ASSIGNMENT LEGAL RESEARCH

1. what does self-executing provision mean in the constitution? Are all of the provisions of the
constitution self-executing? If not, should they all be self-executing?

A constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred and the
liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself so that they can be determined by an
examination and construction of its terms, and there is no language indicating that the subject is
referred to the legislature for action (MANILA PRINCE HOTEL VS GSIS)
Generally, all provisions in the constitution are considered self-executory except for Article 2 of
the 1987 Constitution as Art 2 provisions lay down general principles that are not self-executing.
Should all provisions be self-executory, it creates an imbalance between the government and
their people as some provisions could be broad and confusing to interpret which makes them
restrictive. In some cases, the evaluation of the legislation is situationally needed although not
necessary to help the courts determine and further understand the provisions being executed in
some cases that may require further legislation

2. Distinguish the two schools of thought in interpreting the constitution as elucidated in the
following cases: Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, Mar. 8, 2016 & Lagman v.
Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658, July 4, 2017

In the case Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, it was ruled in this case that GRACE POE is
considerably a natural-born Filipino Citizen. For that, she satisfied the constitutional requirement
that only natural-born Filipinos may run for Presidency. The court also ruled that there is high
probability that Poe’s parents are Filipinos, as being shown in her physical features which are
typical of Filipinos, aside from the fact that she was found as an infant in Jaro, Iloilo, a
municipality wherein there is 99% probability that residents there are Filipinos, consequently
providing 99% chance that Poe’s bilogical parents are Filipinos (POE-LLamanzares v.
COMELEC)

In the case of Lagman vs Medialdea, it was ruled that the Court emphasized that: It was
the collective sentiment of the framers of the 1987 Constitution that sufficient safeguards against
possible misuse and abuse by the commander-in-chief of his extraordinary powers are already in
place and that no further emasculation of the presidential powers is called for in the guise of
additional safeguards (Lagman vs Medialdea)

1. 3. Do  you agree with  the Poe  decision? why not?

Yes I agree with the Poe Decision since she may be a foundling, but she is still considered a
Filipino citizen despite the law not expressively stated whether she should be alienized or
not. Her adoptive parents are both Filipino and she resided here in the Philippines, she also
had the characteristics of a Filipino citizen to which remained undisputed. Even if the law
does not specifically provide how a foundling should be classified as here in the Philippines,
it is also wrong to immediately assume that Poe is not a citizen of the Philippines just
because she is a foundling.