CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty.
Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT
STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT OF THE REPUBLIC
The state cannot be sued without its consent (Art 16 sec 3 1987
Constitution)
Even w ithout this provis ion, the State generally is exempt from any and
all suits if the same is commenced against the State without its
consent.
Rationale:
Logical proposition
There can be no right as against the authority which makes the laws
on which the right emanates from. There can be no legal right as
against the authority whic h creates or guarantees the right.
Practical side
On the practical side, there is logic to this prohibition. Imagine a
situation where the State can be sued w ithout its consent:
The State may not be able to function properly; preoccupied in
defending suits left and right and the time of the State would be
diverted to defending suits
Take Note:
State immunity from suit is not only made available to the Philippine
Republic.
(1) It equally applies to foreign states. Hence, foreigh states cannot be
sued before our local courts w ithout their prior consent.
US v. Ruiz
US was sued in connection with the purported repairs of wharf s in Subic. The SC
ruled that the US cannot be sued in our local jurisdiction without its prior consent.
(2) Immunity from suit likew ise extends to foreign diplomatic agents
They may not be sued in our local jurisdic tion, such that if a US
ambassador commits a crime - cannot be tried; extradite (persona non
grata)
Minocher v. CA GR No. 142396 Feb 11, 2003
Immunity was made to extend to a f oreign agent who operated within Phili ppine
jurisdiction with the consent of the Republic, after it was f ound out that he was
perf orming his f unctions within the conf ines of the authority giv en to him.
A certain Arthur, a member of the US Drug Enf orcement Agency was sent by the
US Gov ernment to the Philippi nes to the P hilippi nes to monitor il legal drug
activ ities. In the course of te perf ormance of his f unction, a certain Iranian was
arrested and prosecuted f or illegal possesion of drugs. In the criminal
prosecution, Arthur testif ied and the Irania n countere d by f iling a civ il case
against Arthur.
Arthur, in his def ense, inv oked the immunity from suit, which was sustained by
the Supreme Court - notin g that f oreign agents could be immun e f rom suit if (1)
they operated in the P hilippin e jurisidction with the consent of their gov ernment,
and (2) did their job within the conf ines of the authority granted to them.
(3) Immunity from suit likew ise extends to foreign international
organizations
Examples: IRRE ( International Rights Research Institute) WHO, ILO
Par in pari nor habet in perium - There is sovereignty among equals.
Each state is regarded as equal to other states.
Sec 3 Article 16
The State cannot be sued without its consent.
Therefore, it can be sued if it gives it consent to being sued.
Two Kinds Of Consent
Express consent
A law enacted by congress allow ing the State to be sued. It is only
Congress that can expressly giv e consent to be sued. The president
cannot nor the SolGen.
a. General Law
DA v. NLRC
RA 1383 - allowing the State to be sued on money claims arising f rom contracts,
whether express or implied. Act 327 as amended by PD 1145
Money claims against the State must be f iled f irst with the off ice of the
Commission on Audit.
b. Special Law
Merritt case
Act 2457 was enacted particularly authorizing Mr. Merritt to sue the Republic.
* Only the Congress can expressly giv e consent to be sued
1|P a g e
Republic v. Sandoval
It was alleged that Corazon Aquino gav e her consent for the State to be sued.
Howev er the SC ruled that it cannot be done because only Congress can giv e
consent f or the State to be sued.
Republic v. Feliciano
Proclamation No. 90 was issued by President Magsay say. SC ruled that not ev en
the President can waiv e the state immunity f rom suit.
Im plied consent
1. When the State commences litigation by itself . When yhe
Republic files a case against a priv ate person or corporation, the
the defendant is authorized to file a countersuit against the
Republic. By filing a case, the Republic has alr eady div ested itself
of its immunity from suit.
But if the State commences litigation only to interpose immunity from
suit, such litigation cannot be construed as an implied consent.
General Rule: When the State commences litigation, it is thereby
giving its implied consent to be sued.
Exception: Where such litigation is brought precisely for the State to
invoke its immunity from suit.
Lim v. Brownel 175 SCRA 345
After World War II, the alien property custodian of the US Govt f ound out that
there were f our parcels of land registered in the name of a Japanese national.
The US conf iscated the parcels of land and had them registered un der its name.
The custodian entrusted the land to the American gov t. Af ter transf er of
sov ereignty from US gov t to Commonwealth gov t, the title of the property was
transf erred to the Philippine alien property adminsitrator.
A case was f ield by the heirs of Enrique z, claiming to be the real owners of the
property . They f iled a case against Brownel, the US Attorney General f or
recov ery of the parcels of land. The Phili ppine g ov t interf ered in the action,
ev enthough it was not a def endant in the action, by f iling a complaint of
interv ention.
But the Philippine g ov ernment did that only to mov e f or the dismissal of the case
by inv oking the doctrine of immunity f rom suit.
2. When the State enters into a contract with priv ate persons or
corporations in the exercise of its proprietary functions - it
descended to the level of a private citizen or individual.
US v. Quinto: Consolidated in the case of US v. Rodrigo182 SCRA 644
There was a bidding f or thw operation of barbershop inside clark airbase. A
certain Dizon submitted his bid and the contract was awarded to him only to be
cancelled later.
Dizon f iled a case f or breach of contract against the US gov ernment. The US
gov t inv oked immunity f rom suit.
In the case of US v. Rodrigo, Rodrigo was employ ed as a cook in a restaurant
inside Camp John Hay but was dismissed f rom serv ice because it was f ound out
that he mixes his urine with the soup he is serv ing. He filed a case against the
US and the US inv oked the def ense of immunity f rom suit.
But the SC ruled that in the two cases, the US govt cannot successly inv oke
state immunity from suit because the contract inv olv ed in the cases were entered
into by the US Gov t in the exercise of its proprietary f unctions.
General Rule: If the State enters into a contact in the exercis e of its
proprietary functions - implied consent
Exception. If the contract is entered into in the exercis e of its
governmental functions - immune from suit
Republic of Indonesia v. Bengzon GR No. 154705 June 26, 2003
The Indonesian embassy in the Philippines contracted the serv ices of a priv ate
contractor f or the maintenance of its aircon facilities, but the contract was
cancelled. The priv ate contractor f iled a case against the Indonesian gov ernment
and in its def ense, pleaded immunity f rom suit.
The SC sustained, noting that when the Republic of Indonesia entered into a
contract f or the repair or maintenance of its aircon facilities, such kind of contract
was entered into in the perf ormance of its gov ernmental f unctions.
Exception to the exception:
DA v. NLRC
When DA entered into a contract with the Security Serv ices, such was done in
pursuit of DA's gov ernmental f unctions. But nonetheless, the case that was f iled
was upheld as v alid because it partook of the nature of a money claim gov erned
by RA 1383, allowing the gov ernment to be sued on money claims pertaining to
contracts, express or implied.
Instances when state immunity cannot be availed of:
1. When the state enters into a contract in the exercise of its
proprietary functions
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
2. When the state takes away private property supposedly for public
use without payment of just compensation
Ami Gable v. Cuenca
Where the state takes away priv ate property f or construction of public road, such
is done in pursuit of gov ernmental f unction, but that will not authorize the state to
def eat the claims of the order of the property in wanting to recov er the land or in
wanting to claim pay ment of just compensation because according to SC, state
immunity f rom suit may not be successf ully inv oked, if only to perpetrate an
injustice committed against a priv ate indiv idual.
SC ruled that any such claim need not b e f iled f irst in the Commission on Audit.
The d irect f iling of action may be authorize d bef ore any regular courts and
recov ery of possession or ownership of the property may be allowed.
Santiago v. Republic 87 SCRA 294
Santiago donated a parcel of land to the Bureau of Plant Industry on the
condition that the State would construct a building thereof complete worth lighting
f acilities. Howev er, such condition was not f ulf illed by the donee.
Santiago f iled a case f or recov ery and rev ocation of donation and the Republic
countered that it cannot be sued because it has not giv en its consent.
But the SC disagreed, reiterating the doctrine lai d do wn in Ami Gabl e v . Cuenca
that the state cannot inv oke immunity f rom suit if only to perpetrate an injustice
committed against a priv ate indiv idual.
STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
If the defendant is the Republic of the Philippines, w e can deduce
whether or not the action w ill prosper. Because if the state has not
given its consent, it can invoke state immunity from suit and can move
for the outright dismissal of the case. -- but this happens only if the
defendant is the Republic itself
Problem often arises if in the case the Republic is not made the
defendant but a government agency without impleading the Republic
of the Philippines.
Make a distinction between incorporated and unincorporated
government agencies:
Incorporated government agency
Govt agencies which have charters of their own governing their
creation, normally in the form if a special law creating such partic ular
agency. (UP, SSS, Central Bank, Phil National Railways)
Rules:
1. Examine the charters of the government agency concerned. If in
their charters, there are provisions providing to the end that their
agency has the capacity to sue and be sued -- it can be sued
even if it is performing governmental functions. The nature of the
function being performed is immaterial.
2. Where the charter is silent in the capacity of such agency to sue
and be sued -- factor in the primary functions being performed
by such incorporated govt agency.
If governmental functions - state immunity applies
If proprietary functions - state immunity cannot apply
Unincorporated government agency
Govt agencies which have no charters of their own. (Dept of Justice,
Dept of Works and Highw ays)
Rules:
1. Determine the primary functions that it is performing.
If governmental functions - immune from suit
If proprietary functions - can be sued
Bureau of printing v. Bureau of printing employees association
The Employ ees Ass filed a labor practice case bef ore the industrial relations
against the Bureau of Printing. The def endant countered that the case be
dismissed because it is a case against the Republic and state immunity applies.
The Emp loy ees Ass countered that the Bureau of Printing perf ormed propri et ary
f unctions because it catered to the needs of priv ate persons by doing printing
jobs.
The SC decreed that considering the f act that the Bureau of Printing was
basically perf orming a gov ernmental f unction, the f act that it incidentally
perf ormed a proprietary f unction, would not div est itself of its being an
unicorporated gov ernment agency.
The Bure au if Printing can still inv oke state immunity f rom suit, notwithstanding
the f act that it was incidentally perf orming a proprietary f unction by catering to the
needs of priv ate customers. Because what is important is that the Bureau of
Printing was princip ally perf orming a gov ernmental f unctions -- printing jobs f or
the Republic.
2|P a g e
Mobile Philis Exlporation Inc v. Customs Service
There were 4 rotary drills that were shipped f rom the US and consigned to Mobile
Philis Exlporation Inc and the items were handled by Customs Serv ice. This
customs serv ice was a unit of the Bureau of Customs. Only three rotary drills
were deliv ered to Mobi le P hils Explor ation Inc. Hence, Mobile Phils f iled a case
against Customs Serv ice.
Customs serv ice interposed as its def ense that it cannot be sued because it is a
gov t entity . But Mobile Phils countered that Customs serv ice cannot inv oke state
immunity f rom suit because was engaging in a proprietary f unction by handling
serv ices.
SC ruled that in as much as the Customs Serv ice was nothing but a unit of
Bureau of Customs which was theref ore a purely gov ernmental f unction, the f act
that Customs Serv ice incidentally perf ormed a proprietary f unction would not
div est itself of the priv ilege of being immune f rom suit.
National Airforce Corp v. Teodoro 91 Phil 203
The National A irf orce Corp was incorporating the air port f acilities in Bacolod. But
it was abolished a nd was succeeded by the civ il aeronautics administration. PAL
was pay ing landin g and parking f ees and the pay ments were supposedly
remitted to the Capitol subdiv ision of the owner of the land which was utilized as
airport. But the National Airf orce Corp did not remit the f unds to the capitol
subdiv ision.
The capitol subdiv ision and the owner of the land f iled a case against PAL f or the
collection of landing and parking f ees. PAL f iled a third party complaint against
the National Airf orce Corp. The National Airf orce Corp interposed a def ense that
it cannot be sue d beca use it is an uni ncorporated gov ernment agency of the
Republic, hav ing authority of its own.
The SC disagr eed, noting that the National Airf orce Corp in the case was merely
perf orming a proprietary f unction - operation of the airport.
STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
Can the LGUS invoke state immunity from suit, being political
subdivisions of the state?
No, because of Sec 22 of LGU allow ing them to sue and be sued.
Hence, they cannot successly invoke state immunity from suit.
STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
General rule: When a case is filed against a public officer for acts
performed by him in the ordinary dis charge of his functions and so long
as he acts w ithin the confines of his giv en authority - immune from suit
(considered as a suit against the republic)
Tests to be employed:
Determine w hether or not in the satisfaction of the claim, a positive act
is to be required from the government.
1. If in satisfying the claims of the plaintiff, there is a need for the
state to appropriate funds to satisfy such claims -- immune from
suit
2. If the claim of the plaintiff can be satisfied without need for
appropriating funds to satisfy such claims - NOT immune from
suit
Exceptions:
Instances where a case may NOT be dismissed even if such was filed
WITHOUT the consent of the State
1. When the action is filed against a public officer if only to compel
the performance of his duties which he is duty-bound to perform
under the las.
Ex. A fire marshall not doing his job - writ of mandamus
2. When the case is filed against a public officer to enjoin the
performance of an act which is patently illegal or
unconstitutional.
Ex. DPWH demolishing a house w ithout payment of just
compensation - injunction order
Del Mar v. Phil Veterans As s
He f iled f or the pay ment of sum of money f rom funds which are already
appropriated f or such purpose. There was no need f or the State to
perf orm a positiv e act because f unds were alrea dy appropriated f or such
purpose.
3. When the case is filed against the public officer who performed an
ultra vires act - beyond the bounds of authority given to him by
law .
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
Republic v Sandoval
The indiv idual off icers of the military mov ed for the dismissal of the action
but the SC did not dismiss because they were sued f or the enf orcement of
their tortious liabilities because they exceeded the bounds of their giv en
authority.
4. When there is a patent violation in the Constitution
Ami Gable v. Cuenca
The prop erty of Ami Gable was taken supposedly for public use without
pay ment of just compensation. The State cannot inv oke state immunity
f rom suit if only to create an injustice against a priv ate indiv idual.
Suability V. Liability
Even w hen the state has already giv en its consent to be sued, it does
not follow that the state is already liable
When the state giv e its consent to be sued, it is not admitting any
liability, it is merely giving the claimant the opportunity to prove his
claims as against the republic. After all, the liability of the republic may
be determined on the basis of evidence produced by the parties in the
course of the trial proper.
Suability is one thing. Liability is another.
Meritt v. GPI
There was a special law enacted authorizing Mr. Meritt to sue the gov ernment.
But in the end the SC exonerated the state f rom any liability , noting that the
driv er of the ambulance was not p erf orming his duties as a special agent f or the
Republic.
Enforcement Of Decision
Suppose the state has alr eady given its consent to be sued, a case if
filed against the republic and after trial, the SC found out that the State
is indeed liable, w ithout the Republic filing an appeal.
Question: Can such decision be enforced as against the State?
Adverse decision against the State or unincorporated government
agency:
Any such decision cannot be enforced because the enforcement
thereof would need another consent on the part of the Stats in the form
of an appropriation law .
The claimant should file his claim on the Commission on Audit using as
basis the final decision rendered by the court. The Commission on
Audit may make recommendation but the appropriation law must come
from Congress.
Republic v. Villasor and DA v. NLRC
Public f unds would remain to be gov ernment funds and the same may only be
appropriated or d isbursed pursuant to an appropr iation la w. Public f unds are
supposedly f or public use an d not f or satisfy ing money claims adjudged ag ainst
the State. Sec 29 par 1 Art 6 no public f unds shall be released f rom public
treasury without the benef it of an appropriation law.
Adverse decision against the State or incorporated government
agency (which under its charter can sue and be sued):
Any such decis ion can be enforced without need for another consent
from State
Adverse decision is rendered against an LGU which under Sec 22
of the LGC can sue and be sued:
Can such adverse decision be enforced via a writ of execution?
No, it cannot be enforced by garnishing the funds or properties of the
defendant LGU, except when there is already an appropriation
ordinance.
Municipality of San Miguel Bulacan v. Fernandez 130 SCRA 56
A decision a dv erse to an LGU cann ot be enf orced as by garnishing the f unds if
properties of the def endant LGU, because there is a need f or an appropriation
ordinance.
A certain Margarita f iled a case against the municipality of san miguel bulacan f or
partial rev ocation of deed of donation. A decision was rendered adv erse to the
municpality and in f av or of Margarita.
There was a monetary compensation, so Margarita f iled f or the issuance of a writ
if execution which was granted by the trial court. Howev er the municipal treasurer
of San Miguel Bulacan did n ot disburse any f unds. Hence, an alias wr it of
execution was issued with a threat coming f rom the judge that should the
treasurer still ref use to disburse any amount, then the treasurer shall b e cited in
contempt of the court and be placed behind bars.
The case was elev ated to the SC. The SC declared that the writ if execution was
inv alid because a decision adv erse to the LGU cannot be satisf ied and enf orced,
EXCE PT when there is already an appropriation ordina nce.
* But w hen there is already an appropriation ordinance, the decision
adverse to the LGU can now be enforced.
3|P a g e
Municipality of Makati v.CA 190 SCR A 206
The pl aintiff can f ile a case f or mandamus if only to compel the local sanggunian
concerned to f ile or enact an appropriation ordina nce. (This remedy howev er is
not applicable to Congress)
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPL ES AND STATE POLICIES
Article 2 1987 Constitution
Sets forth the fundamental principles and state policies
Section 1
The Philippines is a democratic and republican state and sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanates from
them.
Essential characteristics of a democratic state
1. Elections
2. People enjoy basic civil and political rights and liberties (Article 3)
* There is no such thing as absolute right, except freedom to think
You cannot exercise your rights to the detriment of the rights of
others
Freedom of speech
You cannot exercise this right to malign the reputation of others
Republican State
A representative form of government. People elect representativ es in
an election. Once elected, these persons act as our representatives
and are accountable to us.
Artic le 11
All public officials are accountable to us. They are not above our laws
for ours is a government of laws and not of men.
Plurality principle
Representatives need not garner the majority votes cast in an election.
Highest number of votes for a particular elective office w ill suffice.
Section 2
Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy and
adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of
the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justic e
freedom, and amity w ith all nations.
Renounces w ar as an instrument of national policy
But Article 6 Sec 23 – vests upon Congress the power to declare
existence of war.
How to reconcile the two provisions:
What we renounce as an instrument of national policy is offensiv e war
and not defensive war. Such that if China w ould attack the Philippines,
then Congress has the power to declare the existence of war. But in no
way can Philippines start a war on the offensive.
Philippines adopts the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land
Doctrine of Transformation
The principles of international law are being transformed into local
laws. Congress can enact a local law or legislation formally adopting
provis ions of a treaty, international agreements or generally accepted
principles of general law.
Example: PD 1069 issued by Marcos, a law dealing w ith extradition.
PD 1069 adopted the extradition treaty that was entered into by the
Philippines.
Take Note: Even w ithout such local legislation, nothing could prevent
our local courts from taking cognizance of generally accepted
principles of international law in resolving disputes.
Coroda v. Jalandoni
Coroda was an off icer of the Japanese Imperial Army and af ter World War II, he
was tried f or war crimes, app ly ing the prov isions of the Hague conv ention.
Coroda objected to the adoption of the prov isions of the Hague conv ention,
contending that the Philippines was not an a signatory to the conv ention.
SC rejected the contention, holding that Philippines adopts the generally
accepted principles of International law as part of the law of the land.
Republic v. Sandiganbayan
When Cory Aquino became president, she ordered the conf iscation of the
properties of Marcos’ cronies. One of those aff ected was Maj or Ramas. His
properties and all his assets were co nf iscated without the b enef it of a search
warra nt.
Major Ramas objected, inv oking the 1973 prov ision of the constitution which
prohibits the conf iscation and seizure of properties without a search warrant.
Howev er, the SC disagreed b ecause at that time, they were still under the
rev olutionary gov ernment and the 1973 constitution was in operativ e. In f act,
Aquino made an a nnouncement that her administration was instituted in def iance
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez

of the 1973 constitution and that her administration totally abrogated such
constitution. Hence, major Ramas could not inv oke such prov ision of the dead But the SC upheld the f reedom of religion and ov erturned it s earlier
constitution. pronouncement in the case of Hirona. It is not f or the state to adjudge what is to
be considered as a religious sy mbol or image.
But the Supreme Cou rt ruled in his f av or, inv oking the principles under the
univ ersal declaration of human rights and the international civ il and political rights
which President Aquin o did not declare to hav e been abandoned.
Other provisions dealing with the separation of church and state

Treaty obligations should be complied with in good faith.
Conflict between a treaty and a local law
What happens if Philippines enter into a treaty and the treaty is in
conflict with local laws? Which should prevail?
Where there is a seeming conflict between a treaty and a local law –
there should be conscious effort to harmonize the conflicting provision.
But if it cannot be helped but to declare one to be inconsistent with the
other – local laws shall prevail over treaties, since local laws are
enacted by Congress in the exercise of police power.
Eh Chong v. Mirales
Concerning the v alidity of a nationalization law pro hibiting aliens f rom engaging
in retail trade business. This was qu estioned by Eh Chong on the groun d that
such law is contrary to the prov isions of the treaty entered into by Philippines and
China.
The SC decreed that ther e was actually no conf lict and f urther ruled that ev en if
there is conf lict, any such conf lict should be resolv ed in f av or of upholding the
v alidity of our local laws.
Section 3
Civilian authority is at all times supreme over the military and that the
Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the
State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity
of the national territory.
Civilian authority is at all times supreme over the m ilitary
This provision is supported by Art 7 Sec 18 making the president of the
Republic as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces,
notw ithstanding the fact that he may not have a military background.
Even during martial law , military courts cannot validly exercis e
jurisdiction over the civilians. This is guaranteed under Sec 18 Art.
Indeed, civilian authority is at all times supreme over the military.
Section 4
The prime duty of the government is to serve and protect the people
and the government may call upon the people to defend the state and
in the fulf illment thereof, all citizens may be required under conditions
provided by law to render personal military or civil service.
People v. Lagman and People v. Soza
Soza g ot conv icted f or v iolation of Common Wealth Act No. 1, the National
Def ense Act because he ref used to render compulsory military serv ice. Soza
contended that he had a mother and 8 siblings to support.
Sec 5 Art 3
No law shall be passed respecting the establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercis e thereof. Free exercise of worship shall be
allow ed without discrimination or preference.
Sec 29 Art 6
Prohibits the appropriation of public funds for sectarian or religious
purposes. No public money or property shall be appropriated for the
use of any sect, church, denomination or priests, preacher, except
where such priest is assigned in the armed forces, penal institution or
government orphanage.
Practice of Cebu i n don ating funds of appr opriat ing fun ds in support of the
Sinulog celebration – a celebration of the Ro man Catho lic Church
This is NO T v iolativ e of Sec 29 Art 6 because Sinul og cele bration ceases to
become a purely religious activ ity. It has rather become part of our tradition and a
way of promoting the City of Cebu to other States – tourism purposes.
Sec 5 Art 6
Prohibiting the appointment of sectoral representativ e coming from the
religious sector.
Sec 2 Art 9-c
Prohibits the accreditation of religious groups as political parties.
Take Note. The wall separating the church and the state should not be
a wall of hostility. After all, the members of the state are also the
members of the church. Hence, there are times that there is a close
cooperation or coordination between the church and the state.
Provisions where the State grants favor to the Church
Sec 29 Art 6
Allows the appropriation of public funds in support of a priest,
preacher, minister, etc. if such person is assigned in the Armed Forces
of the Philippines, penal institution or government orphanage.
Sec 28 Art 6
Charitable institutions, churches, convents, mosques, non-profit
cemeteries and all lands exclusively used for religious or charitable
purposes are exempt from taxation.
Tax exemption – applies only to real property tax exemptions; It does
not cover income tax or donor’s tax.
Is the income of the church taxable?
No, it is not taxable. While it is true that Sec 28 Art 6 deals only with real property
tax exemption, but income tax exemption is prov ided f or under Sec 30 of the
National Internal Rev enue Code.

Lagman alrea dy ref used to render compulsory military serv ice, contending that
he had a f ather to support and he bel onged to a r eligion which p rohibits killing in
times of war. Lagman inv oked his f reedom of religion.
In the two cases, the Supreme Court sustained t he conv ictions of Lagman and
Soza, hol ding that the State has the po wer to compel its citizens to render
personal military or civ il serv ice
If you cannot render military service because you are not fit to be a
combatant, you can serve the Philippines by rendering civil servic e.
Casus Clay case
The actual name of Muhammed Ali was Casus Clay . He ref used to render
military serv ice because he ref used to be sent to Vietnam. For that, Ali was
conv icted f or v iolating the National Def ense Act of the US and was imprisone d.
That was the reason why during his incarceration, conv erted himself to Islam and
had the name Muhammed Ali.
Section 6
The separation of the church and state shall be inviolable.
Hirona v. Secretary of Education
Happened in Cebu City where the pupils in the public school wer e expelled
because they ref used to participate in the f lag ceremony . The kids were
members of the Jehov ah’s Witness. According to them, they should not be made
to participate because the Philippin e national f lag is a religio us symbol, and their
religion does not allow them to worship any image.
A case was f iled and when the case r eached the Supr eme Court, the SC
sustained the disciplinary action that was meted out on the students. Af ter all, the
Philippine f lag is not a religious sy mbol but a symbol of statehood and unity .
But this ruling was overturned
Ebralina v. Division superintendent of the schools of Cebu
Pupils in the public school were expelled because they ref used to participate in
the f lag ceremony . They challenged the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case
of Hirona, citing their right to f reedom of religion. The Republic countered using
the prov ision that there should be separation f church and state.
If the church has a parcel of land but not used for religious or charitable
purposes, instead leased out to a commercial corpor ation. Is the income in the
for m of rental taxable if such was used for religio us purposes or for the
sustenance of the priests?
Answer: Y es, it is taxable. Income deriv ed in this kind of transaction inv olv ing real
properties of the church but were used f or commercial purposes is taxable
regardless of the use thereof.
Sec 3 Art 14
Allows the teaching of religion in public elementary and secondary
schools, provided that the same is done pursuant to the written
permission of the parents or guardians of the students.
Sec 4 Art 14
Allows an educational institution to be fully-owned by foreigners if such
was established by religious or mission groups.
Section 8
The Philippines, consistent with its national interest, pursues and
adopts the policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.
Tw o schools of thought:
1. Altogether prohibits the storage of nuclear weapons in the
Philippine territory
2. For as long as such storage of nuclear weapons is consis tent with
our national interest, then the same shall be allow ed
Section 10
The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national
development.

4|P a g e
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
Calalang v. Williams
Social justice does n ot mean communism or anarchy . It simply means
humanizatio n of laws and socialization of economic and social forces by the state
so that justice in its rational a nd ob jectiv ely secular conception is approximated;
Promotion of social welf are.
Section 12
The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution and the
state shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the
unborn from conception.
Does this prohibit Congress from enacting a divorce law?
No, it does not altogether prohibit Congress from passing or enacting a
divorce law . It is just a long shot, given the fact that Philippines is
predominantly Catholic.
Equally protect the life of the mother and the unborn child
Art 14 Civil Code – birth determines personality but a fetus is
considered born for all intents and purposes favorable to it provided
that it be born later. Hence, a fetus may be a recipient of a donation
provided that it be born later.
Section 13
The state recognizes the vital role of the youth in national building and
shall protect and promote their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual
and social well-being and that the state shall inculcate in the youth
patriotism and nationalism and encourage their participation in public
and civic affairs.
Section 14
The State recognizes the role of women in nation building and shall
ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.
Section 16
The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a
balanced and healthful ecology with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
Oposa v. Factoran
The case was f iled on behalf of the minor children and children y et to be born. A
case to prosper, has to be f iled by a person who has legal standing to br ing the
action. The children had no legal personal ity but the SC nonetheless sustained
the f iling of the case on their behalf, inv oking Sec 16 Art 2 of the 1987
Constitution, guided by the principle of intergenerational responsibility .
A case filed by a Cebu-based environmental group
According to the group, the whales are also persons because they are mammals.
The gr oup ov erstretched the def inition of person in the civ il code. The whales
and dolphins were made petitioners in the case and the lawy ers claimed to be
the legal guardians of the said animals. But who appointed them as legal
guardians? Sir Gal eon is of the opinion that the case should hav e been
dismissed.
Section 18
The state affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall
protect the rights of the workers and promote their welf are.
Labor Code – the provisions of which are favorable to the workers.
Section 25
The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments
RA 7160 Local Government Code – assures autonomy to the local
government units.
Delegated pow er of eminent domain
The LGUs can now exercis e delegated pow er of imminent domain –
they can take away priv ate property for public use upon payment of
just compensation.
Delegated pow er of police power
LGUs may also exercise delegated police power of the state that they
can now enact local ordinances.
Pow er to tax
LGUs may now exact contributions by way of tax. But the pow er to tax
is not a delegated authority from Congress. It is expressly conferred
upon the LGU by the constitution itself . Sec 5 Art 10.
Section 26
The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public
service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.
The prohibition on political dynasty is not a self-executing
provision
Hence, an enabling law is needed to be enacted by Congress.
Feb 2, 1987 – ratified the 1987 constitution but since then up to the
present, there has been no political dynasty law.
5|P a g e
Under the proposed bill prohibiting political dynasty, the spouses,
brothers and sisters and first cousins cannot run for elective offic e
when one member of the family is already a public official.
SEPARATION OF POWERS
The Philippines is a democratic and republican state and sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanates from
them.
Presidential form of government
The form of government of the Philippines w hich explains why we have
three branches of the government:
1. Executive Branch
2. Legislative Branch
3. Judicial Branch
Executive Branch
Members: President, Vic e president, cabinet members
Duty: Execute the laws
Legislative Branch
Members: House of Representatives and Senate
Duty: Legislate and enact laws
Judiciary Branch
Members: Supreme Court, low er courts
Duty: Interpret the laws to determine w hether or not they are in line
with the provis ions of the Constitution.
Separation of powers
The three branches perform different functions, hence no
concentration of powers.
Standing of each branch in relation to other branches
Co-equal and co-independent bodies, and that they operate under the
principle of checks and balances.
Principle of checks and balances
Each department has the power to prevent the encroachment of its
prerogativ es by the other departments and can check the possible
excesses and abuses as may be committed by the other branches.
Allocation of checks and balances
How can the executive branch check the acts of the other branches?
 The pow er to veto any bill proposed by Congress
 Appointment of justic es of the Supreme Court and judges of the
low er courts
 Pardoning pow er
How can the legislative branch check the acts of the other branches?
 Sec 16 Art 7 The president has the power of appointment and any
such appointment shall be approved by the Commission on
Appointments composed of the members of Congress.
 The pow er to override the veto power of the president by a vote of
2/3
 Art 8 Secs 1 and 2 Legislative department may define and
apportion the jurisdic tion of the courts, especially the lower courts
How can the judiciary branch check the acts of other branches?
 Pow er of judicial review – can declare an executive act or act
made by Congress to be unconstitutional.
BLENDING OF POWERS
However, in actuality, their relationship can be defined as inter-
dependent
Interdependence – these branches should work closely if only to
promote public good. In fact there are instances where tw o
departments may work together towards the promotion of public good.
Examples:
Preparation of national budget
The budget has to prepared by the office of the president. Then the
proposed budget shall be submitted to the house of representativ es for
the enactment of the appropriation bill. Thereafter, the appropriation bill
will be deliberated by the house of reps and Senate. Once approved, it
shall be sent to the president for final approval. There is close
coordination between the Executive and Legislative Branch.
Impeachment
In times of impeachment where the respondent offic er is the president
himself, there is close coordination between the legislative and judic ial
branch where the chief justice of the Supreme Court will act as the
presiding officer.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
Hearing of election cases
In the resolution of hearing of election cases involving the Senate and
the House of Reps, the HRET and SET w ill be participated by the
justices coming from the Supreme Court.
Therefore, while it is desirable for the branches of the government to
have independence, they should be dealing w ith each other at arm’s
length, otherwise the promotion for public good will not be obtained.
NON-DEL EGATION OF POWERS
Non-delegation of delegated authority
Delegated authority may not be further delegated (potestas delegata
non delegari potest)
Equally applies to the three branches of the government, but with
paramount importance in so far as Congress is concerned because of
the many instances where Congress is permitted to further delegate
delegated authority.
Reason:
Increasing complexity of the tasks of the government, coupled w ith the
grow ing inability of Congress to face the many problems demanding its
attention. There are matters which the members of Congress may not
have the competence.
The Philippines is a republican state
We elect representatives, members of congress and president and
vice-president. In the process, we are delegating unto them the power
to legislate in the case of members of congress and the power to
execute the laws in respect to the president and vice-president.
Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority
emanates from them
We are the source of authority and powers – only that we cannot
directly govern the affairs of the state, and so we delegate this
authority to the president and the members of Congress, among
others.
Once delegated
The representatives are duty-bound to perform the delegated authority.
Instances where Congress can validly delegate delegated
authority
1. Tariff powers to the president
2. Emergency powers to the president
3. To the people themselves
4. To the LGUs
5. To the administrative bodies
Tariff powers
Sec 28 Art 6. Congress may, by law, authoriz e the president to fix
within specified limits and subject to such limitations and restrictions, it
may impose tariff rates, import and export quotas, etc.
Reason: Impelled by necessity. These matters pertain to international
trade. In the enactment of laws, the process attendant thereto is very
cumbersome. If we let Congress fix tariff rate, it would take a really
long time. But any such delegation must be done by Congress through
enactment of a law.
Em ergency powers
Sec 23 Art 6. In times of war or national emergency, Congress may, by
law , authoriz e the president for a limited period, and subject to such
restrictions, it may exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out
a declared national policy.
National emergency – any calamity, epidemic, typhoon or flood of
nationw ide proportion
Reason: Impelled by necessity. Congress can only conduct business if
quorum is reached. In times of calamity, quorum is unlikely to be
reached. Therefore, Congress is permitted to delegate emergency
pow ers to the president in times of war and national emergency.
Once power is delegated to the president
The president w ould eventually become a constitutional dictator –
aside from performing executive functions, the president is now
empow ered to is sue legislations in the form of presidential issuances,
proclamations and PDs which have the force and effect of law. It is
constitutional because it is allow ed by the constitution.
The constitution itself sets forth the conditions under whic h Congress
can validly delegate emergency powers to the president.
Conditions:
1. Such delegation must be validly done in times of w ar or national
emergency
2. It should only be for a limited period
3. It is subject to restric tions as may be imposed by Congress
6|P a g e
4. It is subject to the condition that when the president is given such
emergency powers, he should only perform such powers to carry
out a declared national policy
5. It is only Congress permitted to set forth the national policy which is
sought to be obtained by the delegation of such power to the
president
6. There has to be a law authorizing the president to exercis e such
emergency powers
Illustrations
 In times of war or national emergency, is it mandatory upon
Congress to delegate emergency powers to the President?
Answer: NO. It is up to Congress if it would hold on to its legislative
pow ers. It is therefore discretionary upon Congress whether or not
it w ould vest upon the president emergency powers.
 There is a national emergency and congress enacts a law
authorizing the president emergency powers and in that law , it is
clearly mentioned that the president can only exercis e emergency
pow ers for a period of 12 months but the emergency lasted only for
6 months. Can the president continue exercis ing emergency
pow ers for 12 months?
Answer: NO. The vesture of emergency powers is self-liquidating.
As soon as the emergency ceases to exist, the grant of emergency
pow ers also ceases to exist.
 Suppose under such law, the president is authorize to exercis e
emergency powers for 6 months but the emergency lasted for 12
months. Can the president continue exercis ing emergency powers
for 12 months?
Answer: NO. Because the law is clear that any such exercise of
emergency powers is only good for a short duration of 6 months.
 Suppose the law fails to specify the period or duration for the
exercise of the president of emergency powers
Answer: Even if the emergency subsists for a longer period but the
law is silent as to duration, the conferment of emergency power
shall cease upon the next adjournment of Congress.
First Emergency Powers Case
CA 671 en acted by Congress v esting upon President Q uezon emerg ency
powers. This emer gency power was likewise exercised by the successor,
Pres. Osmena and was continued by Pres. Roxas and later by Pres. Quirino.
This was questioned b ut it was contended by the State that until and af ter
Congress would rep eal CA 671, then Pres. Quirino could v alidly exercise the
emergency powers v ested upon Pres. Quezon.
SC declared that to cater to such argument would def eat the v ery purpose of
the conf erment of emergency powers f or it should only be f or a temporary
period. Hence when the Congress reconv ened on May 25, 1948, the grant of
emergency powers upon Pres Quezon ceased to exist.
Notwithstanding the pronouncement of the Supreme Court, Pres. Quirino
continued exercising emergency powers – which pav ed the way f or the f iling
of the second emergency powers case.
2nd sentence Sec 23 Art 6
Unless sooner withdrawn by resolution of Congress, such emergency
pow ers shall cease upon the next adjournment of Congress.
Defect of the abovementioned provision:
Next adjournment of Congress – session that is called after the first
session during which conferment of emergency powers was made
Sec 15 Art 6. Congress is mandated to convey on the fourth Monday of
July and shall continue to be in session until 30 days prior to the next
session date.
Convened: July 2013 – June 2014
Reconvened: July 2014 – June 2015
Session lasting July 2013 – June 2014
There w as an emergency such that Congress enacted a law vesting
emergency powers to the president. The emergency lasted for a longer
period and the law is silent as to the duration of the emergency
pow ers.
Any such emergency powers shall cease upon the end of the next
session – June 2015
This is a situation whe re the preside nt is allo we d to continu e exercising
emergency powers, notwithstanding the f act that Congress is already in session
or alrea dy reconv ened. Hence, the president and the cong ress are exercising
legislativ e powers at the same time – a rather anomalous situation.
Take Note
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
This provis ion is not in accord with the ruling of the Supreme Court in
the first emergency powers case
Provision: Emergency powers shall cease upon the next adjournment
Ruling: Emergency power shall cease upon the reconvening of
Congress
Sec 17 Art 12
In times of national emergency, the state may take over the operation
of privately owned public utilities.
David v. Arroyo
The pr ov ision is a species of grant of emergency powers. While the president
has the po wer to declar e the state of national emergency , but any such
declaration wo uld not automatically permit the president to direct the operation of
priv ately owned public utilities. Bef ore it can be done, there has to be a law to be
enacted by Congress, allowing the president to direct the operation of priv ately
owne d public utilities.
To the people themselves
Santiago v. Comelec; Lambino v. Comelec
Validity of RA 6735 dealing o n the sy stem of initiativ e and ref erendum. RA 6735
allowi ng the people themselv es to directly propose a le gislativ e measure – be it
of a nationwide or local applicability . People may enact a national legislation v ia
the sy stem of initiativ e and ref erendum in like manner that under RA 673 5,
people co uld sponsor a local le gislation in the f orm of a prov incial, city or
municipal, barangay ordinances.
Lambino v . Comelec. RA 6735 is a suff icient enabling la w to gov ern the sy stem
on initiativ e when it comes to amending the constitution.
To the Local Government Units
There has to be a law whereby would delegate legislative pow ers to
the local government units.
RA 7160 Local Government Code
Delegated pow er of police power
The various LGUs could now exercis e the police pow er of the State, a
delegated legislative power allowing LGUs to enact ordinances.
Delegated pow er of eminent domain
The LGUs can now exercis e delegated pow er of imminent domain –
they can take away priv ate property for public use upon payment of
just compensation.
Pow er to tax
LGUs may now exact contributions by way of tax. But the pow er to tax
is not a delegated authority from Congress. It is expressly conferred
upon the LGU by the constitution itself . Sec 5 Art 10.
To Adm inistrative Bodies
When the Congress delegates legislative powers to the various
administrative powers, what is delegated is the power of “subordinate
legislation”
Pow er of subordinate legislation – confers upon the administrative
bodies the pow er and authority to fill in the details w hich are lacking in
the law and which Congress may not have the competence or
opportunity to fill in. (Ex. Implementing rules and regulations)
TAKE NOT E
Any such delegation of legislative power or authority should not be a
roving condition – but should be confined in bounds in prevent such
delegation of authority from running riots.
Tests of Delegation
Tw o tests to determine the validity of the delegation of legislative
pow er or authority
1. Completeness Test – The law should already be complete in all its
terms and conditions before it leaves Congress so that when the
law reaches the hands of the delegate, the delegate has nothing
else to do but enforce the law – not given the w ide latitude or
discretion but to enforce the law as it is.
US v. Ang Tan Ho
There was a law empo wering the gov ernor general of the Philippines to fix
the price of palay s, corns and v egetables commodities whenev er there is an
extraordinary increase in the prices thereof. Pursuant to which, the gov ernor-
general issued a regulation setting the price ceiling f or the sale of palay or
rice.
Ang Tan Ho was conv icted f or v iolating the price ceiling and he questioned
the v alidity of such regulation. The SC sustained the contention of Ang Tan
Ho, noting that any such delegation of power to the gov ernor-general was
v iolativ e of the completeness test – the law empo wering him to do that was
not complete in itself and that the gov ernor-general was giv en wide
7|P a g e
discretion in f ixing the price of palay, especially that there was no def inition
of the term extraordinary increase of palay s or basic commodities.
Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court
Under EO 626- A, the chairman of the meat inspection authority is giv en wif e
latitude to distribute the beef that may be conf iscated, in the same manner
that the chairman of the national animal industry was giv en wide discretion to
determine the person wh o wo uld be the benef iciary of the carabaos under
such law. EO 62 6-A was struck down as inv alid by the SC, f ailing to comply
with the completeness test.
2. Sufficient Standard Test – Even if the law is not complete in itself,
but any such delegation of authority by Congress to another body
may be upheld as valid if such delegation is accompanied by
sufficient standards as to map out the boundaries of the exercis e of
the delegate’s delegated authority.
These standards may take the form of legislative policies as may
be mentioned in the law itself or in another related law whic h would
recite the circumstances under which such delegated authority may
be validly performed.
COMPOSITION OF CONGRESS
Sec 1 Art 6 Legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the
Philippines w hich shall consist of the Senate and House of Reps,
except to the extent dedic ated to the people on the provis ion dealing
with initiative and referendum.
Bicameral Congress (tw o houses)
1. Upper House (Senate)
2. Low er House (House or Representatives)
SENATE
Sec 3 Art 6. The Senate is composed of 24 senators who shall be
elected at large by the qualif ied voters of the Philippines. Even
Filipinos abroad may vote for the president, vic e-president and party-
list organizations (Absentee Voters’ Act)
Good training ground for those who aspire to be president or vice-
president. The senators, being elected at large, are presumed to have
a broader outlook of the problems presenting the country, compared to
congressmen w hose views are traditionally held to be parochial.
Qualifications
Sec 3 Art 6
1. Natural-born Filipino citizen
2. Must be at least 35 years old on the day of the elections
3. Must be able to read and write (not required to be a holder of a
bachelor’s degree)
4. Must be a registered voter of the Philippines
5. Must be a resident for a period of at least 2 years preceding the
day of elections (It is enough that he is a resident of the
Philippines. It is not required that he is a resident of a partic ular
legislative district, because they are elected at large)
Residence – coupled with animus rev ertendi or intent to return (Ong v. Comelec)
Two-fold nature of the qualifications
Continuing qualifications
If one got elected as a senator but subsequently got naturalized in
another state, he thereby forfeits his seat as a member of the Senate.
Mutually exclusive
The Congress enact a law providing for an additional qualification for
those aspiring to become a member of the Senate.
Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board
Sec 36 of RA 9165 prov ides that f or those wanting to become a senator must
undergo a mandatory drug test. It was assailed as inv alid by Senator Pimentel,
contending that by that, Congress sought to amend the prov isions under Sec3
Art 6. Th e SC r uled that such prov ision may not v alidly amend qualif ications f or
senators set f orth in the constitution.
Term of Office
Sec 4 Article 6. Fixed at 6 years, whic h shall commence at noon of
June 30 next follow ing the elections. (date has no partic ular
significance)
Sec 2 Art 18. The Senators and House of Reps first elected under the
1987 constitution w ould have to serve office only up to noon of June
30, 1992 for purposes of the synchroniz ation of elections.
First elections under the 1997 Constitution – May 22, 1987
Follow ing the provision of Sec 2 Art 2 in conjunction with Sec 4 Art 6,
the senators elected in the May 1987 elections, served only for a
period of 5 years.
Staggering of terms
Sec 2 Art 18
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
Of the senators elected in the 1992 elections, the first 12 obtaining the
highest number of votes shall serve for the full term of 6 years,
whereas the bottom 12 would have to serve only for 3 years.
1987 senators (serve only for 5 years – noon of June 30, 1992)
1992 (reckoning point)
1992 senators
- Upper 12 (6 years until 1998)
- Bottom 12 (3 years until 1995)
1995 senatorial elections (6 years until 2001)
1998 senatorial elections (6 years until 2004)
Reason: To provide continuity of the policy of the Senate and so the
veterans could provide guide and training to the neophyte senators.
Take Note:
2nd par Sec 4 Artic le 6. No senator shall serve for more than 2
consecutiv e terms. Voluntary renunciation of office shall not be
considered as an interruption in the continuity for the full term of
service for which he was elected.
Illustrations:
 X ran for senate in the 1998 elections, got elected and served until
2004. In the 2004 elections, X sought reelection and was reelected,
and served offic e until 2010. Can X run again in the 2010
senatorial elections?
Answer: NO, because no senator can serve for more than 2
consecutiv e terms.
 But can he run in the 2010 elections as a member of the House of
Representatives?
Answer: YES, because it cannot be considered as reelection since
it is another electiv e position.
Effect of interruption in service
 Given that there would be elections involv ing senators every other
3 years. X ran for senate in the 1998 elections, got elected and
served until 2004. In the 2004 elections, X sought reelection and
was reelected, and served office until 2010. X did not run again in
2010 know ing he would be prohibited. But can he run in the 2013
elections or must he wait until 2016?
Answer: YES. For as long as there is already an interruption in the
continuity of service, nothing in law can prohibit X from running for
senate in 2013. (Socrates v. Comelec)
 Suppose X ran for senate in the 1998 elections and got elected. He
is to serve until 2004. But in 2003, he resigned from office. Can he
run in the 2010 elections?
Answer: NO because voluntary renunciation shall not be
considered as an interruption in the continuity for the full term of
service for which he was elected.
Effect of disqualification
 Suppose X was rather removed from office in 2003 because when
he ran for senate in the 1998 elections, there was a disqualif ication
case filed against him and after hearing, the SET rendered a
decision adverse to the X. He ran in the 2004 elections, got elected
and served until 2010. Can he run again in the 2010 elections?
Answer: YES, because when he was ousted from office in 2003, it
was not by reason of his own volition, and the same shall be
considered as an interruption. (Lonzanilla v. Comelec)
 Suppose X ran for senate in 1998 and a disqualif ication case was
filed against him in respect to the 1988 elections but was not
decided timely. He served until 2004. He ran again in the 2004
elections and served until 2010. The decision for the
disqualification case was rendered on 2005. Can he run again in
2010?
Answer: NO, because the decision was rendered after the
expiration of the contested term, such that the decis ion w ould have
no bearing. Hence, the fact remains that for the period of 1998-
2004, X assumed office as a member of the Senate. (Rivera v.
Comelec)
Effect of preventive suspension
 Suppose X got elected in 1998 and got reelected in 2004, but a
case was filed against him and the Sandiganbayan imposed a
preventiv e suspension for a period of 3 months. Can he run in the
2010 elections? Can he reason out there was already an
interruption?
8|P a g e
Answer: NO, because it was merely a preventive suspension whic h
did not totally divest him of his office as a member of the Senate.
(Albevino v. Comelec GR No. 184835 Dec 23, 2009)
COMPOSITION OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Membership in the house of reps consis ts of distric t and party-list
representatives.
District Representatives
Sec 5 Art 6 There shall be no more than 250 district representatives,
except as may be provided by law.
Proviso. The membership of the house of reps may be increased if
there is a law, when the Congress would reapportion the legislative
districts pursuant to the authority given Sec 5 par 4 Art 6.
Sec 5 par 4 Art 6. Within 3 years, follow ing the return of every census,
Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts.
Tobias v. Abalos and Mariano v. Comelec
Reapportionment of legislativ e districts may not alway s be through the enactment
of a general reapportionment act. The same may be the result of an enactment of
a special la w as by creating a city with a popu lation of 250,000 people, or a
special law creating a prov ince.
Aquino v. Comelec
SC ruled that the 250,000 minimum popul ation requi rement is only required of
cities f or them to be entitled a representation in the house or reps, but said
requirement is not r equire d of a prov ince. Once a prov ince created, it is thereby
entitled to a representation in Congress, particularly in the House of Reps.
Sema v. Comelec
Only Congress can create a prov ince, because by creating a prov ince, a
legislativ e district is already created – increasing the membership of the House of
Reps which according to Sec 5 pa r 1 Art 6 may only be done pursua nt to a la w,
suggesting theref ore that only Congress can enact a law increasing the
membership of the House of Reps. More so, if we f actor in Sec 5 par 4 Art 6
stating that only Congress can reapportion legislativ e districts.
Aldaba v. Comelec
The 250,00 0 minimum population requir ement is based on ac tual population, and
can nev er be based on mere projections.
Mariano v. Comelec
Where a city has already met the 250,000 minimum population requirement, then
such city may be giv en an additional district, without need f or such city to double
its population. It is enough that the City Makati has met already the minimum
population req uirement, it is no longer required f or such city to double its
population f or it to be entitled to an additional legislativ e district.
Qualifications
Sec 7 Art 6
1. Must be a natural-born Filipino
2. Must be at least 25 years old
3. Must be able to read and write
4. Must be registered voter in the district which he seeks to be
elected
5. Must be a resident therein for a period of at least 1 year before
the elections
Party-list Representatives
Brought about by the party-list system – an innovation introduced in
the 1987 Constitution.
Purpose. To give opportunity to the underrepresented and the
marginalized sectors or those lacking a well-defined constituency to
have a voice in Congress.
Qualifications for party-list nominees
Sec 9 RA 7941
1. Must be a natural-born Filipino
2. Must be at least 25 years old
3. Must be able to read and write
4. Must be registered voter in the district whic h he seeks to be
elected
5. Must be a resident therein for a period of at least 1 year before
the elections
6. Must be a member of the organization he seeks to represent at
least 90 days prior to the elections (Youth –must not be more than
30 years old on the day of the election)
Sec 5 par 2 Art 6
Party-list representatives shall constitute 20% of the total membership
of the house of reps, including the party-list representatives
themselves.
Veterans case and Banat case
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
The S upreme Cou rt ruled that re quirement of 20% is nothing but a ceilin g.
Theref ore, it is not required to be f ully f illed out.
2nd sentence Sec 5 par 2
For 3 consecutive terms follow ing the ratific ation of the 1987
Constitution, one half of the seats allocated for the party-list
representatives shall be filled by election or appointment, as may be
provided for by law.
Sec 7 Art 18
Empow ers the president to appoint sectoral representatives coming
from labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural community,
except from religious sectors. (Before the enactment of RA 7941)
RA 7941 – Became effective in 1998, w here the president is no longer
empow ered to appoint sectoral representatives.
Process
1. Register w ith Comelec - File a verified petition at least 90 days
prior to the elections, accompanied w ith its constitution, bylaws,
platform of government and list of officers.
2. The petition has to be published in 2 newspapers of general
circulation
3. It should be acted upon within the period of 15 days, and no later
than 60 days before elections (there should be formal hearing)
4. Once a party-list organization is accredited by the Comelec, it
must submit to the Comelec a list of 5 nominees not later than
45 days before the elections
Bantay Republic Act v. Comelec
While the names of the nominees need not be set f orth in the certif ied list which
shall be posted in the polling place, but the Comelec is mandated to div ulge to
the public the names of the party -list nominees.
What organizations m ay qualify under the party-list system of
elections
Sec 5 RA 7941 enumerates the rules which may be regis tered under
the party-list: (But the enumeration is not exclusive)
1. Labor
2. Peasant
3. Fisher folks
4. Indigenous cultural communities
5. Urban poor
6. Elderly
7. Handicapped
8. Women
9. Youth
10. Veterans
11. OFWs
12. Professionals
May political parties participate under the party-list system of
elections
YES.
Ang Bagong Bayani v. OFW
The Supr eme Court l aid down the 8 parameters bef ore a political party may be
allowe d registration under the party -list. For a political party to be allowed
participation in the party -list, it must align itself with sectoral groups. In like
manner that nominees thereof must also be representing the underrepresented
and the marginalize d sectors.
8 parameters:
1. The political party must represent the marginalized and
underrepresented groups.
2. It must comply with the declared statutory policy of enabling “Filipino
citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors
3. The religious sector may not be represented in the party-list system
4. The party must not be disqualified under Sec 6 of RA 794
5. The party must not be an adjunct of, or a project organized, or an
entity funded or assisted by the government. It must be independent
from the government.
6. The party must not only comply with the requirements of the law, but
its nominees must likewise to so under Sec 9 of RA 7941.
7. Not only the candidate party must represent the marginalized; so
also must its nominees.
8. The nominee must likewise be able to contribute to the formulation
and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation
as a whole.
But it was modif ied by the subsequent ruling in the case of Ang Atong Paglaum.
Ang Atong Paglaum v. Comelec
Political parties need n ot align themselv es with sectoral groups or or gani zations.
And nominees thereof need not come f rom that sector itself , prov ided that he can
show that he has a pr ov en track record f or adv ocating the cause of the
organi zation he seeks to represent.
6 parameters:
9|P a g e
1. Three different groups may participate in the party-list system. The
national parties, regional parties and sectoral parties.
2. National parties and regional parties do not need to organize along
sectoral lines and don not need to represent any “marginalized or
underrepresented” sector.
3. Political parties can participate in party-list elections provided they
register under the party-list system and do not field candidates in
legislative district elections.
4. Sectoral parties may either be “marginalized and underrepresented”
or lacking in “well-defined political constituencies.”
5. A majority of the members of sectoral parties that represent the
marginalized and underrepresented must belong to such sector
which they represent.
6. National, regional and sectoral parties or organizations shall not be
disqualified if some of their nominees are disqualified, provided that
they have at least one nominee who remains qualified.
Disqualifications
Sec 6 RA 7941
Enumerates the grounds under which an organization may be denied
registration in the party-list
1. Religious sectors
2. Those espousing the use of force or violence to attain its goals
3. Foreign organizations or political parties
4. Those who violated election rules
5. Those who made misrepresentations in the petition
6. Ceased to exist for a period exceeding one years
7. Failed to participate in the last 2 preceding elections
8. Failed to garner at least 2% of the votes cast in the 2 preceding
elections
*In the national election, one voter is entitled to 2 votes for the me mb ers of the
house of reps. 1 vote for the district representative and another for the party -list
representative.
Distribution of guaranteed seats and additional seats
Veterans Case
Banat Case
Elections for the members of Congress
2nd Monday of May, unless otherwise provided by law
Vacancies
Where there is a vacancy in the Senate or the House of Reps, any
such vacancy shall be filled up by a special elections, but the
successor would only have to serve for the remaining unexpired
portion of the predecessor.
Take Note. Where the vacancy occurs in the Senate, RA 7166
provides that any such vacancy shall be filled up in an election to be
held simultaneously w ith a general elections.
Salaries
Sec 10 Art 6
Fixed by law. However, the salaries may be increased but such
increase shall not become effective until after the expiration of the full
term of the members of the Congress who approved the said increase.
(There is no provis ion for decreasing salaries)
Does not prohibit the giving of allowances to the members of the
Congress.
Parliamentary immunities
Sec 11 Art 6 A senator or a member of the House of reps shall in all
cases where the penalty imposable does not exceed 6 years
imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while Congress is in session.
Tw o kinds of privileges:
Privilege from arrest
What it provides is privilege from arrest, and not immunity from suit.
Therefore, a member of the Congress can be sued.
Session of Congress in respect to privilege from arrest
Refers to the period beginning from the initial convening of Congress
until its final adjournment.
June 2013 – Congress convened
May 2014 – Adjourned
Illustration:
X is facing a criminal case for reckless imprudence, the penalty
imposable does not exceed 6 years. May X be arrested during a
recess or at the end of every partic ular session for the day?
NO. For purposes of apply ing privilege from arrest, session of
Congress refers to the period of initial convening of Congress in June
2013 until the final adjournment in May 2014.
Take Note. This privilege from arrest is only applicable to incumbent
members of Congress.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
Privilege of speech and debate
Sec 11 Art 6 2nd sentence. No member of Congress may be
questioned or be held answerable in any other place for any speech or
debate in Congress or in any committee thereof.
Purpose. Encourage the members of Congress to actively participate
in the deliberations of involving important issues.
Privileged speech
Can malign fellow members of the Congress or even the president
because they are immune from suit. Cannot be held liable for libel.
Take Note. This immunity or privilege of speech and debate would
subsis t even after the expiration of the term of office of the partic ular
member of Congress, as long as he delivered the speech while he was
still an incumbent member of Congress.
Requirement sine qua non:
1. The speech or debate must be done while Congress is actually in
session
2. It should be delivered in the exercis e of one’s official capacity.
Jimenez v. Cabangbang
Cabangbang was a member of Batasang Pambansa. He wrote an open letter to
the President, and in the process thereof , he maligned the reputation of Jimenez,
an off icer of the Armed Forces. Jimenez f iled a case against Cabangbang and
the latter interposed as a def ense the so called parliamentary immunity –
priv ilege of speech and debate.
The SC disagre ed, noting that it was rather an open letter to the president,
published in the newspa per and such was done while Congress was not in actual
session and was done by Cabangbang in his personal capacity.
2nd sentence Sec 11 Art 6
No member may be questioned or be held answerable in any other
place. (Suggesting that any such member may be held liable w ith the
Congress itself)
Therefore
If Senator Santiago would malign Noynoy, the allies of Noynoy may
discipline Senator Santiago within the confines of Congress.
Sec 16 par 3 Art 6 – Each ho use has the po wer to promu lgate its own r ules and
proceedings an d disciple a ny of its members f or disorderly behav ior. With the
concurrence of 2/3 v otes of the members of each house, any member may be
suspended not exceeding the period of 60 days.
Is the pow er to suspend a member of Congress vested only in either
the Senate or House of Reps?
NO.
Santiago v. Sandiganbayan
Bef ore she became a sen ator, Santiago was BI Commissioner and an
administrativ e case was f iled against her and the case was pending bef ore the
Sandigan bay an f or which she was meted with p rev entiv e suspension in
accordance with Sec 13 of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. But at the
time of the suspension, Senator Santiago was already a member of the Senate.
Santiago questione d her prev entiv e suspension, contending among others that it
is only Congress which has the power to suspend her f rom office.
The SC d isagreed, noting the Sec 16 par 3 of Art 6 does not mean that only
Congress can suspend its members. Ev en the Sandiganbay an can suspend a
member of Congress.
Conflict of Interest
Sec 12 Art 6. All members of Congress, upon assumption of offic e
shall make a full disclosure of their financial and business interests.
They shall notify the House concerned of a potential conflict of interest
that may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of w hich they
are authors.
Take Note. Although the Congress is required to make a full disclosure
of their financial and business interests, they are not mandated to
divest themselv es of any financial interests in a partic ular corporation.
(Unlike the president, vice-president and members of the cabinet)
Sec 17 Art 11 – requires the filing of SALEN.
Notification of any potential conflict
This is the situation involving Villar. He proposed the enactment of a
bill for the payment of the C5 extension and did not disclose that he
ow ned the properties in question.
Take Note. Sec 20 Art 6 Financial records of Congress shall be open
to the public and audited by the Commission on Audit – and published
annually.
Incompatible and Forbidden Offices
Sec 13 Art 6. Prohibits any member of Congress to hold any other
office or employment in the government or any of its subdiv isions and
instrumentalities including government-ow ned or controlled
corporations during his term w ithout forfeiting his seat.
10 | P a g e
First prohibition: RELATIVE
Instance where a member of Congress could hold another office in the
government simultaneously
Example: Chair man of the Senate Committee of Education and at the
same time, a member of the Senate Electoral Tribunal (because the
second offic e may be considered as an extension of his legislative
function)
Second prohibition: ABSOLUTE
No member of Congress shall be appointed to an office which may
have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the
term for which he was elected.
Illustrations:
 X got elected in the 1988 election, serving office until 2004. In
2004, X sponsored a bill creating CBH ( Commission on Battered
Husbands) and was approved. May X be appointed as Chairman
of such body?
Answer: NO. Even if X w ould relinquish his post as a member of
Senate, he can never be appointed as the head of such
particular body because it w as created during the term for whic h
he w as elected. Even if such office exis ted before, but the
emoluments increased during his term, he can never be validly
appointed, notw ithstanding the fact that he already stepped
dow n as senator.
 Suppose the chairman of CBH w ould have to be elected and X
participated in the elections and got elected as chairman of such
body. May he validly become the chairman of the CBH?
Answer: YES. But this time, he w ill have to forfeit his
membership in the Senate.
 X sponsored a bill for the creation of CBH and he served his full
term 1998-2004. He got reelected in 2004, to serve until 2010.
May X be appointed as chairman of CBH?
YES. Because the prohibition applies only during the term for
whic h he was elected and during which such offic e may have
been created.
Inhibitions and Disqualifications
Sec 14 Art 6. Prohibits any member of Congress from personally
appearing as counsel before any court of law or electoral tribunal or
quasi-judicial and administrative bodies.
Reason. To avoid the judges being influenced.
What is prohibited is personal appearance
So if a member of Congress is a lawyer, there is no prohibition for
signing a pleading. He can still do pleadings but can never personally
appear in court.
Puyat v. De Guzman
There was an i ntra-corporate dispute inv olv ing stockholders of a particular
corporation. Atty . Fernandez appeare d as one f action or group, but at that time
he was also member of the Batasang Pambansa. His appea rance was question
and so he inhibited himself f rom f urther appearing as counsel.
But he purchased stocks in the corporation and appeared as lawy er not f or the
f action but f or himself. It was questioned by the other parties and it was
sustained by the Supreme Court. Th e SC rul ed that what Atty . Fernandez could
not directly do, may nev er be done indir ectly. It was an ev ident purpose to
circumv ent the constitutional prohibition.
Another prohibition:
No member of Congress may become financially interested in any
contract, special privilege or franchis e granted by the government and
its instrumentalities.
What is not allowed: Entering into a business contract with the
government while being a member of the Congress.
What is allowed: A transaction involving a member of the Congress
and the government, w here the congressman w ould not reap
pecuniary benefits or advantage. (Donation of parcel of land in favor of
the state)
Session of Congress
Sec 15 Art 6. Unless a different date is fixed by law , Congress shall
convene on the 4th Monday of July for its regular session and shall
continue to be in session until 30 days prior to the opening of its next
regular session, excluding weekends and holidays.
They are mandated to take a break – at least 30 days prior to the
opening if its next regular session.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
June 2013 – initially convened
4th Monday of July – next regular session
May-June 2014 – recess for 1 month
Separate session
The tw o houses conduct separate sessions.
Instances where the two houses are mandated to conduct joint
session: (But there are instances that they shall be voting separately
and jointly)
Joint session but voting separately
1. Where Congress would canvass the votes for the president and
vice-president – vote in case of a tie (simple majority of each
house)
2. When Congress would call for special elections or confer the
nomination of a member of Congress to become the vice-
president in case there is vacancy. (simple majority of each
house)
3. When majority of the members would transmit to either house a
written declaration that the president is incapacitated to perform
his functions and the same is disputed by the president. (2/3
votes of each house)
4. When Congress would declare the exis tence of war. (2/3 votes of
each house)
5. When they would propose amendments to the Constitution when
they transform themselves to a constituent assembly. (3/4 of each
house)
Joint session and voting jointly
1. When there is declaration of martial law and suspension of the
privilege of writ of habeas corpus – if Congress want to revoke
such proclamation (simply majority)
The president may call for a special session at any time
But there are instances under which Congress may have a special
session without need of call from the President.
1. When Congress would canvass the votes for the president and
vice-president – vote in case of a tie
2. When Congress would pass a law calling for special elections
where there is vacancy in the office of the president or vice-
president.
3. When Congress would consider the idea of impeaching the
president
4. When there is declaration of martial or suspension the priv ilege of
habeas corpus
Sec 16 par 5 Art 6 Should be read together w ith Sec 15.
Sec 16 par 5. Provides that neither House, during the sessions of the
Congress, may adjourn for more than 3 days or convene in another
place other than that w hic h the tw o houses are sitting, w ithout the
consent of the other house.
Reason. As much as possible, they have close coordination because
bills coming from either house w ould have to be passed to the other
house.
Officers
Senate
Senate President, Senate president contemporaire, majority and
minority floor leaders, chairman of the various committees, secretaries
and sergeant at arms.
House or Reps
Speaker of the House, Speaker of the house contemporaire, minority
floor leader, majority floor leader, secretary, sergeant at arms.
Quorum
A majority of the members of each house shall constitute a quorum for
such house to legally transact business.
But few members thereof may convene from day to day if only to
compel the attendance of absent members, in such a manner that
penalties may be provided by each house.
Avelino v. Cuenco
Where one memb er is out of the country, such that he may not be compelled to
participate, in computing the quorum, the absent member should not be counted.
If no quorum is reached
It cannot legally transact business, but the members present although
not constituting a quorum, may approve a resolution to compel the
attendance of the absentee members.
11 | P a g e
Journal
Each house is mandated to maintain a journal and a record of its
proceedings.
Record of proceedings – contains the accounts of what transpired in
the Senate or House of Reps.
Journal – contains the summary of what were done or the measures
that were enacted or passed by the Senate of House of Reps.
Enrolled bill – The bill passed by Congress, authenticated by the
Speaker and the Senate President and approved by the President.
When there is conflict between an enrolled bill and a journal
General Rule: Where there is conf lict between the enroll ed bi ll an d the journa l,
the enrolled bill shall prev ail.
Reason. Because the enroll ed bill car ries on its f ace a solemn assurance by the
legislativ e and executiv e departments charged with the duty of enacting and
executing the laws, that it was passed by the assembly.
Exceptions: Matters that the Constitution requires to be entered in the journal
1. Votes (y eas or nays – where there is a request f or the recording thereof
made by 1/5 of the members of each house)
2. Voting in the third and f inal reading of the bill
3. Reason f or the v eto of the president
4. Votes against ov erriding the v eto power of the president
Casco Philippine Chemical Co. v. Gimenez
Casco imported two chemicals – urea and f ormaldehy de (components for making
a glue). They were made to pay tax, but they claimed tax exemption because of
a la w exempting f rom pay ment of tax the importation of urea f ormaldehy de (the
f inished product). According to Casco, there was an error in the printing of the
enrolled bill. Because on the basis of what appeared in the jou rnal, wh at
Congress intended to enjoy tax exemption was the 2 chemicals – urea and
f ormaldehy de. The SC ruled that wher e is a conf lict between the journal and the
enrolled bill, the enrolled bill shall prev ail.
Astorga v. Villegas
Inv olv es a succession where there was a v acancy in the off ice of the city may or.
In his stead, the may or designated the city engineer instead of the v ice-may or.
The v ice-may or objected because according to him, he should hav e been
designated as the acting may or. The city engineer contended that un der the la w
gov erning the city of manila, in the absence of the city may or, he may designate
somebody else other than the vice-may or.
But when a case was f iled concerning the issue, the senate president and the
president of the republic withdre w their sig nature o n the en rolled bill. The SC
upheld the v alidity of what appear ed in the jour nal. But take note that there was
no conf lict in this case because there is no more enrolled bill to speak of.
Effect of Withdraw al of Authenticity
The Speaker and Senate President may w ithdraw their respectiv e
signatures from the signer bill, w here there is serious and substantial
discrepancy as shown by the journal between the text of the bill as
deliberated in the Legislature and that of the enrolled bill.
Effect: Such withdrawal renders the bill w ithout attestation and nullifies
its status as an enrolled bill. In such case, the bill is no longer accorded
absolute verity.
Creation of Electoral Tribunal in the Senate and House of Reps
Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET)
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET)
Composition
Each electoral tribunal is composed of 9 members, 3 coming from the
Supreme Court and 6 from the Senate or House of Reps as the case
may be.
Tw o components:
1. Judicial component
2. Legislative component
Allocation of seats for the legislative component
Should be done observing the proportional representation of the
political parties and party-list representation, as the case may be.
Tanada v. Cuenco
The SC placed much emphasis o n the p roportion al rep resentation of the
members of the SET. Decided in the old Constitution where the rule bef ore –
members of the SET or the representativ es coming f rom the Senate should come
f rom the majority party and the second minority party .
During that time, there was only opposition in the senate – Senator Tanad a. The
majority party appointed 3 members to the SET and Tanada only nominat ed
himself. The majority party appointed 2 more members coming f rom the party, if
only to f ully fill up the 6 members f or the legislativ e component of the SET. It was
questioned by Tanada and the SC sustained his contention.
The SC rule d that what should be giv en importance is the proportional
representation in the composition of the Senate and not so much on the total
membership therof.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
Sec 17 Art 6. The SET or HRET should be the sole judge of all
contests relating to elections, returns or qualifications of their
respective members. But normally, before election time, if there is a
case involv ing the qualification of the Senate of House of Reps, any
such disqualific ation case should be filed w ith the Comelec.
When can the SET or HRET assume jurisdiction involving
disqualification cases of its members?
Limkaichong v. Comelec
The SE T or HRET can assume jurisdiction the moment the winner has already
been proclaimed, taken its oath and assumed his off ice. The Comelec then
would be div ested of his jurisdiction.
Abba s v. SET
Abbas wanted that the members of the legislativ e component of the SET should
be disqualif ied because the members thereof are also propensities of the case
that he f iled. The SC disagreed, ruli ng that the legislativ e component may not be
totally dispensed with, in like matter that the judicial compo nent of the SET may
not be dispensed with.
Bondoc v. Pineda
The SC held that while it is true that the members of the legislativ e components
of the SET or HRET would come f rom v arious political parties, these members
howev er, are mandated to div est themselv es of their partisanship, in the exercise
of their rights as a member of the SET or HRET.
Chairm an or the body
The senior member coming from the judiciary
Commission on Appointments
There shall only be one commission on appointments in Congress.
May only convene once Congress is in session.
Function. To confer the nomination and appointments made by the
President. (Ex. Appointment by the president of his cabinet members)
Composition
Chaired by the Senate President, composed of 25 members, 12
coming from Senate and other 12 from the House of Reps.
Take Note. This membership has to be filled up by observing the
proportional representation of the political parties including the party -
list organizations in the case of the House of Reps.
Guingona v. Gonzales
Inv olv es the composition of the Commission on Appointments. 25 members –
senate president, 12 f rom Senate, 12 f rom House. If only 10 members is reached
after apply proportional representation, it is allowed because what is giv en
paramount importance is pr oportional repr esentation. But the SC made a
suggestion. If the Senate wants to f ill up the 1 seats, then political
realignments/coalitions should be made.
Daza v. Tingson
Where there is pol itical realignment, then the composition of the Commission on
Appointments may be affected.
Chairm an of Commission of Appointments
Not allow ed to vote, except in cases of tie.
ENACTMENT AND APPROVAL OF LAWS
Artic le 6 Legislative powers shall be vested upon the Congress, except
to the extent reserved to the people by the system of initiave and
referendum.
Legislative power may be performed by the people themselves via
the system of initiative and referendum
Three kinds of initiative
RA 6735
1. Initiative on the Constitution – power of the people to amend the
provis ions of the constitution
2. Initiative on statute – power of the people to enact laws and
legislation or reject any part thereof
3. Initiative on local legislation – power of the people to file a
petition to enact or reject local ordinances
Petition to enact national laws– supported by at least 10% of the
registered voters of the Philippines, provided that each of the
legislative districts must be represented by at least 3% of the
registered voters therein.
Petition on local initiative – if ordinance of an independent or
autonomous region, has to be supported by at least 2000 of registered
voters of the autonomous region.
12 | P a g e
 Initiative for city ordinances –supported by at least 1,000
registered voters
 Initiative for municipal ordinances – supported by at least 100
registered voters
 Barangay – 50 registered voters therein.
Take Note. Any such petition of local initiativ e must pertain to matters within the
scope of authority of the local bodies concerned.
How a Bill becomes a Law
1. A bill is proposed by either of the houses.
2. It is signed by its author/s and filed w ith the Secretary of the
House
3. Bills may originate from either the lower or upper House
Except
Appropriatio n bills, rev enue bills, tariff bills, bills authorizin g increase of
public debt, bills of local application, and priv ate bills (must originate
exclusiv ely in the House of Reps)
First Reading
1. The Secretary reports the bill for first reading. (Reading the
number and title of the bill)
2. The bill is referred to the appropriate Committee for study and
recommendation (the committee may kill the bill at once)
3. The Committee may hold public hearings on the proposed
measure and submit its report and recommendation for
Calendar for second reading.
Second Reading
1. The bill shall be read in full w ith the amendments proposed by
the Committee
2. The bill w ill be subject to debates, pertinent motions and
amendments.
3. After the amendments shall have been acted upon, the bill w ill
be voted.
4. A bill approved on the second reading shall be included in the
calendar of bills for third reading.
5. There should be publication of the final version of the bill and
copies thereof should be distributed to the members at least 3
days prior to the third reading.
Third Reading
1. The bill w ill be submitted for final vote by yeas and nays.
2. No amendment is allow ed.
Presidential certification – Upon the certification of the president as
` to the necessity of the bill’ s immediate e nact ment to meet a public
cala mity or e me rgency, the requi re ment of three readi ngs on
separate days and of printing and d istribution of printed copies three
days prior to its passage, can be dispensed with. (Tolentino v.
Secretary of Finance)
Once the bill is approved on third reading by one house, the bill is
transm itted to the other House for concurrence. (The bill has to
undergo the same procedures – 3 readings)
If the other House approves the bill w ithout amendment, the bill is
passed by Congress and the same w ill be transmitted to the President
for appropriate action.
If the other House introduces amendments and the House w hich it
originated does not agree w ith said amendments, the differences will
be settled by the Conference Committee of both Chambers
Conference Committee reports
Conference Committee
The mechanism for compromising differences betw een the Senate and
the House of Reps in the passage of a bill into law .
Conference Committee as a third body of the legislature
Because its juris diction is not limited to only compromising differences.
It may deal generally w ith the subject matter. It may even produce
unexpected results beyond its mandate. It is w ithin its power to include
its report an entirely new provisions that is not found either in the
House bill or in the Senate Bill. It has the power to propose
amendments. (Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance)
Approval of Conference Report
The conference committee report shall be approved by both Houses of
Congress.
Authentication of bills
1. The law making process in Congress ends when the bill is
approved by the body.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez
2. Before an approved bill is sent to the president for his
consideration, the bill is authenticated.
3. The process of authentication includes the signing by the
Speaker and the Senate President of the printed copy of the
approved bill, certif ied by the respectiv e secretaries of both
Houses, to signify to the president that the bill being presented
to him has been duly approved by the legislature and is ready
for his approval or rejection.
President’s approval or veto
1. Every bill passed by the Congress shall be presented to the
president before it becomes a law.
2. The president if he approves the same, shall sign it.
3. If he does not approve, he shall veto it and return the same
with his objections to the House where it originated.
4. The tw o Houses may override the decision of the president by
a vote of 2/3, voting separately
5. If the President fails to communicate his veto of the bill w ithin
30 days from receipt, the bill becomes a law .
Three ways for a bill to become a law
1. When the President signs it
2. When the President does not sign nor communicate his veto of
the bill w ithin 30 days after his receipt thereof
3. When the vetoed bill is repassed by Congress by 2/3 votes of
all its members, each house voting separately.
When a bill becomes a law without the signature of the president
1. When the President does not sign nor communicate his veto of
the bill w ithin 30 days after his receipt thereof
2. When the vetoed bill is repassed by Congress by 2/3 votes of
all its members, each house voting separately.
3. A law calling for special election where there is vacancy in the
office of the president
Pocket veto
We do not adhere to this in the Philippines. In the US, the US president
is given 10 days within whic h to act on the bill. If he does not sign the
bill, but not w hen the Congress adjourns during the 10-day period.
One bill, one title rule
Purpose. To avoid surprise and prevent hodgepodge legislation –
where the bill would embrace unrelated subject matters, w ith the hope
that the same may be approved because some may be interested in
one subject matter.
Tobias v. Abalos
The title of the bill need not catalog or index all prov isions therein. What is
required is that the prov isions are germane to the purpose f or which the bill is
enacted.
Partial Veto and Partial Approval
May the president partially approve the bill and partially veto the
same?
General Rule: The president has to approve or disapprove the bill in its
entirety.
Exception: When the bill is an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill (item
veto is allowed Sec 27 par 2 Art 6)
Partial veto is only allow ed in:
1. Appropriation bill
2. Revenue bill
3. Tariff bill
Illustrations
 Congress enacts the general appropriation act and the same is
submitted to the president for his approval. The act provides for
the funding of the government for the fiscal year.
Budget A – 1M
Budget B – 3M
May the president dis approve the 3M appropriation for budget B?
Answer: Yes, because it is an appropriation bill and being one,
item veto by the president is allowed.
 Bill making Consoloan City and there 60 sections therein. May the
president veto section 4?
Answer. No, because partial veto is allow ed only for
appropriation, tariff, and revenue bills and does not extend to bills
of local application.
13 | P a g e
Rule: The president has to approve or disapprove the bill in its entirety,
except w hen the bill is an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill.
Exception to the exception: If the bill contains a provision which is
patently illegal or not germane to the purpose for which the bill is
created.
Illustrations
 Consoloan city has but a population of 200,000, but under Sec 40
a legislative dis trict is created for such city. This is patently illegal
for being violative of the 250,000 requirement. Where this
happens, the president can item veto sec 40 thereof.
 Suppose the budgetary allocation of 5M for pork barrel contains a
condition – that it shall be spent only for infrastructure projects.
But the president dis approves only the condition. Is this allowed?
Answer: NO. The president is not allow ed to veto the condition
attached to the appropriation w ithout disapproving the item itself.
(Bolinao Electronics Corporation v. Valencia)
POWERS OF CONGRESS
Power of Taxation
Inherent in the State. The moment the state is created, it is deemed
vested with the power to tax. But this power to tax may only be carried
out w ith the enactment of taxation laws – to be made by Congress.
Lim itations:
1. The rule of taxation shall be uniform (All persons or things
belonging to the same class is subject to the same tax rate)
2. The rule of taxation shall be equitable (payment of taxes shall be
based on one’s capacity to pay – progressive tax; the bigger your
income, the bigger your tax)
3. Churches, mosques, non-profit cemeteries, convents and all lands
exclusively used for religious, charitable and educational purposes
shall be exempt from taxation.
Lladoc v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
The SC sustained the imposition of the donor’s tax made on the church but
the ruling in this case is no l onger control ling. Because n ow, a donation
made in f av or of the church is tax exempt pursuant to the National Internal
Rev enue Code.
4. No law granting tax exemption shall be passed w ithout the
concurrence of majority of all the members of congress.
5. All revenues and assets of non-stock non-profit educational
institutions exclusiv ely used for educational purposes shall be
exempt from taxes and duties
6. All money levied or collected pursuant to a tax shall be considered
a special fund and shall be spent for a special purpose. Where the
special purpose for which the special fund was created has already
been abandoned or fulf illed, the excess shall be given to the
national treasury.
Concurrence Power
The president is given the power to extend amnesty but any such
amnesty to be valid, must have the concurrence of Congress (majority
of the members)
Concur to treaties that may be entered into by the president. For such
treaty to be valid, it must have the concurrence of the Senate (2/3)
War Powers
The Congress, upon the vote of 2/3 of the members of Congress in joint
session but voting separately, has the power to declare the existence of
war. (defensiv e war)
Power on initiative and referendum
Congress is mandated to provide for the system of initiative and
referendum. RA 6735 was passed by Congress.
Power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation
The Senate, House of Reps, or any committee thereof, may conduct
inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules
and procedures.
Congress or any committee (blue ribbon committee) w ould normally
conduct investigation supposedly in aid of legislation
Even w ithout this express provis ion, Congress is given the power to
conduct inquiries in aid of legislation. The fact that it is stated is not so
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW l Atty. Renato Galeon l Review er by Tanya Ibañez

much about conferring the Congress this power, but to delineate the
limitations in the exercis e of this power.

General rule: Congress may conduct investigation on any matter for

as long that the same is done in aid of legislation.

Illustrations

 What happens if the Congress conducts investigation involving a

subject matter whic h is already a subject of a pending case in
the Sandiganbayan or the regular courts? Can they still conduct
inquiries in aid of legislation?

Answer: NO.

Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee

There was alrea dy a case f iled against the Marcos cronies, pen ding
bef ore the Sandigan bay an and there was re port that Romualde z sold his
shareholdings to a certain group of companies. This was to be
inv estigated by the Senate Blue Ribbo n Committee, upon the prodding of
Senator Enrile. When the members of the groups of companies were
summoned by the SBRC, they questioned the purported inv estigation,
contending that they can no longer be i nv estigated because of the
pending case bef ore the Sandiganbay an.

The SC sustained the f iling of injunctiv e petition, noting that since there is
already a pend ing case, then the pe rsons sought b e subpo enaed by the
SBRC, are no longer mandated to appear. They are justif ied from ref using
to appear bef ore the SBRC.

Standard Chartered Bank v. Senate Committee on Banks

The SC ha d a diff erent ruling. The S enate Committee on Banks
conducted inquiry in aid of legislation regarding the sale of unregistered
f oreign securities by the Standard Chartered Bank. Ev en bef ore the SCB
could commence, cases wer e alr eady f iled bef ore the regular courts
concerning the questionable transactions.

When the off ices of the bank wer e summoned by the Senate Committee
on banks, they ref used to appear. But the SC ruled that notwithstanding
the case f iled bef ore the regular courts, the standard chartere d ba nk are
not justif ied f rom ref using to attend.

The distinction between the 2 cases:

Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee - the purported

investigation to be conducted by the SBRC w as not actually in aid of
legislation, but in aid of prosecution.

Standard Chartered Bank v. Senate Committee on Banks – the

purported investigation was really for the purposes of coming up with
legislation dealing w ith the dis position of unregistered foreign
securities.

The rule. The pendency of a case would not normally prohibit the
Congress from conducting inquiries in aid of legislation – so long that
it is really intended to come up w ith a legislation.

Result if the person subpoenaed to appear refuses to appear

Shall be cited in contempt of the senate, house of reps or any
committee. (Arnault v. Nazareno)

In contempt of the Senate – imprisoned indefinitely

In contempt of the House or Reps – imprisoned until final
adjournment of the house of reps

Appropriation power

Lim itations

Implied Limitations

1. Any such disbursement of funds is for public purpose

2. Any such appropriation must be for a determinate amount

Express Limitations

14 | P a g e