Amendment
- The change, modification, by addition, deletion, or alteration, of a statute which
survives in its amended form. The amendment of statute is effected by the
enactment of an amendatory act modifying or altering some provisions of the
statute either expressly or impliedly.
Express amendment is done by providing the amendatory act that specific sections or
provisions of a statute are amended as recited therein or, as commonly indicated, “to read
as follows:” the section of sections affected are then reproduced as amended
- Law that amends, revises or repeals is very specific insofar as it points to the law,
number, name a specific provision it will amend, revise, repeal
Implied Amendment – frowned upon; neither presumed nor favoured
- Congress should know the laws priorly enacted, otherwise, irreconcilable
inconsistencies may arise
- The legislative intent to amend a prior law on the same subject is usually shown by
a statement in the later act that any provision of law which is inconsistent therewith
is modified accordingly.
- There is implied amendment where a part of a prior statute embracing the same
subject as the later act may not be enforced without nullifying the pertinent
provision of the latter, in which event, the prior act is deemed amended or modified
to the extent of the repugnancy.
Amending authority – the legislature has the authority to amend, subject to
constitutional requirements, any existing law
- The authority to amend is part of the legislative power to enact, alter and repeal
laws. Even statutes in the nature of contracts, such as legislative franchises to
establish and operate public utilities, may be altered or modified by the legislative
unilaterally, without impairing the obligations of contract, for deemed read into the
legislative franchise is the constitutional provision that “it shall be subject to
amendment, alteration or repeal by the Congress when the common good so
requires.”
- The SC, in the exercise of its rule-making power or its power to interpret the law,
has no authority to amend or change the law, such authority being the exclusive
prerogative of the legislature.
How amendment is construed
- Read it together with the old law; in tandem with the old law
- An amended act is ordinarily to be construed as if the original statute has been
repealed and a new and independent act in the amended form had been adopted
in its stead. IOW, the amended act is regarded as if the statute has been originally
enacted in its amended form.
- The amendment becomes part of the original statutes as if it had always been
contained therein.
- E.g. where the statute which provides that it shall be in force for a period of two
years from its approval is amended by another statute which provides that it shall
be in force for a period of four years after its approval, the four years is to be
counted from the date the original statute was approved and not from the date the
amendatory act was enacted.
Amendments operate prospectively, except when it involves procedural laws. Statutes
relating to procedure in courts are applicable to actions pending and undetermined at
the time of their passage. Procedural laws are retroactive in that sense.
Effect of amendment on vested rights – operative fact doctrine where after a statute
is amended, the original act continues to be in force with regard to all rights that had
accrued prior to the amendment or to obligations that were contracted under the prior
act, and such rights or obligations will continue to be governed by the law before its
amendment. IOW, rights which have become vested under a statute before its
amendment may not be affected by such amendment, as the amendatory act should not
be applied retroactively so as to nullify such rights.
Effects of Amendment on Jurisdiction –
Once jurisdiction to try a case is acquired, that jurisdiction remains with the
court until the case is finally decided therein. In the absence of a clear legislative
intent to the contrary, a subsequent statute amending a prior act with the effect of
divesting the court of jurisdiction may not be construed to operate to oust jurisdiction
that has already attached under the prior law, for it will be a “subversion of the judicial
process to take a cause from a court having jurisdiction before its final decision is
given.”
- If during the pendency of action, there is a new law that amends to the effect that
it transfers or reduce jurisdiction, the effect is it does not necessarily divest
jurisdiction, unless AL is putative in nature.

Effect if nullity of prior or amendatory act
An invalid of unconstitutional law does not in legal contemplation, generally speaking,
exist. Hence, where a statute which has been amended is invalid, nothing in effect has
been amended.
The amendatory act, it complete by itself, will be considered as an original or independent
act.
OTOH, where the amendatory act is declared unconstitutional, it is as if the amendment
did not exist, and the original statute before the attempted amendment remains unaffected
and in force.
REVISION AND CODIFICATION
1. The purpose is to restate the existing laws into one statute, simplifying complicated REPEAL
provisions, and make the laws on the subject easily found.
2. In the course of the revision or codification, some new provisions are inserted,
some old provisions are omitted, the phraseology is changed, and sections are
rearranged.
3. In R & C, the presumption is that its author has maintained a consistent philosophy
or position. The rule is that a code is enacted as a single, comprehensive statue, and
is to be considered as such and not as a series of disconnected articles or provisions. Statues in pari materia
What is Omitted is Deemed Repealed
In the R&C, all parts and provisions of the old laws that are omitted in the revised statute
or code are deemed repealed, unless the statue or code provides otherwise, expressly of
impliedly. REASON: by its very nature and purpose, r&c is intended to be a complete
enactment on the subject and an expression of the whole law thereon, which thereby
indicates an intent on the part of the legislature to abrogate those provisions of the old
laws that are not reproduced in the revised statute or code.
The repeal by r or c of former laws in possible only if the revised statute or code was
intended to cover the whole subject to be a complete and perfect system in itself.
It is the rule that a subsequent statute is deemed to repeal a prior law if the former revises
the whole subject matter of the former statute.
CHANGE IN PHRASEOLOGY
- Does not, by itself, imply that it was the intention of the lawmakers to amend or change
the construction of the old laws.
- Shall not be held necessarily to alter the construction of the former acts.
Codification of existing laws
A codification should be construed as a continuation of the existing statutes. In such case,
the presumption obtains that the codifiers did not intend to change the law as it formerly
existed. The rearrangement of sections or parts of a statute, or the placing of portions of
what formerly was a single section in separate sections, does not operate to change the
operation, effect or meaning of the statute, unless the changes are of such nature as to
manifest clearly and unmistakably a legislative intent to change the former laws.
- Power to repeal is subject to constitutional limitations, the legislature has plenary
power to repeal, abrogate or revoke existing laws. The power to repeal a law is as
complete as the power to enact one. The legislature cannot in and of itself enact
irrepealable laws or limit its future legislative acts.
- When they relate to the same person or thing, or have the same purpose or object,
or cover the same specific or particular subject matter.
- The later statute may specifically refer to the prior statutes. However, the fact that
no reference is made to the prior laws does not mean that the two laws are not in
pari materia.
- It is sufficient, in order that they may be considered in pari materia, that the two or
more statutes relate to the same specific subject matter. Conversely, two or more
laws are not in pari materia if they refer to different specific matters, although they
both fall under the same broad subject’
Statutes in pari materia, how construed
- Should be so construed not only to be consistent with itself but also to harmonize
with other laws on the same subject matter, as to form a complete, coherent and
intelligible system. The rule is expressed in the maxim, interpretare et concordare
leges legibus est optimus interpretandi modus, or every statute must be so
construed and harmonized with other statutes as in executive issuances is of prime
 importance, and, in the absence of a showing to the contrary, all laws are presumed
to be consistent with each other. Where it is possible to do so, it is the duty of
courts, in the construction of statutes to harmonize and reconcile them
Generally, constitutional provisions are self-executing
Except when the provisions themselves expressly require legislatures to implement them
or when, from their language or tenure, they are merely declarations of principles and
policies.
A self-executing provision is one which is complete by itself and becomes operative
without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation, or which supplies sufficient
rule by means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected.
However, self-executing provision does not preclude the legislature from enacting laws
which facilitate the exercise of powers directly granted by the constitution, further the
operation of self-executing provisions, prescribe a practice to be used for their
enforcement, provide a convenient remedy for the protection for the rights secured or the
determination thereof, or place reasonable safeguards around the exercise of the right.
MANILA PRINCE HOTEL V GSIS
An example of self-executing constitutional provision is Sec. 10 (2) of Article XII of the
1987 Constitution which states that “in the grants of rights, privileges, and concessions
covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified
Filipinos.” The issue raised in connection with this constitutional provision, is whether in
the sale at public bidding of the majority ownership of the Manila Hotel a qualified
Filipino entity can match the winning bid od a foreigner and be entitled to the award of
the contract of sale thereof.
The resolution of the issue depends on whether the provision is self-executing or non-self-
executing which requires enabling legislation to implement it. The Court ruled that the
Filipino entity must be given preference by granting it the option to match the winning
bid because the provision if self-executing.
PRINCIPLES OF CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION
1. VERBA LEGIS - Whenever possible, the words used in the Constitution must
be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed.
It is to be assumed that the words in which constitutional provisions are couched
express the objective sought to be attained.
As the Constitution is not primarily a lawyer’s document, it being essential for the
rule of law to obtain that it should ever be present in the people’s consciousness,
its language as much as possible should be understood in the sense they have in
common use.
2. Ratio Legis Est Anima – words of the Constitution should be interpreted in
accordance with the intent of its framers.
3. Ut magis valeat quam pereat – the Constitution is to be interpreted as a whole
- You cannot isolate one provision from the other; it shall be construed as a whole
Originalist Theory – intent of the framers of the constitution at the time of debates and
deliberation will prevail; concept regarding the interpretation of the Constitution that
asserts that all statements in the constitution must be interpreted based on the original
understanding of the authors or the people at the time it was ratified.
Living Constitution Theory – abandonment of an aged-old provisions; constitution
shall be construed along side changing times; that it should adapt to the changing
circumstances
Morales v CA – abandoned the condonation doctrine; prior constitutions may
not have emphasized the rule on public accountability but when the 1987
Constitution came about, it emphasized the rule exactly why it abandoned the
condonation doctrine.
Normally, we stick to the originalist theory, e.g. reference to debates and delibertions
Conflicting constitutional provisions, how construed
- You cannot separate one from the other; however, in case of conflict, we give life
to both provisions.
De Castro V JBC = talks about midnight appointments; on the retirement of CJ Puno
within two months prior to the elections; where (1) there should be no appointments
two months prior to presidential elections; and (2) mandate of the president to fill in a
permanent appointment in the judiciary within 90 days.
These instances overlap. So which should prevail?
(1)
The provision on appointments within 90 days of vacancy
 Simply the other provision is inapplicable to that particular situation; it does not give
the import that such law/statute is unconstitutional.

Extrinsic aids to Constitutional construction

History or realities existing at the time of the adoption of the Constitution
In re Bermudes
- Non-mention of the names as incumbent Pres/VP to be Cory Aquino and ---
because it might violate equal protection clause
- It can never be Marcos because who had pick the ppl to draft the consti?

Montejo v COMELEC = whether COMELEC is empowered to create political

subdivisions to equalize the number of legislatives

MANDATORY OR DIRECTORY CHANGES OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

Marcelino V Cruz = Petitioner was an accused for a rape case under trial in the sala of
respondent Judge Cruz. On the date set for promulgation of the decision, counsel for
accused moved for postponement, raising for the first time the alleged loss of jurisdiction
of the trial court for failure to decide the case within 90 days from submission thereof for
decision as required by Section 11(1), Article X of the 1987 Constitution. The SC held
that the provision being invoked is actually a directory and not a mandatory provision.

If not self-executing, the agency may manage regulate.