CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
to interpret the law
ATTY. TOM TEMPROSA
August 1
MARBURY VS MADISON
Legal reasoning behind the delivery, and why is it
ministerial?
Madison: appointment not complete because it was not
delivered
Argument of petitioner?
Was Marbury arguing that it was complete? Impliedly or
explicitly?
Is there any participation of the legislative branch of the
government?
what did the SC rule?
Theory: judge asking for his commission
Case brought to SC on the basis that the judiciary act
gave the SC authority to rule on the matter
Naipit ang SC
Evidence against SC
Congress that passed the judiciary act
CJ Marshall: rule on the unconstitutionality of the law as a
way out
Why did SC say that the Judiciary Act is unconstitutional?
Effect if the law is unconstitutional?
If law is unconstitutional - no effect
Bc consti is the supreme law of the land
How can SC rule that something is unconstitutional?
Why can the SC rule that it is unconstitutional?
Duty of the judiciary?
What do you do when you interpret the law?
Power of the judiciary accdg to Judge Marshall
JUDICIAL POWER - POWER TO INTERPRET THE LAW
POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
IF IT’S CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION
NOT CONSISTENT = UNCONSTITUTIONAL = NULL AND
VOID
REVIEWS THE ACTION OF THE GOVT
TELLS US WHAT THE LAW IS
Doctrine of Operative Fact
Null and void but it will still have effects before it was
declared unconstitutional
Basic theory: The spring cannot rise higher than the
source
Everything should be constitutional. It’s the main
document
Judiciary has very broad powers (judicial power, review)
To say what the law is, even if Congress passed it
JUDICIARY: IT IS WHAT IT IS
Conflict between Consti and Law? - Consti
SC vs legislative? - SC
Interpretation power - judicial power
Marbury important - first time US SC declared
unconstitutional
1
Basis: to align with consti
Before: only advisory function
After Marbury: more active role, more power than to
advise the executive
Power: declare a law unconstitutional
DREADSCOTT VS SANFORD
slave
Judicial power can have broad consequences
Either liberate people or treat someone as property
Judicial power and judicial review encompasses a lot of
things
Most infamous case of the US SC
Judicial power can be abused
May depend on someone who is sitting on the SC
“I BELIEVE IN THE INDETERMINANCY OF THE LAW”
You may have interpretations, but until brought in the SC,
you’ll never know
Times where SC can choose not to rule on the case?
NIXON VS US
Impeachment case against a judge
Impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate
Accdg to Nixon, what contradicts the Constitution and
why?
Theory: Power to the senate - senate itself should hear the
trial
Argument on the definition of trial
SC ruling - denied petition of Nixon
On what ground? - POLITICAL QUESTION
GENERAL RULE: JUDICIAL REVIEW
EXCEPTION: POLITICAL QUESTION
When is there a political question?
Power is lodged in another branch of the government
What is the essence of a political question?
one that doesnt call for interpretation of the law
Why?
When can the SC not interpret the law?
SC supplies meaning to the law
Political question because there is no judicially
discoverable standard
What’s written in the impeachment clause? - Senate shall
be the sole judge for impeachment, so why would the SC
influence the process?
Political questions involve other branches of govt
Textually commits to other branch of government =
violation of separation of powers
1. Senate is sole judge - di pwede manghimasok ang SC
kasi binigay sa Senate
2. No judicially discoverable standard by which the SC can
rule (e.g. voting by a committe level = judicially
discoverable standard)
*Case: no standard because nakalagay lang
Senate has the sole power
QUALIFIER: THERE IS NO TEXTUALLY
ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD TO RULE ON THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF AN ACTION
2
QUESTIONS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
1 TEXTUAL COMMITMENT ON ANOTHER Bill of rights included in Consti? Yes, limits authority of the
BRANCH OF GOVT gov’t
2 ASCERTAINABLE STANDARD BY WHICH Reason for consti to define and limit the power of the
TO JUDGE AN ACTION Govt?
Constitution as a social contract; defines, establishes,
MARYLAND VS BALTIMORE limits powers of government (in a traditional sense, di
Case refused on certiorari? kasali ang BoR)
US SC: CERTIORARI IS DISCRETIONARY (Doctrine of
Discretionary Review) After US Consti was promulgated, they decided that gov’t
US SC may refuse to hear the case without any reason is so powerful that you shouldn’t just talk about powers of
PH: Certiorari - SC should rule on the matter gov’t, but also rights of the people
SC should rule on the merits because gov’t us prone to abuse
PH SC should have decisions on certiorari petitions (all not only define but also limit
the time) • Powers between and among branches of
government
POINTS: • As to people
JUDICIAL POWER
JUDICIAL REVIEW Other reason for having a Consti aside from it being the
POLITICAL QUESTION working document of government? Why is Consti a social
WHY A LAW IS IMPORTANT TO BE IN LINE WITH THE contract? - people surrender their sovereign powers to
CONSTITUTION the gov’t for the common good
Allowing gov’t to rule over you - gov’t should also give
August 8 you powers and rights

What is the Constitution? Written and unwritten?

Unwritten constitution? Countries with unwritten constis? - UK, common law
Important thing re: Constitution? countries
IT IS AN INSTRUMENT, CAN BE WRITTEN OR Consti accdg to will of the people (written documents,
UNWRITTEN judicial decisions)
DEFINES, LIMITS, AND ESTABLISHES THE POWERS 3 parts in the written docs: government, liberty,
OF GOVERNMENT sovereignty

3

Consti of sovereignty? Art XVII (amendments and
revisions)
Why is it there?
How many constis have we had?
PREAMBLE
Source of rights and obligations? NO
Why is it a source of light?
“Almighty God” - walang separation of church and state
God and people are not separate even if state and church
are
Separation of church and state absolute?
Attitude of benevolent neutrality
“Common good” vs “general welfare”
Any action on general welfare will be constitutional
regardless of minority. Actions can adversely affect the
minority
Common - each, everyone, all of us
Counter-majoritarian rule
Majority - justifies any action, as long as it’s for majority
“Love”
Document is grounded in a particular history
You felt violated; can u go to court and use preamble as
source of rights?
Stress on “sovereign”
Consti amended or revised? not yet
August 15
ARTICLE I: NATIONAL TERRITORY
Why did we include provision on national territory
Original demarcation - treaty of paris
Import of the national territory in 1935 Consti?
1935 consti - treaty of paris
Retention of provision in 1973 consti
Contribution of 1973 consti
1986 ConCon - educational value; hard to explain if
omitted
Reference to international law? - no, Art I is municipal law
no, we follow intl law anyway, no need to put it in Art 1
Scope of national territory?
Archipelago
Areas over which we have sovereignty/jurisdiction
Seas, domains, etc
What is the PH archipelago?
Reference is treaty of paris - washington - britain
Incorporate reference to IL
Claims: Sabah, Marianas, Freedom Land
Sovereignty - effective control of the area
4
ART I
• Recognition that we’re an archipelago (remember
Definition of archipelago)
• territories over PH has sovereignty or jurisdiction
(Batanes, contested areas)
1973 - historic right/legal title —> changed into
Something less confrontational
Present more comprehensive in scope
ART I just a declaration under domestic law/municipal
law
Doesn’t have any binding force in international law
Internal waters?
Second sentence of Art I (around, between, connecting
the islands)
West PH Sea internal waters or not?
No, it’s not within the PH archipelago
Beyond the baselines
What is a baseline?
Middle mark, median line between low tide and high tide
at the end of the sea/coast
Internal waters?
Waters surrounding Panay Islands
Laguna lake within an island, internal waters? - no;
doesn’t connect another island to the other. Laguna lake
included in inland waters
Archipelagic waters vs internal waters?
Archipelagic waters allow innocent passage; not allowed
in internal waters
Innocent passage - passage that is expeditious, not
prejudicial to coastal state; purpose is just to pass
Problem when we became a party to the UNLOS?
Consti - bawal dumaan sa internal waters
UNCLOS - archipelagic waters must have archipelagic
sea lanes (for innocent passage)
To accommodate the situation, RA 9522 was enacted
(Baselines Law)
We must come up with a law on archipelagic sea lanes bc
we’re a party to the UNCLOS
How do you draw a baseline?
What is the law about?
Sovereignty until territorial sea
EEZ - only to exploit resources; PH doesn’t own it
PH VS CHINA
ISSUES
• Jurisdiction
• About islands
• Environmental damage (Court: China should pay)
What is China claiming here? - Nine-Dash Line
Area belongs to them because of historic rights
*state party instead of signatory
How many issues before the PCA? - multiple issues
How many islands in the PH - depends if high tide or low
5
tide. Is this a correct response?
PCA Decision: 7,641 islands
Number of islands does not depend on high tide or low
tide, bc island should not be submerged entirely
during lowtide (status of features)
All zones are generated by an island
Territorial sea - whole sovereignty
Contiguous zone - limited jurisdiction (customs, fiscal,
immigration, sanitary laws)
EEZ - sovereign right to exploit natural resources;
PCA on the nine-dash line?
Historic rights are weak under int’l law
Standard in claiming part of territory? —> must be land-
based??
How did it happen that we have more islands?
Islands vs Rocks vs Reefs
Islands are never submerged completely
Reefs are submerged
Standard: Islands are capable of maintaining life
2 methods of drawing baselines?
• Straight baseline method - outermost points
connected; doesn’t depart appreciably from the
state of the archipelago
• Normal baseline method - follow the
sinimosities?????? of the island
Difficult to apply normal baseline method (bc PH is an
archipelago)
Straight baseline - almost like a box
MAGALLONA VS ERMITA
Argument of Magallona?
Another set of baselines in 9522: Regime of Islands. Why?
Why does 9522 violate Art I of the Constitution? —> By
changing the baseline, 9522 is dismembering the territory,
reducing the territory contrary to what is stated in Art I
Internal waters are diminished
Nature of Art I in the Constitution?
We’re just following international law when 9522 was
enacted
Did we lose territory? NO
Internal waters are archipelagic waters under international
law
Kahit binawasan yung baseline
ARTICLE II: DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND
STATE POLICIES
What are declaration of principles and state policies?
Preamble vs Art II?
can we use both for interpretation?
What are the declarations for?
INTERPRETATION VS GUIDELINES
ART II = GUIDELINES
Do you have to follow the guidelines? - not necessarily
6
Ordinary parlance: guidelines should be followed
Constitutionally speaking, ART II, as a general rule, is not Did we change government? YES
mandatory Change in constis 1935 to present
At best, you can just consider ART II Abrogation of legislative body - change in gov’t

If a provision of ART II conflicts with a rule in Art VII or Art Constitutional authoritarianism - Assumption of
VIII, what will you do? extraordinary powers by the executive
Apply the more-specific ones as Art II is not self-
executory SOVEREIGNTY
not just independence
Principles vs policies? Test for sovereignty? - FREEDOM FROM COMPULSION
Intention of the framers was to make principles binding OF EXTERNAL CONTROL (EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL
and policies not binding but they’re both GUIDELINES SOVEREIGNTY)
Kilosbayan: policies and principles are not binding, not Political > Legal Sovereignty
self-executory
HK
SECTION 1 Legal sovereignty present
Political sovereignty - regulated by PRC
REPUBLICANISM = REPRESENTATION REPUBLIC OF CHINA - TAIWAN
Democratic vs Republican?
Voting? DEMOCRACY. Doesn’t emphasize on GOVERNMENT
representation but on the act/power of the people to 2 Functions of Government - Constituent and MinIstrant
govern themselves
Marcos: No democracy but there is representation Creation of Philhealth - Ministrant
(republicanism) Land reform - Constituent
Differentiation still relevant or not? - No, it’s already
STATE obsolete
What if we lose territory? Housing?
Government? Institutions or aggregate of institutions by Water and irrigation - ministrant, gov’t can assign it to
which government rules are formulated, carried out, and private sector
interpreted
Administration - people who hold the reins of government

7
PEOPLE VS. GOZO and valid after liberation from belligerent occupation
Who complained? (Postliminy)
Theory of Gozo?
Argument about control? What kind of govt did we have during that time? - De facto
Reasoning of the court in saying that it didn’t abrogate the gov’t of paramount force
area Political acts valid/invalid?
AUTO LIMITATION PRINCIPLE PRESUPPOSES THAT 3 kinds of de facto govt?
WHEN YOU LIMIT YOUR CONTROL OVER THE AREA, De facto vs de jure?
YOUR CONSENT IS NEEDED Kind of govt we have now?
YOU GIVE YOUR OWN LIMITATION
IF YOU’RE NOT THE SOVEREIGN IN THE AREA, YOUR Supposed Duterte passed away under dubious
CONSENT WILL NOT BE NEEDED circumstances
SOVEREIGN = CONSENT = IN A FORM OF AGREEMENT People Power 3
(LEASE) Another person was installed into power
IF PH SUBMITS ITS CONSENT BEFORE, IT CAN STILL De facto vs de jure government?
TAKE BACK CONSENT
If PH didn’t have control of the area, Americans could’ve IN RE: LETTER OF JUSTICE PUNO
just gone there and taken over the area. Instead, Rise into power of Cory Aquino, was it in accordance with
Americans obtained consent 1973 Consti? - in violation of 1973 Consti
Was it a legitimate government?
Republic vs Democracy On what theory is it a legit/illegitimate government? - right
Gov’t vs Administration to revolution instituted by direct action of the people
Constituent (compulsory) vs Ministrant (optional)
functions REVOLUTIONARY GOVT AS ONE IN DEFIANCE OF
Functions are less important LEGAL PROCESSES
Internal vs External sovereignty BECOMES LEGITIMATE IF PEOPLE, BY DIRECT
Sovereignty as freedom from external control, ability to ACTION, INSTALLS THE LEADER
make own decisions (loose definition)
Autolimitation (Sovereignty + auto-limitation) What kind of gov’t did Cory Aquino have?

CO KIM CHAM VS VALDEZ TAN KEH REPUBLIC VS SANDIGANBAYAN

Doctrine: Legislative and Judicial processes remain good How is it possible that consti is not able to exist? -

8
overthrow of the previous govt
Sequestration valid or invalid?
Illegally seized items returned except if contraband
Different patterns of government?
Which one do we have? Mix of direct democracy and
presidentialism
Presidential system = separation of powers
No separation of powers? = parliamentarism (fusion of
executive and legislative power)
Did we ever have a parliamentary system? Nope
presidential altho there are features of parliamentarism
Marcos: Constitutional authoritarianism
figure head prime minister and powerful president =
presidentialism
SECTION 2
“Renunciation of war”
China attacks PH
Pres: China is my friend; avoid war at all costs
INCORRECT. Defensive war is allowed (war in self-
defense)
“Adoption of international law”
Dualist view - distinct spheres
Transformation and Incorporation
Language of Sec 2: “adopts”
Adopt - incorporation
Art VII, Sec 21 - transformation
Incorporation - automatic adoption
How does it happen? - mere declaration in sec 2
“generally accepted principles of international law” -
customary law
Not everything is incorporated, only customary laws
Can we still re-impose death penalty (we’re part of a
treaty)?
TREATY - TRANSFORMATION CLAUSE
GENERAL HUMAN RIGHTS, CUSTOMARY LAW -
INCORPORATION
When you incorporate or adopt, can you dis-adopt
NO. Pacta sunt survanda
Can you un-adopt? NO IT GOES AGAINST SEC 2
MEJOFF VS DIRECTOR OF PRISONS
Can you go to rtc, metc invoking customary laws? YES.
Incorporated
AGUSTIN VS EDU
Was the treaty ratified or not?
Not ratified, can you still use the treaty? - YES, IF
PART OF CUSTOMARY LAW = AUTOMATICALLY
INCORPORATED (NO NEED TO RATIFY)
3rd clause of Sec 2 has force and effect? NO. Guiding
principle
SECTION 3
Role of the armed forces? to protect sovereignty of the
9
state and integrity of national territory
They’re not supposed to be on the roads policing people Jo, concerned citizen, filed suit against Philhealth for
LMAOOO purchase of software
They’re not trained to be technocrats in the govt Does he have standing to sue? - no, suffered no injury
Insult when u put many military members in the govt
GENERAL RULE:
How is provision operationalized? Not the party = no injury
Pres commands the armed forces as commander in chief;
pres is civilian authority EXCEPTIONS:
Taxpayer’s suit
SECTION 4 Concerned citizen
Only during state of war? Legislators
Compulsory ROTC constitutional?
Conditions in Consti? - conditions provided by law IMPORTANT: real, not imagined, direct not indirect
injury
PEOPLE VS LAGMAN
National Defense Act constitutional Taxpayers, can you claim injury?
Allowed for protection of the state Yes, you have to be directly affected
Provided by law
Discrimination towards proletarians Argument about Art II?
Why not self-executory? - no judicially enforceable rights
KILOSBAYAN VS MORATO
case is a general rule TONDO MEDICAL CENTER VS CA
Sec 15: Right to health of people and health
Legal Standing consciousness
Why did Kilosbayan did not have standing to sue? - THEY Why did the Court say that despite sec 15, there is still no
DID NOT SUFFER DIRECT INJURY judicially enforceable rights?
Why won’t they suffer injury? Only real parties to the
contract have standing Duque sued for incompetence in covid-19 response, can
Nature of the contract? fall under Art II?
They’re not questioning the constitutionality, not the
contract BCDA VS COA

10

TAÑADA VS ANGARA
Why was ratification questioned?
Incorporation?
BAYAN VS ZAMORA
VFA not unconstitutional
Treaty ratified by Senate
not abdication of sovereignty
SC: not a military base, only visiting agreement
Does not constitute permanent presence
Jennifer Laude case
questioned jurisdictional clause in VFA
KURODA VS JALANDONI
Generally accepted principles of international law -
international humanitarian law
SC: we already have humanitarian laws by virtue of
incorporation
CUSTOMARY PRINCIPLE = AUTOMATIC PART OF OUR
LAWS
MEJOFF VS DIRECTOR OF PRISONS
case for habeas corpus - determines whether detention is
proper or not; you bring the person before the court then
court will determine w/n person will be released from
custody
He should be released on what grounds?
Principle: arbitrary detention
right to liberty one of the principles of UDHR
No law allowing/prohibiting the release, but Court used
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights = generally
accepted principles = INCORPORATED
UDHR
SC flipflop on the status of UDHR
Earlier cases (Mejoff, Biscof): part of customary law =
GAIL
Part of PH law by virtue of incorporation
More recent cases (Razon): Not binding
REALITY: UDHR NOT BINDING IN ITSELF BECAUSE
IT’S NOT A TREATY
BUT PRINCIPLES ARE BINDING
That’s why courts are confused
Parts of the principles are yes, binding
UDHR as a document is not binding, but the human
rights principles there are binding
GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG VS OLALIA
Can the person under extradition have the right to bail?
Bail in extradition cannot be likened to a criminal
proceeding, nor to a civil proceeding
It’s a proceeding sui generis (a class on its own)
How did SC treat the proceeding?
Why is international law relevant?
DIFFERENTIATE MEJOFF AND GOVT OF HONGKONG
They both involve question of liberty
Are both cases the same
Status of UDHR in Govt of Hong Kong accdg to SC?
11
WE ARE ALREADY A STATE PARTY = BINDING
Art VII, Sec 18 - Executive will sign, and country will be a
signatory
Senate will concur by 2/3 vote = becomes part of our law
Obligation upon PH to transform
UDHR NOT A TREATY - NO NEED FOR RATIFICATION
implementation is the ICMBS and WHA resolutions
ICMBS and WHA not treaties
What customary principle of ICMBS is part of our land,
accdg to SC?
Anong principles sa Milk Code yung customary?

Govt of Hong Kong General principle: diminish infant and child mortality
ICCPR involved - Civil and Political Rights IF ICMBS, AS ADOPTED BY WHA IS NOT A TREATY
We are a party to the treaty bc the executive signed and WHAT KIND OF DOCUMENT IS IT?
the Senate concurred
Classified under transformation clause SC: We transformed the law even tho technically it’s
not a treaty by enacting the legislation = becomes part
We can just accede to the treaty - there’s still the need to of our law
ratify ATTY: I THINK THIS IS INCORRECT
2 ways for a treaty to be binding: You can transform TREATIES
1. State party (sign/ratify or concurrence by Senate) So if ICMBS and WHA are not treaties, what kind of
2. Accession (some other act willing to be party to documents are they?
that and signing)
we become a party to the treaty = obligations under the IBP VS ZAMORA
treaty Civilian supremacy
What is the calling out power?
PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY VS DUQUE Calling out power belongs to the President as commander
Assails the validity of Milk Code bc it bans breastmilk in chief (Art VII, Sec 18)
substitutes Pres may call out the military to suppress violence,
Milk Code promotes breastfeeding over milk substitutes; lawlessness
pharma companies question this bc they will lose profit
Milk Code: breastmilk best for babies LAGMAN VS MEDIALDEA
Petitioners question IRR of Milk Code SC sustained martial law by virtue of calling out power
IRR has provisions not in line with the Milk Code clause

Question the Milk Code bc the basis for its

12
SECTION 6
ESTRADA VS ESCRITOR
SC: Morally wrong ba yung act nina Escritor of living
together?
Was this a criminal case?
What attitude should we adopt when it comes to religion
Difference between benevolent and strict neutrality
Compelling state interest - state has an interest so
compelling that it may intrude into religious liberty
Why did SC say that there’s no compelling state interest?
It was a conjugal arrangement - walang natatapakang iba
Hypo:
Homosexual RTC judge
SECTION 7
Not self executing
SECTION 8
Nuclear weapons banned in our territory? NO, MAY BE
ALLOWED CONSISTENT WITH NATIONAL INTEREST
Nuclear power banned? NO. source of energy
Nuclear force allowed? NO. Art II, sec 2
SECTIONS 9-10
What is social justice?
Those who have less in life shall have more in law.
Art XIII
TONDO MEDICAL CENTER VS CA
Why are they questioning HSRA?
Diminution of payment, challenge for economically
disadvantaged Filipinos
SECTION 12
conflict between unborn and mother, is there a preference
in the Consti?
e.g. woman wants to abort bc she’s the ex of Mr. Quilapio,
and ayaw nya yung baby
What would you advise her accdg to Consti?
Why equal protection of life of mother and unborn?
not at the same level; mom is preferred
Child rearing. State or parents? Parents
K-12, pandemic. Walang kwenta yung educ system
You can’t force me to enroll my child
Can mom be compelled to enroll the child?
Meyer vs Nebraska: Parents have the right to enroll kids
in a school where they teach German; state cannot
compel them to do otherwise bc natural right of formation
of the child belongs to the parents
Public or private school - choice belongs to parents
13
September 12 • OPOSA: WORDING + INTENT OF THE CONSTI

SECTION 16 LLDA VS CA
Why is the power of the LLDA an issue here?
OPOSA VS FACTORAN Power of an LLDA is in a republic act
Did the SC effectively cancel the TLAs? NO, SC only Does the RA provide that LLDA can issue ceast and
said that petitioners desist orders?
have standing to cancel them What if it’s not there, does LLDA still have the authority?
Inter-generational responsibility enabled standing to sue Yes, necessarily implied + Sec 16 of Art II
May or may not be written in the Constitution If it doesn’t have the power to do so, it will just be a
toothless paper agency; it cannot fulfill its
What makes Sec 16 special? What makes it self- constitutional functions
executory
• intergenerational justice + intergenerational MANILA BAY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
responsibility questioning the authority of Manila Bay Development
• explicit word of “right” = actually provides a right Authority
in itself Manila Bay Authority should report to the SC regularly
*Wording of sec 16 compared to other provisions because of Art II Sec 16
Report on the progress of manila bay cleaning
Why is Sec 15 non self-executory despite its wording
(“right”)? NOTE: Section 16 has a very broad scope.
• Standing to file a case – Oposa
Tondo Medical vs Oposa: • Agency can stop polluting activities even if w/o a
• OPOSA LOOKED AT THE DELIBERATIONS OF charter - LLDA
THE CONSTITUTION • Agency taking care of the env’t can be compelled
• IF IT MANDATES SANCTIONS, YOU HAVE THE to report to SC - Manila Bay
RIGHT, AND IT IS THEREFORE SELF- SC created a continuing mandamus to clean up the
EXECUTORY
Manila Bay
• IF YOU VIOLATE SOMETHING, SANCTIONS
ARE MANDATED (UNLIKE IN TONDO
SEC 17
MEDICAL, WALA)
“fluffy provision”

14

SECTION 18
BCDA VS COA
Tondo could’ve been argued as self-executory; nagpigil
lang SC
I-argue pa yung Sec 18 to get a bonus? NO, Art II not
self-executory
SECTION 19
What is this provision about? - Filipino First policy + self-
reliance
GARCIA VS BOI
What happened to the Taiwanese investor? - wanted to
move site from Bataan to Batangas
Nagbago ng product and nagtransfer ng site - inapprove
Due process; should’ve talked to Bataan. REALLY???
What makes it “not an ordinary investment opportunity?”
When is it one such kind of an industry? - energy is
highly regulated by government
What did SC say about Art II not being self-executory?
Provision used by SC to justify ruling? Art XII, Sec 1
Very curious case
Sec 19 on its face may be self-executing
But basis is really DUE PROCESS; Art XII just an
afterthought
Sec 19 not used because it is not self-executing
*remember ratio decidendi + differentiate from obiter
dictum (yung mga “by the way,” not dispositive
issues of the case)
SECTION 26
Are political dynasties prohibited by the 1987
Constitution?
Framers had in mind to prohibit dynasties
But in reality, not prohibited
Leaves it up to Congress to ultimately prohibit pol
dynasties
PAMATONG VS COMELEC
Sir disagrees with the reasoning
Privilege of equal access may be subjected to limitations
HUH??? it should be a right, not a privilege
You can say that the right may be limited. People
have to to have money to run
Pamatong: disqualification = bar from equal access to
public service
ISN’T THIS A PROPERTY REQUIREMENT
IMPLIEDLY?
Technically, you don’t have to prove that you have
money. You just have to prove that you’re a serious
candidate and you have the capability to wage a national
campaign
BELGICA VS OCHOA
15
SECTION 27
Basis of Freedom of Information EO
Still needs a law to be enforced
Why didnt the framers enact a self-executing provision
on this?
Pol dynasties: Framers might get lost in the details
September 16
ART VI: LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
SECTION 1
WHAT IS LEGISLATIVE POWER?
Legislative power vested upon Congress
Also vested upon the people? YES (Art VI, Sec 1)
Definition of legislative power - make, alter, repeal laws
(MAR)
Initiative and referendum also executed in the Consti?
Yes, Sec 36, Art VI
Why did we result to bicameralism? (4 reasons in
casebook)
Who provides the national perspective? - Senate
(NATIONAL WELFARE)
Problem when we only have local perspective?
Local perspective given by local representatives
e.g. Rep from Mindanao = local perspective on the
issue (Muslim, Islam issues)
TO PREVENT PAROCHIAL TENDENCIES
2 kinds of legislative power: ORIGINAL AND
DERIVATIVE
Power of Congress original or derivative? - Derivative;
delegated to Congress through elections
How do we exercise original legislative power?
INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
ORDINARY AND CONSTITUENT LEGISLATIVE
POWER
Move to amend the consti? - Constituent
Make laws - Ordinary
Can the HoR dissolve the Senate?
NO, the power of Congress is to make, alter, and repeal
laws.
What kind of legislative power (in terms of scope)? -
PLENARY
GENERAL RULE: LEGISLATIVE IS POWER IS
PLENARY (ALL ENCOMPASSING; MAY LEGISLATE
ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER)
2 LIMITS: Substantive and Procedural
Example of substantive limit? Bill of Rights
Procedural - procedure prescribed by the Consti
(president’s signature before signing)
INITIATIVE VS REFERENDUM
Initiative - power to propose amendments to consti
16
Referendum - process of voting on the proposal
given the initiative
REQUIRED NUMBERS:
10 per centum of entire number of registered voters
3 per centum of each legislative district
Initiative and Referendum as the People Power
provision; the love provision in the Consti
Why is it a testament to EDSA 1?
GARCIA VS COMELEC
What did they want to do thru Kapasyahan Blg. 10
Was Ordinance 10 a product of an initiative? No, they’re
having an initiative AGAINST it
*Initiative under local gov’t code
Issue? W/N Ordinance 10 can be a subject of an
initiative
COMELEC denied the petition for initiative and
referendum
Ordinance is subject of an initiative
ORIGINAL LEGISLATIVE POWER IS BROAD (BERNAS)
DOCTRINE OF NON-DELEGABILITY OF LEGISLATIVE
POWER
Why can’t legislative power be delegated?
• separation of powers
• due process
• what is delegated cannot be further delegated
Congress is already the agent that’s why it cannot
further delegate power
PEOPLE HAVE ORIGINAL LEGISLATIVE POWER
POWER OF CONGRESS IS ONLY DELEGATED
(DERIVATIVE)
REGULATORY POWER OF ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES, VIOLATION OF NON-DELEGABILITY? NO
Law execution vs law making?
ARE EXECUTIVE ORDERS, ADMIN ORDERS ISSUED
BY DOJ ON ADMISSION OF ALIENS IN THE PH, IS IT
LAW?
NO, BUT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THEM BECAUSE
THEY HAVE THE FORCE AND EFFECT OF LAW
Admin rules and regulations shall also be published (Art
2, CC)
THEORIES JUSTIFYING ADMINISTRATIVE POWER
• Filling in the details (just executing the law)
• Contingent legislation (leaves to another body
the business of bringing the law into actual
operation)
BOTH ARE LAW-EXECUTION AND NOT LAW-MAKING
ABAKADA VS ERMITA
VAT Law
Congress authorized DOF to raise VAT from 10-12%
Held: Valid, contingent legislation
TESTS FOR VALID DELEGATION
1. Completeness TEST (if the law has a policy to be
executed, that’s the time that it’s complete)
17
 2. Sufficient standard test (limits the authority,
maps out the boundaries, conditions)
STANDARD ALWAYS WRITTEN? NO, CAN BE
DETERMINATE OR DETERMINABLE
EASTERN SHIPPING LINES VS POEA
POEA MC 2: We have authority under EO 797
What’s problematic accdg to Eastern Shipping? - no
sufficient standard
SC: Administrative bodies may fill in the details
Is there a policy? Protection of OFWs, seafarers -
ALLOWED
Complete? YES
Standard discoverable in EO
• AS LONG AS THERE’S A POLICY, YOU CAN
ALREADY DELEGATE. THAT’S ENOUGH FOR
A STANDARD
• SOMETIMES, STANDARD AND POLICY ARE
MERGED
• STANDARD - GOVERNS ADJUDICATORY
POWERS
EO as laws (Marcos era, Transition period)
TABLARIN VS GUTIERREZ
Petitioners argue that there’s no standard set for
admission in the profession - No express provision
DOCTRINE OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION
(FILLING IN THE DETAILS)
Standard may be express or implied
Policy can be derived, not necessarily explicit
Standard? Standardization and regulation of medical
education
Rationale on why we allow subordinate legislation:
BECAUSE MODERNITY OF GOVERNANCE,
COMPLEXITY OF MODERN LIFE
Legislature can’t go into much detail, already too
complex
*Subordinate and Contingent Legislation ALLOWED
FREE TELEPHONE WORKERS UNION VS. MINISTER
OF LABOR
BP 130 to assume jurisdiction on labor disputes likely to
cause strikes or lockouts that might adversely affect
national interest
Cited People vs Vera
More liberal approach in delegability - Concept of
modern government, increasing social challenges
Loosening up of the doctrine of non-delegability
CEBU OXYGEN VS. DRILON
Law that it seeks to implement? Minimum wage law
Anniversary wage credited as minimum wage - NOT
FOUND IN THE LAW
Implementing rules cannot add or detract from
provisions of the law
Non delegation issues usually involve IRR, EOs, AOs
18
Case: implementing rules prohibited emloyer to credit
anniversary wage agreed upon in the CBA
IRR prohibits what the law doesn’t prohibit
Drilon interpretation: wag isama sa pagcount ng
minimum wage
SC ruling pro employer
Did the SC allow that increase be included? YES.
In reality, you can add because you supply the details
TATAD VS SECRETARY OF ENERGY
Ramos deregulated the oil industry
Konti lang ang oil industry players and mahal ang gas,
so pinapasok nya ang foreign players
What kind of legislation is the Oil Deregulation Act? -
CONTINGENT RELATION ("IT SHALL TIME THE
IMPLEMENTATION” - DECIDE WHEN)
Ambivalent, what do you allege? No standard or
incomplete? NO STANDARD
WHERE DO WE GET THE STANDARD? - WEBSTER
DICTIONARY
What about the timing?
DOCTRINE: LOOK AT MAN OF REASONABLE
INTELLIGENCE; AS LONG AS YOU CAN FOLLOW
THE MEANING OF THE WORDS, THERE IS A
STANDARD
Atty: You don’t know when it’s declining. The problem is
it’s always declining; the price is always increasing
Declining = price is increasing
Bumaba oil kahapon, stable ang exchange rate ng dollar.
Pede ka nang mag deregulate? NO.
“DECLINING” = AS FAR AS PRACTICABLE
Atty doesn’t quite agree with this decision; kulang pa
yung standards
Kailangan steady decline bago mag deregulate
PEOPLE VS. DACUYCUY
“Fine or imprisonment”
Anong function yung nangengealam ka? -
Coerce/prevent teacher from teaching
Judge can’t allow duration of imprisonment
General rule: non-delegability
Exceptions: Subordinate and contingent legislation
You don’t talk about the exception; problem is with
general rule
Classic example of inasa ng Congress sa judge ang
penalty
Violated separation of powers
EMPLOYEES CONFEDERATION VS NATIONAL
WAGES COMMISSION
Problem of the board - regional wages
Is there something wrong?
regional wage allowed, Art 124 of Wage Rationalization
Act
Baka baguhin? Unrestrained power
ECOP: Government out of the industry and leave labor
management alone
19
SC: Gov’t can intrude because of the constitutional SECTION 2
provisions protecting labor How are senators elected - at large, nationwide voting

GEROCHI VS DENR SECTION 3

Power to tax is lodged in Congress
Power to tax cannot be delegated; congressional power Qualifications for Senator
Universal Charge an exercise of police power and is “Immediately preceding” - 1 day before
merely regulatory, not power of taxation – delegation to
the Executive department is allowed SJS VS DANGEROUS DRUGS BOARD
You cannot add/subtract to the qualifications
ABAKADA VS PURISIMA What if it’s optional?
Attrition Law para malinis ang customs and BIR Case: Not optional, it’s an additional requirement
Revenue targets
SECTION 4
Admin rule: when are you allowed to have a penal “Voluntary renunciation?”
provision in an admin rule?
SECTION 5
PEOPLE VS VERA HoR composition can be increased? Yes, by enacting a
When the board is allowed to be activated, that’s not law
allowed Where do you get your representatives? Legislative
There’s no standard; it’s left to the discretion without districts
standards Legislative districts - provinces, metro manila

EXCEPTIONS TO NON-DELEGABILITY How do you apportion districts? IN ACCORDANCE

・Emergency powers (just give the policy to the WITH INHABITANTS… SEC 5(1)
president) - in times of war or other national emergency)
・ Tariff rates, import and export quotas etc (set by 2 KINDS OF REPRESENTATIVES?
customs) Partylist - 20%
*Sectoral reps - 3 consecutive after ratification of 1987
Why do you think inallow yung customs? consti - not anymore applicable today

20
Legislative districts
How should we reapportion? - contiguous, compact, PRINCIPLE ON APPORTIONMENT:
adjacent territory REPUBLICANISM

Population WHAT IS GERRYMANDERING?

City - 250k, at least 1 rep
Province - no population required; automatic 1 district at TOBIAS VS ABALOS (Mandaluyong)
the minimum Creation of new district from mandaluyong? YES
Creation of legislative district natural and logical
PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVES consequence of the law
Cases in book have already been superseded; Di na kailangan ng law creatng mandaluyong legislative
overturned district
Veterans overturned except apportionment
MARIANO VS COMELEC (Makati)
VETERANS VS COMELEC Boundary dispute not insurmountable difficulty to define
at least 2% territorial jurisdiction
3 seat per party limit Case: Charter creating legislative district of Makati
Method for allocation of seats It’s in the law, but it should also be in the title
Take note of formula Petitioners: Unconstitutional because reapportionment
can’t be made by a special law + population only 450k
FORGET ABOUT ANG BAGONG BAYANI!!!
MONTEJO VS. COMELEC (Leyte)
BANAT VS COMELEC Comelec doesn’t have power to transfer districts
Proportional representation Power to transfer districts lodged in Congress
in proportion to total number of votes
BAGABUYO VS. COMELEC (CDO)
IMPORTANT: ATONG PAGLAUM Plebiscite not required in Art VI, but only in Art X
Party-list system no longer limited to marginalized and Not required merge, abolish, boundaries of an LGU
unrepresented (sir doesn’t really agree) Transfer of one district to another - not needed; only
Intention of the Consti: provide representation about representation
Any party-list can join

21