This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half
1 Macias v COMELEC
Three branches of the government Congress Composition, qualification, term House of representatives
RA 3040 Apportions representative districts in the Philippines. Contention c/o petitioners • RA 3040 is unconstitutional. • It was passed by the HOR without printed final copies of the bill having been furnished the Members at least 3 calendar days prior to its passage • It was approved more than 3 years after the return of the last census of our population • It apportioned districts without regard to the number of inhabitants of the several provinces • They were discriminated against • Provinces were given less representative districts Held & Ratio Unconstitutional. It violated constitutional provisions on the printed form (3-day requirement), population Fast facts BP 885 sought to create a new province of Negros del Norte, getting areas and inhabitants from some of the cities and municipalities of Negros Occidental (i.e. San Carlos, Silay, Cadiz, Calatrava, taboso, Escalante, Sagay, Manapla, Victorias, E.B. Magalona, and Don Salvador Benedicto). A plebiscite to ratify BP 885 was scheduled on January 3, 1986, and would have included only voters from the areas in the would-be province of Negros del Norte, excluding those voters from the other cities and municipalities of Negros Occidental. BP 885 An Act Creating a New Province in the Island of Negros to be known as the Province of Negros del Norte. The said law provides that some cities from the island of Negros would be separated in order to create the new province, subject to a concurrence of the majority in a plebiscite. Contentions c/o petitioners • The exclusion and non-participation of the voters of the Province of Negros Occidental other than those living within the territory of the new province of Negros del Norte is not in accordance with the Constitution. • BP 885 is not in accordance with the Local Government Code as in Article 11, Section 3 of the Constitution. The Constitution provides that a plebiscite be held “in the unit or units affected”. The petitioners said that Negros Occidental is a unit affected by the creation of the new province, thus, they should be allowed to vote. Held & Ratio BP 885 is unconstitutional. The pertinent constitutional provision states that the majority of the “unit or units affected” should approve the change in boundaries in a particular province. The fact that only the inhabitants of the would-be province of Negros del Norte will be given a chance to vote on the plebiscite runs counter to the constitutional provision. Negros Occidental also has to vote on the plebiscite because it is also considered a unit affected, its area being diminished by the creation of this new province.
census, and apportionment of members.
2 Tan v COMELEC
Three branches of the government Congress Composition, qualification, term House of representatives
Tan v COMELEC
Veterans Fed. Party v COMELEC
Three branches of the government Congress Composition, qualification, term House of representatives
What is a Party-List • Organization registered with the COMELEC • Upon election, will sit in HoR as regular members Fast facts In the case at bar, the petitioners are assailing the constitutionality of COMELEC Resolution 98-065 and January 7, 1999 Resolution (affirming 98-065). These 2 resolutions ordered the proclamation of 38 additional party-list representatives to fill all 52 seats in the HoR. Purpose of RA 7941 The State shall promote proportional representation in the election of representatives to the HoR through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof, which will enable Filipino citizens belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who lack well-defined political constituencies but who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole, to become members of the HoR. Parameters of RA 7941 1. 20% allocation. The combined number of all party-list congressmen shall not exceed 20% of the total membership of the HoR, including those elected under the party-list.
Veterans Federal Party v COMELEC
2% threshold. Only those parites garnering a minimum of 2% of the total valid votes cast for the party-list system are “qualified” to have a seat in the HoR.
The 3-seat limit. Each qualified, regardless of the number of votes it actually obtained, is entitled to a
maximum of 3 seats; 1 “qualifying” and 2 additional seats.
Proportional representation. The additional seats which a qualified party is entitlesl to shall be computed “in proportion to their total number of votes.”
Issues 1. Is the 20% allocation for party-list representatives mentioned in Article 6, Section 5(2), mandatory or is it merely a ceiling? Should the 20% allocation for party-list solons be filled up completely all the time? 2. Are the 2% threshold requirement and the 3-seat limit provided in RA 7941 constitutional? 3. If the answer to issue 2 is in the affirmative, how should the additional seats of a qualified party be determined? Held & Ratio The petitions are partly meritorious. The Court agrees with petitioners that the assailed Resolutions should be nullified, but disagrees that they should all be granted additional seats.
As to whether the 20% allocation is mandatory. The Constitution does not require all such seats be filled
up all the time and under all circumstances. It is a mere ceiling. Article 6, Section 5 states that the Congress was vested with the broad power to define and prescribe the mechanics of the party-list system of representation. The Constitution explicitly sets down only the percentage of the total membership in
Page 1 of 36
CONSTI1: A.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half
Title Related Topics Notes
the HoR reserved for PL representatives. The Congress exercised its power through RA 7941. Said legislation deemed it necessary to require parties, organizations, and coalitions participating in the system to obtain at least 2% of the total votes cast for the PL system in order to be entitled to a PL seat. Those garnering more than this percentage could have additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes.
As to the 2% threshold. Valid. This threshold was set out by Congress to ensure that only those
organizations which have been given by the people sufficient basis for them to represent their constituents are to be awarded seats in the Parliament. It gives meaningful representation. We could not have PL reps seat in the House if they do not actually represent a significant number of marginalized people—those who voted them.
As to the 3-seat-per party limit. “Qualified” means having hurdled the 2% vote threshold. 3-seat limit
ensures the entry of various interest-representations into the legislature; no single group, no matter how large its membership, would dominate the party-list seats, if not the entire house.
As to the method of allocating additional seats.
STEPS IN DETERMINING WHO QUALIFIES FOR ADDITIONAL SEATS 1. Rank from the highest, based on the number of votes won. All parties with at least 2% of the total votes are guaranteed 1 seat each. Only these parties shall be eligible for additional seats. Illustration (all hypothetical values, no logical interrelationship) Rank Party-List Votes % of total votes in PL elections 1 ABC Party (FIRST PARTY) 1,000,000 7% 2 DEF Party 900,000 6% 3 GHI Party 800,000 5% 4 JKL Group 700,000 4% 5 MNO Group 600,000 3% 6 PQR Party 500,000 2% 7 STU Group 400,000 1% 8 VWX Group 300,000 1% 9 YZA Party 200,000 1% 10 BCD Group 100,000 1% Note: In this example only those groups ranked 1 through 6 are “qualified” to have seats in the HoR, having hurdled the 2% threshold, ABC party being tagged as the “FIRST PARTY”. 2.
Determine number of additional seats to be granted to the first party. Since the distribution is based
on proportional representation, the number of seats to be allotted to the other parties cannot possibly exceed that to which the first party is entitled by virtue of its obtaining the most number of votes. Formula for additional seats for the first party:
Rules: If proportion ≥ 6%, first party will get 2 seats If proportion ≥ 4%, one seat If proportion ≥ 4%, no additional seat This formula is applicable only in determining the additional seats of the first party. Illustration (based on illustrative facts in ) ABC Party Proportion = 7% Additional seats as first party = 2 seats 3.
Determine number of seats for other qualified parties.
Formula for additional seats for other qualified parties (concerned party):
Illustration Additional seats of DEF Party
Hence, additional seats for DEF Party is only 1 seat, since rounding up is not applied. Outcome based on illustrative facts Party-List Qualified seats 1 ABC Party 1 2 DEF Party 1 3 GHI Party 1 4 JKL Group 1 5 MNO Group 1 6 PQR Party 1 Additional seats 2 1 1 1 1 1 Total HoR seats 3 2 2 2 2 2
As to COMELEC en banc’s decision. COMELEC gravely abused its discretion in ruling that the 38 herein
repondent parties, organizations, and coalitions are each entitled to a party-list seat, because it violated 2 requirements of RA 7941: the 2% threshold and proportional requirement.
Page 2 of 36
CONSTI1: A.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half
4 Bagong Bayani v COMELEC
Three branches of the government Congress Composition, qualification, term House of representatives
Fast facts The case at bar deals with the disqualification of private respondents, apparently organizations considered as political parties, because the party-list system was intended to benefit the marginalized and underrepresented; not the mainstream political parties, the non-marginalized or overrepresented. Contention c/o pet Inclusion of political parties in the party-list race is inconceivable; most objectionable portion of the questioned Resolution. Contention c/o Solicitor General Party-list race is open to all, including political parties Issues (WON) • Political parties may participate in the party-list elections • Party-list system is exclusive to "marginalized and underrepresented" sectors and organizations. Requirements/criteria for party-list candidates 1. Must be representative of the marginalized 2. Political parties – must comply with #1 3. No organization hailing from the religious sector shall be allowed to participate 4. Must not be disqualified under Section 6 of RA7941 5. Must not be an offshoot of the government 6. The nominee him/herself must also qualify, not simply the party
Bagong Bayani v COMELEC
On the inclusion of political parties. They are not prohibited from joining the party-list race. RA 7941
Held & Ratio
expressly states that the party-list system is open to all “registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.” The respondents cannot be disqualified from the party-list elections, merely on the ground that they are political parties.
On the issue of marginalized and underrepresented. Political parties are not barred from joining the partylist elections, but not all of them can participate. Only those which prove that they qualify as party-list candidates based on the definition of what a party-list organization is. Allowing even rich and powerful political parties would defeat the purpose of the party-list system. Case remanded to the COMELEC. 5 Aquino v COMELEC
Three branches of the government Congress Composition, qualification, term House of representatives
Fast facts On April 24, 1995, Move Makati, a duly registered political party, and Mateo Bedon, Chairman of the LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP of Barangay Cembo, Makati City, filed a petition to disqualify Agapito A. Aquino on the ground that the latter lacked the residence qualification as a candidate for congressman which, under Article 6, Section 6 of the Constitution, should be for a period not less than one (1) year immediately preceding the May 8, 1995 elections. Constitution on residency • For a period not less than one (1) year prior to the elections • Residence = Domicile Domicile The place “where a party actually or constructively has his permanent home”, where he, no matter where he may be found at any given time, eventually intends to return and remain, i.e., his domicile, is that to which the Constitution refers when it speaks of residence for the purposes of election law.
Gallego v Vera. To exclude strangers or newcomers unfamiliar with the conditions and needs fo the
Purpose of equating residency and domicile in election law
community from taking advantage of favorable circumstances existing in that community for electoral gain. Issue (WON) Butz Aquino actually was a resident for a period of one year in the area now encompassed by the Second Legislative District of Makati at the time of his election or he was domiciled in the same. Aquino’s COC His domicile of origin of record up to the time of filing of his most recent COC for the 1995 elections was Concepcion, Tarlac. Aquino’s Lease contract Indicates impermanency of residence. Instead of purchasing a place of residence, Aquino simply leased it. Moreover, he had other condominium units in Manila and QC. He admitted that he only stays in the condominium unit in short periods at a time. Change of domicile Not easily achieved. Must be proven that person actually changed his domicile, where he has abandoned prior residence and moved into a new one, with concrete acts manifesting such intention (i.e. severing ties with hometown). Held & Ratio Aquino is disqualified on the ground of the one year residency rule. Aquino’s lease contract is indicative of his purpose not to establish permanent residence in Makati, but simply qualify as a candidate. He also has not established that he has indeed changed his domicile from Tarlac to Makati. 6 Marcos v COMELEC
Three branches of the government Congress Composition, qualification, term House of representatives
Fast facts The case at bar deals with the disqualification of Imelda Marcos from running as a candidate for her district in Leyte, on the ground of the one (1) year residency requirement. It has appeared that she has spent most of her recent life living outside of Leyte, specifically in Ilocos and Manila, since her husband became President of the country. Domicile • Natural place of residence • Permanent home • Physical presence in a fixed place • Intention of returning home Residence v Domicile Residence – physical presence Domicile – intent to return It is possible to have several residences at a time, but it is impossible to have more than one domicile. Successful change of domicile 1. An actual removal or an actual change of domicile 2. A bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one. Voluntary act of relinquishing candidate’s former domicile with an intent to supplant the former domicile with one of her own choosing. 3. Acts which correspond with the purpose
Romualdez-Marcos v COMELEC
Page 3 of 36
a party considered a minority. All these despite the facts that her husband was the President and that his domicile was in Ilocos and most of his activities were in Manila. while only those who had voted for him. Mamba-Perez v COMELEC. March 25. not CDO • Evidenced by him being governor • Evidenced by his pleadings stating that he is a resident of Tagoloan • Evidenced by exercise of powers of government until he filed candidacy for CDO mayor • He remained a resident of Tago. And is certainly within its own jurisdiction and discretion to prescribe the parameters for the exercise of this prerogative. more than half of votes needed to win • In multi-party system: political party which most elected lawmakers belong to Minority A group. June 14. Held & Ratio No violation. Absence from legal residence does not constitute loss of residence. 7 Torayno v COMELEC Three branches of the government Congress Composition. term House of representatives Timeline 1995: Emano (private resp) ran for governor of Misamis oriental. 1998: Filed candidacy for mayor of CDO. Congress verily has the power and prerogative to provide for such officers as it may deem. He has been residing in CDO for 3 years during his term as governor. the Senate’s composition was as follows 10 members 7 members 1 member 1 member 1 member 1 member 2 members 23 – total number of senators. greener pastures. Majority • In elections: plurality. qualification. One does not lose domicile even when he moves to another place for. Guingona cannot be the minority leader. That does not imply that those who do not vote for him constitute the minority. 1997: Emano executed voter registration in Cagayan de Oro. It prescribes only the manner of election of the Senate President. Senator Tatad thereafter manifested that. Contentions c/o pet • Emano is a resident of Tagoloan. Therefore. She did have many residences but it did not imply that she never intended to abandon Tacloban as her domicile. where his COC indicated as residence. His COC indicated as residence. with the agreement of Senator Santiago (the only senator that voted for Tatad). because residence is a “continuing qualification” that an official must possess • Having a hose in CDO is not enough proof of change in domicile Residence requirement • Prevent strangers to seek office in the city and taking advantage of the political situation in the area • To establish residence just to meet the requirement defeats the purpose of representation Representation Candidate who has actual residence in the area is more cognizant of the needs of the community.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Digest Link Domicile of female spouse Woman does not lose it in favor of her husband’s choice of residence. Imelda had always kept her ties with her domicile. belonged to the minority.CONSTI1: A. Tagoloan Misamis Oriental. only him or Senator Santiago may be chosen as minority leader. Election of officers The Constitution provides only for the election of Senate President and Speaker of the House. By a vote of 20-2. he was assuming the position of minority leader. Avelino v Cuenco • Question of who was the rightful Senate President • Court assumed jurisdiction • Resolution of issue hinged on the interpretation of the Constitution (quorum) • Judicial supremacy: court sees to it that no branch transgresses Constitution. Issue (WON) Emano duly established residence in CDO at least one year prior to the May 11. the last 6 members are all classified by petitioners as independent LAMP Lakas-NUCD-UMDP LP Aksyon Demokratico PRP Gabay Bayan Independent Santiago v Guingona On the agenda of the day was the election of officers. Held & Ratio Imelda’s domicile was in Tacloban. Fernan was won the position. Held & Ratio Emano satisfied the residence requirement. His CTC and voter registration evidenced the same. It is silent on the election of other officers. WON it is justiciable (or political) • Election of Senate Electoral Tribunal is not political. Emano not a newcomer to CDO. claiming 20 years of residence. CDO is where the seat of provincial government is located. 1998 elections to qualify him to run for the mayorship thereof. Cagayan de Oro. Actual presence in CDO is enough proof that he is acquainted with the community in that he is familiar with their needs. the candidates were Senators Fernan and Tatad. allegedly the only other member of the minority. Senator Guingona was chosen to become the minority leader. the losing nominee. 8 Santiago v Guingona Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Election of officers Fast facts On the first session of the 11th Congress. It does not provide for the rules on the election of majority and minority leaders. There has been a violation of the Constitution. being a member of Lakas-NUCD. say. It does not depend on Senate’s full discretionary authority subject to constitutional limitations. Constitution provides that the Senate President is voted by more than half (majority) of its members. Contentions c/o Tatad Those who had voted for Senator Fernan comprised the majority. party . or faction with a smaller number of votes or adherents than the majority. For Senate presidency. Gusa. Page 4 of 36 .
the House went on to discussing other matters. Contentions c/o Osmeña • The resolution violated his parliamentary immunity as regards privilege speeches • His speech did not contain words that are considered objectionable to which he must be subjected to punishment • After making his speech. Alejandrino v Quezon Sutherland v Governor The three branches and their powers are equally distributed and independent insofar as their actions as an individual branch are concerned. Without authority of the senate. Invalid. can it reverse the effects of the said resolution? Severino v Governor-General Mississippi v Johnson The judiciary has no power over the executive and legislative branches inasmuch as reviewing the actions of these branches though it is already appropriate for the judiciary to exercise its power. French v Senate of the State of California The judiciary cannot revise even the most arbitrary and unfair action of the legislative considering that its action is part of the power granted by the Constitution to that department. By virtue of which. However. are justiciable and within the jurisdiction expressly conferred to the SC. privilege speeches do endow the legislators freedom of speech. this does not mean that the content of the speech can never be questioned by other members of the House. Section 7 Rules of the House) Held & Ratio • Given that Osmeña was not able to substantiate his allegations and reason out why he should not be reprimanded. as to parliamentary immunity. WON there is usurpation of power. There was no quorum. Senator Cuenco was voted to fill it. Issue WON the SC has jurisdiction over this matter. A Osmeña v Pendatun Page 5 of 36 . The court did not find merit in his arguments. Issue Were resolutions Nos. Osmeña accusing the President of bribery Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Discipline of members Osmeña’s privilege speech He accused president Garcia and his government of bribery (i. though the duty to take it be made ever so clear by the constitution or the laws. the SC did not interfere with this matter out of respect for the legislators and the Senate. Other information There is now a limit in the period of suspension of legislators. Invalid. and if it does. The rump session held by 12 senators. Senator Tañada was scheduled to give his privilege speech which was supposed to be about allegations against the then Senate President Jose Avelino. No court can compel the Legislature to make or to refrain from making laws.e. Despite the criticisms on the jurisprudence applied and the merits of the controversy. 13 Osmeña v Pendatun MEMORY AID: A Message to Garcia.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 9 Avelino v Cuenco Related Topics Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Quorum Notes Fast facts In a senate session on February 21. emphasizes the invalidity of his election. especially when the speech contains words illustrative of disorderly conduct. Jurisprudence has held that the judiciary has no power to overturn any decision of the legislative to suspend an officer. he shall not be liable anymore to answer for his behavior and be questioned by the House (Rule 17. This resolution was adopted in response to his behavior. Resolution 67 Seat of Senate President is vacant. notwithstanding their political nature and implications. 1949. 68 and 67 validly approved? Held & Ratio Digest Link Avelino v Cuenco As to the justiciability of the issue. Resolution No.CONSTI1: A. The court relied on jurisprudence provided in cases Severino and French. criminals. could bail themselves out given they could pay a hefty price). However. depriving him of his position. after Avelino and his 9 supporters walked out from the session hall. had no constitutional quorum to transact business. Avelino adjourned the session and walked out together with some senators. This occurrence does not say well of the country’s justice system. Held & Ratio No. Limit is because suspending an officer for a lengthy period of time would tantamount to taxation without representation. if it is found that a branch has usurped the power of a co-equal branch. even those with serious crimes. Doing so is a violation of the separation of powers. a suspension fifteen (15) months was given as a punishment. The remaining senators continued in the session and made Arranza as acting Senate President. which cannot be divested from it by express prohibition of the Constitution. • First. As to the subsequent session held. The legal and constitutional issues raised by the petitioner in this case. As to the validity of the resolutions. The fact that the respondent has been designated only as acting President of the Senate would not entitle him to succeed to the position of the President of the Philippines. As to the adjournment of effected by Avelino. As Tañada was about to deliver his speech. or to meet or adjourn at its command. 10 Pacete v Commission on appointments Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Rules of proceedings Pacete v Comm on Appointments 11 Arroyo v De Venecia Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Rules of proceedings Arroyo v De Venecia 12 Alejandrino v Quezon MEMORY AID: Punching of De Vera Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Discipline of members Fast facts Senator Alejandrino is assailing the constitutionality of a resolution adopted by the Senate. or to take any action whatsoever. the theory of checks and balances shall be instated. 59 Obligating Congressman Osmeña to substantiate his allegations against the President and give reasons why the Congress should not punish him. re: punching of Senator De Vera in one of its sessions. the remedy shall be impeachment and not one prescribed by one of the three branches to correct the wrong that has been done. regardless of the merits of the decision itself.
*legislators are not exempted RA 3019 Any public official who has pending in court any criminal case under a valid information or any other offense involving fraud against the government shall be suspended from office. Contention c/o Santiago (pet) Only the chamber they belong to has to power to discipline them. an act which is punishable in RA 2381. What governs and is considered final in the judiciary is the enrolled bill. Santiago v Sandiganbayan 15 De Venecia v Sandiganbayan Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Discipline of members De Venecia refused to suspend. Contention c/o Pons RA 2381 is null and void. This is bar the filing of cases against the legislator making the speech. Contention c/o Casco The intent of the legislators. On court’s cognizance of issues on House Rules On matters affecting only internal operation of the legislature. compliance with the same was overturn by the adoption of Resolution 59. as unanimously approved. It has applied for a refund (from the Central Bank) of the margin fees it has paid as a result of its importation of chemicals urea and formaldehyde. however. null and void. almost final. indeed. On privilege speeches A legislator can be made accountable for whatever statement he has made.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes member of the Congress may be questioned of his privilege speech in the Congress itself (Section 15. the Sandiganbayan’s duty to issue the order of preventive suspension is distinct from the power of the Congress to discipline its members. was supposed to be on February 28. However. v Gimenez MEMORY AID: urea. It relates with their penal liability. Sandiganbayan can cite him for contempt Rendered moot and academic. not the chemicals treated separately. 1996 to suspend Santiago for the abovementioned cases. Evidence v conclusive evidence US v Pons Page 6 of 36 . senate president. the legislative rule affects private rights. However. RA 2609 Exempts sale of foreign exchange in relation with the importation of “urea formaldehyde” from the payment of the margin fee. Although there were statements on the floor that contemplated the intent of exempting the separate articles of chemicals rather than the finished product. 1984 • Filed in RTC: Violation of PD 46 • Filed in RTC: Libel. 1914 when the adjournment of the legislature. the legislature’s formulation and implementation of its rules is beyond the reach of the courts. 17 United States v Pons MEMORY AID: Adjournment of legislature. 90-day preventive suspension. Cognizance of legislative journals – Probative value In the US. formaldehyde Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Journal and record Fast facts Casco Chemical Co. as contemplated in the bill passed in congress and the statements made on the floor of the Senate during the consideration of the bill. was to exempt the importation of urea and formaldehyde separately. Citing the Paredes case.CONSTI1: A. Contention c/o pet Only the chamber that they belong to can discipline them (TRUE) This case does not relate with them as legislators and their conduct as such. Digest Link • As to the rules of the House. a legislator is not liable for the statements he makes. preventive suspension Decreed on January 25. it relates with their penal liability. is engaged in the manufacture of synthetic resin glues. modification or waiver at the discretion of the body adopting them. REBUTTAL: The abovementioned contention is accurate. not only the finished product. Article 6 of the Constitution in that the former deals with suspension of the officer not as a penalty but a preliminary and preventive measure. provided that in case of Acts of the legislature where a signed (by presiding officers) and approved copy exists. it shall be conclusive evidence of such an Act and of due enactment thereof. The enrolled bill stated that the exemption is for urea formaldehyde. “Urea and formaldehyde” v “urea formaldehyde” • Urea and formaldehyde are the individual chemical ingredients to concoct the glue • Urea formaldehyde is the finished product. the courts cannot altogether be excluded. Three criminal cases • Filed in Sandiganbayan: Violation of EO 324 on the prohibition of the legalization of 32 aliens who arrived after January 1. Section 313 of Civil Procedure provides that the proceedings of the legislature may be proved by the contents of its journals. he will not be guilty as there will be no law punishing the act of importation of opium. 14 Santiago v Sandiganbayan MEMORY AID: Suspension of Miriam DefensorSantiago Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Discipline of members Article VI of the Constitution).. as set by the Governor-General.al. In a privilege speech. Enrolled bill • Printed. the statements are unavailing. • Signed by the speaker. given that the same was not being imposed upon the petitioner for misbehavior as a member of the House. The rules adopted by deliberative bodies are subject to revocation. February 28 or March 1? Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Journal and record Fast facts Juan Pons et. When. 16 Casco Chemical Co. secretary general • Signatures certify that the bill passed both houses Held & Ratio Casco is not entitled to refunds. the finished product. If. Paredes v Sandiganbayan The suspension spoken of in RA 3019 is different from what is provided in Section 16(3). Held & Ratio The Sandiganbayan had the authority to order the preventive suspension of Santiago. there are certain rules. the case does not relate with them as legislators and their conduct as such. were found guilty by the lower courts of importation of opium. glue itself. journals may be noticed by the courts in determining the question whether a particular bill became a law or not. The Act was passed on March 1.
With this. When the bill thus Page 7 of 36 . The proceedings of the legislature may be proved by the journals of the respective houses. are guilty of an act punishable by RA 2381. which were subsequently approved by the rest of the Senate. Astorga sued on the premise that RA 4065 should be strictly complied with. revoked certain rights and privileges granted to Astorga. by virtue of RA 4065. The amendment introduced by Senator Roxas was not acted upon. RA 4065 An act defining the powers. and duties of the vice mayor of the city of Manila. it becomes final. it shall be conclusive proof of the provisions of such acts and of the due enactment thereof. 1964: President of the Philippines sent a message to the presiding officers of both Houses of Congress informing them that in view of the events that have unfolded. 1964: Tolentino issued a press release that the enrolled copy of house bill 9266 signed into law by the president was a wrong version of the bill actually passed by the Senate. July 5. 1964: bill was filed in the HOR April 21. House bill 9266 House bill from which RA 4065 originated. Even if it was dated March 1. it was established that the bill and attachments submitted to the President of the Philippines for his signature into law was not the same bill approved by the Congress. July 11. May 20. this was not the same version enacted as a law (Police Act of 1966) • The omission of the phrase “who has served the police department of a city or” was made not at any stage of the legislative proceedings but only during the proofreading stage. Since the Senate President withdrew his signature on the enrolled bill. Contentions c/o Villegas • RA 4065 never became law since it was no the bill actually passed by the Senate • The entries in the journal of the Senate. Senator Tolentino introduced substantial amendments. • The approval of the Congress. not the enrolled bill itself. Speaker of HOR. When there exists a copy of an enacted Act signed by the presiding officers and secretaries of the legislative bodies. Held & Ratio • RA 4065 is deemed to have not been duly enacted and therefore did not become a law. Journal entry rule. June 18. • There being no bill to speak of. as it did not contain the amendments emanating from Senator Tolentino. 1964. May 21. Bill was attested by the Secretary of HOR. However. In the journal.CONSTI1: A. his signature on the enrolled bill had not force and effect as it was invalid. Enrolled bill (or road bill???) doctrine • All changes in the contents of the bill shall be valid so long as it comes before the certification • But it should not be done because it is a violation of the rules • After it is certified. there was adjournment sine die (clock was stopped). as amended at the behest of Senator Rodrigo. 1964: President of the Philippines signed the bill. based on the entries in the journal of Senate proceedings. July 21. June 16. The court recognized the contents of the legislative journals indicating that the adjournment of the session was on the midnight of February 28. Committee came up with an amendment re: successor of vice-mayor in case of his incapacity to act as Mayor. thereby making it RA 4065.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes • Evidence – that which proves or disproves any matter in question or to influence the belief respecting it. such lacks valid attestation that is required by the Constitution as to what constitutes proof of due enactment of a bill. 1964: Secretary of HOR sent the copies of the bill to the President of the Philippines. 18 Astorga v Villegas MEMORY AID: Enrolled bill doctrine or journal entry rule Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Journal and record Digest Link Fast facts Villegas. 1964: bill was passed on its third reading without amendments Bill was sent to the Senate committee on provinces and municipal governments and cities. the date in the journal was still February 28. the journal shall prevail. Mayor of Manila. Secretary of the Senate. he was officially withdrawing his signature on the bill. is the requisite contemplated in the Constitution. Attached to the letter was a certification of the amendment. Vice-mayor. 1964: Letter from the Secretary of the Senate to the HOR read that House bill 9266 was passed by the Senate on May 20. the courts shall resort to the entries in the journal. 1964: Senate president addressed a letter to the President of the Philippines explaining that the bill he signed into a law was not the bill the Congress initially approved. Although it really was March 1 already. 1964: bill was discussed in the Senate on its second reading. should be decisive in the resolution of the issue Basic assumption of enrolled bill theory The enrolled bill was validly passed. and serves as conclusive evidence. was the version approved by the Senate.al. • Conclusive evidence – that which establishes the fact Held & Ratio Pons et. not the mechanical act of signing the bill. The Act (2381) was enacted on March 1. Enrolled bill doctrine v journal entry rule Enrolled bill doctrine. HOR approved the bill. the latter being the ones actually approved by the Senate. as signed by the presiding officers. 19 Morales v Subido MEMORY AID: qualifications for chief of a police agency Three branches of the government Congress Organizations and sessions Journal and record Contentions c/o Morales (pet) • The version of the provision of house bill 6951. • Upon examination of the journal. The fact that he and the Secretary of the Senate had signed it did not make the bill a valid enactment. 1964: Senate president clarified that the invalidation of his signature on the enrolled bill meant July 31. and the Senate President. which was the one recommended by Senator Roxas and not the one that emanated from Tolentino. with amendments. Timeline Astorga v Villegas March 30. rights. headed by Senator Roxas. as performed by an employee Field v Clark The signing by the Speaker of the HOR and by the President of the Senate of an enrolled bill is an official attestation by the two houses that such bill is the one that has passed Congress. that the bill had never been approved by the Senate.
Retirement pay is always based on the salary which one has received.. Jimenez v Cabangbang Page 8 of 36 . Letter of Cabangbang • Open letter to the President of the Philippines dated November 14. • The letter is not libelous. Furthermore. The case at bar merely questions the discrepancies between the enrolled bill and the copies of the bill furnished by the general endorsements made by clerks upon bills previous to their final passage and endorsement. Punishment for statutory rape is reclusion perpetua. In this case. as he did that as a regular citizen and not as a legislator. the enrolled bill prevails in the event of any discrepancy. • Equal protection laws. with Jimenez as one of the “masterminds” of the plans. disqualifications Salaries Ligot is not entitled to receive retirement pay computed based on the salaries of Congressmen after his term. the same shall not be questioned in any other place (Article 6. He was neither in the performance of his official duty in that he had published his open letter in newspapers. US v Pons Does not apply in the case at bar. including attendance at legislative sessions and committee meetings despite his having been convicted in the first instance of a non-bailable offense. it is submitted that one may legitimately appeal to the spirit of the prohibition and read the prohibition as an absolute ban on any from of direct or indirect increase of salary. Ligot never received such an amount (equal to salary of Congressmen after his term). disqualifications Salaries Digest Link The purpose of delaying the effectivity of any increase in salary is to place a “legal bar to the legislators’ yielding to the natural temptation to increase their salaries. Contention c/o Cabangbang The letter is not libelous since it is within his privilege as a member of the HOR that for any speech or debate made. 21 Ligot v Mathay Three branches of the government Congress Salaries. People v Jalosjos 23 Jimenez v Cabangbang Three branches of the government Congress Salaries.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes attested is signed by the President and deposited in the archives. (3) a modification of 1. • For offenses punishable by more than six (6) years imprisonment. privileges. • ”It is of course possible that the officers mentioned above are unwitting tools of the plan of which they may have absolutely no knowledge. • There was strong evidence of guilt. Section 15 of 1935). • The performance of legitimate and even essential duties by public officers has never been an excuse to free a person validly in prison.” Referring to the “masterminds”. propagandizing. Held & Ratio • With respect to matters not expressly required to be entered on the journal. disqualifications Freedom from arrest 1935 v 1987 Constitution on immunity from arrest 1935 privilege only encompassed civil arrest 1987 (and 1973) a legislator is privileged from arrest even for a criminal offense provided that the offense was not punishable by a penalty of more than six (6) years imprisonment. disqualifications Speech and debate clause Fast facts Jimenez files a case to recover damages from a publication of a letter by Cabangbang. Mabanag v Lopez-Vito An enrolled bill imports absolute verity and is binding on the courts. (2) coup d’etat. Only when the journals lack of pertinent information required by the Constitution. • To prevent Jalosjos from fleeing again. • It cannot be defeated by insuperable procedural restraints arising from pending criminal cases. Held & Ratio • Jalosjos is not allowed to pursue undertakings as Congressman while in detention. privileges. This is a covenant with his constituents made possible by the intervention by the State. Cited jurisprudence deals with the discrepancy between the enrolled bill and the journal. it does not fall under the speech and debate privileges of a member of the HOR.” that is salaries. its authentication as a bill that has passed Congress should be deemed complete and unimpeachable. 22 People v Jalosjos Three branches of the government Congress Salaries.CONSTI1: A. 1968 while Congress was not in session • Published in several newspapers • Exposé on three plans. which is allegedly libelous. • The enrolled bill does not always prevail over the journals. there was no immunity from arrest. Plans consisted of: (1) grooming. The statements contained therein are not sufficiently derogatory as to award damages to the petitioner. it was issued when the HOR was not in session. privileges.” While the letter of the present law prohibits immediate increase of “said compensation. a member of the HOR. • Privilege has to be granted by law. • Field v Clark: The case at bar merely questions the discrepancies between the enrolled bill and the copies of the bill furnished by the general endorsements made by clerks upon bills previous to their final passage and endorsement. he has the duty to perform the functions of a Congressman. to be the next RP President. • Having been duly elected. and glamorizing Jesus Vargas. not inferred from the duties of a position. • When the voters of his district elected him. Mandate of sovereign will • Main argument of Jalosjos • The sovereign of the First District of Zamboanga del Norte chose him as their representative in Congress. an issue which the present case lacks. The organs of government may not show nay undue favoritism or hostility to any person. • Election to the position of Congressman is not a reasonable classification in criminal law enforcement. privileges. and. the greater is the requirement of obedience rather than exemption. Salary increase will only be increased after the terms of all the legislators who passed the bill on it have already lapsed/ended (next elections). Held & Ratio • It being an open letter. they did so with full awareness of the limitations on his freedom of action. 20 Phiconsa v Mathay Three branches of the government Congress Salaries. The privilege is available only “while the Congress is in session” whether regular or special and wehter or not the legislator is actually attending a session. The higher the rank. Subject matter of motion c/o Jalosjos That he be allowed to fully discharge the duties of a Congressman. Secretary of National Defense. • All persons similarly situated shall be treated alike both in rights enjoyed and responsibilities imposed.
especially when the duty is expressly granted by the Constitution. only the SC justices) Held & Ratio • It is proper for the senators to remain as member of the tribunal • The Constitution clearly provides for the composition of the tribunal and definition of its jurisdiction and powers • The reason why the Constitution provides such a composition (justices and senators) is that the duty and authority in adjudicating in election contests lies in both the legislative and the judiciary • As to the ratio of the members (3:6). disqualifications Disqualifications May 14. and qualifications of their respective members Motion for disqualification Disqualification of the senators from being members of the tribunal who was going to adjudicate the case of mass disqualification (22 senators). they are interested parties • Considerations of public policy and norms of fair play and due process call for the disqualification of the senators as members of the tribunal • In response to this. evidenced in its majority membership. 1979: deed of sale of shares of stock owned by Fernandez was notarized. May 31. the tribunal will be hampered in performing its duty. returns. He then ran as assemblyman. Subterfuge. private corporation. privileges. instead. not only the final tally in the case. Pineda was proclaimed the winner of the elections. Contention c/o Fernandez (resp) He was not the counsel for the Acero group as he only intervened as a separate party who had legal interest in the matter being a shareholder of IPI. Bondoc protested Pineda’s proclamation with the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET). Held & Ratio • Fernandez cannot intervene in the SEC case. Puyat group contested this as it is in violation of the Constitution (…that no assemblyman could appear as counsel before any administrative body…).300 votes.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 24 Adaza v Pacana Related Topics Three branches of the government Congress Salaries. the tribunal will have abandoned its duty • The tribunal should not be prevented from discharging their duty. 107 votes.CONSTI1: A. Initially. May 25. May 31. 1979: SEC case was called. Article 6 of 1987) Decision of HRET Bondoc is the winner of the contest. his old position is deemed to have automatically been forfeited. 1979: Fernandez filed an urgent motion for intervention in the SEC case as the owner of the newly purchased 10 shares. there should be an amendment in the tribunal’s rules wherein its procedure should permit the contest to be decided by only three (3) members of the Tribunals (effectively. with a margin of. 1979: Acero group. If everyone who becomes a member of such tribunal and for every instance their membership questioned. 1979. Fast facts Puyat group. One cannot do indirectly something that he can also not do directly. 1991: Congressman Camasura. In public office. Senate Electoral Tribunal • Composed of three (3) SC justices and six (6) senators • Sole judge of all contests relating to the election. Realizing the validity of the objection. contests the appearance in intervention of Fernandez. Digest Link 25 Puyat v De Guzman Three branches of the government Congress Salaries. privileges. the substitutes of the senators will still be questioned. one who runs for another position. 1979: election for the 11 directors of International Pipe Industries (IPI). Timeline revealed to Congressman Cojuangco. 27 Bondoc v Pineda Three branches of the government Congress Electoral tribunals Fast facts Pineda (LDP) and Bondoc (NP) are rivals in the congressional race in the 4th district of Pampanga. In effect. once he takes his oath in the new position. Contention c/o petitioners • Senators cannot be members of the tribunal because. 1979: Puyat group contends that Fernandez orally entered his appearance as counsel for Acero group. is indispensable. (Rationale: one cannot have two (2) or multiple loyalties) Adaza was the governor. to “intervene” as a shareholder. Pulling them out of the tribunal would result to violating the spirit and intent of the Constitution • Inasmuch as substitutions will take place. filed a case in the SEC questioning the May 14 election and alleging that the votes thereat were not properly counted. Page 9 of 36 . but also that he voted for Bondoc to honor a gentleman’s agreement among the HRET members. July 17. HRET Chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and the parties or organizations registered under the party-list system represented therein (Section 17. • He has circumvented the Constitution by hiding behind his supposed legal interest as a shareholder. 1987 elections). Timeline May 15. May 30. he had already expressed his intention to appear as counsel for Acero which would have materialized had it not for the objection of the Puyat group. the Constitution implies that the legislative component in the tribunal. composed of the remaining directors elected on May 14. secretary-general of LDP. composed of some of the directors who were elected on May 14. Bondoc v Pineda March 4. an assemblyman. Puyat group would be in control of management. having won with a margin of 3. after reexaminations. 1979: Fernandez purchased 10 shares of stock of IPI. he decided. • The “intervention” was merely an afterthought to enable him to appear actively in the proceedings in some other capacity. disqualifications Disqualifications Notes One cannot hold multiple positions. 26 Abbas v SET Three branches of the government Congress Electoral tribunals Fast facts Petitioners filed a case in the Senate Electoral Tribunal against 22 newly elected senators (May 11. 1979: SEC granted intervention. This is evident in his actions where he bought the shares right after the elections and filed an intervention immediately thereafter. • Moreover. Article 8 of 1973). in the SEC case on the ground that assemblymen cannot appear as counsel for SEC (Section 11. member of the HRET which decided on the Bondoc case. This stirred a buzz in the LDP that led to the plotting of neutralizing the “Bondoc majority” in the HRET. May 25-31. especially in this case.
for allegedly pirating LDP members to join a rival party. their primary recourse rests with the HOR. It is a clear impairment of the constitutional prerogative of the HRET to be the sole judge of the election contest between Bondoc and Pineda • Disloyalty to a party is not a valid cause for termination of membership in the HRET. together with Congressman Bautista. the SC cannot interfere with the HOR’s decision in choosing Page 10 of 36 . 1991: Bondoc seeks reversal of HOR decision of disqualifying Camasura from the HRET. SC justices who were members of the tribunal. the constitutional provision mandating representation based on political affiliation would be completely nullified. from the Secretary-General of the HOR. Cojuangco informed Camasura that he. it also has the sole power to remove any of them whenever the ratio in the representation of the political parties in the House or Senate is materially changed • The term of the member of the tribunal could not be co-extensive with his legislative term. and to transfer to that tribunal all the powers previously exercised by the legislature in matters of pertaining to contested elections of its members • Power of Electoral Commission: intended to be unimpaired as if it had remained in the legislature Held & Ratio • HOR’s resolution disqualifying Camasura from the tribunal is null and void • The disqualification was made in view of what happened between Camasura and the LDP. not HRET. 1991: SC ordered the justices to return to their posts in the tribunal. March 13. especially the legislature • Cited Suanes and Angara cases 28 Codilla v De Venecia Three branches of the government Congress Electoral tribunals Who has jurisdiction? COMELEC has jurisdiction. because there was still a pending Motion for Reconsideration. Contention c/o petitioners • Present composition of the HRET violates the Constitution in that it lacks representation from party-list representatives • Locus standi requirement. and reconfigure” the composition of the HRET and the CA to include party-list representatives.CONSTI1: A. about the ouster of the two (2) congressmen and had him note the implications of the ouster as to the prerequisite “party” in the membership to the HRET. A member cannot be expelled unless there be some just cause. being of the opinion that the turn of events undermines the independence of the tribunal and derails the orderly adjudication of electoral cases. should be brushed aside because of the issue’s transcendental importance Held & Ratio Petition dismissed. from its members. • The disqualification was clearly made to interfere with the tribunal’s disposition in the Bondoc case and deprive Bondoc of the fruits of the favorable decision • The tribunal should not be hampered to perform its duty specifically granted by the Constitution by reasons which have nothing to do with the merits before it. not with the SC. • Expulsion of Camasura from LDP is “purely a party affair” and is thus a political question beyond the reach of the judiciary Proportional representation in the tribunal • Provided for by the 1987 constitution • 3 members chosen by the House or Senate upon nomination of the party having the largest number of votes. they have asked the Chief Justice to relieve them of membership from the tribunal. Case was still in the COMELEC. it is not a valid ground for expulsion. The Constitution expressly grants to the HOR the prerogative. Contentions c/o Pineda • Congress has the sole authority to nominate and elect. there was no case. 3 SC justices • Premised that no party or coalition of parties can dominate the legislative component in the tribunal • Justices hold the deciding votes in that it is impossible for any political party to control the voting in the tribunal Suanes v Chief Accountant of the Senate • Purpose of the establishment of the Electoral Commission was to provide an independent and impartial tribunal for the determination of contest to legislative office. Pineda files for the dismissal of Bondoc’s petition. March 21. expressed similar sentiments. Remaining senator-members of the tribunal. for if a member of the tribunal suddenly changes political party affiliation and is not removed from the tribunal. as a procedural technicality. 1991: HRET issued a Notice of Promulgation of Decision on March 14. reorganize. 1991: Tribunal Chairman Armeurfina Herrera received a letter. Having been not duly proclaimed. one must discharge his duties with the concept of nonpartisanship. has been expelled by the LDP as early as February 28. 1991. Promulgation of the decision of Bondoc case was cancelled. March 19. devoid of partisan consideration. Even assuming that party-list representatives comprise a sufficient number and have agreed to designate common nominees to the HRET. speaker of the house. 1991. informing the tribunal that it has decided to withdraw the nomination and rescind the election of Camasura to the HRET. • The tribunal was created to function as a nonpartisan court although 2/3 of its members are politicians. dated March 13. Therefore. March 14. Cojuangco also informed Mitra. to choose from among its district and party-list representatives those who may occupy the seats allotted to the house in the HRET. • The disqualification is violative of Camasura’s right to security of tenure. There was no valid proclamation. 1991: Eve of promulgation of decision. It is only if the HOR fails to comply with the constitutional directives on proportional representation can this court have jurisdiction over the matter.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Digest Link March 5. reconstitute. other than Camasura. within defined limits. delegates to the HRET • Vis-à-vis. 29 Pimentel v HRET Three branches of the government Congress Electoral tribunals Fast facts Petitioners pray that the respondents be ordered to “alter. As a member of the tribunal. 1991 re: Bondoc case. Such will affect the results of the Bondoc case where Camasura was the “conscience vote”…the decision lacks the concurrence of five (5) members as required by the rules of the tribunal. Under the doctrine of separation of powers. • It is established by the constitution and prevailing jurisprudence that the tribunal must be independent from any other body. 3 members from the party having the second largest number of votes.
Cordero v Cabatuando) 3. 31 Coseteng v Mitra Three branches of the government Congress Commission on Appointments 32 Guingona v Gonzales Three branches of the government Congress Commission on Appointments 33 Tio v Videogram Regulatory Board Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills As to titles of bills Constitutional requirements as to title of bills 1. unregulated videogram activities have affected the movie industry. the persons interested in the subject matter. Those preambles explain the motives of the lawmaker in presenting the measure. twelve (12) congressmen. Held & Ratio Decree is constitutional. earnings of videogram established are not taxed appropriately. and is reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the general object of the decree. These provisions are inserted and are made to “ride” on the bill. the provision which is not directly connected with it is nonetheless made into law. which is the regulation of the video industry through the VRB. Congress is to refrain from conglomeration. distribution of videogram materials has greatly prejudiced the operations of movie houses and theaters. are still acting as such. 1987 An Act Creating the Videogram Regulatory Board. depriving the government P180M per annum 3. They simply refused to participate therein. proper taxes should be imposed to these establishments to alleviate financial condition of the industry. scope.. which imposes a tax of 30% on the gross receipts payable to the local government. Said act involved the formation of the new municipality that will be composed of the following barrios: Barrios from Lanao del Sur Kapatagan Losain Bongabong Matimos Aipang Magolatung Dagowan Bakikis Bungabung Barrios from Cotabato (P-Parang. study and discuss the same. unlike in electoral tribunals where they lose their personality as legislators. Tio v VRB 34 Lidasan v COMELEC Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills As to titles of bills RA 4790 An Act Creating the Municipality of Dianaton in the Province of Lanao del Sur. Rider Said to have occurred when provisions of the bill do not relate with the subject matter as contemplated by the title of the bill. the government has to create conducive to growh and development of all business industries (regulation of such) 5. civic-minded citizens and groups have called for remedial measures to curb these blatant malpractices which have flaunted our censorship and copyright laws 8. of heterogenous subjects 2. taxation being the primary rationale of regulating videogram activities 6. bold emergency measures must be adopted with dispatch Contention c/o petitioner Decree is unconstitutional because Section 10 of said decree. with broad powers to regulate and supervise the videogram industry Rationale of decree (preambular clauses) 1. Resident and taxpayer of the detached portion of Parang. Cotabato.CONSTI1: A. of the nature. Recktenwald) PD No. decreasing government revenues by an estimated P450M per annum 2.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics its representatives in the HRET. 30 Daza v Singson Three branches of the government Congress Commission on Appointments Notes Digest Link Commission on Appointments CA confirms the nominees of the President. Section 26) 2. since they do not have personal stake in the matter. titles should be given practical rather than technical construction (Public Service Co. prevent surprise or fraud upon them Guidelines Page 11 of 36 . The express purpose of the decree to include taxation is evident in the preambular clauses (5). in the CA. Limitations of constitutional provision for the titles of bills 1. members of the judiciary and bar council. Legislators. such that when the bill is made into law. The title of the decree is comprehensive enough to include in its subject matter all the provisions contained in the decree. Section 10 is allied and related to. consuls. ambassadors. rampant and unregulated showing of obscene videgram is immoral especially as regards the youth 7. under one statute. titles should not be so narrowly construed as to cripple or impede the power of legislation (Governemnt v Hongkong Shanghai Banking Corporation. Appointees include heads of agencies. thus. AFP (naval captain up). to ensure national economic recovery. the title is to be couched in a language sufficient to notify the legislators and the public and those concerned of the import of the single subject thereof Meeting the constitutional requirements: What is sufficient • title serves the purpose of the constitutional demand that it informs the legislators. which has resulted to the closing down of more than 1. public ministers. petitioners’ locus standi is not recognized. and the public. is a RIDER and the same is not related to the subject matter of the decree.200 movie houses and theaters 4. Composed of twelve (12) senators. Case is academic as the composition of the house has already been changed as a result of the May 14. every bill shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the title thereof (Article 6. and consequences of the proposed law and operation • title leads legislators to inquire into the body of the bill. Case lacks merit in that party-list representatives were not deprived of their participation in the election of members of the HRET. take appropriate action thereon. 2001 elections. and. In this light. B-Buldon) Togaig (B) Sarakan (P) Madalum (B) Kat-bo (P) Bayanga (P) Digakapan (P) Langkong (P) Magabo (P) Tabangao (P) Tiongko (P) Colodan (P) Kabamakawan (P) Lidasan v COMELEC Bara Lidasan Petitioner. in view of the aforementioned. Contention c/o Daza (pet) He cannot be removed from CA There is nothing Daza can do.
The automatic appropriation is authorized by PD 81. 35 De la Cruz v Paras Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills As to titles of bills Digest Link RA 938 An Act granting municipal or city boards and councils the power to regulate the establishment. The Constitution simply implies that what has to go through a process is if there are any bills relating with the appropriation measures still to be passed by Congress. Section 25) Held & Ratio as to complying PD 1177 is unconstitutional. The second one does not relate with the subject matter of the RA as expressed in its title. The transfer of barrios from Cotabato to Lanao constitutes a change in the boundaries. not prohibition.). an automatic appropriation of P98. 1992 – August 31.CONSTI1: A. as Amended. shall remain in the old legislative district. De la Cruz v Paras 36 Tobias v Abalos Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills As to titles of bills Fast facts Before the enactment of RA 7675. November 23. Bills have to be approved by the president.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes • sufficiency of the title is established when it is determined WON the same is misleading • technical accuracy is not essential • title is considered bad if: (1) uncertain that the average person will not be sufficiently informed of the subject matter (2) misleading. legislators. and PD 1967. electing just one set of local government officials. Transmitted to Senate Committee on Ways and Means. then a law must be passed by Congress to authorize said automatic appropriation. Title failed to give notice to all persons interested (i. Held & Ratio Aforementioned contention is untenable. including congressman. Section 49 of RA Mandaluyong City shall have its won legislative district. title pertains to one subject. In the next elections. maintenance and operation of certain places of amusement within their respective territorial jurisdictions May 21. P86.No. PD 1177. RA 7675 An Act Converting the Municipality of Mandaluyong into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as City of Mandaluyong Article 8. San Juan and Mandaluyong formed a single legislative district. Guingona v Caraque 39 Tolentino v Secretary of Finance Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Appropriation laws Procedure for the passage of bills RA 7716 An Act Restructuring the Value-Added Tax (Vat) System. 11197 (bill). residents. among others.4 billion. both of which are included in the General Appropriations Act. “prohibit…” The title remained the same. H. 1177 Budget reform decree of 1977. and For Other Purposes. The purpose and conditions for which funds may be transferred may be specified. (2) the division of the congressional district of San Juan/Mandaluyong into two separate districts. November 6 and 17. The President…may be authorized to do augment any item in the general appropriations law…from savings in other items of their respective appropriations. but likewise. necessarily includes and contemplates the subject and treated under Section 49. and for These Purposes Amending and Repealing the Relevant Provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code. should be kept in mind by the court Held & Ratio RA 4790 is unconstitutional—null and void. Contention c/o petitioners To construe RA 938 as allowing the prohibition of the operation of night clubs would give rise to a constitutional question. The creation of a separate congressional district for Mandaluyong is a natural logical consequence of its conversion into a highly urbanized city. Held & Ratio Statute is invalid. All were referred to House Committee on Ways and Means which recommended for approval a substitute measure. when. two separate representatives shall be voted for. something else is embraced by its contents • substance over form • constitutional requirement of giving notice to all persons interested. etc. Held & Ratio Abovementioned contention is devoid of merit. 37 Demetria v Alba Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Appropriation laws PD No. 1993: The bill was considered on a second reading and was subsequently approved by the HOR after the third and final reading. The PD makes no regard as to WON the funds to be transferred are actually savings in the item from which the same are to be taken or WON the transfer is for the purpose of augmenting the item to which said transfer is to be made. 1954 The first section of the Act was amended to include not merely the power to regulate. being part of the old legislative district to which Mandaluyong formerly belonged to. It fails to specify the objectives and purposes for which the proposed transfer of funds are to be made. 1993: Bill was sent to the Senate. The title did not reflect the true subject matter of the Act. Widening its Tax Base and Enhancing its Administration. Page 12 of 36 . The framers of the constitution did not intend to say that longestablished statutes. July 22. Constitutional requirement No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations. a significant detail that the title failed to communicate.8 of which goes to debt service. Demetria v Alba 38 Guingona v Caraque Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Appropriation laws Fast facts The 1990 budget consists. have to go again through the legislative process of bill passage in order to be properly enacted. San Juan. like PDs. Section 24 of 1987). Contention c/o petitioners The inclusion of Section 49 in the subject law resulted in the latter embracing two principal subjects: (1) the conversion of Mandaluyong into a highly urbanized city and. presumptively. 1993: Several bills were introduced in the HOR seeking to amend certain Timeline Tolentino v Sec of Finance provisions in the NIRC related with VAT. Authorizes the President to transfer any fund that has already been appropriated for a given department to another program. Contention c/o petitioners Abovementioned PDs are contrary to the constitution (Article 6. The title.e. (Article 6. The power granted remains that of a regulation. in truth. The prohibition to transfer an appropriation for one item to another was explicit and categorical under the 1973 Constitution. It is misleading in that it gives the impression that the barrios which will form the new municipality are all from Lanao del Sur.
• December 30. in consolidation with Senate Bill No. The provision is also attempting to repeal PD 1177 (Foreign Borrowing Act) and EO 292. Senators take on the role of taking on the same problem in a more macro or national perspective. • The provision that was vetoed was with regard to first special provision (Appropriations for debt service) in GAA of 1994. No. S. Legislative power is vested by the Constitution not just to one particular chamber but both HOR and Senate. It was stated that the bill was being submitted "in substitution of Senate Bill No. • It imposed conditions and limitations on certain items of appropriations in the proposed budget previously submitted by the President. but the concept of initiative. Special provision vetoed The appropriation shall be used for the payment of debt. and for Other Purposes. • Originated from House bill No. may undergo changes. The Constitution. Contentions c/o petitioners • As to complying with appropriation laws. May 2. not the “readings” requirement.1630 has complied with the constitution (Article 6. or tax bills. May 5. Philconsa v Enriquez Page 13 of 36 . Also. Any payment that will exceed the appropriation shall be subject to approval. 11197. 1993: the president signed the bill into law after the same had been presented to him by the Congress for consideration and approval. It implies that the HOR is superior to the Senate. It also authorized members of Congress to propose and identify projects in “pork barrels” allotted to them and to realign their respective operating budgets. 10900. Initiative in proposing revenue bills What is important to consider in understanding the Constitutional requirement expressed in Article 6. Section 25). 1630. • The president cannot veto the Special Provision on the appropriation for debt service without vetoing the entire amount of P86. It is not the law. • As to complying with procedures for the passage of bills. S. Now if the argument shall flourish.No. 1630. Res. 1994: Senate committee submitted its report and recommended the approval of S. Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-Four. Held & Ratio As to complying with procedures for the passage of bills. 40 Philconsa v Enriquez Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Appropriation laws Procedure for the passage of bills RA 7663 • An Act Appropriating Funds for the Operation of the Government of the Philippines from January One to December Thirty One. 1630) in the Conference Committee to produce the bill which the President signed into law.” April 27.1630 has likewise complied with procedural requirements as set forth in the constitution. The initiative for filing revenue. 734 and H. Presidential Veto on House bill 10900 • Veto power is part of the legislative process • The president exercised his veto power upon certain provisions in the bill before signing the same into law. Section 26). private bills and bills of local application must come from the HOR under the premise that congressmen. No. 1994: HOR approved conference committee bill. tariff. March 24. but the revenue bill itself. not the individual members of their respective Houses. a member of Congress may re-allocate a portion of said allocation to any other expense category so long as the limits are still complied with. • Any provision which does not relate to any item of appropriation. Presidential certification When the president certifies to the urgency of the immediate enactment of a certain bill. The veto was justified by the president by saying that the debt reduction scheme contained in the context of said provision cannot be validly done through GAA of 1994. It is important to note this because a House bill. March 22. are more abreast to the needs and problems of their locality. 1630. bills authorizing an increase of the public debt. that a revenue statute—not only the bill which the process began with—must be the same House. and to reverse the debt payment policy. The issue WON there is an actual emergency to be the basis of the certification is subject to a different standard of review. 11197 had originated in the HOR. No. as they come from particular districts. The Senate can propose its own version even with respect to bills which are required by the Constitution to originate in the House. B. is considered “an inappropriate provision” which can be vetoed separately from an item • Repeal of laws (i. No. Since it did not originate from the HOR. 1994: President marked the bill as “urgent”. Gonzales v Macaraig • The president may veto a single provision without also vetoing the whole bill (item-veto) • Any provision in the general appropriations bill shall relate specifically to some particular appropriation therein…(Article 6. No. S. taking into consideration P. 1994: Senate approved conference committee bill. April 1994: Bills H. 1129. even when it is passed to the Senate. amendments to the bill. upon undergoing the legislative process. certain procedural requirements may be dispensed with (Article 6. 1994: Senate began its consideration of S. in relation with the presidential certification. let alone propose. only dispenses with the “printing” requirement. Section 24). Section 25). it has not become a law." Digest Link February 8.CONSTI1: A.e. it must be addressed by revising our debt policy by way of innovative and comprehensive debt reduction programs. PD 1177. Section 24) although H. which the Constitution requires to originate from the HOR. it is also saying that the Senate has no power to concur with.No. 1630 did not pass three readings on separate days as required by the Constitution because the second and third readings were done on the same day. EO 292) shall be done in a separate law not in the appropriations law Realignment of allocation of operating expenses From the original amount of allocation for operating expenses. there is no viable emergency that would justify the certification of the bill. be approved in accordance with the attached copy of the bill as reconciled and approved by the conferees.3 Million. The views of both these chambers are considered in enacting such laws.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes February 7. S. 11197. As to complying with appropriation laws. 1994: Bill was approved on second and third readings.11197 and S. is authorized by the Constitution to realign appropriations (Article 6.1630 were referred to a conference committee which recommended that "House Bill No. • No step was taken in either House of Congress to override the vetoes. Congress violated the Constitution because (Article 6. In enacting RA 7716. it was not passed by the Senate but was simply consolidated with the Senate version (S. The Senate accepted the president’s certification and dispensed with the requirement of readings on separate days. Section 24 is not the procedural factor of having a bill exclusive originate from the HOR. 1994: Bill was presented to the president who then signed it. Contentions c/o petitioners • Only the Senate President and the Speaker.
There is no explicit provision on its alleged exemption from real property taxes. and Special provision No. Held & Ratio The Lung Center is a valid charitable institution as created by PD 1823. deductions are enumerated. The number of items considered as allowable deductions may have been reduced. shall approve the realignment. the Senate President and the Speaker of the HOR. Thus. They find their argument on Article 6. As to complying with constitutional provisions on taxation. Lung Center v QC 42 Tan v Del Rosario Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Tax laws Fast facts Petitioners. which is not contemplated in the title thereof. are assailing the constitutionality of RA 7496 or the Simplified Net Income Taxation Scheme (SNIT) and the validity of RR 2-93. However there is simply no need for the title to do so because there is actually no change in the method of taxation. However. CJ Davide: The exemption does not relate with the institution itself. (2) Article 6. It has been an established rule in taxation that single proprietorships and professionals shall be imposed with income taxes. which is gross revenues less allowable deductions (bottom line amount) Income tax of individuals v income tax of corporations Individuals – rates with which income tax shall be computed varies depending on the tax base or the income of the individual. but the incorporation of the same in tax computation is nonetheless results in net income taxation. regardless of tax base As to the sufficiency of the title of the bill. (2) from the payment of charges and fees with respect to equipment purchases made by. Article 6. whichever the case may be.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Digest Link Held & Ratio As to complying with Appropriation laws. it is exempt from these real taxes. Section 28 of the Constitution. specifically those which are leased to commercial establishments. It owns a parcel of land. Section 28 With regard to charitable institutions. this does not imply that certain taxpayers are prejudiced by this change. it cannot be said that the amendatory RA contravenes uniformity and equity. It is true that this title does not contemplate any shift to gross income taxation. as Amended. Section 28… As to the sufficiency of the title of the bill. Therefore. Contention c/o Lung Center It is a charitable institution. as to Section 6. House bill 34314. Contentions c/o petitioners • RA 7496 violates the following constitutional provisions: (1) Article 6. where higher the income. Significant portions of the remaining space on the land are leased to business enterprises for which the entity earns rental income. 1823. or for the Lung Center. if any. in the center of it is the Lung Center building proper. building. There is indeed a shift from the conventional to a scheduler approach in the income taxation of individuals. and improvements actually. higher the tax rate (progressive tax system) Corporations – single rate system. • It is in excess of the respondents’ rule-making authority to apply SNIT general professional partnerships (GPP) GPPs GPPs are tax-exempt partnerships under the tax code. However.CONSTI1: A. The bill has suddenly adopted the gross income method of taxation. It is subject to taxation of its real property. As to complying with constitutional provisions on tax. Page 14 of 36 .2 of the item of appropriation for the DPWH. The ground floor of the building proper is likewise leased to concessionaires and doctors (clinics). Nonetheless. directly. was simply Held & Ratio entitled Simplified Net Income Taxation Scheme for the Self-Employed and Professionals Engaged in the Practice of their Profession. as opposed to net income taxation. 12 o nthe purchase of medicine by the AFP. They are in a position to determine such as they are knowledgeable of any deficiencies in other items of their operating expenses that need augmentation. rather. in their capacity as taxpayers. The amendments include a revised graduated income tax table on the taxes to be imposed on self-employed and professionals engaged in the practice of profession and an enumeration of deductions from gross income to arrive at the gross taxable income. Gross income v net income taxation Gross income taxation – imposed on the amount of gross revenues without applying deductions from said amount (top line amount) Net income taxation – imposed on the net income. Members of the Congress have authority insofar as determining the necessity of the appropriations. PD 1823. There is no mention in PD 1823 of its exemption form real property taxes. Vetos are sustained except for the veto of the special provision on debt service specifying that the fund therein appropriated “shall be used for payment of the principal and interest of foreign and domestic indebtedness” prohibiting the use of the said funds “to pay for the liabilities of the Central Bank Board of Liquidators” and veto of the second paragraph of Special Provision No. as these are not in pursuance of the entity’s purposes as a charitable institution. The income it generates is taxable not as income of the entity but as income of its individual partners with such income is distributed to them. but. The City Assessor (resp) assessed real property taxes on the entity’s land and building. with its real property as regards real property tax. 41 Lung Center v QC Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Tax laws Fast facts Petitioner is a non-stock and non-profit entity established by virtue of PD No. As provided for in Section 29. RA 7496 An Act Adopting the Simplified Net Income Taxation Scheme For The Self-Employed and Professionals Engaged In The Practice of Their Profession. The objectives of the constitution as to the title of the bill have been sufficiently met. Section 2 Exemptions that the entity could avail of include: (1) from income and gift taxes. Section 26. As to complying with procedures for the passage of bills. from which the RA originated. The RA uniform and equitable as to the imposition of taxes. and exclusively used for charitable purposes shall be exempt from tax. to be incorporated in the computation of the net taxable income of the individual. it is only exempted from taxes insofar as the statute that created it so indicates. as defined therein. all land. It attempts to tax single proprietorships and professionals differently from the manner it imposes the tax on corporations and partnerships. Amending Sections 21 and 29 of the National Internal Revenue Code.
On the other hand. 420 • Creating and Designating a Portion of the Area Covered by the Former Camp John Hay as the John Hay Special Economic Zone (SEZ) Pursuant to RA 7227 • Section 3 of this proclamation provides that CJH SEZ shall be granted the incentives provided for in RA 7227 RA 7227 Provides that no taxes. headings. as mirrored by the exemptions provided for in RA 7227. Levying of customs duties is done to give much opportunity to local manufactures (i. Contention c/o Garcia • Abovementioned EO’s violate the constitution (Article 6. Personal note (highly disputable. RA 7227 expressly requires the concurrence of local government units to the creation of SEZs. Held & Ratio Section 27 of RA 6770 is invalid. which authorizes an appeal by certiorari t to the SC of the certain adjudications of the Office of the Ombudsman.” Contentions c/o respondents RA 7227. a specific tax per liter or barrel of imported crude oil and other oil products. the action must be brought to the CA. in addition to the 9% ad valorem tax. The proclamation circumvents the Constitution’s imposition that a law granting any tax exemption must have the concurrence of a majority of all the member of Congress. Contention c/o petitioners Proclamation 420 insofar as it grants tax exemptions that RA 7227 supposedly extends to it. EO 478 Levies. by providing that the mode of appeal shall be by petition for certiorari under Rule 45. its power to exempt being as broad as its power to tax. Contention c/o Fabian (pet) Section 27 of RA 6770. 44 John Hay PAC v Lim Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Tax laws Presidential Proclamation No. the proclamation has no basis for the exemptions is extends to CJH. when the appeal is origination from judgments and final orders of a quasi-judicial agency. Held & Ratio The President can enact revenue bills in view of Article 6. Held & Ratio Proclamation 420 is void. Digest Link Garcia v Executive Secretary Section 401. Said provision explicitly provides the constitutional permission to Congress to authorize the president “subject to such limitations and restrictions a [Congress] may impose” to fix “within specific limits” “tariff rates…and other duties…” Moreover. or local governments may pass ordinances on exemption only from local taxes. then what may be raised therein are only questions of law of which SC already has jurisdiction. I say this because some of the petitioners are local government officials of Baguio and that their locus standi is based on their interest as such. Section 27 does not increase the SC’s appellate jurisdiction since. All tariff sections. It is the legislature.CONSTI1: A. It cannot validly authorize any appeal to the SC from the decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases. unless limited by a provision of the state constitution. local and national shall be imposed within the Subic Special Economic Zone (Section 12). except in the cases of crude oil and other oil products which continued to be subject to the additional duty of 9% ad valorem. orders. it cannot be made to pay local taxes such as property taxes. including power to modify the form of duty. RA 6770 Effectivity and finality of decisions—all provisionary orders at the Office of the Ombudsman are immediately effective and executory…in all administrative disciplinary cases. • Levying of customs duties only results in the “protection of local industries” • President’s action is driven purely to generate revenue for the government. not at all conclusive): I think the petitioners were assailing the proclamation as to the validity of its exemptions granted to CJH. still embodies the legislative intent of exempting all US Military Bases that will be converted to SEZs from taxes. Nowhere in RA 7227 is there a grant of tax exemption to SEZs yet to be established in base areas. it contravenes Article 6.e. Moreover. Tariff and Customs Code Section 104. the President may not assume such power of issuing EO 475 and 478 which are in the nature of revenue-generating measures. or decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman may be appealed to the SC by filing a petition for certiorari within 10 days from receipt of the written notice of the order. It is clear that RA 7227 only grants the exemptions to Subic SEZ. Therefore. If it were the intention of the legislature to grant CJH SEZ the same exemptions and incentives it grants to Subic SEZ. chapters. unlike the grant under Section 12 thereof of tax exemption and investment incentives to the therein established Subic SEZ. John Hay PAC v Lim 45 Fabian v Desierto Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Appellate jurisdiction of SC Section 27. does not violate the Constitution. Section 401 of the Code shall be subject to periodic investigation and may be revised by the president upon recommendation of the NEDA. The present Rule 45 only allows appeals to be brought to the SC through a petition for review on certiorari from judgments and final orders of the lower courts. The Constitution vests the authority to enact revenue bills in Congress. Flexibility clause. that has full power to exempt any person or entity from taxation. The Constitution may itself provide for specific tax exemptions. 46 Tolentino v Secretary of Finance See 39. is invalid and illegal. Thus. because the local government of Baguio will experience a reduction in tax revenues because when CJH is exempted. Only a 5% cumulative Gross income tax shall be imposed on entities within the SEZ. and subheadings under Section 104 of PD 34 and all subsequent EOs and PDs shall form part of the Code. The Revised Rules of Civil Procedure preclude appeals from quasi-judicial agencies to the SC via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. Section 24). Section 28 of the constitution where it is provided that “no law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the members of Congress. Page 15 of 36 . directives. It violates Article 6. directive or decision or denial of the motion for reconsideration in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The power is premised in the theory that modification will be done in the interest of national economy. The president has the power to increase or decrease rates of import duties within set limits. it would have so expressly provided in RA 7227. general welfare and/or national security.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 43 Garcia v Executive Secretary Related Topics Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Requirements as to bills Requirements as to certain laws Tax laws Notes EO 475 Reduces rate of additional duty on all imported articles from 9% to 5% ad valorem. although merely mentioning Subic SEZ. Section 30 of the Constitution because it illegally increased the jurisdiction of the SC. local oil producers) as against dominant importers or restrict the importation of products that are exclusively produced by foreign countries. Section 28 of the Constitution. the president is empowered to do so by virtue of the Tariff and Customs Code.
it shall be deemed forfeited in favor of the State. Sections 2 and 3 of this RA provides. the prima facie presumption (as stated above). the legitimate income of the public officer Significant financial data Issues (WON) • The petitioner was able to prove its case for forfeiture in accordance with Sections 2 and 3 of RA 1379 • The respondents have interest and ownership over the funds in question Held & Ratio • Yes. It was sufficiently established that the funds were unlawfully acquired. The extent to which the amount of that money or property exceeds. among others.000) and the total amount of the funds ($356M). as opposed to Page 16 of 36 . Establishment of facts according to RA 1379 1. The Republic established that the former first couple were.e. filed an action for forfeiture of the Marcos Swiss accounts on the grounds set forth by RA 1379. that they acquired a considerable amount of assets during their incumbency as public officials and. whether it be in his name or otherwise 2. Ownership by the public officer of money or property acquired during his incumbency. public officials. The prima facie presumption was not overturned. hence subject to forfeiture. and that if the respondent fails to prove that the property in question is actually lawfully acquired.CONSTI1: A.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 47 Philconsa v Enriquez Related Topics See 40. Notes Digest Link 48 Gonzales v Macaraig Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Procedure for the passage of bills Gonzales v Macaraig 49 Bengzon v Drilon Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Procedure for the passage of bills Bengzon v Drilon 50 Miller v Mardo Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Procedure for the passage of bills Miller v Mardo 51 Tañada v Tuvera See midterm reviewer (23). is grossly disproportionate to. Republic v Sandiganbayan RA 1379 An Act Declaring Forfeiture In Favor of the State Any Property To Have Been Unlawfully Acquired By Any Public Officer or Employee and Providing For the Procedure Therefor. at the time. Prima facie presumption – unlawfully acquired property A property is unlawfully acquired. The burden of overturning the same rests upon the respondent. Marcoses did not present any evidence that the funds were legally acquired. through the PCGG. 52 Arnault v Nazareno Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Legislative investigation Arnault v Nazareno 53 Armault v Balagtas Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Legislative investigation 54 Bengzon v Sen. that there was apparent disproportion between the first couple’s legitimate income ($304. if its amount or value is manifestly disproportionate to the official salary and other lawful income of the public officer who owns it. Blue Ribbon Committee Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Legislative investigation Bengzon v Senate Blue Ribbon Committe 55 Senate v Ermita Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Legislative investigation Senate v Ermita 56 Sabio v Gordon Three branches of the government Congress Legislative process Legislative investigation 57 Pimentel v Joint Com Three branches of the government Congress Other powers 58 Republic v Sandiganbayan Three branches of the government Executive department The president Privileges and salary Fast facts The Republic. i..
Special consideration should be given to the fact that the events which led to the resignation of Estrada happened at express speed and culminated on a Saturday. admitted judicially that they have interest in the funds. Section 13 of the Constitution. directly or indirectly practice any other profession. Ex officio refers to an authority that forms part as one of the duties that stems from a position and not a separate position. The phrase “unless otherwise provided in this Constitution” must be given a literal interpretation to refer only to those particular instances cited in the Constitution itself: Article 7. Angara diary Contains direct statements of Estrada which can be categorized as admissions of a party: his proposal for a snap presidential election where he would not be a candidate. the Vice-President shall assume said position. VP. Section 13 is meant to be the exception applicable only to the President. Section 13. admit of the broad exceptions made for appointive officials in general under Article 9-B.” 61 Cruz v COA Three branches of the government Executive department The president Exceptions to prohibition from holding another office Secretary of Justice as member of Judicial and Bar Council Not only prohibition from holding multiple positions. through their separate testimonies.” by the primary functions may be considered as not constituting “any other office. EO 284 is null and void. Section 7? Held & Ratio • No. Page 17 of 36 . No one section is allowed to defeat another. A Constitutional provision must be interpreted with reference to the intention underlying it. Interpreting Article 9-B as broad exceptions as directly referred from Article 7. in whole or in part. Section 11 In the event that the President expresses through written correspondence to the Senate President and the House Speaker that he is unable to fulfill the duties of his position. he shall reassume said position. Only the additional functions and duties “required. no appointive official shall hold any other office or employment in the Government or any subdivision… Issue Does the prohibition in Article 7. Section 7 and. Ex officio Article 7. Article 7. Section 13 insofar as Cabinet Members. by 2/3 vote of separate houses. Any exception to this provision shall be expressly stated in another Constitutional provision. Article 8. This is illustrative of a stricter mandate as regards the President. Section 13. Contentions c/o Estrada • Congress is at fault in disregarding his argument of temporary inability to govern and President-onleave • The acts of Congress. • On taking the provisions of the constitution together. A doubtful provision will be examined in the light of the history of the times. on the competency and credibility of some persons other than the witness by whom it is sought to produce it. 60 CLU v Executive Secretary Three branches of the government Executive department The president Exceptions to prohibition from holding another office Secretary of Justice as member of Judicial and Bar Council Fast facts Petitions are assailing the constitutionality of EO 284. It has been held that the Court in construing a provision should bear in mind the object sought to be accomplished by its adoption. Section 13 would render certain Constitutional provisions inoperative. Article 9B is meant to lay down the general rule applicable to all elective and appointive public officials and employees. Congress. • On valid references made by Article 7. Section 3. participate in any business. not separately. is post facto in that it occurred after Arroyo had already assumed the presidency • A declaration of presidential incapacity cannot be implied Held & Ratio There is nothing in the Constitution that says that the declaration of Congress should come before the assumption of the Vice-President of the presidency. • On intent of framers. Admitted as evidence in the case at bar. Article 7. shall resolve this disagreement. declaring his unfitness to assume the presidency. The Vice-president can also make the same assumption of the presidency in the event that a Majority of the Cabinet Members likewise expresses through written correspondence to the Senate president and House Speaker that the President is unable to fulfill his duties. and the condition and circumstances under which the Constitution was framed. his statement that he only wanted the 5day period promised by Angelo Reyes. If the President submits a retraction of his prior declaration of inability to assume the presidency. his statements that he would leave by Monday if the second envelope would be opened and that he was “very tired” and “didn’t want any more of this”. Congress was not in session then and had no reasonable opportunity to make such a declaration a priori on Estrada’s letter claiming inability to govern. The Marcoses. or be financially interested in any contract… Article 9-B. Section 8. Section 13 does not cover those positions held in ex officio capacity. sought to be prevented or remedied. while Article 7.CONSTI1: A. as it was prevalent in the Marcos regime. The provisions were constructed with the distinct objective of disallowing abuse of multiple positions held by an individual from the executive. EO No. should a majority of the Cabinet members still submit an express statement that the President is nonetheless unfit to assume his position. in addition to their primary position. Digest Link 59 Estrada v Arroyo Three branches of the government Executive department The president Succession In case of temporary disability Hearsay evidence Probative force depends. • Yes. to hold not more than two (2) positions in the government and government corporations… Contention c/o petitioners EO 284 runs counter to the provisions of Article 7. Article 7. However. Section 13 Executive Department shall not hold any other office or employment during their tenure.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes the presumption that it is ill-gotten. It allows officials of the Executive Department. but also prohibition from receiving double compensation. and the evils. if any. their deputies and assistants. Section 7 Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position.” as opposed to “allowed. in the absence of the Presidents retraction of his prior statement or that he is already able to fulfill his duties. 284 It adds exceptions to Article 7. • On simultaneous interpretation of Sections 13 and 9B. their deputies or assistants are concerned. Such testimonies are admissible as evidence against them. including appointees. Cabinet members.
Notes in class • Exclusive list of powers – there are inherent limitations. so is his representative likewise restricted. after having been exiled. per COA memorandum 97-038. 66 Hutchison Ports v SBMA Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Control of executive departments 67 NEA v COA Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Control of executive departments Page 18 of 36 . Held & Ratio There is no legal basis to grant per diems. Contention c/o DENR employees The power to transfer the Regional Office of the DENR is executive in nature. there is no grave abuse of discretion. the ex officio member. Not all the powers granted in the Constitution are themselves exhausted by internal enumeration. in violation of the rule on multiple positions. or their representatives. the multifarious executive and administrative functions of the President are performed by and through the executive departments. are presumptively the acts of the President. South Cotabato. three (3) ex officio members. These members may designate their representatives. Contention c/o NAC COA erred in applying the Memorandum to the NAC ex officio members’ representatives who were all appointive officials with ranks below that of the Assistant Secretary. There should be no gap in the exercise of power. Digest Link 63 Marcos v Manglapus MEMORY AID: Marcos’ return home Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive power Fast facts The wish of the Marcoses to return to the Philippines. 65 Blaquera v Alcala Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Control of executive departments Blaquera v Alcala President has the ultimate say to which company the contract shall be awarded. so that. 2 The new Implementing Rules and Regulations of Proclamation 347. has been barred by President Corazon Aquino. Alternates cannot receive honoraria because the agent cannot have a better right than his principal. among others. Issue (WON) The President has the power under the Constitution to bar the Marcoses from returning to the Philippines Held & Ratio Yes. restricted by the doctrine of separation of powers. Sections 14-23 Powers (executive) expressly provided for the Constitution. The payment of honoraria to the representatives should be allowed. their deputies and assistants. Article 7. authority is implied unless there or elsewhere expressly limited.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 62 NAC v COA Related Topics Three branches of the government Executive department The president Exceptions to prohibition from holding another office Secretary of Justice as member of Judicial and Bar Council Notes Fast facts Order to disallow the payment of honoraria to the representatives of petitioner’s ex officio members. and the acts of the Secretaries of such departments. the Regional director/office of DENR cannot enact said Memorandum as it is beyond its powers. by virtue of the qualified political agency doctrine. The NAC shall be composed of.CONSTI1: A. Application of qualified political agency doctrine. Executive power is what the president can/cannot do. and other benefits to the representatives of ex officio members. in exercise of her executive power. COA Memorandum 97-038 specifically disallows any payment of any form of additional compensation to cabinet secretaries. so long as not forbidden by the Constitutional text. who has been expressly granted powers by the Constitution. within a sphere properly regarded as one of “executive” power. allowances. Section 1 The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines. derived from the oath she has taken during her inauguration. also has implied residual powers inherent to the grant of executive power and which are necessary for her to comply with her duties under the Constitution. • Supreme court proved that Aquino can prevent Marcos from returning by defining and establishing that the president has residual powers Residual powers Inherent powers exercised by the President in accordance with her position. Said representatives shall be entitled to per diems and other benefits. As long as there is some factual basis for the president’s decision. performed. Thus. and promulgated in the regular course of business. The President has powers other than those expressly stated in the Constitution. Article 7. DENR employees that were going to be affected by the enactment of the said Memorandum filed a petition to enjoin such enactment. AO No. The President. If the ex officio member is barred from receiving additional compensation. She did not act in grave abuse of discretion. The power of the President to reorganize the National Government may validly be delegated to his cabinet members exercising control over a particular executive department… Held & Ratio The DENR Secretary has the authority to reorganize the DENR. Myers v US The federal executive could exercise power from sources not enumerated. All powers that is not under judicial or legislative. Qualified political agency All executive and administrative organizations are adjuncts of the Executive Department…demand that he act personally. The Memorandum set forth for the immediate transfer of the DENR XII Regional offices from Cotabato City to Koronadal. Marcos v Manglapus 64 DENR v DENR Region 12 Employees Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive power Fast facts A Memorandum was issued by the Regional Director of the DENR pursuant to AO 99-14. and to effect the refund of any and all such additional…citing CLU case.
which is subject to the approval of the Minister of Budget and Management upon the recommendation of the local chief executive concerned. Chapter 2. Digest Link 69 Bermudez v Torres Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Fast facts Bermudez is assailing the appointment of Conrado Quiaoit to the post of Provincial Prosecutor of Tarlac. Power of appointment Discretionary (Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila v Intermediate Appellate Court. Secretary of the Department of Budget. Held & Ratio Mison was duly appointed to the Bureau of Customs and. with the role of the President being reduced to nearly nothing. San Juan v CSC Cited by the petitioners. The doctrine in San Juan v CSC cannot be used in the case at bar because. This posed the danger of abuse on the part of the President as his prerogatives will not be subjected to checks and balances the CA provides. bureau. 70 Sarmiento v Mison Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Fast facts Petitioners question the constitutionality of the appointment of Salvador Mison as par t of the Office of Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs. The corresponding recommendation of the secretaries of the DOF. The President has the power to assume directly the functions of an executive department. In the present case however. This is in line with EO 112. in that case. so long as they act within the scope of their authority. he can only supervise. the DBM had local autonomy. Book 4. DILG. This cultivated a culture of “horse-trading” and other corrupt practices. that is. All other officers of the government. other public ministers 2. or indorsement. is the same as the case at bar. may do away with this particular action because appointment is discretionary and he has the power to control the department. Contention c/o Bermudez (pet) The appointment of Quiaoit is disputable since it lacks the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. as regards the appointment of the Provincial Chief Prosecutor. which is essentially persuasive in character and not binding or obligatory upon the party to whom it is made.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 68 Pimentel v Aguirre Related Topics Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president General supervision over local governments/autonomous regions Notes AO 372 • Requires LGUs to reduce expenditures by 25% • Withholds a portion of internal revenue allotments Contention c/o pet President cannot control LGU. as prescribed under the Revised Administrative Code of 1987. a position he previously held. It is to be construed as mere advise. ambassadors. Those whom the President may be authorized to appoint 4. Local autonomy v interference Local autonomy does not bar any kid of intervention including supervision. An unmanaged public sector deficit of the government 2. Only advisory in nature. Consultations with the presiding officers of the Senate and the HOR and the presidents of the various local leagues 3. Heads of executive departments. The recommendation being highly indispensible in the appointment of a prosecutor. or office. That being. Officers lower in rank 1935 v 1975 Constitutions: on role of CA 1935 – virtually all appointments of the President had to be subjected to the confirmation and approval of the CA. He can supervise as it is advisory in nature. He cannot intervene with LGUs. there is no sharing of power. as the head of the executive department.CONSTI1: A. Speaks of the appointment of the Provincial Budget Officer. Title 3. with the latter being appointed without the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments. Revised administrative code. This. Fiscal autonomy LGUs have the power to create their own sources of revenue in addition to their equitable share in the national taxes released by the government. cannot effect disbursements in the payment of the salaries of Mison. Contention c/o resp The act is not “control” as it merely “directs” LGUs to identify measures that will reduce their expenditures. and DBM. exhortation. Requisites for valid intervention by the President 1. Control v supervision Supervision – overseeing or the power or authority of an officer to see that subordinate officers perform their duties Control – power of an officer to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what a subordinate officer has done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former for that of the latter Taule v Santos The President wields no more authority than that of checking whether LGUs or their officials were performing their duties as provided by the fundamental law and by statutes. The one who holds the power has the option which he may exercise freely according to his judgment. even Sarmiento III v Mison Page 19 of 36 . The appointment can be made only with the approval of the President alone. Flores v Drilon). the appointments of whom are not specifically provided for by the law 3. Held & Ratio The President has the authority to supervise. Held & Ratio The recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. thus. The President. Principle of local autonomy. The President is the head of the government whose authority includes the power of control ever all executive departments and bureaus. deciding for himself who is the best qualified individual for a given post. as well as the power to allocate their resources in accordance with their won priorities. Section 9 Provides that all provincial and city prosecutors and their assistants shall be appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. AO 372 is violative of this doctrine. Contention c/o pet Guillermo Carague. entitled to receive salaries and perform his duties as such. 4 groups a President may appoint 1. the President shared its power on appointment with the DBM. 1975 – power of appointments was vested solely in the President. the petitioners claim. hence unconstitutional. dispensable.
The President is within her authority to appoint the Held & Ratio Chairman and Commissioners of the NLRC without the prior confirmation of the CA. Since it is not included in the first group.e. The aforementioned officials are not included in the first group of appointees. As to the constitutionality of RA 6715. as their appointment lacks confirmation from the CA. As to the validity of the disbursements. The court reviewed the transcripts of the 1986 Constitutional Convention and it revealed that the framers intentionally left out the last three (3) groups of individuals the President may appoint from the CA confirmation requirement. Only those encompassed by the first group shall be subjected for confirmation. require confirmation by the CA of appointments extended by the President to government officers additional to those expressly mentioned in Article 7. As to the Constitutionality of RA 6975. Confirmation is not required when the President appoints other government officers whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law or those officers whom he may be authorized by law to appoint 3. etc. RA 6715 Section 13 Provides that the Chairman and Commissioners of the NLRC shall be appointed by the President upon the confirmation of CA. 74 Soriano v Lista Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Fast facts The case at bar deals with the appointment of the respondents to different positions in the Philippine Coast Guard and their subsequent assumption of office.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes without submitting the nomination for the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments. Doctrines from jurisprudence (Mison. without the confirmation of the CA. sectoral reps to Congress and members of the CSC. the 1987 constitution. intentionally left out “heads of bureaus” from the first group. It was stated that the appointees may qualify and assume the duties and responsibilities of their appointed seats.CONSTI1: A. the appointments of Page 20 of 36 . Confirmation is not required in the appointment of those from inferior offices. by law. Confirmation from CA is only required when the appointee involved in the first group. The payments were made to legitimate officers of the PNP Held & Ratio whose appointments were valid as well. Moreover. The 1987 Constitution intentionally made these distinctions as a “middle-ground” between the provision of 1935 and 1975 constitutional provisions on the same matter. they should not be entitled to receiving salaries for their positions. She took her oath and assumed the duties and responsibilities of the position. Section 16. The President shall validly appoint the Chairman of the CHR. because it shall be construed as those officers whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law Issue WON Congress may. Held & Ratio The position of Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights is not among the positions mentioned in the first group of presidential appointees. The clause “officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain” refers to military officers alone. Officers from the PNP differ from those from the AFP. Held & Ratio The appointments are legal and constitutional. appointments to which are to be made with the confirmation of the CA. There must be compliance with RA 6975. Contention c/o Pet There is illegal disbursement of public funds because the payments of salaries and other emoluments were made to PNP officers who were not validly appointed. as compared to the 1935 Constitution. as a requirement for strict compliance. RA 6975 Empowers the CA to confirm the appointments of public officials. the PCG is under DOTC not the Philippine Navy. If those from the latter require the confirmation by the CA in order for them to finally be appointed by the President. Moreover. Congress cannot. and Concepcion-Bautista) 1. These officers were appointed by President Aquino without subjecting such appointments to the confirmation of the CA. Sections 26 and 31 of the RA are unconstitutional as they provide additional legislation. Moreover. The respondents should be prohibited from discharging their duties and functions as such officers of the PCG. As to the constitutionality of the appointments. The enumeration of appointments subject to confirmation by the CA under Article 7. Bautista v Salonga 72 Calderon v Carale Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Fast facts President Aquino appointed the Chairman and Commissioners of the NLRC representing the public workers and employers sectors. whose appointments are expressly vested by the constitution in the President. with the consent of the CA. additional officers which it requires to be appointed by the President upon the confirmation of the CA. Section 16 fo the Constitution whose appointments require confirmation from the CA Contention c/o pet Section 13 of RA 6715 must mandatorily be complied with. Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution is exclusive. Contention c/o Soriano III The aforementioned appointments are illegal and unconstitutional for failure to undergo the confirmation process in the CA. 73 Manalo v Sistoza Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Fast facts The case at bar deals with the validity of the disbursements made as payment of the salaries of officers of the PNP. unlike the Chairpersons and members of the COMELEC. It appears that the legislature is not happy with the lessened role of the CA in the appointment process. Her appointment was questioned by the CA because she was appointed without having the CA confirm her nomination. Contention c/o Bautista CA does not have the jurisdiction to question her appointment. 71 Concepcion-Bautista v Salonga Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Digest Link Fast facts Bautista was appointed by President Aquino. The appointments of the respondents to their respective positions are not contemplated within the first group—that which requires the confirmation by the CA. Valid. as clearly explained in Mison. It amends legislation by adding to the first group provided in Article 7. Section 16. as enumerated in Article 7. those from the PNP need not abide the same process. based on the transcripts of the constitutional convention. Quintos-Deles. from an ad interim appointment. expand the power of confirmation of the CA and require confirmation of appointments of other government officials not mentioned in the first group provided in Article 7. as the Chairperson of the CHR. by law. The appointment of the Chairman of the CHR is not specifically provided in the constitution itself. Section 16. CSC. including those officers whose appointments are expressly vested by the constitution itself in the President (i. and COA. pursuant to the abovementioned constitutional provision. particularly those who are from the rank of superintendent and higher. Unconstitutional.) 2.
which grants amnesty in favor of all persons who may be charged with a felony in furtherance of the resistance to the enemy or against personas aiding the war efforts of the enemy.CONSTI1: A. Title I. it entails for the personal choice of the president. Classes of acts/crimes (pursuant to political objectives) who may be guilty of political offenses. The legislature may not interfere with the exercise of this executive power except in those instances when the Constitution expressly allows it. Before or after the institution of the criminal prosecution. Chapter 5. Prospective. but is forgiven. 8 • Amnesty Proclamation of September 7. The President has the right to appoint the person of her choice into a vacant position temporarily before there is a permanent replacement because the department secretary is her alter ego. and committed during December 8. presided by the respondents. The law expressly allows the president to make such acting appointment. with the concurrence of Congress Public. Civil liability subsists. Does not restore rights to hold office or of suffrage. The GAC remanded the same to the CFI without rendering a decision on WON the petitioners are entitled to amnesty. 8. Being such. not simply the assumption of the undersecretary of the vacant position. Barrioquinto v Fernandez When Effects After conviction by final judgment Crime subsists. whether regular or acting. through proclamation. petitioners cannot invoke the benefits of amnesty. An alter ego calls for the trust and confidence of the president. Proclamation No. committed by a particular group of people Anytime. Contention c/o Resp In order for GAC to be able to preside over such cases. Criminal liability extinguished. with concurrence of Congress • Provides among others that in order to determine if the persons who have been charged or will be charged. Contentions c/o petitioners • PGMA should not have appointed respondents as acting secretaries because only an Undersecretary can be designated as an acting secretary • No appointments can be made while congress is in session. It is enough that the evidence shows that the offense committed is a felony that qualifies for amnesty as provided in the proclamation. in pursuance of the Page 21 of 36 . Legislature can only prescribe the qualification for the position. conduct summary hearings of witnesses both for the complainant and the accused Pardon v Amnesty Pardon Granted by Public v Private Granted to whom President Private.” Pimentel v Ermita 76 In Re: Valenzuela Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Filing of vacancies important but there is no showing in the case at bar of any compelling reason to justify the making of appointments during the period of the ban. Retroactive. the GAC shall examine the facts and circumstances surrounding each case and. As such. Book III of EO 292 states that “the president may temporarily designate an officer already in the government service or any other competent person to perform the functions of an office in the executive branch. to the date when each particular area of the country where the offense was actually committed was liberated from enemy control and occupation. • Issued by the then president Manuel Roxas. Section 17. it must be held that the petitioners (those who have applied for amnesty) have admitted having committed the offense.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes the respondents need not be subjected for confirmation by the CA. The GAC must conduct these hearings regardless of confession. Individual Amnesty President. Petitioners filed an action to mandate the GAC to proceed with presiding over their application for amnesty. Principal penalty is extinguished. Courts take no cognizance. The performance of the summary hearings by the GAC is not dependent on the confession on the part of the accused. Petitioners submitted their case to the Guerilla Amnesty Commission (GAC). unless expressly provided in the terms of the pardon (accessory penalties). 1946. Courts take judicial notice. Digest Link 75 Pimentel v Ermita Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Nature of power to appoint Executive in nature. It cannot appoint someone in the guise that it is prescribing qualifications to that office. In Re: Valenzuela 77 De Rama v CA Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment 78 Matibag v Benipayo Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment Matibag v Benipayo 79 Larin v Executive Secretary Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Power of appointment 80 Barrioquinto v Fernandez Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive clemency Fast facts Petitioners were charged with murder. sometimes also after conviction Crime is considered not to have been committed at all. 1941. Limitations on the executive power to appoint are construed strictly against the legislature. without the approval of the Commission on Appointments Held & Ratio Appointments are constitutional. Held & Ratio It is not necessary for the petitioners to admit having committed the felony charged to them in order for the GAC to preside over their case and ultimately qualify for amnesty. if necessary. Jimenez learned of Proclamation No. come within the terms of this proclamation.
83 In Re: Lontok Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive clemency Fast facts Case at bar relates with an action for disbarment of Marcelino Lontok from his office of lawyer in the Philippines. it is impossible for the court or GAC to verify the motive for the commission of the offense. would defeat the action. he will be eligible for appointment only to positions which are clerical or manual in nature and involving no money or property responsibility.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes provisions of the proclamation. as he was clearly the winner of the popular vote. Given that the pardon was extended after the election but before the actual proclamation. if he should be guilty again of any misconduct. If the accused has not confessed to it. because only the accused could explain his belief and intention or the motive of committing the offense. it is still absolute insofar as it “restores the respondent to full civil and political rights. (c) the respondent having served his sentence and all the accessory penalties imposed by law. Miguel Cristobal (pet) filed an action on November 16. He was imprisoned from March 14 to August 18. Citing Cristobal v Labrador. it has been held that while the effect of the pardon is to relieve him of the penal consequences of his act. he has no use for amnesty. But where the proceedings to disbar an attorney are founded on the professional misconduct involved in a transaction which has culminated in a conviction of felony. but removes all disabilities resulting from the conviction. Palatino was convicted in 1912 and sentenced to imprisonment. Rebuttal to dissenting Motive for the commission of a crime is established by the testimony of witnesses on the acts or statements of the accused before or after the commission of the offense.” Right of suffrage is expressly restored by the pardon. 1939. inasmuch as the criminal acts may nevertheless constitute proof that the attorney does not possess a good moral character and is not a fit or proper person to retain his license to practice law. involving a conviction of Bigamy and promulgated on February 27. Limitations on pardoning power of the Chief Executive 1. he may still be subjected to disbarment proceedings. the municipal president of that municipality. Nature and extent of pardon re: disbarment of attorney A pardon operates to wipe out the conviction and is a bar to any proceeding for the disbarment of the attorney after the pardon has been granted. it gives the impression that the rationale behind its extension is to specifically allow Palatino to assume his office. Amnesty is a public act which the courts. Effects of pardon granted to Lontok The sentence in his case. The pardoning power cannot be restricted or controlled by legislative action 82 Pelobello v Palatino Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive clemency Fast facts Florencio Pelobello (pet) filed an action against Gregorio Palatino (resp) questioning the validity of the latter’s election as mayor of their municipality. Held & Ratio The absolute pardon granted to Palatino restored him his right of suffrage. 1932 and paid the corresponding costs of trial. Issue (WON) The absolute pardon had the effect of removing the disqualification incident to criminal conviction under the Election Code. 1918. The pardon extended to him is not conditional. and. Page 22 of 36 . Despite his conviction and imprisonment. on the condition that he shall not again be guilty of any misconduct. Effect of pardon granted to Palatino Restored him to the enjoyment of full civil and political rights. cannot generally be considered and relied on. and he would then become subject to disbarment.” Contention c/o Cristobal The pardon extended by the President to Santos did not restore the full enjoyment of respondent’s political rights because: (a) the pardoning power of the President does not apply to legislative prohibitions. Dissenting opinion (Tuason) Amnesty presupposes the commission of a crime. Held & Ratio Lontok cannot be disbarred on the ground of his previous conviction. Effect of pardon granted to Santos Restored his “full civil and political rights. the condition of his pardon is then violated. if true. there was nothing to pardon. It is the burden of the accused to prove the existence of certain conditions provided in the amnesty proclamation.’” He was granted pardon on December 24. That such power does not extend to cases of impeachment Nature and extent of absolute pardon It not only blots out the crime committed. the pardon having been granted after the election but before the date fixed by law for assuming office. While the pardon in the case at bar is conditional in the sense that it limits the positions he may occupy or be eligible for. When granted after the term of imprisonment has expired. The testimony of a defendant at the time of arraignment or the hearing of the case about said motive. The accused has to confess the allegations against him before he is allowed to set out such facts as. That the power be exercised after conviction 2. However. it removes all that is left of the consequences of conviction. Santos continued to be a registered voter in his municipality and was.CONSTI1: A. He was granted conditional pardon by the Governor-General in 1915 and absolute pardon by the President in 1940. 1940 to exclude the name of Santos from the list of voters in their municipality. as the same has already been pardoned. Contention c/o Pelobello Palatino was disqualified from voting and being voted upon for the contested municipal office. He applied for pardon in view of a newly promulgated Election Code which “disqualifies the respondent from voting for having been ‘declared by final judgment guilty of any crime against property. must take cognizance of. He was convicted of bigamy and has since been pardoned by the Governor-General. Unless the defendant admits at the investigation or hearing having committed the offense and states that he did it in furtherance of the resistance to the enemy and not for purely personal motive. except that with respect to the right to hold public office or employment. including the GAC. between 1934 and 1937. is remitted. Such a testimony may simply be an afterthought or have underlying interest. 81 Cristobal v Labrador Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive clemency Digest Link Fast facts Teofilo Santos (resp) was found guilty of estafa and sentenced to six (6) months of arresto mayor and the accessories provided by law. barring him from disqualification from voting and being voted for. Held & Ratio Santos cannot be excluded for the list of voters since he has already been granted pardon. such disqualification not having been removed by plenary action. (b) the pardoning power here would amount to an unlawful exercise by the President of a legislative function.
Effect of pardon granted to Torres Otherwise absolute if not for the condition that he would “not again violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Digest Link 84 Torres v Gonzales Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Executive clemency Timeline Prior to 1979: Wilfredo Torres was convicted of estafa and sentenced to imprisonment. not subject to judicial scrutiny • The determination of WON a breach of condition has occurred may be a purely executive act not subject to judicial scrutiny. invasion. in effect. It is as if the convict. with full competency to bind himself in the premises. he necessarily exercises a discretionary power solely vested in his wisdom. Determined by the president. To maintain peace and order 2. Evidence obtained revealed that petitioner had been charged with estafa and convicted of sedition. Section 64(i) Empowered the Governor-General to grant to convicted prisoners reprieves…and to authorize the arrest and recommitment of those who have violated the terms of his pardon. Tesoro v Director of Prisons If the accused accepted the pardon/parole granted to him. he will be proceeded against in the manner prescribed by law. Role of Congress (limitation) It may revoke a presidential proclamation or suspension on the matter and the Court may review the sufficiency of the factual basis thereof. • If the President chooses to proceed under Section 64 of the Revised Administrative Code. Calling out of armed forces v Martial Law To validly proclaim Martial Law. he. or rebellion. Revised Administrative Code. also agreed that the GovernorGeneral’s determination (rather than that of the regular courts of law) that he had breached one of the conditions of his parole by committing a felony (adultery) while he was conditionally at liberty. He did not violate his conditional pardon since he has not been convicted by final judgment of the many charges filed against him. Should this condition be violated. should not be subjected to judicial review. Dissenting (Cruz) Conviction by final judgment is necessary in determination of WON there has been breach of the terms of the pardon. 1979: The President granted him a conditional pardon. Issue (WON) Conviction of a crime by final judgment of a court is necessary before the petitioner can be validly rearrested and recommitted for violation of the terms of his conditional pardon and accordingly to serve the balance of his original sentence. There is textual commitment under the Constitution to bestow on the President full discretionary power to call out the armed forces and to determine the necessity for the exercise of such power. He accepted the pardon and was released from confinement. had expressly contracted and agreed. an executive order for his arrest and remandment to prison should at once issue. Included in the evidence was a letter enumerating the charges that have been brought against Torres over the past 20 years. Espuelas v Provincial Warden of Bohol The power to determine WON the convict has violated the conditions of his pardon is vested upon the President. October 10. respectively. To place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law Presidential mandate • Deployment of PNP and Marines in malls • Joint visibility patrols • For crime prevention and suppression Nature of authority of Commander-in-Chief When the President calls the armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence. and be conclusive upon him. but it may also be a judicial act consisting of trial for and conviction of violation of a conditional pardon under Article 159 of the RPC. It is an encroachment of judicial functions where it is in the prerogative of the President to determine himself WON there has been a violation of the terms of the pardon and revoke the pardon altogether. To no other department of the Government has such power been entrusted. 1986: Issuance of an Order of Arrest and recommitment against Torres. Conviction by final judgment is not a condition precedent to the revocation of conditional pardon granted. 1986: The Board of Pardons and Parole recommended to the President the cancellation of the conditional pardon granted to Torres. in order to successfully cancel the conditional pardon granted to a convict. Based on jurisprudence. 85 IBP v Zamora MEMORY AID: Case on deployment of marines in the malls Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief Authority of Commander-in-Chief 1. September 8. Held & Ratio The Order of Arrest and Recommitment against Torres is valid. conviction by final judgment is not necessary. that. To call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence. whenever the governor should conclude that he had violated the conditions of his parole.” Contention c/o Torres The Order of Arrest and Recommitment issued against him is invalid. the following must be present: 1. To suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus 4. which were pending and on appeal. The President opted to proceed with Section 64 of the Revised Administrative Code. was binding and conclusive upon him. 1986: President cancelled the conditional pardon. Torres v Gonzales May 21. Summary of doctrines from jurisprudence • The grant and subsequent cancellation of a conditional pardon are executive acts. There must be an actual invasion or rebellion Digest. April 18. or rebellion 3. Thus. an action which is not subject to judicial scrutiny. The accused is still presumed innocent until he is convicted by final judgment. invasion. IBP v Zamora Page 23 of 36 . Sales v Director of Prisons It is in the prerogative of the Governor-General if he will determine if the conditions of the pardon were breached.CONSTI1: A.
1980: Petitioners filed action enjoining respondent MC from proceeding with the trial of their case. based on IBP v Zamora. does not have to occur because all it (calling out of marines) requires is that there is a necessity in doing so. AFP to suppress the rebellion. and Paterno. Nature of authority of Commander-in-Chief Article 7 Section 18 grants the President. Issue (WON) A military tribunal has jurisdiction to try civilians while the civil courts are open and functioning. v MC 2 Held that the MC has been lawfully constituted and validly vested with jurisdiction to hear the cases against civilians. An actual invasion. (6) attempted murder of Perez. provided by the legislature for the President as Commander-in-Chief to aid him in properly commanding the army and any and enforcing discipline therein. 435 August 1. 8 (creating military tribunals) and provided that “military tribunals created pursuant thereto are hereby dissolved upon final determination of cases pending therein which may not be transferred to the civil courts without irreparable prejudice…” December 4. Prompt and effective trial and punishment of offenders have been considered as necessary in a state of martial law. The recent bombings and Mindanao insurgencies. as Commander-in-Chief. triable by military tribunals. May 30. January 17. that the calling out power does not necessitate the same conditions required for the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus and the proclamation of martial law. so long as the requisites for a valid warrantless arrest are present. v Ponce-Enrile Timeline 88 Olaguer v MC No. Basis of Chief Executive in calling out marines President has sufficient basis. 4 July 27. 2045). 1980: Amended charge sheet was filed enumerating the following offenses: (1) unlawful possession of explosives and incendiary devices. military tribunals will never have jurisdiction over civilians.” From the most to the least benign. and Corpus. 1980: Respondent Chief-of-Staff of AFP created the respondent commission Military Commission No. This proclamation revoked General Order No. Marcos. Held & Ratio • As long as the civil courts in the land are open and functioning. Proclamation No. February 14. Held & Ratio It is constitutional. and from implementing the judgment of conviction rendered by the MC because the same is null and void. 1980: Petitioners were charged for subversion (For violation of PD 885. (2) conspiracy to assassinate President and Mrs. the revised antisubversion law) Olaguer v MC 34 June 30. Tatad. The President has enough basis to set out such a proclamation. Feburary 1986: President Aquino assumed office. as a mere power of detention may be wholly inadequate for the exigency. It is enough that there is sufficient basis to support such a proclamation.g. • The power of interpreting laws is a function of the judiciary. Public danger warrants the substitution of executive process for judicial process. The only criterion to adjudge the calling out is that whenever such calling out becomes necessary. and utilized under his orders or those of his authorized military representatives. as well as those of a civil character. SM) have not even complained when they are actually the ones who have standing on this issue (because the marines are deployed in their establishments). Calling out of the marines is simply in pursuance of the prevention and suppression of lawless violence. Page 24 of 36 . (3) conspiracy to assassinate cabinet members Enrile. Notes in class There is history in engaging military in law enforcement.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes 2. Public safety must require it These conditions need not be present in order to validly call out the armed forces. Roño. A person may be subjected to a warrantless arrest for the crime of rebellion WON there is such a proclamation. Aquino. Held & Ratio The mere declaration of a state of rebellion cannot diminish or violate constitutionality of protected rights. The warrantless arrest feared by the petitioners is not exclusive to the declaration of state of rebellion. (4) conspiracy to assassinate Tangco. 87 Aquino. as IBP contends. the MC passed sentence convicting the petitioners and imposed upon them the penalty of death by electrocution. To take cognizance of such a jurisdiction will be a violation of the constitutional right to due process of the civilian. and (7)conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion. 427 & General Order No. Proclamation No. Contention c/o IBP • Civilian character of PNP has been violated • REBUTTAL: Test: as long as PNP is still in charge. a “sequence” of “graduated powers. and inciting to rebellion. 34 Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief December 24. The malls (e. Jr. martial law creates an exception to the general rule of exclusive subjection to the civil jurisdiction. v Enrile Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief Digest Link 86 Sanlakas v Executive Secretary MEMORY AID: Oakwood Mutiny Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief Sanlakas v Executive Secretary Aquino. August 19. and Generals Espino and Ver. 1979: Petitioners were arrested and detained. 34 to try the criminal case filed against the petitioners. Military tribunals Pertain to the Executive Department and are simply instrumentalities of the executive power. through military authorities. It is not the function of the executive. 2003: State of rebellion. 2003: Declaration that the state of rebellion has ceased to exist. not the marines – perfectly okay. and renders offenses against the laws of war.CONSTI1: A. 1981: President Marcos lifted Martial Law (Proclamation No. danger in society is prevalent. July 30. 1984: Pending resolution on the petition. (5) arson of nine buildings. Jr. Jr. Valencia. 1985: Petitioners file action in SC seeking to enjoin the MC from taking any further action on the case against them. Not a single citizen has complained that his rights have been violated as a result of the deployment of the marines. It is reiterated.
• Article 7. 2003 • Issued by Chief of Staff of AFP. RA 7055 Provides. The RA also provides an enumeration of what are considered service-related offenses. no further relief could be granted to them. The trial court’s declaration was made when the Omnibus Motion had Held & Ratio already been rendered moot and academic with respect to Navales et. but rather absorbed and in furtherance to the alleged crime of coup d’etat. 889 • Instituted as a result of the August 21. September 12. 1971 Plaza Miranda bombings • Issued on August 23. Provided for by RA 7055. 2003: DOJ issued a Resolution finding probable cause for coup d’etat against only 31 of the original 321 soldiers and dismissing the charges against the other 290. by various safeguards contained in directives issue by proper authority Safeguards 1. that Members of the AFP and other persons subject to military law shall be tried by the proper civil court. 90 Lansang v Garcia Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief Proclamation No. No warrantless arrests shall be made. 889-A Lansang v Garcia Page 25 of 36 . February 11. 2004 • Declared that all charges before the court-martial against the accused as well as those former accused are not service-connected. The authority that was once vested in the MCs are already revoked and obsolete. 2003: Information was filed with the RTC charging 321 soldiers. and that “public safety and the security of the State required the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus • The President acted on relevant facts gathered through the coordinated efforts of the various intelligence agents of our government • The determination made by the President is “final and conclusive upon the courts and upon all persons” and “partakes of the nature of political questions which cannot be the subject of judicial inquiry • The President of the Philippines has undertaken certain steps to insure that the constitutional rights and privileges of the petitioners remain unimpaired • Opportunities or occasions for abuse by peace officers in the implementation of the proclamation have been greatly minimized. The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus will apply only to those people specified in the proclamation 3. Contentions c/o Resp • The petitioners had been apprehended and detained “on reasonable belief” that they had “participated in the crime of insurrection or rebellion” • That “their continued detention is justified due to the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Proclamation 889” • That there is “a state of insurrection or rebellion” in the country. 2004: Issuance of RTC Order. It has jurisdiction. among others. RTC admitted the Amended Information of October 20. November 14. if not completely curtailed. • Prayed for the trial court to. The declaration of the RTC that the violations of Articles 63. 64. EO 333. 2003: In its Order. Once vested by law on a particular court or body. acquire jurisdiction over all the charges file before the military courts in accordance with RA 7055. Insofar as those whose case against them was dismissed. except when caught in the act 2. there will be no double jeopardy because an indispensable element of double jeopardy is that the first tribunal which tried the case must be of competent jurisdiction. As to the jurisdiction of the Court-Martial. there was nothing else left to resolve after the Omnibus Motion was considered moot and academic.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes • Martial Law has already been lifted. Commitment Order August 2. General Abaya • Directed the Major Service Commanders and the Chief of ISAFP to take custodial responsibility of all the military personnel involved in the mutiny Contention c/o Navales The Court-Martial cannot have jurisdiction over the case because the charges are not service-connected. based on the Omnibus Motion filed by the 243 under the Information dated August 1. The Chief of Constabulary shall check any abuses made in connection with the suspension of the privilege of the writ 4. creating a Presidential Administrative Assistance Committee to hear complaints regarding abuses committed in connection with the implementation of the proclamation Proclamation No. the jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the action cannot be dislodged by any body other than by the legislature through the enactment of a law. 96. 67. Section 18: Martial shall in no way suspend the functioning of the civil courts nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction to military courts 89 Navales v Abaya Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief Digest Link Main Issue (WON) The General Court-Martial has jurisdiction to conduct the court-martial proceedings involving several junior officers and enlisted men of the AFP charged with violations in connection with the Oakwood Mutiny. 1971 • In response to lawless elements that have created a state of lawlessness and disorder affecting public safety and the security of the State • Proclamation of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus for the persons detained for the crimes of insurrection and rebellion Fast facts On different days subsequent to the proclamation. Contention c/o Respondent Charges filed against petitioners are within those provided in RA 7055 as service-connected. The RTC cannot divest jurisdiction validly granted to the Court-Martial over those charges classified as service-connected. and 97 of the Articles of War (considered service-connected) are absorbed by the crime of coup d’etat is null and void. EXCEPT when the offense is service-connected. As to RTC Order. RTC Order February 11. Refer to the following timeline: August 1. They were no longer parties to the case. • If those cases pending in the MCs are transferred to the civil courts. among others. October 20. in which case the offense shall be tried by the court-martial.al by reason of the dismissal of the charge of coup d’etat against them. several individuals (pet) were apprehended and detained by the members of the Constabulary without warrant. Null and void.CONSTI1: A. 2003: 243 soldiers filed with the RTC an Omnibus Motion. These individuals filed petitions for writs of habeas corpus assailing the validity of their warrantless arrest.
• Not all loans should be paid for. of incitement to sedition or rebellion. which are those contracts allowed by the Constitution to be contracted by the President. although they may disagree on the mains to be used at a given time and a particular place. In latter years. the President’s alter ego in the matters of that department where the President is required by law to exercise authority. No law defining terrorism David v Macapagal-Arroyo 93 Constantino v Cuisia Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Contracting and guaranteeing foreign loans Financing program • Consists of. either direct or guaranteed. These were companies owned by Marcos cronies. The issuer is the debtor. The government is guaranteeing loans of private corporations. the NPA was established. Every statute is understood. Buyback Scheme where the debtor pays the debt but a lower price. provides that sovereign bonds may be issued not only to supplement government expenditures but also to provide for the purchase. It makes no prohibition on the issuance of certain kinds of loans or distinctions as to which kinds of debt instruments are more onerous than others. as agreed upon by the parties. by implication. These are neither “loans” or “guarantees”. These are. including all such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically inferred from its terms. • The Program is made available even to those debts that were fraudulently obtained. The bond is a debt in the point of view of the issuer. or jurisdiction which it grants. “public safety” must require the suspension of the privilege Held & Ratio The President has in his authority the suspension the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. It allows the President to contract and guarantee foreign loans.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes • Amendment to 889 • Apart from adverting to the existence of actual conspiracy and of the intent to rise in arms to overthrow the government. the issuer needs money so it issues bonds at a discount to attract third parties to purchase the same. Page 26 of 36 . On the buyback scheme. at a particular face value. as amended by PD 142. the resulting relief agreements should also be void. If so. • The power to contract such transactions cannot be delegated by the President to the respondents. Essentially. Grounds for the suspension of privilege of the writ 1. or refunding of any obligation. buyback scheme and bond conversion • Established to managed the country’s external debt through a negotiation-oriented debt strategy involving cooperation and negotiation with foreign creditors • Restructuring of old debt Contentions c/o Petitioners • The buyback scheme and debt conversion. it is unthinkable that he would perform all the minor and tedious procedures in preparation for incurrence of foreign debt. there must be “invasion. Some should be ignored. in this case the government. If the power is vested solely in the President. It is but natural for this task to be delegated. Delegation is also substantiated by the doctrine of qualified political agency (see DENR v DENR Employees). On the delegation of power.CONSTI1: A. President has the authority to use the buyback scheme as a relief agreement. Each head of a department is. President has the authority to use bonds as a relief agreement. the proclamation specifies that even overt acts committed by these individuals in furtherance thereof shall also give rise to such suspension Extent of review • Test of arbitrariness • Without just cause • Congress Issue (WON) The authority to decide whether the exigency has arisen requiring suspension (of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus) belongs to the President and his decision is final and conclusive upon the courts and upon all other persons. usually at a price lower than the face value. is beyond the powers granted to the President. the amendment asserts that the lawless elements “are actually engaged in an armed insurrection and rebellion” to accomplish purpose. There is no apparent limitation on the President’s power to contract foreign loans. 91 In Re: De Villa Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief Digest Link Existence of first ground. The NPA adheres to the Maoist concept of the “protracted people’s war” or “war of national liberation. Held & Ratio Constantino v Cuisia On bond conversion. • Instead of detaining those who committed crimes in relation with insurrection or rebellion. RA 245. thus void. An example is the HMB or the HUKBALAHAP. insurrection. The decision on how the loan is paid lies solely with the executive. GO 5: Unconstitutional. with the objective 92 David v Arroyo Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Commander-in-chief State of emergency: seize private and public businesses. among others. of the Philippine Government. However there are just some things the President will never be able to delegate: suspending the writ of habeas corpus and proclaiming Martial Law. The grounds for such suspension are all present. Communists believe that force and violence are indispensable to the attainment of their main and ultimate objective. and act in accordance with such belief. or to make effective rights. The authority of the President to contract debts will be meaningless if he cannot implement the payment for the same. Copied from the declaration of Martial law. and taken part in other violent incidents injuring numerous people. It is an investment on the part of the purchaser. resorted to kidnappings. and must be. as debt-relief contracts entered into pursuant to the Financing Program. Prevalent Communist activities in the country since the 1920s. Buyback is a necessary power which springs from the grant of foreign borrowing power. the purchaser becomes the creditor as it awaits the payment of the principal amount of the bond plus interest. in turn purchased by third parties. The NPA is per se proof of the existence of rebellion.” They have conducted raids. Bonds Instruments issued by an organization. redemption. powers. privileges. or rebellion or imminent danger thereof 2. to contain all such provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its object and purpose. some repudiated. The language of the Constitution is simple and clear as it is broad. The power can be delegated.
Page 27 of 36 . Petitioner has been speculating. NOTES IN CLASS: The President can sue. Only good during the term of the President. The Board has jurisdiction even if there has been no final conviction. Held & Ratio • Yes. (Forbes v Chuoco Tiaco and Crossfield) • Conviction is not a requirement to the commencement of the deportation proceedings against an alien. The Board is only a fact-finding body whose function is to make a report and recommendation to the President in whom is lodged the exclusive power to deport an alien or dismiss a deportation proceeding. under the Constitution. sees that the continued stay of the alien in the country is injurious to public interest. The power may be exercised by the President “when he deems such action is necessary for the peace and domestic tranquility of the nation. may initiate criminal proceedings against the petitioners through the filing of the complaint-affidavit. a private lawyer cannot represent him. in his discretion. as provided in Section 69 of the Revised Administrative Code. If criminal proceedings ensue by virtue of the President’s filing of her complaint-affidavit. There has been no suit filed against the President. If a public official is sued in his public capacity. not any other person. There is no need for the Congress to ratify it. (2) the Commissioner of Immigration. a Chinese man. This would in an indirect way defeat her privilege of immunity from suit. In 1994. Fast facts Deportation case. Go Tek (pet). • The accused in a criminal case cannot establish as a defense the privilege of immunity of the President to prevent the case from proceeding against the accused. she may subsequently have to be a witness for the prosecution. Icasiano asked for the reconsideration of his reassignment. Cannot be used as a shield from criminal proceedings (high-crimes). also demands undivided attention. aside from requiring all of the office-holder’s time. was arrested in the belief that he was a sector commander and intelligence and record officer of a guerilla unit of the Emergency Intelligence Section. (Tan Tong v Deportation Board) • Exercise of power. The President approved the said recommendation. considering that being the President. But the international agreements involving adjustments in detail carrying out well-established national policies and traditions and those involving a more or less temporary character usually take form of executive agreements. is a job that. 98 Gloria v CA Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Immunity from suit Fast facts Bienvenido Icasiano (private resp) was the School Division Superintendent of QC. Issue (WON) The Deportation Board can entertain a deportation proceeding based on a ground which is not specified in section 37 of the Immigration Law and although the alien has not yet been convicted of the offense imputed to him. but he cannot be sued within his term. The President’s power to deport aliens and the investigation of aliens subject to deportation are provided for in the Revised • Under existing law. Contention c/o Go Tek The Deportation Board (resp) had no jurisdiction to try the deportation case because the President may deport aliens only on the grounds specified in the law. Held & Ratio • The President may initiate criminal proceedings. President preserving the peace and order Section 69 Revised Administrative code on President’s power to deport An alien may be deported by the President only upon investigation conducted by him or his agents of the ground upon which such action is contemplated. Army of the US. The CA held that the reassignment was violative of Icasiano’s security of tenure. Secretary Gloria (pet) recommended to the President the reassignment of Icasiano to Marikina Institute of Science and Technology (MIST). not by any other person in the President’s behalf. Issue (WON) The President. Privilege of immunity from suit. Director Rosas (pet) informed Icasiano of his reassignment. the deportation of an undesirable alien may be effected by: (1) order of the President.CONSTI1: A. and thus enjoined. after due investigation. The decision for waiver is solely upon the President. he may deport the alien even in the absence of express law. Contention c/o Beltran The reasons which necessitate presidential immunity from suit impose a correlative disability to file suit. as by testifying on the witness stand.” When the President. • Issue is premature.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 94 People’s Movement v Manglapus Related Topics Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Foreign affairs Notes Digest Link 95 Commission of Customs v Eastern Sea Trading Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Foreign affairs International agreements involving political issues or changes in national policy and those involving international agreements of permanent character usually take the form of TREATIES. pertains to the President by virtue of the office and may be invoked only by her. 96 Go Tek v Deportation Board Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Foreign affairs Held & Ratio It is an agreement. Privilege of immunity from suit To assure the exercise of Presidential duties and functions free from any hindrance or distraction. bringing her under the trial court’s jurisdiction. Treaties – between 2 states that establishes rights and obligations demandable to and from each state. Qua Chee Gan v Deportation Board Held that the mere possession of forged checks is not sufficient a ground for the deportation of the alien. Only the OSC can. upon recommendation of the Board of Commissioners (Qua Chee Gan case) • The State has the inherent power to deport undesirable aliens. • The President may waive this privilege and submit to the court’s jurisdiction. as appointed by former President Aquino. she would be exposing herself to possible contempt of court or perjury. 97 Soliven v Macasiar Three branches of the government Executive department Powers and functions of the president Immunity from suit Fast facts Maximo Soliven and Luis Beltran (pets) were arrested for the charge of libel. Go Tek v Deportation Board Administrative Code. the holder of the office. Contention c/o Deportation Board A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite before the State may exercise its right to deport an undesirable alien. There must be conviction for the crime before he is tried for deportation.
Act NO. arguments. to utilize the financial assistance promised by the Laguna provincial government for the purchase of the necessary supplies and materials and to rely on the national government for the equipment needed by the court (Under Section 190 of the Revised Administrative Code. and that it would be improper and illegal for the members of the SC. shall be entertained. thus if someone questions the transfer. 1446. 101 Meralco v Pasay Trans Co. The SC cannot sit as members of the Board of Arbitration because it is not within their jurisdiction to decided on cases on purely contractual situations. to act on the petition of the MEC.. all these items must be furnished by the provincial government The provincial officials of Laguna. Held & Ratio Digest Link On the violation of doctrine of presidential immunity from suit. 1970. sitting as a board of arbitrators. The Municipal Government of Calamba offered to supply the space for the courtroom and offices of the court. . in violation of the doctrine of presidential immunity from suit. (resp) for alleged dishonesty. 1971 • Macaraig. It was never intended that all administrative disciplinary cases should be heard and decided by the whole Court since it would result in an absurdity and inefficiency. sitting as a board or arbitrators. • Gacott wants the Court to pass upon his other supplications. Section 11 contravenes the maxims which guide the operation of a democratic government constitutionally established. still received salaries for the period in question Page 28 of 36 . pet). informed the respondent that the province was not in a position to do so). certificate of service. etc). The Court en banc. despite knowing that he has not been fulfilling his duties as judge. Section 11 of the Constitution should be interpreted to mean that even divisions can preside over administrative and disciplinary cases of judges. requesting the members of the SC. • The Court en banc is not an Appellate Court to which decisions or resolutions of a Division may be appealed. violation of Republic Act 296 or the Judiciary Act of 1948. to fix the terms upon which certain transportation companies shall be permitted to use the Pasig bridge of the MEC and the compensation to be paid to the MEC by such transportation companies. • A decision of a Division of the Court is a decision of the Supreme Court. • The division did refer the case en consulta to the Court en banc. The petition was clearly filed against Gloria and Rosas. violation of his oath of office as judge . The reassignment by Icasiano is indefinite and may be viewed as a demotion or a constructive removal from service. Contentions c/o MMDA • The resort to certiorari was proper • There was no valid contract as it never passed the negotiation stage • The case should be heard by the Court en banc Held & Ratio on cognizance of SC en banc • The case should not be referred to the SC en banc. the decision of a majority of whom shall be final. however. sitting as a board of arbitrators the decision of a majority of whom shall be final. 102 Garcia v Macaraig Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court No non-judicial work for judges Fast facts • Administrative charge filed against Judge Catalino Macaraig. and even his insinuations for that matter. • It took so much time for the branch to become established as it experienced difficulties in finding a place to hold its office and finally use the amount appropriated for its expenses Contentions c/o Paz Garcia (pet) • Macaraig has not submitted any monthly reports. (Bentain v CA) 99 MMDA v Jancom Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Mode of sitting Fast facts The case at bar relates with an assailment of a waste management contract between the Republic of the Philippines and JANCOM Environmental Corporation. committed (allegedly). period of July 1. the act of the President is questioned. sitting as a board of arbitrators. Even so. SC en banc. • He asks for his “erroneous” decision to not be included in his permanent records as it would be detrimental to his career. Held & Ratio Act 1446. Section 11 Relates with the legal act of the members of the SC. • Circular 2-89 further pertinently provides that “no motion for reconsideration of the action of the Court en banc declining to take cognizance of a referral by a Division. 55 and 58 thereof. There is no violation of the doctrine. (particularly) Sections 5. Held & Ratio Article 8. On the violation of the security of tenure. to act in that capacity. Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management. Ramos approved the transfer. Jr. is the only body which can administratively punish him. The decisions of the Board of Arbitration shall go through the regular court system (Trial Courts – Court of Appeals – SC). • Macaraig took his oath as Judge of the CFI of Laguna and San Pablo City on June 29. It was a newly organized branch which had to establish its operations from scratch. They will be reviewed by the lower courts and will ultimately be reviewed by themselves.CONSTI1: A.00 for gross ignorance of the law. 1970 to February 28. He was reprimanded a fine of P10. declined to take over the case and returned it to the Third Division with instructions that it be re-raffled among the other members of the Division. Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court No non-judicial work for judges Fast facts The case at bar relates with a petition of the Manila Electric Company (MEC. information of which will be included in his permanent records. as amended. The divisions of the SC cannot preside over his case.000. Issue Concerns the legal right of the members of the SC. • Gacott somehow suggests that the administrative case against him was unfairly raffled to Justice Bidin in the Third Division Contention c/o Gacott The full court. the acts of the President may still be questioned and tried in the courts where there is grave abuse of discretion or that the President acted without or in excess of jurisdiction (Executive Secretary.. to act on the petition. There is violation of security of tenure (Civil Service Laws). suggesting or inquiring if the Court en banc should take over and whether the case should be re-raffled courtwide due to the inhibition of Justice Carpio. however.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Contention c/o Pet The petition for prohibition is improper because the same attacks an act of the President. not the President. gross incompetence.” 100 People v Gacott Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Mode of sitting Fast facts • Eustaquio Gacott (resp) is charged of grave abuse of discretion for erroneously dismissing a case.
respectively. this member must first be removed from office via impeachment proceedings before other actions will prosper against him. would be violative of the clear mandate of the fundamental law. the Court resolved to dismiss the charges made by Cuenco against Fernan for utter lack of merit.” The action against Fernan was filed in the Tanodbayan. contrary to the provision of Section 10. otherwise. During graduation. In the circumstances. Jurisdiction of courts Only with regard those actual cases and controversies that require the interpretation of the law. but were not able to follow through on that. must be observed before such liability may be determined and enforced. He did not violate his oath of office as judge. 105 Santiago v Bautista Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Jurisdiction Fast facts Teodoro Santiago.CONSTI1: A. One of the grounds is that the committee on the ratings of students for honor whose actions are being condemned in the case at bar is not the tribunal. so as to "give substance to equality among the three branches of Government" in the words of Commissioner Rigos (uniformity of taxation). Judges cannot be appointed to positions in other bodies. Held & Ratio • The declared the salaries of members of the Judiciary are not exempt from payment of the income tax and considered such payment as a diminution of their salaries during their continuance in office. 3135 Resolution dated February 1988 entitled “Miguel Cuenco v Honorable Marcelo B. with Socorro Medina and Patricia Lingat as first and second honors. what with his vast experience. Jr. The respondent took it upon himself to personally work for early action on the part of the corresponding officials in this direction and. while being unable to perform his regular duties as judge without any fault on his part Judicial work encompasses only what is mentioned as judicial power in the Constitution. They intended to put it in a separate item. CFI Decision The petition states no cause of action and should be dismissed. The final list of awardees was deliberated by a board composed of Grade 6 teachers. or officer exercising judicial functions against which an action for certiorari may lie under Section 1 of Rule 65. their salary shall not be decreased. • As will be shown hereinafter. Section 7 (1987 Constitution). Tanodbayan – special prosecutor like a fiscal. Impeachment first. ombudsman. Members of the SC would be vulnerable to all manner of charges which might be brought against them by unsuccessful litigants or their lawyers or by other parties who. Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution mandating that during their continuance in office. in violation of the rule that the committee must be composed of teachers from both Grades 5 and 6. unless it is provided by the Constitution or created by the SC. It is just that. he simply could not carry out his duties for the simple reason that he had no sala yet. made himself available to the Department of Justice to assist the Secretary. Must call for the application of the law. 103 Nitafan v Commission of Internal Revenue Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Salary 1935 v 1973 v 1987 1935 – jurisprudence says that deduction of withholding taxes erodes independence of judiciary. The letter was addressed to Gonzales referring to charges for disbarment brought by Miguel Cuenco against Justice Fernan and asking “to do something about this. to allow a public officer who maybe removed solely by impeachment to be charged criminally while holding his office with an offense that carries the penalty of removal from office. The Court resolved to require Cuenco to show cause why he should not be administratively dealt with for making unfounded serious accusations against Fernan. exempt from taxation 1973 – judges are not exempt 1987 – silent WON judges’ salaries are exempt from taxation. thus giving her an edge in the judgment of awarding of honors • The committee which adjudged the awarding of honors were composed of only Grade 6 teachers. board. since he was receiving salaries. for any number of reasons might seek to affect the exercise of judicial authority by the Court. The Court hereby reiterates that the salaries of Justices and Judges are properly subject to a general income tax law applicable to all income earners and that the payment of such income tax by Justices and Judges does not fall within the constitutional protection against decrease of their salaries during their continuance in office. 104 In Re: Gonzales Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Removal Fast facts Raul Gonzales forwarded an anonymous letter by “Concerned Employees of the Supreme Court” to Justice Fernan. (pet) was a student of Sero Elementary School in Cotabato City. is. There is fundamental procedural requirement that Reason for ruling. in his spare time. During the period in question. Proscribes the removal from office of the aforementioned constitutional officers by any other method. the provision of 1973 was specifically deleted Contention c/o Pet Any tax withheld from their emoluments or compensation as judicial officers constitutes a decrease or diminution of their salaries. Teodoro was awarded the third honor. Can judges be disbarred during their term? Yes. The Court is not saying that a Member of the SC is absolutely immune from disbarment and criminal actions against him. Contentions c/o Teodoro • He has been prejudiced in that Socorro Medina was tutored by one of their teachers. The 1987 provision should be interpreted the same way 1935 was interpreted. having worked therein for sixteen years. he may then be held to answer either criminally or administratively (by disbarment proceedings) for any misbehavior that may be proven against him. Requisites for a valid action of certiorari 1. before criminal and other actions. Fernan” in which Resolution. far from being dishonesty.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Digest Link Held & Ratio Macaraig is not guilty of dishonesty and gross incompetence. to his credit. A public officer who under the Constitution is required to be a Important principles of AC 3135 Member of the Philippine Bar as a qualification for the office held by him and who may be removed from office only by impeachment. cannot be charged with disbarment during the incumbency of such public officer. the clear intent of the Constitutional Commission was to delete the proposed express grant of exemption from payment of income tax to members of the Judiciary. Article 8. • The framers actually intended to include an express provision regarding the non-exemption of judges from taxation. it was certainly not improper that he rendered some kind of service to the government. Should the tenure of the SC Justice be thus terminated by impeachment. That there must be a specific controversy involving rights of person or property and said controversy Page 29 of 36 . The only ones who could be disbarred are the impeachable officers. Without the rule. The issue must be justiciable. Administrative Case No. Lecaroz v Sandiganbayan.
and what the legal rights of parties are. that the ratings he gave the second placer should have been such as would entitle her to first place. For cases where the court does not want to expose the identity of the ponente. at least. it is not judicial. Judicial function • It must be the exercise of discretion and judgment within that subdivision of the sovereign power which belongs to the judiciary. This requirement is only present in judicial decisions. Also citing Felipe v Leuterio. although only implied. It should be made of record that at no time during the deliberations on the case did the CJ show any ill will nor any sign of vindictiveness much less any attempt to exact vengeance for past affront against Grecia. board. i. Held & Ratio As to CJ Teehankee’s voluntary inhibition. Error is contemplated by law as a misapplication of a statute or provision. beauty contests. like a disbarment proceeding. the Consings submitted a revised subdivision plan. If the matter in respect to which it is exercised. it is beyond doubt that the conclusions of the Court in its decision were arrived at after consultation and deliberations and voted attest to that. but it is not error in context of law. • The Court’s decision violates the Constitution in that it lacks certification by the CJ that the conclusions of the Court were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to a member for the writing of the opinion of the Court. Santos defaulted in her payments. After a member has given an opinion on the merits of a given case. belongs to either of the other branches. The decision of the board in such contests. The Court would not interfere in literary contests. and whenever an officer is clothed with that authority and undertakes to determine those questions. or. There could be error in the computation of final scores. Consing demanded for her payment and had planned to resort to court litigation. Contentions c/o Resp • CJ Claudio Teehankee should have voluntary inhibited himself from the proceedings. Santos expressed her willingness to settle her obligation. Days after the contest has been conducted and the winners announced.e. The committee composed of the teachers was not engaged in judicial functions. Provided in their contract of sale were particular terms of payment in which the purchase price shall be paid (installment basis. Even if such certification were required. with respect to a matter in controversy. Grecia (resp). must state facts and law 108 Consing v Court of Appeals Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Deliberations Fast facts Merlin Consing (pet) sold a house and lot to Caridad Santos. 107 Prudential Bank v Castro Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Deliberations Fast facts The case at bar relates with the disbarment of Atty. he cannot escape liability to Santos for having sold to her portions of the roads or streets denominated as right-of-way. he may not be disqualified from participating in the proceedings because a litigant cannot be permitted to speculate upon the action of the Court and raise an objection of this sort after decision has already been rendered. not in administrative cases. or officer must pertain to that branch of the sovereign power which belongs to the judiciary. or at least which does not belong to the legislative or executive department. Issue (WON) The Courts have the authority to reverse the award of the board of judges of an oratorical contest. In response. 3. However. It is only evidence for failure to observe the requirement. There is no mention that when teachers do sit down as a committee and adjudge the awarding of honors to their students. and Luis General. Petition denied for lack of legal and factual basis. 106 Felipe v Leuterio Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Jurisdiction Fast facts The case at bar relates with alleged erroneous results of an oratorical contest held in Naga City. board. CJ was prejudicial against Grecia that he rendered a decision against Grecia (disbarment). or officer for hearing and determination of their respective rights and obligations (Judicial action) The tribunal. their acts as such relate with the determination of what the law is. exchange of ideas. he acts judicially. one of the judges (pet) confesses he made a mistake. No jurisdiction. In the process. Contention c/o Consing CA did not comply with the certification requirement. Held & Ratio The judiciary has no power to reverse the award of the board of judges of an oratorical contest. Held & Ratio No actual case or controversy. among them were: Nestor Nosce. or officer before whom the controversy is brought must have the power and authority to pronounce judgment and render a decision on the controversy construing and applying the laws to that end. Emma Imperial (resp). not merely by a member of the same • To ensure that decisions are arrived only after deliberation. is final and unappealable. which does not belong to the legislative or executive department. and similar contests. and concurrence of majority vote Held & Ratio The absence of certification does not invalidate a decision. Issue (WON) • SC has the jurisdiction over the issue. board. plus interest).MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes is brought before a tribunal. Purpose of certification requirement • To ensure that all court decisions are reached after consultation with members of the court en banc or division. Resolution v Decision Resolution – does not decide the case. The other judges refuse to alter their verdict. There could be an administrative case on the ground of lack of certification. CFI Decision Santos was fully justified in refusing to pay further her monthly amortizations because although Consing submitted a revised plan and may have corrected irregularities and/or have complied with the legal requirements for the operation of their subdivision. As to the lack of certification.CONSTI1: A. The tribunal. Per curiam decision – opinion of the court as a whole. The issue arose when it was found out that there was an arithmetical error in the final scores. there is no ponente. dilatory. Digest Link 2. • The committee on the rating of students for honor exercised judicial or quasi-judicial functions in the performance of its assigned task. dismissal of a case for lack of merit Decision – when the court has given due course. Jr. • Involves the determination of what the law is. this is upon the condition that the Consings comply with all the laws and regulations on subdivision and after payment to her damages as a consequence of the use of a portion of her lot as a subdivision road. There were 8 contestants. Page 30 of 36 . as the case may be • To ensure that the decision is rendered by a court as a whole.
Puno (separate opinion). However. Facts and law must be clearly distinguished 111 Nunal v COA Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions Contention c/o pet The Resolution of the SC under date of May 11. Provides. Section 15 of the Constitution. after redeliberation.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Digest Link 109 Cruz v DENR Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Voting Fast facts The petitioners are assailing the constitutionality of certain provisions of RA 8371. This mandate is applicable only in cases “submitted for decision.” i. It disrespects the judicial function. and De Leon. 112 People v Bugarin Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions Fast facts Marcelino Bugarin (resp) is found by the RTC guilty of raping his daughter. Memorandum decision Only dispositive portion is authored by the SC. and non-technical. much less reverse the Order appealed from”. he can point out to the appellate court the findings of facts or the ruling on points of law with which he disagrees. RTC Decision • Guilty beyond reasonable doubt • Four counts of consummated rape • One count of attempted rape • Sentence (dispositive) indicates “3” counts instead of “4” Contention c/o Bugarin The decision of the RTC does not state facts ad law upon which it was based. the assailed order is not a decision of a court of record. 110 Valladolid v Inciong Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions Fast facts JRM owned Tropicana and Copacabana hotels. Rule 120.. there was no necessity of discussing anew the issues raised therein. otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA). 1998 is not in accordance with Article 8. pursuant to Rule 56. as Copacabana was managed by its owners (siblings Yu). 1979) In response to the application for clearance and Valladolid’s complaint for Illegal Dismissal. that judgment shall contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts proved or admitted by the accused and the law upon which such judgment is based. However. The assailed Resolution does state the legal basis for the dismissal of the Petition and thus complies with the Constitutional provision. Kapunan. The Deputy Minister of Labor. Pardo. summary. The rest is copied from the decision of the lower court. Held & Ratio Constitutional. Maryjane. 1979 lacks a statement of facts and conclusions of law does not equate to the violation of the constitutional requirement set forth in Article 8. Notes in class Only cases that are submitted for decision shall require a full-blown decision. Held & Ratio • The decision of the RTC falls short of the requirement. Quisumbing. Pertinent financial and business information was being leaked from Copacabana to Tropicana. thus unconstitutional. Section 7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Results of voting Seven (7) voted to grant petition. Seven (7) voted to dismiss petition. Panganiban.CONSTI1: A. Amado Inciong (resp) failed to state the facts and conclusion of law upon which it is based. it only had controlling interest in Tropicana. 1979 (December 26. the voting remained the same. It is not applicable to an Order or Resolution refusing due course to a Petition for certiorari. with rules of procedure mandated to be non-litigious. Vitug. as the case may be. He was subsequently transferred to the position of clerk-collector. The Ministry of Labor is an administrative agency with quasi-judicial functions. Gonzaga-Reyes. preventing him from deciding by ipse dixit (a bare assertion resting on the authority of the individual).e. in a succinct Order. As the votes were equally divide and the necessary majority was not obtained. among others. Accordingly. CJ. dismissed both appeals after finding “no sufficient justification or valid reason to alter. However. Bellosillo. the case was redeliberated upon. • An assurance to the parties that. 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure Reiterates Article 8. As the Deputy Minister was in full accord with the findings of fact and the conclusions of law drawn from shoes facts by the Regional director. The two hotels became direct competitors. The assailed Resolution was not a “Decision” within the meaning of the Constitutional requirement. Contention c/o JRM The order of Hon. Melo. the Regional director issued this order. Section 14 of the Constitution. modify. Buena. and its Implementing Rules and Regulations. Held & Ratio The fact that the Order of the Deputy Minister of Labor issued on December 26. instead of 6 (there were 6 informations filed against him)…the dispositive further adding to the confusion indicating just 3 counts Reasons for the requirement • To inform the parties of the basis for the decision so that if any of them appeals. He was suspected to be the leak who sends important information to the competitor. • A safeguard against the impetuosity of the judge. which is required of decisions or courts of record. given due course and after the filing of Briefs or Memoranda and/or other pleadings. Santiago. still valid. the judge did so through the processes of legal reasoning. and Mendoza (not justiciable). Page 31 of 36 . Section 14 No decision shall be rendered by any Court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. but it is not encouraged. Order of May 2. Article 8. The assumption is the law is constitutional. the petition is DISMISSED. Ricardo Valladolid (pet) was employed by JRM in 1977 as a telephone switchboard operator. • There was no evaluation of evidence and discussion of legal questions • Does not explain why RTC considered Maryjane’s testimony credible despite the fact that she could not remember the time of the day when she was allegedly raped • Decision found him guilty on 4 counts of consummated rape. Not prohibited. section 14. in reaching judgment.
Section 14 does not apply to the Sandiganbayan. or cites some other legal basis. PD 1606 Law creating the Sandiganbayan.” What the law insists on is that a decision state the “essential ultimate facts. however the Sandiganbayan. Issue What is the reglementary period within which the Sandiganbayan must decide/resolve cases falling within its jurisdiction? Contentions c/o IBP • The Sandiganbayan is a trial court. does not contain decision 118 Fr. the appellate court cannot be said to have withheld “any specific finding of facts. Article 8 Section 14 Deals with the disposition of petitions for review and motions for reconsideration. Fast facts IBP filed a resolution (administrative complaint) for “serious delays in the decision of cases and in the resolution of motions and other pending incidents before the different divisions of the Sandiganbayan. Lopez. 117 Tichangco v Enriquez Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Petition for review/motion for reconsideration Contention c/o Pet The CA’s Decision is invalid because it failed to mention that a magnetic survey was completed only on November 15. after deliberation. Article 8. Martinez v CA Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Petition for review/motion for reconsideration Contention c/o Pet The resolution of the CA denying his motion for reconsideration was rendered in violation of the Constitution because it does not state the legal basis thereof. The Sandiganbayan promulgated its own rules providing that the maximum period to decide cases is within 3 months from the date the case was submitted for decision. Issue (WON) The CA complied with Section 14 Article 8 of the 1987 Constitution. The CA Decision contains the necessary antecedents to warrant its conclusions. possession all the inherent powers of a court of justice.” Indeed. states that the questions raised are factual or have already been passed upon. the “mere failure to specify the contentions of the petitioner and the reasons for refusing to believe them is not sufficient to hold the same contrary to the requirements of the provision of law and the Constitution. in denying reconsideration of its decision. as a trial court. Section 15 • Must be resolved within 24 months from date of submission to the SC.” Notes in class Resolution – disposition of merits upon due course. Article 8. decides to deny a motion. “all lower collegiate courts” must decide or resolve cases or matters before it within 12 months “from date of submission”. but merely a statement of the “legal basis” for denying due course. a fact that they perceive to be crucial to the determination of the case. or at the most. unless otherwise reduced by the SC • 12 months for all lower collegiate courts • 3 months for all other lower courts • Presupposes that case is deemed submitted for decision • Last pleading Contention c/o Solicitor General • 3 months – original • 12 months . 6 months from the date of submission. Period of appeal start when copy of the written decision is served. “Dismissed for lack of merit” – sufficient as to the constitutional requirement SC is not required to give due course to ALL decisions. with functions of a trial court. it is required to submit the same reports required of the RTC. 116 Asiavest v CA Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions Principles of international law/comity – give due respect to the acts of another country. If court exceeds mandatory periods = administrative sanctions 119 Re: Delays in the Sandiganbayan Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Periods for deciding cases Page 32 of 36 . 1905. Notes in class SC reversed the decision of the CA. Maximum period of determination of cases for the Sandiganbayan = 3 months Held & Ratio Article 8. Decision came out more than a year after promulgation—only dispositive portion.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 113 Hernandez v CA Related Topics Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions Notes Digest Link 114 Yao v CA Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions 115 Dizon v Judge Lopez Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Requirements as to decisions Court forgave J. Held & Ratio The Constitutional requirement was fully complied with when the CA. Section 5 provides that Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the SC. is required to resolve and decide cases within a reduced period of 3 months like RTCs.appeal Sandiganbayan Sepcial court of the same level as the CA.CONSTI1: A. • The Constitution states that. Held & Ratio There is sufficient compliance with the constitutional requirement when a collegiate appellate court. stated in its resolution that it found no reason to change its ruling because petitioner had not raised anything new. In appellate courts. the rule does not require any comprehensive statement of facts or mention of the applicable law.
as near as may be. At least 2 of the accused are official with power and influence in Kabankalan and they have been released on bail. Basis of change of venue A change of place of trial in criminal cases should not be granted for whimsical or flimsy reason. Demetria accompanied a certain Go Teng Kok and Atty. 123 People v Sola Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice Fast facts CFI Negros Occidental issued a search warrant for the search and seizure of the deceased bodies of 7 persons believed in the possession of the accused Pablo Sola in his hacienda at Sta. I would suppose. the unsigned letter of “concerned court employees. Contention c/o Zaldivar Page 33 of 36 . Formaran declined the request and simply said that he would bring the matter to CSP Jovencito Zuño. There have been reports made to police authorities of threats made on the families of the witnesses. Resolution The evidence is clear. former Congressman Romulo Lumaig • Their witnesses would be afraid to testify for fear of harassment and reprisals • Their lives and the lives of their witnesses and lawyers would be in grave danger in Ifugao because of the tensions and antagonisms spawned by the case and the political rivalry beteen the Lumauig and Mondiguing factions. Upon meeting Formaran. i. “Iyon pala.e. Contentions c/o witnesses in the murder cases They were in fear that if the trial is held at the CFI branch in Himamaylan which is but 10km from Kabankalan. Demetria was found guilty on March 27. it should be resolved in favor of a change of venue. Negros Occidental. Held & Ratio Petition for change of venue is meritorious. All his benefits were ordered forfeited. as promulgated by the retired SC Justice Griño-Aquino. it is necessary to prosecute and punish the criminal in the very place. Isabel.” Demetria then called Zuño and requested the CSP to order Formaran to withdraw the MFI. Issue (WON) Mondiguing’s plea for a change of venue is justified. Held & Ratio Change of venue has become moot and academic. and to betray the very purpose for which courts have been established. It would be absurd to compel him to undergo trial in a place where his life would be imperiled. Among other events. where it is mentioned that the SC has the power to dismiss the judges of the lower courts. that it is about Article 8. or instrumentality. The usual precautions and security measures should be adopted in bringing Crisologo to Crame on the occasion of the hearing. Section 11. The decision to dismiss Demetria. Dispositive The municipal court of Vigan is directed to transfer the record of Crisologo’s Criminal Case to the city court of Quezon City where it should be redocketed and raffled to any Judge.CONSTI1: A. if not overwhelming and damning” that respondent did intercede for suspected Chinese drug queen Yu Yuk Lai. General rule The primordial aim and intent of the Constitution must ever be kept in mind. The Office of the Tanodbayan conducted the preliminary investigation and filed the criminal informations in those cases. 2001 of interceding in behalf of suspected drug queen Yu Yuk Lai. Reinerio Paas to the office of SP Formaran. Because of this fear. the case proceeds with this discussion: To compel the prosecution to proceed to trial in a locality where its witnesses will not be at liberty to reveal what they know is to make a mockery of the judicial process. where he committed his crime”. flaw or grave abuse of discretion. then an Associate Justice of the CA. What is involved in the case at bar is not merely a miscarriage of justice but the personal safety of Crisologo. However.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title 120 In Re: Demetria Related Topics Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Supervision of lower courts Notes Fast facts Justice Demetrio G. including GOCCs or institutions. we shall not disturb the findings of the respected Justice. The witnesses in the case are fearful of their lives. “the interests of the public require the. Ifugao because Judge Francisco Men Abad of the CFI of that province is a protégé of Governor Lumauig and his brother. Personal Note Did not find a discussion within the case of the exact Constitutional provision that relates to the “Supervision of lower courts” which this case is supposed to be illustrative of. partiality. was dismissed from service with prejudice to his appointment or reappointment to any government office. to secure the best results and effects in the punishment of crime. A change of venue is granted as it was shown that the accused might be liquidated by his enemies in the place where the trial was originally scheduled to be held. 12159-12161 and 12163-12177 (for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) pending before the Sandiganbayan. Notes in class Applies to criminal cases (civil cases – inhibition venue can be transferred but not jurisdiction. Absent any showing of bias. most of the accused remained at large. Digest Link 121 People v Pilotin Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice Contention c/o Crisologo His life would be in jeopardy if he were to be confined in the Vigan municipal jail during the trial because there are many political enemies of the Crisologo family in that vicinity. Go Teng Kok readily asked the prosecutor to withdraw his motion for inhibition.) Jurisdiction • Subject matter • Person • Territory 122 Mondiguing v Abad Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice Contentions c/o Mondiquing • They could not expect a fair and impartial trial in Lagawe. 124 Zaldivar v Gonzales Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Admission to the practice of law Fast facts Zaldivar (pet) is one of several defedants in Criminal Cases Nos. their safety could be jeopardized. though. agency. with Demetria commenting. they may either refuse to testify or testify falsely to save their lives. In case of doubt. the public prosecutor handling the Yu Yuk Lai case. They are afraid they would be killed on their way to or from Himamaylan during any of the days of trial. Kabankalan. Held & Ratio The Constitution expressly empowers the Court to “order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice”. In addition. The case may be tried at Camp Crame. Demetria.” was “not strong”. Demetria being in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
a general average of 70%. Statements in MFR filed by Gonzales on April 28. Raul M.094 candidates. OBJECTIVE: to admit to the bar those candidates who suffered from insufficiency of reading materials and inadequate preparation. 1988 • That decision was rendered in retaliation by the SC against him for the position he had taken “that the SC Justices cannot claim immunity from suit or investigation by government prosecutors”. it is a judgment revoking those promulgated by the Court during the aforecited year affecting the bar candidates concerned. including dismissal of “cases” against 2 of its own members. has plenary disciplinary authority over attorneys. and hence that the informations filed in the aforementioned Criminal Cases were all null and void. Such statements very clearly debase and degrade the SC and. Date of Bar Exams 1946-1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 Passing % 70 71 72 73 74 Those who deemed to have passed by virtue of the RA shall be allowed to take and subscribe the corresponding oath of office as member of the Philippine Bar. life. suspension. In decreeing that bar candidates who obtained in the bar exams of 1946 to 1952. The enactment of the RA will result in the admittance of additional 1. the SC has been continually preventing him to do so. Admission to the practice of law The admission. that the SC has become incapable of judging him impartially and fairly. Discussion of the issue The law is contrary to public interest because it qualifies 1. like that involving Zaldivar. constitute the grossest disrespect for the Court. and not the legislative (by virtue of RA) or executive (EO) department may do so. the SC holds that the statements made by Gonzales clearly constitute contempt and call for the exercise of the disciplinary authority of the SC. Issue (WON) RA 972 is constitutional. Role of Congress May repeal. 125 In Re: Cunanan Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Admission to the practice of law Digest Link Fast facts The case at bar deals with an RA that. especially the one which mentions that the SC made a deliberately erroneous decision. • The members of the SC have improperly “pressured him to render decisions favorable to their “colleagues and friends”. the disputed law is not a legislation. and supplement the rules promulgated by the Court. was no longer vested with power and authority independently to investigate and to institute cases for graft and corruption against public officials and employees. To approve officially of those inadequately prepared individual to dedicate themselves to such a delicate mission is to create a serious social danger. but the authority and responsibility over the admission. and reinstatement of attorneys at law and their supervision remain vested in the SC.” He continues to accuse that this issue will promote further lack of confidence in the judiciary. Dispositive Atty. 1988 SC Decision Order Gonzales too cease and desist from conducting investigations and filing criminal cases with the Sandiganbayan or otherwise exercising the powers and functions of the Ombudsman. the respondent was called over the phone by a leading member of the SC and was asked to dismiss cases against 2 members of the Court Authority to discipline The SC. as regulator and guardian of the legal profession. it is difficult for an ordinary litigant to get his petition to be given due course. disbarment. result in the passage and admittance to the practice of law of people who have previously flunked the bar exams.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Gonzales (resp). the suspensions to take effect immediately. Held & Ratio Considering the kinds of statements of lawyers discussed above which the Court has in the past penalized as contemptuous or as warranting application of disciplinary sanctions. • The SC deliberately rendered an erroneous decision when it rendered it Decision on April 27. While he has been supposedly been assigned by President Aquino to preside over graft cases as Tanodbayan. “can aggravate the thought that affluent persons can prevent the progress of trial…What I am afraid of (with the issuance of the order) is that it appears that while rich and influential persons get favorable actions from the SC. which includes as well authority to regulate the practice itself of law. That in several instances. as Tanodbayan and under the provisions of the 1987 Constitution. 1988 1. it is no less certain that only the Court.. Philippine Daily Globe article Tanod Scores SC for Quashing Graft Case Gonzales is quoted in many occasions saying that stopping him from investigating graft cases. it will Page 34 of 36 . honor. alter. through the SC.be admitted in mass to the practice of law.CONSTI1: A. disbarment. An adequate legal preparations one of the vital requisites for the practice of law that should be developed constantly and maintained firmly. precisely more so as legal problem evolved by the times become more difficult. and reinstatement of attorneys at law in the practice of the profession their supervision have been indisputably a judicial function and responsibility. That he had been approached by a leading member fo the SC and he was asked to “go slow” on Zaldivar and “not be too hard on him” 2. the entire system of administration of justice in the country. suspension. Requirement of legal profession The public interest demands of legal profession adequate preparation and efficiency.094 law graduates who confessedly had inadequate preparation for the practice of the profession. Contentions c/o Gonzales • Members of the court should inhibit themselves as they were biased and prejudiced against him • The issues of the proceeding should be passed upon the IBP because he does not expect due process from the SC. Although the Court can certainly revoke these judgments. The statements. Otherwise. Gonzales is suspended from the practice of law indefinitely and until further orders from the SC. April 27. and in order to stop respondent from investigating cases against “some of the protégés or friends of some SC Justices”. The authority to discipline lawyers stems from the Court’s constitutional mandate to regulate admission to the practice of law.. RA 972 An Act to Fix the Passing Marks for Bar Examinations from 1946 up to and including 1955. That he was approached and asked to “refrain” from investigating the COA report on illegal disbursements in the SC because “it will embarrass this Court” 3. when effected. and civil liberties. To the legal profession is entrusted the protection of property.
or chapter. Integrated Bar and Integration of the bar Integration of the bar is a process by which every member of the Bar is afforded an opportunity to do his share in carrying out the objectives of the Bar as well as obliged to bear his portion of its responsibilities. Masbate • Rana represented himself as counsel for and behalf of Vice Mayoralty candidate. Article 3 IBP By-laws Provides. Notes in class A law enacted in 1953 (It revoked the judgments the SC has made before as regards the lawyers they have admitted). Passing the bar is not the only qualification to become an attorney-at-law. The SC has the plenary power over all cases regarding the admission to and supervision of the practice of law. Affirmed findings of OBC. as the regulator of the practice of law. Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any group of which he is not already a member. An integrated Bar is an official national body of which all lawyers are required to be members. Ramon Nisce. To compel a lawyer to be a member of the IBP 128 In Re: IBP Elections Bar Matter No. training. The practice of law being clothed with public interest. They are. the holder of this privilege must submit to a degree of control for the common good. Requisites for the admittance to the practice It is not enough that a candidate passes the bar exams. legal procedure. knowledge. Resolution The RA is partly unconstitutional and constitutional. to the extent of the interest he has created. George Bunan and signed the pleading as counsel for Bunan. that continued delinquency in payment of the fees shall authorize the IBP to resort to all appropriate actions. However. Generally. applied retroactively will in effect give the Congress the power that should have been vested solely in the judiciary: violates separation of powers. On Edillon’s constitutional right of freedom to association. grave misconduct. Section 24. Held & Ratio Rana is denied admission to the Philippine Bar.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics be a usurpation of functions. and grave misrepresentation • Rana appeared as counsel for a candidate in the May 2001 elections before the MBEC of Mandaon. His behavior casts serious doubt on his moral fitness to be a member of the Bar. Practice of law Any activity. He was about to take his oath when a petition was filed against him. Section 10 Court Rule Provides. Integration provides an official national organization for the well-defined but unorganized and incohesive group of which every lawyer is already a member. he was allowed to take his oath but was enjoined from signing in the roll of attorneys until judgment has finally been rendered. 491 Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Integration of the bar Fast facts There were 3 candidates for the position of IBP President in 1989: Attorneys Nereo Paculdo. 126 Aguirre v Rana Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Admission to the practice of law Notes Digest Link Fast facts Edwin Rana (resp) was among those who passed the 2000 bar exams. To engage in the practice of law is to perform acts which are usually performed by members of the legal profession. Integration of the Bar in the Philippines is valid as there is a power expressly vested in the SC by the Constitution. OBC found Rana to be guilty of misconduct. and Violeta Drilon. Created by the SC. violation of law. Contentions c/o IBP Edillon should be disbarred and whose name should be stricken out of the Roll because of stubborn refusal to pay his membership dues to the IBP. Held & Ratio On Edillon’s name and the Roll. is not violative his constitutional right to associate. there are two (2) requisites. All legislation directing the integration of the Bar has been uniformly and universally sustained as a valid exercise of the police power over an important profession. Contentions c/o Aguirre (pet) • Rana is guilty of unauthorized practice of law. there were allegations that the candidates resorted to unorthodox campaigning practices that further investigation was conducted. Contention c/o Edillon The abovementioned provisions in the IBP by-laws and Court Rule are null and void as they are violativeof his right to freedom of association. and experience. Drilon won the elections. subject to all the rules prescribed for the governance of the Bar. to practice law is to render any kind of service which requires the use of legal knowledge or skill. It is the signing in the Roll that finally makes one a full-fledged lawyer. or regional. It was proven that he represented himself as counsel even before he had taken his oath. after the passing of the bar exams: (1) taking oath and (2) signing in the Roll. IBP The IBP shall be non-political in character and that there shall be no lobbying nor campaigning in the choice of members of the Board of Governors and of the House of Delegates. Edillon is barred and his name is removed from the Roll. that the effect of the nonpayment of dues shall warrant suspension of membership in the IBP and continued default for one year shall be a ground for removal of the name of the delinquent from the Roll. Page 35 of 36 . the latter being caused by lack of unanimity among the presiding justices. Rana’s unauthorized practice of law is a sufficient ground to deny his admission to the practice of law. including a recommendation to the SC for the removal of the delinquent member’s name from the Roll. Reason for the collection of fees In order to further the State’s legitimate interest in elevating the quality of professional legal services. 127 In Re: Edillon Three branches of the government Judicial department The Supreme Court Administrative powers Integration of the bar Fast facts Marcial Edillon is subject to an action for his name to be removed from the Roll of Attorneys.CONSTI1: A. He is being deprived of the rights to liberty and property guaranteed to him by the Constitution. Effectively. national. therefore. in or out of court. Roman Ozaeta The integration of the Philippine Bar is perfectly constitutional and legally unobjectionable. Pending decision for the charges filed against him. requesting for the denial of his admission to the bar. among others. In re: Petition for the IBP. which requires the application of law. among others. and of the IBP officers.
Issue (WON) BP 129 is constitutional. In addition the Court amended the by-laws of the IBP. This conclusion flows from the fundamental proposition that the legislature may abolish courts inferior to the SC and therefore may reorganize them territorially or otherwise thereby necessitation new appointments and commissions. BP 129 mandates that Justices and Judges of inferior courts from the Court of Appeals to municipal courts. The Court has power to amend the by-laws as part of their power to promulgate rules under Article 8. The purpose of this act is to promote expediency in decisions and avoid accumulation of pending cases. prescribe. The changes included. would be considered separated from the Judiciary. 129 De La Llana v Alba Three branches of the government Judicial department Lower courts Tenure Digest Link Fast facts De La Llana was a Judge and was allegedly affected by BP 129. and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts. The Constitution vests in the National Assembly the power to define. the shift of the voter participation in the elections from all the delegates of the IBP per region to simply the members of the Board of Governors. All the practices. except the occupants of the Sandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals. together with other colleagues.CONSTI1: A. among others. Held & Ratio The abolition of an office within the competence of a legitimate body if done in good faith suffers from no infirmity. Appropriating Funds Therefor and for other Purposes". BP 129 An Act Reorganizing the Judiciary. De La Llana v Alba Page 36 of 36 . subject to certain limitations in the case of the SC. Section 5(5). those which pertain to the campaign of the 3 candidates proving to be overly extravagant and unreasonable. unless appointed to the inferior courts established by such Act. made a political circus of the proceedings and tainted the whole elections process.MUYOT: CASE SUMMARY: First Semester 2007-2008: Second-half Title Related Topics Notes Resolution Elections of 1989 are null and void. There is no undue delegation of legislative power if the law is complete and provides for a standard. filed an action to enjoin the enactment of BP 129. He.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.