leaves the legislature such that when it reaches the past, accepted as sufficient standards the
the delegate, the only thing he will have to do is following: "interest of law and order;" "adequate
to enforce it. The second test mandates and efficient instruction;" "public interest;"
"justice and equity;" "public convenience and met, constitutes undue delegation of the
welfare;" "simplicity, economy and legislative power to tax.
efficiency;" "standardization and regulation of
medical education;" and "fair and equitable Held: No. The case before the Court is not a
employment practices." Provisions of the delegation of legislative power. It is simply a
EPIRA such as, among others, ―to ensure the delegation of ascertainment of facts upon which
total electrification of the country and the enforcement and administration of the increase
quality, reliability, security and affordability of rate under the law is contingent. The legislature
the supply of electric power‖ and ―watershed has made the operation of the 12% rate
rehabilitation and management‖ meet the effective January 1, 2006, contingent upon a
requirements for valid delegation, as they specified fact or condition. It leaves the entire
provide the limitations on the ERC‘s power to operation or non-operation of the 12% rate
formulate the IRR. These are sufficient upon factual matters outside of the control of
standards. the executive.
the above agencies for the purpose of public office in connection with the May 10,
encouraging their officials and employees to 2004 synchronized national and local
exceed their revenue targets. elections. Petitioner Aquilino Pimentel a senator
Revenue targets are based on the of the Republic and a candidate for re-election
original estimated revenue collection expected in the May 10, 2004 elections,[1] filed a Petition
respectively of the BIR and the BOC for a given for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule
fiscal year as approved by the DBCC and stated 65. In it, he seeks (1) to nullify Sec. 36(g) of RA
in the BESF submitted by the President to 9165 and COMELEC Resolution No. 6486
Congress. Thus, the determination of revenue dated December 23, 2003 for being
targets does not rest solely on the President as it unconstitutional in that they impose a
also undergoes the scrutiny of the DBCC. qualification for candidates for senators in
On the other hand, Section 7 specifies addition to those already provided for in the
the limits of the Board‘s authority and identifies 1987 Constitution.
the conditions under which officials and
employees whose revenue collection falls short ISSUE: Whether or not Resolution No. 6486 is
of the target by at least 7.5% may be removed unconstitutional.
from the service. RULING: Yes. COMELEC cannot, in the guise
At any rate, this Court has recognized of enforcing and administering election laws or
the following as sufficient standards: ―public promulgating rules and regulations to
interest,‖ ―justice and equity,‖ ―public implement Sec. 36(g), validly impose
convenience and welfare‖ and ―simplicity, qualifications on candidates for senator in
economy and welfare.‖ In this case, the declared addition to what the Constitution prescribes. If
policy of optimization of the revenue- Congress cannot require a candidate for senator
generation capability and collection of the BIR to meet such additional qualification, the
and the BOC is infused with public interest. COMELEC, to be sure, is also without such
power. The right of a citizen in the democratic
process of election should not be defeated by
unwarranted impositions of requirement not
otherwise specified in the Constitution.
G. LEGISLATIVE
ALDABA VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
Aquilino Pimentel vs. Commission on
Elections G.R No. 188078 (January 25, 2010)
TOPIC: Composition, Qualification, Term FACTS: Congress enacted Republic Act (R.A.)
9591, to amend Section 57 of R.A. 8754, the
FACTS: On December 23, 2003, Terafe charter of the City of Malolos, making the city a
Commission on Elections issued Resolution separate district from the existing first
No. 6486, prescribing the rules and regulations legislative district of Bulacan. Petitioners filed
on the mandatory drug testing of candidates for the present action, assailing the constitutionality
of R.A. 9591 pointing out that the law failed to said law and he went immediately to the
comply with the requirement of Section 5(4), Supreme Court. He was contending that the
Article VI of the 1987 Constitution that a city 2nd district was created without a plebiscite
must have a population of at least 250,000; (2) which was required by the Constitution.
that the creation of a separate district amounts
to a conversion and requires the conduct of ISSUE: Whether or not a plebiscite was required
a plebiscite; and (3) that the law violates Section in order to create a legislative district.
5(3), Article VI which provides that each district
shall comprise as far as practicable, contiguous, RULING: No. A plebiscite is not required in the
compact and adjacent territory. case at bar. RA 9371 merely increased the
representation of Cagayan de Oro City in the
ISSUE: RA 9591 unconstitutional for House of Representatives and Sangguniang
being violative of Section5(3), Article VI of the Panglungsod pursuant to Section 5, Article VI
1987 Constitution and Section 3 of the of the 1987 Constitution; the criteria established
Ordinance appended to the 1987Constitution. under Section 10, Article X of the 1987
Constitution only apply when there is a
RULING: Yes RA 9591 is unconstitutional for creation, division, merger, abolition or
being violative of Section5 (3), Article VI of the substantial alteration of boundaries of a
1987 Constitution and Section 3 of the province, city, municipality, or barangay; in this
Ordinance appended to the 1987 Constitution. case, no such creation, division, merger,
The Certification of Regional Director Miranda, abolition or alteration of boundaries of a local
which is based on demographic projections, is government unit took place; and R.A. No. 9371
without legal effect because Regional Director did not bring about any change in Cagayan de
Miranda has no basis and no authority to issue Oro‘s territory, population and income
the Certification. The Certification is also void classification; hence, no plebiscite is required.
on its face because based on its own growth rate
assumption; the population of Malolos will be Ang Ladlad LGBT Party vs. COMELEC
less than 250,000 in the year 2010.
G.R. No. 190852 (April 8, 2010)
BAGABUYO VS. COMELEC TOPIC: Party-list Organization
G.R. No. 176970 (December 8, 2008) FACTS: Petitioner filed a petition for Certiorari with
an application for preliminary injunction against the
TOPIC: Plebiscite Resolutions of the Commission on Election‘s refusal
to accredit Ang Ladlad as a party-list organization
FACTS: Cagayan de Oro Congressman under Republic Act (RA) No. 7941, otherwise
Jaraula sponsored a bill to have two legislative known as the Party-List System Act. Ang Ladlad is
districts in Cagayan deOro since CdO had only an organization composed of men and women who
one legislative districts. The law was passed (RA identify themselves as lesbians, gays, bisexuals, or
9371) hence two legislative districts were trans-gendered individuals (LGBTs) that are
created. Bagabuyo assailed the validity of the marginalized and under-represented sector that is
of First Distict of Negros Occidental. Petitions proper proceeding before the HRET. This is
for her disqualification were instituted alleging pursuant to Section 17, Article VI of the
that she lacked the citizenship requirement. Constitution which states that ―The Senate and
Limkaichong, however, emerged as the winner the House of Representatives shall each have an
pending the disqualification case. A Very Urgent Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge
Motion for Leave to Intervene and to Suspend of all contests relating to the election, returns,
the Proclamation of Limkaichong was filed. and qualifications of their respective Members‖
COMELEC 2nd Division granted the petitions
in the disqualification cases and disqualified
Limkaichong and directed Provincial Board of Señeres v. COMELEC
Canvassers (PBOC) to suspend her
proclamation. However, COMELEC en banc 585 SCRA 557; April 16, 2009
issued a resolution adopting the policy-
Topic: Electoral Tribunal
guidelines of not suspending the proclamation
of winning candidates with pending Facts: Hans Christian Señeres, holding himself
disqualification cases. PBOC, in compliance up as acting president and secretary-general of
with the resolution, proclaimed Limkaichong. Buhay Hayaan Yumabong (BUHAY) filed a
COMELEC later on issued a resolution Certificate of Nomination with the COMELEC.
declaring Limkaichong as a disqualified This is prior private respondent and elected
congressional candidate. President Melquiades Robles‘ filing of the same
Louis Biraogo, as a citizen, contended that certificate. Señeres filed a petition to deny
COMELEC en banc gravely abused its discretion Robles‘ certificates of nomination alleging that
for still acting upon Limkaichong‘s the latter has no authority because he was the
manifestation and motion. acting president and secretary-general of
BUHAY. National Council of BUHAY expelled
Issue: Whether or not upon Limkaichong's
Señeres. BUHAY was proclaimed winner in the
proclamation, the HRET, instead of the
May 2007 election and COMELEC issued a
COMELEC, should assume jurisdiction over
resolution (E.M. 07-043) recognizing and
the disqualification cases.
declaring Robles as the president of BUHAY.
Ruling: Yes. Once a winning candidate has Señeres then filed the petition for certiorari
been proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed alleging that COMELEC acted without or in
office as a Member of the House of excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
Representatives, the COMELEC's jurisdiction discretion amounting to lack or excess of
over election contests relating to his election, jurisdiction in issuing E.M. 07-043.
returns, and qualifications ends, and the
Issue: Whether or not a petition for certiorari is
HRET's own jurisdiction begins. It follows then
a proper remedy for Señeres
that the proclamation of a winning candidate
divests the COMELEC of its jurisdiction over Ruling: No. A special civil action for certiorari
matters pending before it at the time of the may be availed of when the tribunal, board, or
proclamation. The party questioning his officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
qualification should now present his case in a functions has acted without or in excess of
jurisdiction and there is no appeal or any plain, Rules from the issuance of NBC Resolution No.
speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary 07-60. The NBC Resolution partially
course of law for the purpose of annulling the proclaimed CIBAC as a winner but was not a
proceeding. Since at the time Señeres filed this proclamation of the private respondent
petition, nominees had taken their oath and himself. Alternatively, since petitioner‘s
already assumed their officed in the House of challenge goes into private respondent‘s
Representatives, the proper recourse would qualifications, it may be filed at any time during
have been to file a petition for quo warranto his term.
before the House of Representatives Electoral
Tribunal (HRET).
Lokin Jr. v. COMELEC
the mode of review of the judgments, final Ruling: Yes. Sec. 5, Art. VI of the Constitution
orders or resolutions of the COMELEC and and the Party-list System Act both recognize
the Commission on Audit is by a petition for party-list nominees as ―members of the House
certiorari in accordance with Rule 65 to be filed of Representatives‖. It is the party-list
in the Supreme Court within a limited period of representatives who are ―elected‖ into office,
30 days. Undoubtedly, the Court has original not their parties or organization.
and exclusive jurisdiction over Lokin‘s petitions Sec. 17, Art. VI of the Constitution provides
for certiorari and for mandamus against the that the HRET shall be the sole judge of all
COMELEC. contests relating to the qualifications of the
members of the HR. Since party-list nominees
are members of the HR, the HRET has the
Abayon v. HRET jurisdiction to pass upon their qualifications.
Facts: Daryl Grace Abayon is the first nominee G.R. No. 193256; March 22, 2011
of the Aangat Tayo party-list that won a seat in Topic: Electoral Tribunal
the House of Representatives during the 2007
elections. Respondents, as registered voters, Facts: A petition was filed for the cancellation
argued that Aangat Tayo was not an eligible of registration and accreditation of ABC
party-list because it did not represent the (Alliance for Barangay Concerns) Party-List as it
marginalized and the underrepresented sectors was allegedly a front for a religious organization,
and that Abayon herself was not qualified a violation of R.A. 7941 (Party-list System Act).
because she did not belong to the said sector COMELEC 2nd Division dismissed this petition.
and she lost her bid as a party-list representative However, COMELEC en banc partially granted
in the immediately preceding election. the motion for reconsideration and directed the
Abayon countered that COMELEC already Commission Secretary to schedule a hearing.
confirmed the status of Aangat tayo as an Petitioner contended that COMELEC en banc
eligible party-list organization. Furthermore, she has no more jurisdiction to entertain the
pointed out that the House of Representatives petition for cancellation of registration and
Electoral Tribunal (HRET) has no jurisdiction accreditation since ABC was already proclaimed
over the issue of Aangat Tayo‘s qualification as as winner. Invoking Section 17, Article VI of
well as her eligibility. These matters should be the Constitution which provides that the House
within the jurisdiction of COMELEC. of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET)
shall be the sole judge of all electoral contests,
Issue: Whether or not the HRET has the the COMELEC is divested of jurisdiction to
authority to pass upon the eligibilities of the pass upon its qualification.
nominees of the party-list groups that won seats
in the lower house of Congress. Issue: Whether or not the HRET should have
the jurisdiction of the case.
Issue: Whether or not the HRET committed because it permits legislative participation in the
grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack or implementation and enforcement of the law.
excess of jurisdiction
Respondent countered that the creation of the
Ruling: No. Rule 88 of the HRET Rules states congressional oversight committee enhances
HRET could continue or discontinue the separation of powers. It ensures the fulfilment
revision proceedings ex propio motu, that is, of its of the legislative policy and serves as a check to
own accord. The only requisite is its own any over-accumulation of power on the part of
determination that the evidence presented could the executive and the implementing agencies.
affect the officially proclaimed results.
ISSUE: Whether or not the congressional
oversight violates the separation of powers.
ABAKADA GURO PARTY-LIST v.
PURISIMA RULING: No. The power of oversight
embraces all activities undertaken by Congress
562 SCRA 251 (2008) to enhance its understanding of and influence
over the implementation of legislation it has
TOPIC: Legislative Power enacted. Clearly, oversight concerns post-
enactment measures undertaken by Congress:
FACTS: RA 9335 was enacted to optimize the (a) to monitor bureaucratic compliance with
revenue-generation capability and collection of program objectives, (b) to determine whether
the BIR and the BOC. This is to encourage its agencies are properly administered, (c) to
officials and employees to exceed their revenue eliminate executive waste and dishonesty, (d) to
targets by providing a system of rewards and prevent executive usurpation of legislative
sanctions through the creation of a Rewards and authority, and (d) to assess executive conformity
Incentives FUND and a Revenue Performance with the congressional perception of public
Evaluation Board, sourced from the collection interest.
of the BIR and the BOC in excess of their
revenue targets for the year. The power of oversight has been held to be
intrinsic in the grant of legislative power itself
Invoking their rights as taxpayers, petitioners and integral to the checks and balances inherent
challenged the constitutionality of RA 9335, in a democratic system of government.
contending that the system invites corruption
and undermines the constitutionally mandated
duty of these officials and employees to serve JAMES IMBONG v. HON. OCHOA
the people with utmost responsibility, integrity,
Gr No. 204819; April 8, 2014
loyalty and efficiency since they will do their
best only in consideration of such rewards. TOPIC: Approval of the Bill
the President approved the bill, challengers and consequences of the proposed law and
from various sectors of society came knocking its operation. Moreover, this Court has
on the doors of the Court, beckoning it to wield invariably adopted a liberal rather than
the sword that strikes down constitutional technical construction of the rule "so as not
disobedience. to cripple or impede legislation."
Petitioners contend that RH Law violates the In this case, a textual analysis of the various
one subject/one bill rule provision under provisions of the law shows that both
Section 26(1), Article VI of the Constitution on "reproductive health" and "responsible
the ground that being one for reproductive parenthood" are interrelated and germane to the
health with responsible parenthood, the overriding objective to control the population
legislation violates the constitutional standards growth.
of due process by concealing its true intent - to
act as a population control measure. Considering the close intimacy between
"reproductive health" and "responsible
To belittle the challenge, the respondents insist parenthood" which bears to the attainment of
that the RH Law is not a birth or population the goal of achieving "sustainable human
control measure, and that the concepts of development" as stated under its terms, the
"responsible parenthood" and "reproductive Court finds no reason to believe that Congress
health" are both interrelated as they are intentionally sought to deceive the public as to
inseparable. the contents of the assailed legislation.
ISSUE: Whether or not RH Law violates the ABAKADA GURO PARTY LIST v.
one subject/one bill rule provision under ERMITA
Section 26 (1) of Article VI of the Constitution.
469 SCRA 1 (2005)
RULING: The RH Law does not violate the
one subject/one bill rule. In Benjamin E. TOPIC: Approval of the Bill
Cawaling, Jr. v. The Commission on Elections and Rep.
FACTS: RA 9337 ―VAT Reform Act‖ was
Francis Joseph G Escudero, it was written:
signed into law by the President. But before the
law took effect, ABAKADA GURO Party List,
It is well-settled that the "one title-one
et al., filed a petition for prohibition, questioning
subject" rule does not require the Congress
the constitutionality of Sections 4, 5 and 6 of
to employ in the title of the enactment
R.A. No. 9337 having common proviso
language of such precision as to mirror, fully
authorizing the President, upon
index or catalogue all the contents and the
recommendation of the Secretary of Finance, to
minute details therein. The rule is
raise the VAT rate to 12%, subject to
sufficiently complied with if the title is
conditions:
comprehensive enough as to include the
general object which the statute seeks to (i) Value-added tax collection as a
effect, and where, as here, the persons percentage of GDP of the previous
interested are informed of the nature, scope year exceeds 2 4/5%;
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 51
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
(ii) National government deficit as a No. The Court reiterates here that the ―no-
percentage of GDP of the previous year amendment rule‖ refers only to the procedure
exceeds 1½%‖ to be followed by each house of Congress with
regard to bills initiated in each of said respective
Petitioners allege the grant of stand- houses, before said bill is transmitted to the
by authority to the President on the ground that other house for its concurrence or
it is an undue delegation of legislative power, amendment. Verily, to construe said provision
that the increase in the VAT rate to 12% in a way as to proscribe any further changes to a
contingent on any of the two conditions being bill after one house has voted on it would lead
satisfied violates the due process clause to absurdity as this would mean that the other
embodied in Article III, Section 1 of the house of Congress would be deprived of its
Constitution, as it imposes an unfair and constitutional power to amend or introduce
additional tax burden on the people. changes to said bill. Thus, Art. VI, Sec. 26 (2)
Petitioners further claim that the inclusion of of the Constitution cannot be taken to mean
a stand-by authority granted to the President by that the introduction by the Bicameral
the Bicameral Conference Committee is a Conference Committee of amendments and
violation of the ―no-amendment rule‖ laid modifications to disagreeing provisions in bills
down in Article VI, Section 26(2) of the that have been acted upon by both houses of
Constitution. Congress is prohibited.
were sent belatedly and arrangements were House of Congress with power to make
already made and scheduled. Subsequently, investigations and exact testimony to the end
GMA issued EO 464, which prohibits officials that it may exercise its legislative functions
and such other officers as may be determined advisedly and effectively, such power is so far
by the President, who are covered by the incidental to the legislative function as to be
executive privilege, from appearing in such implied. In other words, the power of inquiry –
hearings conducted by Congress without first with process to enforce it – is an essential and
securing the president‘s approval. appropriate auxiliary to the legislative
function. A legislative body cannot legislate
The department heads and the military officers wisely or effectively in the absence of
who were invited by the Committee then information respecting the conditions which the
invoked EO 464. The legislation is intended to affect or change; and
scheduled hearing proceeded even if only 2 where the legislative body does not itself
military personnel attended. For defying possess the requisite information – which is not
President Arroyo‘s order barring military infrequently true – recourse must be had to
personnel from testifying before legislative others who do possess it. Experience has
inquiries without her approval, Brig. Gen. shown that mere requests for such information
Gudani and Col. Balutan were relieved from are often unavailing, and also that information
their military posts and were made to face court which is volunteered is not always accurate or
martial proceedings. complete; so some means of compulsion is
essential to obtain what is needed.‖
EO 464‘s constitutionality was questioned on
the ground that it infringes on the rights and
duties of Congress to conduct investigation in Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability
aid of legislation and conduct oversight of Public Officers and Investigations
functions in the implementation of laws.
GR No. 180643; March 25, 2008
Topic: Legislative Inquiries
ISSUE: Whether E.O. 464 contravenes the
power of inquiry vested in Congress.
Facts: Petitioner testified before respondent
RULING: E.O. 464, to the extent that it bars Committees in an investigation on the NBN
the appearance of executive officials before Project. He disclosed that then Commission on
Congress, deprives Congress of the information Elections (COMELEC) Chairman Benjamin
in the possession of these officials. To resolve Abalos offered him P200 Million in
the question of whether such withholding of exchange for his approval of the NBN
information violates the Constitution, Project. He further narrated that he informed
consideration of the general power of Congress President Arroyo about the bribery attempt and
to obtain information, otherwise known as the that she instructed him not to accept the
power of inquiry, is in order. bribe. However, when probed further on what
they discussed about the NBN Project,
―Although there is no provision in the petitioner refused to answer, invoking
Constitution expressly INVESTING either
Committees did not send him an advance list of Petition for Prohibition and Injunction, with
questions. Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order and/or
The phrase ‗duly published rules of Writ of Preliminary Injunction that the
procedure‘ requires the Senate of every respondent House Committees be restrained
Congress to publish its rules of procedure from using these tape recordings of the ―illegally
governing inquiries in aid of legislation because obtained‖ wiretapped conversations in their
every Senate is distinct from the one before it or committee reports and for any other purpose.
after it. Since Senatorial elections are held every
three (3) years for one-half of the Senate‘s Issue: Whether or not the respondents should
membership, the composition of the Senate also be prohibited from playing the tape recordings
changes by the end of each term. Each Senate on the ground that it is in violation of R.A. No.
may thus enact a different set of rules as it may 4200 and Section 3, Article III of the
deem fit. Not having published its Rules of Constitution.
Procedure, the subject hearings in aid of
legislation conducted by the 14th Senate, are Held: The Court dismissed the petition for
therefore, procedurally infirm. being moot and academic because the
recordings were already played and there is also
Garcillano v. House of Representatives the widely publicized fact that the committee
Committee on Accountability of Public reports on the ―Hello Garci‖ inquiry were
Information, Public Order and Safety, completed and submitted to the House in
National Defense and Security, Information plenary by the respondent committees. Having
and Communications Technology and been overtaken by these events, the Garcillano
Suffrage and Electoral Reforms petition has to be dismissed for being moot and
academic. After all, prohibition is a preventive
GR No. 170338; December 28, 2003 remedy to restrain the doing of an act about to
Topic: Legislative Inquiries be done, and not intended to provide a remedy
for an act already accomplished.
Facts: The tapes, notoriously referred to as the _____________________________________
―Hello Garci‖ tapes, allegedly contained the Philcomsat Holdings Corp. v. Senate
President‘s instructions to COMELEC
Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano to manipulate GR No. 180308; June 19, 2012
in her favor results of the 2004 presidential Topic: Legislative Inquiry
elections. These recordings were to become the
subject of heated legislative hearings conducted Facts: Committee Report No. 312
separately by committees of both Houses of recommended, inter alia, the privatization and
Congress. After prolonged and impassioned transfer of the jurisdiction over the shares of
debate by the committee members on the the government in POTC and PHILCOMSAT
admissibility and authenticity of the recordings, to the Privatization Management Office (PMO)
the tapes were eventually played in the under the Department of Finance (DOF) and
chambers of the House. Petitioner Virgilio O. the replacement of government nominees as
Garcillano (Garcillano) filed with this Court a directors of POTC and PHILCOMSAT in view
of the losses that the government continued to
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 55
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
thus, cannot be used as the basis of any Government (PCGG). Section 4 (b) of E.O. No.
investigation involving them relative to 1 provides that: ―No member or staff of the
the Moscow incident. Commission shall be required to testify or
produce evidence in any judicial, legislative
Issue: Whether or not the Committee has or administrative proceeding concerning
jurisdiction over the incident. matters within its official cognizance.‖
Held: Yes. Section 16(3), Article VI of the Apparently, the purpose is to
Philippine Constitution states:“Each House shall ensure PCGG‘s unhampered performance of its
determine the rules of its proceedings.” This provision task.
has been traditionally construed as a grant of
full discretionary authority to the Houses of Issue: Whether or not Sec. 4 (b) EO No. 1 is
Congress in the formulation, adoption and constitutional.
promulgation of its own rules. As such, the
exercise of this power is generally exempt from Held: No. Section 4(b) of E.O. No.1 limits
judicial supervision and interference, except on such power of legislative inquiry by exempting
a clear showing of such arbitrary and all PCGG members or staff from testifying in
improvident use of the power as will constitute any judicial, legislative or administrative
a denial of due process. The challenge to the proceeding.
jurisdiction of the Senate Foreign Relations The Congress‘ power of inquiry has been
Committee partakes of the nature of a political recognized in foreign jurisdictions long before it
question that, in Tañada v. Cuenco, was reached our shores through McGrain v.
characterized as a question which, under the Daugherty, cited in Arnault v.Nazareno. In those
Constitution, is to be decided by the people in earlier days, American courts considered the
their sovereign capacity, or in regard to which power of inquiry as inherent in the power to
full discretionary authority has been delegated legislate. The 1864 case of Briggs
to the legislative or executive branch of the v. MacKellar explains the breath and basis of the
government. Further, pursuant to this power, thus:
constitutional grant of virtually unrestricted
authority to determine its own rules, the Senate Where no constitutional limitation or restriction
is at liberty to alter or modify these rules at any exists, it is competent for either of the two
time it may see fit, subject only to the bodies composing the legislature to do, in their
imperatives of quorum, voting and publication. separate capacity, whatever may be
essential to enable them to legislate….It is
well-established principle of this parliamentary
Sabio v. Gordon
law, that either house may institute any
investigation having reference to its own
GR No. 174340; October 17, 2006
organization, the conduct or qualification of its
Topic: Legislative Inquiry
members, its proceedings, rights, or privileges
or any matter affecting the public interest
Facts: Former President Corazon C. Aquino
upon which it may be important that it
issued Executive Order (E.O.) No. 1, creating
should have exact information, and in
the Presidential Commission on Good
respect to which it would be competent for The controversy started when the City
it to legislate. The right to pass laws, Treasurer of Manila addressed a letter to GSIS
necessarily implies the right to obtain President and General Manager Winston F.
information upon any matter which may Garcia informing him of the unpaid real
become the subject of a law. It is essential property taxes due on the
to the full and intelligent exercise of the aforementioned properties for years 1992 to
legislative function….In American 2002. GSIS argued that both its old and new
legislatures the investigation of public charter Presidential Decree No. (PD) 1146, and
matters before committees, preliminary to present charter, RA 8291 or the GSIS Act of
legislation, or with the view of advising the 1997, exempt the agency and its properties from
house appointing the committee is, as a all forms of taxes and assessments, inclusive of
parliamentary usage, well established as it is realty tax.
in England, and the right of either house to
compel witnesses to appear and testify before Issue: Whether or not petitioner is exempt
its committee, and to punish for disobedience from the payment of real property taxes on the
has been frequently enforced….The right of property it leased to a taxable entity.
inquiry, I think, extends to other matters, in
respect to which it may be necessary, or Held: No. GSIS enjoys under its charter full tax
may be deemed advisable to apply for exemption. Moreover, as an instrumentality of
legislative aid. the national government, it is itself not liable to
pay real estate taxes assessed by the City
POWER OF TAXATION of Manila against its Katigbak and Concepcion-
Arroceros properties. Following the ―beneficial
GSIS v. City Treasurer of the City of Manila use‖ rule, however, accrued real property taxes
are due from the Katigbak property, leased as it
GR No. 186242; December 23, 2009 is to a taxable entity. But the corresponding
Topic: Power of Taxation liability for the payment thereof devolves on the
taxable beneficial user. The Katigbak property
Facts: Petitioner GSIS owns or used to own cannot in any event be subject of a public
two (2) parcels of land, one located at Katigbak auction sale, notwithstanding its realty tax
25th St., Bonifacio Drive, Manila (Katigbak delinquency. This means that the City
property), and the other, at Concepcion cor. of Manila has to satisfy its tax claim by serving
Arroceros Sts., also in Manila (Concepcion- the accrued realty tax assessment on MHC, as
Arroceros property). Title to the Concepcion- the taxable beneficial user of the Katigbak
Arroceros property was transferred to this property and, in case of nonpayment, through
Court in 2005 pursuant to Proclamation No. means other than the sale at public auction of
835 dated April 27, 2005. Both the GSIS and the leased property.
the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC)
of Manila occupy the Concepcion-Arroceros
property, while the Katigbak property was
under lease.
Issue: Whether or not diplomatic negotiations G.R. No. 191618 (November 23, 2010)
are covered by the Executive Privilege during
legislative inquiries. Topic: Constitutionality of Presidential
Electoral Tribunal
Held: Yes. While the final text of the JPEPA
may not be kept perpetually confidential – since FACTS: Atty. Romulo B. Macalintal filed an
there should be ―ample opportunity for undesignated petition that questions the
discussion before [a treaty] is approved‖ – constitution of the Presidential Electoral
the offers exchanged by the parties during the tribunal, as an illegal and unauthorized progeny
negotiations continue to be privileged even after of Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution
the JPEPA is published. It is reasonable to wherein PET created a ―separate tribunal
conclude that the Japanese representatives complemented by a budget allocation, a seal, a
submitted their offers with the understanding set of personnel and confidential employees, to
that ―historic confidentiality‖ would govern effect the constitutional mandate,
the same. Disclosing these offers could impair notwithstanding the silence of constitutional
the ability of the Philippines to deal not only provision.
with Japan but with other foreign
governments in future negotiations. ISSUE: Whether or not PET is constitutional.
RULING: Yes. PET is not a separate and RULING: Yes. The court reiterated that the
distinct entity from the Supreme Court, albeit it PET is authorized by the last paragraph of
has functions peculiar only to the Tribunal. The Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution and as
PET was constituted in implementation of supported by the discussions of the Members of
Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution, and it the Constitutional Commission which drafted
faithfully complies not faithfully defies the the present Constitution. The basis of PET was
constitutional directive. The adoption of a mentioned in the deliberations of the members
separate seal, as well as the change in the of the Members of the Constitutional
nomenclature if the Chief Justice and the Commission during the present Constitution.
Associate Justices into Chairman and Members
of the tribunal was designed simply to highlight RODRIGO VS. MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
the singularity and exclusivity of the Tribunal‘s
function as a special electoral court. G.R. No. 191805 (Novembr 15, 2011)
FUNA VS. ACTING S ECRETARY OF JUSTICE Commission on Elections, each for a term of
ALBERTO AGRA seven years and all expiring on February 2,
2008. The Office of the President submitted to
G.R. No. 191644 (February 19,2013) the Commission on Appointments the ad
interim appointments for confirmation, however,
TOPIC: Concurrent Capacities the CA did not act on said appointments. On
FACTS: President Gloria Arroyo appointed June 1, 2001, President Arroyo renewed the ad
Agra as the Acting as the Acting Secretary of interim appointments of respondents to the same
Justice following the resignation of Secretary positions and for the same term of seven years.
Agnes VST Devanadera on March 1, 2010. They took their oaths of office for a second
President Arroyo designated Agra as the Acting time. The Office of the President transmitted
Secretary General in a concurrent capacity on their appointments to the CA but the Congress
March 5, 2010. adjourned before the CA could act on their
appointments. Thus, on June 8, 2001, President
ISSUE: Whether or not the designation of Agra Macapagal Arroyo renewed again the ad
as the Acting Secretary of Justice concurrently interim appointments. Petitioner Ma. Angelina
with his position of Acting Solicitor General, Matibag is the Director IV of COMELEC‘s
violate the constitutional prohibition against Education and Information Department (EID).
dual or multiple offices fot the Members of the Benipayo, as the COMELEC Chairman
Cabinet and their deputies and assistant. reassigned Matibag to the Law Department.
Matibag requested for reconsideration but was
RULING: The designation of Agra as Acting denied by Benipayo. Petitioner questioned the
Secretary of Justice concurrently with his appointment and the right to remain in office of
position of Acting Solicitor General was Benipayo et al. claiming that their ad interim
unconstitutional and void in violation of the appointments were unconstitutional
constitutional prohibition under Section 13,
Article VII of the 1987 Constitution in order to Issue: Whether or not the ad interim
prevent the concentration of powers in the appointments amounted to a temporary
Executive Department officials, specifically the appointment prohibited by Sec. 1 (2), Article
President, the Vice President, the members of IX-C of the Constitution.
the Cabinet and their deputies and assistants.
Ruling: No. An ad interim appointment is a
permanent appointment. Sec. 16, Art. VII of the
Matibag v. Benipayo Constitution states that the ad interim
appointment remains effective until such
380 SCRA 49; April 2, 2002 disapproval by the CA or the next adjournment
of Congress, meaning, it can no longer be
Topic: Powers of the President- Appointing
withdrawn or revoked by the President.
Powers
472 SCRA 587; October 13, 2005 496 SCRA 13; July 21, 2006
Topic: Powers of the President- Appointing Topic: Powers of the President- Appointing
Powers Powers
Issue: Whether or not the Congress may limit Ruling: No. In making his recommendation to
the President‘s prerogative to nominate the President on the existence of either of the
ambassadors by legislating age qualifications two conditions, the Secretary of Finance is not
acting as the alter ego of the President or even
Ruling: The petition was dismissed without her subordinate. In such instance, he is not
reaching the merits for lack of a case or subject to the power of control and direction of
controversy grounded on petitioner‘s lack of the President. He is acting as the agent of the
capacity to sue and mootness. legislative department, to determine and declare
the event upon which its expressed will is to
take effect. Thus, being the agent of Congress
Abakada Guro Party List v. Ermita and not of the President, the President cannot
alter or modify or nullify, or set aside the
469 SCRA 1; September 1, 2005
findings of the Secretary of Finance and to
Topic: Powers of the President- Control Power substitute the judgment of the former for that
of the latter.
Facts: R.A. No. 9337 was enacted for mounting
budget deficit, revenue generation, inadequate
fiscal allocation for education, increased
Gudani v. Senga
emoluments for health workers, and wider
coverage for full value-added tax benefits, 498 SCRA 671; August 15, 2006
among others. Petitioners ABAKADA
GURO Party List, et al., filed a petition for Topic: Powers of the President- Control Power
prohibition on May 27, 2005. They question Facts: The petitioners are high-ranking officers
the constitutionality of Sections 4, 5 and 6 of of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).
R.A. No. 9337 for abandoning Congress‘ Both petitioners, Brigadier General Francisco
exclusive authority to fix the rate of taxes. Gudani and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander
These questioned provisions contain a Balutan, belonged to the Philippine Marines.
uniform proviso authorizing the President, upon Both petitioners and respondent AFP Chief of
recommendation of the Secretary of Finance, to Staff Lieutenant General Generoso Senga were
raise the VAT rate to 12%, effective January 1, invited by the Senate to appear at a public
2006, after any of the following conditions have hearing before the Senate Committee on
been satisfied. They also argue that the law also National Defense and Security. However,
effectively nullified the President‘s power of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo ordered
control, which includes the authority to set aside that no AFP personnel shall appear before any
and nullify the acts of her subordinates like the congressional or senate hearing without her
Secretary of Finance, by mandating the fixing of approval. Defying President Arroyo‘s order,
the tax rate by the President upon the petitioners appeared and testified at the hearing.
recommendation of the Secretary of Finance. They were then directed to appear before the
Issue: Whether or not the law violates the Office of the Provost Marshal General
power of control of the President (OPMG), who recommended that petitioners
be charged with violation of Article of War 65,
Ruling: Yes. The Constitution reposes final Nine petitions assailing the constitutionality of
authority, control and supervision of the AFP to DAP and issuances relating to DAP were filed.
the President. Section 18, Article VII declares Issue: Whether or not the DAP realignments
that ―the President shall be the Commander-in- can be considered as impoundments by the
Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines‖. executive
Section 5, Article XVI, the commander-in-chief
clause vests on the President, absolute authority Ruling: No. There is no impoundment in DAP
over the persons and actions of the members of but transfer of funds. Impoundment of funds
the armed forces including the ability of the refers to the President‘s power to refuse to
President to restrict the travel, movement and spend appropriations or to retain or deduct
speech of military officers, activities which may appropriations for whatever reason.
otherwise be sanctioned under civilian law. Impoundment is actually prohibited by the
General Appropriations Act unless there will be
an unmanageable national government budget
Maria Araullo v. Benigno Aquino deficit in the future.
regard certain acts as crimes and impose Secretary for Asia Pacific Kurt Campbell, met
penalties for their commission as well as with the Philippine panel, headed by Foreign
provisions that would enable the government to Affairs Undersecretary Rodolfo Severino Jr., to
track down and penalize violators. exchange notes on ―the complementing
strategic interests of the United States and the
Issue: Whether or not the cybercrime law is Philippines in the Asia-Pacific region.‖ Both
unconstitutional. sides discussed, among other things, the
possible elements of the Visiting Forces
Ruling: No. Only the following provisions of
Agreement (VFA for brevity). On October 5,
the cybercrime law are unconstitutional: Section
1998, President Joseph E. Estrada, through
4(c)(3); Section 12; Section 19; Section 4(c)(4)
respondent Secretary of Foreign Affairs, ratified
that penalizes online libel with respect to those
the VFA. On May 27, 1999, Proposed Senate
who simply receive the post and react to it;
Resolution No. 443 was approved by the Senate,
Interference, Section 4(a)(5) on Misuse of
by a two-thirds (2/3) vote[9] of its members.
Devices, Section 4(a)(6) on Cyber-squatting,
Senate Resolution No. 443 was then re-
Section 4(b)(1) on Computer-related Forgery,
numbered as Senate Resolution No. 18.
Section 4(b)(2) on Computer-related Fraud,
Petitioners - as legislators, non-
Section 4(b)(3) on Computer-related Identity
governmental organizations, citizens and
Theft, and Section 4(c)(1) on Cybersex with
taxpayers - assail the constitutionality of the
respect to Sections 4(c)(2) on Child
VFA and impute to herein respondents grave
Pornography, 4(c)(3) on Unsolicited
abuse of discretion in ratifying the agreement.
Commercial Communications, and 4(c)(4) on
online Libel. The law is only partially
Issue: Whether or not the respondents
unconstitutional.
committed grave abuse of discretion in ratifying
the agreement.
Bayan (Bagong Alyansang Makabayan) v. Held: No. As regards the power to enter into
Zamora treaties or international agreements, the
Constitution vests the same in the President,
GR No. 138570. October 10, 2000 subject only to the concurrence of at least two-
Topic: Diplomatic Power thirds vote of all the members of the Senate. In
this light, the negotiation of the VFA and the
Facts: With the expiration of the RP-US subsequent ratification of the agreement are
Military Bases Agreement, the periodic military exclusive acts which pertain solely to the
exercises conducted between the two countries President, in the lawful exercise of his vast
were held in abeyance. Notwithstanding, the executive and diplomatic powers granted him
defense and security relationship between the no less than by the fundamental law itself. Into
Philippines and the United States of America the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and
continued pursuant to the Mutual Defense Congress itself is powerless to invade it. Consequently,
Treaty. On July 18, 1997, the United States the acts or judgment calls of the President
panel, headed by US Defense Deputy Assistant involving the VFA-specifically the acts of
ratification and entering into a treaty and those
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 66
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
necessary or incidental to the exercise of such petitioners’ claims against Japan. It is well-
principal acts - squarely fall within the sphere of established that "[t]he conduct of the foreign
his constitutional powers and thus, may not be relations of our government is committed by the
validly struck down, much less calibrated by this Constitution to the executive and legislative--'the
Court, in the absence of clear showing of grave political'--departments of the government, and the
abuse of power or discretion. propriety of what may be done in the exercise of this
It is the Court‘s considered view that the political power is not subject to judicial inquiry or
President, in ratifying the VFA and in decision." In this case, the Executive Department
submitting the same to the Senate for has already decided that it is to the best interest of
concurrence, acted within the confines and the country to waive all claims of its nationals for
limits of the powers vested in him by the reparations against Japan in the Treaty of Peace of
Constitution. 1951. The wisdom of such decision is not for the
courts to question. Neither could petitioners herein
Vinuya v. Romulo assail the said determination by the Executive
Department via the instant petition for certiorari.
GR No. 162230; April 28, 2010
Topic: Diplomatic Power
3. The constitutional question must be raised at to its members. This view fuses the legal
the earliest opportunity; and identity of an association with that of its
4. The decision of the constitutional question members.16An association has standing to file
must be necessary to the determination of the suit for its workers despite its lack of direct
case itself. interest if its members are affected by the action.
An organization has standing to assert the
Executive Secretary v. Court of Appeals concerns of its constituents.
The respondent is, thus, the appropriate
GR No. 131719; May 25, 2004 party to assert the rights of its members,
Topic: Locus Standi because it and its members are in every practical
sense identical. The respondent asserts that the
Facts: Republic Act No. 8042, otherwise assailed provisions violate the constitutional
known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas rights of its members and the officers and
Filipinos Act of 1995, took effect on July 15, employees thereof. The respondent is but the
1995. Respondents questioned the provisions of medium through which its individual members
RA 8042, by way of a restraining order seek to make more effective the expression of
otherwise, the member recruitment agencies of their voices and the redress of their grievances.
the petitioner will suffer grave or irreparable However, the respondent has no locus
damage or injury. Indeed, this has far reaching standi to file the petition for and in behalf of
effects not only to survival of the overseas unskilled workers. We note that it even failed to
manpower supply industry and the active implead any unskilled workers in its petition.
participating recruitment agencies, the country‘s
economy which has survived mainly due to the In Re: Appointment of Mateo A. Valenzuela
dollar remittances of the overseas workers but and Placido B. Vallarta
more importantly, to the poor and the needy
who are in dire need of income-generating jobs A.M. No. 98-5-01-SC. November 9, 1998
which can only be obtained from abroad. Topic: Power of Appointment
The petitioners contend that the
respondent has no locus standi.It is a non-stock, Facts: Hon. Mateo A. Valenzuela and Hon.
non-profit organization; hence, not the real Placido B. Vallarta were appointed as Judges of
party-in-interest as petitioner in the action. The the Regional Trial Court of Branch 62, Bago
respondent, for its part, asserts that it has duly City and of Branch 24, Cabanatuan City,
established its locus standi and its right to respectively on March 30, 1998, two months
injunctive relief as gleaned from its pleadings before the next presidential elections. The
and the appendages thereto. referral was made in view of the serious
constitutional issue concerning said
Issue: Whether or not the respondent has the appointments arising from the pertinent
legal standing in the case. antecedents. Attention was drawn to Section 15,
Article VII of the Constitution reading as
Held: Yes. The modern view is that an follows:
association has standing to complain of injuries
made explicit in Section 15, Article VII as being the President, in recognition of the principle of
equally applicable to the appointment of judicial courtesy, should have refrained from
Members of the Supreme Court in Article VIII implementing our decision until The Court have
itself, most likely in Section 4 (1), Article VIII. ruled with finality on this case.
That such specification was not done only
reveals that the prohibition against the President Issue: Whether or not a Court‘s decision based
or Acting President making appointments on close vote affects the finality of a case.
within two months before the next presidential
elections and up to the end of the President‘s or Held: No. ―…a slim vote of 8-7 does not, and
Acting President‘s term does not refer to the cannot, have the effect of making our ruling any
Members of the Supreme Court. less effective or binding. Regardless of how
close the voting is, so long as there is
Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the concurrence of the majority of the members of
Philippines the en banc who actually took part in the
deliberations of the case, a decision garnering
GR No. 196271; February 28, 2012 only 8 votes out of 15 members is still a
Topic: Finality of a Decision decision of the Supreme Court en banc and must
be respected as such. The petitioners are,
Facts: Petitioners assail the Supreme Court‘s therefore, not in any position to speculate that,
Decision dated October 18, 2011, where the based on the voting, ―the probability exists that
Court upheld the constitutionality of Republic their motion for reconsideration may be
Act (RA) No. 10153. Pursuant to the granted.‖
constitutional mandate of synchronization, RA
No. 10153 postponed the regional elections in Bengzon v. Drilon
the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao
(ARMM) (which were scheduled to be held on G.R. No. 103524 April 15, 1992
the second Monday of August 2011) to the Topic: Fiscal Autonomy of the Judiciary
second Monday of May 2013 and recognized
the President‘s power to appoint officers-in- Facts: The petitioners are retired Justices of the
charge (OICs) to temporarily assume these Supreme Court and Court of Appeals who are
positions upon the expiration of the terms of currently receiving monthly pensions under
the elected officials. Republic Act No. 910 as amended by Republic
The petitioners in G.R. No. 197280, in their Act No. 1797. They filed the instant petition on
Manifestation and Motion dated December 21, their own behalf and in representation of all
2011, question the propriety of the appointment other retired Justices of the Supreme Court and
by the President of Mujiv Hataman as acting the Court of Appeals similarly situated.
Governor and Bainon Karon as acting Vice This petition assails the constitutionality of the
Governor of the ARMM. They argue that since veto by the President of certain provisions in
the Court‘s previous decision was based on a the General Appropriations Act for the Fiscal
close vote of 8-7, and given the numerous Year 1992 relating to the payment of the
motions for reconsideration filed by the parties,
adjusted pensions of retired Justices of the disburse such sums as may be provided by law
Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. or prescribed by them in the course of the
discharge of their functions.‖
Issue: Whether or not the questioned veto is
repugnant to the fiscal autonomy granted to the Re: COA Opinion on the Computation of
Judiciary. the Appraised Value of the Properties
Purchased by the Retired Chief/Associate
Held: Yes. In the case at bar, the veto of these Justices of the Supreme Court
specific provisions in the General
Appropriations Act is tantamount to dictating A.M. No. 11-7-100-SC; July 31, 2012
to the Judiciary how its funds should be utilized, Topic: Judiciary’s Fiscal Autonomy
which is clearly repugnant to fiscal autonomy.
The freedom of the Chief Justice to make Facts: The Commission on Audit requested the
adjustments in the utilization of the funds Court to determine the proper formula to be
appropriated for the expenditures of the used in computing the appraisal value that a
judiciary, including the use of any savings from retired Chief Justice and several Associate
any particular item to cover deficits or shortages Justices of the Supreme Court have to pay to
in other items of the Judiciary is withheld. acquire the government properties they used
Pursuant to the Constitutional mandate, the during their tenure. This issue has its roots in
Judiciary must enjoy freedom in the disposition the June 8, 2010 Opinion1 issued by the Legal
of the funds allocated to it in the appropriations Services Sector, Office of the General Counsel
law. It knows its priorities just as it is aware of of the Commission on Audit (COA), which
the fiscal restraints. The Chief Justice must be found that an underpayment amounting to
given a free hand on how to augment P221,021.50 resulted when five (5) retired
appropriations where augmentation is needed. Supreme Court justices purchased from the
Supreme Court the personal properties assigned
Bengzon v. Drilon to them during their incumbency in the Court .
G.R. No. 103524 April 15, 1992 Issue: Whether or not the COA can conduct
Topic: Fiscal Autonomy Defined post-audit examination on constitutional bodies
granted fiscal autonomy under Sec. 2 (1) of
Fiscal autonomy means freedom from outside Article IX-D of the Constitution.
control.
―Fiscal autonomy…contemplates a guarantee Held: No. Any kind of interference on how
on full flexibility to allocate and utilize their these retirement privileges and benefits are
resources with the wisdom and dispatch that exercised and availed of, not only violates the
their needs require. It recognizes the power and fiscal autonomy and independence of the
authority to levy, assess and collect fees, fix Judiciary, but also encroaches upon the
rates of compensation not exceeding the highest constitutional duty and privilege of the Chief
rates authorized by law for compensation and Justice and the Supreme Court En Banc to
pay plans of the government and allocate and manage the Judiciary‘s own affairs.
G.R. No. 193978; February 28, 2012 G.R. No. 149719; June 21, 2007
Topic: Locus Standi Topic: Appellate Jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court
Facts: Pres. Aquino issued EO 7 ordering (1) a
moratorium on the increases in the salaries and Facts: Petitioner decided to stop paying the
other forms of compensation of all GOCC and electric bills for the streetlights and advised
GFI employees for an indefinite period to be respondent association to assume this obligation.
set by the President, and (2) a suspension of all Respondent association objected to petitioner‘s
resolution and refused to pay the electric bills. Planters Products Inc. v. Fertiphil
HUDCC Resolution No. R-562, series of 1994 Corporation
was issued, mandating subdivision
owners/developers shall continue to maintain GR No. 166066; March 14, 2008
street lights facilities and pay the bills for Topic: RTC Jurisdiction on
electric consumption of the subdivision street Constitutionality Issue
lights until the facilities in the project are turned
over to the local government. A writ of Facts: Fertiphil filed a complaint for collection
preliminary mandatory injunction was also and damages against FPA and PPI with the
issued ordering the petitioner to assume the RTC in Makati. It questioned the
obligation of paying the cost of electricity of the constitutionality of LOI No. 1465 for being
streetlights. unjust, unreasonable, oppressive, invalid and an
Petitioner elevated the matter to the Court of unlawful imposition that amounted to a denial
Appeals by filing a Petition for Prohibition and of due process of law. Fertiphil alleged that the
Certiorari, praying not only for the reversal of LOI solely favored PPI, a privately owned
the writ of preliminary mandatory injunction, as corporation, which used the proceeds to
well as the two issuances, but also for the maintain its monopoly of the fertilizer industry.
nullification of HUDCC Resolution No. R-562,
series of 1994, on the ground that it is Issue: Whether or not the Regional Trial Court
unconstitutional. has jurisdiction over the case.
Issue: Whether or not the Court of Appeals has Held: It is settled that the RTC has jurisdiction
a jurisdiction to take cognizance of this original to resolve the constitutionality of a statute,
action for certiorari and prohibition. presidential decree or an executive order. This
is clear from Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987
Held: The Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction Constitution, which provides: SECTION
to take cognizance of this original action for 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following
certiorari and prohibition, notwithstanding powers:
Section 4, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. The
general rule is that this Court shall exercise only (2) Review, revise, reverse, modify,
appellate jurisdiction over cases involving the or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the
constitutionality of a statute, treaty or regulation, Rules of Court may provide, final judgments
except in circumstances where the Court and orders of lower courts in:
believes that resolving the issue of (a) All cases in which
constitutionality of a law or regulation at the the constitutionality or validity of any treaty,
first instance is of paramount importance and international or executive agreement, law,
immediately affects the social, economic and presidential decree, proclamation, order,
moral well-being of the people. instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in
question.
Issue: Whether or not petitioner has the Held: Yes. While it is true that a ―personal
standing to file this suit. stake‖ on the case is imperative to have locus
standi, this is not to say that only official
Held: Petitioners have standing to file the suit nominees for the post of Chief Justice can come
simply as people‘s organizations and taxpayers to the Court and question the JBC composition
since the matter involves an issue of utmost and for being unconstitutional. JBC‘s duty is not at
far-reaching Constitutional importance, namely, all limited to the nominations for the highest
the qualification – nay, the citizenship – of a magistrate in the land. The legality of the very
person to be appointed a member of this Court. process of nominations to the positions in the
Standing has been accorded and recognized in Judiciary is the nucleus of the controversy.
similar instances. Hence, a citizen has a right to bring this
question to the Court, clothed with legal
standing and at the same time, armed with
issues of transcendental importance to society.
Chavez v. Judicial and Bar Council of-war over the ownership of a parcel of land
located in Barrio De la Paz, Antipolo City. After
676 SCRA 579; July 17, 2012 a series of court trials, Supreme Court First
Topic: Appointments- JBC Division ruled that Ambrosio Aguilar,
successor-in-interest of Hermogenes Lopez, is
Facts: The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) was the lawful owner of the property. However,
created as an independent body, in-charge of Land Management Bureau dismissed the claim
the process of appointments in the Judiciary. It of Lopez and ordered the reconstitution of the
is composed seven members; one of them is a homestead application of Elino Adia. The
representative from the Congress as an ex officio Lopez heir filed a motion for consideration of
member. However, an 8th member was added to the LMB decision which was denied by LMB.
the JBC as two representatives from Congress They later filed a petition for review on
began sitting in the JBC-one from House of certiorari with the Supreme Court which was
Representatives and one from the Senate, each denied by its Third Division. The Third
having one-half of a vote. Division in its decision clarified that its
Petitioner contended that the Constitution Resolution ―prevails over‖ the Decision
clearly states that JBC shall have only one rendered by the First Division, thus the Aida
representative from the Congress. hers‘ titles are valid.
Issue: Whether or not Section 8, Article VIII of Issue: Whether or not the Third Division may
the 1987 Constitution allow more than one reverse the ruling of First Division.
member of Congress to sit in the JBC with one
vote each. Ruling: No. Section 4 (3), Article VIII of the
1987 Constitution provides that no doctrine or
Ruling: No. The Constitution mandates that principle of law laid down by the Supreme
the JBC be composed of seven (7) members Court en banc or its Divisions may be modified
only. Sec. 8 of Article VIII provides Congress or reversed except by the Court sitting en banc. A
with equal voice with other members of the JBC. Decision rendered by a Division of Supreme
Additionally, the seven-member composition of Court in violation of the above constitutional
the JBC serves a practical purpose, that is, to provision would be in excess of jurisdiction and
provide solution in case of a tie or stalemate in is therefore invalid.
voting.
Cabuay Jr v. Malvar
Imbong v. Ochoa
Petitioner prays for the invalidation of the RULING: It was noted that if a majority
resolution for having been promulgated without concurred only―in the result,‖
a quorum because of the failure of the two the ponencia would have no doctrinal value.
commissioners to indicate the reason for taking More importantly, any decision ousting a sitting
no part in the case. member of the House of Representatives
should spell out clearly the legal basis relied
ISSUE: Whether or not the failure of the upon by the majority for such extreme measure.
Commissioners to indicate their reasons for
taking no part in the case annuls the Resolution. SC ruled that, a decision becomes binding only
after it is validly promulgated. Until such
RULING: No. The omission of not indicating operative acts occur, there is no really decision
the reason of inhibition does not invalidate the to speak of, even if some or all the Justices have
ruling. The non-compliance with the rule does already affixed their signature thereto.
not annul the ruling in which a judge takes no
part but may be basis for holding him AGOY VS. ARANETA CENTER
responsible for the omission. G.R. No. 196358 (March 21, 2012)
the September 11, 2011 resolution affirming the petitioner‘s motion to transfer cases to the Banc
authenticity of the former resolution. The but the Court deliberated on the consultation
petitioner sought the Court En Banc to decide and voted 9-5 to accept cases for the En Banc.
reiterating that his case cannot be decided by a
minute resolution. ISSUE: Whether or not these consolidated cases
can be considered and treated as en banc cases.
ISSUES: Whether or not it was proper for the
Court to deny his petition through a minute RULING: Yes, Supreme Court voted 9-5 to
resolution. accept the cases for the En Banc to pass upon
in view of the finding that the cases above
RULING: The court itself has defined the entitled are of sufficient importance to merit its
instances when cases are to be adjudicated by attention. The action of the court is a legitimate
decision, signed resolution, unsigned resolution and valid exercise of its residual power within
or minute resolution. the contemplation of Paragraph 9 of the
Resolution En Banc Nov. 18, 1998 ―All other
Minute resolutions constitute actual cases as the court en banc by a majority of its
adjudications on the merits. They are the result actual membership may deem of sufficient
of thorough deliberation among the members importance to merit its attention‖.
of the court. When the court does not find any
reversible error in the decision of the CA and Taking into account the importance of these
denies the petition, there is no need for the cases and the issues raised, let alone the
Court to fully explain its denial, since it already enormous value of the area in litigation, which
means that it agrees with and adopts the is claimed as government property, there is
findings of the CA. merit in the prayer of the petitioners that their
pending motions for reconsideration should be
FIRESTONE CERAMICS INC. VS. COURT OF resolved by the Court En Banc.
APPEALS
G.R. No. 127022 (January 15, 2002) IN THE MATTER OF THE CHARGES OF
G.R. No. 127245 (January 15, 2002) PLAGIARISM AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
DEL CASTILLO
Topic: EN BANC Cases A.M. 10-7-17-SC (October 12, 2010)
certified as permanent by the CSC cannot is a permanent, career position and not
conceal or alter its highly confidential nature. primarily confidential.
This Court holds that the position of
respondent Arandela as the provincial attorney ISSUE: (1) Whether or not the courts may
of Iloilo is a primarily confidential position. determine the proper classification of a position
Following the principle that the tenure of an in government.
official holding a primarily confidential position
ends upon loss of confidence, Arandela‘s (2) Whether or not the position of Corporate
termination is valid. Secretary in a GOCC is primarily confidential in
nature.
However, with respect to the legal assistants or
subordinates of the provincial attorney, their RULING: The Court is expected to make its
positions are not confidential but are highly own determination as to the nature of a
technical in character. They are permanent particular position, such as whether it is a
employees and they enjoy security of tenure. primarily confidential position or not, without
being bound by prior classifications made by
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v. other bodies. The findings of the other
JAVIER branches of government are merely considered
initial and not conclusive to the Court. However,
546 SCRA 485, (2008) in case of conflict, the Court must exercise its
constitutional role as final arbiter of all
TOPIC: Civil Service Commission justiciable controversies and disputes.
FACTS: Nita Javier was first employed as The position of corporate secretary in a GOCC
Private Secretary in the GSIS on a ―confidential‖ is primarily confidential in nature.
status. A month before her 64th birthday, she
opted for early retirement. Barely a year after, A position is considered to be primarily
GSIS reappointed her as Corporate Secretary confidential when there is a primarily close
and classified her appointment as ―confidential intimacy between the appointing authority and
in nature and the tenure of office is at the the appointee (―proximity rule‖).
pleasure of the Board.‖.
The secretary reports directly to the board of
CSC alleged that the respondent‘s directors, without an intervening officer in
reappointment on confidential status was meant between them. The nature of the duties and
to illegally extend her service since under the functions attached to the position points to its
civil service regulations, those who are in highly confidential character.
primarily confidential positions may serve even
beyond the compulsory retirement age of 65.
Ramagos assailed the decision of CA that RULING: The guarantee of security of tenure
MCWD correctly declared her as mentally unfit. under the Constitution is not a guarantee of
perpetual employment. It only means that an
ISSUE: Whether or not MCWD sufficiently employee cannot be dismissed (or transferred)
proved that Ramagos‘ mental incapacity has from the service for causes other than those
rendered her incapacitated to work, justifying provided by law and after due process is
her being dropped from the rolls. accorded the employee.
RULING: MCWD sufficiently established that What it seeks to prevent is capricious exercise
Ramagos suffers from a mental disorder. of the power to dismiss. However, no such
However, a declaration of mental disorder does capriciousness can be raised for so long as the
not automatically translate to a judgment of remedy proposed to cure a perceived evil is
mental incapacity to perform work. germane to the purposes of the law.
effect, it declared that their terms were deemed its lines of control, authority and responsibility,
expired and separated from office. neither has there been a reduction in its
membership, nor a consolidation or abolition of
Petitioners assailed the constitutionality of the offices constituting the same.
Section 8 of RA 8551, arguing that their
removal from office violates their security of Therefore, no bona fide reorganization of the
tenure. Respondents pointed out that RA 8551 NAPOLCOM having been mandated by
reorganized the NAPOLCOM resulting in the Congress in RA 8551, insofar as it declares the
abolition of petitioners‘ offices. terms of office of the petitioners as expired and
resulting in their removal from office. It
ISSUE: Whether or not there is a bona fide removes civil service employees from office
reorganization of NAPOLCOM in RA 8551. without legal cause and must therefore be struck
down for being constitutionally infirm.
RULING: Reorganization takes place when
there is an alteration of the existing structure of GLORIA v. COURT OF APPEALS
government offices or units therein, including 338 SCRA 5 (2000)
the lines of control, authority and responsibility
between them. It involves a reduction of TOPIC: Civil Service Commission
personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition
thereof by reason of economy or redundancy of FACTS: Private respondent Dr. Bienvenido
functions.Naturally, it may result in the loss of Icasiano was reassigned as Superintendent of
one‘s position through removal or abolition of the Marikina Institute of Science and
an office. However, for a reorganization to be Technology upon the recommendation of
valid, it must also pass the test of good faith. DECS Sec. Ricardo Gloria.
Dario v. Mison...As a general rule, a
Icasiano filed a TRO and preliminary
reorganization is carried out in "good
mandatory injuction against Sec. Gloria on the
faith" if it is for the purpose of
ground that it violates his security of tenure.
economy or to make bureaucracy
The DECS Secretary argued that the filing of
more efficient. In that event, no
the case is improper because the same attacks
dismissal (in case of a dismissal) or
an act of the President, in violation of the
separation actually occurs because the
doctrine of presidential immunity from suit.
position itself ceases to exist. And in
that case, security of tenure would not
ISSUE: (1) Whether or not the private
be a Chinese wall…There is an invalid
respondent‘s reassignment violates his security
"abolition" as where there is merely a
of tenure.
change of nomenclature of positions,
or where claims of economy are belied
(2) Whether or not the filing of the case violates
by the existence of ample funds
the presidential immunity from suit.
The basic structure of the NAPOLCOM has
been preserved. There has been no revision in
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 86
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
RULING: Yes. The Court ruled that the which appointment was, however, requested to
reassignment of petitioner to MIST "appears to be retrieved by the Office of the Vice President
be indefinite". The same can be inferred from and at the same time disapproved by the Civil
the Memorandum of Secretary Gloria for Service Commission. Moreover, it was found
President Fidel V. Ramos to the effect that the out that there exists a prima facie case against
reassignment of private respondent will "best fit Albao for Dishonesty and Falsification of
his qualifications and experience" being "an Official Documents. A case was then initiated
expert in vocational and technical education." It against him by CSC-NCR. Respondent filed a
can thus be gleaned that subject reassignment is petition for review before the Court of Appeals
more than temporary as the private respondent alleging that the CSC has no original jurisdiction
has been described as fit for the (reassigned) job, to institute administrative case and so, it cannot
being an expert in the field. Besides, there is delegate the same to CSC-NCR.
nothing in the said Memorandum to show that
the reassignment of private respondent is CA ruled that the CSC-NCR does not have
temporary or would only last until a permanent jurisdiction to investigate and decide the case of
replacement is found as no period is specified respondent. Consequently, the CSC-NCR
or fixed; which fact evinces an intention on the exceeded its authority in initiating the
part of petitioners to reassign private administrative case against him.
respondent with no definite period or duration.
Such feature of the reassignment in question is ISSUE: Whether or not the power conferred
definitely violative of the security of tenure of upon the CSC-NCR to hear and decide
the private respondent. administrative cases does not include the power
to initiate and prosecute said cases.
Petitioners‘ contention is untenable because the
petition is directed against petitioners and not RULING: No. When the Commission, in the
against the President. The questioned acts are course of the performance of its official and
those of petitioners and not of the President. other duties, comes to know of any
Furthermore, presidential decisions may be transgression committed by a government
questioned before the courts where there is employee, it can initiate the necessary
grave abuse of discretion or that the President proceedings. In this case, it initiated the
acted without or in excess of jurisdiction. administrative proceedings against respondent
after the discovery of the latter‘s spurious
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION-NCR v. eligibility.
ALBAO
472 SCRA 548 (2005) This is an integral part of its duty, authority and
power to administer the civil service system and
TOPIC: Civil Service Commission protect its integrity, as provided in Article IX-B,
Sec. 3 of the Constitution, by removing from its
FACTS: Respondent Albao was a contractual list of eligibles those who falsified their
employee in the Office of the Vice President qualifications. This is to be distinguished from
before his appointment to a permanent position, ordinary proceedings intended
to discipline a bona fide member of the system, Issue: Whether or not the employees should be
for acts or omissions that constitute violations recalled on the sole ground that their
of the law or the rules of the service. appointment is a midnight appointment.
TIAPE as a Municipal Administrator of San Force Investigation Team from the COMELEC
Vicente, Palawan, knowing fully well that arrived in the area supposedly Barangay Padian
Orlando Tiape, a relative of Villapando‘s wife Torogan. It came out that the name Padian-
and that lacks the qualification as he is a losing Torogan means a cemetery not a residential
mayoralty candidate in the Municipality of place. So this contradicts the records being
Kitcharao, Agusan del Norte during the May brought by the COMELEC Team from the
1998 elections, hence is ineligible for Census saying that the area has 45 households
appointment to a public office within one year with a total population of 285. COMELEC
(1) from the date of the elections. issued Order finding Padian Torogan as ghost
precinct and shall be excluded from the special election to
Issue: Whether or not Villapando violated the be conducted in Madalum. Petitioners seek to
provisions of Article 244 of the RPC which nullify the Order issued by the COMELEC, for
punishes any public officer who shall knowingly having been issued with grave abuse of
nominate or appoint to any public office any discretion.
person lacking legal disqualifications.
Issue: Whether or not the respondent
Held: Yes. Such appointment is in violation of COMELEC committed grave abuse of
Art. 244 of the RPC. Legal disqualification in discretion in declaring Padian-Torogan as ghost
Article 244 of the Revised Penal Code simply precinct.
means disqualification under the law. Clearly,
Section 6, Article IX of the 1987 Constitution Held: No. The findings of the administrative
and Section 94(b) of the Local Government agency cannot be reversed on appeal
Code of 1991 prohibits losing candidates within or certiorari particularly when no significant facts
one year after such election to be appointed to and circumstances are shown to have been
any office in the government or any overlooked or disregarded which when
government-owned or controlled corporations considered would have substantially affected the
or in any of their subsidiaries. outcome of the case. The COMELEC has
broad powers to ascertain the true results of an
election by means available to it. The assailed
J. 2. COMMISSION ON order having been issued pursuant to
ELECTIONS COMELEC‘s administrative powers and in the
absence of any finding of grave abuse of
Sarangani v. COMELEC discretion in declaring a precinct as non-existent,
said order shall stand. Judicial interference is
G.R. No. 135927. June 26, 2000 unnecessary and uncalled for. No voter is
Topic: On Judicial Review of COMELEC’s disenfranchised because no such voter exist.
Findings The sacred right of suffrage guaranteed by the
Constitution is not tampered when a list of
Facts: An ocular inspection was conducted on fictitious voters is excluded from an electoral
the alleged twelve (12) ghost barangays in the exercise. Suffrage is conferred by the
Municipality of Madalum, Lanao Del Sur. Task Constitution only on citizens who are qualified
to vote and are not otherwise disqualified by law.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 89
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
On the contrary, such exclusion of non-existent are recognized as official candidates of LDP
voters all the more protects the validity and ―Aquino Wing‖
credibility of the electoral process as well as the
right of suffrage because the "electoral will" Issue: Whether or not the COMELEC
would not be rendered nugatory by the committed grave abuse of discretion in
inclusion of some ghost votes. Election laws recognizing the two wings of LDP
should give effect to, rather than frustrate the
will of the people. Held: Yes. From the foregoing, it is plain that
Nevertheless, the determination of the COMELEC misapplied equity in the
whether a certain election precinct actually present case. For all its conceded merits, equity
exists or not and whether the voters registered is available only in the absence of law and not as
in said precinct are real voters is a factual matter. its replacement. Equity is described as justice
On such issue, it is a time-honored precept that without legality, which simply means that it
factual findings of the COMELEC based on its cannot supplant, although it may, as often
own assessments and duly supported by happens, supplement the law.[40] The
evidence, are conclusive upon this Court, more COMELEC should have decided the case on
so, in the absence of a substantiated attack on the basis of the party constitution and election
the validity of the same. laws.
By creating the two wings, the
Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino v. COMELEC effectively diffused the LDP‘s
COMELEC strength and undeniably emasculated its chance
of obtaining the Commission‘s nod as the
G.R. No. 161265. February 24, 2004 dominant minority party.
Topic: COMELEC and Political Party By allowing each wing to nominate
Dispute different candidates, the COMELEC planted
the seeds of confusion among the electorate,
Facts: Preceding the May 2004 Elections, a who are apt to be confounded by two
dispute arose within the LDP Party as to who candidates from a single political
among the [LDP] officers [are] authorized to party. In Recabo, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, this
authenticate before the Commission that the Court declared that the electoral process
person filing the certificate of candidacy as party envisions one candidate from a political party
nominee for a certain position is the official for each position, and disunity and discord
candidate of the party chosen in accordance amongst members of a political party should
with its Constitution. The COMELEC not be allowed to create a mockery
decided the dispute with LEGAL EQUITY thereof. The admonition against mocking the
recognizing candidates for President down to electoral process not only applies to political
the last Sangguniang Bayan Kagawad nominated parties but with greater force to the COMELEC.
and endorsed by LDP Chairman Edgardo J.
Angara as official candidates of LDP ―Angara
Wing‖ and those nominated and endorsed by
LDP Secretary General Agapito ―Butz‖ Aquino
against those liable for vote-buying or vote- Memorandum filed with this Court. Clearly then,
selling. Pursuant to Minute Resolution No. 00- respondent judge committed grave abuse of
2453, the Law Department filed a motion to discretion when he denied the motion to
dismiss Criminal Cases Nos. 7950-00 to 7959- dismiss Criminal Cases Nos. 7950-00 to 7959-
00 and 7980-00 before Branch 20 of the RTC of 00 and 7980-00 despite COMELEC‘s
Imus, Cavite, presided by herein respondent determination that the accused therein are
judge. The latter, however, denied the said exempt from criminal prosecution for vote-
motion and the motion for selling pursuant to the proviso in the fourth
reconsideration. According to respondent judge, paragraph of Section 28 of R.A. No. 6646.
before one can be exempt from prosecution
under the fourth paragraph of Section 28 of K. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
R.A. No. 6646, it is necessary that such person City Government of Quezon City v. Bayan
has already performed the overt act of Telecommunications Inc.
voluntarily giving information or testifying in
any official investigation or proceeding for the GR No. 162015; March 6, 2006
offense to which such information or testimony
Topic: On LGUs’ Taxing Power
was given. It was thus premature to exempt the
respondents in I.S. No. 1-99-1080 from criminal Facts: The government of Quezon City,
prosecution, since they have not yet testified. pursuant to the taxing power vested on the
Local Government Units by Sec. 5, Art. X of
Issue: Whether or not the respondent judge the Constitution in relation to Sec. 232 of the
grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess LGC, enacted the Quezon City Revenue Code
or lack of jurisdiction in peremptorily denying imposing a real property tax on all real
the prosecution‘s motion to dismiss Criminal properties in Quezon City and reiterating under
Cases Nos. 7950-00 to 7959-00 and 7980-00. Sec. 6 thereof, the withdrawal of exemption
from real property tax under section 234 of the
Held: Yes. Respondents in who are the accused LGC. With the QC‘s Revenue Code, new tax
in Criminal Case for vote selling are exempt declarations for Bayantel‘s real properties in
from criminal prosecution for vote-selling by Quezon City were issued. Bayantel, on the other
virtue of the proviso in the last paragraph of hand, sought the exclusion of its real properties
Section 28 of R.A. No. 6646. Respondent judge in the city from the roll of taxable real
lost sight of the fact that at the time the properties on the ground that under RA 7633
complaint for vote-selling was filed with the (enacted months after the effectivity of the
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor, the had LGC), amending Bayantel‘s original franchise,
already executed sworn statements attesting to states that ‗the grantee, its successors or assigns
the corrupt practice of vote-buying in the case shall be liable to pay the same taxes on their real
docketed as Criminal Case No. 7034-99. It estate, buildings and personal property,
cannot then be denied that they had exclusive of this franchise, as other persons
already voluntarily given information in the vote- or corporations are now or hereinafter may be
buying case. In fact, they willingly testified in required by law to pay.
Criminal Case No. 7034-99 per petitioner‘s
Issue: Whether or not the city government of another part of the GAA under the heading
Quezon City, pursuant to its delegated power to ‗UNPROGRAMMED FUNDS‘ provided for
tax under the LGC, can impose real property an allotment of 10 Billion which shall be released
tax on Bayantel which was granted exemption only when the revenue targets can be realized.
by Congress. Petitioners argue that the GAA violated this
constitutional mandate when it made the
Ruling: No. Reiterating the Court‘s ruling in release of IRA contingent on whether revenue
PLDT v. City of Davao, the grant of taxing collections could meet the revenue targets
powers to LGUs under the Constitution and the originally submitted by the President, rather
LGC does not affect the power of Congress to than making the release automatic as mandated
grant exemptions to certain persons pursuant to under Article X Section 6.
a declared national policy.
In the case at bar, Rep. Act No. 7633 was Issue: Whether or not the Legislature can
enacted subsequent to the LGC. Perfectly aware impose conditional requirement in the release of
that the LGC has already withdrawn Bayantel‘s IRA.
former exemption from realty taxes, Congress
opted to pass Rep. Act No. 7633 using, under Held: No. The automatic release of IRA is
Section 11 thereof, exactly the same defining mandatory in nature. To rule that the term
phrase ‖exclusive of this franchise‖ which was ‗automatic release‘ contemplates such
the basis for Bayantel‘s exemption from realty conditional release would be to strip the term
taxes prior to the LGC. In plain language, automatic of all meaning, and the only
Section 11 of Rep. Act No. 7633 states that ―the exception to the rule is when the national
grantee, its successors or assigns shall be liable internal revenue collections for the current fiscal
to pay the same taxes on their real estate, year is less than 40 percent of the collections of
buildings and personal property, exclusive of the preceding third fiscal year, in which case
this franchise, as other persons or corporations what should be automatically released shall be a
are now or hereafter may be required by law to proportionate amount of the collections for the
pay.‖ current fiscal year. The adjustment may even be
made on a quarterly basis depending on the
Alternative Center for Organizational actual collections of national internal revenue
Reforms and Development Inc. v. Zamora taxes for the quarter of the current fiscal year.
petitioner is authorized to charge its subscribers an implied restriction that the ordinances shall
the maximum rates specified therein, ―provided, be consistent with the general law.
however, that any increase of rates shall be
subject to the approval of the Sangguniang
Panlungsod.‖ Sometime in November 1993, Rodolfo Navarro et. al. v. Executive
petitioner increased its subscriber rates from Secretary Ermita
P88.00 to P180.00 per month. As a result, GR No. 180050; February 10, 2010
respondent Mayor wrote petitioner a letter Topic: On Creation of Provinces
threatening to cancel its permit unless it secures Facts: Congress passed Republic Act (R.A.) No.
the approval of respondent Sangguniang 9355, otherwise known as An Act Creating the
Panlungsod, pursuant to Resolution No. 210. Province of Dinagat Islands. Petitioners question
alleged that respondent Sangguniang Panlungsod the constitutionality of the law pointing that
has no authority to regulate the subscriber rates when the law was passed, Dinagat had a land
charged by CATV operators because under area of 802.12 square kilometers only and a
Executive Order No. 205, the National population of only 106,951, failing to comply
Telecommunications Commission (NTC) has with Section 10, Article X of the Constitution
the sole authority to regulate the CATV and of Section 461 of the LGC. Respondents
operation in the Philippines. on the other hand argued that they conducted
special census in 2003 which yielded a
Issue: Whether or not the Sangguniang population count of 371,576 inhabitants in the
Panlalawigan has the power to regulate proposed province. The NSO, however, did not
subscriber charges by CATV Operators. certify the result of the special census. They
further argued that the land requirement need
Held: No. Since E.O. No. 205, a general law, not be contiguous if it comprises two (2) or
mandates that the regulation of CATV more islands or is separated by a chartered city
operations shall be exercised by the NTC, an or cities that do not contribute to the income of
LGU cannot enact an ordinance or approve a the province as stated in the LGC-IRR.
resolution in
violation of the said law. It is a fundamental Issue: Whether or not RA 9355 complied with
principle that municipal ordinances are inferior the Constitution and Statutory Requirements
in status and subordinate to the laws of the state. under Section 461 of the LGC.
An ordinance in conflict with a state law of
general character and statewide application is Held: No. RA 9355 was rendered
universally held to be invalid. The principle is Unconstitutional. It is a requirement in the LGC
frequently expressed in the declaration that that the population requirement be certified by
municipal authorities, under a general grant of the NSO, in the case at bar, even though the
power, cannot adopt ordinances which infringe special census was conducted with the
the spirit of a state law or repugnant to the assistance of NSO representative, still the result
general policy of the state. In every power to was not certified by the said government agency
pass ordinances given to a municipality, there is since NSO conducts census of population every
10 years and special census every 5 years, in this
case, the special census was conducted 2003. Issue: Whether or not the LGC-IRR is
Likewise, the pertinent provision in the IRR did unconstitutional on the ground that it provided
not fill in any detail in accordance with a known an exemption not expressly stated in the LGC
standard provided for by the law. Instead, the with respect to the creation of provinces.
IRR added an exemption to the standard or
criteria prescribed by the Local Government Held: No. The LGC-IRR pertaining to
Code in the creation of a province as regards exemptions in the creation of provinces is
the land area requirement, which exemption is constutional. The Philippines, as an
not found in the Code. As such, the provision archipelagic country, accounts for the
in the IRR that the land area requirement shall exemption from the land area requirement of
not apply where the proposed province is local government units composed of one or
composed of one or more islands is not in more islands, as expressly stated under Sections
conformity with the standard or criteria 442 and 450 of the LGC, with respect to the
prescribed by the Local Government Code; creation of municipalities and cities, but
hence, it is null and void. inadvertently omitted from Section 461 with
respect to the creation of provinces. Hence, the
void or missing detail was filled in by the
Rodolfo Navarro et. al. v. Executive Oversight Committee in the LGC-IRR. When
Secretary Ermita the
GR No. 180050; April 12. 2011 exemption was expressly provided in Article
Topic: On Creation of Provinces 9(2) of the LGC-IRR, the inclusion was
intended to correct the congressional oversight
Facts: This is a motion for reconsideration of in Section 461 of the LGC – and to reflect the
the February 10, 2010 Decision. The Decision true legislative intent. It would, then, be in order
declared R.A. No. 9355 unconstitutional for for the Court to uphold the validity of Article
failure to comply with the requirements on 9(2) of the LGC-IRR. Consistent with the
population and land area in the creation of a declared policy to provide local government
province under the LGC. Consequently, it units genuine and meaningful local autonomy,
declared the proclamation of Dinagat and the contiguity and minimum land area requirements
election of its officials as null and void. The for prospective local government units should
Decision likewise declared as null and void the be liberally construed in order to achieve the
provision on Article 9(2) of the Rules and desired results. The strict interpretation adopted
Regulations Implementing the LGC (LGC-IRR), by the February 10, 2010 Decision could prove
stating that, ―[t]he land area requirement shall to be counter-productive, if not outright absurd,
not apply where the proposed province is awkward, and impractical.
composed of one (1) or more islands‖ for being
beyond the ambit of Article 461 of the LGC, _____________________________________
inasmuch as such exemption is not expressly
provided in the law.
services of casual/job order employees and Governor. In the same manner, the authority to
reappointment of the respective recommendees appoint casual and job order employees of the
entered into by the Vice-Governor and only Sangguniang Panlalawigan belongs to the Vice-
retained 4 casual job orders to be assigned to Governor. The authority of the Vice-Governor
the Office of the Vice-Governor and 1 to appoint the officials and employees of the
casual/job order employee for each member of Sangguniang Panlalawigan is anchored on the fact
the Sanggunian Panlalawigan. that the salaries of these employees are derived
from the appropriation specifically for the said
Issues: 1. Who between the Governor or Vice- local legislative body. Indeed, the budget source
Governor is authorized to approve purchase of their salaries is what sets the employees and
orders issued in connection with the officials of the Sangguniang
procurement of supplies, materials, equipment, Panlalawigan apart from the other employees and
including fuel, repairs and maintenance of the officials of the province. Accordingly, the
Sanggunian Panalalawigan? appointing power of the Vice-Governor is
limited to those employees of the Sangguniang
2. Does the Governor have the authority to Panlalawigan, as well as those of the Office of
terminate or cancel the appointments of casual the Vice-Governor, whose salaries are paid out of the
job/ order employees of the Sangguniang funds appropriated for the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.
Panlalawigan Members and the Office of the
Vice-Governor? Latasa v. COMELEC
Municipality of Digos and is now running for Sorsogon had already been merged with the
the first time for the position as the City Mayor. Municipality of Bacon to form a new political
unit, the City of Sorsogon pursuant to RA 8806.
Issue: Whether or not petitioner Latasa is Thus he argued that his third term was actually
eligible to run as candidate for the position of just his first term in the new political unit and
mayor of the newly created City of Digos that he was accordingly entitled to run for two
immediately after he served for three more terms.
consecutive terms as mayor of the Municipality Laceda likewise argued that assuming he had
of Digos. already served three consecutive terms, Rep.
Act No. 9164 which imposes the three-term
Held: No. He is not eligible to run for the limit, cannot be made to apply to him as it
position of City Mayor. While it is true that the would violate his vested right to office. He
new city acquired a new corporate existence alleged that when he was elected in 1994 the
separate and distinct from that of the prohibition did not exist. Had he known that
municipality. This does not mean, however, that there will be a law preventing him to run for the
for the purpose of applying the subject fourth time, he would not have run for office in
Constitutional provision, the office of the 1994 as he was looking forward to the election
municipal mayor would now be construed as a in 2007.
different local government post as that of the Issue: Whether or not Laceda is eligible to run
office of the city mayor. As stated earlier, the as candidate for Punong Barangay after serving
territorial jurisdiction of the City of Digos is the for three consecutive terms as Punong Barangay
same as that of the municipality. Consequently, of Panlayaan.
the inhabitants of the municipality are the same
as those in the city. These inhabitants are the Held: No. He cannot run for again for the
same group of voters who elected petitioner Office of the Punong Barangay after serving
Latasa to be their municipal mayor for three three consecutive terms. while it is true that
consecutive terms. These are also the same under Rep. Act No. 8806 the municipalities of
inhabitants over whom he held power and Sorsogon and Bacon were merged and
authority as their chief executive for nine years. converted into a city thereby abolishing the
former and creating Sorsogon City as a new
Laceda Sr. v. Limena and COMELEC political unit, it cannot be said that for the
purpose of applying the prohibition in Section 2
GR No. 182867; November 25, 2008 of Rep. Act No. 9164, the office of Punong
Topic: Three Term Limit Rule Barangay of Barangay Panlayaan, Municipality of
Sorsogon, would now be construed as a different
Facts: Laceda served as Punong Barangay of local government post as that of the office of
Panlayaan, West District, Sorsogon City for Punong Barangay of Barangay Panlayaan,
three consecutive terms. Latasa argued that that Sorsogon City. The territorial jurisdiction of
when he was elected for his first two terms, Barangay Panlayaan, Sorsogon City, is the same
Sorsogon was still a municipality and that when as before the conversion. Consequently, the
he served his third term, the Municipality of inhabitants of the barangay are the same. They
are the same group of voters who elected officials from being elected and serving for
Laceda to be their Punong Barangay for three more than three consecutive terms for the same
consecutive terms and over whom Laceda held office, thereby, Morales is not eligible to run
power and authority as their Punong Barangay. again. Here, respondent Morales was elected for
Moreover, Rep. Act No. 8806 did not interrupt the term July 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001. There
Laceda's term. was actually no interruption or break in the
continuity of Morales‘ service with respect to
Atty. Rivera III & Atty. De Guzman v. the 1998-2001 term. He assumed the position.
COMELEC & Morales He served as mayor until June 30, 2001. He was
mayor for the entire period notwithstanding the
GR No. 167591; May 9, 2007 Decision of the RTC in the electoral protest
Topic: On Three Term Limit Rule case filed by petitioner Dee ousting him
(respondent) as mayor.
Facts: Petitioners Atty. Rivera III and Atty. De
Guzman filed a petition to cancel respondent Dizon v. COMELEC & MORALES
Morales‘ COC for the 2004 elections on the
ground that he was elected and served three GR No. 182088; January 30, 2009
previous consecutive terms as Mayor of Topic: On Three Term Limit Rule
Mabalacat. Respondent Morales argued that he
served as Mayor of Mabalacat, Pampanga for Facts: Petitioner alleges that respondedt was
the term 1995-1998 (first term) and 2001-2004 proclaimed as the Municipal Mayor of
(third term) but during his second term 1998- Mabalacat Pampanga during the 1995, 1998,
2001, he only served as a ‗caretaker of the office‘ 2001 and 2004 elections and had fully served
or as a ‗de facto officer‘ because he was not the same. Respondent filed his COC on March
validly elected for the second term since his 28, 2007 again for the same position. Petitioner
proclamation was declared void by the RTC and argues that respondent is no longer eligible and
the Decision became final and executor on qualified to run for the same position for the
August 6, 2001 and that he was preventively May 14, 2007 elections as it is violative of the
suspended by the Ombudsman in an anti-graft three term limit rule. Respondent, on the other
case from January 16, 1999 to July 15, 1999. hand, asserts that he is still eligible and qualified
to run because he was not elected for the said
Issue: Whether or not Morales‘ assumption of position in the 1998 elections thereby his term
office as Mayor of Mabalacat from 1998-2001 should be reckoned from 2001 and that his
may be considered as one full term service in election in 2004 is only his second term.
the context of the three-term limit rule.
Issue: Whether or not Morales‘ fourth term
Held: Yes, such assumption of office for was interrupted when he relinquished the office
service of the full term should be counted as for 1 month and 14 days prior to the May 14,
full term in contemplation of the three term 2007 elections.
limit rule prescribed by the constitutional and
statutory provisions barring local elective
FACTS: The respondent Wilfredo F. Asilo was No. Preventive suspension does not involve a
elected as councilor of Lucena City for three voluntary act on the part of the suspended
consecutive terms. (1998, 2001 and 2004) In official, except in the indirect sense that he may
September 2005, the Sandiganbayan have voluntarily committed the act that became
preventively suspended him for 90 days because the basis of the charge against him.
of a criminal case against him.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 101
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
Barbara Ruby filed her own CoC for Mayor of clear, too, that a candidate who does not file a
Lucena City in substitution of Ramon, attaching valid CoC may not be validly substituted,
thereto the Certificate of Nomination and because a person without a valid CoC is not
Acceptance issued by Lakas-Kampi-CMD, the considered a candidate in much the same way as
party that had nominated Ramon. any person who has not filed a CoC is not at all
a candidate.
During the elections, the name of Ramon
remained printed on the ballots but the votes Yes. Elected Vice-Mayor must succeed
cast in his favor were counted in favor of and assume the position of Mayor
Barbara Ruby, resulting in her victory. Castillo due to a permanent vacancy in the office. The
was seeking for the suspension of Barbara law expressly declares that a candidate
Ruby‘s proclamation. He alleged that Barbara disqualified by final judgment before an election
Ruby could not substitute Ramon because his cannot be voted for, and votes cast for him
CoC had been cancelled and denied due course; shall not be counted. This is a mandatory
and she could not be considered a candidate provision of law.
because the COMELEC En Banc had approved
ABUNDO v. COMELEC
her substitution three days after the elections;
hence, the votes cast for Ramon should be TOPIC: Local Government
considered stray.
FACTS: Abelardo Abundo Sr. vied for the
Barbara Ruby countered that the COMELEC position of Mayor of Viga, Catanduanes for 4
En Banc did not deny due course to or cancel consecutive elections (2001, 2004, 2007 and
Ramon‘s CoC because there was no finding that 2010). In both 2001 and 2007, he was
he had committed misrepresentation. Roderick proclaimed as the winner and served his term.
Alcala sought to intervene, positing that he However, Jose Torres was proclaimed winner in
should assume the post of Mayor because the 2004 elections. Abundo unseated Torres
Barbara Ruby‘s substitution had been invalid after a successful election protest. He served the
and Castillo had clearly lost the elections. remaining 1 year and 1 month of the term.
ISSUE: (1) Whether or not Barbara Ruby can In the 2010 elections, Abundo and Torres again
validly substitute his husband, Ramon, as opposed each other. Torres filed a petition to
candidate for Mayorship of Lucena City. disqualify Abundo based on the three-term limit
rule. Meanwhile, Ernesto Vega filed a quo
(2) Whether or not Roderick Alcala, the duly- warranto proceeding against Abundo before the
elected Vice-Mayor of Lucena City, should be RTC which ruled that the latter was ineligible to
the one to assume the post of Mayor. serve as Mayor. On appeal, COMELEC Second
Division and En Banc affirmed the RTC ruling.
RULING: No. Existence of a valid CoC is a
condition sine qua non for a valid substitution. ISSUE: Whether or not Abundo is deemed to
Considering that a cancelled CoC does not give have served three consecutive terms.
rise to a valid candidacy, there can be no valid
substitution of the candidate under Section 77 RULING: No. The two-year period during
of the Omnibus Election Code. It should be which Torres, was serving as mayor should be
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 103
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
considered as an interruption, which effectively alleged that the recall election was not a regular
removed Abundo‘s case from the ambit of the election, but a separate special election
three-term limit rule. specifically to remove incompetent local
officials. Petitioner opposed private
The consecutiveness of what otherwise would respondent‘s claim, stating that serving the
have been Abundo‘s three successive, unexpired term of office is considered as 1
continuous mayorship was effectively broken term.
during the 2004-2007 term when he was initially
deprived of title to, and was veritably disallowed COMELEC En banc ruled in favor of private
to serve and occupy, an office to which he, after respondent and reversed the First Division‘s
due proceedings, was eventually declared to ruling.
have been the rightful choice of the electorate. ISSUE: Whether or not private respondent had
served 3 consecutive terms.
ADORMEO v. COMELEC
RULING: COMELEC‘s ruling that private
G.R. No. 147927; February 4, 2002
respondent was not elected for 3 consecutive
TOPIC: Local Government terms should be upheld. For nearly 2 years he
was a private citizen. The continuity of his
FACTS: Petitioner and private respondent were mayorship was disrupted by his defeat in the
the only candidates who filed their CoCs for 1998 elections. To bolster his case, respondent
mayor of Lucena City in the May 2001 elections. adverts to the comment of Fr. Joaquin Bernas,
Private respondent Talaga Jr. was then the stating that in interpreting said provision that ―if
incumbent mayor, elected in 1992, 1995, 1998. one is elected representative to serve the
He lost to Tagarao in 1998. However, Talaga Jr. unexpired term of another, that unexpired, no
won in a recall election and served the matter how short, will be considered one term
unexpired term of Tagarao until June 30, 2001. for the purpose of computing the number of
successive terms allowed.‖
Petitioner filed a petition, seeking for Talaga‘s
disqualification, on the ground that the he was As pointed out by the COMELEC En banc, Fr.
elected and had served as city mayor for 3 Bernas‘ comment is pertinent only to members
consecutive. Private respondent claimed that he of the House of Representatives. Unlike local
served only for 2 consecutive terms and not 3, government officials, there is no recall election
pointing his defeat in the election by Tagarao. provided for members of Congress
COMELEC First Division found Talaga Jr. SOCRATES VS COMELEC
disqualified to run for the Mayorship on the
ground that he had already served 3 consecutive GR No. 154512; November 12, 2002
terms, and his Certificate of Candidacy was
ordered withdrawn and/or cancelled. TOPIC: Local Government
Talaga Jr. filed a motion for reconsideration FACTS: The members of the incumbent
reiterating that ―3 consecutive terms‖ means barangay officials of the Puerto Princesa passed
continuous service for 9 years. He further Resolution No. 01-02 which declared its loss of
confidence in Victorino Dennis M. Socrates and
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 104
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
called for his recall. COMELEC gave due MMDA Chairman Oreta requesting the return
course to the Recall Resolution against Mayor of his license and expressed his preference for
Socrates of the City of Puerto Princesa, and case to be filed in Court. Receiving no
scheduled the recall election on September 7, immediate reply, Garin assailed the validity of
2002. Section 5(f) of Republic Act No. 7924 on the
ground that it violates the constitutional
Hagedorn filed his COC for mayor in the recall prohibition against undue delegation of
election. Several petitions were consolidated, legislative authority, allowing MMDA to fix and
seeking the disqualification of Hagedorn to run impose unspecified and unlimited fines and
and the cancellation of his COC on the ground penalties.
that the latter is disqualified from running for a
4th consecutive term, having been elected and ISSUE: Whether or not Section 5(f) of
having served as mayor of the city for 3 Republic Act No. 7924 which authorizes
consecutive full terms in 1992, 1995 and 1998 MMDA to confiscate and suspend or revoke
immediately prior to the instant recall election driver‘s license in the enforcement of traffic
for the same post. constitutional.
COMELEC‘s First Division dismissed in a RULING: The MMDA is not vested with
resolution the petitioner for lack of merit and police power. It is not a local government unit
declared Hagedorn qualified to run in the recall or a public corporation endowed with legislative
election. power and it has no power to enact ordinances
for the welfare of the community.
ISSUE: Whether or not Hagedorn who has
been elected and served for 3 consecutive full Police power, as an inherent attribute of
terms is qualified to run for mayor in the recall sovereignty, is the power vested by the
election. Constitution in the legislature to make, ordain,
and establish all manner of wholesome and
HELD: The candidacy of Hagedorn in the reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances, either
recall election is not an immediate re-election with penalties or without, not repugnant to the
after his third consecutive term which ended on Constitution, as they shall judge to be for the
June 30, 2001. He ceased to be mayor after his good and welfare of the commonwealth, and
term and became a private citizen until the recall for the subjects of the same.
election of September 24, 2002 when he won by
3,018 votes over his closest opponent, Socrates. MMDA v. VIRON TRANSPORTATION
CO., INC.
MMDA v. GARIN G.R. No. 170656; August 15, 2007
G.R. No. 130230; April 15, 2005 TOPIC: Local Government
issued a Resolution No. 03-07 series of 2003 implement a project such as the Project in
expressing full support of the Project. MMDA question.
then recommended a plan to decongest traffic By designating the MMDA as the implementing
by eliminating the bus terminals located along agency of the Project, the President clearly
major Metro Manila thoroughfares and overstepped the limits of the authority
providing more and convenient access to the conferred by law, rendering E.O. No. 179 ultra
mass transport system to the commuting public vires.
through the provision of mass transport
terminal facilities. Respondents, provincial bus Disomangcop v. Datumanong
operators who had bus terminals that were
threatened to be removed, alleged that the EO 444 SCRA 203;
No. 179 should be declared unconstitutional
Topic: Local Government Units- Autonomous
and illegal for transgressing the possessory
Regions
rights of owners and operators of public land
transportation units over their respective Facts: The first ARMM Organic Act, R.A. 6074,
terminals. as implemented by E.O. 426, devolved the
ISSUE: Whether or not MMDA can validly functions of the DPWH in the ARMM which
exercise police power by ordering the includes Lanao del Sur to the Regional
elimination of the respondents‘ terminals. Government. R.A. 8999 was passed to establish
an engineering district in the first district of the
RULING: MMDA is devoid of authority to
Province of Lanao Del Sur. DPWH D.O. 119
implement the Project as envisioned by the EO
was issued creating the Marawi Sub-District
No. 179. Police power rests primarily with the
Engineering Office which has jurisdiction over
legislature, such power may be delegated by
infrastructure projects within Marawi City and
virtue of a valid delegation, the power may be
Lanao del Sur.
exercised by the President and administrative
Petitioners assailed the constitutionality and
boards as well as by the lawmaking bodies of
validity R.A. 8999 and D.O. 119.
municipal corporations or local governments
under an express delegation by the Local Issue: Whether or not R.A. 8999 and D.O. 119
Government Code of 1991. violate the provisions of E.O. 426
It is the DOTC, and not the MMDA, which is Ruling: Yes. The challenged law creates an
authorized to establish and implement a project office with functions and powers which have
such as the one subject of the cases at bar. Thus, been previously devolved to the DPWH-
the President, although authorized to establish ARMM. The department order runs counter to
or cause the implementation of the Project, the provision of E.O. 426 identifying only four
must exercise the authority through the district engineering offices in each of the four
instrumentality of the DOTC which, by law, is provinces. The First Engineering District of the
the primary implementing and administrative DPWH-ARMM in Lanao Del Sur has
entity in the promotion, development and jurisdiction over projects within Marawi City.
regulation of networks of transportation, and
the one so authorized to establish and
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS | FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW | 1D 2014-2015 106
|JAVIER, Lloyd Danielle V.| MARTINEZ, Hennessy O. | SARANGAY, Jossa M.|ZOLINA, Jarena Ria Z.
POLITICAL LAW I JUSTICE AMY LAZARO-JAVIER
Issue: Whether or not the contention of the Issue: Whether or not the second impeachment
petitioner is meritorious complaint is barred under Section 3(5) of
Article XI of the Constitution
Ruling: No. Petitioner‘s claim is not only
without any factual and legal basis; it is also Ruling: Yes. The initiation takes place by the
purely speculative. Public officers enjoy the act of the filing of the impeachment complaint
presumption of regularity in the performance of and referral to the House Committee on Justice.
their duties. R.A. 9335 operates on the basis Once an impeachment complaint has been
thereof and reinforces it by providing a system initiated in the foregoing manner, no
of rewards and sanctions with the purpose of impeachment may be filed against the same
encouraging the officials and employees of BIR official within one year pursuant to Article XI,
and BOC to exceed their revenue targets and Section 3(5) of the Constitution.
optimize their revenue-generating capability and
collection.
415 SCRA 44; February 15, 2011 452 SCRA 714; March 4, 2005
Facts: On 22 July 2010, Baraquel, et al. filed an Facts: Office of the Deputy Ombudsman
impeachment complaint against Ombudsman (OMB) filed a formal complaint against then
Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez based on betrayal Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas,
of public trust and culpable violation of the respondent Arturo Mojica.
Constitution. A Second Complaint was filed by
Reyes against the same respondent also based Issue: Whether or not a Deputy Ombudsman
on the same grounds. The two complaints were is an impeachable officer
referred by the House Plenary to the Committee Ruling: No. The impeachable officers
on Justice at the same time and found that the enumerated in Section 2, Article XI of the
two complaints were sufficient in form and Constitution is exclusive. Only the Ombudsman,
substance. not his deputies, is impeachable.
Petitioner maintains the ―one offense, one
complaint‖ rule stating that a complaint or
information must charge only one offense.
People v. Sandiganbayan
Issue: Whether or not an impeachment
451 SCRA 413; February 16, 2005
complaint need to allege only one impeachable
offense. Topic: Sandiganbayan
Ruling: No. An impeachment complaint need Facts: The Office of the Ombudsman filed two
not allege only one impeachable offense. The separate informations for violation of Section
Constitution allows the indictment for multiple 3(e) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt
impeachment offenses, with each charge Practices Act) with the Sandiganbayan against
representing an article of impeachment, Efren Alas, in his capacity as President and
assembled in one set known as the ―Articles of Chief Operating Officer of the Philippine Postal
Impeachment.‖ Multiple complaints may be Savings Bank (PPSB). Alas argued that
considered so long as they would all be Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction which the
simultaneously referred/endorsed to the proper latter confirmed because PPSB was a private
committee of the HR, and would lead to only corporation because it was not created by a
one impeachment proceeding. special law.
Petitioner contended that PPSB is a GOCC and
that there must be no distinction as to the
manner of its creation. Hence, Alas came under
the jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan.