1. What is civilian supremacy over the military means? waters inside the baselines are considered as internal waters.
ines are considered as internal waters. This makes the
Sec 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. 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/supremacy clause (1stsentence)
1.Civilian authority simply means the supremacy of the law because
authority, under our constitutional system, can only come from law.
2.Under this clause, the soldier renounces political ambition.
Mark of sovereignty (2ndand 3rdsentences)
1.Positively, this clause singles out the military as the guardian of the
people and of the integrity of the national territory and therefore
ultimately of the majesty of the law.
2.Negatively, it is an expression of disapproval of military abuses.
The principle of civil supremacy over the military is an important
principle of the Philippine constitutional government. This article looks at the
principle from another point of view. Here it is seen as a moral principle applicable
to individual officers and soldiers. The principle states that (1) the ends of
government policy are to be set by civilians; the military is limited to decisions about
means; and (2) it is for the civilian leadership to decide where the line between
ends and means (and hence between civilian and military responsibility) is to be
drawn. The article defends this two-point principle and discusses its limits by
appeal to general philosophical considerations and by reflection on historical
examples.
The central element of a democratic system is the principle of civilian
supremacy or the rule over the various institutions of the state by the people
through their elected representatives to ensure that they function in accordance
with the will of the people. If one looks at the system of government in any mature
democracy, one finds that the ultimate authority of the state lies with the elected
representatives.
The logic behind the principle of civilian supremacy over the
unelected institutions of the state is especially relevant to the military. Armed forces
constitute the raw power of the state. The decision to use this power for the
defense and security of the state must be in the hands of the elected
representatives of the people. This is the only way to ensure that the armed forces
are employed in the service of the state’s goals and policies as decided by its
elected representatives and are not misused for the fulfillment of the vested or
personal interests of the generals commanding them. It goes without saying that
the misuse of the armed forces can cause grave harm to the security and economic
well-being of the country as Pakistan’s history, punctuated by repeated military
takeovers, clearly shows.
2. What is the citizenship of the Filipina who married a foreigner in 1970?
What is the citizenship if the children?
Under the old rule, those whose fathers are foreigners and whose mothers are
citizens of the Philippines must still elect their Philippine citizenship upon reaching
18 years old. In other words, citizenship depends upon blood relations with the
father.
3. Explain Archipelagic Doctrine.
"The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago with all the islands and
waters embraced therein and all the other territories belonging to the Philippines..."
This doctrine means, therefore, that the country, with its thousands of islands and
many seas, should be considered as a political unit for reasons of history, law,
geography, economics, and security. Also, when questions involving territorial
conflicts arise, the Philippines uses this doctrine to support its territorial claims.
It is defined as all waters, around between and connecting different islands
belonging to the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective of their width or dimension,
are necessary appurtenances of its land territory, forming an integral part of the
national or inland waters, subject to the exclusive sovereignty of the Philippines. It
is found in the 2nd sentence of Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution.
It emphasizes the unity of the land and waters by defining an archipelago as group
of islands surrounded by waters or a body of waters studded with islands.
To emphasize unity, an imaginary single baseline is drawn around the islands by
joining appropriate points of the outermost islands of the archipelago with straight
lines and all islands and waters enclosed within the baseline form part of its
territory.
The main purpose of the archipelagic doctrine is to protect the territorial interests
of an archipelago, that is, the territorial integrity of the archipelago. Without it, there
would be “pockets of high seas” between some of our islands and islets, thus
foreign vessels would be able to pass through these “pockets of seas” and would
have no jurisdiction over them. Accordingly, if we follow the old rule of international
law, it is possible that between islands, e.g. Bohol and Siquijor, due to the more
than 24 mile distance between the 2 islands, there may be high seas. Thus, foreign
vessels may just enter anytime at will, posing danger to the security of the State.
However, applying the doctrine, even these bodies of water within the baseline,
regardless of breadth, form part of the archipelago and are thus considered as
internal waters.
Despite the opposition of maritime powers, the Philippines and four other states
(Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Bahamas) got the approval in the UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea held in Jamaica last December 10, 1982. They
were qualified as archipelagic states. The archipelagic doctrine is now
incorporated in Chapter IV of the said convention. It legalizes the unity of land,
water and people into a single entity.
On the strength of these assertions, the Philippines Archipelago is considered as
one integrated unit instead of being divided into more than seven thousand islands.
The outermost of our archipelago are connected with straight baselines and all
large bodies of waters connecting the islands of the archipelago like Mindanao
Sea, Sulo Sea and the Sibuyan Sea part of the Philippines as its internal waters,
similar to the rivers and lakes found within the islands themselves.
The archipelagic principle however is subject to the following limitations:
a) respect for the right of the ship and other states to pass through the territorial as
well as archipelagic waters
b) respect to right of innocent passage
c) respect for passage through archipelagic sea lanes subject to the promulgation
by local authorities of pertinent rules and regulations.
4. Issues raised in EO 464 Hello Garci Tape
The controversial wiretap recordings were the primary issue raised against former
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, in an impeachment complaint before the
House of Representatives.
1. The tape allegedly detailed telephone conversations between the
President and former elections commissioner Virgilio Garcillano in
which the rigging of results of the May 10, 2004 elections.
2. Mrs. Arroyo admitted it was "a lapse in judgment" on her part in
calling the election official but denied allegations that she sought to
fix election results.
3. Garcillano, after going into hiding for six months after the controversy
broke, also denied rigging the presidential election results.
4. Before Garcillano made the denial, the House of Representatives
dismissed the opposition-initiated impeachment complaint against
the President on Sept. 6.
5. The Senate, however, expressed its desire to conduct a separate
inquiry into the controversy on the grounds that the wiretapping
constituted a breach of national security.
The evidence carried with it great consequences. The Ong tape were neutrally
authenticated by foreign companies Uniquest (Australia) and Voice Identification
(United States). Arroyo's spokesman, Ignacio Bunye, as well as the president
herself, acknowledged that it was indeed Arroyo's voice. The protesting public
insisted that the tapes and CDs proved electoral fraud, and that Arroyo cheated
and rigged the 2004 elections. A sizable number of people wanted the results of
the 2004 elections to be made invalid. The Supreme Court withheld judgment on
the matter, refraining from actions toward invalidating the election. The
administration said the Ong recordings were inadmissible in court, since the audio
was taped without consent.
Initially, there were two possible outcomes for the government; Arroyo could have
either resigned or be ousted through a constitutionally accepted process. These
actions could only take place after addressing the current state of the faulty
electoral system. The other outcome was for Arroyo to be cleared of any
wrongdoing. Neither outcome occurred, and hence no final course of action was
taken to resolve Arroyo's legitimacy or to prevent electoral fraud. Those unrealized
possible outcomes could have resolved definitely the legitimacy issue, and could
have made Arroyo accountable for any wrongdoing. However, Philippine law and
the country's flawed electoral rules complicate the legitimacy and accountability
problem. The law only mentions impeachment followed with a conviction as a
possible way of removing certain serving legitimate government officials. The law
however is unclear on how to prosecute and convict the sitting official if illegitimacy
is the problem, due to allegations of vote rigging. Conrado de Quiros, a strong
advocate of electoral reforms, argues that a special presidential election must be
done in coinciding with midterm elections to resolve legitimacy.
he Philippines, according to experts, has a reputation for having political issues
based on patronage politics and personality politics. To some experts, what is
unique about the crisis is that it addresses the greater issue of electoral fraud and
an allegedly faulty election system that allows cheaters to win and get away with
it. This is manifested in a humorous local saying that, "There are two types of
people in elections. Those who win and those who get cheated out of office."
Politically outspoken student groups mention that this is rather new for Philippine
politics, and shows a gradual development of the voting public, the electorate.
According to pundits, the past 60 years of the Philippine history already has a
reputation of electoral fraud, proven or otherwise. It is just that no one ever gets
caught or punished.
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 464
ENSURING OBSERVANCE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF
POWERS, ADHERENCE TO THE RULE ON EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE AND
RESPECT FOR THE RIGHTS OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS APPEARING IN
LEGISLATIVE INQUIRIES IN AID OF LEGISLATION UNDER THE
CONSTITUTION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
1. Executive Order No. 464 (popularly known as E.O. 464) is a
controversial executive order issued in the Philippines on September
26, 2005 by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo that prevents
cabinet members, police and military generals, senior national
security officials, and "such other officers as may be determined by
the President" to attend congressional hearings unless the President
gives permission to those who will attend the said proceedings.

2. The order was created as two officers from the military appeared
during the hearings of the Senate Committee on National Defense
on the Hello Garci scandal. It also comes a week after National
Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales appeared in a Senate hearing
regarding the contract of the government with the Washington-based
law firm Venable LLP. Arroyo revoked the order on March 5, 2008.
3. To justify the constitutionality of the decree, President Arroyo
invoked "the constitutional guarantees of the separation of powers of
the Executive Branch, Legislative and Judicial branches of
government" and cited Article VI Section 22 of the
PhilippineConstitution, which permits department heads, cabinet
members and other officials under the Executive Branch to appear
at congressional hearings with the consent of the President.
4. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), Bayan Muna, Courage,
Counsels for the Defense of Liberties, former Solicitor General Frank
Chavez, Alternative Law Groups Inc., 17 senators, and PDP Laban
petition before the Philippine Supreme Court to scrap the Executive
Order.
5. In the 26-page petition of the IBP lawyers, Executive Order 464 is a
"derogation of the legislative power to investigate." Furthermore,
they said that the non-appearance of executive officials during
congressional hearings by invoking Executive Order 464 hampered
Congress investigation in aid of legislation, "thus petitioners' right to
be informed of matters of public interest has been denied."
Decision of the SC: On April 20, 2006, in a 52-page en banc decision at a session
in Baguio City, the Supreme Court of the Philippines nullified two sections of the
executive order namely Sections 2(B) and 3.[1] These sections prohibit officials
under the Executive Department from appearing on hearings of Congress without
the consent of the President. However, the Supreme Court declared that Sections
1 and 2 are valid.[2] This validity asserts the right of the President to forbid
executive officials from attending at the hour of question of the Senate and the
House of Representatives and the right to request for a closed-door session if the
"security of the state or the public interest so requires."\
5. What are the inherent powers of the state?
1. for public good or welfare - Police Power
POLICE POWER is the power of promoting the public welfare by restraining and
regulating the use of both liberty and property of all the people. It is considered to
be the most all-encompassing of the three powers. It may be exercised only by the
government. The property taken in the exercise of this power is destroyed because
it is noxious or intended for a noxious purpose.
It lies primarily in the discretion of the legislature. Hence, the President, and
administrative boards as well as the lawmaking bodies on all municipal levels,
including the barangay may not exercise it without a valid delegation of legislative
power. Municipal governments exercise this power by virtue of the general welfare
clause of the Local Government Code of 1991. Even the courts cannot compel the
exercise of this power through mandamus or any judicial process.
Requisites of a valid police measure:
(a.) Lawful Subject – the activity or property sought to be regulated affects the
apublic welfare. It requires the primacy of the welfare of the many over the interests
of the few.
(b.) Lawful Means – the means employed must be reasonable and must conform
to the safeguards guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
2. for public use - Power of Eminent Domain
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN affects only property RIGHTS. It may be
exercised by some private entities. The property forcibly taken under this power,
upon payment of just compensation, is needed for conversion to public use or
purpose.
The taking of property in law may include:
- trespass without actual eviction of the owner;
- material impairment of the value of the property; or
- prevention of the ordinary uses for which the property was intended.
The property that may be subject for appropriation shall not be limited to private
property. Public property may be expropriated provided there is a SPECIFIC grant
of authority to the delegate. Money and a chose in action are the only things
exempt from expropriation.
Although it is also lodged primarily in the national legislature, the courts have the
power to inquire the legality of the right of eminent domain and to determine
whether or not there is a genuine necessity therefore.
3. for revenue - Power of Taxation
POWER OF TAXATION affects only property rights and may be exercised only by
the government. The property taken under this power shall likewise be intended
for a public use or purpose. It is used solely for the purpose of raising revenues, to
protect the people and extend them benefits in the form of public projects and
services. Hence, it cannot be allowed to be confiscatory, except if it is intended for
destruction as an instrument of the police power.
It must conform to the requirements of due process. Therefore, taxpayers are
entitled to be notified of the assessment proceedings and to be heard therein on
the correct valuation to be given the property. It is also subject to the general
requirements of the equal protection clause that the rule of taxation shall be
uniform and equitable.
6. Can President Duterte suspend the WHC and declare Martial Law?
Yes. President Rodrigo Duterte may have the right to suspend the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus under the Constitution but its basis has to go through a
process.
The writ of habeas corpus is an order by the court to produce the body of someone
who has been detained and determine why he is being restrained without
necessarily ordering the release of the prisoner.
The first thing that needs to be established is if there is a need for suspension.
Article VII, Section 18 of the Philippine Constitution states that in cases of invasion
or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, the President may for a period not
exceeding 60 days suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the
Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.
As Commander-in-Chief, he may call out the armed forces of the Philippines in
cases of lawless violence, invasion, and rebellion. In case of invasion and
rebellion, martial law may be declared in the country or a part of it, and the writ of
habeas corpus may be suspended.
Both martial law and the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus may not exceed
a period of sixty days. The writ suspension is not automatic under martial law.
Moreover, the suspension only applies to those specifically charged with rebellion
or invasion, and even with the suspension, the person arrested must be judicially
charged within three days or else released.
Within forty-eight hours of the declaration, the President must submit a report to
Congress. Congress must then vote jointly and decide by majority vote of all its
members whether or not to revoke the President’s decision.
Upon the President’s initiative, Congress may also similarly extend the period of
60 days when necessary. The period of extension is determined by Congress.
Subject to filing by a citizen, the Supreme Court is also mandated to review
whether there is sufficient factual basis to declare martial law. Within 30 days of
filing, a decision must be promulgated.
All these measures ensure that the immense power of martial law cannot be
abused by the President. With all these checks and balances, martial law can only
be declared when there is sufficient factual basis to declare it, as competently
reviewed by the Supreme Court. Moreover, additional specifics are laid out to
protect citizens from abuse under the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.
Many of these additions reflect lessons directly learned from the period of Martial
Law under Marcos.
7. What are the 3 branches of the government?
The Legislative branch is authorized to make laws, alter, and repeal them through
the power vested in the Philippine Congress. This institution is divided into the
Senate and the House of Representatives.
The Legislative Branch enacts legislation, confirms or rejects Presidential
appointments, and has the authority to declare war. This branch includes Congress
(the Senate and House of Representatives) and several agencies that provide
support services to Congress.
Senate – The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be
elected at large by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by
law.
House of Representatives – The House of Representatives shall be composed of
not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who
shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities,
and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective
inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who,
as provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered
national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.
The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per cent of the total number
of representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms
after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list
representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the
labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and
such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.
The Executive branch carries out laws. It is composed of the President and the
Vice President who are elected by direct popular vote and serve a term of six years.
The Constitution grants the President authority to appoint his Cabinet. These
departments form a large portion of the country’s bureaucracy.
The executive branch carries out and enforces laws. It includes the President, Vice
President, the Cabinet, executive departments, independent agencies, and other
boards, commissions, and committees.
Key roles of the executive branch include:

President – The President leads the country. He/she is the head of state, leader of
the national government, and Commander in Chief of all armed forces of the
Philippines. The President serves a six-year term and cannot be re-elected.
Vice President – The Vice President supports the President. If the President is
unable to serve, the Vice President becomes President. He/she serves a six-year
term.
The Cabinet – Cabinet members serve as advisors to the President. They include
the Vice President and the heads of executive departments. Cabinet members are
nominated by the President and must be confirmed by the Commission of
Appointments.

The Judicial branch evaluates laws. It holds the power to settle controversies
involving rights that are legally demandable and enforceable. This branch
determines whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting
to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part and instrumentality of the government.
It is made up of a Supreme Court and lower courts.

The judicial branch interprets the meaning of laws, applies laws to individual cases,
and decides if laws violate the Constitution. The judicial power shall be vested in
one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law.

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and
to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting
to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
Government. The judicial branch interprets the meaning of laws, applies laws to
individual cases, and decides if laws violate the Constitution.

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

The President can veto laws passed by Congress.

Congress confirms or rejects the President's appointments and can remove the
President from office in exceptional circumstances.
The Justices of the Supreme Court, who can overturn unconstitutional laws, are
appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
The Philippine government seeks to act in the best interests of its citizens through
this system of checks and balances.

The Constitution expressly grants the Supreme Court the power of Judicial Review
as the power to declare a treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance or regulation
unconstitutional.

8. Distinguish Dual Citizenship from Dual Allegiance.