Political and International Law Review1

Ricardo A. Sunga III2

ricardo.sunga@dlsu.edu.ph

1st Semester 2020-2021

I. Description

This course considers the range of topics of political and

international law, in preparation for the bar exam. The focus is
on the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the legal philosophy
that underpins its provisions. The case method will be used
extensively. The students will be asked to read Philippine
Supreme Court cases and other materials. Graded recitation will

1
I am grateful to Prof. Victoria V. Loanzon on whose syllabus some portions of this course
outline are based.
2
Ricardo A. Sunga III, BS ME (Ateneo de Manila University), LLB (University of the
Philippines) and LLM (University of New South Wales), is a Member and former Chair-
Rapporteur of the United Nations Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent,
Special Procedures of the United Nations Human Rights Council,
http://ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Racism/WGAfricanDescent/Pages/Members.aspx and
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=54418#.V6U4jNJ97Mw viewed 6 August
2016. His research interests include the international human rights law on torture and enforced
disappearances. See, for example, Ricardo A. Sunga III, ‘The Committee on Enforced
Disappearances and Its Monitoring Procedures’ (2012), 17(1) Deakin Law Review 151, available
at http://www.deakin.edu.au/buslaw/law/dlr/docs/vol17-iss1/vol17-1-6.pdf, viewed 7 November
2012, ISSN 1 321-3660, Ricardo A. Sunga III, ‘On Locating the Rights of Lost’ (2012), 45(4)
John Marshall Law Review 1051, available at http://lawreview.jmls.edu/articles/show/54, viewed
22 November 2012, and Ricardo A. Sunga III, ‘Protecting the Children of the Lost’ (2012), 86(4)
Philippine Law Journal 796, available at http://plj.upd.edu.ph/protecting-the-children-of-the-
lost/, viewed 29 May 2013..
follow. Other class activities will be held to provide
opportunities for critical reflection.

II. Learning Outcomes

At the end of the course, it is hoped that students will be able to:

1. Articulate the law and the legal doctrines enunciated in

relevant Supreme Court cases
2. Apply the law and legal doctrines in specific cases
3. Formulate legal arguments based on the constitution and
international law
4. Demonstrate critical thinking by making commentary on
developments in political and international law
5. Excel in the political and international law bar exam by
providing appropriate answers to bar exam questions
6. Contribute meaningfully to society as exceptional La
Sallian lawyers with a bias for the poor and vulnerable

III. Outline

A.General Matters
1. Recent Cases
2. Separation of Powers
3. Checks and Balances
4. Judicial Review
5. Citizenship
6. Fundamental Powers of the State
B.Legislative Branch
 1. Legislative powers
2. Undue delegation of legislative powers: completeness
test and sufficient standard test
3. Inquiry in aid of legislation
4. Impeachment
C.Executive Branch
1. Qualified political agency
2. Commander-in-chief
a. Martial law proclamation and suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
b. Calling out
3. Chief administrator – appointment
4. General supervision over local governments
5. Executive clemency
D.Judicial Branch
1. Judicial review
2. Judicial and bar council
3. Presidential Electoral Tribunal
E. Bill of Rights
1. Due process
2. Right to privacy
3. Equal protection
4. Right against unreasonable searches and seizures
5. Freedom of expression
6. Right to travel
F. Other Provisions
1. Social justice, urban land reform and housing, health,
and people’s organizations
2. Education, right to quality education and academic
freedom
3. Family
 4. Administrative and election law
5. Constitutional commissions
6. Ombudsman
7. Autonomy of local governments

IV. Grading System

 Participation 40%
◦ Recitation, posts and other activities
 Midterm Exam 30%
 Final Exam 30%

V. Grading Scale

100-99 4
98-99 3.75
96-95 3.50
94-93 3.25
92-91 3.00
90-89 2.75
88-87 2.50
86-85 2.25
84-83 2.00
82-81 1.75
80-79 1.50
78-77 1.25
76-75 1.00
 VI. Rubrics

RUBRIC FOR ORAL PRESENTATIONS

(A) Sophisticated (B) Competent (C/D) Gaining

Competence

Presentation Slides are error-free Slides are largely error- Slides contain errors
and logically present free and logically and lack a logical
the main components present the main progression.
of the term paper and components of the
recommendations. term paper and Major aspects of the
recommendations. analysis or

recommendations are

absent.

Visual Aids Text and material are Text and material are Text is too small and
readable and the mostly readable and diagrams or graphics
graphics highlight and graphics reiterate the confuse the audience.
support the main ideas.
main ideas.

Oral Presentation Speakers are audible Speakers are mostly Speakers are often
and fluent on their audible and fluent on
inaudible or hesitant,
topic, and do not rely their topic, and require
on notes to present or minimal referral to often speaking in
respond. notes. Speakers
respond incomplete sentences.
Speakers respond
accurately and to most questions Speakers rely heavily on
appropriately to accurately and notes. Speakers have
audience questions and appropriately. difficulty responding
comments. clearly and accurately
to

audience questions.

Body Language Body language, as Body language, as Body language, as

 indicated by indicated by a slight indicated by frequent,
appropriate tendency to repetitive
and distracting gestures repetitive, and
and meaningful distracting gestures,
(e.g., tapping a pen,
gestures wringing hands, waving little or no audience eye
contact, and/or stiff
(e.g., drawing hands arms, clenching fists,
etc.) and breaking eye posture and movement,
inward to convey indicate a high degree
contact with audience,
demonstrates a slight of discomfort
contraction, moving interacting with
discomfort with the
arms up to convey lift, audience.
etc.), eye contact with audience.
audience, and
movement,
demonstrates a high
level of comfort and

connection with the

audience.

Timing Presentation is Presentation runs over Presentation runs well

completed with enough the allotted time. over the allotted time.
time left for audience
questions.

RUBRIC FOR WRITTEN WORK

(A) Excellent (B) Very Good (C) Gaining (D) Not Yet
Competence Competent

Creativity and You exceed the You meet all the You meet most of You do not meet
Originality parameters of the the parameters of the parameters of
assignment, with parameters of the the assignment. the assignment.

original insights or assignment.

a particularly
engaging style.

Argument Your central Your central Your central Your central

 argument is clear, argument is clear argument argument
interesting, and and demonstrable.
is demonstrable is unclear or it is
demonstrable The claims made but not entirely not demonstrable.
(i.e.,based in the body of clear. A few of the The claims made
your paper support claims made in the in the body of your
on evidence, not your central body of paper do not
opinion). The argument. Your support your
claims made in the arguments and your paper do not central argument.
body of your paper claims reflect a clearly support Your arguments
clearly solid your and claims reflect
understanding of little
and obviously central argument.
key understanding of
support your
Your arguments key ideas from this
central argument. ideas from this
and claims reflect course.
course.
Your arguments some
Arguments
and claims reflect a
understanding of contradict each
robust and nuanced
key ideas from other.
understanding of
key ideas from this this course.
course.

Evidence The evidence you The evidence you Some of the Little of the
use is specific, rich, use supports your evidence evidence
varied, and claims. Quotations
unambiguously and you use does not you use supports
supports your support your your claims. Few
claims. illustrations are claims. Some of of the quotations
framed reasonably the quotations and illustrations
Quotations and effectively and are framed
explicated and illustrations effectively or
illustrations are appropriately in are not framed
framed effectively the text. effectively or explicated
and explicated appropriately in
explicated the text.
appropriately in the appropriately in
text. Secondary sources the text.
include several
academic books Secondary sources
and journals are mostly from
Secondary sources More secondary news articles and
are mostly from sources are from websites
academic books news articles and
and journals. websites than
academic books
and journals
Structure Your ideas are The reader can The reader cannot The reader cannot
presented in a always follow the follow the
logical and follow the structure of your structure of
coherent manner structure of your argument.
throughout the argument with your argument.
paper, with strong very little effort.
topic sentences to
guide the

reader. The reader

can effortlessly
follow the

structure of your

argument.

Clarity Your sentences are The reader can The reader cannot The reader cannot
concise and well discern your always discern discern your
crafted, and the meaning with very your meaning. meaning.
vocabulary is little effort.
precise; the reader
can effortlessly
discern your
meaning.

Mechanics There are no There are few There are some There are
distracting significant
distracting distracting
spelling, spelling, spelling, and distracting
punctuation, or punctuation,
punctuation, and/or spelling,
grammatical errors, and/or punctuation,
and grammatical grammatical
errors, and errors, and/or or grammatical
quotations are all quotations are some of the
properly cited. errors, and/or the
all properly cited. quotations are not quotations are
properly cited.
improperly cited.
 VII. Secondary Sources

Joaquin Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A

Commentary (Rex Bookstore, 2009)

Philip Alston and Ryan Goodman, International Human Rights (OUP, Oxford,
2013)

Lyudmila Spector, ‘Classification of Crimes in the Sphere of Administration of

Justice’ (2016), 3(6) Journal of Scientific Research and Development 11

Rocio Comas, ‘Gender Invisibility and the Best Interests of the Child in the
Administration of Justice: Analysis of the Request for House Arrest by Ana Maria
Fernandez’ (EIUC Thesis Awarded 2014/2015)

Andrzej Borowski, ‘Confidence in Social Institutions in Post-Communist

Counties’ (2014), 25 International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 7.

VIII.Schedule

Session One

A. General

Falcis v Civil Registrat, G.R. No. 217910, 3 September 2019

Inmates v Secretary of Justice, G. R. No. 212719, 25 June 2019
Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado, Supreme Court of the US, 584 US, 4 June
2018
Republic v Sereno, G. R. No. 237428, 11 May 2018
Celdran v People, G. R. No. 220127, 21 March 2018
Lagman v Medialdea, G. R. No. 231658, 4 July 2017
Ocampo v Enriquez, G. R. No. 225973, 8 November 2016
Arroyo v People. G.R. No. 220598, 19 July 2016
Poe v COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, 8 March 2016
Carpio-Morales v Binay, G.R. Nos. 217126-27, November 10, 2015
Enrile v Sandiganbayan, G. R. No. 213847, 18 August 2015
Disini v Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 203335, 18 February 2014
SJS v DDB, G. R. No. 157870, 3 November 2008
Lambino v. COMELEC, 505 SCRA 160
Ampatuan, Jr. v. De Lima et. al., G.R. No. 197291, April 3, 2013
Republic v. Bayao et. al., G.R. no. 179492, June 5, 2013
Angara v. Electoral Tribunal, 63 Phil. 139, 158 (1936)
Pimentel v. Joint Committee of Congress, G.R. No. 163783, June 22, 2004
Belgica et. al. v. Executive Secretary et. al. G.R.No. 208566, Alcantara et. al. v.
Drilon et. al. G.R. No. 208493, and Nepomuceno et. al. v. Pres. Aquino et. al.,
G.R. No.209251, Nov. 19, 2013
BOCEA v. Hon. Teves, G.R. No. 181704, December 6, 2011
Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary et al., G.R. No. 196425, July
24, 2012
Banda et al. v. Ermita, G.R. No. 166620, April 20, 2010
Judge Angeles v. Hon. Gaite et al., G.R. no. 176596, March 23, 2011
Hacienda Luisita v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, G.R. No. 171101,
November 22, 2011
Isagani Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, G. R. No. 135385, Dec. 6, 2000
Frivaldo v. COMELEC, 257 SCRA 727
Qua Chee Gan v. Deportation Board, 9 SCRA 27 (1963)
Republic v. Batugas, G.R. No. 183110, October 7, 2013
DOJ Secretary v. et. al. v. Pennisi, G.R. No. 169958
Republic v. Karry Lao Ong, G.R. No. 175430, June 18, 2012
Republic v. Li Ching Chung, G.R. No. 197450, March 20, 2013
Sobejana-Condon v. COMELEC et al., G.R. no. 198742, August 10, 2012
Macquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649, April 16, 2013.
In Re: Petition to Re-acquire Privilege to Practice Law, Epifanio Muneses, A.M.
No.2112, July 24, 2012
Nicolas- Lewis v. COMELEC , 497 SCRA 649

Session Two

Lim v. Pacquing, 240 SCRA 649

SURNECO v. Energy Regulatory Commission, G.R. No. 183626, October 4, 2010
CREBA v. DAR Secretary, G.R. No. 183409, June 18, 2010
MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Assn. 328 SCRA 836
Moday v. C. A. 268 SCRA 586
Land Bank of the Philippines v. Yatco Agricultural Enterprises, G.R. No. 172551,
January 15, 2014
Manila Memorail Park et al. v. DSWD Secretary et al., G.R. no. 175356,
December 3, 2013
Smart Communications v. Municipality of Malvar, Batangas, G.R. No. 204429,
February 2014
Com. of Internal Revenue v. S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc., 309 SCRA 87
Dept. of Agriculture v. NLRC, 227 SCRA
Department of Health et al. v.Phil. Pharmawealth, Inc. G.R. No. 182358, February
20, 2013
Air Transportation Office v. Spouses Ramos, G.R. No. 159402, February 23. 2011.
Yujuico. Atienza, 472 SCRA 463
City of Manila v. Alegar Corporation et al., G.R. No. 187604, June 25, 2012
Quarto v. Ombudsman et al., G.R. No. 169042, October 12, 2011
Chavez v. Sandiganbayan, 193 SCRA 282

Session Three

B. Legislative Branch

Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC, G.R.No. 190582, April 8, 2010

PGBI v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 190529, April 29, 2010
Magdalo v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 190793, June 19, 2012
Demetria v. Alba, G. R. No. L-45129, March 6, 1987
Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1
Gutierrez v. House of Representatives, G. R. No. Feb. 15, 2011
Chief Justice Corona v. Senate of the Philippines et al., G.R. No.200242, July 17,
2012
Reyes v. COMELEC and Tan, G.R. No. 207264, June 25, 2013

C. Executive Branch

Macalintal v. PET, G.R. No. 191618, June 11, 2011

Ople v. Torres, 293 SCRA 141(1998)
Fortich v. Corona, 298 SCRA 678(1998)
Joson v. Executive Secretary, 290 SCRA 279(1998)
De Castro v. JBC, G.R. No. 191002, March 17, 2010
People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56 (1937)
Tesoro v. Director of Prisons, 68 Phil. 154 (1939)
Tolentino v. Catoy, 82 Phil. 300 (1948)
Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, 82 Phil. 642 (1949)
Cristobal v. Labrador, 71 Phil. 34 (1940)
Pelobello v. Palatino, 72 Phil. 441 (1941)
In Re: Wilfredo S. Torres, 2 SCRA 109
Ampatuan et al. v. Hon. Puno, et al., G.R. No. 190259, June 7, 2011
Arthur Lim et al v. Executive Secretary GR No. 131445, April 11, 2002
Harvey et al v. Defensor-Santiago, 162 SCRA 1988
The Board of Commissioners v. Jung Keun Park, G.R. No. 159835

Session Four

D. Judicial Branch

De los Santos v. COA, G.R. No.198457, August 13, 2013

Macalintal v. PET, G.R. No.191618, November 23, 2010
Legarda v. De Castro 542 SCRA, 125

E. Bill of Rights

Acuzar v. Jarolan and Apresa PLEB, G.R. No. 177878, April 7, 2010
Winston F. Garcia v. Molina and Velasco, G.R. No. 157383, August 10, 2010
The Heirs of Jolly Bugarin v. Republic, G.R. No. 174431, August 6, 2012
Carbonel v. CSC, G.R. No. 187689, September 7, 2010
Velasco v. Sandiganbayan and the People of the Philippines, G. R. No. 169253,
February 20, 2013
Viveres and Suzara v. St. Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 202666, September 29,
2014.
Garcia v. Hon. Drilon et al., G.R. No. 179267, June 25, 2013
NAPOCOR v. Pinatubo Commercial, G. R. no. 179006, March 26, 2010
Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth Commission of 2010 et al., G.R.Nos.192935 and
193036, December 7, 2010
Stonehill v. Diokno, 20 SCRA 388 (1967)
People v. Belocura, G.R. No. 173474, August 29, 2012
People v. Ronaldo de Guzman, G.R. No. 186498, March 26, 2010
HPS Software and Communication Corp. and Yap v. PLDT, et al., G.R. No.
170217, 170694, December 10, 2012
Sales v. People, G.R.No. 191023, February 6, 2013
People v. Ngik Bun, Kwok Wai Cheng et al., G.R. No. 180452, January 10, 2011
People v. Buenaventura G.R. No. 184807, November 23, 2011
Fajardo v. People, G.R. no. 190889, January 10, 2011
United Laboratories, Inc. v. Isip, 461 SCRA 574 (2005)
Valmonte v. De Villa, 178 SCRA 211 (1989)
People v. Dequina et al., G.R. no. 177570, January 19, 2011
People v. Johnson, 348 SCRA (2000)
People v. Macarios, G.R. no. 188611, June 16, 2010
People v. Marti, 193 SCRA 57 (1991)
Pollo v. Chairperson Constantino-David, et al., G.R. No. 181881, October 18,
2011
In re: Macasaet, 561 SCRA 395
Flor v. People, 454 SCRA 440(2005)
Vasquez v. Court of Appeals, 314 SCRA 460
Social Weather Station v. COMELEC, 357 SCRA 504 (2001)
Soriano v. Laguardia, 587 SCRA 79
Gonzales v. Kalaw- Katigbak, 137 SCRA 717
David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, 489 SCRA 160 (2006)
Southern Hemisphere Engagement Network, Inc., v. Anti-Terrorism Council, et al.,
G.R. No.178552, October 5, 2010
GMA Network, Inc. v. Bustos, 504 SCRA 638 (2006)
Binay v. Secretary of Justice, 501 SCRA 312 (2006)

Session Five

OCA v. Judge Ignacio B. Macarine, A.M. No. MTJ-10-1770, July 18, 2012
Gudani v. Senga, 498 SCRA 671 (2006)
Fr. Roberto P. Reyes v. Sec. Gonzales, G. R. No. 182161, December 31, 2009
CENPEG v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 189546, September 21, 2010
Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1 (2006)
Neri v. Senate Committees 549 SCRA 77 (2008)
Antolin v. Abelardo R. Domondon, et al., G.R. No. 165036. July 5, 2010
Bayan Muna v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 226 (2006)
IBP v. Mayor Atienza, G.R. No.175241, Feb. 24, 2010
GSIS and Garcia v. Villaviza et al., G. R. No. 180291, July 27, 2010
People v. Lucero, G.R. No. 188705, March 2, 201
Ho Wai Ping v. People, G.R. No. 176229, October 19, 2011
People v. Lauga, G.R. No. 186228, 15 March 2010

Session Six

Disini v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180564, June 22, 2010

Roquero v. The Chancellor, U.P. College of Manila, G.R. no. 181851, March
9,2010
Dela Peña v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 412 Phil. 921, 929 (2001)
Fortun and Angeles v. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, G.R. No. 190293, March 20,
2012
In the Matter of Petition for Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data in Favor of Noriel
H. Rodriguez v. Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805, 193160, November
15, 2011
Viveres and Suzara v. St. Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 202666, September 29, 2014
People v. Dante Tan G.R. No. 167526, July 26, 2010
Braza v. Sandiganbayan, G. R. No. 195032, February 20, 2013
Lejano v. People, G.R. Nos. 176389 and 176864, January 18, 2011
People v. C.A.., G.R. No. 198589, July 25, 2012
Bangayan, Jr., v. Bangayan, G.R. no. 172777, October 19, 2011
People v. Balao, et al., G.R. 176819, January 26, 2011

Session Seven

F. Other Provisions

Calalang v. Williams, 70 Phil. 726 (1940)

Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792
MMDA v. Concerned Citizens of Manila Bay
Miriam College v. CA, 348SCRA 215
University of San Agustin v. CA 270 SCRA 761
Ateneo v. Capulong 222 SCRA 643
Imbong et. al. v. Ochoa et. al. (Consolidated Petitions) G.R. No. 204819, April 8,
2013
Emilio A. Gonzales III v. Office of the President, etc., et al./Wendell Bareras-Sulit
v. Atty. Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr., et al., G.R. No. 196231/G.R. No. 196232, January
28, 2014
People v. Luis Morales, G.R. No. 166355, May 30, 2011
BANAT V. COMELEC, 592 SCRA 294
Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC, G. R. No, 190852, April 8, 2010
Macquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649, July 2, 2013
DBP v. COA, 373 SCRA 356
Ramon R. Yap vs. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 158562, April 23, 2010
Vivas v. BSP and the PDIC, G.R. No. 191424, August 7, 2013
Republic v. MERALCO, 391 SCRA 700(2002)

Session Eight

Aldaba v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 188078, March 15, 2010

Sen. Aquino and Mayor Robredo v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 189793, April 7, 2010
Legaspi v. City of Cebu, G.R. No. 159692, December 10, 2013
Municipality of Tiwi et al. v. Betito, G.R. no. 171873, July 9, 2010
Land Bank v. Cacayuran, G.R. No. 191667, April 17, 2013
The Learning Child et al. v. Ayala Alabang Village Association, et al., G.R. No.
176885, July 5, 2010
Greenhills East Association v. E. Ganzon, Inc., G.R. No. 169741, January 20,
2010
The Province of Negros Occidental v. COA, G.R. No. 182574, September 28, 2010
Bayan Muna v. Romulo and Ople, G.R. No. 159618, February 1, 2011