Political Law Pre Week Notes

PRE WEEK NOTES IN POLITICAL LAW
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1
What is the Archipelagic Doctrine?
All states are sovereign equals and cannot assert jurisdiction over one another, consonant with the Public
International Law principle of par in parem non habet imperium. A contrary disposition would "unduly vex the peace
of nations. (Arigo v. Swift, G.R. No. 206510, Sept.)
When is a suit against the State?
A suit is against the State regardless of who is named the defendant if: (1) it produces adverse consequences to the
public treasury in terms of disbursement of public funds and loss of government property; or (2) it cannot prosper
unless the State has given its consent.
ART. XVI, Sec. 3 states that “The State may not be sued without its consent.” What is the test to determine if a
suit is against the State?
State immunity from suit may be invoked as long as the suit really affects the property, rights, or interests of the
State and not merely those of the officers nominally made party defendants. [Tan v. Director of Forestry, G.R. No. L-
24548, (1983)]
A suit is not against the State:
a. When the purpose of the suit is to compel an officer charged with the duty of making payments pursuant to an
appropriation made by law in favor of the plaintiff to make such payment, since the suit is intended to compel
performance of a ministerial duty; or
b. When from the allegations in the complaint, it is clear that the respondent is a public officer sued in a private
capacity; or c. When from the allegations in the complaint, it is clear that the respondent is a public officer sued in a
private capacity.
Can a private party make a government entity liable on a contract which that private party executed with another
private party?
Under the principle that the state cannot be sued without its consent, a third party cannot hold a government entity
liable. The government entity is a stranger to the contract. The assets of the government cannot be held liable for
liabilities of a private person. Such assets cannot be subject to levy and garnishment for to allow such actions would
impair government operations and delay delivery of vital public services. (Dept. of Agriculture vs. NLRC, G.R. No.
104269, Nov. 11, 1993)
When is the State deemed to have given its consent to be sued? Does such consent make the State liable?
A State is deemed to have given its consent to be sued when it commences in litigation, as it becomes vulnerable to
a counterclaim, or when it enters into a business contract where the contract is in pursuit of a soverign activity.
No, waiver of immunity by the State does not mean a concession of its liability. When the State gives its consent
to be sued, all it does is to give the other party an opportunity to show that the State is liable. The State does
not necessarily admit that it is liable.
Who are citizens of the Philippines?
The following are citizens of the Philippines:
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
Page 1 of 32
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine Citizenship upon reaching the age
of majority; and
4. Those who are naturalized in the accordance with law. [1987 CONST, ART. IV, Section 1]
Who are natural born citizens?
Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to
acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who are born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who
elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority shall be deemed natural-born citizens.
Are foundlings natural-born citizens?
Yes. As a matter of law, foundlings are, as a class, natural-born citizens. Natural-born citizens are those who are
citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine
citizenship 1987 CONST., ART IV, Section 2]. Firstly, "having to perform an act" means that the act must be personally
done by the citizen. In this instance, the determination of foundling status is done not by the child but by the
authorities. Secondly, the object of the process is the determination of the whereabouts of the parents, not the
citizenship of the child. Lastly, the process is certainly not analogous to naturalization proceedings to acquire
Philippine citizenship, or the election of such citizenship by one born of an alien father and a Filipino mother under
the 1935 Constitution, which is an act to perfect it. While the 1935 Constitution’s enumeration is silent as to
foundlings, there is no restrictive language which would definitely exclude foundlings either. No such intent or
language permits discrimination against foundlings. On the contrary, all three Constitutions (1935, 1973, 1987)
guarantee the basic right to equal protection of the laws. All exhort the State to render social justice. [Poe-
Llamanzares v COMELEC, G.R. No.
What Constitutional provisions institutionalize the principle of civilian supremacy? (2006 BAR)
The provisions of the Constitution which institutionalized the principle of civilian supremacy are Article II, Section 3,
which makes civilian authority supreme at all times over the military, and Article VII, Section 18, which makes the
President the commanderin-chief of the armed forces of the Philippines.
Article II, Section 3, of the 1987 Constitution expresses, in part, that the “Armed Forces of the Philippines is the
protector of the people and (of) the State." Describe briefly what this provision means. Is the Philippine National
Police covered by the same mandate? (2003 BAR)
Article II, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution means that the Armed Forces of the Philippines should not serve the
interest of the President but of the people and should not commit abuses against the people. (Record of the
Constitutional Commission, Vol. V, p. 133.)
This provision is specifically addressed to the Armed Forces of the Philippines and not to the Philippine National
Police, because the latter is separate and distinct from the former. (Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. V,
p. 296; Manalo v. Sistoza. 312 SCRA 239)
Several concerned residents of the areas fronting Manila Bay, among them a group of students who are minors,
filed a suit against MMDA and a number of other executive agencies, asking the court to order them to perform
their duties relating to the cleanup, rehabilitation and protection of Manila Bay. The complain alleges that the
continued neglect by defendants and their failure to prevent and abat pollution in Manila Bay constitute a
violation of the petitioners’ constitutional right to life, health and a balanced ecology. If the defendants assert
that the students/petitioners who are minors do not have locus stanti to file the action, is the assertion correct?
Explain your answer. (2016 BAR)
The assertion that the students/petitioners who are minors have no locus standi is erroneous. Pursuant to the
obligation of the State under Section 16, Article II of the Constitution to protect and advance the right of the people
Page 2 of 32
to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature, minors have standing to sue
based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility (Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792, 1993).
When is there a violation of the principle of separation of powers?
There is a violation of the principle when there is impermissible (a) interference with and/or (b) assumption of
another department's functions. (Belgica, et al., v. Ochoa, et al., G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013)
May a taxpayer file a suit to compel Congress to enact a law making the use of marijuana for medical reasons
legal?
NO. A writ of mandamus will not lie because this violates the principle of separation of powers. It is discretionary on
the part of Congress to consider bills which in its judgment will serve the public. Judicial power includes the duty of
the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights that are legally demandable and enforceable, and
to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
on the part of any branch or instrumentality of government. There is no legally demandable right to compel the
Congress to make such law.
The two accepted tests to determine whether or not there is a valid delegation of legislative power are the
Completeness Test and the Sufficient Standard Test. Explain each. (2005 BAR)
The Completeness Test provides that law must be complete in all essential terms and conditions when it leaves the
legislature so that there will be nothing left for the delegate to do when it reaches him except to enforce it. The
Sufficient Standard fixes a standard, the limits of which are sufficiently determinate or at least determinable to which
the delegate must conform in the performance of his functions. (Santiago v. COMELEC, March 19, 1997)
What is the principle of delegata potestas non potest delegari?
The principle, when translated, means that what has been delegated can no longer be delegated. Since the powers
of the government have been delegated to them by the people, who possess original sovereignty, these powers
cannot be further delegated by the different government departments to some other branch or instrumentality of
the government. State the exceptions to the rule of non-delegation of powers.
Exceptions to the rule of nondelegation of powers:
1. Delegation to the People through initiative and referendum (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 1);
2. Emergency powers delegated by Congress to the President [Art. VI, (Sec. 23(2)];
3. Congress may delegate Tariff powers to the President [Art. VI, Sec. 28 (2)];
4. Delegation of quasi-legislative powers to administrative bodies;
5. Delegation of local legislative power to Local Governments.
Distinguish between a De jure government and a De facto government.
A De jure government has a rightful title but no power or control, either because this has been withdrawn from it,
or because it has not yet actually entered into the exercise thereof. A De facto government is without legal title but
actually exercises power or control.
What are the kinds of a de facto government? Discuss each.
The kinds of de facto government are: 1) De facto proper; 2) Government of paramount force; and 3) Independent
government.
A De facto proper government gets possession and control of, or usurps, by force or by the voice of the majority, the
rightful legal government and maintains itself against the will of the latter. A Government of paramount force is
established and maintained by military forces who invade and occupy a territory of the enemy in the course of war.
Page 3 of 32
An Independent government is established by the inhabitants of the country who rise in insurrection against the
parent State (Co Kim Cham v. Valdez Tan Keh, G.R. No. L- 5, Sept. 17, 1945).
What is the composition of the HRET?
Three Supreme Court justices designated by the Chief Justice, and six members of the House chosen on the basis of
proportional representation from the political parties and the parties or organizations registered under the party-
list system represented therein. The Senior Justice shall be its chairman [1987 CONST., ART VI, Sec. 17]
When can the HRET assume jurisdiction over an election contest?
The HRET acts as the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the members of
the House. To be considered a Member of the House of Representatives, there must be a concurrence of the
following requisites: (1) a valid proclamation, (2) a proper oath, and (3) assumption of office. An elected candidate
can only assume office "at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election." [Reyes v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 207264 (2013)]
In an investigation in aid of legislation, Senator Estrada asked Atty. Francisco I. Chavez, as resource person, on
the facts and issues the latter raised with the Supreme Court in Chavez v. National Housing Authority. The said
case has already been decided by the Court with finality. Is the subject matter of the legislative inquiry sub judice?
No. The subject matter of the legislative inquiry is no longer sub judice or before a court or judge for consideration.
The Court already denied with finality the motion of Chavez, as the petitioner in Chavez v. National Housing
Authority, for reconsideration of the Decision of the Court. The sub judice issue has been rendered moot and
academic by the supervening issuance of the en banc Resolution. An issue or a case becomes moot and academic
when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy, so that a determination of the issue would be without practical
use and value. In such cases, there is no actual substantial relief to which the petitioner would be entitled and which
would be negated by the dismissal of the petition. In fine, it will not avail petitioners any to invoke the sub judice
effect of Chavez and resist, on that ground, the assailed congressional invitations and subpoenas. [Romero v. Senator
Estrada, G.R. No. 174105, April 2, 2009]
Will a pending case before the Supreme Court bar the continuance of a Senate Committee investigation?
No. On-going judicial proceedings do not preclude congressional hearings in aid of legislation. While Sabio and
Standard Chartered Bank advert only to pending criminal and administrative cases before lower courts as not posing
a bar to the continuation of a legislative inquiry, there is no rhyme or reason that these cases’ doctrinal
pronouncement and their rationale cannot be extended to appealed cases and special civil actions awaiting final
disposition before the Supreme Court. The mere filing of a criminal or an administrative complaint before a court or
quasi-judicial body should not automatically bar the conduct of legislative investigation. Otherwise, it would be
extremely easy to subvert any intended inquiry by Congress through the convenient ploy of instituting a criminal or
an administrative complaint. Surely, the exercise of sovereign legislative authority, of which the power of legislative
inquiry is an essential component, cannot be made subordinate to a criminal or administrative investigation.
Can cabinet secretaries invoke executive privilege and excuse themselves from appearing in Senate
investigations?
No. They cannot invoke the executive privilege in their own capacities. In light of this highly exceptional nature of
the executive privilege, the Court finds it essential to limit to the President the power to invoke the privilege. She
may of course authorize the Executive Secretary to invoke the privilege on her behalf, in which case the Executive
Secretary must state that the authority is "By order of the President," which means that he personally consulted
with her. The privilege being an extraordinary power, it must be wielded only by the highest official in the executive
hierarchy. In other words, the President may not authorize her subordinates to exercise such power. It follows,
therefore, that when an official is being summoned by Congress on a matter which, in his own judgment, might be
Page 4 of 32
covered by executive privilege, he must be afforded reasonable time to inform the President or the Executive
Secretary of the possible need for invoking the privilege. This is necessary in order to provide the President or the
Executive Secretary with fair opportunity to consider whether the matter indeed calls for a claim of executive
privilege. If, after the lapse of that reasonable time, neither the President nor the Executive Secretary invokes the
privilege, Congress is no longer bound to respect the failure of the official to appear before Congress and may then
opt to avail of the necessary legal means to compel his appearance. [Senate v. Ermita, G.R. No. 169777, April 20,
2006]
What are the elements of presidential communications privilege?
1. The protected communication must relate to a quintessential and non-delegable presidential power.
2. The communication must be authored or solicited and received by a close advisor of the President or the President
himself. The judicial test is that an advisor must be in operational proximity with the President.
3. The presidential communications privilege remains a qualified privilege that may be overcome by a showing of
adequate need, such that the information sought likely contains important evidence and by the unavailability of the
information elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority. [Neri v. Senate, G.R. No. 180643, March 25, 2008]
What is a pocket veto?
A pocket veto is an indirect veto of a legislative bill by the executive by retaining the bill unsigned, or taking no action
on it.
Are there pocket vetoes in the Philippines?
There are no pocket vetoes in the Philippines. Under ART. VI, Sec. 27(1) of the 1987 CONST, if the President fails to
communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within 30 days after receipt thereof, it shall become
a law as if he had signed it.
There are three requisites to acquire a new domicile:
1. Residence or bodily presence in a new locality; 2. an intention to remain there; and 3. an intention to abandon
the old domicile.
To successfully effect a change of domicile, one must demonstrate an actual removal or an actual change of domicile;
a bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one and definite acts
which correspond with the purpose. In other words, there must basically be animus manendi coupled with animus
non revertendi. The purpose to remain in or at the domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period of time; the
change of residence must be voluntary; and the residence at the place chosen for the new domicile must be actual.
The residency requirement should not be counted from the re-acquisition of citizenship, but from when Salome
effected a change of domicile. Here, Salome effectively abandoned San Theodoros for the Philippines in 2005, more
than 10 years before the May 2016 elections, thus fulfilling the residency requirement provided in the Constitution.
[Poe-Llamanzares v COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697 (2016)]
Under what circumstances can the President suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus?
Three conditions must concur for the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus to be valid:
1. There must be invasion or rebellion;

2. The public safety must require the suspension of the privilege;
3. For a period not exceeding sixty (60 days). [Lansang v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-33964 December 11, 1971; 1987
CONST., ART. III, Section 15 and ART. VII, Section 18]
What are the constitutional safeguards to the exercise of the President’s power to proclaim martial law?
Page 5 of 32
The following are the constitutional safeguards to the exercise of the power of the President to proclaim martial
law:
1. There must be actual invasion or rebellion;

2. The duration of the proclamation shall not exceed sixty (60) days;
3. Within forty-eight (48) hours, the President shall report his action to Congress. If Congress is not in session, it must
convene within forty-eight (48) hours;
4. Congress may by majority vote of all its members voting jointly revoke the proclamation, and the President cannot
set aside the revocation;
5. By the same vote and in the same manner, upon initiative of the President, Congress may extend the proclamation
if the invasion or rebellion continues and public safety requires the extension;
6. The Supreme Court may review the factual sufficiency of the proclamation, and the Supreme Court must decide
the case within thirty (30) days from the time it was filed;
7. Martial law does not automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the operation of the
Constitution. It does not supplant the functioning of the civil courts and of Congress. Military courts have no
jurisdiction over civilians where civil courts are able to function [Cruz, Philippine Political Law, 1995 ed., pp. 213-214]
Can the Congress review the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or proclamation of martial
law by the President?
Yes. The Congress can either revoke or extend such suspension or proclamation. Within forty-eight (48) hours from
the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall
submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority
of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall
not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend
such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall
persist and public safety requires it. [1987 CONST., ART. VII, Section 18]. NB: In Padilla v. Congress, [GR No. 231671,
Jul 25, 2017] the Court held that the provision in Article VII, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution requiring the
Congress to vote jointly in a joint session is specifically for the purpose of revocation of the President's proclamation
of martial law and/or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
Can the President declare the existence of a state of national emergency without the approval of the Congress?
Yes. The President can validly declare the existence of a state of national emergency even in the absence of a
Congressional enactment. Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution grants the President such power. [David v.
Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396 (2006)].
State the guidelines for the declaration of martial law.
1. There must be an Invasion or Rebellion, and

2. Public Safety requires the proclamation of martial law all over the Philippines or any part thereof.
3. Duration: Not more than 60 days following which it shall be automatically lifted unless extended by Congress.
4. Duty of the President to report to Congress: within 48 hours personally or in writing.
5. Authority of Congress to affirm or revoke or allow the lapse or extend the effectivity of proclamation: by majority
vote of all of its members voting jointly.
Who can challenge the constitutionality of the declaration of Martial Law?
The Constitution explicitly clothes “any citizen” with the legal standing to challenge the constitutionality of the
declaration of martial law or suspension of the writ. The Constitution does not make any distinction as to who can
bring such an action. As discussed in the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission, the “citizen” who can
Page 6 of 32
challenge the declaration of martial law or suspension of the writ need not even be a taxpayer. (Fortun v. Pres.
Macapagal Arroyo, March 20, 2012)
What is the procedure for questioning the President’s declaration of Martial Law? What is the extent of the
Supreme Court’s power to review such declaration?
Section 18, Article VII provides that the Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding, filed by any
citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus. The phrase "in an appropriate proceeding" refers to any action initiated by a citizen for
the purpose of questioning the sufficiency of the factual basis of the exercise of the Chief Executive's emergency
powers. It could be denominated as a complaint, a petition, or a matter to be resolved by the Court. A certiorari
petition under Rule 65 is not the proper mode of review. The Court is limited to an examination on whether the
President acted within the bounds set by the Constitution, i.e., whether the facts in his possession prior to and at
the time of the declaration or suspension are sufficient for him to declare martial law or suspend the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus. The parameters for determining the sufficiency of factual basis are: l) actual rebellion or
invasion; 2) public safety requires it; the first two requirements must concur; and 3) there is probable cause for the
President to believe that there is actual rebellion or invasion. [Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658 (2017)]
What is the extent of the President’s power to pardon?
Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the President may grant reprieves,
commutations and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment. He shall also have
the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress. [1987 CONST,
ART. VII, Sec. 19]
If the President wishes to include in the pardon the restoration of the rights of suffrage and to hold public office, or
the remission of the accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification, he or she should do so expressly.
Articles 36 and 41 only ask that the President state his or her intentions clearly, directly, firmly, precisely, and
unmistakably. The President retains the power to make such restoration or remission, subject to a prescription on
the manner by which he or she is to state it. The inclusion of the phrase "(h)e is hereby restored to his civil and
political rights," expressly remitted the accessory penalties that attached to the principal penalty of reclusion
perpetua. [Rosas-Vidal v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 206666 January 21, 2015]
The Madrid Protocol, concluded in 1989, governs the Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks,
which is the centralized system providing a one-stop solution for registering and managing marks worldwide. This
System allows the trademark owner to file one application in one language, and to pay one set of fees to protect
his mark in the territories of up to 97 member-states. Conformably with its express authority under Section 9 of
Executive Order No. 459, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) determined that the Madrid Protocol was an
executive agreement. Thus, the President ratified it through an instrument of accession. The Intellectual Property
Association assailed the constitutionality of such instrument. It argued that the DFA Secretary committed grave
abuse of discretion in determining the Madrid Protocol as an executive agreement. Does the Madrid Protocol
need to be ratified by the Senate?
No. The Madrid Protocol is an executive agreement that does not require legislative concurrence or Senate
ratification to be binding, unlike treaties. The registration of trademarks and copyrights has been the subject of
executive agreements entered into without the concurrence of the Senate. Some executive agreements have been
concluded in conformity with the policies declared in the acts of Congress with respect to the general subject matter.
After examining the Declaration of State Policy under the Intellectual Property Code (Republic Act No. 8293, IP Code),
the Supreme Court held that the Madrid Protocol was concluded in conformity with the IP Code, a policy declared
in acts of Congress with respect to the general subject matter. [Intellectual Property Association of the Philippines
Vs. Hon. Paquito Ochoa, et al., G.R. No. 204605. July 19, 2016]
Page 7 of 32
What are the requirements for validity of an international agreement allowing foreign military bases, troops, or
facilities in the Philippines?
An international agreement allowing foreign military bases, troops, or facilities in the Philippines must be:
1. Under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate;

2. Ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national referendum held for that purpose, when the
Congress so requires; and
3. Recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State. [1987 CONST ART. XVIII, Section 25]
What is the doctrine of incorporation?
Under the doctrine of incorporation, rules of international law form part of the law of the land no further legislative
action is needed to make such rules applicable in the domestic sphere. The doctrine of incorporation, as applied in
most countries, decrees that rules of international law are given equal standing with, but are not superior to, national
legislative enactments. Accordingly, the principle lex posterior derogat priori takes effect — a treaty may repeal a
statute and a statute may repeal a treaty. In states where the constitution is the highest law of the land, such as the
Republic of the Philippines, both statutes and treaties may be invalidated if they are in conflict with the constitution
[Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, January 18, 2000].
Does the operative fact doctrine apply to executive acts?
Yes. The operative fact doctrine does not only apply to laws subsequently declared unconstitutional or unlawful, as
it also applies to executive acts subsequently declared as invalid. Evidently, the operative fact doctrine is not
confined to statutes and rules and regulations issued by the executive department that are accorded the same status
as that of a statute or those which are quasi-legislative in nature. The Court can apply the operative fact doctrine to
acts and consequences that resulted from the reliance not only on a law or executive act which is quasi-legislative
in nature but also on decisions or orders of the executive branch which were later nullified. This Court is not
unmindful that such acts and consequences must be recognized in the higher interest of justice, equity and fairness.
[Hacienda Luisita v. PARC, G.R. No. 171101, November 22, 2011]
What is the faithful execution clause?
This is the second sentence of Sec. 17 of Art. VII, of the 1987 CONST pertaining to the duty of the President to "ensure
that the laws be faithfully executed." Being the Chief Executive, the President represents the government as a whole
and sees to it that all laws are enforced by the officials and employees of his or her department. Under the Faithful
Execution Clause, the President has the power to take "necessary and proper steps" to carry into execution the law.
The mandate is self-executory by virtue of its being inherently executive in nature and is intimately related to the
other executive functions. It is best construed as an imposed obligation, not a separate grant of power. The provision
simply underscores the rule of law and, corollarily, the cardinal principle that the President is not above the laws but
is obliged to obey and execute them. [Ocampo v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 225973, November 08, 2016]
Classes of legislative power
1. Original - Possessed by the people in their sovereign capacity i.e. initiative and referendum
2. Delegated - Possessed by Congress and other legislative bodies by virtue of the Constitution.
3. Constituent - The power to amend or revise the Constitution.
4. Ordinary - The power to pass ordinary laws.
Limitations on the legislative power of Congress
1. Substantive - limitations on the content of laws.

2. Procedural - limitations on the manner of passing laws. 3. Congress cannot pass irrepealable laws. 4. Congress, as
a general rule, cannot delegate its legislative power.
Page 8 of 32
How are legislative districts apportioned?
Legislative districts are apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area. They are
apportioned in accordance with the number of their respect inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and
progressive ratio (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 5).
May reapportionment of legislative districts be effected thru a special law?
Yes. The Constitution did not preclude Congress from increasing its membership by passing a law, other than a
general reapportionment of the law. Moreover, to hold that reapportionment can only be made through a general
apportionment law, with a review of all the legislative districts allotted to each local government unit nationwide,
would create an inequitable situation where a new city or province created by Congress will be denied legislative
representation for an indeterminate period of time. (Mariano, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 118577, March 7, 1995)
A bill, upon filing by a Senator or a Member of the House of Representatives, goes through specified steps before
it leaves the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be. After leaving the legislature, please
name the three methods by which said bill may become a law. (1988 BAR)
A bill passed by Congress may become a law in any of the following cases:
1. If it is signed into law by the President; or

2. If it is re-passed over the President’s veto power by the vote of two-thirds of all the members of the Senate and
of the House of Representatives; or
3. If the President fails to veto it within thirty days after receipt thereof and communicate the veto to the House
from which it originated.
Limitations on party list representation
1. Only 20% of the total number of the membership of the House of Representatives is the maximum number of
seats available to party-list organizations.
2. A party list must garner at least 2% of the total votes cast in the party-list elections to be ensured of one (1) seat.
3. The additional seats of the remaining seats after allocation of the guaranteed seats shall be distributed to the
party-list organizations including those that received less than two percent of the total votes.
4. Each party list can only have a maximum of three seats immaterial of the number of votes garnered.
Is it necessary for a party-list nominee to actually belong to the marginalized sector that he seeks to represent?
No. A nominee who does not actually possess the marginalized and underrepresented status presented by the party-
list group but proves to be a genuine advocate of the interest and concern of the marginalized and underrepresented
sector represented is still qualified to be a nominee. (Atong Paglaum Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 203766, April, 2,
2013)
State the rule making it incompatible for members of Congress to hold offices or employment in the government.
(BAR 1998)
Section 13, Article VII of the Constitution, which prohibits Members of Congress from holding any other office during
their term without forfeiting their seat, does not distinguish between government corporations with original
charters and their subsidiaries, because the prohibition applies to both.
Voting requirements in Impeachment Proceedings
1. A majority vote of the members of the Committee on Justice of the House of Representatives is necessary for
consideration of its report in a plenary session. [Sec. 3(2), Art. XI]
Page 9 of 32
2. A vote of at least 1/3 of all members of the House of Representatives is necessary to either affirm a favorable
resolution with the Articles of Impeachment or override its contrary resolution.
3. A verified complaint or resolution of impeachment filed by 1/3 of all members of the House of Representatives
shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment.
4. Two thirds vote of all members of the Senate is necessary to convict the impeached public officer.
Can the Congress compel the attendance of an absent member who is in confinement?
No. The members of the Congress cannot compel absent members to attend sessions if the reason of absence is a
legitimate one. The confinement of a Congressman charged with a non-bailable offense is certainly authorized by
law and has constitutional foundations. (People v. Jalosjos, G.R. No. 132875-76, Feb. 3, 2000)
Instances when Congress is voting jointly
1. When revoking or extending the proclamation suspending the privilege of writ of habeas corpus (1987
Constitution, Art. VII, Sec. 18)
2. When revoking or extending the declaration of martial law. (1987 Constitution, Art. VII, Sec. 18)
What is the nature of suspension under the Anti-Graft Law?
The suspension under the Anti-Graft Law is mandatory, imposed not as a penalty but as a precautionary measure to
prevent the accused public officer from frustrating his prosecution. It is incidental to the criminal proceedings before
the court.
What is the function of the Senate Electoral Tribunal and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal? (2006
BAR)
The function of the Senate Electoral Tribunal and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal is to be the sole
judge of all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of Senators and Congressmen, respectively.
(1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 17)
What is the composition of each? (2006 BAR)
The Senate Electoral Tribunal and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal are composed of nine members,
three of whom are Justices of the Supreme Court designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining six members
are Senators and Congressmen, respectively chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the political
parties as well as the parties registered under the party-list system represented in the House of Representatives, in
the case of the latter. The senior justice acts as the Chairman.
What are the rules on voting in the Commission on Appointments?
1. The CA shall rule by a majority vote of all the members. 2. The chairman shall only vote in case of tie. 3. The CA
shall act on all appointments within 30 session days from their submission to Congress. (1987 Constitution, Art. VI,
Sec. 18)
State the limitations in the confirmation of appointment.
1. Congress cannot by law prescribe that the appointment of a person to an office created by such law be subject to
confirmation by the Commission.
2. Appointments extended by the President to the above-mentioned positions while Congress is not in session shall
only be effective until disapproval by the Commission or until the next adjournment of Congress. (Sarmiento III, v.
Mison, G.R. No. L-79974, Dec. 17, 1987)
Page 10 of 32
Discuss the Doctrine of Shifting Majority
The Doctrine of Shifting Majority provides that for each House of Congress to pass a bill, only the votes of the majority
of those present in the session, there being a quorum, is required. An exception is in votes where requirement is
based on “all the members of Congress”, the requirement is based on the entire composition of a House or Congress,
regardless of the number of members present or absent.
Limitations on legislative investigation
1. The persons appearing in or affected by such legislative inquiries shall be respected.

2. The Rules of procedures to be followed in such inquiries shall be published for the guidance of those who will be
summoned. This must be strictly followed so that the inquiries are confined only to the legislative purpose and to
avoid abuses.
3. The investigation must be in aid of legislation.
4. Congress may not summon the President as witness or investigate the latter in view of the doctrine of separation
of powers except in impeachment cases.
5. Congress may no longer punish the witness in contempt after its final adjournment. The basis of the power to
impose such penalty is the right to selfpreservation. And such right is enforceable only during the existence of the
legislature. (Lopez v. Delos Reyes, G.R. No. L-34361, Nov. 5, 1930)
6. Congress may no longer inquire into the same justiciable controversy already before the court. (Bengzon v. Senate
Blue Ribbon Committee, G.R. No. 89914, Nov. 20, 1991)
What measures can the Bicameral Conference Committee take to reconcile or harmonize disagreeing provisions
in a bill?
1. Adopt the specific provisions of either the House bill or Senate bill;
2. Decide that neither provisions in the House bill or the provisions in the Senate bill would be carried into the final
form of the bill;
3. Try to arrive at a compromise between the disagreeing provisions.
What is the Doctrine of Augmentation? (1996, 1998 BAR)
The Doctrine of Augmentation provides that no law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations;
however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item
in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective
appropriations. (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 25[5]; Demetria v. Alba, G.R. No. 71977, February 27, 1987)
Non-legislative functions of Congress
1. Power to canvass the presidential elections

2. Declare the existence of war
3. Give concurrence to treaties and amnesties
4. Propose constitutional amendments
5. Initiate impeachment cases
Enumerate the grounds for impeachment.
1. Culpable violation of the Constitution

2. Treason
3. Bribery
4. Graft and Corruption
Page 11 of 32
5. Other high crimes
6. Betrayal of public trust (1987 Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 2)
Discuss briefly the one-year bar rule on impeachment cases. (2014 BAR)
Once an impeachment complaint has been initiated in the foregoing manner, another may not be filed against the
same official within a one-year period (Gutierrez v. HoR Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459, Feb. 15, 2011).
It refers to the element of time, and not the number of complaints. The impeachable officer should defend himself
in only one impeachment proceeding, so that he will not be precluded from performing his official functions and
duties. Similarly, Congress should run only one impeachment proceeding so as not to leave it with little time to
attend to its main work of law-making (Gutierrez v. The HoR Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459, Feb. 15, 2011).
Give the elements in making a valid, complete, and effective Presidential appointment. (VRAT)
1. Authority to appoint and evidence of the exercise of the authority;

2. Transmittal of the appointment paper signed by the President and evidence of the transmittal;
3. A Vacant position at the time of appointment;
4. Receipt of the appointment paper and Acceptance of the appointment by the appointee who possesses all the
qualifications and none of the disqualifications
Explain the procedure of impeachment after a verified complaint is filed.
It is included in the Order of Business within 10 session days from filing, and referred to the proper Committee within
3 session days thereafter. After hearing, if a majority is reached, the Committee shall submit its report to the House
within 60 session days from the referral, together with the corresponding resolution. 1/3 of the all the members of
the House is necessary to affirm a favorable resolution of the Committee or override a contrary resolution. [1987
CONST, ART XI, Sec. 3(1)(2)(3)]
Can an officer be impeached without the complaint being referred to the proper Committee?
Yes. If the verified complaint is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute
the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed. [1987 CONST, ART XI, Sec. 3(4)]
While Congress was in session, the President appointed eight acting Secretaries. A group of Senators from the
minority bloc questioned the validity of the appointments in a petition before the Supreme Court on the ground
that while Congress is in session, no appointment that requires confirmation by the Commission on Appointments
can be made without the latter’s consent and that an undersecretary should instead be designated as Acting
Secretary. Should the petition be granted? (2013 BAR)
No, the petition should not be granted. The Department Head is an alter ego of the president and must enjoy his
confidence even if the appointment will be merely temporary. The Senators cannot require the President to
designate an Undersecretary to be the temporary alter ego of the president. (Pimentel Jr. v. Ermita, 472 SCRA 587)
Name the category or categories of officials whose appointments need confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments? (1999 BAR)
The only officers whose appointments need confirmation by the Commission on Appointments are the head of
executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, officers of the armed forces from the rank
of colonel or naval captain, and other officials whose appointments are vested in the President by the Constitution.
(Sarmiento v. Mison, 156 SCRA 549)
Does the prohibition on midnight appointments apply to all kinds of appointments?
Page 12 of 32
No. The prohibition on midnight appointments only applies to presidential appointments. It does not apply to
appointments made by local chief executives. Nevertheless, the Civil Service Commission has the power to
promulgate rules and regulations to professionalize the civil service. It may issue rules and regulations prohibiting
local chief executives from making appointments during the last days of their tenure. Appointments of local chief
executives must conform to these civil service rules and regulations in order to be valid (Provincial Government of
Aurora v. Marco, G.R. No. 202331, April 22, 2015).
Does the prohibition on midnight appointments apply to the Judiciary?
No. Article VII is devoted to the Executive Department, and, among others, it lists the powers vested by the
Constitution in the President. Article VIII is dedicated to the Judicial Department and defines the duties and
qualifications of Members of the Supreme Court, among others. Section 4(1) and Section 9 of this Article are the
provisions specifically providing for the appointment of Supreme Court Justices. In particular, Section 9 states that
the appointment of Supreme Court Justices can only be made by the President upon the submission of a list of at
least three nominees by the JBC; Section 4(1) of the Article mandates the President to fill the vacancy within 90 days
from the occurrence of the vacancy.
Had the framers intended to extend the prohibition contained in Section 15, Article VII to the appointment of
Members of the Supreme Court, they could have explicitly done so. They could not have ignored the meticulous
ordering of the provisions. They would have easily and surely written the prohibition made explicit in Section 15,
Article VII as being equally applicable to the appointment of Members of the Supreme Court in Article VIII itself,
most likely in Section 4 (1), Article VIII. That such specification was not done only reveals that the prohibition against
the President or Acting President making appointments within two months before the next presidential elections
and up to the end of the Presidents or Acting Presidents term does not refer to the Members of the Supreme Court.
(De Castro v. Judicial And Bar Council, G.R. No. 191002, 17 March 2010)
Is the President vested with disciplinary authority over the Ombudsman?
No. Sec. 8(2) of RA 6770 vesting disciplinary authority on the President over the Deputy Ombudsman violates the
independence of the Office of the Ombudsman and is, thus, unconstitutional. Subjecting the Deputy Ombudsman
to discipline and removal by the President, whose own alter egos and officials in the Executive Department are
subject to the Ombudsman's disciplinary authority, cannot but seriously place at risk the independence of the Office
of the Ombudsman itself. The law directly collided not only with the independence that the Constitution guarantees
to the Office of the Ombudsman, but inevitably with the principle of checks and balances that the creation of an
Ombudsman office seeks to revitalize. What is true for the Ombudsman must be equally and necessarily true for her
Deputies who act as agents of the Ombudsman in the performance of their duties. (Gonzales III v. Ochoa, G.R. No.
196231; Barreras Sulit v. Ochoa, G.R. No.196232; Feb.26, 2014)
The executive power of control over the acts of department secretaries is laid down in Section 17, Article VII of the
1987 Constitution. The power of control has been defined as the "power of an officer to alter or modify or nullify or
set aside what a subordinate officer had done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of
the former for that of the latter." Such "executive control", however, is not absolute. The definition of the structure
of the executive branch of government, and the corresponding degrees of administrative control and supervision is
not the exclusive preserve of the executive. It may be effectively limited by the Constitution, by law, or by judicial
decisions. All the more in the matter of appellate procedure as in the instant case. Appeals are remedial in nature;
hence, constitutionally subject to this Court’s rulemaking power. The Rules of Procedure was issued by the Court
pursuant to Section 5, Article VIII of the Constitution, which expressly empowers the Supreme Court to promulgate
rules concerning the procedure in all courts.
Page 13 of 32
What is the doctrine of qualified political agency?
The doctrine of qualified political agency declares that, save in matters on which the Constitution or the
circumstances require the President to act personally, executive and administrative functions are exercised through
executive departments headed by cabinet secretaries, whose acts are presumptively the acts of the President unless
disapproved by the latter.
What are the constitutional limitations on thepardoning power of the President? (1999, 2015 BAR)
The following are the limitations on the pardoning power of the President:
a. It cannot be granted in cases of impeachment;

b. Reprieves, commutations, pardon, and remission of fines and forfeitures can be granted only after conviction by
final judgment.
c. Amnesty requires the concurrence of the majority of all members of Congress;
d. The favorable recommendation of the COMELEC is required for violation of election laws, rules and regulations.
e. The President cannot pardon members and employees of the Judiciary found guilty by the Supreme Court in
administrative cases. f. Distinguish between pardon and amnesty. (1999 BAR)
The following are the distinctions between pardon and amnesty:
a. Pardon is a private act and must be pleaded and proved by the person pardoned; while amnesty is a public act of
which courts take judicial notice;
b. Pardon does not require the concurrence of Congress, while amnesty requires the concurrence of Congress;
c. Pardon is granted to individuals, while amnesty is granted to classes of persons or communities;
d. Pardon may be granted for any offense, while amnesty is granted for political offenses;
e. Pardon is granted after final conviction, while amnesty may be granted at any time; and
f. Pardon looks forward and relieves the offender from the consequences of his offense, while amnesty looks
backward and the person granted it stands before the law as though he had committed no offense. (Barrioquinto v.
Fernandez, 82 Phil. 642,)
When can Congress grant emergency powers to the President? (2010 BAR)
Under Art. VI, Sec. 23(2), Congress may grant the President emergency powers subject to the following conditions:
1. There is a War or other national emergency;

2. The grant of emergency powers must be for a Limited period;
3. The grant of emergency powers is subject to such Restrictions as Congress may prescribe; and
4. The emergency powers must be exercised to carry out a National policy declared by Congress.
What is judicial power?
It includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government. [1987
CONST, Art. VIII, Sec. 1]
What is a political question?
A political question refers to those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the people in their
sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the Legislature or
executive branch of the Government. It is concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not legality, of a
particular measure. The political question doctrine which, under the classic formulation of Baker v. Carr, applies
Page 14 of 32
when there is found, among others: 1. a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a
coordinate political department; 2. a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it or 3.
the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non- judicial discretion.
Can decisions of the PET be appealed to the Supreme Court?
No. The PET is not a separate and distinct entity from the Supreme Court, albeit it has functions peculiar only to the
Tribunal. the present Constitution has allocated to the Supreme Court, in conjunction with latter’s exercise of judicial
power inherent in all courts, the task of deciding presidential and vicepresidential election contests, with full
authority in the exercise thereof. The power wielded by PET is a derivative of the plenary judicial power allocated to
courts of law, expressly provided in the Constitution. [Macalintal v. PET, G.R. No. 191618 November 23, 2010]
What is the Deliberative Process Privilege?
The Deliberative Process Privilege is a privilege against disclosure of information or communications that formed the
process of judicial decisions. This applies to confidential matters, which refer to information not yet publicized by
the Court like (1) raffle of cases, (2) actions taken in each case in the Court’s agenda, and (3) deliberations of the
Members in court sessions on case matters pending before it. This privilege, however, is not exclusive to the
Judiciary and it extends to the other branches of government due to our adherence to the principle of separation of
powers. (In Re: Production of Court Records and Documents and the Attendance of Court Officials and Employees
as Witnesses under the Subpoenas of Feb. 10, 2012 and the Various Letters of Impeachment Prosecution Panel dated
Jan. 19 and 25, 2012, Feb. 14, 2012)
What is the principle of Judicial Restraint?
It is the theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power. In terms of
legislative acts, it means that every intendment of the law must be adjudged by the courts in favor of its
constitutionality; invalidity being a measure of last resort. (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, Nov. 19,
2001)
The JBC submitted three different lists of nominees for the appointment of three Justices of the Sandiganbayan.
The President appointed filled in the three vacancies but disregarded the clustering of the nominees, electing to
appoint the nominees from the 1st list for all the vacancies. The nominees in the second and third list argue that
this is unconstitutional, are they correct?
No. The JBC’s act of clustering nominees is impermissible. The power to recommend of the JBC cannot be used to
restrict or limit the President's power to appoint as the latter's prerogative to choose someone whom he/she
considers worth appointing to the vacancy in the Judiciary is still paramount. As long as in the end, the President
appoints someone nominated by the JBC, the appointment is valid. [Hon. Aguinaldo v. Aquino III, G.R. No. 224302,
November 29, 2016]
Can five members of the Supreme Court declare a municipal ordinance unconstitutional? Explain. (1996 BAR)
Yes. Five Members of the Supreme Court sitting en banc can declare a municipal ordinance unconstitutional. Under
Section 4(2), Article VIII of the Constitution, a municipal ordinance can be declared `unconstitutional with the
concurrence of a majority of the Members of the Supreme Court who actually took part in the deliberation on the
issues in the case and voted thereon. If only eight Members of the Supreme Court actually took part in deciding the
case, there will still be a quorum. Five Members will constitute a majority of those who actually took part in deciding
the case.
Page 15 of 32
What administrative cases may SC hear en banc?
The Supreme Court may hear en banc cases involving Administrative judges; Disbarment of lawyers; Suspension of
more than 1 year; or Fine exceeding Php 10,000. (People v. Gacott, G.R. No. 116049, July 13, 1995)
Guarantees of independence provided for by the Constitution to the 3 Commissions
1. They are constitutionally-created; may not be abolished by statute of its judicial functions. (1987 Constitution,
Art. IX-A, Sec. 1)
2. Each is conferred certain powers and functions which cannot be reduced by statute. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-B,
C and D)
3. Each is expressly described as independent. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-A, Sec. 1)
4. Chairmen and members are given fairly long terms of office for 7 years. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-B, C and D, Sec.
1[2])
5. Chairmen and members cannot be removed except by impeachment. (1987 Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 2) 6.
Chairmen and members may not be reappointed or appointed in an acting capacity. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-B, C
and D, Sec. 1[2])
7. Salaries of chairmen and members are relatively high and may not be decreased during continuance in office.
(1987 Constitution, Art. IX-A, Sec. 3; Art. XVIII, Sec. 17) 8. Commissions enjoy fiscal autonomy. (1987 Constitution,
Art. IX-A, Sec. 5) 9. Each commission may promulgate its own procedural rules. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-A, Sec. 7)
10. Chairmen and members are subject to certain disqualifications and inhibitions calculated to strengthen their
integrity. (1987 Constitution, Art. IXA, Sec. 2) 11. Commissions may appoint their own officials and employees in
accordance with Civil Service Law. (1987 Constitution, Art. IX-A, Sec. 4)
What is the meaning and guarantee of security of tenure? (1999 BAR)
According to Palmera v. Civil Service Commission, 235 SCRA 87, Security of Tenure means that no officer or employee
in the Civil Service shall be suspended or dismissed except for cause as provided by law and after due process.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
Define the Police Power of the State.
Police power is the power of the state to promote public welfare by restraining and regulating the use of liberty and
property. It is the most pervasive, the least limitable, and the most demanding of the three fundamental powers of
the State. The justification is found in the Latin maxims salus populi est suprema lex (the welfare of the people is the
supreme law) and sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas (so use your property as not to injure the property of others).
(Gerochi v. Department of Energy, G. R. 159796, July 17, 2007)
What are the requisites for a valid exercise of police power?
For a valid exercise of police power, there must be a lawful subject and it must be executed through lawful means.
There is a lawful subject when the interests of the public generally, as distinguished from those of a particular class,
require the exercise of the police power. It is executed through lawful means when the means employed are
reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. (NTC v.
Philippine Veterans Bank, 192 SCRA 257)
Discuss the power of eminent domain
The power of eminent domain is the power of the sovereign state to take, or to authorize the taking of private
property for public use without the owner’s consent, conditioned upon payment of just compensation. (Brgy.
Sindalan, San Fernando, Pampanga v. CA, G.R. No. 150640, March 22, 2007)
Page 16 of 32
How is the Power of Eminent Domain exercised?
The power of eminent domain is exercised through the taking of private property, for public use, for a just
compensation, and upon observance of due process. Before such taking, a valid offer to buy the property must be
made, and a refusal of said offer.
What are the requisites for a valid taking?
1. The expropriator must enter a private property 2. Entry must be for more than a momentary period 3. Entry must
be under warrant or color of legal authority 4. Property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally
appropriated or injuriously affected 5. Utilization of property must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive
him of beneficial enjoyment of the property. (Republic v. vda. De Castellvi, G.R. No. L20620, Aug. 15, 1974)
Nature of property taken
GR: All private property capable of ownership, including services, can be taken.
EXC:
a. Money
b. Choses in action - personal right not reduced in possession but recoverable by a suit at law such as right to receive,
demand or recover debt, demand or damages on a cause of action ex contractu or for a tort or omission of duty
What is considered “Public Use”?
Public use does not necessarily mean “use by the public at large.” Whatever may be beneficially employed for the
general welfare satisfies the requirement. Moreover, that only few people benefit from the expropriation does not
diminish its public-use character because the notion of public use now includes the broader notion of indirect public
benefit or advantage. (Manosca v. CA, G.R. 166440, Jan. 29, 1996)
Explain the concept of Vicarious Benefit
The concept of Vicarious Benefit abandons the traditional concept of public purpose, the essence of which is the
number of actual beneficiaries. Public use now includes the broader notion of indirect public advantage, i.e.
conversion of a slum area into a model housing community, urban land reform and housing. There is a vicarious
advantage to the society. (Filstream International Incorporated vs. CA, 284 SCRA 716, Jan. 23, 1998)
When is payment of consequential damages proper?
In cases where a property is not wholly expropriated, the consequential damages of the remaining property shall be
added in the fair market value, minus the consequential benefits, but in no case will the consequential benefits
exceed the consequential damages (Sec. 6, Rule 67, Rules of Court). If the subject property is being expropriated in
its entirety, there is no remaining portion which may suffer an impairment or decrease in value as a result of the
expropriation. Hence, the award of consequential damages is improper. (Republic of the Philippines v. Soriano, G.R.
No. 211666, Feb. 25, 2015)
If the Government does not immediately pay the amount fixed by the court as just compensation, can the owner
successfullty demand the return of the property to him? (2016 BAR)
As a general rule, non-payment by the government does not entitle private owners to recover possession of the
property because expropriation is an in rem proceeding, not an ordinary sale. The delay only entitles them to
demand payment of the fair market value of the property, and legal interest should be paid from the time of the
taking. However, non-payment entails recovery when there is deliberate refusal to pay just compensation, or when
the government failed to pay compensation within 5 years from the finality of the judgment in the expropriation
Page 17 of 32
proceedings. This is in connection with the principle that the government cannot keep the property and dishonor
the judgment. (Republic v. Lim, G.R. No. 161656, June 29, 2005)
If the Court grants the City's prayer for expropriation, but the City delays payment of the amount determined by
the court as just compensation, can FCC recover the property from Pasig City?
The mere delay in the payment of the just compensation will not entitle the Filipinas Computer Corporation to
recover the property. Instead, legal interest on the just compensation should be paid (National Power Corp. v.
Henson, 300 SCRA 751 [1998].) However, if payment was not made within five (5) years from the finality of judgment
in the expropriation case, Filipinas Corporation can recover the property. To be just, the compensation must be paid
within a reasonable time. [Republic v. Lim, 462 SCRA 265 (2005)]
Suppose the expropriation succeeds, but the City decides to abandon its plan to subdivide the property for
residential purposes having found a much bigger lot, can FCC legally demand that it be allowed to repurchase the
property from the City of Pasig? Why or why not?
If the lot was expropriated with the condition that it can be used only for low-cost housing, it should be returned to
Filipinas Computer Corporation upon abandonment of the purpose [Heirs of Timoteo Moreno v. Mactan-Cebu
International Airport Authority, 413 SCRA 502 (2003)].
When may a law be said to have impaired the obligation of contracts?
A law which (1) changes the terms of a legal contract between parties (either in the time or mode of performance)
or (2) imposes new conditions or dispenses with those expressed, (3) or authorizes for its satisfaction something
different from that provided in its terms.
Is there a presumption of regularity in search cases?
No. A liberal construction in search and seizure cases is given in favor of the individual whose rights were violated.
This is to prevent stealthy encroachment upon, or gradual depreciation of the right to privacy. [Sony Music v Judge
Espanol, G.R. No. 156804, March 14, 2005]
What kind of evidence is needed to establish probable cause?
As implied by the words themselves, “probable cause” is concerned with probability, not absolute or even moral
certainty. The prosecution need not present at this stage proof beyond reasonable doubt. The standards of judgment
are those of a reasonably prudent man, not the exacting calibrations of a judge after a full-blown trial. [Microsoft
Corporation v. Maxicorp, G.R. No. 140964, September 13, 2004]
What is the knock and announce principle?
Police officers are obliged to give the appellant notice, show to her their authority, and demand that they be allowed
entry. They may only break open any outer or inner door or window of a house to execute the search warrant if,
after such notice and demand, such officers are refused entry to the place of directed search. This is known as the
knock and announce principle which is embodied in Anglo-American Law. The method of entry of an officer into a
dwelling and the presence or absence of such notice are as important considerations in assessing whether
subsequent entry to search and/or arrest is constitutionally reasonable. The proper trigger point in determining,
under the knock and announce rule, whether the police waited long enough before entering the residence to execute
a warrant, is when those inside should have been alerted that the police wanted entry to execute a warrant. [People
v. Huang Zhen Hua, G.R. No. 139301, September 29, 2004]
Page 18 of 32
Differentiate searches incidental to lawful arrests from “stop and frisk” searches.
Searches incidental to a lawful arrest require that a crime be committed in flagrante delicto, and the search
conducted within the vicinity and within reach by the person arrested is done to ensure that there are no weapons,
as well as to preserve the evidence. On the other hand, "stop and frisk" searches are conducted to prevent the
occurrence of a crime. "Stop and frisk" search should be used when dealing with a rapidly unfolding and potentially
criminal situation in the city streets where unarguably there is no time to secure a search warrant. [People v. Cogaed,
G.R. No. 200334, July 30, 2014].
Is a tip given by a police informant sufficient to justify a valid warrantless arrest?
No. A reliable information alone is not sufficient to justify a warrantless arrest. The rule requires, in addition, that
the accused perform some overt act that would indicate that he has committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit an offense. [People v. Raquero, G.R. No. 186529, August 3, 2010].
What is a custodial investigation?
Custodial investigation refers to any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken
into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way. This presupposes that he is
suspected of having committed a crime and that the investigator is trying to elicit information or a confession from
him. The rule begins to operate at once, as soon as the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an unsolved
crime, and direction is aimed upon a particular suspect who has been taken into custody and to whom the police
would then direct interrogatory questions which tend to elicit incriminating statements. [Jesalva v. People, G.R. No.
187725, January 19, 2011]
What is the legal effect of the violation of the rights in custodial investigations?
Art. 3 Section 12(3): “Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 (provision against self-
incrimination) hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.”
May the rights under custodial investigation be waived?
Yes but it must be in writing and in the presence of counsel. It must be done knowingly and intelligently. [People v
Galit,, 135 SCRA 465, March 20, 1985]
What is bail?
Bail is a mode short of confinement which would, with reasonable certainty, insure the attendance of the accused
at his trial. It usually takes the form of a deposit of money or its equivalent as a guarantee of such attendance. Such
deposit is forfeited upon the failure to appear. It is awarded to honor the presumption of innocence and to enable
the accused to prepare his defense without being subject to punishment prior to conviction. [Cortes v Catral, A.M.
No. RTJ-97-1387, September 10, 1997]
Who has a constitutional right to bail?
The general rule is, therefore, that any person, before being convicted of any criminal offense, shall be bailable,
unless he is charged with a capital offense, or with an offense punishable with reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment, and the evidence of his guilt is strong. Hence, from the moment he is placed under arrest, or is
detained or restrained by the officers of the law, he can claim the guarantee of his provisional liberty under the Bill
of Rights, and he retains his right to bail unless he is charged with a capital offense, or with an offense punishable
with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, and the evidence of his guilt is strong. Once it has been established
that the evidence of guilt is strong, no right to bail shall be recognized. [Enrile v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847,
August 18, 2015]
Page 19 of 32
When is admission to bail discretionary?
For purposes of admission to bail, the determination of whether or not evidence of guilt is strong in criminal cases
involving capital offenses, or offenses punishable with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment lies within the
discretion of the trial court. But, as the Court has held in Concerned Citizens v. Elma , "such discretion may be
exercised only after the hearing called to ascertain the degree of guilt of the accused for the purpose of whether or
not he should be granted provisional liberty." It is axiomatic, therefore, that bail cannot be allowed when its grant is
a matter of discretion on the part of the trial court unless there has been a hearing with notice to the Prosecution.
In resolving bail applications of the accused who is charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, the trial judge is expected to comply with the guidelines outlined in Cortes
v. Catral:
1. In all cases, whether bail is a matter of right or of discretion, notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application
for bail or require him to submit his recommendation (Section 18, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, as amended); 2.
Where bail is a matter of discretion, conduct a hearing of the application for bail regardless of whether or not the
prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling
the court to exercise its sound discretion; (Section 7 and 8, Rule 114) 3. Decide whether the guilt of the accused is
strong based on the summary of evidence of the prosecution; 4. If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge
the accused upon the approval of the bailbond (Section 19, Rule 114) Otherwise petition should be denied. [Enrile
v. Sandiganbayan, supra]
Can special, humanitarian, and compelling circumstances be considered in determining whether a person should
be admitted to bail?
Yes. This national commitment to uphold the fundamental human rights as well as value the worth and dignity of
every person has authorized the grant of bail not only to those charged in criminal proceedings but also to
extraditees upon a clear and convincing showing: (1) that the detainee will not be a flight risk or a danger to the
community; and (2) that there exist special, humanitarian and compelling circumstances. Thus, an aging Senator,
charged with a crime punishable by the penalty of reclusion perpetua, may be granted bail due to his social standing
and his poor health indicating that the risk of his flight or escape from this jurisdiction is highly unlikely. [Enrile v.
Sandiganbayan, supra]
When does presumption of innocence end?
Until the accused is finally proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence stands. Thus,
where the conviction by a lower court is still on appeal and it has not yet reached finality, the accused still enjoys
such presumption. Re: Judge Angeles, A.M. No. 06-9-545 RTC, January 31, 2008 (citing Mangubat v Sandiganbayan
where the court held that respondent Sandiganbayan did not act with grave abuse of discretion when it ruled that
despite her conviction, the accused still enjoyed presumption of innocence).
What is a writ of amparo?
The petition for a writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is
violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private
individual or entity. The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof. For the
protective writ of amparo to issue, allegation and proof that the persons subject thereof are missing are not enough.
It must also be shown and proved by substantial evidence that the disappearance was carried out by, or with the
authorization, support or acquiescence of, the State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge
the same or give information on the fate or whereabouts of said missing persons, with the intention of removing
them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. Simply put, the petitioner in an amparo case
has the burden of proving by substantial evidence the indispensable element of government participation. A writ of
amparo may lie against a private individual or entity. But even if the person sought to be held accountable or
Page 20 of 32
responsible in an amparo petition is a private individual or entity, still, government involvement in the disappearance
remains an indispensable element. [Navia v. Pardico, G.R. No. 184467, June 19, 2012]
What are the requisites for a valid classification under the equal protection clause?
1. The classification rests on substantial distinctions; 2. It is germane to the purpose of the law; 3. It is not limited
to existing conditions only; and; 4. It applies equally to all members of the same class. [Biraogo v. Philippine Truth
Commision, G.R. No. 192935, December 7, 2010]
What is the strict scrutiny standard?
According to the strict scrutiny standard, a legislative classification that impermissibly interferes with the exercise of
fundamental rights or operates to the peculiar class disadvantage of a suspect class is presumed unconstitutional.
The burden is on the government to prove that the classification is necessary to achieve a compelling state interest
and that it is the least restrictive means to protect such interest. The strict scrutiny standard was used to assess the
validity of laws dealing with the regulation of speech, gender, or race as well as other fundamental rights, as
expansion from its earlier applications to equal protection. [Disini v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 203335 , February
11, 2014]
What does the constitutional exercise of the Congress’ power to reimpose the death penalty entail?
It entails the following: “(1) that Congress define or describe what is meant by heinous crimes; (2) that Congress
specify and penalize by death only crimes that qualify as heinous in accordance with the definition set in the death
penalty bill and/or designate crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua to death in which latter case, death can only
be imposed upon the attendance of circumstances duly proven in court that characterize the crime to be heinous in
accordance with the definition or description set forth in the death penalty bill; (3) that Congress, in enacting this
death penalty bill, be singularly motivated by ‘compelling reasons involving heinous crimes.’” [People v Echegaray,
G.R. No. 117472, February 7, 1997]
What is the extent of the authority of the State to regulate public assemblies?
The right to peaceable assembly is a right cognate to those of free speech and free press and is equally fundamental.
(de Jonge v Oregon, 299 US 353, 364 1937). The Supreme court has previously held, however, that the state
possesses reasonable discretion to determine or specify the streets or public places to be used for the assembly in
order to secure convenient use thereof by others and provide adequate and proper policing to minimize the risks
of disorder and maintain public safety and order. Navarro v Villegas, 31 SCRA 721 (1970 In addition, in Philippine
Blooming Mills Employees Organization v Philippine Blooming Mills Co. Inc., 51 SCRA 189 (1973), the Court of
Industrial Relations adjudged the petitioners’ concerted act and the occurrence of a temporary stoppage of work a
violation of the collective bargaining agreement and upheld the dismissal of some union leaders. The Supreme Court
reversed this decision stating that the primacy of human rights (freedom of expression, of peaceful assembly, and
of petition for redress of grievances) over property rights has been sustained.
What is a content-neutral regulation? What is a content-based regulation?
Content-based restraint or censorship refers to restrictions "based on the subject matter of the utterance or
speech." In contrast, content-neutral regulation includes controls merely on the incidents of the speech such as time,
place, or manner of the speech
What is the overbreadth doctrine?
An exception to the prohibition against third-party standing, the doctrine permits a person to challenge a statute on
the ground that it violates the free speech rights of third parties not before the court, even though the law is
constitutional as applied to that defendant. In other words, the overbreadth doctrine provides that: Given a case or
Page 21 of 32
controversy, a litigant whose own activities are unprotected may nevertheless challenge a statute by showing that
it substantially abridges the free speech rights of other parties not before the court.
What is the void for vagueness doctrine?
The void-for-vagueness doctrine holds that a law is facially invalid if men of common intelligence must necessarily
guess at its meaning and differ as to its application. The vagueness doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of
certainty for the statute to be upheld - not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. [Spouses Romualdez v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 167011 April 30, 2008]
What is academic freedom? What are its limits?
In a number of decided cases, the Court has espoused the concurring opinion of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix
Frankfurter in Sweezy v. New Hampshire, which enumerated “the four essential freedoms” of a university, in defining
the extent of academic freedom: To determine for itself on academic grounds (1) who may teach, (2) what may be
taught, (3) how it shall be taught, and (4) who may be admitted to study. An educational institution has the power
to adopt and enforce such rules as may be deemed expedient for its government, this being incident to the very
object of incorporation, and indispensable to the successful management of the college. It can decide for itself its
aims and objectives and how best to attain them, free from outside coercion or interference except when there is
an overriding public welfare which would call for some restraint. The schools’ power to instill discipline in their
students is subsumed in their academic freedom and that “the establishment of rules governing university-student
relations, particularly those pertaining to student discipline, may be regarded as vital, not merely to the smooth and
efficient operation of the institution, but to its very survival. The Court has always recognized the right of schools to
impose disciplinary sanctions, which includes the power to dismiss or expel, on students who violate disciplinary
rules. The power of the school to impose disciplinary measures extends even after graduation for any act done by
the student prior thereto. [Cudia v. Superintendent, G.R. No. 211362, February 24, 2015]
Page 22 of 32
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAW
What are the requirements for an administrative regulation to have the force of a penal law?
For an administrative regulation to have the force of penal law, (1) the violation of the administrative regulation
must be made a crime by the delegating statute itself; and (2) the penalty for such violation must be provided by the
statute itself. [Perez v. LPG Refillers Association of the Phils., Inc., (2006)]
Does the doctrine of res judicata apply to administrative proceedings?
Yes. While the Court has declared that the doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or quasijudicial
proceedings, and not to the exercise of administrative powers, the latter has also been limited to proceedings purely
administrative in nature. Therefore, when the administrative proceedings take on an adversary character, the
doctrine of res judicata certainly applies. [Heirs of Maximino Derla v. Heirs of Catalina Derla Vda. De Hipolito, Apr.
13, 2011]
When is prior notice and hearing required for a valid exercise of an administrative agency’s rule-making power?
As a general rule, notice and hearing, as the fundamental requirements of procedural due process, are essential only
when an administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial function. In the performance of its executive or legislative
functions, such as issuing rules and regulations, an administrative body need not comply with the requirements of
notice and hearing. [Corona v. United Harbor Pilots Association of the Philippines, 1997, citing PHILCOMSAT v.
Alcuaz, 1989]. Where the rules and/or rates laid down by an administrative agency applies exclusively to a particular
party, predicated upon a finding of fact, it is held that in making said finding of fact said agency performed a function
partaking of a quasi-judicial character, the valid exercise of which demands previous notice and hearing.
However, in Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. CA (1996), the SC held that when the administrative rule goes
beyond merely providing for the means that can facilitate or render least cumbersome the implementation of the
law but substantially adds to or increases the burden of those governed, it behooves the agency to accord at least
to those directly affected a chance to be heard, and thereafter to be duly informed, before that new issuance is given
the force and effect of law. Thus, the due observance of the requirements of notice, of hearing, and of publication
should not have been then ignored. (This ruling was later cited in GMA Network, Inc. v. COMELEC, 2014)
What is the hold-over principle?
The hold-over principle provides that in the absence of any express or implied constitutional or statutory provision
to the contrary, the public officer whose term has expired or services terminated is entitled to hold his office until
his successor shall have been duly chosen and shall have qualified. The purpose of the hold-over principle is to
prevent a hiatus in public service. (Lecaroz v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 130872, March 25, 1999)
What is the effect of Recall on the three-term limit rule? (2010 BAR)
The three-term limit for local elected officials is not violated when a local official wins in a recall election for mayor
after serving three full terms as mayor since the recall election is not considered an immediate reelection, it is not
counted for purposes of the 3-term limit. Term limits should be construed strictly to give the fullest possible effect
to the right of the electorate to choose their leaders. (Socrates v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 154512, November 12, 2002)
What is a public office?
A right, authority, or duty, created and conferred by law, by which for a given period either fixed by law or enduring
at the pleasure of the creating power, an individual is invested with some portion of the sovereign power of
government to be exercised by him for the benefit of the public [Fernandez v. Sto. Tomas, G.R. No. 116418 (1995)]
Page 23 of 32
What is the effect of filing a certificate of candidacy (COC) during the tenure of incumbency of an (a) appointive
official; (b) elective official?
Upon the filing of his COC, an appointed official is considered ipso facto resigned from his office, and such resignation
is irrevocable (Sec. 66 OEC) (2002 BAR). On the other hand, the filing of a COC by an elective official shall have no
effect. The candidate shall continue to hold office, whether he is running for the same or a different position (Sec.
14, Fair Elections Act expressly repealed Sec. 67 of BP 881).
Which groups may participate in party-list elections?
1) National parties or organizations - do not need to organize along sectoral lines and do not need to represent any
“marginalized and underrepresented” sector.
2) Regional parties or organizations - Political parties can participate in party-list elections provided they register
under the party-list system and do not field candidates in legislative district elections. A political party, whether
major or not, that fields candidates in legislative district elections can participate in partylist elections only through
its sectoral wing that can separately register under the party-list system. The sectoral wing is by itself an independent
sectoral party, and is linked to a political party through a coalition.
3) Sectoral parties or organizations - may either be “marginalized and underrepresented” or lacking in “well defined
political constituencies.” It is enough that their principal advocacy pertains to the special interest and concerns of
their sector. The sectors that are “marginalized and underrepresented” include labor, peasant, fisher folk, urban
poor, indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, veterans, and overseas workers. The sectors that lack “well-
defined political constituencies” include professionals, the elderly, women, and the youth. A majority of the
members of sectoral parties or organizations that represent the “marginalized and underrepresented” must belong
to the “marginalized and underrepresented” sector they represent. Similarly, a majority of the members of sectoral
parties or organizations that lack “well-defined political constituencies” must belong to the sector they represent.
The nominees of sectoral parties or organizations that represent the “marginalized and underrepresented,” or that
represent those who lack “well-defined political constituencies,” either must belong to their respective sectors, or
must have a track record of advocacy for their respective sectors. The nominees of national and regional parties or
organizations must be bona-fide members of such parties or organizations. As an additional guideline, national,
regional, and sectoral parties or organizations shall not be disqualified if some of their nominees are disqualified,
provided that they have at least one nominee who remains qualified. [Atong Paglaum v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 203766,
et al., April 2, 2013]
May an independent candidate be substituted?
NO. Section 77 of the Omnibus Election Code proscribes substitution for any independent candidate.
May an official candidate of a duly registered political party be substituted?
YES. As a general rule, no change of names or alteration of the order of nominees shall be allowed after the same
shall have been submitted to the COMELEC except in cases where the nominee dies, or withdraws in writing his
nomination, or becomes incapacitated. If the death, withdrawal, or disqualification occurs after the last day for filing
of COCs, substitution is allowed by a candidate belonging to, and nominated by, the same political party or coalition.
However, if the death, withdrawal, or disqualification occurs within the period for filing of COCs, substitution is no
longer allowed.
How is substitution done?
The substitute for a candidate who died or is disqualified by final judgment, may file a CoC up to mid-day of Election
Day; provided that, the substitute and the substituted have the same surnames.
Page 24 of 32
If the death or disqualification should occur between the day before the election and mid-day of Election Day, the
substitute candidate may file a CoC with any Board of Election Inspectors, Election Officers, Provincial Election
Supervisor, or Regional Election Director, as the case may be, in the political subdivision where such person is a
candidate, or in the case of a candidate for President, Vice-President or Senator, with the Law Department; Provided
that, the substitute and the substituted candidate have the same surnames. (COMELEC Resolution 9984, Aug. 18,
2015)
Is a valid COC a prerequisite to a valid substitution?
A disqualified candidate may only be substituted if he had a valid COC in the first place because, if the disqualified
candidate did not have a valid and seasonably filed COC, he is and was not a candidate at all. If a person was not a
candidate, he cannot be substituted under Sec. 77 of the OEC. If we were to allow the so-called "substitute" to file a
"new" and "original" COC beyond the period for the filing thereof, it would be a crystalline case of unequal protection
of the law. (Tagolino v. HRET and Lucy TorresGomez, G.R. No. 202202, March 19. 2013)
Who can be considered confidential employees?
They occupy positions which are primarily confidential. This denotes not only confidence in the aptitude of the
appointee for the duties of the office but primarily close intimacy which insures freedom of intercourse without
embarrassment or freedom from misgivings of betrayals of personal trust or confidential matters of state. [De los
Santos v. Mallare, G.R. No. L-3881 August 31, 1950]
Note: Positions which are either primarily confidential or policy determining are exempt from the requirement of
competitive examinations for
positions in the civil service.
What is the next in rank rule?
In promotions, the appointing authority must automatically consider the employees next in rank as candidates for
appointment. The next-in-rank rule is a rule of preference on who to consider for promotion. The rule does not give
employees next in rank a vested right to the position next higher to theirs should that position become vacant.81
Appointment is a discretionary power of the appointing authority. So long as the appointee possesses the
qualifications required by law, the appointment is valid. [Abad v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 207422, March 18, 2015]
Does the Ombudsman have disciplinary power over members of Congress?
No. The Ombudsman has no disciplinary power over the following [Sec. 21, RA 6770] (1) Officials who may be
removed only by impeachment (2) Members of Congress (3) Members of the Judiciary However, the Office of the
Ombudsman has the power to investigate any serious misconduct in office committed by officials removable by
impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted. [Sec. 22, RA 6770].
Petition for Disqualification
It is the remedy against any candidate who does not possess all the qualifications required by the Constitution or
law, or who commits any act declared by law to be grounds for disqualification. (Sec.1, Rule 25, COMELEC Rules of
Procedure)
What is the effect of disqualification?
If the final judgment was released before election, the candidate shall not be voted for, and the votes cast for him
shall not be counted. On the other hand, if no final judgment is released until after election and the candidate
receives the highest number of votes in the election, the Court or Commission shall continue with the trial and
Page 25 of 32
hearing of the action, inquiry or protest and upon motion of the complainant or any intervenor, may, during the
pendency thereof, order the suspension of the proclamation of such candidate whenever the evidence of his guilt is
strong.
What is the second-placer rule?
In a situation where the candidate who is the first-placer in an election has a void Coc, the candidate for the same
position who garnered the next highest vote shall be proclaimed as the winner. Technically, such candidate is the
first-placer for the reason that a void CoC cannot produce any legal effect and therefore, an ineligible candidate is
not considered a candidate at all. Knowledge by the electorate of a candidate’s disqualification is not necessary
before a qualified candidate who placed second to a disqualified one can be proclaimed as the winner. The
subsequent disqualification based on a substantive ground that existed prior to the filing of the CoC voids not only
the CoC but also the proclamation. (Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R No. 195649, April 16, 2013)
What will happen to the votes of the electorate for the ineligible candidate?
It will not be considered at all. However, even if it is disregarded, the will of the electorate is still respected because
the votes cast in favor of an eligible candidate do not constitute the sole and total expression of the sovereign voice.
(Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R No. 195649, April 16, 2013)
Post-election disputes
They are disputes which arise or are instituted after proclamation of winning candidates and which issues pertain to
the casting and counting of votes (Election Protests), or to the eligibility or disloyalty of the winning candidates (Quo
warranto).
What is a Quo warranto proceeding for an elective office?
It is a proceeding to determine the right to the use or exercise of an office and to oust the holder from its enjoyment,
if his claim is not well-founded or if he has forfeited his right to enjoy the privilege.
Are courtesy resignations valid?
A "courtesy resignation" cannot properly be interpreted as resignation in the legal sense for it is not necessarily a
reflection of a public official's intention to surrender his position. Rather, it manifests his submission to the will of
the political authority and the appointing power. Resignation is defined as the act of giving up or the act of an officer
by which he declines his office and renounces the further right to use it. To constitute a complete and operative act
of resignation, the officer or employee must show a clear intention to relinquish or surrender his position
accompanied by the act of relinquishment. Resignation implies an expression of the incumbent in some form,
express or implied, of the intention to surrender, renounce and relinquish the office, and its acceptance by
competent and lawful authority. [Ortiz v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 78957, June 28, 1988].
What is the Condonation Doctrine?
In essence the condonation doctrine states that since the penalty of removal may not be extended beyond the term
in which the public officer was elected for each term is separate and distinct, an elective official's re-election serves
as a condonation of previous misconduct, thereby cutting the right to remove him therefor. This is based on the
theory that courts may not deprive the electorate, who are assumed to have known the life and character of
candidates, of their right to elect officers. In Carpio-Morales v. Court of Appeals [G.R. Nos. 217126-27, November
10, 2015], the Court explicitly abandoned the condonation doctrine.
Page 26 of 32
What are the two branches of the general welfare clause?
The two branches are General Legislative Power and the Police Power Proper. The first authorizes the municipal
council to enact ordinances and make regulations not repugnant to law, as may be necessary to carry into effect and
discharge the powers and duties conferred upon the municipal council by law. The second authorizes the
municipality to enact ordinances as may be necessary and proper for the health and safety, prosperity, morals,
peace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the municipality and its inhabitants, and for the protection of their
property. (Rural Bank of Makati v. Municipality of Makati, July 2, 2004)
Differentiate the grounds for preventive suspension imposed on public officials under the Ombudsman Act and
the Local Government Code.
The Ombudsman can impose the 6-month preventive suspension to all public officials, whether elective or
appointive, who are under investigation. To justify the preventive suspension of a public official under Section 24,
R.A. No. 6770, the evidence of guilt should be strong, and a) the charge against the officer or employee should
involve dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty; b) the charges should
warrant removal from the service; or c) the respondent’s continued stay in office would prejudice the case filed
against him. Upon the other hand, in imposing the shorter period of 60 days of preventive suspension prescribed in
the LGC on an elective official (at any time after the issues are joined), it would be enough that a) there is reasonable
ground to believe that the respondent has committed the act or acts complained of, b) the evidence of culpability is
strong, c) the gravity of the offense so warrants, or d) the continuance in office of the respondent could influence
the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other evidence. [Hagad v. Gozo-Dadole,
G.R. No. 108072, December 12, 1995]
What is the extent of a mayor’s operational supervision and control over the police force, fire protection unit,
and jail management personnel assigned in the mayor’s jurisdiction?
“Operational supervision and control” shall mean the power to direct, superintend, and oversee the day-to-day
functions of police investigation of crime, crime prevention activities, and traffic control in accordance with the rules
and regulations promulgated by the Commission. It includes the power to direct the employment and deployment
of units or elements of the PNP, through the station commander, to ensure public safety and effective maintenance
of peace and order within the locality. [Section 62, R.A. No. 6975 (DILG Act)]
Who are disqualified from running for any elective local position?
The following persons are disqualified from running for any elective local position:
(a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one
(1) year or more of imprisonment, within two (2) years after serving sentence; (b) Those removed from office as a
result of an administrative case; (c) Those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to the
Republic; (d) Those with dual citizenship; (e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases here or abroad;
(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have acquired the right to reside abroad and continue to
avail of the same right after the effectivity of this Code; and (g) The insane or feeble-minded. [R.A. No. 7160, Section
40]
Is the conduct of plebiscite required in a legislative apportionment?
No. A plebiscite is not required in a legislative apportionment. The Constitution and the Local Government Code
expressly require a plebiscite to carry out any creation, division, merger, abolition or alteration of boundary of a local
Page 27 of 32
government unit. In contrast, no plebiscite requirement exists under the apportionment or reapportionment
provision.
Discuss briefly the power of LGUs to sue in behalf of the community it represents.
A municipality prejudiced by the action of another municipality is vested with the character of a juridical entity, is a
corporation of public interest endowed with the personality to acquire and hold property, contract obligations, and
bring civil and criminal actions in accordance with the laws governing its organization, and it is entitled to file claims
for the purpose of recovering damages, losses and injuries caused to the community it represents. (Municipality of
Mangaldan v. Municipality of Manaoag, G.R. No. L-11627, Aug. 10, 1918)
What are the requirements for a valid tax ordinance?
1. The tax is for a public purpose;

2. The rule on uniformity of taxation is observed;
3. Either the person or property taxed is within the jurisdiction of the government levying the tax; and
4. In the assessment and collection of certain kinds of taxes, notice and opportunity for hearing are provided. (Pepsi-
Cola Bottling Co. v. Municipality of Tanauan, G.R. No. L-31156, February 27, 1976)
State the rule on liability of LGUs
As a general rule, municipalities are not liable for torts committed by them in the discharge of governmental
functions. By way of exception, they are liable only if it can be shown that they were acting in a proprietary capacity.
Page 28 of 32
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
What is sovereign immunity?
The result of independence, territorial supremacy, and equality. A state shall enjoy immunity from the exercise of
jurisdiction by another state, except when it has given its consent or submitted voluntarily to the jurisdiction of the
state concerned. A state enjoys immunity in respect of itself and its property, from the jurisdiction of the courts of
another state subject to the provisions of the present Convention [UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of
States and Their Property, 2004].
What is the rule on use of force in international relations?
All [United Nations] Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of
the United Nations [Article 2(4), UN Charter].
What is the rule on self-defense in international relations?
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed
attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to
maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence
shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility
of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to
maintain or restore international peace and security [Article 51, UN Charter].
What are the privileges and immunities of a diplomatic agent?
1. The person of a diplomatic agent shall be inviolable. He shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. The
receiving State shall treat him with due respect and shall take all appropriate steps to prevent any attack on his
person, freedom or dignity [Article 29, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR)].
2. The private residence of a diplomatic agent shall enjoy the same inviolability and protection as the premises of
the mission. 3. His papers, correspondence and, except as provided in paragraph 3 of article 31, his property, shall
likewise enjoy inviolability [Article 30, VCDR].
Immunities:
1. A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State.
He shall also enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction, except in the case of: a. A real action
relating to private immovable property situated in the territory of the receiving State, unless he holds it on behalf of
the sending State for the purposes of the mission; b. An action relating to succession in which the diplomatic agent
is involved as executor, administrator, heir or legatee as a private person and not on behalf of the sending State; c.
An action relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent in the receiving State
outside his official functions.
2. A diplomatic agent is not obliged to give evidence as a witness. 3. No measures of execution may be taken in
respect of a diplomatic agent except in the cases coming under subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 of this
article, and provided that the measures concerned can be taken without infringing the inviolability of his person or
of his residence. 4. The immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt
him from the jurisdiction of the sending State.
What is a jus cogens norm or peremptory norm of international law, and what is the status of a treaty provision
which conflicts with such a norm?
Page 29 of 32
A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law
peremptory norm of general international law is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community
of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a
subsequent norm of general international law having the same character [Article 53, Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties]
What is extradition? The principles of dual criminality and specialty?
The practice of extradition enables one state to hand over to another state suspected or convicted criminals who
have fled to the territory of the former. It is based upon bilateral treaty law and does not exist as an obligation upon
states in customary law. It is usual to derive from existing treaties on the subject certain general principles, for
example that of double criminality, i.e. that the crime involved should be a crime in both states concerned, and that
of specialty, i.e. a person surrendered may be tried and punished only for the offence for which extradition had been
sought and granted [Shaw, International Law].
Who are stateless persons?
For the purpose of this Convention, the term “stateless person” means a person who is not considered as a national
by any State under the operation of its law (Article 1(1), 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons).
What are the elements before one may be considered as a refugee?
1. The person is Outside the country of his nationality, or in the case of Stateless persons, outside the country of
habitual residence; 2. The person lacks National protection; 3. The person fears Persecution in his own country.
The second element makes a refugee a Stateless person. Only a person who is granted asylum by another State can
apply for refugee status; thus the refugee treaties imply the principle of asylum.
Who are considered participants in a war?
Under international law, there are two classifications of participants in a war. These are combatants and
noncombatants. Combatants are those who engage directly in the hostilities, while Non-combatants are those who
do not engage directly in the hostilities, such as women and children.
What are combatants?
Combatants are those individuals who are legally entitled to take part in hostilities. These include:
1. Regular Forces (RF) – members of the armed forces except those not actively engaged in combat. These are the
army, navy, and air force. Non-combatant members of the armed forces include: chaplains, army services and
medical personnel. 2. Irregular Forces (IF) – also known as franctireurs consist of militia and voluntary corps. These
are members of organized resistance groups, such as the guerrillas. They are treated as lawful combatants provided
that they are: a. Being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; b. Wearing a fixed distinctive sign
or some type of uniform;
c Carrying arms openly; and d. Obeying the laws and customs of war. 2. Non-privileged Combatants (NPC) –
individuals who take up arms or commit hostile acts against the enemy without belonging to the armed forces or
forming part of the irregular forces. If captured, they are not entitled to the status of prisoners of war. 3. Citizens
who rise in a “levee en masse” – The inhabitants of unoccupied territory who, on approach of the enemy,
spontaneously take arms to resist the invading troops without having time to organize themselves, provided only
that they: a. Carry arms openly; and b. Observe the laws and customs of war. 4. The officers and crew members of
merchant vessels who forcibly resist attack.
Page 30 of 32
Define the principle of postliminium.
The principle of postlminium provides for the revival or reversion to the old laws and sovereignty of territory which
has been under belligerent occupation once control of the belligerent occupant is lost over the territory affected.
Define the principle of uti possidetis.
The principle of uti possidetis allows retention of property or territory in the belligerent’s actual possession at the
time of the cessation of hostilities
Jus ad bellum (Law on the use of force)
It seeks to limit resort to force between States. States must refrain from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of another state (Art. 2, par. 4, UN Charter).
Exceptions to this principle are provided in case of self-defense or following a decision adopted by the UN Security
Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
Status Quo Ante Bellum
Each of the belligerents is entitled to the territory and property which it had possession of at the commencement of
the war.
Who are stateless persons?

For the purpose of this Convention, the term “stateless person” means a person who is not considered as a national
by any State under the operation of its law (Article 1(1), 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons).
What is the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)?
According to Art. 36 of the ICJ Statute, the jurisdiction of the Court comprises all cases which the parties refer to it
and all matters specially provided for in the Charter of the United Nations or in treaties and conventions in force. In
the event of a dispute as to whether the Court has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by the decision of the
Court.
Define a treaty under international law.
Under Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a treaty means an international agreement
concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single
instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.
Define innocent passage.
Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Passage
of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in
the territorial sea it engages in any of the following activities: (a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty,
territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any other manner in violation of the principles
of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations; (b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any
kind; (c) any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal State; (d)
any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State; (e) the launching, landing or
taking on board of any aircraft; (f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device; (g) the loading or
unloading of any commodity, currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and
regulations of the coastal State; (h) any act of willful and serious pollution contrary to this Convention; (i) any fishing
activities; (j) the carrying out of research or survey activities; (k) any act aimed at interfering with any systems of
Page 31 of 32
communication or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State; (l) any other activity not having a direct
bearing on passage.
What are the two elements of customary international law?
International customary rules are accepted as binding as a result from the combination of two elements: the
established, widespread, and consistent practice on the part of States; and a psychological element known as the
opinion juris sive necessitates (opinion as to law or necessity). Implicit in the latter element is a belief that the
practice in question is rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule of law requiring it. [Poe-Llamanzares v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697 (2016)]
What is the precautionary principle?
The Precautionary Principle is provided under Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration. It states that in order to protect
the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where
there are threats of serious damage, lack of full scientific certainly shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-
effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
What is the Polluter Pays Principle?
The Polluter Pays Principle means that the party responsible for producing the pollutants must bear responsibility
for shouldering the costs of the damage done to the environment.
The Rome Statute accords the International Criminal Court jurisdiction over which crimes?
The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community
as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The
crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. [Rome Statute,
Art. 5]
What laws apply in cases before the ICC?
In the first place, the Rome Statute applies. In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the
principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed
conflict shall apply. Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of
the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the
crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and
internationally recognized norms and standards.
Explain the Doctrine of Command Responsibility
Under Article 28 of the Rome Statute, a military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander
shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her
effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure
to exercise control properly over such forces, where:
1. That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should
have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and
2. That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or
her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities
for investigation and prosecution.
Page 32 of 32

Political Law Pre Week Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Political Law Pre Week Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRE WEEK NOTES IN POLITICAL LAW

What is the Archipelagic Doctrine?

When is a suit against the State?

A suit is not against the State:

Who are citizens of the Philippines?

The following are citizens of the Philippines:

Who are natural born citizens?

Are foundlings natural-born citizens?

When is there a violation of the principle of separation of powers?

What is the principle of delegata potestas non potest delegari?

Exceptions to the rule of nondelegation of powers:

Distinguish between a De jure government and a De facto government.

What are the kinds of a de facto government? Discuss each.

What is the composition of the HRET?

When can the HRET assume jurisdiction over an election contest?

What are the elements of presidential communications privilege?

What is a pocket veto?

Are there pocket vetoes in the Philippines?

There are three requisites to acquire a new domicile:

1. There must be invasion or rebellion;

1. There must be actual invasion or rebellion;

State the guidelines for the declaration of martial law.

1. There must be an Invasion or Rebellion, and

Who can challenge the constitutionality of the declaration of Martial Law?

What is the extent of the President’s power to pardon?

1. Under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate;

What is the doctrine of incorporation?

Does the operative fact doctrine apply to executive acts?

What is the faithful execution clause?

Classes of legislative power

Limitations on the legislative power of Congress

1. Substantive - limitations on the content of laws.

How are legislative districts apportioned?

May reapportionment of legislative districts be effected thru a special law?

1. If it is signed into law by the President; or

Limitations on party list representation

Voting requirements in Impeachment Proceedings

Instances when Congress is voting jointly

What is the nature of suspension under the Anti-Graft Law?

What is the composition of each? (2006 BAR)

What are the rules on voting in the Commission on Appointments?

State the limitations in the confirmation of appointment.

Discuss the Doctrine of Shifting Majority

Limitations on legislative investigation

1. The persons appearing in or affected by such legislative inquiries shall be respected.

What is the Doctrine of Augmentation? (1996, 1998 BAR)

Non-legislative functions of Congress

1. Power to canvass the presidential elections

Enumerate the grounds for impeachment.

1. Culpable violation of the Constitution

1. Authority to appoint and evidence of the exercise of the authority;

Explain the procedure of impeachment after a verified complaint is filed.

Does the prohibition on midnight appointments apply to all kinds of appointments?

Does the prohibition on midnight appointments apply to the Judiciary?

Is the President vested with disciplinary authority over the Ombudsman?

a. It cannot be granted in cases of impeachment;

The following are the distinctions between pardon and amnesty:

1. There is a War or other national emergency;

What is judicial power?

What is a political question?

Can decisions of the PET be appealed to the Supreme Court?

What is the Deliberative Process Privilege?

What is the principle of Judicial Restraint?

Guarantees of independence provided for by the Constitution to the 3 Commissions