ARTICLE VI

LEGISLATIVE

SECTION 1: The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines,
which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent
reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.

 The original provision on legislative is the first portion of Section 1, ‘The legislative
power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines, which shall consist of the
Senate and the House of Representatives’.

 With the advent of people’s initiative, brought about by and inspired by the people
power, the 1987 Constitution invented a system of direct democracy where the people
themselves can directly legislate. That is now the second portion, except to the extent
reserved to the people by the provision of initiative and referendum.

 Jones Law was enacted by US Congress to govern the Philippines. It provided for
bicameral legislature. Unicameral has one house. Bicameral has two houses – lower
house or upper house, smaller house or bigger house or depending where you are.
Subsequently, the 1935 Constitution started with unicameral legislature, then later
amended to become bicameral. In the 1973 Constitution, they had unicameral
National Assembly, but later amended to unicameral Batasang Pambansa. In the 1987
Constitution, the voting on whether it would be unicameral or bicameral was very
closed. Bicameral had 23 votes. Unicameral had 22 votes. Bicameral won. Because of
this event, some provisions were affected. There were provisions in the Constitution
that were designed or made for unicameral. The Commission should have adjusted its
provisions to adjust it to bicameral.

Instances where legislators failed to adjust to be in tune with bicameral legislature:

1. Amendment of the Constitution proposed by the Congress upon the vote of 2/3 of
Congress. (This was made for unicameral Congress)

2. Membership in the Judicial and Bar Council. This states a Representative from the
Congress. (The Congress consists of two houses – Senate and the House of
Representatives

Instances where legislators adjusted the provisions to be in tune with bicameral legislature:
1. Section 4, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution: In case of tie in the Presidency, The
President will be chosen by Congress voting separately.

2. Section 9, Article 7 – Nominees to replace the President. When Arroyo ascended to

Presidency, she chose Guingona as her Vice President. Congress’ confirmation was
required. So, she proposed that Congress vote separately.

3. Section 18, Article 7 – On the proclamation of Martial Law, Congress made voting
jointly – agree with the declaration or disagree with the declaration.

1
What is a legislative power?

 Legislative Power is the authority to make, alter or repeal laws.

 The 1935, 1973, and the 1987 constitutions grant plenary (meaning: full, total and
unlimited) legislative power to the Legislature. Thus, any power deemed to be
legislative by usage and traditions is necessarily possessed by Congress, unless the
organic act is lodged in initiative and referendum.

What is the extent of the plenary power of the Congress?

Congress may legislate on any subject matter, provided that its substantive and procedural
requirements found in the Constitution must be observed.

What is doctrine of non-delegability legislative power?

The issuance by administrative bodies of rules and regulations by virtue of the statutes
creating them is not law making function power but only a rule making power or law
executing function.

For instance, Congress crafted a law creating agencies and in that law, they identified
which administrative bodies will craft the rules and regulations, you call that
implementing rules and regulations (IRR).

When administrative bodies craft IRR, that is not a law-making function, so it does not
violate the doctrine of non-delegability of legislative power. Because they are not
performing a legislative function. They are only executing, it is an act of execution, it is a
rule-making power. It is not a law-making power. So that administrative bodies may be
allowed either to fill up the details of already complete statutes or ascertain the facts
necessary to create a continual flow or actual operation.

The crafting of administrative rules, implementing rules and regulations does not violate
the principles of non-delegability of legislative power for as long as the statute making
the delegation

1. It is complete by itself – by setting forth the policy to be implemented

2. It must fix a standard to which the delegate must conform

Is the crafting of IRR a violation of a doctrine of non-delegability of legislative

power?
Answer: No (Explain why)

Principle of Separation of Powers

The principle of separation of powers means the legislation belongs to Congress,
execution belongs to the Executive, and settlement of legal controversies belongs to the
Judiciary. However, the separation is not total, it allows for check and balances, which
means no department is able to act without the cooperation of at least one of the other
department.

What is meant by Checks and Balances?

The purpose of separation of powers is to prevent of concentration of powers in one
department and thereby to avoid tyranny of one department over the other.

2
 Negative Result or Down side of Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances
Inefficiency and gridlock if there is too much checks and balances.

 Legislative power remains to be a limited power. It is subject to the limitations. It is

subject to the limitations provided by the Constitution and found in the Article III:
Bill of Rights, the allowable subjects of legislation, and also procedural limitations
such as those prescribed in the manner of passing bills and in the form they shall take.

Why do we say legislative power is a limited power?

Because it is subject to limitation.

Two kinds of legislative power

1. Original Legislative Power – possessed by sovereign people
2. Derivative Legislative Power – is one which has been delegated by the sovereign
people to legislative bodies

Two classification of legislative power

1. Constituent – power to amend or revise the constitution
2. Ordinary – power to pass ordinary laws/statutes

 When Congress will tackle the proposal to amend or revise the constitution, they
constitute themselves into a Constituent Assembly, because they will be performing a
constituent legislative function. It is not an ordinary function. It is not as if they are
making laws. They are revising or amending the constitution, that entails legislative
constituent power.

Holders of legislative power

1. Sovereign – people themselves; holders of or original legislative power
2. Legislature – holds derivative legislative power
3. By the people themselves under initiative and referendum
4. Instances provided by law in the constitution; the President may exercise emergency
legislative powers, when authorized by Congress.

SECTION 2: The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at
large by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law.

SECTION 3: No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural born citizen of the

Philippines, and on the day of the election, is at least thirty-five years of age, able to read
and write, a registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not less than two years
immediately preceding the day of the election.

 Qualification of a Senator

SECTION 4: The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence,
unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their
election. No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary
renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption
in the continuity of his service for the full term of which he was elected.

3
SECTION 5: (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two
hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from
legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila
area in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a
uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be elected through
a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.

Section 5 ‘The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred
members’ is an original provision. There is an exemption, otherwise provided by law. The
Constitution fixed the membership into 250 members, but it does not stay on that number
because in ordinary legislation, the numbers of the members of the House of Representatives
may increase. The members shall be elected from a legislative district. The entire country is
divided into legislative districts apportioned among provinces, cities, and the and the
Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and
on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be
elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or
organizations.

 "Unless otherwise fixed by law” -paragraph 1; the number of House of

Representatives might increase, this number (250) is not absolute because there will
be provinces or districts to be created through reapportionment

What is the composition of the House of Representatives?

The House of Representatives is composed of Representatives from legislative districts and
party-list Representatives.

Nowhere in the constitution you may find Congressman as referring to the member of the
Congress.

(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of
representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the
ratification of this Constitution, one half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives
shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban
poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be
provided by law, except the religious sector.

20% of the 250 members shall constitute the party-list representatives

Paglaum vs COMELEC

(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and
adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or
each province, shall have at least one representative.

(4) Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a
reapportionment of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section.

We do not follow this. There has never been reapportionment done after the adaption of
1987 Constitution.

4
The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty
members, unless otherwise fixed by law – which means the total number of the House can be
increased by statute, which can be done through reapportionment (which I just have said
never happened in the past) or through a creation of new provinces or cities melt in one
legislative district.

 Two kinds of Representatives:

1. District Representative
2. Public Representative
3. (Sectoral Representative is no longer in Congress)

Benigno Aquino vs COMELEC

 This is a case filed by Noynoy Aquino when he was still a Senator.
 The President during that time was Gloria Arroyo. She had a son, who wanted to
become a Representative in Camarines. So, she passed a law creating a district for her
son.
 This was questioned by Benigno Aquino in the Supreme Court. Aquino said that
legislative district shall have a population of 250,000 to be entitled to a
Representative.
 Note: Aquino wrongly read the constitution because population of 250, 000 is
required only in city/cities, not in province/s. You may create a legislative district
with less than 250,000 members and that province may entitle to a Representative.

Three important cases:

Ang Bagong Bayani vs COMELEC (June 26, 2001) GR No. 1475189

 In the case of Bagong Bayani,, it settled the question of which parties and
organizations are qualified to be voted for in party list elections.
 The Supreme Court ruled that the intent of the Constitutional Commission and that of
the implementing law, RA No. 7941, was not to allow all associations to participate
indiscriminately in the party-list system but to limit participation to parties or
organizations representing ‘the marginalized and the underprivileged’.
 The Supreme Court said that not all can participate, only the parties and organizations
representing the marginalized and underprivileged because the party-list system is a
social justice tool.
 Bernas disagrees with this decision of the Supreme Court, because he said there is no
such ideological requirement (meaning marginalized and underprivileged) is found in
Section 6 of Article 6 of the Constitution neither in RA 7941 prescribes it. To Bernas,
this decision is one of the instances of what may be called Judicial Legislation.

BANAT vs COMELEC (April 2009) GR. No. 179271

 The question of who are entitled to participate in the party-list system came up and it
was discussed, it is part of the issue that the doctrine in Ang Bagong Bayani case is
not supported by the Constitution or the party-list law. However, when the Justices
voted for it, the voting was 8:7, they were unable to reverse the doctrine in Ang
Bagong Bayani.
 Many of the justices agreed that there is no basis for the Ang Bagong Bayani doctrine,
yet they failed to reverse it, so the doctrine in Ang Bagong Bayani case continues.

5
  In Banat case, the twenty percent ratio of representatives is defined. The number of
party-list representatives must be proportionately increased for every increase in the
number of district representatives.
 It provides that the 2% threshold prescribed in RA 7914 will be used only to compute
the guaranteed seats for party-list based on the number of votes garnered. BANAT
reiterated the commentary of Bernas (the stand of Bernas) that neither the
Constitution nor RA 7941 prohibit major political parties from participating in the
party-list elections. The decision said that there is no such thing that that kind of
decision is not provided in the Constitution nor in RA 7941 but because the SC had to
come up with enough votes to overturn a doctrine which was already enunciated in
Ang Bagong Bayani, It has to come up with a more than 8 votes in the senate in order
to overturn the doctrine in Ang Bagong Bayani and it failed to do that. By a vote of 8-
7 that Supreme Court prohibited them anyway (Parties from participating in elections
as enunciated in Ang Bagong Bayani)

Atong Paglaum VS comelect (April 2015) GR 2037666

The Supreme Court agreed that it must be marginalized but the marginalization does
not necessarily mean economic marginalization. It does not mean they are poor.
 Our concept of party-list party is the one that is economically marginalized, but in
Paglaum case, national and regional parties may also mean marginalized. But the
regional parties had a hard time winning in the regular election in legislative districts
so they created a regional party-list. The party-list system participants must be
marginalized, but this time a regional and national party-list was marginalized, not
economically, but politically.Their entry is through party-list system.
 1987 is not only confined with the economic disadvantage but also the political
disadvantage.

Explain Bagong Bayani case and Atong Paglaum case. Are they necessarily conflicting each
other or complementarily to each other?

Look for Commentary of Bernas on Atong Paglaum case (April 2013)

SECTION 6: No person shall be a Member of the House of Representatives unless he is a

natural-born citizen of the Philippines and on the day of the election, is at least twenty- five
years of age, able to read and write, and, except the party-list representatives, a registered
voter in the district in which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for a period of not
less than one year immediately preceding the day of the election.

The qualification requirement is residence, not domicile.

Residence is a place of abode, whether permanent or temporary.
Domicile means permanent residence to which one when absent has the intention to return.

3 Interesting cases on domicile:

1. Romualdez Marcos vs COMELEC (September 18, 1995) GR No. 119776

The case of Imelda when she ran in Leyte in 1995. Imelda is originally from Leyte. There is
no denying that she has been to other places when her husband Marcos went to different
places. When Imelda ran, her residency in Leyte was questioned. The Supreme Court said her

6
domicile of origin is in Holog, Leyte. Leyte has been her domicile of origin. The Supreme
Court also said she never abandoned her domicile origin.

2. Aquino vs COMELEC
Butch Aquino was the brother of Cory Aquino. He ran for the House of Representatives in
Makati. In 1992, Arroyo was the only Representative in Makati. Makati was then a single
legislative district. The same year, Makati was split into two legislative districts – first and
second district. Aquino ran for second district. Somebody questioned his domicile. The
domicile of origin of Butch Aquino is Tarlac. He has never abandoned Tarlac as domicile of
origin. Even if he abandoned Tarlac and tried to reside in Makati, he has not established yet
his domicile in Makati because it will take one year to establish domicile into new domicile.
He has not established the domicile in Makati.

3. Domino vs COMELEC
Domino was from Condon, Ilocos Sur. He must have changed his domicile of origin to
Quezon City because he ran in Quezon City for the House of Representatives in 1995 only
that he lost. In 1998, he transferred to Saranggani and ran for Congress representing
Saranggani. The Supreme Court said he was not able to establish his domicile in Saranggani
because his domicile of origin is in Candor, Ilocos Sur. Then he changed it to Quezon City.
He was not able to establish his domicile in Saranggani.

The key here is a domicile of origin. Anywhere you go provided there is no showing of
abandonment like Imelda, then that is your domicile.

SECTION 7: The members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of
three years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth
day of June next following their election.

Term is the legal length of time that one holds office, dictated by law or constitution.
Senate – 6 years
House of Representatives – 3 years

Tenure is the actual time that a person holds office. By law that is the length, that is the
duration of how long will one stay in office; can be shortened by death or removal.

No member of the House of Representatives shall serve for two consecutive terms.

The Fair Elections Law (RA 9006, Feb 12, 2001)

Passed in February 12, 2001 – almost the end of the term of members of House of
Representatives who entered in 1992 (almost 3 terms)
Originally, if you run for a position which is not the position you are holding, then upon
filing your certificate of candidacy, you are deemed to have abandoned or resigned from your
position
Example: term: from 1998 until June 2001
Certificate of candidacy: filed in March 2001
Originally (old law)– deemed resigned in March

7
 Under the Fair Elections Law:
- any elected public official whether local / national shall not be considered
resigned
- Purpose: benefited incumbents running for another position because they
would still be able to use their office during the campaign period
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CONGRESSMAN IN THE CONSTITUTION.

SECTION 8: Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election of the Senators and
the Members of the House of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May.

SECTION 9: In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a special

election may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by law, but the
Senator or Member of the House of Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the
unexpired term.

RA 6455 prescribes the manner of filling up the vacancy in the House of Representatives and
in the Senate. The procedure is the House where the vacancy occurs shall pass a resolution
declaring the existence of vacancy and call for a special election to fill up such vacancy. The
COMELEC shall schedule the election not earlier than 45 days or later than 90 days from the
resolution.

Resolution from the House of Representatives  Special Election

Your election must be for three years and shall serve for three years.

SECTION 10: The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall
be determined by law. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the
expiration of the full term of all the Members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives approving such increase.

In 1987, the House of Representatives pass a law increasing the salary of the members of the
House of Representatives, but it was not until 1998. After the election in 1998 will this
increase be implemented. It has to exhaust the full term.

SECTION 11: A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses
punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the
Congress is in session. No member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place
for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.

Conditions:
1. The offense must be punishable by not more than 6 years of imprisonment
2. While Congress is in session

First Sentence: A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all

offenses punishable by not more than six years of imprisonment, be privileged from
arrest while the Congress is in session.

8
1935 Constitution  The members shall in all cases except treason, felony, and breach of the
peace, be privileged from arrest.
1973 and 1987 Constitution  Members shall be privileged from arrest for all offenses
punishable by not more than six years of imprisonment.

The privilege from arrest applies for as long as Congress is in session whether or not the
legislator is attending it.

Question: A member of the House of Representatives was charged from an offense

punishable by not more than 6 years. He was seen playing golf in Baguio. The
policeman arrested him. Is that a violation from the privilege from arrest?
Answer: No, because the Congress is in session, whether or not a member is attending a
session. He will be privileged from arrest.

Second Sentence: No member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place
for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.

The key here is in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any
committee thereof.

Question: Banat was attending a committee hearing, he said a lot of things. Can he be
sued?
Answer: He cannot be questioned nor be held liable except in Congress itself. He cannot be
sued for libel.

If the libellous statement was made in the plenary by the member, still he cannot be sued or
held liable. Only disciplinary actions may be applied.

Even if he is not in the plenary like Committee hearing or People’s gym, that is still
Congress, the immunity is carried by the member of the Congress.

Parliamentary freedom of speech or debate is a guarantee of immunity from answerability, an

outside forum before but from not an answerability from Congress. Congress has the right
and power to discipline its members.

SECTION 12: All members of the Senate and the House of Representatives shall, upon
assumption of office, make a full disclosure of their financial and business interests. They
shall notify the House concerned of a potential conflict of interest that may arise from the
filing of a proposed legislation of which they are authors.

SECTION 13: No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may hold any other
office or employment in the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality
thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries,
during his term without forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office
which may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for
which he was elected.

Remember the term, you are elected for three years, you cannot hold any other office or
employment in the government, without forfeiting seat. Take for example, Butch Abad,

9
author of DAP. He was a member of HR, representing Batanes, during the time of Cory
Aquino. He was enticed by the latter to accept DAR Secretary post. He forfeited his seat in
the House. But Commission on Appointments rejected his cabinet post. Hence, he was never
able to serve. He lost two posts.

Neither shall he be appointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments
thereof increased during the term for which he was elected – members of the House of
Representatives who have agencies where the salary of the employees was increased. This
member of the house cannot accept any position where the salary was increased during his
term.

Question: After his term and he is no longer a house member, can he accept position?
Answer: No, if you were a member of the House at the time where the salary or emoluments
was increased, you cannot or never accept a position, the position where the salary was
increased during your term in the House of Representatives.

IF YOU DO NOT DISQUALIFY A MEMBER FROM BEING APPOINTED TO AN

OFFICE THAT WAS CREATED INCREASED DURING HIS TERM, THEN YOU ARE
ABETTING CORRUPTION

SECTION 14: No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally

appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-
judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be
interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted
by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any
government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office.
He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary
benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

 These are members of the House, who are also lawyers.

 1987 Constitution as prohibitional. Under 1935 Constitution, the Commission on
Appointments holds the appointments of the Justices.
 There was this member of the House who was appearing in the sala of a Judge. The
Judge went down to his courtroom to welcome that House member, happened to be
the litigant in the case. Because of this kind of event, the House member cannot
appear personally before the Court or any Judge.

Personal appearance
Question: I have a law office. May my law office appear representing a litigant in a sala
or in a court or in any electoral tribunal or quasi-judicial offices?
Answer: Yes, the prohibition is only personal appearance.

SECTION 15. The Congress shall convene once every year on the fourth Monday of July
for its regular session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and shall continue to be in
session for such number of days as it may determine until thirty days before the opening of
its next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The President
may call a special session at any time.

10
  1935 Constitution  Congress held session for 100 days.
 4th Monday of July  State of the Nation Address of the President; beginning of the
session; it will continue to be in session until 30 days before the next SONA or 4 th
Monday of July. All year round except the 30 days before the next opening of
Congress, that is the mandatory recess or sine die (last or final adjournment of
Congress). Every day they adjourn, but the final adjournment is 30 days before the
next regular session.

SECTION 16. (1) The Senate shall elect its President and the House of Representatives its
Speaker, by a majority vote of all its respective Members. Each House shall choose such
other officers as it may deem necessary.

Santiago vs Guingona
The appeal of Sen. Tatad challenged the validity of the election of Guingona as a minority
leader. The Supreme Court said that they cannot intervene because that matter belongs to the
Congress to settle.

(2) A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller
number may adjourn from day to day and may compel the attendance of absent Members
in such manner, and under such penalties, as such House may provide.

What is a quorum?
Majority of each house constitutes a quorum. If there are 260 legislators and 59 party-
list, one half of the total number of the legislators plus one is the quorum.

(3) Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for
disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or
expel a Member. A penalty of suspension, when imposed, shall not exceed sixty days.

If a member of the house lambasted someone. It is true that he, being a member of the House,
may not be sued outside of Congress, but the Congress itself may discipline him (member)
under the provision of Article XVI, Section 3.

Osmena Jr. vs Pendalton

Disciplinary proceedings initiated in the house against Osmena

Paredes vs Sandiganbayan

(4) Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the
same, excepting such parts as may, in its judgment, affect national security; and the yeas
and nays on any question shall, at the request of one-fifth of the Members present, be
entered in the Journal. Each House shall also keep a Record of its proceedings.

Documents kept by Congress:

Journal  a summary of the proceedings of Congress publish daily

The duty to keep the journal is to ensure publicity of the proceedings of the legislature as a
proof to what actually transpired.

11
Record  word for word record of the proceedings; given a year after

US vs Pons
The defendant Pons was charged and the statute charging him of violation, according to him,
was unconstitutional for having been passed after the last allowable day of session. But what
the journal would tell must be followed. Journal versus extraneous evidence.

Enrolled bill doctrine  is a bill that has been approved by one House bearing the signature
of the Speaker and the Secretary of the House, likewise, the signature of the Senate President
and the Secretary of the Senate.
 Duly authenticated copy of the resolution bearing the signature of
House of Representatives Speaker and Secretary and Senate’s
Senate President and Secretary.

Mabanag vs Lopez-Vito
The context of the journal conflicts with the enrolled bill. Authenticated bill is one binding in
the courts.
a. Journal against extraneous evidence. You follow the journal.
b. If the journal conflicts with an enrolled bill or authenticated bill, the enrolled bill must
be followed as against the journal. There is already an imprint of authenticity in the
enrolled bill. It bears the signatures of the Speaker, Senate President and respective
Secretaries of both Houses.

(5) Neither House during the sessions of the Congress shall, without the consent of the
other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two
Houses shall be sitting.

Adjournment
 Neither Houses can adjourn without the consent of the other. That is why from time to
time, both houses will agree with each other on the calendar because there is a joint
resolution of both houses to follow the calendar.
 Joint resolution to follow the calendar. Cannot go to recess without the other.
 Both cannot adjourn without the other.
 Schedule of the sessions is a concurrent resolution of both House of Representatives
and Senate.

SECTION 17. The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral
Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and
qualifications of their respective Members. Each Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of
nine Members, three of whom shall be Justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by
the Chief Justice, and the remaining six shall be Members of the Senate or the House of
Representatives, as the case may be, who shall be 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 in the Electoral Tribunal shall
be its Chairman.

12
Electoral Tribunals is the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and
qualification of their respective members.

Composition: 9 members (3 Justices of the Supreme Court and 6 Members of the House of
Representatives

How they will be chosen? Based on Proportional representation from the political parties –
Let us say, you need 6 members. PDP almost are members of PDP, so if the PDP consists of
2/3 of the members of the House of Representatives, the Electoral Tribunal shall be also
composed of 2/3 of PDP members, because of the proportional representation. Proportion to
their number in the House of Representatives.

Bondoc vs Pineda

 There must be an election contest - the defeated candidate challenges the credentials
of a member, not only to dislodge him but also to take his seat.
 If there is no election contest, then there is no case that comes with the jurisdiction of
the Electoral Tribunals. So before the electoral tribunals can take recognizance of the
case, there must be an election contest - it must protest the election of another.
 If there is no election contest, the respective body itself, not the electoral tribunal may
inquire the credentials of the member and judge his qualification. That is why every
after election all elected members of the House of Representatives must present to the
Secretariat their declaration from the COMELEC that they are the ones who won in
the election and such other documents.
 Even if there is no contest that has been filed, the House of Representatives itself will
check on the qualifications of the members of the house.
 When there is already a proclamation, then the tribunal has jurisdiction, Take for
example, Juan won and proclaimed by COMELEC as truly elected Representative of
Cagayan. If somebody will contest that election. Then the electoral tribunal will have
jurisdiction. If there is no proclamation happened, then the electoral tribunals has no
jurisdiction. The jurisdiction now belongs to the COMELEC. But in reality, it is
somehow impossible because COMELEC has to proclaim the winners right away.
 General rule: If there is no proclamation, cases or controversies for the election of the
members of the House or Representatives, exemption: in case of manifest error in the
certificate of canvass or election returns.

What are manifest errors?

Errors which cannot be verified except by opening of the ballot boxes are not considered
manifest errors, so errors that can be verified by just looking at it or applying arithmetic or
simple mathematics in the results of the election.

Election returns are the basis of the canvass.

Electoral tribunals are independent constitutional creation, promulgating its own rules and
regulations, without the Control of the House of Representatives.

SECTION 18. There shall be a Commission on Appointments consisting of the President

of the Senate, as ex officio Chairman, twelve Senators and twelve Members of the House of
Representatives, elected by each House on the basis of proportional representation from

13
the political parties and parties or organizations registered under the party-list system
represented therein. The Chairman of the Commission shall not vote, except in case of a
tie. The Commission shall act on all appointments submitted to it within thirty session days
of the Congress from their submission. The Commission shall rule by a majority vote of all
the Members.

Commission on Appointments
 It shall consist of the President of the Senate, 12 Senators and 12 members of the
House of Representatives
 Its function or power is to act on all the appointments submitted to it within the
session days of the Congress. The Commission will shall rule by the majority of all its
members
 The membership of this agency shall be based on proportional representation from the
political parties or organizations or party-list represented.
 The function of the CA is to agree on the appointments made by the President.
 To confirm or confirm the appointments made by the President
 Intended to serve as an administrative check
 Senate President shall not vote except in case of a tie.

SECTION 19. The Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments shall be
constituted within thirty days after the Senate and the House of Representatives shall have
been organized with the election of the President and the Speaker. The Commission on
Appointments shall meet only while the Congress is in session, at the call of its Chairman
or a majority of all its Members, to discharge such powers and functions as are herein
conferred upon it.

Guingona vs Gonzales
Proportional representation

 The Constitution does not require Electoral Tribunals to have a complete number of
members.

SECTION 20. The records and books of accounts of the Congress shall be preserved and
be open to the public in accordance with law, and such books shall be audited by the
Commission on Audit which shall publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid to and
expenses incurred for each Member.

 There is a Committee on Accounts in the House of Representatives. It handles all the

money of the House of Representatives.
 The Committee on Accounts is always the personal choice of the Speaker.

SECTION 21. The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective
committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly
published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such
inquiries shall be respected.

14
Section 21 looks the same with section 22. Section 22 is also about investigation but not in
aid of legislation, it is part of the oversight function of the Congress. It looks the same with
section 21, but they are not the same nor connected to each other.

Arnold vs Nazareno
It is a case that justifies that even in the 1935 Constitution even if there was no provision
similar to Section 21, there was already a recognition that Congress has an inherent right or
power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation.

3 Limitations of the power in aid of legislation (in the provision itself)

1. Must be in aid of legislation
2. In accordance with published rules
3. The rights of the person attending or appearing must be respected.

Bengzon Jr vs Blue Ribbon Committee

Facts: Sen. Enrile delivered a privilege speech before the Senate suggesting the need to
determine the existence of violations in the alleged transfer of some properties of Kokoy
Romualdez (brother of Imelda Marcos) to LOPA Group of Companies (belongs to the
relatives of Cory Aquino). Enrile emphasized in his privilege speech that there must be an
investigation in the transfer of properties. Then the matter was referred to the Blue Ribbon
Committee, which brought the controversy to the Supreme Court
Rulings: The Supreme Court ruled that the investigation is not in aid of legislation, because
the speech of Enrile does not contain suggestion of contemplated legislation, but merely
pointed out the need to determine whether the relatives of Cory Aquino violated the law
when they acquired the properties of Kokoy Romualdez.

Bernas commentary: He suggested that the Blue Ribbon Committee has jurisdiction in
conducting the investigation because the requirement that the investigation in aid of
legislation is not difficult to satisfy. The totality of legislative power, which is plenary and
unlimited, is possessed by Congress.

SECTION 22. The heads of departments may upon their own initiative, with the consent of
the President, or upon the request of either House, as the rules of each House shall
provide, appear before and be heard by such House on any matter pertaining to their
departments. Written questions shall be submitted to the President of the Senate or the
Speaker of the House of Representatives at least three days before their scheduled
appearance. Interpellations shall not be limited to written questions, but may cover matters
related thereto. When the security of the State or the public interest so requires and the
President so states in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in executive session.

1935 Constitution  The content was permissive. The department heads could appear but
the legislature was not obligated to entertain them. Reciprocally, the legislature could request
their appearance but could not oblige them specially if the President objected.

EO 464

Senate vs Ermita, GR. NO. 169777

15
Facts: This is about the validity of section 2 and 3 of EO 464, which bans Cabinet officials,
bureaucrats, and Police Generals from appearing in Congressional hearings without executive
clearance for testimonies sought by Congress in aid of legislation.
Rulings: The Supreme Court invalidated section 2 and 3, which is the ban, in effect, the
decision clarifies that the Congress may compel officials to appear in hearings in aid of
legislation. The President can ban officials from appearing in Congress during question hour
or inquiries not related to pending legislation.

Section 21 and Section 22 do not pertain to the same power. Section 21 specifically relates
the power of Congress to conduct inquires in aid of legislation. The aim is to illicit
information that may be used for legislation. When Congress requires the appearance of the
department heads, their appearance is mandatory as long as in aid of legislation. On the other
hand, Section 22 pertains to the power to conduct a question hour, the objective of which is to
obtain information in pursuit of Congress oversight function.

SECTION 23: (1) The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses in joint session
assembled, voting separately, shall have the sole power to declare the existence of a state of
war.
(2) In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the
President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to
exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless
sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress, such powers shall cease upon the next
adjournment thereof.

2nd Paragraph: In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may by law,
authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may
prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy.

Remember: Only in times of war or other national emergencies that the Congress may pass a
law authorizing the President within a limited period and subject to some restrictions as it
may prescribe to exercise powers necessary to carry out a declared national policy.

 This is a law passed by Congress but may be withdrawn by resolutions.

 Ordinarily, a law must be repealed by another law, but by constitutional mandate, a
law passed by Congress authorizing the President to exercise limited power may be
withdrawn by a mere resolution of Congress, which is very easy because it does not
need to pass 3 readings.
 If not, such power will cease upon the next adjournment of Congress. When Congress
adjourns, the law will cease also. It does not need to repeal by another law or
withdrawn by a resolution.
 The paragraph 2 of section 23 is related to section 17 of Article 12 as clarified in the case
of David vs Arroyo.

Article 12, Section 17

In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during
the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct
the operation of any privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest.

By executive fiat, law may be passed authorizing the pres to exercise emergency powers.

16
David vs Arroyo (May 3, 2006) G.R. No. 171396
Bernas in all his earlier books has another interpretation of sec 17, article 12. His
interpretation was that by executive fiat or order a law may be passed authorizing the
president to exercise emergency powers.

In David vs Arroyo case, this particular provision was refined by the Supreme Court. It said it
must be passed by Congress not by executive fiat as written by Bernas in his old
commentaries. The authority must be given by Congress not by executive fiat.

SECTION 24. All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the
public debt, bills of local application, and private bills shall originate exclusively in the
House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments.

Exclusive origination of appropriation laws, revenues, tariff bills, bills authorizing the
increase of public debt and private bills. These bills must start with the House of
Representatives otherwise there is no bill to speak of.

Tolentino vs Secretary of Finance

The meaning of origination from the House of Representatives and the scope of the power of
the Senate is to introduce amendments. The exclusivity of the prerogative of the House of
Representatives means simply that the House alone can initiate the passage of the revenue or
appropriation bills. Such that a house does not initiate one, no revenue or appropriation laws
can be passed. Once the House approves a revenue or appropriation bill, the senate can
completely overhaul it by amendment of parts or amendment by substitution and come out
with a completely different from what the House of Representatives has approved. If the
House of Representatives approves a cut looking bill, the Senate may come up with this
substitution that a dog looking bill, and that still be constitutional.

 Explicit limitations on the power to appropriate

- Explicit limitations:
- Found in Article 6, sections 24, 25 and 29
also Sec 22 of Art 7
- It is also subject to the IMPLICIT limitation that public money can be
appropriated only for public purpose.

SECTION 25: (1) The Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by the
President for the operation of the Government as specified in the budget. The form,
content, and manner of preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law.
(2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless
it relates specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such provision or
enactment shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation to which it relates.
(3) The procedure in approving appropriations for the Congress shall strictly follow the
procedure for approving appropriations for other departments and agencies.
(4) A special appropriations bill shall specify the purpose for which it is intended, and shall
be supported by funds actually available as certified by the National Treasurer, or to be
raised by a corresponding revenue proposed therein.

17
(5) 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.
(6) Discretionary funds appropriated for particular officials shall be disbursed only for
public purposes to be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as
may be prescribed by law.
(7) If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the general
appropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law for the
preceding fiscal year shall be deemed reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until
the general appropriations bill is passed by the Congress.

1st Paragraph: It pertains only to the prohibition to increase the presidential budget, not about
the budget for the Congress or for the Judiciary. No provision or enactments shall be
embraced in the appropriation bill unless it relates specifically to some particular
appropriations bill. Any such provision or enactment shall be limited in its operations to the
appropriation to which it relates.

2nd Paragraph: The appropriation bill must contain only appropriations. Appropriations bill
is a law. Everything inside is a law. So no rider shall be included. Provisions on related to the
appropriation bill is considered prohibited riders, therefore unconstitutional.

3rd Paragraph: It shall be the same with other departments.

4th Paragraph: Not only the general appropriations law shall be enacted, also the special
appropriation bills.

5th Paragraph:
 General rule: No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations. In
the appropriation law or any other laws, no law shall be passed authorizing the
transfer of appropriation.
 The Executive branch cannot transfer appropriations to any other appropriations
specially those are considered crossed border. This particular provision of law was
cited as one violated by DAP during the time of Noynoy Aquino. There was a transfer
of funds from one department to another (crossed border of funds), from executive to
judiciary. This kind of transfer is clearly a violation of the constitution.
 However, the President, Senate President, Speaker of the House, Chief Justice and
Heads of the Constitutional Commissions, may by law, under the general
appropriation act be authorized to augment any items in their general appropriations
for their respective offices from savings to any other items of their respective
appropriations.
 Exemption: The transfer is possible but within the department only.
 If the Congress fails to pass the appropriation bill for the next fiscal year, the
appropriation bill of the current year will be re-enacted. The disadvantage of this is
the budget for the completed items cannot use for the next fiscal year, only identified
items in the current year can be utilized.

Aurelio vs Aquino (February 3, 2019), GR No. 209287

DAP case

18
READ: Article of Former Justice Artemio Panganiban, Philippine Inquirer, July 6,
2014

SECTION 26. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall embrace only one subject which
shall be expressed in the title thereof.
(2) No bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed three readings
on separate days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its
Members three days before its passage, except when the President certifies to the necessity
of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency. Upon the last reading
of a bill, no amendment thereto shall be allowed, and the vote thereon shall be taken
immediately thereafter, and the yeas and nays entered in the Journal.

1st Paragraph: This is to prevent confusion.

2nd Paragraph: How a bill become a law:

1. Filing of a bill and receiving by the House of Representatives

2. First Reading:
 Reading of the Bill – Title, author and the assigned number of the bill;
 Referring to the Appropriate Committee to study and recommend
 Making of report by the assigned committee.
3. Second Reading:
 The Committee on rules will schedule the bill for consideration
 Period of sponsorship, debate, amendments, and voting
4. Third Reading:
 Distribution of the final form of the bill three days before the third reading
 Voting
 No amendment shall be allowed during this period
5. Transmittal of the bill to the Senate
 It undergoes the same legislative procedures
6. Conference Committee will settle or reconcile conflicting provisions or differences of
both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
7. Transmittal of the bill to the President
 Approved bill: He will sign it for publication and distribution to the implementing
agencies.
 Vetoed bill: He will return it to the House of origination, including the
communication of the reason of his veto, but the House of Representatives may
override the veto by 2/3 of votes of its members.
 Failure to respond in 30 days, the bill will lapse into law.

necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency – three

readings but may do in one day. No objection may happen.

Conference Committee
 Third Congress
 It reconciles or settles conflicting provisions or differences of both the House of the
Representatives and the Senate.
 Not mentioned in the constitution

19
SECTION 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be
presented to the President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall
veto it and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which
shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such
reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass the bill, it
shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House by which it shall likewise be
reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that House, it shall
become a law. In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or
nays, and the names of the Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal.
The President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated
within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he
had signed it.
(2) The President shall have the power to veto any particular item or items in an
appropriation, revenue, or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or items to which
he does not object.

Why the President can veto only item on the Appropriation Bill?
If the President will veto the whole, it will go through a lot, no enough time for that. No
appropriation will be used for the next year round.

Philippine Consar vs Enriquez

The doctrine of Inappropriate Provision

Executive impoundment

SECTION 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall
evolve a progressive system of taxation.
(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and
subject to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export
quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of
the national development program of the Government.
(3) Charitable institutions, churches and parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto,
mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements, actually,
directly, and exclusively used for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall be
exempt from taxation.
(4) No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a
majority of all the Members of the Congress.

1st Paragraph: The power of taxation is one of the inherent powers of the government.

Does Section 28 grant the government the power to tax?

Answer: No, it merely enunciates the limitation on the power of taxation, and because the
power of taxation is an inherent power of the State.

2nd Paragraph: One of the powers given to the President is to fix important bills.

20
3rd Paragraph: Exemption was given to charitable institutions from realty taxes but an on
land buildings and improvements must be actually, directly and exclusively used for
religious, charitable and educational purposes.

SECTION 29. (1) No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an
appropriation made by law.
(2) No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly
or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian
institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious
teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is
assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or
leprosarium.
(3) All money collected on any tax levied for a special purpose shall be treated as a special
fund and paid out for such purpose only. If the purpose for which a special fund was
created has been fulfilled or abandoned, the balance, if any, shall be transferred to the
general funds of the Government.

This section was touched in the DAP case.

SECTION 30. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court as provided in this Constitution without its advice and concurrence.

Question: Is it prohibited for Congress to increase the appellate jurisdiction of the

Supreme Court?
Answer: False, but it has to be with the concurrence of the members of the Supreme Court.

SECTION 31. No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted.

SECTION 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a system of initiative
and referendum, and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose
and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress
or local legislative body after the registration of a petition therefor signed by at least ten per
centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be
represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters thereof.

 It is an ordinary law.
 There is a law implementing this.
 It is declared by the Supreme Court that is not applicable to amendments of the
constitution.
 That law is valid only in people’s initiative in ordinary laws but not to amend the
constitution.

RA No. 7375

21