You are on page 1of 15

WIGBERTO E. TAÑADA et al.. vs. EDGARDO ANGARA, et al.

Measures
Agreement on Safeguards
Facts Annex 1B: General Agreement on Trade in Services and Annexes
Note: Justice Panganiban provides a brief historical background on the development of the WTO Annex 1C: Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
(see p28-34) Property Rights
ANNEX 2
On April 15, 1994, Respondent Rizalino Navarro, then Secretary of The Department of Trade Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
and Industry, representing the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, signed in the Settlement of Disputes
Marrakesh, Morocco, the Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral ANNEX 3
Negotiations (Final Act, for brevity). (Note: This act makes the Philippines one of the founding Trade Policy Review Mechanism
members of the WTO)
On December 16, 1994, the President of the Philippines signed the Instrument of Ratification,
On August 12, 1994, the members of the Philippine Senate received a letter dated August 11, declaring the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization and the agreements and
1994 from the President of the Philippines, stating among others that "the Uruguay Round Final associated legal instruments included in Annexes one (1), two (2) and three (3) ratified and
Act is hereby submitted to the Senate for its concurrence pursuant to Section 21, Article VII of confirmed
the Constitution."
To emphasize, the WTO Agreement ratified by the President of the Philippines is
On August 13, 1994, the members of the Philippine Senate received another letter from the composed of the Agreement Proper and "the associated legal instruments included in
President of the Philippines likewise dated August 11, 1994, which stated among others that "the Annexes one (1), two (2) and three (3) of that Agreement which are integral parts thereof."
Uruguay Round Final Act, the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, the
Ministerial Declarations and Decisions, and the Understanding on Commitments in Financial On the other hand, the Final Act signed by Secretary Navarro embodies not only the WTO
Services are hereby submitted to the Senate for its concurrence pursuant to Section 21, Article Agreement (and its integral annexes aforementioned) but also (1) the Ministerial
VII of the Constitution." Declarations and Decisions and (2) the Understanding on Commitments in Financial
Services. The Solicitor General describes these two latter documents as follows:
On December 9, 1994, the President of the Philippines certified the necessity of the immediate
adoption of P.S. 1083, a resolution entitled "Concurring in the Ratification of the Agreement The Ministerial Decisions and Declarations are twenty-five declarations and decisions
Establishing the World Trade Organization." on matters such as measures in favor of least developed countries, notification
procedures etc.
On December 14, 1994, the Philippine Senate adopted Resolution No. 97 which "Resolved, as it
is hereby resolved, that the Senate concur, as it hereby concurs, in the ratification by the The Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services dwell on, among other
President of the Philippines of the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization." things, standstill or limitations and qualifications of commitments to existing non-
conforming measures, market access, national treatment etc.
The text of the WTO Agreement is written on pages 137 et seq. of Volume I of the 36-volume
Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations and includes various agreements and On December 29, 1994, the present petition was filed. The Court resolved on December 12,
associated legal instruments (identified in the said Agreement as Annexes 1, 2 and 3 thereto and 1995, to give due course to the petition. The court also requested the Hon. Lilia R. Bautista, the
collectively referred to as Multilateral Trade Agreements, for brevity) as follows: Philippine Ambassador to the United Nations stationed in Geneva, Switzerland, to submit a
paper, hereafter referred to as "Bautista Paper,", (1) providing a historical background of and (2)
ANNEX 1 summarizing the said agreements.
Annex 1A: Multilateral Agreement on Trade in Goods
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 During the Oral Argument held on August 27, 1996, the Court directed the petitioners to submit
Agreement on Agriculture the (1) Senate Committee Report on the matter in controversy and (2) the transcript of
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and proceedings/hearings in the Senate; and the Solicitor General, as counsel for respondents, to
Phytosanitary Measures file (1) a list of Philippine treaties signed prior to the Philippine adherence to the WTO
Agreement on Textiles and Clothing Agreement, which derogate from Philippine sovereignty and (2) copies of the multi-volume WTO
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement and other documents mentioned in the Final Act.
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of he Issues:
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1. WON the petition presents a justiciable controversy
1994 2. WON the provision of the WTO agreement and its three annexes contravene sec. 19,
Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of the article 2 and sec. 10 and 12, article 12 of the Philippine Constitution
General on Tariffs and Trade 1994 3. WON the provisions of said agreement and its annexes limit, restrict or impair the
Agreement on Pre-Shipment Inspection exercise of legislative power by congress
Agreement on Rules of Origin 4. WON said provisions unduly impair or interfere with the exercise of judicial power by
Agreement on Imports Licensing Procedures this court in promulgating rules on evidence
Agreement on Subsidies and Coordinating 5. WON the concurrence of the senate in the WTO agreement and its annexes are
sufficient and/or valid, considering that it did not include the final act, ministerial
declarations and decisions, and the understanding on commitments in financial
services a) In the area of investment measures related to trade in goods (TRIMS, for brevity):
b) In the area of trade related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS, for
Holding: the petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit. brevity):
Ratio: Each Member shall accord to the nationals of other Members treatment no less
favourable than that it accords to its own nationals with regard to the protection of
1. WON the Court has jurisdiction over the controversy intellectual property. . . (par. 1 Article 3, Agreement on Trade-Related Aspect of
Intellectual Property rights, Vol. 31, Uruguay Round, Legal Instruments, p. 25432
Yes. (emphasis supplied)
The jurisdiction of this Court to adjudicate the matters raised in the petition is clearly set out in c) In the area of the General Agreement on Trade in Services:
the 1987 Constitution, as follows:
Declaration of Principles Not Self-Executing
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, By its very title, Article II of the Constitution is a "declaration of principles and state policies." The
and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion counterpart of this article in the 1935 Constitution is called the "basic political creed of the
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or nation" by Dean Vicente Sinco. These principles in Article II are not intended to be self-
instrumentality of the government. executing principles ready for enforcement through the courts. They are used by the
judiciary as aids or as guides in the exercise of its power of judicial review, and by the
As the petition alleges grave abuse of discretion and as there is no other plain, speedy or legislature in its enactment of laws. As held in the leading case of Kilosbayan,
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, we have no hesitation at all in holding that Incorporated vs. Morato, the principles and state policies enumerated in Article II and
this petition should be given due course and the vital questions raised therein ruled upon some sections of Article XII are not "self-executing provisions, the disregard of which can
under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. Indeed, certiorari, prohibition and mandamus are give rise to a cause of action in the courts. They do not embody judicially enforceable
appropriate remedies to raise constitutional issues and to review and/or prohibit/nullify, constitutional rights but guidelines for legislation."
when proper, acts of legislative and executive officials. On this, we have no equivocation.
In general, the 1935 provisions were not intended to be self-executing principles ready for
We should stress that, in deciding to take jurisdiction over this petition, this Court will not review enforcement through the courts. They were rather directives addressed to the executive and to
the wisdom of the decision of the President and the Senate in enlisting the country into the the legislature. If the executive and the legislature failed to heed the directives of the
WTO, or pass upon the merits of trade liberalization as a policy espoused by said international article, the available remedy was not judicial but political. The electorate could express
body. Neither will it rule on the propriety of the government's economic policy of their displeasure with the failure of the executive and the legislature through the
reducing/removing tariffs, taxes, subsidies, quantitative restrictions, and other import/trade language of the ballot. (Bernas, Vol. II, p. 2).
barriers. Rather, it will only exercise its constitutional duty "to determine whether or not
there had been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction" It seems to me important that the legal right which is an essential component of a cause
on the part of the Senate in ratifying the WTO Agreement and its three annexes. of action be a specific, operable legal right, rather than a constitutional or statutory
policy, for at least two (2) reasons:
2. WON The WTO Agreement contravenes the Phil. Constitution
1. That unless the legal right claimed to have been violated or disregarded is given
No. specification in operational terms, defendants may well be unable to defend
The "flagship" constitutional provisions referred to are Sec 19, Article II, and Secs. 10 and 12, themselves intelligently and effectively; in other words, there are due process
Article XII, of the Constitution, which are worded as follows: dimensions to this matter.

Article II DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES 2. Where a specific violation of law or applicable regulation is not alleged or proved,
Sec. 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economy petitioners can be expected to fall back on the expanded conception of judicial power
effectively controlled by Filipinos. in the second paragraph of Section 1 of Article VIII of the Constitution

Article XII NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY Economic Nationalism Should Be Read with Other Constitutional Mandates to Attain
Sec. 10. . . . The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the formation Balanced Development of Economy
and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos.
In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and Secs. 10 and 12 of Article XII, should be read and understood in relation to the other
patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos. sections in said article.

Sec. 12. The State shall promote the preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic The Constitution ordains the ideals of economic nationalism (1) by expressing preference in
materials and locally produced goods, and adopt measures that help make them favor of qualified Filipinos "in the grant of rights, privileges and concessions covering the
competitive. national economy and patrimony" and in the use of "Filipino labor, domestic materials and
locally-produced goods"; (2) by mandating the State to "adopt measures that help make them
Petitioners aver that these sacred constitutional principles are desecrated by the following WTO competitive; and (3) by requiring the State to "develop a self-reliant and independent national
provisions quoted in their memorandum: economy effectively controlled by Filipinos." In similar language, the Constitution takes into
account the realities of the outside world as it requires the pursuit of "a trade policy that countries to be effected within ten (10) years. In regard to export subsidy for agricultural
serves the general welfare and utilizes all forms and arrangements of exchange on the products, GATT requires developed countries to reduce their budgetary outlays for export
basis of equality ad reciprocity"; and speaks of industries "which are competitive in both subsidy by 36% and export volumes receiving export subsidy by 21% within a period of six (6)
domestic and foreign markets" as well as of the protection of "Filipino enterprises years. For developing countries, however, the reduction rate is only two-thirds of that prescribed
against unfair foreign competition and trade practices." for developed countries and a longer period of ten (10) years within which to effect such
reduction.
It is true that in the recent case of Manila Prince Hotel vs. Government Service Insurance
System, et al., this Court held that "Sec. 10, second par., Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution is a Moreover, GATT itself has provided built-in protection from unfair foreign competition and trade
mandatory, positive command which is complete in itself and which needs no further guidelines practices including anti-dumping measures, countervailing measures and safeguards against
or implementing laws or rule for its enforcement. From its very words the provision does not import surges. Where local businesses are jeopardized by unfair foreign competition, the
require any legislation to put it in operation. It is per se judicially enforceable." However, Philippines can avail of these measures. There is hardly therefore any basis for the
as the constitutional provision itself states, it is enforceable only in regard to "the grants statement that under the WTO, local industries and enterprises will all be wiped out and
of rights, privileges and concessions covering national economy and patrimony" and not that Filipinos will be deprived of control of the economy. Quite the contrary, the weaker
to every aspect of trade and commerce. It refers to exceptions rather than the rule. situations of developing nations like the Philippines have been taken into account; thus,
there would be no basis to say that in joining the WTO, the respondents have gravely
The Constitution did not intend to pursue an isolationist policy. It did not shut out foreign abused their discretion.
investments, goods and services in the development of the Philippine economy. While the
Constitution does not encourage the unlimited entry of foreign goods, services and Constitution Does Not Rule Out Foreign Competition
investments into the country, it does not prohibit them either. In fact, it allows an
exchange on the basis of equality and reciprocity, frowning only on foreign competition Furthermore, the constitutional policy of a "self-reliant and independent national
that is unfair. economy" does not necessarily rule out the entry of foreign investments, goods and
services. It contemplates neither "economic seclusion" nor "mendicancy in the
WTO Recognizes Need toProtect Weak Economies international community." As explained by Constitutional Commissioner Bernardo
Villegas, sponsor of this constitutional policy:
WTO decides by consensus whenever possible, otherwise, decisions of the Ministerial
Conference and the General Council shall be taken by the majority of the votes cast, except in Economic self-reliance is a primary objective of a developing country that is keenly aware of
cases of interpretation of the Agreement or waiver of the obligation of a member which would overdependence on external assistance for even its most basic needs. It does not mean autarky
require three fourths vote. Amendments would require two thirds vote in general. Amendments or economic seclusion; rather, it means avoiding mendicancy in the international community.
to MFN provisions and the Amendments provision will require assent of all members. Any
member may withdraw from the Agreement upon the expiration of six months from the date of The WTO reliance on "most favored nation," "national treatment," and "trade without
notice of withdrawals. discrimination" cannot be struck down as unconstitutional as in fact they are rules of
equality and reciprocity that apply to all WTO members. Aside from envisioning a trade
Hence, poor countries can protect their common interests more effectively through the policy based on "equality and reciprocity," the fundamental law encourages industries
WTO than through one-on-one negotiations with developed countries. Within the WTO, that are "competitive in both domestic and foreign markets," thereby demonstrating a
developing countries can form powerful blocs to push their economic agenda more clear policy against a sheltered domestic trade environment, but one in favor of the
decisively than outside the Organization. This is not merely a matter of practical alliances gradual development of robust industries that can compete with the best in the foreign
but a negotiating strategy rooted in law. Thus, the basic principles underlying the WTO markets. Indeed, Filipino managers and Filipino enterprises have shown capability and tenacity
Agreement recognize the need of developing countries like the Philippines to "share in to compete internationally. And given a free trade environment, Filipino entrepreneurs and
the growth in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic managers in Hongkong have demonstrated the Filipino capacity to grow and to prosper against
development." These basic principles are found in the preamble of the WTO Agreement. (see the best offered under a policy of laissez faire.
case for preamble of WTO)
Constitution Favors Consumers, Not Industries or Enterprises
Specific WTO Provisions Protect Developing Countries
The Constitution has not really shown any unbalanced bias in favor of any business or
So too, the Solicitor General points out that pursuant to and consistent with the foregoing basic enterprise, nor does it contain any specific pronouncement that Filipino companies should be
principles, the WTO Agreement grants developing countries a more lenient treatment, pampered with a total proscription of foreign competition. On the other hand, respondents claim
giving their domestic industries some protection from the rush of foreign competition. that WTO/GATT aims to make available to the Filipino consumer the best goods and services
Thus, with respect to tariffs in general, preferential treatment is given to developing obtainable anywhere in the world at the most reasonable prices. Consequently, the question
countries in terms of the amount of tariff reduction and the period within which the boils down to whether WTO/GATT will favor the general welfare of the public at large.
reduction is to be spread out. Specifically, GATT requires an average tariff reduction rate
of 36% for developed countries to be effected within a period of six (6) years while Constitution Designed to Meet Future Events and Contingencies
developing countries — including the Philippines — are required to effect an average
tariff reduction of only 24% within ten (10) years. No doubt, the WTO Agreement was not yet in existence when the Constitution was drafted and
ratified in 1987. That does not mean however that the Charter is necessarily flawed in the sense
In respect to domestic subsidy, GATT requires developed countries to reduce domestic support that its framers might not have anticipated the advent of a borderless world of business.
to agricultural products by 20% over six (6) years, as compared to only 13% for developing
It is not difficult to answer this question. Constitutions are designed to meet not only the
vagaries of contemporary events. They should be interpreted to cover even future and Apart from the UN Treaty, the Philippines has entered into many other international pacts — both
unknown circumstances. It is to the credit of its drafters that a Constitution can withstand bilateral and multilateral — that involve limitations on Philippine sovereignty. These are
the assaults of bigots and infidels but at the same time bend with the refreshing winds of enumerated by the Solicitor General in his Compliance dated October 24, 1996 (see case for list
change necessitated by unfolding events. As one eminent political law writer and respected of bilateral treaties)
jurist explains:
In such treaties, the Philippines has effectively agreed to limit the exercise of its
3. WON the WTO Agreement restricts or limits the Legislative Power of Congress sovereign powers of taxation, eminent domain and police power. The underlying
consideration in this partial surrender of sovereignty is the reciprocal commitment of the
No. other contracting states in granting the same privilege and immunities to the Philippines,
The WTO Agreement provides that "(e)ach Member shall ensure the conformity of its laws, its officials and its citizens. The same reciprocity characterizes the Philippine
regulations and administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the annexed commitments under WTO-GATT.
Agreements." Petitioners maintain that this undertaking "unduly limits, restricts and impairs
Philippine sovereignty, specifically the legislative power which under Sec. 2, Article VI of the The point is that, as shown by the foregoing treaties, a portion of sovereignty may be
1987 Philippine Constitution is vested in the Congress of the Philippines. waived without violating the Constitution, based on the rationale that the Philippines
"adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the
More specifically, petitioners claim that said WTO proviso derogates from the power to tax, land and adheres to the policy of . . . cooperation and amity with all nations."
which is lodged in the Congress. And while the Constitution allows Congress to authorize the
President to fix tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other 4. WON WTO Agreement impairs Judicial Power
duties or imposts, such authority is subject to "specified limits and . . . such limitations and
restrictions" as Congress may provide, as in fact it did under Sec. 401 of the Tariff and Customs No.
Code. Petitioners aver that paragraph 1, Article 34 of the General Provisions and Basic Principles of
the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) intrudes on the
Sovereignty Limited by International Law and Treaties power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice and procedures.
(See case for scope and meaning of Article 34, Process Patents and Burden of Proof, TRIPS)
While sovereignty has traditionally been deemed absolute and all-encompassing on the
domestic level, it is however subject to restrictions and limitations voluntarily agreed to There exists a similar burden of proof required in the current patent law. The foregoing should
by the Philippines, expressly or impliedly, as a member of the family of nations. really present no problem in changing the rules of evidence as the present law on the
Unquestionably, the Constitution did not envision a hermit-type isolation of the country subject, Republic Act No. 165, as amended, otherwise known as the Patent Law, provides
from the rest of the world. In its Declaration of Principles and State Policies, the Constitution a similar presumption in cases of infringement of patented design or utility model.
"adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, and
adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation and amity, with all By and large, the arguments adduced in connection with our disposition of the third issue
nations." By the doctrine of incorporation, the country is bound by generally accepted principles — derogation of legislative power — will apply to this fourth issue also. Suffice it to say
of international law, which are considered to be automatically part of our own laws. One of the that the reciprocity clause more than justifies such intrusion, if any actually exists.
oldest and most fundamental rules in international law is pacta sunt servanda — Besides, Article 34 does not contain an unreasonable burden, consistent as it is with due
international agreements must be performed in good faith. "A treaty engagement is not a process and the concept of adversarial dispute settlement inherent in our judicial system.
mere moral obligation but creates a legally binding obligation on the parties . . . A state So too, since the Philippine is a signatory to most international conventions on patents,
which has contracted valid international obligations is bound to make in its legislations trademarks and copyrights, the adjustment in legislation and rules of procedure will not
such modifications as may be necessary to ensure the fulfillment of the obligations be substantial.
undertaken."
5. WON Senate concurrence in the WTO Agreement and Not in Other Documents
By their inherent nature, treaties really limit or restrict the absoluteness of sovereignty. By their Contained in the Final Act are binding
voluntary act, nations may surrender some aspects of their state power in exchange for greater
benefits granted by or derived from a convention or pact. Yes.
Petitioners allege that the Senate concurrence in the WTO Agreement and its annexes — but
The sovereignty of a state therefore cannot in fact and in reality be considered absolute. not in the other documents referred to in the Final Act, namely the Ministerial Declaration and
Certain restrictions enter into the picture: (1) limitations imposed by the very nature of Decisions and the Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services — is defective and
membership in the family of nations and (2) limitations imposed by treaty stipulations. insufficient and thus constitutes abuse of discretion. They contend that the second letter of the
President to the Senate which enumerated what constitutes the Final Act should have been the
UN Charter and Other Treaties Limit Sovereignty subject of concurrence of the Senate.

When the Philippines joined the United Nations as one of its 51 charter members, it consented The assailed Senate Resolution No. 97 expressed concurrence in exactly what the Final
to restrict its sovereign rights under the "concept of sovereignty as auto-limitation." Under Article Act required from its signatories, namely, concurrence of the Senate in the WTO
2 of the UN Charter, "(a)ll members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action Agreement.
it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any
state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action."
The Ministerial Declarations and Decisions were deemed adopted without need for b. The fideicommissary substitution are also invalid because the first heirs are not
ratification. They were approved by the ministers by virtue of Article XXV: 1 of GATT
related to the 2nd heirs. (CC provisions prohibition)
which provides that representatives of the members can meet "to give effect to those
c. Grant of usufructuary to Wanda is illegal because aliens can’t own real properties
provisions of this Agreement which invoke joint action, and generally with a view to
in the Philippines.(Sec.6 Art.III, 1935 consti)
facilitating the operation and furthering the objectives of this Agreement."
d. The proposed partition of Sta. Cruz Bldg. and Lot between Marcelle and GN
opposes express will of testator who willed in to GN
The Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services also approved in Marrakesh
does not apply to the Philippines. It applies only to those 27 Members which "have
Issues: the court accepted three
indicated in their respective schedules of commitments on standstill, elimination of
WON the widow’s legitime is legal. YES and NO
monopoly, expansion of operation of existing financial service suppliers, temporary entry
Even the GN do not question this. Art. 900 cc” if the only survivor is the widow….she
of personnel, free transfer and processing of information, and national treatment with
shall be entitled to one half of the hereditary estate. And since only Marcelle survived the
respect to access to payment, clearing systems and refinancing available in the normal
deceased, she is entitled to one half of the estate over which he could impose no burden,
course of business.”
encumberance, condition, or substitution of any kind whatsoever.(art.904 par.2 cc)
HOWEVER: it is the 1/3 usufruct of the free or nude portion for the GN that is
(Note: Justice Panganiban ends with an epilogue that acts as a summary. It is about 2 pages in
questioned. And yes, they are right. By giving her the usufruct the testator specified in the will,
length.)
the court erred in ruling in favor of Marcelle. Her entitlement of ½ the estate “en pleno dominio”
by virtue of the cc is more than what is due to her under the will. To give her more than her
TESTATE ESTATE OF JOSE EUGENIO RAMIREZ, MARIA LUISA PALACIOS,
legitime will run counter to the testator’s intent, for as stated in the will, his dispositions even
Administratrix, petitioners-appellee, vs. MARCELLE D. VDA. DE RAMIREZ, ET AL.
impaired the wife’s legitime in favor of the companion.
Oppositors, Jorge and Roberto Ramirez, legatees, oppositors-appellants.
WON the substitutions are valid. YES on the vulgar but NO on the fideicommissary subs
This is an appeal on the manner of the partitioning of the testate estate of Jose eugenio
• Substitutions as defined by Art.857 “is the appointment of another heir so that he may
Ramirez, a Filipino national who died in Spain.
Facts: enter into inheritance by default of the heir originally substituted.”
He left his estate to his widow Marcelle Demoronde Ramirez; his grandnephews; Jorge and • Art 858 provides for 4 kind of subs: simple or common; brief or compendious;
Roberto; and his companion Wanda de Wrobleski. reciprocal; and fideicommissary.
Even if there is a testament, the issue arises upon the nationalities of some of the heirs. • But commentator, Tolentino says that in actual there are only: simple and
Marcelle is French and now lives in France. fideicommissary. The others are but variations of these.
Wanda is Austrian who now lives in Spain.
CFI Manila then appointed Maria Luisa Palacios as administratrix.
• Art. 859 states that simple or vulgar subs are those “the testator may designate one or
Maria then provided the inventory: more persons to substitute the heir or heirs instituted in case such heir or heirs should
Land and Bldg in Sta. Cruz, Escolta………………………P500k die before him, or should not wish, or should not wish to accept the inheritance or
Land in Antipolo…………………………………………..P658.34 incapacitated to do so. ”” As simple sub without a statement of cases to w/c it
491 stocks in “Central Azucarera de la Carlota” at P17…..P8347 refers shall comprise of the three unless the testator shall provide otherwise.”
10806 stocks in “Central Luzon Milling Co.” at P0.15……P1620.9 So the GN were wrong in saying Wanda(already moot from 1st issue) and
Ahorros in Philippine Trust Co…………………………….P2,350.73 Marcelle have to die before the testator.
Minus: • Art. 863 states that fideicommissary subs are those” by virtue of w/c the fiduciary or
Mortagage of la Carlota Stocks in Banco las islas Filipinas..P5000 first heirs instituted is entrusted with the obligation to preserve and to transmit to a
Total: second heir the whole or part of inheritance, shall be valid and shall take effect,
Liquid Value………………………………………………….………P507, 976.97 provided such substitution does not go beyond one degree from the heir originally
The testament dispositions read: instituted, and provided further that the fiduciary or first heir and second heir.”
a. The nude property in Sta.Cruz, Escolta goes to the grandnephews(GN from • The usufruct due to MArcelle, with Wanda as simple and fideicommissary sub is moot
hereon), with a vulgar substitution for one, Jose Ma. Ramirez.
since Marcelle will no longer receive the usufruct.
b. Usufructs
• The GN question Wanda’s usufruct with the fidei and simple subs of Jankowski and
1. 1/3 of the nude property’s usufruct be given to Marcelle with Wanda as
vulgar and fideicommissary substitute Horace Ramirez. They contend that Wanda survived the testator, but we all know that
2. 2/3 of the nude property’s usufruct be given to Wanda with vulgar death is not only the reason for simple sub from Art.859.
substitution and fideicommissary substitution of Juan Pablo Jankowski • HOWEVER, they are right in contesting the fideicommissary subs. Tolentino
and of Horace Ramirez. says that “one degree” can only be a parent or a child, since they are the only
Then the administratrix decided and submitted for the court to affirm, a two-part partitioning. ones one generation away from the heir originally instituted. Since Wanda is not
Half-goes to the widow, Marcelle “in pleno dominio”. Half goes to the GN with charges of related to the subs, then she has no absolute duty to transmit the usufruct to
usufruct(1/3 to MArcelle, 2/3 to Wanda) the subs.(art. 865 and 867 cc).
• Appellee admits that the testator contradicts the establishment of fidei sub when he
GN contests: permits the properties subject of the usufruct to be sold upon mutual agreement of the
a. usufructs of Wanda and Marcelle can’t be honored because they survived the usufructuaries and naked owners.
testator.
*RELEVANT MAIN ISSUE: WON THE USUFRUCT OF WANDA IS VOID BECAUSE
FOREIGNERS CAN’T OWN REAL PROPERTIES IN THE PHILIPPINES………………….NO
 Private resp should have first exhausted the administrative remedies still available to it by
appealing the challenged order of NEA approving the increased rates to the Pres of the
• BECAUSE even if UNDER THE CONTROLLING 1935 CONSTI Art XIII Sec.5 “Save in
Phils who exercises the power of suprevision over NEA as provided by Sec 13 of the
Cases of hereditary succession no private agri land shall be transferred or assigned
Organic Law of NEA, PD No 2692.
except to individuals, corporations, or associations, qualified to acquire or hold lands
of the public domain in the Phils.”  Considering that the Pres has the power to review on appeal the orders or acts of
• The court held that usufruct is not owning. It is a real right but does not vest title to petitioner NEA, the failure of private respondent IBP to undertake such an appeal bars it
from resorting to a judicial suit.
the land in the usufructuary. And what is prohibited by the Consti is vesting of titles to
 The rates and charges affecting the cooperative ORMECO are indeed subject to the
aliens.
approval by the Board of Administrators of NEA, as creditor. Hence, the CFI now RTC
cannot usurp for itself the power, as it did, to review the rates charged by ORMECO and
Doctrine: The consti provision w/c enables aliens to acquire private land by testamentary
approved by NEA. This competence has been lodged by law to NEA and to no other.
succession is void. It circumvents the prohibition in the consti allowing aliens to pay
 NEA, as in the case of Pineda v Lantin, is the very least a co-equal body w/ the CFI and co-
landowners in exchange for a piece of land.
equal bodies have no power to control the other.
Whereas the estate is distributed:  TO add, the power of judicial review of NEA’s order and decision is lodged in the Supreme
½ to the wife; ½ to the GN with charges of 2/3 usufruct for Wanda and her now only Court as decreed in Sec 59 of PD No 269.
SIMPLE SUBSTITUTES Jankowski and Horace Ramirez.
HELD: Petition granted and both orders set aside for being null and void and issued in excess of
SMITH, BELL & CO. VS. REGISTER OF DEEDS (Spanish) its jurisdiction.

NATIONAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION v. MENDOZA1 CALALANG VS. WILLIAMS
Petition for certiorari to review the orders of CFI of Oriental Mindoro. 1985. Original Action in the SC. Prohibition. Dec. 2, 1940

FACTS (Alampay, J.): Petitioner: Maximo Calalang, as a private citizen & taxpayer of Manila
Respondents: A.D. Williams, National Traffic Commission Chairman; Vicente Fragante, Public
On February 20, 1981, petitioner Oriental Mindoro Electric Cooperative I (ORMECO I), sent Works Director; Sergio Bayan, Public Works & Communications Acting Sec.; Eulogio Rodriguez,
notices to the electric consumers in Oriental Mindoro informing them that it will charge increased Manila Mayor; Juan Dominguez, Manila Acting Chief of Police
rates of electricity effective March 01 ’81 authorized by Nat’l Electric Administration (NEA) on
Feb 4 ’81. Facts:
 July 17, 1940: National Traffic Commission (NTC) resolved to recommend to the Dir. Of
IBP Oriental Mindoro Chapter, through its officers, opposed the increase and filed a petition for Public Works (PW) & to the Sec. of Public Works & Communications (PWC) that: animal-
injunction on March 17, 1981. A restraining order was issued by the respondent Judge on the drawn vehicles be banned from passing:
same day to prevent the implementation of the increase. 1. along Rosario St. extending from Plaza Calderon de la Barca to Dasmariñas St. from
7:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. & from 1:30 p.m.-5:30 p.m.
ORMECO I filed its answer in April 10 upon MFR to lift TRO. Judge lifted restraining order but 2. along Rizal Ave. extending from the railroad crossing at Antipolo St. to Echague St.
was again reinstated when IBP filed their MFR. from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.
Such prohibition will last for 1 year from the date of the opening of the Colgante Bridge to
In September, petitioner NEA filed its Motion for Intervention, w/c was granted, and a succeeding traffic.
Motion to Dismiss the injunction suit on the ground that resp Court had no jurisdiction over the  July 18, 1940: NTC Chairman recommended such to the Director of PW pursuant to Sec.
case w/c pertains to the electricity rates that are being charged by a cooperative. It contended 1, Commonwealth Act No. 5483.
that the matter is w/in the exclusive jurisdiction of NEA. Motion to dismiss was denied. Resp  Aug. 2, 1940: PW Director endorsed NTC recommendation to the Sec. of PWC. PW
Court declared that it can restrain the implementation of said rates inasmuch as there was no recommended its approval w/the modification that the closing of Rizal Ave. be limited to the
public hearing on the proposed rates to be collected by the cooperative from its consumers. portion extending from the railroad crossing Antipolo St. to Azcarrage St.
 Aug. 10, 1940: PWC Sec. approved the recommendation. Manila Mayor & its Acting Chief
Judge issued 2 orders: of Police enforced rules & regulations adopted pursuant to such recommendation. All
1. March 3 ’82: directing Provincial Auditor to assist IBP in examining the records of Petitioner
ORMECO I to determine WON the latter is losing 2
2. March 10 ’82: fixing the rate of PhP 1.72/kwh The NEA shall be under the supervision of the Office of the Pres. All orders, rules and regulations promulgated by
NEA shall be subject to the approval of the Office of the Pres of the Phils.
3
ISSUE and RATIO: Sec. 1, Commonwealth Act No. 548: allows the National Assembly or the President of the Phil to permit the Dir
of PW, w/the approval of the Sec. of PWC, to promulgate necessary rules & regulations to regulate & control use
of & traffic on national roads to promote safe transit upon & avoid obstructions on these roads &
WON CFI has jurisdiction to decide the case – NO streets. Rules may include provisions controlling/regulating the construction of buildings & other structures w/in
a reasonable distance from the national roads. Roads may be temporarily closed to any/all classes of traffic by
the PW Dir & his duly authorized representatives whenever the road/traffic condition makes such
1 necessary or advisable in the public convenience & interest for a specified period w/the PWC Sec’s
Cited as PPA v. Mendoza, 138 SCRA 632, p.24 of Consti outline. approval.
animal-drawn vehicles were not allowed to pass & pick-up passengers in the areas  The scope of police power keeps expanding as civilization advances such that a lawful
mentioned. business today may be a menace in the future due to the changed situation. The rt to
 Petitioner contends that CA No. 548 is unconstitutional. exercise this power is a continuing one due to the increasing desire of the people & gov’t to
look after & care for the interests of the individuals of the state.
Issues & Ratio:
1. WON CA No. 548 is unconstitutional for being an undue delegation of legislative 3. WON the rules & regulations infringe upon the constitutional precept regarding the
power. – NO promotion of social justice to insure the well-being & economic security of all
 Rubi vs. Provincial Board of Mindoro: Delegation of power to make the law necessarily people. – NO.
involves a discretion as to what it shall be while proper delegation involves conferring an  Social justice cannot be achieved through a mistaken sympathy towards any given group.
authority/discretion as to its execution to be exercised under & in pursuance of the law. The  Social justice is neither communism nor despotism, nor atomis, nor anarchy but the
first cannot be done; to the latter no valid objection can be made. humanization of laws & the equalization of social & economic forces by the State so that
 Wayman vs. Southard: Discretion may be committed by the Legislature to an executive justice in its rational & objectively secular concept may at least be approximated.
dept or official. US vs. Kinkead: Legislature may make decisions of executive  Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of all the people, the adoption by the
departments/subordinate officials thereof, to whom it has committed the execution of Gov’t of measures calculated to insure economic stability of all the competent elements of
certain acts, final on questions of fact. society, thru the maintenance of a proper economic & social equilibrium in the interrelations
 CA No. 548 does not confer legislative power upon the PW Dir & PWC Sec. It does not give of the members of the community either:
them the authority to determine what pub policy demands but merely to carry out the a. constitutionally thru the adoption of measures legally justifiable or
legislative policy laid down the Nat’l Assembly in said act. Sec. 1 clearly sets out the policy b. extra-constitutionally thru the exercise of powers underlying the existence of all
of the provision (see underlined & bold parts). The delegated power is not the governments on the time-honored principle of salus populi est suprema lex (literal
determination of what the law shall be but merely the ascertainment of the facts & translation: what is good for the people is the greatest/supreme law).
circumstances upon w/c the application of said law is to be predicated. Promulgating the  Social justice must be founded on the recognition of the necessity of interdependence
rules & regulations & determining when & how long the roads and the requirements of pub among the different units of a society & on the even & equally protection to all groups as a
convenience & interest are administrative functions w/c the National Assembly can’t directly combined force in our social & economic life, consistent w/the fundamental & paramount
perform. It should then depend on the discretion of another gov’t official whose duty is to obj of the state of promoting health, comfort & quiet of all persons and of bringing about the
determine the whether the proper occasion exists for executing the law. greatest good to the greatest number.

A law dependent on a future event/act is still a law and the Legislature is not prohibited ASSN. OF SMALL LANDOWNERS IN THE PHILIPPINES v. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN
from exercising such power to act wisely for the pub welfare. Legislature can make a law to REFORM
delegate a power to determine some fact/state of things where the execution of the law will 175 SCRA 343 (1989)
depend. There are many things upon w/c wise & useful legislation must depend w/c can’t
be known to the law-making power & must be a subj of inquiry & determination outside of
the halls of legislation (Field vs. Clark).  The 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitution had already recognized equitable redistribution of
private property, finally mandating an agrarian reform program in the 1987 Constitution.
People vs. Rosenthal & Osmeña: the principle of separation of powers adapts itself to the Even before the 1973 Constitution, R.A. No. 3844—the Agricultural Land Reform Code—
complexities of modern governments giving rise to the adoption w/in certain limits of the had already been enacted.
principle of “subordinate legislation.” The legislature is permitted to delegate greater powers  This was superseded by Pres. Marcos’s P.D. No. 72 to provide for compulsory acquisition
& to vest a larger amount of discretion in administrative & executive officials in execution & of private lands for distribution among tenant-farmers & to specify maximum retention limits
promulgation of rules & regulations due to the growing complexity of modern life, for landowners
multiplication of the subj of governmental regulations & increased difficulty of administering
laws.  Pres. Aquino, while exercising legislative powers before Congress had convened, had also
issued E.O. No. 228, declaring full land ownership in favor of the beneficiaries of P.D. No.
2. WON CA No. 548 constitutes an unlawful interference w/legitimate business or trade 27 and providing for the valuation of still unvalued lands covered by the decree as well as
& abridges the rt to personal liberty & freedom of locomotion. – NO. the manner of their payment.
 This was passed by the National Assembly in the exercise of the paramount police power  This was followed by Pres. Proc. No. 131, instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform
of the State. The NA was prompted by considerations of pub convenience & welfare in
program (CARP), and E.O. No. 229, providing the mechanics for its implementation.
enacting the law. It aimed to relieve traffic congestion w/c is a menace to pub safety. The
State in order to promote the gen welfare may interfere w/personal liberty, property &  When Congress did convene, it enacted R.A. No. 6657—the Comprehensive Agrarian
w/business & occupations. Persons & prop may be subjected to all kinds of restraints & Reform Law of 1988, which although considerably changing the previous enactments,
burdens in order to secure the gen comfort, health & prosperity of the state. To this nevertheless gives them suppletory effect.
fundamental aim of the gov’t, the rights of the individual are subordinated.  4 cases were consolidated and resolved. Petitioners in the 4 cases include landowners
 Without liberty, life is a misery. But liberty prevailing over authority may lead the society into whose lands are given to the tenants tilling the lands, sugar planters, landowners
anarchy while authority prevailing over liberty may lead the individuals to fall into slavery. associations etc. who essentially assail the constitutionality of the different measures to
The citizens thru their education & personal discipline should balance Liberty & authority. implement the Constitutional mandates regarding agrarian reform.
The paradox lies in the fact that the apparent curtailment of liberty is precisely the very  Note: Issues shall be the allegations and contentions of the petitioners and respondents
means of insuring its preservation.
Issues: 8. WON the State should first distribute public agricultural lands in the pursuit of
1. WON petitioners and intervenors are proper parties agrarian reform instead of immediately disturbing property rights by forcibly
 YES. Each of them has sustained or is in danger of sustaining an immediate injury as a acquiring private agricultural lands
result of the acts or measures complained of. Besides, the transcendental importance  NO. The Constitution calls for “the just distribution of all agricultural lands.” In any
to the public of these cases demands that they be settled promptly and definitely, event, the decision to redistribute private agricultural lands in the manner prescribed by
brushing aside, if the Court must, technicalities of procedures. the CARP was made by the legislative and executive departments in the exercise of
their discretion. The Court is not justified in reviewing that discretion in the absence of a
2. WON enactment of P.D. No. 27, Proc. No. 131 and E.O. Nos 228 and 229 are clear showing that it has been abused.
constitutional
 YES. Promulgation of P.D. No. 27 by Pres. Marcos in the exercise of his powers under 9. WON expropriation as contemplated by the agrarian reform program matches the
martial laws has already been sustained in Gonzales v. Estrella requirements for a proper exercise of the power of eminent domain
 Power of Pres. Aquino to promulgate Proc. No. 131 and E.O. Nos 228 and 229 is  YES. The requirements for proper exercise of the power are
authorized under Sec. 6 of the Transitory Provisions of the 1987 Constitution. o Public use.
 They are not midnight enactments as they were enacted in July 17 (E.O. 228) and July o Just compensation
22, 1987 (Proc. 131 and E.O. 229) while Congress convened in July 27.  Public use. The purposes specified in PD No. 27, Proc. 131 and RA 6657 is in fact, an
 These measures did not cease to be valid when she lost her legislative power, they elaboration of the constitutional injunction that the State adopt the necessary measures
continue to be in force unless modified or repealed by subsequent law or declared “to encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands to enable
invalid by the courts. farmers who are landless to own directly or collectively the lands they till.” That public
 The Congress she allegedly undercut has not rejected but in fact substantially affirmed use, as pronounced by the Constitution, must be binding on the court.
the measures and even provided that they be suppletory to R.A. 6657  Just compensation. Petitioners argue that the manner of fixing the just compensation is
entrusted to the administrative authorities in violation of judicial prerogatives. To be
3. WON P50 billion fund created in Sec. 2 Proc. No. 131 and Secs. 20 and 21 of E.O. 229
sure, the determination of just compensation is a function addressed to the courts of
is invalid for not originating in the House of Reps (Sec. 24, Art. VI) and not being
justice and may not be usurped by any other branch or official of the government. But a
certified by the National Treasurer as actually available (Sec. 25(4), Art. VI).
reading of the assailed provision of R.A. 6657 (Sec. 16(d)) will show that although the
 NO, as it is not an appropriation measure even if it does provide for the creation of said proceedings are described as summary, the landowner and other interested parties are
fund, for that is not its principal purpose. The creation of the fund is only incidental to nevertheless allowed an opportunity to submit evidence on the real value of the
the main objective of the proclamation, which is agrarian reform. property. But more importantly, the determination of the just compensation by the DAR
 It should follow that the specific constitutional provisions do not apply. is not by any means final and conclusive upon the landowner or any other interested
party, for Sec. 16(f) provides: “Any party who disagrees with the decision may bring the
4. WON Proc 131 and EO 229 should be invalidated for not providing for retention limits matter to the court of proper jurisdiction for final determination of just compensation.”
as required by Sec. 4, Art. XIII, Consti. Thus, the determination made by the DAR is only preliminary unless accepted by all
 MOOT as R.A. No. 6657 now does provide for such limits in Sec. 6 of said law parties concerned. Otherwise, the courts of justice will still have the right to review with
finality the said determination in the exercise of what is admittedly a judicial function
5. WON EO 229 violates constitutional requirement that a bill shall have only one
subject, to be expressed in its title  The petitioners also argue that Sec. 18 of RA 6657 is unconstitutional insofar as it
 NO. The title of the bill does not have to be a catalogue of its contents and will suffice if requires the owners of the expropriated properties to accept just compensation in less
the matters embodied in the text are relevant to each other and may be inferred from than money, which is the only medium of payment allowed. True enough jurisprudence
the title. has shown that the traditional medium for payment of just compensation is money and
no other (Manila Railroad Co. v. Velasquez, J.M. Tuazon v. LTA, Mandl v. City of
6. WON writ of mandamus cannot issue to compel the performance of a discretionary Pheonix, etc.). But this is not traditional or ordinary expropriation where only a specific
act especially by a specific department of the government (as contended by a private and limited area is sought to be taken by the State for a local purpose. This is a
respondent) revolutionary kind of expropriation which affects all private agricultural land as long as
 NO. mandamus can lie to compel the discharge of the discretionary duty itself but not they are in excess of the maximum retention limits allowed their owners. It benefits the
to control the discretion to be exercised. In other words, mandamus can issue to entire Filipino nation, from all levels of society. Its purpose furthermore, goes beyond
require action only but not to specific action in time to the foreseeable future. The cost will be tremendous which is not fully
available at this time. It is assumed that the framers foresaw this and thus it is assumed
7. WON sugar planters should not be made to share the burden of agrarian reform as that their intention was to allow such manner of payment as is now provided for by the
they belong to a particular class with particular interests of their own CARP law. The Court did not find in the records of the Con-Com, categorical
 NO. No evidence has been submitted to the Court that the requisites of a valid agreement among the members regarding the meaning of just compensation as
classification have been violated, namely applied in the CARP. But then, there is nothing in the records either that militates
o It must be based on substantial distinctions; against the assumption that Con-Com had intended to allow such mode of payment.
o It must be germane to the purposes of the law;  With these assumptions, the Court held that the content and manner of compensation
in Sec. 18 is not violative. It is further held that the proportion of cash payment to the
o It must not be limited to existing conditions only; and
other things of value constituting the total payment, as determined on the basis of the
o It must apply equally to all the members of the class
areas of the lands expropriated, is not unduly oppressive upon the landowner.
10. WON RA 6657 is unconstitutional for divesting the landowner of his property even
 Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that:
before actual payment to him in full of just compensation, in contravention of a well- i. every person has the right to education
accepted principle of eminent domain. ii. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages
 NO. The rule is that title to the property expropriated shall pass from the owner to the iii. Elementary education shall be compulsory
expropriator only upon full payment of the just compensation. And it is true that P.D. no.
27 expressly ordered the emancipation of tenant-farmer as of Oct. 21, 1972and iv. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available
declared that he shall “be deemed the owner” of a portion of land consisting of a family- v. Higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit
sized farm except that “no title to the land owned by him was to be actually issued to  The academic freedom of institutions of higher learning includes the right to set academic
him unless and until he had become a full-fledged member of a duly recognized standards to determine under what circumstances failing grades suffice for the expulsion of
farmer’s cooperative.” It was understood however, that full payment of the just students
compensation also had to be made first, conformably to the constitutional requirement.  Once it has done so, however, that standard should be followed meticulously
 It cannot be used to discriminate against those students who exercise their constitutional
Villar vs. TIP rights
(Special Civil Action for certiorari and prohibition to review the decision of the TIP Board)  Otherwise, there is a legitimate grievance that their right to equal protection of the law has
been disregarded
 Because of this, the doctrine should apply not only to petitioners named, but to all
Facts: other students similarly situated without need of appeal to the SC.
 TIP Board barred certain students from enrollment (or blacklisted them) after they
participated in some sort of assembly or demonstration, which obviously displeased the
school’s admin
 Seven students filed this petition to review the decision of the TIP board Secondary Issue: W/N all the petitioners are entitled to be re-admitted

Held: NO. The Constitutional provision on academic freedom enjoyed by institutions of higher
Issue: W/N the exercise of freedom of assembly on the part of certain students of respondent learning justifies refusal of admission to students who have not met the minimum
TIP could a basis for their being barred from enrollment. academic standards set by TIP.

Held: NO. Among the most important social, economic and cultural rights is the right to Reasoning:
education, not only in the elementary and high school grades, but also on the  The academic standing of the petitioners are as follows:
college level. Institutions of higher learning have the right to set academic Rufino Salcon 1 failing grade Entitled to the relief sought
standards, but these standards cannot be utilized to discriminate against those Romeo Guilatco 1 failing grade Entitled to the relief sought
students who exercise their constitutional rights to peaceable assembly and free Venecio Villar 2 failing grades in one semester Entitled to the relief sought
speech. Inocencio F. Recitis 3 failing grades in two semesters Entitled to the relief sought
Noverto Barreto 5 failing grades in the 1st sem and Can be denied admission
Reasoning:
6 failing grades in the 2nd sem
 The SC has previously ruled on this same issue in Malabanan v. Ramento Edgardo de Leon, Jr. 3 failing grades in one semester Can be denied admission
 There they said that the respect for constitutional rights of peaceable assembly and free Regloben Laxamana 5 failing grades in one sem Can be denied admission
speech does support the decision of the TIP
 Students, like the rest of the citizens, enjoy the freedom to express their views and  While the right to college education is included in the social, economic and cultural rights, it
communicate their thoughts to those disposed to listen in gatherings is equally manifest that the obligation imposed on the State is not categorical
 As Justice Fortas said in Tinker v. Des Moines Community School District: Students do  The phrase used being “generally available” (see Article 26(iv) quoted above), and higher
not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the education being equally accessible to all “based on merit,” there is justification for excluding
schoolhouse gate three of the aforementioned petitioners because of their marked academic deficiency

 Among the most important social, economic and cultural rights is the right to education, not
only in the elementary and high school grades, but also on the college level
Tangonan vs. Pano [June 27, 1985]
 The constitutional provision as to the State maintaining “a system of free public elementary Petition for Certiorari with preliminary mandatory injunction to review the decision of the
education and, in areas where finances permit, establish and maintain a system of free COFI of Rizal.
public education up to the high school level” does not per se exclude the exercise of that
right in colleges and universities Facts:
 It merely reflects the lack of sufficient funds for such a duty to be obligatory in the case of ♦ Mely Tangonan was temporarily admitted in May 1975 at the Capitol Medical School of
students in the colleges and universities Nursing for the school year 1975-1976, as a second year student subject to the
submission of a sealed "Honorable Dismissal" and a "Transcript of Records" valid for
transfer. Her admission in said school was on probationary basis having merely enroll under the term, policies and conditions imposed by the schools, rather than on
submitted an unsealed "Honorable Dismissal" and a "Transcript of Records" not valid her own terms. She is moreover free to enroll in any of these schools. Capitol Medical
for transfer. Center School of Nursing has not prevented her from doing so, and has offered to
♦ She enrolled for two (2) semesters. In her second semester, she flunked in Psychiatric assist in such transfer.
Nursing but was allowed to cross-enroll in said subject in Summer 1976 at the De ♦ To grant such relief would be doing violence to the academic freedom enjoyed by the
Ocampo Memorial School. Obviously, petitioner had enrolment problems at the De respondent school enshrined under Article XV, Section 8, Par. 2 of our Constitution
Ocampo Memorial School for she was reported to have attempted to bribe Dean which mandates "that all institutions of higher learning shall enjoy academic freedom."
Florencia Pagador of the said school so that her name could be included in the list of This institutional academic freedom includes not only the freedom of professionally
Summer 1976 enrolled students. This is confirmed by petitioner's letter of apology. qualified persons to inquire, discover, publish and teach the truth as they see it in the
♦ June 14, 1976 – applied for re-enrolment but this was denied because of her refusal field of their competence subject to no control or authority except of rational methods
and/or failure to submit the required explanation, the matter of her re-admission was by which truths and conclusions are sought and established in these disciplines, but
submitted to the school's Board of Admission. also the right of the school or college to decide for itself, its aims and objectives, and
♦ Tangonan filed a complaint with the Department of Education. During their conference how best to attain them—the grant being to institutions of higher learning—free from
it was agreed that Tangonan will transfer to another school. Instead of transferring she outside coercion or interference save possibly when the overriding public welfare calls
filed a petition for Mandamus before the COFI of Rizal praying that praying that for some restraint. It has a wide sphere of autonomy certainly extending to the choice
pending adjudication of the case on the merit, an ex-parte order be issued of students.
commanding respondents to admit petitioner to enroll and attend classes upon ♦ School has the discretion to turn down even qualified applicants due to limitations in
payment of the prescribed fees; and after hearing, judgment be rendered requiring space, facilities, professors and optimum class size and component considerations.
respondents to pay damages and attorney's fees.
♦ Lower Court dismissed the petition. TABLARIN VS. GUTTIEREZ
Issue: WON the school can be compelled by the court to re-admit Tangonan. NO FACTS:
• Petitioners sought admission into schools of medicine for SY ’87-88. However, they
Ratio: either didn’t take or didn’t pass the Nat’l Medical Admission Test (NMAT) required by
♦ Mandamus lies under the following circumstances: the Board of Med Educ (one of the public respondents) & administered by private
o against any tribunal which unlawfully neglects the performance of an act respondent, the Center for Educational Measurement (CEM).
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty • It is pursuant to MECS Order 52 that CEM conducted NMATs for entrance to medical
o in case any corporation, board or person unlawfully neglects the colleges during SY ’86-87. In Dec ’86 & in Apr ’87, CEM conducted the NMATs for
performance of an act which the law enjoins as a duty resulting from an admission to med colleges during the ST ’87-88.

o
office, trust or station
in case any tribunal, corporation, board or person unlawfully excludes
• March 5 ’87: Petitioners sought to enjoin the Sec of Educ, Culture & Sports,
another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other Boardof Med Educ & the CEM from: 1) enforcing Sec. 5 (a) & (f) of RA 2382 as
is legally entitled and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy amended & MECS Order No. 52; 2) requiring the taking & passing of NMAT as a
in the ordinary course of law. condition for securing certificates of eligibility for admission; 3) proceeding w/
accepting applications for taking the NMAT; & 4) administering the NMAT as
♦ It is essential to the issuance of a writ of mandamus that he should have a clear legal
scheduled on Apr 26, 1987 & in the future.
right to the thing demanded and it must be the imperative duty of the respondent to
• Present action in SC: Special Civil Action for Certiorari to set aside the Order of
perform the act required. It never issues in doubtful cases. While it may not be
necessary that the duty be absolutely expressed, it must however, be clear. Tangonan respondent judge denying the petition for issuance of a writ of prelim injuncton.
miserably failed to show a clear legal right to be admitted and be enrolled in
respondent's School of Nursing THE ASSAILED STATUTE & MECS ORDER:
♦ Every school has a right to determine who are the students it should accept for • RA 2382, as amended by Ras 4224 & 5946 (“Medical Act of 1959”)
enrolment. It has the right to judge the fitness of students This is particularly true in the
case of nursing students who perform essential health services. Over and above its
- Sec.1. Objectives. This Act provides for & shall govern (a) the standardization &
regulation of med educ…
responsibility to petitioner is the responsibility of the school to the general public and
the community. - Functions: Sec.5 (a) To determine & prescribe requirements for admission into a
♦ Tangonan questions the findings of respondent school as to her academic recognized college of med…(f) To accept applications for certification for admission to
competence, the Court cannot find any legal jurisdiction to interfere in the exercise of a medical school & keep a register of those issued said certificate; & to collect from
said applicants the amount of P25 each w/c shall accrue to the operating fund of the
judgment of the school on this matter. The Court finds it significant that even the Board of Med Educ
Department of Education and Culture refused to intervene in this case although the
Court in its Order of July 6, 1976 invited the Department to send its legal officer as • MECS Order No. 52 (issued by Minister of Educ, Culture & Sports): Established a uniform
earlier mentioned, it is not disputed that petitioner agreed to transfer to another school admission test – the NMAT as an addt’l requirement for issuance of a certificate of eligibility for
during a conference held at the Department. admission into med schools beginning w/ SY- ’86-87. This Order states that:
♦ She is not being prevented from completing her Nursing course. There are many - “2. The NMAT, an aptitude test, is considered as an instrument toward upgrading the
nursing schools in Metropolitan Manila where she can finish her course. But she must selection of applicants for admission into the med schools & is calculated to improve
the quality of med educ in the country…The NMAT rating of each applicant, together Accordingly, w/ the complexities of modern life, the multiplication of the subjects of
w/ the other admission requirements as presently called for under existing rules, shall govt’l regulation, & the increased difficulty of administering the laws, there is a
serve as a basis for the issuance of the prescribed certificate of eligibility for admission constantly growing tendency toward the delegation of greater power by the
into the med colleges.
legislature, & toward the approval of the practice by the courts.
- “8. No applicant shall be issued the requisite Certificate of Eligibility for Admission • Further, the standards set for subordinate legislation in the exercise of rule making
(CEA), or admitted for enrolment as 1st yr student in any med college, beginning the authority by an administrative agency like the Board of Med Educ are necessarily
SY ’86-87 w/o the required NMAT qualification as called for under this Order.” broad & highly abstract.
ISSUE/S: CONSTITUTIONALITY OF RA 2382 & MECS ORDER 52 • Edu v. Ericta: The standard…could be implied from the policy & purpose of the act
1. WON RA 2382 & MECS Order 52 violate the ff Const’l provisions: a) Art II, Secs 114, considered as a whole.
135, & 176; b) Art XIV, Sec. 17 & c) Art XIV, Sec 5(3)8 • Court held that the necessary standards are set forth in Sec 1 of the 1959 Medical Act:
2. WON Sec 5(a) & (f) of RA 2382 constitute undue delegation of legislative power by “the standardization & regulation of med educ” & in Sec 5(a) & 7 of the same Act, the
failing to establish the necessary standard to be followed by the delegate Board of body of the statute itself, & that these considered together are sufficient compliance w/
Med Educ the requirements of the non-delegation principle.
3. WON the NMAT prescribed in MECS Order 52 is an unfair, unreasonable &
inequitable requirement w/c results in a denial of due process. 3. NO
4. WON MECS Order 52 is in conflict w/ the equal protection clause of the Consti. • Petitioners have failed to specify what factors/features of NMAT render it “unfair &
unreasonable or inequitable”.
RATIO:
1. NO • They appear to suggest that passing the NMAT is an unnecessary requirement when
added to the other admission requirements already established. Petitioners’
• Petitioners have not seriously undertaken to demonstrate to what extent or in what arguments thus appear to relate to utility & wisdom or desirability of the NMAT
manner the statute & the administrative order they assail collide w/ the State policies requirement. This Court has neither commission nor competence to pass upon
embodied in Secs 11, 13, & 17 of Art II. They have not discharged the burden of questions of the desirability or wisdom or utility of legislation or administrative
proof w/c lies upon them. This burden becomes heavier where the const’l provision regulation.
invoked is cast, as the 2nd portion of Art II is cast, in language descriptive of basic
policies, or more precisely, of basic objectives of State policy & therefore highly • Another reason is that the statute & the regulation impugned constitute a valid
generalized in tenor. exercise of police power to secure & promote public order, an important component
of w/c is the health & physical safety & well-being of the population. This is a
• Petitioners again failed to demonstrate that the statute & regulation clash w/ Art XIV, legitimate objective of govt’l effort & regulation.
Sec 1. On the contrary, Court held that the statute & regulation they attack are
designed to promote quality educ at the level of professional schools. When one reads • Finally, Court held that there is a reasonable relation bet’n the prescribing of
Sec 1 in relation to Sec 5(3) of Art XIV, the latter phrase of Sec 1 is not to be read w/ passing the NMAT as a condition for admission to med school on the one hand,
absolute literalness. The State is not really enjoined to take appropriate steps to make & the securing of the health & safety of the gen community, on the other.
quality educ “accessible to all who might wish to enroll in professional school but • That the power to regulate & control the practice of medicine includes the power to
rather merely to make such educ accessible to all who qualify under “fair, reasonable, regulate admission to the ranks of those authorized to practice medicine is well
& equitable admission & acad requirements.” recognized.
2.

NO
The gen principle of non-delegation of legislative powers, w/c both flows from &
• Govt is entitled to prescribe an admission test like the NMAT as a means for achieving
its stated objective of “upgrading the selection of applicants into our med schools” &
reinforces the more fundamental rule of sep of powers must be applied w/
“improving the quality of med educ in the country.” This objective is the protection of
circumspection in respect of statutes, w/c like the Medical Act of 1959, deal w/
the public from the potentially deadly effects of incompetence & ignorance of those
subjects as obviously complex & technical as med educ & the practice of med in our
present day world. who would undertake to treat our bodies & minds for disease or trauma 
4. NO
• Pangasinan Transport CO, Inc. vs The Public Service Commission: (On sep of • Petitioners assert that students seeking admission during a given school year (e.g.
powers)…it has been made to adapt itself to the complexities of moder govt… ’87-88), when subjected to a different cutoff score than that established for an earlier
school year, are discriminated against & that this renders the MECS Order “arbitrary &
4
II(11): The State values the dignity of every human person & guarantees full respect of human rights. capricious.”
5
II(13) The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation building & shall promote & protect their • The force of this argument is more apparent than real. Diff cutoff scores for diff school
physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual & social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism & nationalism, years may be dictated by differing conditions obtaining during those years.
& encourage their involvement in public & civic affairs. • Thus, the appropriate cutoff score for a given year may be a function of such factors
6
II(17): The State shall give priority to educ, science & technology, arts, culture & sports to foster patriotism & as the ff: 1) No. of students who have reached the cutoff score established the
nationalism, accelerate social progress & to promote total human liberation & dev’t. preceding year; 2) number of places available in med schools during the current yr; 3)
7
XIV(1) The State shall protect & promote the right of all citizens to quality educ at all levels & take appropriate level of difficulty of the test given during the current yr, etc.
steps to make such education accessible to all.
8
XIV(5[3]): Every citizen has a right to select a profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable &
equitable admission & academic requirements.
• The above language in MECS Order 52 far from being arbitrary or capricious, leaves Ratio:
the Board of Med Educ w/ the measure of flexibility needed to meet circumstances as The conflict of the present petition pits the concept of academic freedom as against the right to
they change. free public secondary education. Art. XIV, Section 2, [2] of the Constitution, provides: "The State
shall establish and maintain a system of free public education in the elementary and high school
HELD: Prescribing the NMAT & requiring certain minimum scores therein as a condition for levels. Without limiting the right of natural parents to rear their children, elementary education is
admission to med schools in RP do not constitute an unconst’l imposition. Petition is compulsory for all children of school age." On the other hand, Art. XIV, Section 5 [2], provides:
DISMISSED. Order of trial court denying petition for a writ of prelim injunction is AFFIRMED. "Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning."

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE UP BOARD OF REGENTS AND DEAN UP’s capacity to abolish UPCBHS
PATRICIO LAZARO, petitioners, vs. HON. JUDGE RUBEN AYSON, Br. VI, RTC-BAGUIO
CITY, AND UP COLLEGE BAGUIO HIGH SCHOOL FOUNDATION, INC., REPRESENTED In Garcia v. The Faculty Admission Committee, Loyola School of Theology (68 SCRA 277
HEREIN BY ITS PRESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, SALVADOR VALDEZ, JR., [1975]), the Court provided the scope of academic freedom recognized by the Constitution as
respondents. follows:

Facts: It is the business of a university to provide that atmosphere which is most
In 1972, the UP Board of Regents approved the establishment of UPCBHS as an integral part of conducive to speculation, experiment and creation. It is an atmosphere in which
the graduate program in education to serve as a laboratory and demonstration school for there prevail the four essential freedom of a university—to determine for itself
prospective teachers. Provided, that UPCBHS be self-supporting and should not entail any on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be
subsidy from the budget of the UP. taught, and who may be admitted to study"' (Emphasis supplied; citing Sinco,
Philippine Political Law, 491, (1962) and the concurring opinion of Justice Frankfurter
In 1978, the Board of Regents provided for the establishment of a Division of Education in UP in Sweezy v. New Hampshire (354 US 234 [1957]).
College Baguio (UPCB). However, the Department of Professional Education was never
organized, although the High School Department has been in continuous operation. At this juncture, it must be pointed out that UPCBHS was established subject to a number
of conditionalities: that it must be self-supporting, it can serve as a feeder for the UP at
In 1981, the Committee to Review Academic Program recommended abolition of UPCBHS. Baguio, it can serve as a laboratory and demonstration school for prospective teachers,
failing in which the University can order its abolition on academic grounds, specially
In 1985, the Program Review Committee likewise asked the UPCB to look into the viability of its where the purposes for which it was established was not satisfied.
secondary education program on account of limited financial resources plus the fact that
UPCBHS failed to serve as a laboratory school for teacher training program as UPCB does not Specifically, the University of the Philippines was created under its Charter (Act No. 1870
offer programs in Education. [1908], as amended) to provide advanced tertiary education and not secondary education.
Section 2 of said Act states that "the purpose of said University shall be to provide advanced
On January 30,1989, the UP Board of Regents approved the proposed phase-out of UPCBHS instruction in literature, philosophy, the sciences, and arts, and to give professional and technical
on the grounds, that only an insignificant number of UPCBHS graduates qualified for admission training."
and actually enrolled in UPCB and that UPCBHS is not serving as a laboratory or demonstration
school for prospective teachers much less a self-supporting unit. It is apparent that secondary education is not the mandated function of the University of
the Philippines; consequently, the latter can validly phase out and/or abolish the UPCBHS
Subsequently, petitioner Dean Patricio Lazaro issued a memorandum directing the UPCBHS especially so when the requirements for its continuance have not been met, Rep. Act No.
Principal not to accept new incoming high school freshmen for the school year 1989- 1990. 6655 to the contrary notwithstanding.
On May 25,1989, respondent UP College Baguio High School Foundation Inc. filed a petition
with the Regional Trial Court of Baguio presided by respondent Judge against herein petitioners, The findings of facts by the Board of Regents which led to its decision to phase out the UPCBHS
for Injunction with preliminary preventive and mandatory injunction with prayer for the issuance must be accorded respect, if not finality. Acts of an administrative agency within their areas
of a temporary restraining order alleging that the decision of the UP Board of Regents to phase of competence must be casually overturned by the courts. It must be emphasized that
out the UPCBHS is without legal basis and unconstitutional. UPCBHS was established as a component of the tertiary level, i.e., the teacher/training
program. As it turned out however, the latter program was not viable in UPCB thereby
Respondent Judge issued the assailed Orders restraining petitioners from implementing the necessitating the phasing out of UPCBHS, the rationale being its reasons for existence
Board's decision to phase out UPCBHS and the memorandum of Dean Patricio Lazaro. no longer exists. On this score, UPCBHS differs from the other UP high schools in Iloilo,
Petitioners' motion to dismiss Civil Case was denied by respondent Judge. Hence this petition. Diliman, Cebu and Los Bañ;os. The latter schools serve as laboratory schools for the College of
Education in said areas, whereas, in Baguio, there is no College of Education.
Issues:
WON it the court should issue a writ of certiorari in favor of University of the Philippines so it can Argument of RA 6655 not allowing the abolition
abolish UP college baguio high school foundation (Is secondary public education demandable in
an institution of higher learning such as the University of the Philippines?) Rep. Act No. 6655 (Free Public Secondary Education Act of 1988) includes in its coverage state
colleges and universities (SCUs) offering secondary courses. Respondents contend that since a
Holding: Yes, lower court ruling is set aside (No, secondary public education is not demandable secondary course is being offered in UPCB, petitioners cannot unilaterally withdraw therefrom,
in an institution of higher learning such as University of the Philippines) otherwise, the said Act would be nothing but a mere nullity for all other SCUs. Besides,
respondents contend, petitioners already recognized the applicability of Rep. Act No. 6655
when they implemented the same at the UPCBHS for School Year 1988-89 and petitioners' Then the court held that since only Tamayo served for 3 years above(3 ½ years), then he should
assertion that UPCBHS was established only if it would be "self-supporting and should not be removed except for just cause and due processH, the court decided that the “unlawful
not entail any subsidy from the budget of UP" is but a lame excuse. demonstration” fulfilled the just cause and the “investigation” fulfilled the due process. He still got
sacked!
A careful perusal of Rep. Act No. 6655 could not lend respondents a helping hand. Said Act The other two, Messrs. Rene Encarnacion(2 ½ years) and Severino Cortes(1 1/2 years) did not
implements the policy of the State to provide free public secondary education (Sec. 4) and vests reach the 3 years, so evidently since under no security of tenure and subject to renewal of
the formulation of a secondary public education curriculum (Sec. 5), the nationalization of public contract every semester alone, was just not rehired.
secondary schools (Sec. 7) and the implementation of the rules and regulations thereof (Sec. 9) The ponente said that academic freedom in all forms demands full display of discipline. To
upon the Secretary of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS).lRep. Act No. hold otherwise would be to subvert freedom to degenerate license.
6655 complements Sec. 2 (2), Article XIV of the Constitution which mandates that the
State shall establish and maintain a system of free public secondary education. However, Petition denied.
this mandate is not directed to institutions of higher learning like UP but to the
government through the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS). As an JUSTICE CORTES’ RELEVANT CONCUR AND DISSENT. (THE CONSTI PART ONLY): THE
institution of higher learning enjoying academic freedom, the UP cannot be compelled to RELATION BETWEEN A STUDENT AND HIS SCHOOL IS A DOCTRINAL ERROR IN THIS
provide for secondary education. However, should UP operate a high school in the exercise CASE. We owe it to the constitution’s express mandate for the State to protect and
of its academic freedom, Rep. Act No. 6655 requires that the students enrolled therein "shall be promote the right of all citizens to qualify education and to exercise reasonable
free from payment of tuition and other school fees. supervision and regulation over all educational institutions. Art XIV secs. 1 and 4(1)
prevents one from viewing the relation from student and his school as a simple contract
SOPHIA ALCUAZ, MA. CECILIA ALINDAYU, BERNADETTE ANG, IRNA ANONAS, MA. with a term of one semester. Obiter dictum in this case allows the sentiment to to
REMEDIOS BALTAZAR, CORAZON BUNDOC, JOHN CARMONA, ANNA SHEILA DINOSO, complete their education in schools of their choice. But it does not correct the error. This
RAFAEL ENCARNACION, ANNALIZA EVIDENTE, FRANCIS FERNANDO, ZENNY GUDITO, case is going against the landmark case of Malabanan v Ramento, where the court
EDGAR LIBERATO, JULIET LIPORADA, GABRIEL MONDRAGON, JOSE MARIA PACKING, acknowledges that the school may punish students for demonstrating and a violation of
DOMINIC PATILLA, MA. SHALINA PITOY, SEVERINO RAMOS, VICTOR SANTIAGO, an agreed upon area. BUT, the court lowered the penalty of one year suspension to a
CAROLINA SARMIENTO, FERDINAND TORRES, RICARDO VENTIGAN AND OTHER week in recognition of the disruption to the education of the students.
STUDENTS OF PSBA Q.C. SIMILARLY SITUATED, PETITIONERS VS. PSBA Q.C. Dr. Juan
lim IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRES. AND CHAIRMAIN OF PSBA BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ATTY. That’s all folks!!!!!
BENJAMIN PAULINO IN HIS CAPACITY AS VP OF ADMIN AND REG, MR. RUBEN
ESTRELLA IN HIS CAPACITY AS OIC, MR. RAMON AGAPAY IN HIS CAPACITY DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF STUDENTS AFFIAR AND MR. ROMEO RAFER, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF
SECURITY OF PSBA, RESPONDENTS EBRALINAG VS. DVISON OF SCHUPT. OF SCHOOLS

This is a resolution by the court in the appeal for intervention by the Union for an MFR for three
teachers. Because they think that the decision by the courts perpetuates the pernicious practice GONZALES v. COMELEC
of arbitrary and wanton termination of teachers simply because of signed contracts. The court’s Original action in SC. Prohibition with preliminary injunction. 1967.
decision was “…….it is evident that after the close of the first semester, the PSBA QC no longer
has existing contracts either with the students or with intervening teachers….it is a time-honored FACTS (Concepcion, C. J.):
principle to honor contracts between contracting parties”. Guys, the court looked at education
as a simple contract BETWEEN STUDENTS AND SCHOOL. GR No L-28196: an original action for prohibition, w/ preliminary injunction where Petitioner
Ramon Gonzales, a Fil citizen, taxpayer and voter, brings this class suit praying:
Facts.
• There was a rally by the students for unmentioned reasons and the court deemed it 1. that COMELEC be restrained from enforcing RA No 4913, or from performing any act
that they had an “unlawful demonstration” in the PSBA. leading to the holding of the plebiscite for the ratification of the consti’l amendments
• Three teachers were let go on the basis that they were part of the demonstration. proposed in Joint Resolutions 1 and 3
• Faculty members Mr. Asser Tamayo and Mr. Rene Encarnacion were supposedly 2. that the Dir or Printing be restrained from printing ballots for the plebiscite’s purpose
found guilty by Mr. Magtalas and his investigating committee. And yet, they were 3. that the Auditor Gen be restrained from passing in audit any disbursement from the
previously given permanent appointments by the PSBA president himself. Only appropriation of funds made in RA No 4913.
Tamayo can attest to this. 4. that RA No 4913 be declared unconsti’l and void.
• Mr. Severino Cortes was the third teacher and he didn’t have permanency.
RA 4913 provides that:
(1) Sec 5 Art VI Consti be amended so as to increase the membership of the Hse of Reps from
Issue
120 (as max) to 180 (as max) to be apportioned among the several provinces according to
WON the permanent status can be used against termination
the number of their respective inhabitants, although each province shall have at least 1
The court based its resolution in the Manual of Regulations of Private Schools (par 75) which
member;
says that it is only after 3 years of continuous service that a teacher may attain security of
(2) Sec 16 Art VI Consti be amended so as to authorize senators and members of the Hse to
tenure.
become delegates to the said consti’l convention, w/o forfeiting their respective seats in
Congress; and
(3) the aforementioned consti’l amendments be submitted for approval by the people at the
general elections on Nov 14, 1967. C. WON the failure of Congress to “enact a valid reapportionment law” has the effect of
rendering illegal the Hse of Reps elected thereafter or of rendering RA No 4913 as
GR No L-28224: PHILCONSA, as petitioner, prays for a review by certiorari of the COMELEC’s
unconstitutional and void - NO
previous dismissal of the case. Petitioner previously prayed that the decision in GR No L-28196
be deferred until after an identical case has been submitted for a joint decision.  First, Contrary to the ruling in Mabanag v. Lopez Vito where the Court held that the
issue was political, the Court now exercises its power to pass upon the validity of
On the other hand, Sen Tolentino filed an opposition against PHILCONSA on the same ground constitutional amendment and finds the issue subject to judicial review.
that the Court does not have jurisdiction either to grant the relief sought or to pass upon the
legality of the composition of the Hse of Reps, and that the petition, if granted, would in effect  It is contended that since the last enumeration or census took place in 1960, and that
render non-operational the legislative dept. It further contends that the failure of Congress to no apportionment has been made w/in 3 yrs thereafter, the Congress and/or the
“enact a valid reapportionment law” does not have the legal effect of rendering illegal the House election of its members became de facto and that their Acts are null and void.
of Reps elected thereafter, nor of rendering its acts null and void.  However, our law does not support the view that failure to discharge a mandatory duty,
whatever it may be, would automatically result in the forfeiture of an office, in the
ISSUES and RATIO: absence of a statute to that effect.
 Therefore, despite the violation of such mandatory duty, the title to their respective
A. WON Court has jurisdiction in deciding if a resolution of Congress, acting as a constituent
offices remains unimpaired, until dismissal or ouster pursuant to a judgment of
assembly, violates the Constitution - YES conviction rendered in accordance w/ Art IX Consti. In short, the loss of office or the
 As was uttered by Dr Jose Laurel, “the judicial department is the only consti’l organ extinction of title thereto is not automatic.
w/c can be called upon perform its power to determine the proper allocation of  Moreover, public interest demands that acts of persons holding, under color of title, an
powers between the several depts and among the integral or constituent units office created by a valid statute are deemed valid insofar as the public is concerned.
thereof.”  Needless to say, insofar as the Congress is concerned, its Acts as regards the
 It must be noted that the power to amend the Consti or to propose amendments Resolutions herein contested and RA No 4913 are complete and constitutional.
thereto is not included in the general grant of legislative powers to Congress. It is
inherent in the power of the people – as the repository of sovereignty in a republican HELD: Petitions dismissed inasmuch as there are less than 8 votes10 in favor of declaring RA No
state to make and amend their own fundamental law. 4913 as unconstitutional and invalid.
 Congress may propose amendments to the Constitution merely because the same
explicitly grants such power. Since the members of Congress derive their authority DE LEON VS. ESGUERRA [AUG. 31, 1987]
from it, they do not have the final say on WON their acts are w/in or beyond Original Action for prohibition to review the order of Rizal Province’s OIC Gov
constitutional limits.
Petitioners: Alfredo de Leon, Angel Salamat, Mario Sta. Ana, Jose Tolentino, Rogelio de la Rosa
& JOse Resurreccion
Respondents: Hon. Benjamin Esguerra, Rizal Province OIC governor; Hon. Romeo de Leon,
OIC Mayor of Taytay, Rizal; Florentino Magno; Remigio Tigas; Ricardo Lacanieta; Teodoro
B. WON constitutional amendments may be submitted for ratification in a general election? Medina; Rosendo Paz & Teresita Tolentino
-YES
 There is nothing in Art XV9 of Consti that indicates that the “election” referred to is a Facts:
special one. The circumstance that 3 previous consti’l amendments were submitted to  May 17, 1982 Brgy Elections: Alfredo de Leon was elected brgy capt & other petitioners
the people for ratification via special elections merely show that Congress deemed it were elected as councilors pursuant to BP Blg 222 or the Brgy Election Act of 1982.
best to so under the circumstances then. It does not negate its authority to submit  Feb. 9, 1987: A. de Leon received a memo from Gov. Esguerra antedated Dec. 1, 1986 but
proposed amendments for ratification in general elections. signed Feb. 8, 1987 designating Magno as the new Brgy Capt of Bgry Dolores, Taytay
allegedly by authority of the Minister of Loc Gov’t. A similar memo was signed designating
 There is no denying that it would be better that such would be submitted to the Tigas, Lacanienta, Medina, Paz & Tolentino as members of the brgy council. Esguerra
people’s approval independently of the election of public officials. However, the submitted an affidavit attesting to the fact that the memos were antedated.
question whether the Consti forbids the submission of proposals for amendment to the  Petitioners contend that the memos are null & void pursuant to Sec. 3 of BP Blg. 222 w/c
people except under such conditions is another thing. Reading into the Consti what provides that their term of office shall continue until their successors shall have elected &
they believe is not written thereon violates the spirit of the law & is a matter of sheer shall have qualified or up to June 7, 1988. They further allege that w/the ratification of the
speculation. 1987 Consti, Esguerra no longer had the authority to replace them & designate their
 What is essential is that the electorate be duly notified of the provisions of RA No 4913 successors.
so as to fairly apprise them of the gist or substance of the proposals during the 8
months before the Nov 14 ’67 elections.
9
The Congress in joint session assembled, by a vote of ¾s of all its Members, voting separately, may propose
amendments to this Constitution or call a convention for that purpose. Such amendments shall be valid as part of this
Constitution when approved by a majority of the votes cast at an election at w/c the amendments are submitted to the
people for their ratification. 10
Separate opinions provided in the case, mostly concurring.
 Respondents invoke Sec. 2, Art. III of the provisional Consti 11. They claim that the terms of
office of elective & appointive officials were abolished & the Bgry Election Act provision re
their term of office has been repealed by the Provisional Consti.
Issue: WON the memoranda issued by Gov. Esguerra were valid.
Held: NO. Memoranda have no legal effect & force.
Ratio:
1. Provisional Consti allows petitioners to continue in office unless any of the events
mentioned will take place, meaning (1) the proclamation/executive order terminating the
term of elective barangay officials and (2) the designation or appointment & qualification of
successors w/in a period of one year from Feb. 25, 1986. None of the former so we’ll look
into the second condition.
2. Date of replacement pursuant to the memos should be Feb. 8, 1987 & not Dec. 1, 1986
since as admitted by Esguerra the memos were antedated. Feb. 8, 1997 is w/in one yr from
Feb. 25, 1986.
3. BUT the Provisional Consti was overtaken by Sec. 27, Art. XVIII of the 1987 Consti12. The
1987 Consti was ratified in a plebiscite on FEB. 2, 1987. By then, the Provisional Consti
was no longer in effect & thus, Gov. Esguerra no longer had the authority to designate
respondents to the elective positions occupied by petitioners. Petitioners have acquired
security of tenure specially considering that BP Blg 222 declares that autonomy of the
brgys shall be promoted to ensure their fullest dev’t as self-reliant communities. The 1987
Consti w/c ensures the autonomy of loc gov’ts and of political subdivisions & limits the
President’s power to general supervision over loc gov’ts upholds such.
4. Sec. 8, Art. X of the 1987 Consti 13 provides that law will determine the term of office of brgy
officials. And until the law determines that term of office, the 6-yr term provided for in BP
Blg. 222 should still govern.
5. 6-yr term under BP Blg 222 & the 1987 Consti are not inconsistent. Former is still operative
pursuant to Sec. 3, Art. XVIII of the 1987 Consti14

11
Sec. 2. All elective & appointive officials & employees under the 1973 Consti shall continue in office until
otherwise provided by proclamation or executive order or upon the designation/appointment & qualification of
their successors, if such appointment is made w/in a period of one year from Feb. 25, 1986.
12
Sec. 27. This Constitution shall take effect immediately upon its RATIFICATION by a majority of the votes cast
in a plebiscite held for the purpose and SHALL SUPERSEDE ALL PREVIOUS CONSTITUTIONS.
13

Sec. 8. The term of office of elective local officials, except BARANGAY OFFICIALS, w/c shall be DETERMINED BY
LAW, shall be 3 yrs.
14

Sec. 3. All exiting laws, decrees, E.O.s, proclamations, letters of instructions & other executive issuances NOT
INCONSISTENT w/this Constitution SHALL REMAIN OPE-RATIVE UNTIL AMENDED, REPEALED OR REVOKED.