ARTICLE VII.

THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

I. Executive Power (Sec. 1)

CASES:
1.Marcos v. Manglapus, G.R. No. 88211, September 15, 1989 (Read also the concurring opinion of CJ Fernan, and
the dissenting opinions of J. Sarmiento & Cruz)
2.Laurel v. Garcia, G.R. No. 92013 July 25, 1990 (read also the concurrence of J. Padilla and dissent of J.
Feliciano)
II. Qualifications (Sec. 2)
A. Citizenship – natural-born citizen
CASES:
3.Fornier v. COMELEC, G. R. No. 161824, March 3, 2004 (read also the concurrences and dissents for
additional nuances)
4.Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, G. R. No. 221697, March 8, 2016
B. Registered voter
C. Literacy requirement – able to read and write
D. Age on election day – at least 40
E. Residence – at least 10 years immediately preceding election day
5. CASE: Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, supra
III. Election, Canvass & Proclamation (Sec. 4)
A. Election
B. Canvass & proclamation
6.CASE: Macalintal v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 157013
C. Proclamation of winner
D. The Presidential Electoral Tribunal
CASES:
7.Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004
8.Macalintal v. PET, G.R. No. 191618, November 23, 2010
9.Santiago v. Ramos, P.E.T. Case No. 001, February 13, 1996
10.Poe v. Macapagal-Arroyo, P.E.T. Case No. 002, March 29, 2005
11.Legarda v. De Castro, P.E.T. Case No. 003, March 31, 2005 (re PET power to correct manifest errors in
the SOVs and COCs); January 18, 2008 (protest mooted)
12.Roxas v. Binay, P.E.T. No. 004, August 16, 2016
IV. Oath of office (Sec. 5)
V. Term of office (Sec. 4)
A. Duration
B. Eligibility for reelection
1. President: no
13.CASE: Pormento v. Estrada, G.R. No. 191988, August 31, 2010
2. Vice-President: yes; 2 consecutive terms only
VI. Vacancies and manner of filling it in (Sec. 7, 8 & 10)
A. Possible causes of vacancy
14.CASE: Estrada v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 146738, March 2, 2001 (read also the concurring opinion of J.
Mendoza re permanent incapacity)
B. Effects of vacancy
C. Role of Congress
VII. Temporary incapacity & serious illness of the President (Sec. 11)
15.CASE: Estrada v. Arroyo, supra (read also the concurrence of J. Vitug regarding temporary incapacity)
VIII. Privileges and inhibitions (Sec. 6 & 13)
CASES:
16.Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 83896, February 22, 1991
17.Public Interest Center Inc. v. Elma, G.R. No. 138965, June 30, 2006
18.Funa v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 184740, February 11, 2010
IX. Presidential Immunity
CASES:
19.Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. No. 146710-15, March 2, 2001 – no post-tenure immunity from criminal prosecution
20.Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982) – post-tenure absolute immunity from civil litigation (for acts
committed during incumbency)
21.Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997) – no immunity from civil litigation for pre-tenure acts
X. Specific Powers of the President
A. The Appointing Power (Sec. 16); Midnight appointments (Sec. 15)
CASES:
 22.Sarmiento v. Mison, G.R. No. 79974 December 17, 1987
23.Kida v. Senate, G.R. No. 196271, October 18, 2011
24.Rufino v. Endriga, G.R. No. 139554, July 21, 2006
25.Pimentel v. Ermita, G.R. No. 164978, October 13, 2005
1.Velicaria-Garafil v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 203372, June 16, 2015 (read also the concurring
and dissenting opinion of J. Brion)
2.Javier v. Reyes, G.R. No. L-39451, February 20, 1989
3.Aytona v. Castillo, G.R. No. L-19313, January 19,
4.Velicaria-Garafil v. Office of the President, supra (read also the concurring and dissenting opinion of J.
Brion)
5.In Re Appointments of Valenzuela and Vallarta, A.M. No. 98-5-01-SC November 9, 1998
6.De Castro v. JBC, G. R. No. 191002, March 17, 2010 (read also the dissent of J. Carpio-Morales)
B. The Power of Control and the Faithful Execution clause (Sec. 17)
CASES:
7.Gascon v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 78389, October 16, 1989
8.Maceda v. Macaraeg, G.R. No. 88291, May 31, 1991
9. Drilon v. Lim, G.R. No. 112497, August 4, 1994
10. David v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006
11. Chavez v. NHA, G.R. No. 164527, August 15, 2007
12. Biraogo v. Truth Commission, G.R. No. 192935, December 7, 2010
13. Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 196425, July 24, 2012
C. The Military Powers (Sec. 18)
1. Distinctions
2. The Calling out power
CASES:
14. IBP v. Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, August 15, 2000
15. Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 159085, February 3, 2004
16. David v. Arroyo, supra
17. Ampatuan v. Puno, G.R. No. 190259, June 7, 2011
18. Kulayan v. Tan, G.R. No. 187298, July 3, 2012
3. Martial law & suspension of the privilege of habeas corpus
CASES:
19. Lagman v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 231658, July 4, 2017 (read also the separate opinions)
20. Padilla v. Congress, G.R. No. 231671, July 25, 2017 (joint voting vs. joint session)
21. Lagman v. Pimentel, G.R. No. 235935, February 6, 2018 (re 2nd extension)
22. Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 243522, February 19, 2019 (re 3rd extension)
4. Judicial review
CASES:
23. Lansang v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-33964, December 11, 1971
24. Aquino v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-35546, September 17, 1974
25. Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-61388, April 20, 1983
1. Fortun v. Arroyo, G.R. No. 190293, March 20, 2012 (read also the dissent of J. Carpio)  Read,
however, 2.Lagman v. Executive Secretary, supra
5. Consequences of ML proclamation or suspension of the privilege of the writ
3. CASE: Olaguer v. Military Commission No. 34, G.R. No. L-54558, May 22, 1987 (concurring opinion
of CJ Teehankee)
D. The power of executive clemency (Sec. 19)
1. Types – reprieves, commutations, pardons, remission of fines and forfeitures, and amnesty
2. Limitations
CASES:
4. Llamas v. Orbos, G.R. No. 99031 October 15, 1991
5. People v. Salle, G.R. No. 103567, December 4, 1995
3. Evolution of the Philippine laws on presidential pardon
6. CASE: People v. Salle, supra
4. Effect of grant of pardon
CASES:
7. Monsanto v. Factoran, G.R. No. 78239, February 9, 1989 (read also the concurrence of JJ. Padilla
and Feliciano)
9. Risos-Vidal v. Estrada, G.R. No. 206666, January 21, 2015
5. Effect of violation of clemency
CASES:
10. Culanag v. Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L-27206, August 26, 1967
 11. Torres v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 76872, July 23, 1987
12. In Re Wilfredo Sumulong Torres, G.R. No. 122338, December 29, 1995
6. Grant of amnesty
13. CASE: Magdalo Para sa Pagbabago v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 190793, June 19, 2012
7. President’s power of clemency vs. power of the courts to control the execution of final decisions
14. CASE: Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601, January 19, 1999
E. The borrowing power (Sec. 20)
F. The diplomatic power (Sec. 21); also read: Sec. 25, Article XVIII
CASES:
15. Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, October 10, 2000 (read also the dissent of J. Puno)
16. Nicolas v. Romulo, G.R. No. 175888, February 11, 2009 (read also the dissent of JJ. Puno and Carpio)
G. The budgetary power (Sec. 22)
H. The informing power (Sec. 23)
I. The presidential pork barrel
17. CASE: Belgica v. Executive Secretary, supra
J. Other powers
1. delegated emergency powers [Sec. 23(2), Article VI; also Sec. 17, Article XII]
18. CASE: David v Arroyo, supra
2. power to call special session of Congress at any time (Sec. 15, Article VI)
3. power to certify urgent bills [Sec. 26(2), Article VI]
4. power to approve or veto legislation [Sec. 27(1), Article VI]
19. CASE: Belgica v. Executive Secretary, supra – pork barrel system violates the President’s
constitutional line-item veto power
5. delegated power to fix tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties
or imposts [Sec. 28(2), Article VI]
6. power to concur in the deputation of law-enforcement agencies and government instrumentalities by the
COMELEC during elections [Sec. 2(4), Article IX-B]
7. power to remove or discipline, upon the recommendation of the Comelec, any officer or employee
deputized by the Comelec during elections [Sec. 2(8), Article IX-C]
8. power to extend beyond three years the tour of duty of the Chief of Staff of the AFP [Sec. 5(7), Article
XVI]
9. powers implicit in the President’s as Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief powers
CASES:
20. Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain, supra – power to conduct
peace negotiations with rebel groups, and to agree to pursue reforms that would require new legislation
and/or constitutional amendments
21. Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary, supra – power to declare a state of rebellion