Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Political Law Areas 2019
Political Law Areas 2019
Interpretation of the Constitution: (Francisco vs. Article XVII, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution
House of Representatives, GR No. 160261, Nov. 10, provides that subject to the enactment of an
2003) implementing law, the people may directly propose
1. Verba Legis – whenever possible, the words of the amendments to the Constitution through initiative.
constitution must be given their ordinary meaning,
except when technical terms are employed. Presidential vs. Parliamentary
2. Ratio legis est anima – when there is ambiguity, the In presidential government, there is separation of powers
words of the constitution should be interpreted in between the executive and legislative departments. In
accordance with the intent of the framers. parliamentary, there is fusion of both executive and
legislative powers in Parliament, although the actual
As we [the SC] have held in League of Cities of the exercise of executive powers is vested in a Prime
Philippines v. Commission on Elections— Minister who is chosen by and accountable to the
Ratio legis est anima. The spirit rather than the letter of Parliament.
the law. A statute must be read according to its spirit or
intent, for what is within the spirit is within the statute DOCTRINE OF AUTO-LIMITATION
although it is not within its letter, and that which is within The adherence of the Philippines to principles of
the letter but not within the spirit is not within the statute. international law as a limitation to the exercise of its
Put a bit differently, that which is within the intent of the sovereignty. It means that any state may, by its consent,
lawmaker is as much within the statute as if within the express or implied, submit to a restriction of its sovereign
letter, and that which is within the letter of the statute is rights (Reagan vs. CIR, No. L-26379, Dec. 27, 1969)
not within the statute unless within the intent of the
lawmakers. Withal, courts ought not to interpret and
should not accept an interpretation that would defeat the NATIONAL TERRITORY
intent of the law and its legislators (cited in Navarro vs.
The ARCHIPELAGIC DOCTRINE emphasizes the unity
Executive Secretary, GR No. 180050, April 12, 2011).
of land and waters by defining an archipelago either as a
group of islands surrounded by waters or a body of
3. Ut magis valeat quam pereat – the constitution has
waters studded with islands. For this purpose, it requires
to be interpreted as a whole. Sections bearing on a
that baselines be drawn by connecting the appropriate
particular subject should be considered and interpreted
points of the "outermost islands to encircle the islands
together as to effectuate the whole purpose of the
within the archipelago. The waters on the landward side
constitution and one section is not to be allowed to
of the baselines regardless of breadth or dimensions are
defeat another, if by any reasonable construction, the
merely internal waters.
two can be made to stand together (Civil Liberties Union
vs. Executive Secretary, 194 SCRA 317).
The Archipelagic Doctrine is reflected in the 1987
Constitution. Article I, Section 1 provides that the
Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy national territory of the Philippines includes the
Under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, if a law Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters
or contract violates any norm of the Constitution, that law embraced therein; and the waters around, between, and
or contract, whether promulgated by the legislative or by connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of
the executive branch or entered into by private persons their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal
for private purposes, is null and void and without any waters of the Philippines.
force and effect. Thus, since the Constitution is the
fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the nation,
CONTIGUOUS ZONE is a zone contiguous to the
it is deemed written in every statue and contract (Manila
territorial sea and extends up to 12 nautical miles
Prince Hotel vs. GSIS, 267 SCRA 408 [1997]).
from the territorial sea and over which the coastal
state may exercise control necessary to prevent
"People power" as a concept recognized in the
infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or
Constitution
sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or
territorial sea. (Article 33 of the Convention on the
Article III, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution
Law of the Sea.)
guarantees the right of the people peaceable to
assemble and petition the government for redress of
The EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE is a zone
grievances.
extending up to 200 nautical miles from the baselines
of a state over which the coastal state has sovereign
Article VI, Section 32 of the 1987 Constitution
rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting,
requires Congress to pass a law allowing the people
conserving and managing the natural resources,
to directly propose and enact laws through initiative
whether living or nonliving, of the waters superjacent
and to approve or reject any act or law or part of it
to the seabed and of the seabed and subsoil, and with
passed by Congress or a local legislative body.
Page 1 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
regard to other activities for the economic exploitation a. When the state commences a litigation, it
and exploration of the zone. (Articles 56 and 57 of the becomes vulnerable to a counterclaim (Froilan vs.
Convention on the Law of the Sea.) Pan Oriental Shipping, GR No. L-6060, Sept. 30, 1950).
Constitution reserves to Filipino citizens the use and • Intervention of the State would constitute
enjoyment of the exclusive economic zone of the commencement of litigation if the State asks for
Philippines. affirmative reliefs other than resisting the claims
against
Section 2. Article XII of the Constitution provides:
b. When the State enters into a business contract.
“The State shall protect the nation's marine part in its
Thus, contract bidded out for barbershop facilities in
archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive Clark Field US Air Force was deemed commercial (US
economic zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment to vs. Guinto, 182 SCRA 644).
Filipino citizens." Section 7, Article XIII of the • But when the contract is in pursuit of a sovereign
Constitution provides: "The State shall protect the activity [construction of wharves for national
rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of local defense], there is no waiver of immunity (US vs.
communities, to the preferential use of the communal Ruiz, 136 SCRA 487).
marine and fishing resources, both inland and • i. Contracts entered into for the maintenance of
offshore. It shall provide support to such fishermen a Diplomatic mission for the upkeep of air
through appropriate technology and research, conditioning units, generator sets, etc., in the
adequate financial, production, and marketing embassy is a governmental contract (Republic of
assistance, and other services. The State shall also Indonesia vs. Vinzon, GR No. 154705, June 26,
protect, develop, and conserve such resources. The 2003). A provision in the contract containing a
protection shall extend to offshore fishing grounds of statement that all legal controversies shall be
subsistence fishermen against foreign intrusion. settled according to Philippine laws does not
Fishworkers shall receive a just share from their labor necessarily mean waiver of immunity.
in the utilization of marine and fishing resources. • ii. The exercise of the power of eminent domain
is an act juri emperii but without prejudice to
Amigable vs. Cuenca.
DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE
POLICIES When public officers may be sued without prior
consent of the state (Sanders vs. Veridiano, 162 SCRA
88):
STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT a) To compel him to do an act required by law;
The State may not be sued without its consent (sec. 3, b) To restrain him from enforcing an act claimed
Art. XVI). Basis: There can be no legal right against the to be unconstitutional;
authority which makes the law on which the right c) To compel the payment of damages from
depends (republic vs. Villasor, 54 SCRA 83). already appropriated assurance fund;
d) To refund tax over-payments from fund
Test to determine if suit is against the State: already available for the purpose;
On the assumption that decision is rendered against the e) When the judgment will not require any
public officer or agency impleaded, will the enforcement affirmative act on the part of the State [sued in his
thereof require an affirmative act from the State, such as personal capacity];
the appropriation of the needed amount to satisfy the f) Where the government itself has violated its
judgment? If so, then it is a suit against the State. own laws;
Page 2 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
1) If governmental; NO suit without consent. b) Requiring the members of the AFP to swear
to uphold and defend the Constitution (sec. 5 [1], Art.
Samples: XVI).
a. Bureau of Printing;
b. Bureau of Customs; The separation of the Church and the State shall be
inviolable. This is reinforced by the following
Note: even in the exercise of proprietary functions provisions:
incidental to its primary governmental function, an a) Freedom of religion clause (sec. 5, Art. III);
unincorporated agency still cannot be sued without its b) Non-registration of religious sect as political
consent (Bureau of Printing vs. BPEA, 1 SCRA 3400. party (sec. 2 [5], Art. IX-C);
2) If proprietary; suit will lie. c) No religious sectoral representative (sec. 5
[2], Art. VI);
When the state engages in principally proprietary functions, d) No appropriation for sectarian benefit (sec. 29
then it descends to the level of a private individual (NAC vs. [2], Art. VI).
Teodoro, 91 Phil. 207)
Exceptions:
RESTRICTIVE STATE IMMUNITY a) Exemption from taxation (sec. 28 [3], Art. VI);
A state cannot invoke state immunity from suit when it b) Allowing appropriation for priest, etc.
enters into a purely commercial contract. assigned to the AF or to any penal institution or
government orphanage or leprosarium (sec. 29 [2], Art.
VI);
Two Ways of Making IL Part of the Philippine Law: c) Optional religious instruction for public
DOCTRINE OF INCORPORATION elementary and high school students (sec. 3 [3], Art.
By virtue of this clause, our courts have applied the rules XIV);
of international law in a number of cases even if such d) Educational institutions established by
rules had not been previously been subject of statutory religious groups and mission boards (sec. 4 [2], Art.
enactments, because these GAPIL are deemed XIV).
automatically part of the law of the land (Kuroda vs.
Jalandoni, 42 OG 4282). TRANSPARENCY
The following are the constitutional provisions
DOCTRINE OF TRANSFORMATION reflecting the State policy on transparency in matters
Requires the enactment by the legislative body of such
of public interest:
international law principles as are sought to be part of
municipal law. (sample – RA 9851, punishing Genocide,
War Crimes, and Crimes against Humanity). 1. "Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by
law, the State adopts and Implements a policy of full
RULES IN CASE OF CONFLICT BETWEEN public disclosure of all its transactions involving public
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND MUNICIPAL LAW interest."(Section 28, Article II)
A. International Court/Body deciding –
International Law should prevail. 2. The right of the people to information on matters of
public concern shall be recognized. Access to official
B. Domestic Court deciding – efforts should records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to
first be exerted to harmonize the seemingly conflicting official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to
laws. As a rule, municipal law prevails. Ratio: Police government research data used as basis for policy
power cannot be bargained away through a medium of a development, shall be afforded to citizen, subject to
treaty or contract (Ichong vs. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 115. such limitations as may be provided by law." (Section
7, Article III)
Above is, however, subject to the following modifications
– (Review Lecture) 3. The records and books of accounts of the
a) Conflict between Constitution and jus cogens Congress shall be preserved and be open to the
norm – jus cogens prevails. No derogation is allowed. public in accordance with law, and such books shall
b) Conflict between Constitution and jus
be audited by the Commission on Audit which shall
dispositivum - Constitution prevails.
publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid to
c) Conflict between Constitution and Treaty
based on jus dispositivum – Constitution prevails. and expenses incurred for each Member." (Section
d) Statute and Norm of International law – 20. Article VI)
i. Statue vs. jus cogens norm – jus cogens
prevails. 4. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the
ii. Statute vs. jus dispositivum – apply the rule on following powers, functions, and duties:XXX XXX (6)
lex posterior derogat priori and the general and special Publicize matters covered by its investigation when
law rule. That is, the later law governs and that special circumstances so warrant and with due prudence,"
law prevails over general law dealing on the same (Section 12, Article XI)
subject matter.
5. "A public officer or employee shall, upon
Note: Civilian supremacy is ensured by the following assumption of office, and as often as thereafter may
provisions: be required by law, submit a declaration under oath of
a) Installation of the President (a civilian) as the his assets, liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the
Commander-in-Chief of the AFP (sec. 18, Art. VII); and President, the Vice President, the Members of the
Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the
Page 3 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional material impairment of the value of the property or
offices, and officers of the armed forces with general prevention [easements and servitudes] of the ordinary
or flag rank, the declaration shall be disclosed to the uses for which the property was intended (Cruz, 2007).
public in the manner provided by law." (Section 17,
Article XI) d) Public use – the general concept of meeting
public need of public exigency. The term “public use”
POLICE POWERS has now been held to be synonymous with public
The power of promoting public welfare by restraining and interest, public benefit, public welfare and public
regulating the use of liberty and property. [The law of convenience (Reyes vs. NHA, GR No. 147511, Jan. 20,
overruling necessity] 2003).
(Tests for Valid Exercise of Police Power Note: Right to Claim Just Compensation Does Not
a) Lawful Subject – the interests of the public in Prescribe:
general, as distinguished from those of a particular Where the private property is taken for public use
class, require the exercise of the power. The activity or without first acquiring title thereto either through
property sought to be regulated must affect general expropriation or negotiated sale, the owner’s action to
welfare. recover the land or the value thereof does not prescribe
(NPC vs. Campos, Jr. GR No. 143643, June 27, 2003).
The ordinary requirements of procedural due process
yield to the necessities of protecting vital public interests 2 Stages of Eminent Domain Cases:
through the exercise of police power. Thus, the Pollution i i. Determination of the authority of the plaintiff to
Adjudication Board is permitted by law and regulations to exercise the power and the propriety of its exercise in
issue ex parte cease and desist orders (PAD vs. CA, the context of the facts of the case;
195 SCRA 112). ii ii. Determination of just compensation by the
b) Lawful Means – the means employed are court.
reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the
purpose, and not unduly oppressive on individuals.
POWER OF TAXATION
Note: Both must concur (Ynot vs. IAC, GR No. 74457, It is the power by which the sovereign, through its law-
March 20, 1987) making body, raises revenue to defray the necessary
expenses of government. It is a way of apportioning the costs
It cannot be bargained away through the medium of a of government among those who in some measure are
treaty or a contract (Ichong vs. Hernandez, 101 Phil. privileged to enjoy its benefits and must bear its burdens.
1155). LIMITATIONS:
Taxing power may be used as an implement of police A. Inherent Limitations –
power (Lutz vs. Araneta, 98 Phil. 148). 1. Public purpose;
2. Non-delegability of the power;
3. Territoriality or situs of taxation;
Eminent domain may be used as an implement to attain
4. Exemption of government;
police objective (ASLP vs. Sec. of Agrarian, 175 SCRA
5. International comity.
343 [1989]).
Non-impairment contracts or vested rights clauses will
B. Constitutional Limitations -
have to yield to the superior and legitimate exercise of
police power (Ortigas and Co. vs. CA, GR No. 126102,
1. Due process of law - tax should not be confiscatory;
Dec. 4, 2000).
2. Equal protection clause;
3. Public purpose – tax for special purpose, treated as a
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN special fund and paid for such purpose only; when such
purpose is fulfilled, the balance, if any shall be
Jurisdiction is with the RTC. The primary issue to resolve transferred to the general funds;
is the right to expropriate. Determination of value of the 4. Double taxation – additional taxes are laid on the
property is merely incidental [secondary] (Barangay San same subject by the same taxing authority during the
Roque vs. Heirs of Francisco Pastor, GR No. 138896, same taxing period and for the same purpose;
June 20, 2000) Expropriation proceedings is incapable Despite absence of specific constitutional prohibition,
of pecuniary estimation. double taxation will not be allowed if the same will result
in a violation of the equal protection clause.
Requisites:
a) Necessity – the necessity must be genuine 5. Tax exemptions;
and of public character. Where the tax exemption is granted gratuitously, it may
be revoked at will; but not if granted for a valuable
b) Private property – generally, all property consideration (MCIAA vs. Marcos, 261 SCRA 667)
capable of ownership may be expropriated; may include Majority votes of ALL the members of Congress required
public utility [service] (Republic vs. PLDT, L-18841, Jan. in granting tax exemptions.
27, 1969). 6. Non-imprisonment for non-payment of poll tax;
7. ART bills originating in the House of Representatives;
8. Non-impairment of contracts;
c) Taking in the constitutional sense – 9. Non-impairment of SC jurisdiction over tax cases
imports a physical dispossession of the owner. However,
in law, the term has broader connotation as it may
TAX LICENSE FEE
include trespass without actual eviction of the owner,
Page 4 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
To raise revenue – To regulate – a police A law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon
revenue measure measure inquiry and renders judgment only after trial.
Rate or amount to be Amount is limited to EXTENT/SCOPE OF PROTECTION
collected is unlimited cost of issuing the Universal in application without regard to any difference
provided not license and the in race, color or nationality. Applies also to artificial
confiscatory necessary inspection persons in so far as their property is concerned.
or police surveillance, 1. Life;
except when imposed 2. Liberty; and;
on non-useful 3. Property.
occupations
Imposed on persons or Paid for privileged of Note: Public office is not a property right but
property doing something but nevertheless a protected right (Bince vs. COMELEC,
the privilege is 218 SCRA 782).
revocable
In case of non- In case of non- • Mandatory suspension from public office
payment, business or payment, business pending criminal prosecution for violation of RA 3019 is
activity does not becomes illegal not deprivation of property without due process of law
become illegal (Libanan vs. Sandiganbayan, 233 SCRA 163).
One’s employment, profession or trade or calling is a
property right but is subject to reasonable regulation
pursuant to the police power (Crespo vs. Provincial
NON-IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACTS Board, 160 SCRA 66).
Anything that diminishes the efficacy of the contract. There is
substantial impairment when the law changes the terms of a A mining license, being a mere privilege, may be
legal contract between the parties, either in the time or mode revoked, when public interest so requires (Republic vs.
of performance, or imposes new conditions, or dispenses Rosemoor Mining, GR No. 149927, March 30, 2004).
with those expressed, or authorizes for its satisfaction
something different from that provided in its terms (Clements SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS REQUISITES
vs. Nolting, 42 Phil. 702). Requisites:
1. The interest of the public, in general, as distinguished
from those of a particular class, require the intervention
• The change must not only impair the obligation
of the State [Lawful Subject];
of the existing contract, but the impairment must be
2. The means employed are reasonably necessary for
substantial and effect a change in the rights of the
the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly
parties with reference to each other, and not with respect
oppressive on individuals [lawful means].
to non-parties (Phil. Rural Electric Coop. vs. Secretary of
DILG, GR No. 143076, June 10, 2003).
• An ordinance requiring all laundry
LIMITATIONS
establishments to issue receipts in English and Spanish
a• a) Police power – public welfare is superior to
was held valid (Kwong Sing vs. City of Manila, 41 Phil.
private rights.
103).
• But a law prohibiting traders from keeping their
Municipal zoning ordinance is a police measure and
books accounts in a language other than English,
prevails over a restriction contained in the title to
Spanish or any local dialect was held unconstitutional
property (Ortigas vs. Feati Bank, 94 SCRA 533).
(Yu Eng Cong vs. Trinidad, 271 US 500).
Regulation of rentals of dwelling units is an exercise
• A provision which provides that the surviving
of police power and an exception to the non-impairment
spouse has no right to survivorship pension benefits if
clause (Canleon vs. Agus Dev. Corp., 207 SCRA 748).
the surviving spouse contracted marriage with the
An AO probiting the assignment of salaries of
pensioner within three years before the pensioner
teachers to their creditors was not violative of the
qualified for pension benefit [sec 18, PD 1146] was
gurantee (Tiro vs. Hontanosas, 125 SCRA 697).
declared invalid (GSIS vs. Montesclaros, 434 SCRA 41).
Existing share tenancy contracts conversion to
leasehold tenancy through the exercise of police power
PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS REQUISITES
(Ilusorio vs. CAR, 17 SCRA 25).
Requisites:
But the substitution of a mortgage with a security
1. An impartial court/tribunal clothed with judicial power
bond for the payment of a loan violates non-impairment
to hear and decide the matter before it.
clause (Ganzon vs. Inserto, 123 SCRA 713).
NOTE: Franchises, privileges, licenses, etc., do not 3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be
come within the context of the guarantee. heard.
• Unreasonable delay in the termination of the requirements upon Baclaran Credit Cooperative violated
preliminary investigation by the Tanodbayan is violative equal protection clause (Olivarez vs. Sandiganbayan,
of due process (Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan). 248 SCRA 700).
• When the petitioner was not given the chance to
present evidence, there is violation of due process, and Equal protection clause is not violated by an
the Arbitrator’s decision is null and void (Unicraft executive order issued pursuant to law, granting tax and
Industries vs. CA, GR No. 134309, March 26, 2001). duty incentives only to businesses an residents within
• Not all cases require trial-type hearing. the “secured area” of the Subic Special Economic Zone
Submission of position papers may be enough [in and denying the same to those who live within the Zone
administrative proceedings], Mariveles vs. CA, GR No. but outside the “fenced-in” territory (Tiu vs. CA, GR No.
144134, Nov. 11, 2003). 127410, Jan. 20, 1999).
• To be heard may also by means of pleadings
and not merely verbal arguments in court (Torres vs. A compromise agreement between the PCGG and
Gonzales, 152 SCRA 272). the Marcoses providing that the assets to be retained by
• The respondent is not entitled to notice and Marcos family are exempt from all taxes violates equal
hearing during the evaluation stage of the extradition protection clause (Chavez vs. PCGG, GR No. 130716,
process. It is to accommodate the more compelling state Dec. 9, 1998).
Interest to prevent the escape of potential extraditee
(Sec. of Justice vs. Judge Lantion, GR No. 139465, Oct. An ordinance imposing a tax on a named taxpayer
17, 2000). [Ormoc Sugar Company], and none other, was held
• The right of a party to cross-examine the witness invalid because it will not apply in case a new sugar
against him in civil cases is an indispensable part of due central will be established It does not apply to present
process. and future condition and is limited to existing condition
• The filing of a MR cures the defect of absence of only. (Ormoc Sugar Co. vs. Treasurer of Ormoc City (22
a hearing (Chua vs. CA, 287 SCRA 33). SCRA 603).
4. Alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes jeopardy as there was yet been arraigned (sec. 9, Rule
conviction upon less or different testimony than the law 117, ROC).
required at the time of the commission of the offense;
5. Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, 4) Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted,
but in effect imposing a penalty or deprivation of a right or the case dismissed or otherwise terminated
for something which when done was lawful; and without his express consent –
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime of some
lawful protection to which he has ▪The mere filing of two informations or complaints
become entitled, such as protection of a former charging the same offense does not yet afford the
conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty. accused in those cases the occasion to complain that he
is being placed in jeopardy for the same offense, for the
CHARACTERISTICS: simple reason that the primary basis of the defense of
a) Refers to criminal matters [not mere DJ is that the accused has already been convicted or
procedural laws]; acquitted in the first case, or the same has been
b) It is retroactive in application; terminated without his consent (P. vs. Miraflores, 115
c) It works to the prejudice to the accused. SCRA 586).
The judge cannot motu proprio, initiate and subsequently DOCTRINE OF SUPERVENING EVENT
dismiss a criminal information without ay motion to that The accused may still be prosecuted for another offense
effect being filed by the accused based on the alleged if a subsequent development changes the character of
violation of the latter’s right against ex post facto law and the first indictment under which he may have already
double jeopardy (P. vs. Judge Nitafan, GR No. 107964- been charged or convicted. (see sec. 7, Rule 117, ROC).
66, Feb. 1, 1999).
• Note: A law can never be an ex post facto as FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, FREEDOM OF THE
long as it operates prospectively since its strictures PRESS
would cover only offenses committed after and not No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech,
before its enactment. of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
BILL OF ATTAINDER redress of grievances.
It is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without trial. In
history, it is an act of the Parliament in England declaring that Limitation: Freedom of expression is NOT absolute. it is
the blood of certain person/s has/have been attainted (with always subject to the police power of the State. This is
evil) and lacks heritable character. premised on the need to protect society from injurious
exercise of said freedom and the need to promote or
protect public welfare, public safety, public morals and
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION national security (Suarez, 2008).
Section 12, Article III of the 1987 Constitution states that
any person under investigation for the commission of an FREEDOM FROM PRIOR RESTRAINT OR
offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to CENSORSHIP
remain silent and to have a competent and independent
counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person
The arbitrary closure of a radio station DYRE was
cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be
held violative of freedom of expression (Eastern
provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except
Broadcasting vs. Dans, 137 SCRA 647).
in writing and in the presence of counsel.
Prohibition against the use of taped jingles in mobile
DOUBLE JEOPARDY
units used in election campaign was in the nature of
Requisites:[DJ for the same offense]
censorship (Mutuc vs. COMELEC, 36 SCRA).
1) Valid complaint or information –
Prohibition against radio commentators or
• No DJ in Preliminary Investigation (Icasiano vs.
columnists from commenting on the issues involved in
Sandiganbayan, 209 SCRA 377).
the scheduled plebiscite on the organic law creating the
CAR was unconstitutional (Sanidad vs. COMELEC, 181
2) Filed before a competent court –
SCRA 529).
Subsequent filing of the case with a court of proper
Prohibition of posting of decals and stickers in
jurisdiction, after it was erroneously filed with a court,
mobile units like cars and other moving vehicles was
without territorial jurisdiction over the place where the
declared unconstitutional for infringement of freedom of
crime was committed, will not constitute DJ ((P. vs.
expression (Adiong vs. COMELEC, 207 SCRA 712).
Puno,208 SCRA 550).
Where the criminal case was dismissed by the RTC so
OVERBREATH DOCTRINE
that the appropriate information may be filed with the
A prohibition on the government from achieving its
Sandiganbayan which had jurisdiction, the defense of DJ
purpose by “means unnecessarily broad, reaching
is not available (Cunanan vs. Arceo, 242 SCRA 88).
constitutionally protected as well as unprotected activity.
The essence is that the government has gone too far.
3) To which the defendant had pleaded – GR: The established rule is that a party can question the
validity of a statute only if, as applied to him, it is
The grant of motion to quash may be appealed by the unconstitutional.
prosecution, without placing the accused under DJ, Exception: “FACIAL CHALLENGE”
because the accused has not been placed in [first]
Page 7 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
c) Balancing of Interests Test – when particular THE COMPELLING STATE INTEREST TEST
conduct is regulated in the interest of public order, and Benevolent neutrality recognizes that government must
the regulation results in an indirect, conditional, or partial pursue its secular goals and interests, but at the same time,
abridgment of speech, the duty of the courts is to strive to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent
determine which of the two conflicting interests demands possible within the flexible constitutional limits. Thus,
the greater protection under the circumstances although the morality contemplated by law is secular,
presented (American Communication Ass. vs. Douds, benevolent neutrality could allow for accommodation of
339 US 282). morality based on religion, provided that it does not offend
compelling state interest (Estrada vs. Escritor, AM No. P-02-
FREEDOM TO ASSEMBLY 1651, Aug. 4, 2003).
The right to assemble is not subject to prior restraint. It
may not be conditioned upon the prior issuance of a
permit or authorization. However, the right must be PRIVACY OF CORRESPONDENCE
exercised in such a way as well not prejudice public
welfare.
Page 8 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
The privacy of communication and rules of procedure, and without counsel, he may be
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon convicted not because he is guilty but because he does
lawful order of the court, or when public safety or not know how to establish his innocence (P. vs.
order requires otherwise, as prescribed by law. Holgado, 86 Phil. 752).
Any evidence obtained in violation of this shall be RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION AGAINST HIM
To arraign an accused while he is in a state of insanity will
LIBERTY OF ABODE AND RIGHT TO TRAVEL violate the right of the accused to be informed of the nature
Limitation on the liberty of abode: Lawful order of the court and cause of the accusation against him (P. vs. Alcalde, GR
within the limits prescribed by law. No. 139225-26, May 29, 2002).
Limitation on the right to travel: interest of national VOID FOR VAGUENESS RULE
security, public safety or public health, as may be Where the statute itself is couched is such indefinite
provided by law. language that it is not possible for men of ordinary
An administrative order suspending the deployment intelligence to determine therefrom what acts or
of female domestic helpers abroad was upheld (PASE omissions are punished, there is violation of the right to
vs. Drilon, supra). be informed of the nature and cause of accusation and
The SC sustained the refusal of the government to due process (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 148560, Nov.
allow the petitioner’s return to the country on the ground 19, 2001).
that it would endanger national security (Marcos cs.
Manglapus, 178 SCRA 760).
RIGHT TO SPEEDY, IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC TRIAL.
Note: A lawful order of the court is also a valid restriction on A trial free from vexatious, capricious and oppressive
the right to travel. The court may validly refuse to grant the delays. But justice and fairness, not speed, are the
accused permission to travel abroad, even if he is out on bail objectives. (Acevedo vs. Sarmiento, 36 SCRA 247).
(Manotoc vs. CA, 142 SCRA 149).
RIGHT TO FACE THE WITNESS FACE TO FACE.
RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED [aka the Right of Confrontation]
1. To afford the accused an opportunity to test the
CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS (Mejia vs. Pamaran, 160 testimony of the witness by cross-examination; and
SCRA 457): 2. To allow the judge to observe the deportment of the
1) The accused has been heard in a court of witness (US vs. Javier, GR No. 12990, Jan. 21, 1918).
competent jurisdiction;
2) The accused is proceeded against the orderly
process of law; THE RIGHT TO COMPULSORY PROCESS TO
3) The accused has been given notice and the SECURE THE ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES AND
opportunity to be heard; and PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE.
4) The judgment rendered was within the TRIAL IN ABSENTIA
authority of a constitutional law. Whenever the accused has been arraigned, notified of
date/s of hearing, and his absence is unjustified, trial
The unreasonable delay in resolving a complaint by shall proceed despite the absence of the accused.
the Ombudsman violates due process and speedy trial Purpose: To speed up the disposition of criminal cases,
(Roque vs. Ombudsman, GR No. 129978, May 12, trial of which could, in the past, be indefinitely deferred,
1999). and many times completely abandoned, because of the
Also unreasonable delay in the termination of defendant’s escape (P. vs. Agbulos, 222 SCRA 196).
preliminary investigation violates due process (Tatad vs. Note: Presence of the accused is mandatory:
Sandiganbayan, 159 SCRA 70). 1) During arraignment;
However, when the delay is due to complexity of the 2) During trial for identification;
issues, or the petitioner’s own acts, there is no violation 3) During promulgation of sentence, except for light
of due process and speedy trial (Santiago vs. offenses;
Garchitorena, 228 SCRA 214).
An accused who jumps bail, escapes from confinement,
or flees to a foreign country, loses standing in court, and
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE unless he surrenders or submits himself to the
Every circumstance favoring the innocence of the jurisdiction of the court, he is deemed to have waived his
accused must be taken into account. The proof against right to seek relief from the court, including the right to
him must survive the test of reason; the strongest appeal his conviction (P vs. Mapalao, 197 SCRA 79).
suspicion must not be permitted to sway judgment (P.
vs. Austria, 195 SCRA 700). THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
(Availability)
Available not only in criminal prosecutions but also in all
other government proceedings, including civil actions
RIGHT TO BE HEARD BY HIMSELF AND and administrative or legislative investigations. It is
COUNSEL available not only to the accused but also any witness to
The right to counsel during trial is not subject to waiver whom a question calling for an incriminating answer is
because “even the most intelligent or educated man may addressed.
have no skill in the science of law, particularly in the
Page 9 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Amparo Libertad) A suspicion because the petitioner’s “eyes were moving
It is a writ directed to the person detaining another and fast” does not justify a search under this rule (Malacat vs.
commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at CA, GR No. 123595, Dec. 12, 1997).
a certain time and place, with the day and the cause of
his caption and detention, to do, to submit to, and
receive whatsoever the court or judge awarding the writ
4. Where the search is an incident to a lawful
shall consider in his behalf.
arrest.
Requisites:
Writ of Amparo [AM No. 07-9-12-SC] i. It is necessary that the apprehending officer must have
Is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, been spurred by probable cause in effecting the arrest
liberty and security is violated or threatened with which could be considered as on in cadence with the
violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public instances of permissible arrests enumerated in sec. 5,
official or employee, or of a private individual or entity. Rule 113, ROC;
The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced ii. Search is contemporaneous with the arrest;
disappearances or threats thereof.
Thus, where the officers, after conducting a buy-
The Writ of Habeas Data [AM No. 08-1-16-SC] bust, reported to the office and subsequently return to
The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any the place of sale to conduct a search, such search is
person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security invalid.
is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission
iii. Made within the permissible area of search – includes
of a public official or employee, or of a private individual the premises or surroundings under his immediate
or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing control.
of data or information regarding the person, family, Thus, the search inside the house where the buy-
home and correspondence of the aggrieved party. bust operation was conducted outside the house is
invalid (Espano vs. CA, 288 SCRA 558).
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, Note: Under this exception, the valid arrest must
houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable precede the search. The process cannot be reversed (P.
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any vs. Chua Ho San, GR NO. 128222, June 17, 1999).
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or
warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable 5. Search in vessels and aircrafts
cause to be determined personally by the judge after 6. Search in moving vehicles (Extensive if there is
examination under oath or affirmation of the probable cause. Visual search if otherwise.)
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and 7. Inspection of buildings and other premises for
particularly describing the place to be searched and the enforcement of fire, sanitary and building
the persons or things to be seized. (MEMORIZE) regulations.
8. When prohibited articles are in plain view
WARRANTLESS SEARCHES AND SEIZURES Requisites: (P. vs. Aruta, GR No. 120515, April 13,
1. Right voluntarily waived; 1998).
The consent must be voluntary, unequivocal, specific and i. Prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless
intelligently given, uncontaminated by any duress or arrest in which the police are legally present in the
coercion. It cannot be lightly inferred but must be proved pursuit of their official duties;
by clear and convincing evidence. The burden of proof is
upon the State (Caballes vs. CA, GR NO. 136292, Jan. 15, • Valid intrusion includes being present in the
2002). place by reason of a warrantless arrest, search with a
search warrant for other object sought, search incidental
2. Routine airport security procedure as allowed to lawful arrest and other legitimate reasons
under RA 6235. unconnected with a search directed against the accused
Strip search in the ladies’ room was held valid under the (United Lab. vs. Isip, GR No. 163858, June 28, 2005).
circumstance (P. vs. Canton, GR No. 148825, Dec. 27,
ii. The evidence is inadvertently discovered;
2002)
iii. Evidence is immediately apparent without any
further search;
3. When there is valid reason to “stop and frisk”. iv. Illegality of the evidence must be apparent.
The right of a police officer to stop a citizen on the street,
interrogate him and pat him for weapons whenever he The apparent illegality does not require unduly high
observes unusual conduct which leads him to conclude degree of certainty as to the incriminating character of
that criminal activity may be a foot [Terry Search] (Terry the evidence. What is required is merely a probable
vs. Ohio). cause to associate the property with a criminal activity
Requisite: The apprehending officer must have (United Lab. vs. Isip, supra).
a genuine reason, in accordance with the police
officer’s experience and the surrounding conditions, Note: An object is in plain view if the object itself is
to warrant a belief that the person to be held has plainly exposed to sight. Where the object is in a closed
weapons or contraband concealed about him. The package, the object is not in plain view.
search must precede the arrest. Exception: when the package proclaims its
contents, whether by its distinctive configuration,
Page 10 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
its transparency, or if its contents are obvious to (3)Those born before January 17, 1973, of
the observer (Caballes vs. CA, supra). Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine Citizenship
upon reaching the age of majority; and
9. Search and seizure under emergency;
10. Search and seizure by private individual; (4)Those who are naturalized in the accordance
11. Search in open field; with law.
12. Search of an office computer assigned to a
government employee;
DUAL ALLEGIANCE VS DUAL CITIZENSHIP
Search of an office computer assigned to a An individual may have 2 or more citizenship but
government employee. owe allegiance to one State. Taking for example
The search of office computer, where personal files RA no. 9225 providing for retention of Philippine
were stored and used by the government employer citizenship among natural born Filipino citizens.
as evidence against the respondent in an Dual citizenship arises when, as a result of the
administrative case (misconduct), was held concurrent application of the different laws of two
reasonable by SC under the circumstances. There or more states, a person is simultaneously
was no violation of the constitutional right to privacy considered a national by those states and is
as guaranteed by section 2, Article III of the involuntary. Dual allegiance refers to the
Constitution. (Pollo vs. Constantino-David, GR No. situation in which a person simultaneously owes
181881, Oct. 18, 2011, En Banc). by some positive and voluntary act, loyalty to
two or more states (Mercado vs. Manzano, 307
WARRANTLESS ARREST SCRA 630 [1999]).
Page 11 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
MODES OF REMOVAL
(Section2(5), Article IX-C of the Constitution). Under
In accordance with Art. III, section 16(3), of the
the law, the following are grounds for
Constitution, Senators and Congressmen may be disqualification for registration in the party-list
removed by their EXPULSION for disorderly system:
behavior, with the concurrence of at least two-thirds
Page 12 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
Four Inviolable Principles under RA 7941 and the Sec. 21 Legislative Sec. 22 Oversight
Constitution: (Veterans Federation Party vs. Investigation Function
COMEMLEC, GR No. 136781, Oct. 6, 2000) As to persons who may appear
Any person Only a department
a) The 20% allocation. The combined number of all the head
party-list congressmen shall not exceed 20% of the total As to who conducts investigation
membership of the House of Representatives; Committees Entire body
b) The 2% threshold. Only those parties garnering a As to subject matter
minimum of 2% of the total votes cast for the party-list Any matter for the Matters related to the
system are qualified to have a seat in the House; purpose of legislation department only
c) The 3 seat limit. Each qualified party, regardless of As to purpose
the number of votes it actually obtained, is entitled to a In aid of legislation, the The objective of which
maximum of 3 seats; aim to which is to elicit is to obtain information
d) Proportional representation. The additional seats information that may be in pursuit of oversight
which a qualified party is entitled to shall be computed used for legislation function
“in proportion to their total number of votes”. As to attendance
Compulsory Discretionary hence it
The continued operation of the 2% threshold as it
is valid for the
applies to the allocation of the additional seat is now
President to require
unconstitutional because this threshold mathematically
that the consent be
prevents the filling-up of the available party-list seats.
required first before her
The additional seats shall be distributed to the parties in
subordinates appear
a second round of seat allocation (Barangay Ass. for
As to compelling power of Congress
National Advancement [BANAT] vs. COMELEC, GR No.
Can compel the Congress cannot
179271, April 21, 2009).
attendance of compel appearance of
executive officials, executive officials if no
except the President consent is given.
ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL
POWER: The SET and HRET shall be the sole judge of
all contests relating to the election, returns and DELEGATION OF POWERS
qualifications of their respective members. The Rule is that what has been delegated cannot be re-
Electoral Tribunal may assume jurisdiction only after the delegated (Potestas delegata non potest delegare). The
winning candidate shall have been duly proclaimed, has delegated power constitutes not only a right but a duty to
taken his oath of office and assumed the functions of the be performed by the delegate through the instrumentality
office, because it is only then that he is said to be a of his own judgment and not thorough the intervening
member of Congress (Aquino vs. COMELEC, 248 SCRA mind of another.
400).
REVIEW OF DECISIONS EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
Its decisions may be reviewed by the SC only upon
showing of grave abuse of discretion in a petition for
certiorari filed under Rule 65 (Pena vs. HRET, GR No. QUALIFICATIONS
123037, March 21, 1997). [President and V-President]
i. Natural-born citizen;
ii. Registered voter;
SEPARATION OF POWER iii. Able to read and write;
The Power of Legislative Investigation iv. At least 40 years old on the election day;
May refer to the implementation or re-examination of any v. Resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years
law or appropriation, or in connection with any proposed immediately preceding such election.
legislation or for the formulation of or in connection with
future legislation, or will aid in the review or formulation POWERS
of a new legislative policy or enactment (Senate Rules
Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation). Executive Power – (sec. 1, art. VII)
Limitations:
Page 13 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
AD INTERIM APPOINTMENT; ACTING VS Every State possesses the capacity to conclude treaties,
PERMANENT as an attribute of sovereignty. International
organizations, also possess treating capacity, although
may be limited by the purpose and the constitution of
Permanent – are those extended to persons
such organizations.
possessing the requisite eligibility and are thus protected
by the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure.
Page 14 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
Page 15 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
Exceptions to the mootness rule: 3. The question must be raised at the earliest
I. There is grave violation of the Constitution. possible opportunity.
II. Paramount public interest because of exceptional
circumstances. As a rule it must be raised in the pleadings, however –
III. Court exercises symbolic function. a• a) In criminal cases – the question can be raised
IV. Issues raised are capable of repetition yet evading at any time at the discretion of the court.
review. b• b) In civil cases – at any stage if necessary for
the determination of the case itself.
Requisites: c• c) At any stage – if the issue involves jurisdiction
1) The life of the controversy is too short to be fully of the court, except when there is estoppel.
litigated prior to its termination.
2) There is reasonable expectation that the same NOTE: The question of unconstitutionality may not
problem would arise again. necessarily be raised in the pleadings if the tribunal
where the case is initially filed or pending has no
2. Raised by the proper party. jurisdiction to resolve question of unconstitutionality.
REAL PARTY IN INTEREST 4. The decision on the question must be the very lis
Party who is ought to be benefited or injured by the mota of the case.
judgment in a suit raised by the person entitled to the
avails of the suit. Ratio: separation of powers demands proper respect be
accorded the other departments. The Court stressed that
A party who has sustained or is in imminent danger of it will not pass upon a question of constitutionality if the
sustaining an injury as a result of the act complained of. case can be disposed of on some other ground (Mirasol
Samples: vs. CA).
a) Province has personality to question Every law has in its favor the presumption of
provisions of the GAA relative to projects funded constitutionality, and to justify its nullification, there must
by IRA (Province of Batangas vs. Romulo, 429 be a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution,
SCRA 736). and not one that is doubtful, speculative or
b) Legislator [senator] has standing to bring suit argumentative (Arceta vs. Mangrobang, GR No. 152895,
for usurpation of legislative powers (Ople vs. June 15, 2004).
Torres, 293 SCRA 141).
c) Passengers of buses, trains and jeepneys in DOCTRINE OF OPERATIVE FACTS – The general rule
questioning DOTC memo authorizing operators to is that an unconstitutional law is void. It produces no
increase/decrease fares (KMU vs. Garcia, 239 rights, imposes no duties and affords no protection.
SCRA 386). However, the doctrine of operative fact is an exception to
d) Registered voters in cases involving the right the general rule and it only applies as a matter of equity
of suffrage. and fair play. Under the doctrine of operative fact, the
e) Taxpayers in cases involving taxing or unconstitutional law remains unconstitutional, but the
spending powers of Congress. effects of the unconstitutional law, prior to its judicial
declaration of nullity, may be left undisturbed as a matter
Requisites: of equity and fair play. It can never be invoked to
1) Public funds are disbursed by a political subdivision or validate as constitutional an unconstitutional act.
instrumentality;
2) A law is violated or some irregularity is committed by JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL
allegedly ultra vires act (AGLP vs. CA, 260 SCRA 250). The Judicial and Bar Council has the principal
f) The government is a proper party to question the function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary.
validity of its own laws (P. vs. Vera, 65 Phil. 56). It may exercise such other functions and duties as the
Supreme Court may assign to it. (Art. VIII, sec. 8(5)).
NOTE: A party’s standing in court is a procedural
technicality which may be set aside by the court in view The JBC is composed of the Chief Justice as ex
of the importance of the issues involved.
officio Chairman, the Secretary of Justice and a
• Issues of paramount interest (Kilosbayan vs.
representative of the Congress as ex officio Members,
Guingona, 232 SCRA 110).
• Issues of transcendental importance (ITF vs. a representative of the Integrated Bar, a professor of
Comelec, GR No. 159139, Jan. 13, 2004). law, a retired Member of the Supreme Court, and a
representative of the private sector. (Art. VIII,
“FACIAL CHALLENGE” sec. 8(1)).
A facial challenge to a legislative act is the most difficult
challenge to mount successfully since the challenge The Supreme Court supervises the JBC andprovides
must establish that no set of circumstances exits under in the annual budget of the Court the appropriations of
which the act would be valid (Estrada vs. the JBC. (Art. VIII, sec. 8(4)).
Sandiganbayan, GR No. 148560, Nov. 19, 2001).
• This challenge operates properly in the realm of SEPARATION OF POWER
freedom of expression. Note: The Ombudsman may not initiate or investigate a
• Take note that legislative act infringing upon criminal or administrative complaint before his office
freedom of expression comes to court with a heavy against a judge; he must first indorse the case to the SC
presumption of unconstitutionality. for appropriate action (Fuentes vs. Office of the
Ombudsman, GR No. 124295, Oct. 23, 2001).
Page 16 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
The investigation conducted by the Ombudsman 5. Section 5, Article IX-B of the Constitution, which
encroaches into the SC’s power of administrative provides for the standardization of the compensation
supervision over all courts and its personnel, in violation of government officials and employees, distinguishes
of the doctrine of separation of powers (Maceda vs. between government corporations and their
Vasquez, 221 SCRA 469). subsidiaries, for the provision applies only to
government corporations with original charters.
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OF OFFICERS AND
RATIONAL SCHEME EMPLOYEES IN CIVIL SERVICE
The rational scheme of appointments in the COMELEC Under Art. IX-B. Sec. 2(3) of the Constitution, officers
refers to the appointment of the Commissioner and 5 of and employees in the Civil Service may only be
its members not simultaneously but by intervals of every
removed for cause as provided by law and after
after 2 years upon expiration of their term of office.
observance of due process. Their removal must be
effected by the appropriate disciplinary authority in
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION accordance with Ch. 7 secs. 47-48 of Book V of the
CAREER SERVICE Administrative Code of 1987 and the Civil Rules and
Career Service – Characterized by: Regulations.
i. entrance based on merit and fitness to be
determined, as far as practicable by competitive
examinations, or based on highly technical qualifications; SECURITY OF TENURE
ii. opportunity for advancement to higher career There is no such thing as an absolute right to hold office.
positions; and Except those who hold constitutional offices which
iii. Security of tenure. provide for special immunity as regards salary and
Note: The mere fact that the position belongs to the tenure, no one can be said to have vested right to office
Career Executive Service does not automatically confer or salary. When loss of public position or office is due to
security of tenure. Such right will have to depend on the the exercise of the power of the President to regorganize
nature of appointment which, in turn, depends on his the executive department, then such is valid and there is
eligibility or lack of it. A person who does not have the no violation of security of tenure. (Banda v. Ermita, GR.
required qualifications may be appointed only in an 166620 April 20, 2010)
acting capacity, in the absence of appropriate eligibles.
The appointment cannot be regarded as permanent,
even if it is so designated (De Leon vs. CA, GR No.
COMELEC
127182, Jan. 22, 2001).
GRANT OF PARDON
GOCC WITH ORIGINAL CHARTER VS GOCC The Constitution requires recommendation from the
WITHOUT ORIGINAL CHARTER COMELEC before the President may grant executive
clemency for offenses violating election laws.
1. Section 13. Article VII of the Constitution,
which prohibits the President from appointing his
JURISDICTION
spouse and relatives within the fourth degree of Jurisdiction to entertain petition to declare failure of
consanguinity or affinity does not distinguish between election: The COMELEC, sitting en banc, motu proprio
government corporations with original charters or upon a verified petition, and with a hearing summary
and their subsidiaries, because the prohibition applies in nature.
to both.
A law granting the COMELEC jurisdiction over
2. Section 13, Article VII of the Constitution, which inclusion and exclusion cases is unconstitutional.
prohibits Members of Congress from holding any Under Section 2(3), Article IXC of the Constitution, the
other office during their term without forfeiting their COMELEC cannot decide the right to vote, which
seat, does not distinguish between government refers to the inclusion and exclusion of voters. Under
corporations with original charters and their Section 2(6), Article IX-C of the Constitution, it can
subsidiaries, because the prohibition applies to both. only file petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of
voters.
3. Section 2, Article IX-A of the Constitution, which
prohibits Members of the Constitutional Commissions The COMELEC shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all
from being financially interested in any contract with –pre-proclamation controversies [sec. 242, BP 881]. The
or any franchise or privilege granted by the possibility of conflict of jurisdiction between the
Government, does not distinguish between COMELEC and the HRET and SET regarding contests
government corporations with original charters and involving congressional elections has been foreclosed by
their subsidiaries, because the prohibition applies to sec. 15, RA 7166, which prohibits pre-proclamation
both. controversies in national offices, except of questions
involving the composition and proceedings of the Board
4. Section 2(1), Article IX-D of the Constitution which of Canvassers. Besides, see Aquino vs. COMELEC,
provides for post audit by the Commission on audit of supra, which delineated the jurisdictional boundaries
government corporations, does not distinguish between COMELEC and the Electoral Tribunals.
between government corporations with original
charters and their subsidiaries, because the ▪However, the COMELEC is without authority to
provision applies to both. partially or totally annul a proclamation or to suspend the
effects of a proclamation without notice and hearing, as
Page 17 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
this would violate due process clause (Bince vs. • Violation of BP 22 (Villaber vs. COMELEC, GR
COMELEC, 218 SCRA 782). No. 148326, Nov. 15, 2001).
▪In the exercise of its exclusive appellate jurisdiction,
the COMELEC has the power to issue writs of • Violation of Anti-Fencing Law (De la Torre vs.
prohibition, mandamus and certiorari because of the last COEMLEC, 258 SCRA 483).
part of sec. 50, BP 697, and not had not been repealed
by BP 881 (Relampagos vs. Cumba, 243 SCRA 690). 4) A person who is a permanent resident of or an
immigrant to a foreign country.
EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION
RA 6679, in so far as its grants appellate jurisdiction to • The “green card” is an ample proof that the
the RTC over decisions of MTCs and/or MeTCs in holder thereof is a permanent resident of, or an
electoral cases involving elective barangay officials is immigrant of to the US (Caasi vs. COMELEC, 191 SCRA
unconstitutional (Flores vs. COMELEC, 184 SCRA 484). 229).
Note: Under the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, the B. Under the LGC -
mere filing of the notice of appeal is not enough; it Section 40. Disqualifications. - The following
should be accompanied by payment of the correct persons are disqualified from running for any
amount of appeal fee, in order that the appeal may be elective local position:
deemed perfected. However, the rule is merely (a) Those sentenced by final judgment for
permissive. The COMELEC may refuse to take action an offense involving moral turpitude or for
until the docket fees are paid or outrightly dismissed the an offense punishable by one (1) year or
case (Sunga vs. COMELEC, 288 SCRA 76). more of imprisonment, within two (2) years
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DECISIONS after serving sentence;
Only decisions of the COMELEC en banc may be • Note: Even if the candidate is under probation,
brought to the SC on certiorari. the disqualification still subsists, because the effect of
the probation is only to suspend the implementation of
▪Only decisions of the COMELEC made in the the sentence [not the fact of being convicted with an
exercise of adjudicatory or quasi-judicial power may be offense involving moral turpitude] (De La Torre,
brought to the SC. Indeed, determinations made by the COMELEC, supra.)
COMELEC which are merely administrative in character,
may be challenged in an ordinary action before trial • However: Those who have not served their
courts (Filipinas Engineering vs. Ferrer, 135 SCRA 25). sentence by reason of the grant of probation which
should not be equated with service of sentence, should
not likewise be disqualified from running for a local
ELECTION LAWS elective office because the 2-year period of ineligibility
SECOND PLACER RULE does not even begin to run [during the period of
A distinction should be delineated as to when the finality probation] (Moreno vs. COMELEC, GR No. 168550,
of judgment disqualifying the candidate took effect. If the Aug. 10, 2006).
disqualification is already final and executory before the •
day of the election, the Doctrine of Rejection of the (b) Those removed from office as a result of
Second Placer will not apply. The candidate obtaining an administrative case;
the 2nd highest number of votes shall be proclaimed the • Note: an elective local official who was removed
winner. The votes cast for the winning bitdisqualified from office as a result of an administrative case prior to
candidate shall be considered stray votes. Jan. 1, 1992 [the effectivity of LGC], is not disqualified
from running for an elective local public office because
However, if the disqualification is not yet final and executory the sec. 40 cannot be given retroactive effect (Grego vs.
on the day of the election, the candidate obtaining the 2 nd COEMELEC, GR No. 125955, June 19, 1997).
highest number of votes cannot be declared as the winner. To
do so would be to disenfranchise the will of the electorate. • A municipal mayor who had been ordered
The rules on succession to vacancy in elective office will apply removed from office by the SP, was disqualified despite
instead. his allegation that the decision is not yet final [and
executory] because he had not received a copy of the
GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATIONS decision, inasmuch as it is shown that he merely refused
to accept delivery of the copy of the decision (Reyes vs.
DISQUALIFICATIONS: COMELEC, 254 SCRA 514).
A. Under the OEC [BP 881, sec. 12] –
1) Declared as incompetent or insane by competent (c) Those convicted by final judgment for
authority. violating the oath of allegiance to the
2) Sentenced by final judgment for subversion (no more Republic;
crime of subversion- already repealed), insurrection,
rebellion or any offense for which he has been (d) Those with dual citizenship;
sentenced to a penalty of more than 18 months of • Note: Just connect to topic on citizenship and
imprisonment. see Mercado vs. Manzano, 307 SCRA 630).
3) Sentenced by final judgment for a crime involving
moral turpitude. • In the absence of any official action or approval
by the proper authorities, a mere application for
Page 18 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
repatriation, does not, and cannot amount to an 1) From RTC/MTC – appeal shall be made
automatic reacquisition of applicant’s Philippine exclusively to the COMELEC, whose decision shall be
citizenship (Labo vs. COMELEC, GR No. 105111, July final and unappeasable.
3, 1992).
▪Period to Appeal: 5 days from promulgation or receipt
• The “oath of allegiance” contained in the COC, of a copy of the decision.
which is substantially similar to the one contained in sec.
3, of RA 9225 [The Citizenship Retention and ▪The filing of a MR is a prohibited pleading and does
Reacquisition Act], does not constitute the personal and not interrupt the running of the 5-day period (Veloria vs.
sworn renunciation sought under sec. 5[2], RA 9225. Garcia, 211 SCRA 907).
The renunciation of foreign citizenship is an additional
requisite only for those retained or reacquired Philippine ▪The RTC/MTC has the competence to order
citizenship under RA 9225 and who seek elective public execution of its decision pending appeal, it being a
posts, considering their special circumstance of having judicial prerogative and there being no law dis-
one citizenship (De Guzman vs. COMELEC, GR No. authorizing the same (Garcia vs. De Jesus, 206 SCRA
180048, June 19, 2009). 779).
(e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or non- ▪In the exercise of its exclusive appellate jurisdiction,
political cases here or abroad; the COMELEC has the power to issue writs of certiorari,
• Note: Fugitives from justice “includes not only prohibition and mandamus under sec. 50 of BP 697, it
those who flee after conviction to avoid punishment, but being not amended by BP 881 (Relampagos vs. Cumba,
likewise those, who after being charged, flee to avoid 243 SCRA 502).
prosecution”. Because the arrival in the Philippines from
the US preceded the filing of felony complaint in LA ▪The provision of RA 6679, granting appellate
Court by almost 5 months, Rodriguez cannot be jurisdiction to the RTC over decisions of MTC in electoral
considered a fugitive from justice (Rodriguez vs. cases involving barangay officials is
COMELEC, GR No. 120099, July 24, 1996). unconstitutional (Flores vs. COMELC, 184 SCRA 484).
(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or ▪Galang Doctrine [Galang vs. Geronimo]
those who have acquired the right to reside A petition for certiorari questioning an interlocutory order
abroad and continue to avail of the same right of a trial court in an electoral protest is within the
after the effectivity of this Code; and appellate jurisdiction of the COMELEC (Ceriaco Bulilis
• Note: see Caasi vs. COMELEC, supra. vs. Victorino Nuez, GR No. 195953, Aug. 9, 2011).
▪The fact that decisions, final orders or rulings of the
(g) The insane or feeble-minded. COMELEC in appealed cases involving municipal and
barangay officials are final [and executory] and
EFFECT OF FILING CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY unappealable does not preclude a recourse to the SC by
APPOINTIVE AND ELECTIVE OFFICE way of a special civil action for certiorari (Galido vs.
Section 66, BP 881. Candidates holding appointive office or COMELEC, 193 SCRA 78).
positions. - Any person holding a public appointive office or
2) Decisions, rulings of the COMELEC division are
position, including active members of the Armed Forces of
subject to Motion for Reconsideration to be resolved by
the Philippines, and officers and employees in government- the COMELEC en banc.
owned or controlled corporations, shall be considered ipso
facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate 3) Decisions, ruling, final orders of the COMELEC en
of candidacy. banc is reviewable via Petition for CPM within 30 days
from notice of the decision, etc (see Rule 64, Rules of
ELECTION PROTEST Court in Remedial Law Reviewer.
Jurisdiction Over Election Contests:
A. Original and Exclusive – 4) Decisions of the Electoral Tribunals, except the PET,
1) President/Vice-President – Supreme Court en are not appealable but may be subject of review by the
banc acting as Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) SC via Rule 65 (petition for CPM).
2) Senator –Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET).
3) Representative – House of Representatives PRE-PROCLAMATION CONTEST
Electoral Tribunal (HRET). A pre-proclamation controversy refers to any
4) Regional/Provincial/City – COMELEC. question pertaining to or affecting the
5) Municipal – RTC. proceedings of the board of canvassers which
6) Barangay – MTC, MeTC, MCTC may be raised by any candidate or by any
7) Sangguniang Kabataan - .DILG (Alunan vs. registered political party or coalition of political
Mirasol, GR No. 108399, July 31, 1997). parties before the board or directly with the
Commission, or any matter raised under Sections
• In the absence of any express provision in the 233, 234, 235 and 236 in relation to the
governing law, it is the RTC, which has jurisdiction over preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and
controversies involving election of members of the SK appreciation of the election returns.
(Mercado vs. Board of Election Inspectors, GR No.
109713, April 6, 1995). PURPOSE: To prevent the nefarious practice known as
“grab the proclamation, prolong the protest.”
B. Appellate Jurisdiction –
Page 19 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
Page 20 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
Page 21 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
The President may enter into agreements with Art. XIII. sec. 3 of the Constitution guarantees the
foreign-owned corporations involving either right of all workers to engage in peaceful concerted
technical or financial assistance for large-scale activities, including the right to strike in accordance
exploration, development, and utilization of with law.
minerals, petroleum, and other mineral oils
according to the general terms and conditions
provided by law, based on real contributions to EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
the economic growth and general welfare of the ARTS
country. In such agreements, the State shall
promote the development and use of local
ACADEMIC FREEDOM: FLAG SALUTE; FREEDOM
scientific and technical resources.
OF RELIGION
The President shall notify the Congress of every
contract entered into
From the standpoint of the educational institution: The
freedom of the university to determine –
EEZ RESERVED EXCLUSIVELY TO FILIPINO
i. Who may teach;
CITIZEN
ii. What may be taught;
The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth in its
archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and Exclusive iii. How shall it be thought; and
Economic Zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment iv. Who may be admitted to the study.
exclusively to Filipino citizens.
According to Reyes v. Court of Appeals, 194 SCRA
OWNERSHIP PUBLIC UTILITIES (60-40 RULE) 402, academic freedom is the freedom of a faculty
MASS MEDIA (100%) member to pursue his studies in his particular
ADVERTISING (70%) specialty and thereafter to make known or publish the
result of his endeavors without fear that retribution
SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS would be visited on him in the event that his
SOCIAL JUSTICE conclusions are found distasteful or objectionable by
Social justice is neither communism, nor despotism, nor the powers that be, whether in the political, economic,
atomism nor anarchy, but the humanization of laws and or academic establishments.
the equalization of social and economic forces by the
State so that justice in its rational and objectively secular As held in Ebralinag v. The Division Superintendent
conception may at least be approximated. of Schools of Cebu. 219 SCRA 256 [1993], to compel
students to take part in the flag ceremony when it is
Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of all against their religious beliefs will violate their religious
people, the adoption by the government of measures freedom. Their expulsion also violates the duty of the
calculated to ensure economic stability of all component State under Article XIV, Section 1 of the Constitution
elements of the society through the maintenance of to protect and promote the right of all citizens to
proper economic and social equilibrium in the quality education and make such education
interrelations of the members of the community, accessible to all.
constitutionally, through the adoption of measures legally
justifiable, or extra constitutionally, through the exercise Under Section 3(3), Article XIV of the Constitution, at
of powers underlying the existence of all governments, the option expressed in writing by the parents or
on the time honored principle of salus populi est guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught to
suprema lex (Calalang vs. Williams, GR No. 47800, Dec. their children or wards in public elementary and high
2, 1940)
schools within the regular class hours by instructors
designated or approved by the religious authorities to
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
which the children or wards belong, without additional
cost to the Government.
• The CHR has no jurisdiction or adjudicatory
powers over certain specific types of cases, like alleged
RIGHT TO CHOOSE PROFESSION
human rights violations involving civil and political rights.
(Cariño vs. CHR, GR No. 96681, Dec. 2, 1991). Under Section 5(3), Article XIV of the Constitution,
the right to choose a profession is subject to fair,
• Having merely the power to investigate, the reasonable and equitable admission and academic
CHR cannot and should not try and resolve on the merits requirements. The rule does not violate equal
the matters involved in striking teachers case. protection. As held in Department of Education,
Culture and Sports v. San Diego,180 SCRA 533
CHR HAS NO POWER TO ISSUE TRO (1989), the five-strike rule is a valid exercise of police
In Simon vs. Commission on Human Rights, 229 power to ensure that those admitted to the medical
SCRA 117. the Court held that the Commission on profession are qualified.
Human Rights has no power to issue a restraining
order or a writ of injunction and has no power to cite ACADEMIC REQUIREMENTS must always be
for contempt for violation of the restraining order or a scrutinized under Equal Protection Clause and
writ of preliminary injunction. Police power of the state
Page 23 of 25
Political Law Areas in the 2019 Bar
Atty. Genesis M. Auza - #auzalawreview - 09207025338
e. The Double Criminality Rule: The act for Above is, however, subject to the following modifications
which the extradition is sought must be punishable in – (Review Lecture)
both the requesting and the requested State. a) Conflict between Constitution and jus cogens
norm – jus cogens prevails. No derogation is allowed.
EXPULSION or DEPORTATION – may be predicated on the b) Conflict between Constitution and jus
dispositivum - Constitution prevails.
ground that the stay of the alien constitutes a menace to the
c) Conflict between Constitution and Treaty
security of the State or that his entry was illegal, or that the
based on jus dispositivum – Constitution prevails.
permission to stay has expired, or that he has violated any
d) Statute and Norm of International law –
limitation or condition prescribed for his admission and
i. Statue vs. jus cogens norm – jus cogens
continued stay. prevails.
EXTRADITION DEPORTATION ii. Statute vs. jus dispositivum – apply the rule on
Is the surrender of a Is the expulsion of an lex posterior derogat priori and the general and special
person by one State to alien considered law rule.
another State where he is undesirable by the local
wanted for prosecution, or State That is, the later law governs and that special law
if already convicted, for prevails over general law dealing on the same subject
punishment. matter.
The Surrender is Deportation is a
generally at the request of unilateral act of the SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY OF STATES (supra)
the State where he is local State
wanted for prosecution or PRINCIPLE OF NON-INTERVENTION
punishment Each state is sovereign and equal. It is a generally accepted
At the instance of the At the instance of the principle not to intervene with the affairs of other co-equal
requesting State for its local State made
states.
interest in bringing pursuant to its own
someone to justice interest
SELF-DEFENSE
Generally exists only by An inherent right of the
Treaty stipulation State as a sovereign International law on self-defense cannot assume the
The alien is brought only He may be brought, not nature of war. War requires "a declaration of war
to the requesting State necessarily to his own giving reasons" under the Hague Convention II of
State, but to any State 1907. Waging was as an instrument of national law is
willing to accept him. prohibited by the Pact of Paris of 1928.
Page 25 of 25