Constitutional Law

Topic: General Principles of Constitutional Law

Personal Notes Synchronous Notes
1. Political Law vs. Constitutional Law Relations to the inhabitants of its territory;
Political law: branch with public law that deals with
 A branch of public law which deals organizations and operations of the government
with the organization and operations Rel bet gov and state: governed by political law
of the governmental organs of the Rel bet private to indiv: civil law
State and defines the relations of the
State with the inhabitants of its Code of kalantiaw: before spaniards
territory. (PEOPLE VS. PERFECTO, Political law vs. civil law
43 Phil. 887)
 Political laws are deemed abrogated if Elements of the State
there is a change of sovereignty and Constitution: body of rules and maxims
unless re-enacted under the new
sovereign, the same is without force Constitution
and effect. ( MACARIOLA VS. Three major branches: executive, legislative,
JUDGE ASUNCION, 114 SCRA 77) judiciary
Scope of Political Law: Written instrument directly enacted by the
a. Law of Public Administration: deals direct action of the people; fundamental
with the organization and management powers-fundamental government; exercise by
of the different branches of the the three branches of the government.
government. It does not only establish or limits but also
b. Constitutional Law: deals with the defines; useful exercise
guaranties of the constitution to
individual rights and the limitations on Rigid: because the consti itself said the
governmental action. parameters which we can modify through
c. Administrative Law: deals with the amendment and revisions
exercise of the executive power in the
making of rules and the decision of Broad: encompasses provisions
questions affecting private rights. Brief: no redundancy
d. The law of Public Corporations: deals Definite: clear and not susceptible to
with governmental agencies for local interpretation and construction
governmental or for other special
purposes. Different ways to interpret the Constitution:

Basis of Philippine Political Law Verba legis: not susceptible to interpretation

The principles of government and Ratio Legis est Anima: reason
political law of the Philippines are Ut magis valeat quam pereat: Interpret the
fundamentally derived from American constitution as a code.
jurisprudence. This conditions was the
inevitable outcome of the establishment of the OC
American rule in the Philippines. When Spain
ceded the Phils. to the US, the Spanish Provision of the law is ambiguous: two or more
Political laws were automatically displaced by interpretation: ambiguous
those of the US.
Construct: interpret or understand
Constitutional Law:
 The concept of the Constitution as Statutory Construction: how do you interpret a
the fundamental law, setting forth law; interpreting or analyzing the meaning of
the criterion for the validity of any consti only if those provisions are ambiguous
 public act whether proceeding
from the highest official or the In case of doubt: the provisions of the consti
lowest functionary, is a postulate should be interpreted as 1) self executive:
of our system of government. That 2) mandatory rather than directory: e.g:
is to manifest fealty to the rule of “shall” 3) prospective rather than retroactive:
law, with priority accorded to that Prospective: today onwards
which occupies the topmost rung Retroactive: take effect even before today; will
in the legal hierarchy. (MUTUC also apply in past scenarios
VS. COMELEC, 36 SCRA 228) (Manila prince hotel vs. GSIS)
Susceptible to interpretation: must construct
 It is a body of rules resulting from
the interpretation by a high court Interventions with liberty:
of cases in which the validity, in Warrants of arrest:
relation to the constitutional
instrument, of some act of Amendment Vs. Revision
government…has been challenged. Amendment: piece of change
(Bernas Commentary xxxviii) Revision: you overfull the constitution, it might
 It is a term used to designate the affect the framework of the government
law embodied in the constitution
and the legal principles growing Lambino Vs. Comelec: doctrine of?
out of the interpretation and Framework of Government
application made by courts of the The provisions of the consti relating the
constitution in specific cases. framework of the govt is change are revision
(Sinco, Phil. Political Law) and not amendment.
 It is the study of the maintenance Revisions: cannot use people’s initiative
of the proper balance between
authority represented by the three Ex: chacha
inherent powers of the State and
liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of State and amendment of the Constitution
Rights. (Cruz, Constitutional Law) It can be true to congress
 It consist not only of the
constitution, but also of the cases Proposal of Amendment: made by congress. ¾
decided by the Supreme Court on Each house each separately makes amendments.
constitutional grounds, i.e., every Proposal: acting upon ¾
case where the ratio decidendi is Con com
based on a constitutional People’s Initiative
provision. (Defensor-Santiago,
Constitutional Law) 3% that would willing to amend
A constitution is a system of 12% as a whole
fundamental laws for the governance
and administration of a nation. It is Ratification
supreme, imperious, absolute and Familiarize to the Doctrine of Proper
unalterable except by the authority Submission
from which it emanates. It has been
defined as the fundamental and
paramount law of the nation.  It
prescribes the permanent framework
of a system of government, assigns to
the different departments their
respective powers and duties, and
establishes certain fixed principles on
 which government is founded. The
fundamental conception in other words
is that it is a supreme law to which all
other laws must conform and in
accordance with which all private
rights must be determined and all
public authority administered.
(MANILA PRINCE HOTEL VS.
GSIS, 267 SCRA 408)
Types of Constitutional Law:
1. English type
2. European continental type
3. American type

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

ISLANDS vs. GREGORIO PERFECTOR
Facts:
The Philippine Senate regarded that Mr.
Gegorio Perfecto constituted a libellous act
and a violation of Article 256 of the Penal
Code which states, “Any person who, by
word, deed, or writing, shall defame, abuse, or
insult any Minister of the Crown or other
person in authority, while engaged in the
performance of official duties, or by reason of
such performance, provided that the offensive
minister or person, or the offensive writing be
not addressed to him, shall suffer the penalty
of arresto mayor,” when he published an
editorial article for La Nacion on the 20th of
August 1920 regarding the disappearance of
certain documents which comprised the
records of testimony given by witnesses in the
investigation of oil companies. One of the
statements manifests, “After all, the
perpetration of the robbery, especially under
the circumstances that have surrounded it,
does not surprise us at all.” Mr. Perfecto
questioned if the Article 256 of the Spanish
Penal Code is still in force on the new
American occupation since in the United
States, such publications are usually not
punishable as criminal offense. The defendant
Gregorio Perfecto was found guilty in the
municipal court and again in the Court of First
Instance of Manila.

Issue/s:
If Mr. Gregorio Perfecto violated Article 256
of the Penal Code or not. And, if Article 256
of the Penal Code is still enforceable with the
new American occupation.

Held/Ruling/Ratio: Judgment should be

reverse. Because if there is an attainment of
new land, the preceding political law are
deemed abrogated if there is a change of
sovereignty and unless re-enacted under the
new sovereign, the same is without force and
effect. In this case, United States considers
some of their Penal Code has come from
Spanish Regime. Thus, Article 256 of the
Spanish Penal Code was enacted by the
Government of Spain to protect Spanish
officials who were the representatives of the
King. On the other hand, the American
occupation deals with that every man may
lawfully do what he will, so long as it is not
malum in se or malum prohibitum for himself
or does not infringe upon the equally sacred
rights of others.

2. Purpose, classification, qualities of a

good constitution.
The 1987 Phil Constitution is
conventional/enacted, written,
and rigid/inelastic
constitution.

Purpose: The constitution serves as the

supreme or fundamental law; it is the Charter
creating the government that binds all
individual citizens and all organs of the
government. It is the law which all other laws
must conform and it is the test of the legality
of all governmental actions. It also establishes
the basic framework and underlying principles
of government. It prescribes the permanent
framework of the system of government, and
assigns to the different department or
branches, their respective powers and duties.
It is also to establish certain basic principles
on which the government is founded. It is
designed to preserve and protect the rights of
the citizens against the powers of the State.

Classification:
I. As to origin and history:
a. Conventional or enacted:
one which is enacted by a
constituent assembly or
granted by a monarch to his
subjects.
 b. Cumulative of evolved: one
which is a product of long
period of development
originating in customs,
traditions, judicial decision
etc, rather than from
deliberate and formal
enactment.
II. As to form:
a. Written Constitution: one
which has been given
definite form at a particular
time, usually by a specially
constituted authority called
a ”constitutional
convention” or
“constitutional
commission”.
b. Unwritten Constitution:
one which is entirely a
product of political
evolution, consisting
largely of a mass of
customs, usages, and
judicial decisions.
III. As to manner of amending
them:
a. Rigid or inelastic: one
regarded as a document of
special sanctity, which
can’t be amended or altered
except by some special
machinery other than
ordinary legislative
process.
b. Flexible or elastic: one
which possesses no higher
legal authority than
ordinary laws and which
may be altered in the same
way as other laws.
c.
Qualities:
I. Brief: because if a constitution is
too detailed, it would lose the
advantage of a fundamental law. It
would never be understood by the
public.
II. Broad: the constitution must be
comprehensive as possible.
III. Definite: because otherwise the
application of its provision to
 concrete situations may prove
unduly difficult if not impossible.
3. Parts of the Philippine Constitution
Constitution of Liberty: The series of
proscriptions setting forth the fundamental
civil and political rights of the citizens and
imposing limitations on the powers of
government as a means of securing the
enjoyment of those rights.

o Article III - Bill of

Rights
o Article XIII - Social
Justice and Human
Rights

Constitution of Government: The series of

provisions outlining the organization of the
government, enumerating its powers, laying
down certain rules relative to its
administration and defining the
electorate.
o Article II - Declaration
of Principles and State
Policies, Sec 1
o Article VI - Legislative
Department
o Article VII - Executive
Department
o Article VIII - Judicial
Department
o Article IX -
Constitutional
Commissions
o Article X - Local
Government
o Article XI -
Accountability of
Public Officers

Constitution of Sovereignty: The provisions

pointing out the mode or procedure in
accordance with which formal changes in the
fundamental law may be brought about.

o Article I - National Territory

o Article II - Declaration
of Principles and State
Policies
o Article XII - National
Economy and
 Patrimony

 Plain meaning rule. Whenever

possible the words used in the
Constitution must be given their
ordinary meaning except when
technical terms are employed.
 Interpretation according to spirit.
The words of the Constitution should
be interpreted in accordance with the
intent of the framers. The constitution
has to be interpreted as a whole.

G.R. No. 78059 August 31, 1987

Alfredo M. De Leon vs. Hon. Benjamin B.
Esguerra

Facts:
Alfredo M. De Leon was elected Barangay
Captain and the others (Angel S. Salamat,
Mario C. Sta. Ana, Jose C. Tolentino, Rogelio
J. de la Rosa and Jose M. Resurrecion, as
Barangay Councilmen of Barangay Dolores,
Taytay, Rizal under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22,
otherwise known as the Barangay Election
Act of 1982 in Barangay Election held on
May 17, 1982. Thus, on February 9, 1987,
Alfredo M. de Leon received a Memorandum
preceded December 1, 1986 but signed by
respondent OIC Governor Benjamin Esguerra
on February 8, 1897 designating respondent
Florentino G. Magno as Barangay Captain of
Barangay Captain of Barangay Dolores,
Taytay, Rizal. The designation made by the
OIC Governor was by the authority of the
Minister of Local Government. Also on
February 8, 1987, respondent OIC signed a
Memorandum, antedated December 1, 1986
designating respondents Remigo M. Tigas,
Ricardo Z. Lacanieta Teodoro V. Medina,
Roberto S. Paz and Teresita L. Tolentino as
members of the Barangay Council of the same
Barangay Council of the same Barangay and
Municipality.
So, the petitioners pray that the subject
Memoranda of February 8, 1987 be declared
null and void and that respondents be
prohibited from taking over their positions of
Barangay Captain and Barangay Councilmen,
respectively. Petitioners maintain that
pursuant to Section 3 of the Barangay
Election Act of 1982 (BP Blg. 222), their
terms of office “shall be six (6)years which
shall commence on June 7, 1892 and shall
continue until their successors shall have
elected and shall have qualified,” or up to
June 7, 1988. It is also their position that with
the ratification of the 1987 Constitution,
respondent OIC Governor no longer has the
authority to replace them and to designate
their successors. On the other hand,
respondents rely on Section 2, Article III of
the Provisional Constitution, promulgated on
March 25, 1986 which provided that all
elective and appointive officials and
employees under the 1973 Constitution shall
continue in office until otherwise provided by
proclamation or executive order or upon the
designation or appointment and qualification
of their successors, if such appointment is
made within a period of one year from
February 25, 1986.

Issue/s:
 If the 1982 Constitution took effect on
February 2, 1987 in the date of
plebiscite where its ratification was
held or whether it took effect on
February 11, 1987 where its
ratification was proclaimed.
 If the appointing of replacement of the
Barangay officials was valid during
the end on February 25, 1987.

Ruling:
The 1987 Constitution was ratified in a
plebiscite on February 2, 1987. Therfore, the
Provisional Constitution must be deemed to
have been superseded. Having become
inoperative, respondent OIC Governor could
no longer rely on Section 2, Article III,
thereof to designate respondents to the
elective positions occupied by petitioners.
The Memoranda issued by the OIC Governor,
therefore declared to be of no legal force and
is granted the Writ of Prohibition which
blocks the respondents from taking over
petitioners position in Barangay Council.
----
 Section 27 of Transitory Article XVIII
of the 1987 Constitution was that “the
act of ratification is the act of voting
by the people. So that is the date of the
ratification and that the “canvass
thereafter of the votes is merely the
mathematical confirmation of what
was done during the date of the
plebiscite and the proclamation of the
President is merely the official
confirmatory declaration of an act
which was actually done by the
Filipino people in adopting the
Constitution whey they cast their votes
on the date of the plebiscite.
 The 1987 Constitution ensures the
autonomy of local governments and of
political subdivisions of which the
Constitution ensures the autonomy of
local governments and of political
subdivisions and of which the
barangays form a part, and limits the
President’s power to “general
supervision” over local governments.

4. Construction of the Constitution

 A constitution is a system of
fundamental laws for the governance
and administration of a nation. It is
supreme, imperious, absolute and
unalterable except by the authority
from which it emanates. It has been
defined as the “fundamental and
paramount law of the nation”. It
prescribes the permanent framework
of a system of government, assigns to
the different departments their
respective powers and duties, and
establishes certain fixed principles on
which the government is founded.
 It is the supreme law to which all other
laws must conform and in accordance
with which all private rights must be
determined and all public authority
administered.
 Doctrine of constitutional supremacy:
if a law or contract violates any norm
of the constitution that law or contract
whether promulgated by the legislative
or by the executive branch or entered
 into by private persons for private
purposes is null and void and without
any force and effect.
 A provision which is complete in itself
and becomes operative without the aid
of the supplementary or enabling
legislation, or that which supplies
sufficient rule by means of which the
right it grants may be enjoyed or
protected- self-executing.
 Self-executing: if the nature and
extent of the right conferred and the
liability imposed are fixed by the
constitution.
o The legislature may still enact
legislation to facilitate the
exercise of powers directly
granted by the constitution.
o It does not necessarily exhaust
legislative power on the
subject, but any legislation
must be in harmony with the
constitution.
o A constitutional provision may
be self-executing in one part
and non-self executing in
another.
 The legislature is not precluded from
enacting other further laws to enforce
the constitutional provision so long as
the contemplated statute squares with
the Constitution.
Three (3) divisions of power
a. Executive
b. Legislative
c. Judicial
 Any interpretation of any
constitutional provision must adhere to
such basic concept. It cannot override
the demands of nationalism.
 The executive department has a
constitutional duty to implement laws,
including the Constitution, even before
Congress acts – provided that there are
discoverable legal standards for
executive action.
 The “legislative power” is vested
exclusively in the Congress, yet, this
does not detract from the power of the
courts to pass upon the
constitutionality acts of Congress.
 Judicial power includes the authority
to inquire into the legality of statutes
enacted by the two Houses of
Congress. It determines whether the
acts of the other two departments are
in harmony with the fundamental law.
It is their duty in authorized
proceedings to give affect to the
existing Constitution and to obey all
constitutional provisions irrespective
of their opinion as to the wisdom if
such provisions.
 All the departments are of the other
government are unquestionably
entitled and compelled to judge of the
Constitution for themselves; but in
doing so, they act under the
obligations imposed in the instrument,
and in order of time pointed out by it.
 Discretionary powers: granted by the
Constitution or by statute. It is the
manner in which those powers are
exercised is not subject to judicial
review.
 One department is just as
representative as the other, and the
judiciary is the department which is
charged with the special duty of
determining the limitations which the
law places upon all official action.
 For the practical construction of a
Constitutional, as a general rule, it is
only in cases of substantial doubt and
ambiguity that the doctrine of
contemporaneous or practical
construction has any application.
 Where the meaning of a constitutional
provision is clear, a contemporaneous
or practical executive interpretation
thereof is entitled to no weight, and
will not be allowed to distort or in any
way change its natural meaning.
 The doctrine of “checks and balances”
which has been carefully calibrated by
the Constitution to temper the official
acts of each of these three branches
must be given effect without
destroying their indispensable co-
equality; Salus populi est suprema lex
 Balance of powers
 A cardinal rule in dealing with
 Constitutions is that they should
receive a consistent and uniform
interpretation.
 A constitution should operate
prospectively only, unless the words
employed show a clear intention that
should have a retrospective effect.
 The Constitution sets forth in no
uncertain language the restrictions and
limitations upon governmental powers
and agencies.

5. Amendment vs. Revision of the 1987

Constitution
Amendment:

The modification of materials by the addition 
of supplemental information; the deletion of u
nnecessary, undesirable, or outdated informati
on; or the correction of
errors existing in the text. In practice, it is a
change in the pleadings, statements of the
allegations of the parties and may achieved if
the parties agree to the amendment or if the
court in which the proceeding is pending
grants a motion for the amendment made by
one party. Thus, a judgment may be altered by
an amendment if a motion to do is made
within a certain time after its entry and
granted by the court. Also, a will, trust,
corporate charter, and other legal documents
are also subject to amendment.
These are provided in sections one to four of
Article XVII of our Constitution, which
enumerates the methods, namely: Congress
upon a vote of all its members; a
constitutional convention or upon direct
proposal by the people through initiative.

[Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of,

this Constitution may be proposed by:
(1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths
of all its Members; or
(2) A constitutional convention.
Section 2. Amendments to this Constitution
may likewise be directly proposed by the
people through initiative upon a petition of at
least twelve per centum of the total number of
registered voters, of which every legislative
district must be represented by at least
three per centum of the registered voters
therein. No amendment under this section
shall be authorized within five years following
the ratification of this Constitution nor oftener
than once every five years thereafter.
The Congress shall provide for the
implementation of the exercise of this right.
Section 3. The Congress may, by a vote of
two-thirds of all its Members, call a
constitutional convention, or by a majority
vote of all its Members, submit to the
electorate the question of calling such a
convention.
Section 4. Any amendment to, or revision of,
this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall
be valid when ratified by a majority of the
votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held
not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety
days after the approval of such amendment or
revision.
Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall
be valid when ratified by a majority of the
votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held
not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety
days after the certification by the Commission
on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.]

Revision: The dictionary definition of

revision is “a change or a set of changes that
corrects or improves something”.
Under the 1987 Constitution, a people's
initiative cannot introduce constitutional
revisions but only amendments. The Court
held that changing the form of government,
from presidential to parliamentary, or
abolishing a house of Congress, like the
Senate, are revisions, which cannot be done
by a people's initiative.

6. How to amend the 1987 Phil.

Constitution?

 Under the common interpretation of

the Constitution, amendments can be
proposed by one of three methods: a
People's Initiative, a Constituent
Assembly or
a Constitutional Convention.

(1) Both houses propose an amendment with a

two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the state
legislatures approve. Twenty-six of the 27
amendments were approved in this manner.
(2) Both houses propose an amendment with a
two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the states
approve the amendment via
ratifying conventions. Only the 21st
Amendment, which repealed Prohibition, was
passed in this manner.
(3) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on
Congress to hold a constitutional convention,
and three-fourths of the state legislatures
approve the amendment.
(4) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on
Congress to hold a constitutional convention,
and three-fourths of the states approve the
amendment via ratifying conventions.
7. Lambino vs. Comelec, GR No.
174153, October 25, 2006
Facts:
On the 15th of February 2006, Petitioners Raul
L. Lambino, together with his associate, Erico
B. Aumentado, and other members of the
“Lambino Group” gathered signatures for an
initiative petition to change the 1987
Constitution and then filed a petition with
COMELEC to hold a plebiscite to ratify their
initiative petition using Republic Act 6735 or
the Initiative and Referendum Act. The said
initiative petition was allegedly supported by
6,327,952 people constituting the required
number of at least 12 per centum of all
registered voters and which 3 per centum of
registered voters ofeach legislative district are
represented in the petition [Link]
changes that were proposed under the petition
will shift the present Bicameral-Presidential
system to a Unicameral-Parliamentary form of
government. Lambino contends that the
COMELEC committed grave abuse of
discretion in denying due course to their
petition, pursuant to Santiago v. Comelec
ruling.

Issue/s:
Whether or not the initiative petition
sufficiently complied with the constitutional
requirement on direct proposal by the people.

Held/Ruling/Ratio:
The Constitution clearly states that the
requirement to an initiative petition is that the
people must first see the full text of the
proposed amendments before they sign to
signify their assent, and that the people must
sign on an initiative petition that contains the
full text of the proposed [Link]
this, our framers clearly intended that the
"draft of the proposed constitutional
amendment" should be "ready and shown" to
the people "before" they sign such
[Link] Lambino group clearly supplied
the people inadequate information concerning
the initiative petition by not presenting
attachments that explain the propositions as
they conducted their collection of signatures
by merely asking in the signature sheet if the
people agree of the shift from a Bicameral-
Presidential to a Unicameral-Parliamentary
form of Government and thus clearly did not
include the facts that proposed amendments.
Therefore, the petition of the Lambino group
is unconstitutional for it did not “directly”
propose amendments to the Constitution
through people’s initiative.