Ma. Angela M.

Torres LEGRES G03

11981229

Topic: The Maria Clara Doctrine

The Maria Clara doctrine was first introduced to Philippine jurisprudence after the
resolution of the People v. Taño case which occurred in 1960. The doctrine is also known as the
“Woman’s Honor” doctrine and is utilized in cases concerning abuse against women, particularly
cases of rape. When applied, this legal doctrine asserts the belief that “women, especially
Filipinos, would not admit that they have been abused unless that abuse had actually
happened.”1 However, in February 2018, the Third Division of the Supreme Court decided to
forego the application of the Maria Clara doctrine in their reversal of a ruling by a Davao court
which convicted two people of rape. The ponente of the decision, Associate Justice Samual
Martires, chronicled that the doctrine “put the accused at an unfair disadvantage,”2 and called
for a more contemporary approach and the “acceptance of the realities of a woman’s dynamic
role in Philippine society.”3 Public outcry from several women’s rights groups followed the
reversal of the ruling, claiming that this decision from the Third Division would prompt more
cases of violent sexual attacks against women. The main question to be asked in this topic is
should the Maria Clara doctrine be abandoned or modified to better fit the way of the Modern
Filipina?

Topic: The constitutionality of the use of police power by Local Government Units to
prohibit Home Births
In 2008, Administrative Order No. 2008-0029 was issued by the Department of Health,
this order was entitled “Implementing Health Reforms for Rapid Reduction of Maternal and
Neonatal Mortality.” Essentially, the order aspired to promote child births in medical facilities in
order to respond to the Millennium Development Goal of increasing the accessibility to
healthcare services, and to lower maternal and neonatal mortality. 4 In response to the order
given by the DOH, a number of Local Government Units sanctioned the prohibition of home
births for expecting mothers through the exercise of police power duly sanctioned by the Local
Government Code under the General Welfare Clause located therein. The issue to be explored
within this topic is the constitutionality of the LGU-sanctioned prohibitions regarding home births.

Topic: The residual powers of the President and the judicial consistency in the
application of these powers
There are two cases to be explored in this topic, that of Marcos v. Manglapus and
Ocampo v. Enriquez. Both cases exhibit the residual powers that the President is entrusted
with, far more than those that have been expressly stated in the Constitution. The two cases
portray how two presidents, Cory Aquino and Rodrigo Duterte, used their residual power to
keep Ferdinand E. Marcos out of the country at the time of his imminent death, and in the

1
​People vs. Taño, G.R. No. L-11991, October 31, 1960.
2
​Cawilan, Christopher Lloyd. ​"SC acquits 2 men of rape charges"​. Philippine News Agency.
3
​Cawilan, Christopher Lloyd. ​"SC acquits 2 men of rape charges"​. Philippine News Agency.
4
​A.O. 2008-0029, gen. princ.
country for the duration of his afterlife. But, while the Presidents used their executive power in
order to implement the exile and the eternal repose of Ferdinand E. Marcos, the judiciary
exercised their heavy power of judicial review to determine what law gave them that power, and
what law had been breached when Marcos was finally allowed to lay in the Hero’s Cemetery.
The main issue to be explored in this topic is the legality of the exercise of the executive power
that had once prohibited a man to die in his home country, and 27 years later with the same
exercise of that executive power, allowed him to repose eternally in the nation’s cemetery for
heroes.5

5
​Ateneo Law Journal. April 2018.