MIDTERM EXAM

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
AUGUST 16, 2018

I. (60 pts)

In 2017, the municipalities of Carigara, Barugo, San Miguel, Tunga, Jaro, and Capoocan,
all of the Leyte Province, successfully gained independence from the State of the Philippines and
created their own state call the Royal Kingdom of Eklavuh.

The Mayors of these towns decided that Mayor Kong of Carigara would be the head of
the kingdom. The other Mayors became the Ministers of the unincorporated agencies of the
Kingdom. As a new Kingdom, Eklavuh has no Constitution of its own and no law, so they
decided that the Constitution and Laws of the Philippines shall be made applicable in the
kingdom until such time that their own municipal laws have been enacted. The king also
convened an interim parliament composed of 50 members made up of the brightest minds in the
kingdom to serve as the interim legislature and it was tasked with drafting the Constitution of the
Royal Kingdom of Eklavuh. King Kong also appointed the oldest living person in the Kingdom,
Tigoh Rang, as the Supreme Justice of the Lone Court of Law.

While the Kingdom was still in the process of structuring, King Kong, through his
Minister of Public Works, opened biddings for the construction of a naval base along the
shorelines of the Kingdom and for the repairs of the damaged roads all over the kingdom. Bids
were submitted by many construction companies. There were two highest bidders, the Mayaman
Construction Co. (Mayaman) and the Mahirap Construction Co. (Mahirap). Having completed
the requisites of the bidding process, King Kong awarded the contract to Mahirap Construction
Co. Aggrieved, Mayaman went to the Lone Court of Law with a petition for the temporary
restraining order and to question the award of the contract to Mahirap with the allegation that
Mayaman was in a better position to construct the naval base and rehabilitate the roads because it
had better and modern equipments. Mahirap on the other hand opposed the petition saying that
they are more than able to construct the naval base and repair the roads despite using purely
human labor. The Lone Court refused to take cognizance of the case saying that it has no
jurisdiction over the issues raised as it involved purely political issues.

One day, a citizen of the kingdom, Ma. Lakat, was walking by the roadside, on the way to
the Lone Court. A garbage truck of the Ministry of Order and Cleanliness driven by its regular
driver, while collecting the garbage, passed by her. While the truck was by her side, the truck
sped up and run over a hump on the road causing it to jump a little, as a result of which, barrels
of garbage fell and hit Ma. Lakat on the head. Ma. Lakat suffered concussions. She went straight
to the hospital and obtained a medical certificate then headed to the Lone Court and filed a suit
for damages against the kingdom. She alleged that the driver was negligent in driving the truck
such that the kingdom thru the Ministry of Tourism should be liable for damages. The Ministry
of Tourism moved to dismiss the case based on State Immunity alleging that the kingdom never
gave its consent to be sued. Supreme Justice Tigoh Rang dismissed the case on the ground of
state immunity.

When the construction of the naval base was finished, Mahirap now tried to collect from
the kingdom the contract price. However, the kingdom refused payment on the ground that they
still do not have the money. Mahirap then brought an action for collection of money in the Lone
Court.

Meanwhile, the Philippines considered Eklavuh a state, extending to Eklavuh recognition

as such. However, Malaysia, did not recognize Eklavuh as a state because it does not have its
own Costitution and laws. Upon learning of this opinion from Malaysia, the citizens of the
kingdom became restless and demanded that the Constitution be made so that Eklavuh may
become a legitimate state and be recognized by the international community.
 Despite the clamor of its citizens, the interim legislature of Eklavuh failed to come up
with a complete constitution. The only provision the interim legislature was able to make in the
draft, was that relating to the Minister of Public Works wherein it was provided that the Minister
must be a Civil Engineer. Upon learning of this provision in the draft, the Minister of Public
Works, who was a lawyer by profession, immediately went to the Lone Court to challenge the
said provision. He argued that should that provision be approved in a plebiscite, he will lose his
job and it will be tantamount to deprivation of his salary and illegal dismissal. The Lone Court
agreed with the petitioner minister, took cognizance of the case and ordered that the questioned
provision be removed from the draft of the draft constitution.

Since it did not recognize Eklavuh as a state, Malaysia invaded Eklavuh in the year 2018
and engaged in a war with the Eklavuh Royal Pink Guards, then later on set up a military
government in Eklavuh. Ma. Lakat thinkinh that this would be the opportune time to take
revenge against the kingdom, aided the Malaysian Army in capturing political leaders of the
kingdom and her help was instrumental in capturing the various ministers of the kingdom, except
King Kong, who was able to hide safely somewhere in the mountains. The citizens of the
kingdom who were loyal to King Kong made a citizens’ arrest of Ma. Lakat and the Eklavuh
Pink Guards charged her with Treason for aiding the enemy in time of war. Ma. Lakat set up the
defense that she could not be charged with treason against the Kingdom of Eklavuh because the
kingdom was under the control of Malaysian Army, thus the sovereignty of the Philippines was
suspended at the time. The Lone Court dismissed the case for treason siding with the argument
of Ma. Lakat.

With respect to the case filed by Mahirap against the Kingdom, the Lone Court also
dismissed the same saying that since the Malaysian military government was in control of the
state, civil cases against the kingdom of Eklavuh should be dismissed.

1. Was the Lone Court correct in refusing to take cognizance of the case filed by
Mayaman? (10 pts)
2. Supposing the lone court dismissed the case of Mayaman based on state
immunity, would the lone court be correct in doing so? (10 pts)
3. Decide whether or not the state gave consent to be sued in the damage suit filed
by Ma. Lakat. (10 pts)
4. Was the contention of the citizens of Eklavuh that a Constitution is essential to be
considered a state meritorious? (5 pts)
5. Is the decision of the Lone Court upholding the contention of minister of public
works correct? (10 pts)
6. Was the government set up by the Malaysian Army de jure or de facto? Explain
briefly. (5 pts)
7. Was the Lone Court correct in dismissing the treason case against Ma. Lakat? (5
pts)
8. Was decision of the Lone Court in dismissing the civil case for collection of
money filed by Mahirap against Eklavuh correct? (5 pts)

II. (10 pts)

1. Any of the following may propose amendments to the Constitution except:

a. A constitutional convention called ½ vote of all members of Congress
b. A petition representing 12% of the nation’s registered voters wherein each legislative
district is represented by 2% of its registered voters
c. ¾ vote of all the members of the Congress
d. A petition representing 12% of the nation’s registered voters wherein each legislative
district is represented by 3% of the population
e. All of the above
f. None of the above
2. The Constitution is the basic and paramount law of the land.
a. True
b. False, because it is not a law
c. False, because it is not only law of the land but also law of the sea and the atmosphere
d. False, because it is not at all important
e. None of the above

3. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the exclusive economic zone refers to
an area:
a. That is at least 100 miles from the baselines from which the outer limit of the
territorial sea is measured
b. That is at least 200 miles but not to exceed 300 miles from the baselines from which
the outer limit of the territorial sea is measured
c. Beyond and adjacent to a country’s territorial sea which cannot go beyond 200
nautical miles from the outer limit of the territorial sea
d. That can go beyond 3 nautical miles but cannot extend 300 nautical miles from the
baselines from which the outer limit of the territorial sea is measured
e. None of the above

4. Three essential parts of a Constitution are:

a. The bill of rights, the governmental structure and the process of amendment
b. The preamble, the bill of rights and the provision on checks and balances
c. National territory, fundamental principles and state policies
d. Executive Department, Legislative Department and Judiciary Department
e. None of the above

5. The constitutional provision on people initiative and referendum is not self-executoru and
this is so because it requires:
a. An implementing resolution from the COMELEC
b. An implementing resolution from the Supreme Court
c. An implementing legislation
d. An implementing resolution from the House of Representatives
e. All of the above

III. (30 pts)

1. Explain briefly the following: (2 pts each)

a. Doctrine of Parens Patriae
b. Doctrine of Jus Postliminium
c. Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy
d. Act of State Doctrine
e. Incorporation Clause

2. Discuss, with reasons and basis, where or not R.A. 6735 is sufficient to provide for the
procedure of amending the Constitution through a People’s Initiative. (10 pts)

3. Enumerate the qualifications of a member of Senate and the House of Representatives. (5

pts)

4. What is Social Justice as defined in the case of Calalang vs. Williams? (5 pts)

-nothing follows-