Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1987-2014 Political Law

    Uploaded by

    Glaiza Rafa
    78 views296 pages
    Philippine Bar Questions

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Philippine Bar Questions

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    78 views296 pages

    1987-2014 Political Law

    Uploaded by

    Glaiza Rafa
    Philippine Bar Questions

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 296
    Copyright 2017 by the U.P. Law Complex ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO REPRODUCE THIS BOOK OR PORTIONS THEREOF IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER ISBN No. 971-15-0328-x Published by: INFORMATION AND PUBLICATION DIVISION U.P. Law Complex FOREWORD In response to public demand, the U.P. Law Complex is pleased to publish this latest ‘edition of ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS which covers all subjects in ‘the Bar examinations. ‘The previous edition had been of groat assistance to the bar examinees, law students, law practitioners, and law professors, alike by making readily available questions asked in the bar examinations every year and the suggested answers thereto, ‘The answers in each bar subject were discussed and prepared by a select group of law professors and practitionors who are exports and authorities in each subjeet. Aer the a {wera were finalized by each group or committe, the suggested answers were transmitted to the Chairman of the Supreme Court Bar Examinations Committee nnd who in turn furnished ‘copies to the examiners. It is our hope that this publication will guide bar reviewees and law students infor rmulating their answers to bar examination questions, and bar examiners in evaluating the answers of examinees EDUARDO A, LABITAG Heart, Training & Convention Division UP. Law Contor RESOURCE PERSONS Pro JACINTO D. JMMENEZ Judge ALOYSIUS C. ALDAY SR Dean SALVADOR T CARLOTA Dean DANILO L CONCEPCION Prot CARLO L. CRUZ Prot BARTOLOME C. FERNANDEZ Prot RENE 8. GOROSPE Prot EDUARDO A LABITAG Dean ERNESTO PMACEDA JR ean MERLIN ML MAGALLONA Prot HEROUINIO HARRY L ROQUE Dean AMADO D, VALDEZ Prot ANTHONY CHARLEMAGNE c. Ye Prot JACINTO D JIMENEZ ean PACIFICO A. AGAIN “Judge ALOYSIUS ©. ALDAY 5 Prot ROMMEL J, CASIS Dean DANILO L CONCEPCION Prot RENE 2. COROSTE Prot EDUARDO A LABITAG Dean MERLIN, MAGALLONA Pro EDWIN R SANDOVAL Prot CARMELO. SISON Prot ANTHONY CHARLEMAGNE Yt Prot JACINTO DIMENEZ “Judge ALOYSIUS ©. ALDAY Dean ANDRES D, BAUTISTA Dean SALVADOR T, CARLOTA Prot ROMMEL J. casts Pro DANILO L coNcRECION Prot CARLO L CRUZ ‘rot BARTOLOME C. FERNANDEZ ‘rot RENE B. GoRostee Prot FLORINT. HILBAY Prot EDUARDO A. LABITAG. ‘an MERLIN, MAGALLONA Dean RAUL C. PANGALANAN rot HERMINIO HARRY L ROQUE rot CARMELO. ISON Pro ANTHONY CHARLEMAGNE c. Wu Prot JACINTO D. JIMENEZ Dean PACIFICO A. AGABIN “dude ALOYSIUS C-ALDAY 5 Dean SALVADOR. CARLOTA Prot ROMMEL J. caSis Prot DANILO L CONEERCION Prot BARTOLOME A. FERNANDEZ. Prof RENE 8. GOROSPE Pro FLORINT. HLBAY [rok EDUARDO A LABITAG Dean MERLIN M- MAGALLONA Dean RAUL C. PANGALANGAS Prof CARMELO V. SISON 2009 Prk JACINTO .IMENEZ Dean PACIFICO A. AGABIN Judge ALOYSIUS © ALDAY st Prot DANILO L CONCEPCION Prot CARLO L CRUZ Pro ARTURO M. DE.casTRO ‘ot RENE B, GOROSPE rot LORIN. HILBAY Pro EDUARDO A. LABITAG Dean MERLIN M, MAGALLONA ‘Dean RAUL C. PANGALANOAN Prot CARMELO. ISON sJstice IAGANI A, CRUZ Prot JACINTO DIMENEZ [ean PACIFICO A. AGAR Judge ALOYSIUS. ALDAY Prot BARTOLOME A, FERNAKDEZ Prot RENE 8. GOROSPE Prot EDUARDO A. LABITAG ‘Dean MERLIN M. MAGALLONA Prot EDWIN R SANDOVAL Prot CARMELO V. ISON “Donte RAGAN A CRUZ rot JNCIRTO D. JIMENEZ Dean PACIFICO A. AGABIN sentative to State Hinterlands. During one of his vacations, senimissador Gaylor decided to experience for himself the fights and sounds of State Paradise, a country know’ for Betpeauty and other attractions. While in State Paradise, Keabassadior Gaylor was caught in the company of children tier suspicious circumstances, He was arrested for viola tn of the strict anti-pedophilia statute of State Paradise fig claims that he is immune from arrest and incarceration, by virtue of his diplomatic immunity. Does the claim of Ambassador Gaylor hold water? (1° SUGGESTED ANSWER: ‘Ambassador Gaylor cannot invoke his diplomatic immunity, In accordance with Paragraph 1, Article 31 of the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations, since State Paradise is not his receiving state, he does ot enjoy diplomatic immunity within its territory: Under Paragraph 1, Article 40 of the Vienna Conven: tun of Diplomatic Relations, he cannot be accorded diplomatic immunity in State Paradise, because he i not passing through it to take up or return to his post or to return to State Juvenus. ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2014 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW XXX. Congress passed a law, R.A. No. 15005, creating an ‘Administrative Board principally tasked with the super- vision and regulation of legal education. The Board was attached to the Department of Education. It was empow- fred, among others, to prescribe minimum standards for law admission and minimum qualifications of faculty members, the basic curricula for the course of study dligned to the requirements for admission to the Bar, law practice and social consciousness, as well as to establish a Jaw practice internship as a requirement for taking the Bar which a law student shall undergo anytime during the law course, and to adopt a system of continuing legal educa- tich, Professor Boombastick, a long-time law practitioner ‘and lecturer in several prestigious law schools, assails the constitutionality of the law, arguing that it encroached on the prerogatives of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules relative to admission te the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. If you were Professor Boombastick’s understudy, how may you help him develop clear, concise and cogent argu iments in support of his position based on the present ‘Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court on judicial independence and fiscal autonomy? (4%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: ‘The statutory authority granted to the Administra- tive Board to promulgate rules and regulations cannot encroach upon the exclusive authority of the Supreme Court to regulate the admission to the practice of law (Section 5(5), Article VIII of the Constitution). ‘Thus, the Administrative Board cannot prescribe additional standards for admission to the practice of law, adopt a course of study which is inconsistent with the requirements of the Supreme Court, and impose additional requirements to take the bar examinations (Philippine Lawyer's Association v. Agrava, G.R. No. 12426, February 16, 1959, 105 Phil. 173). Since has no power to repeal, alter or supplement the Rules of Court, it cannot delegate such power to the Administrative Board. 2013 BAR EXAMINATION ESSAY QUESTIONS L Inthe last quarter of 2012, about 5,000 container vans of imported goods intended for the Christmas Season were ctiged by agents of the Bureau of Customs. The imported goods were released only on January 10, 2013. A group of Beporters got together and filed an action for damages before the Regional Trial Court of Manila against the Department of Finance and the Bureau of Customs. "The Bureau of Customs raised the defense of immunity from suit and, alternatively, that liability should lie with XYZ Corp. which the Bureau had contracted for the lease of ten. (10) high-powered van cranes but delivered only five (S) of these cranes, thus causing the delay in its cargo-handling operations. Itappears that the Bureau, despite demand, did fot pay XYZ Corp. the PhpiMillion deposit and advance Tental required under their contract. {A)_ Will the action by the group of importers prosper? (5%) ‘SUGGESTED ANSWER: (A) No, the action of the group of importers will not prosper. The primary function of the Bureau of Customs is governmental, that of assessing and collecting lawful revenues from imported articles and all other tariff and ‘customs duties, fees, charges, fines and penalties (Mobil Philippines Exploration, Inc. v. Customs Arrastre Service, G.R. No, 1-23139, December 17, 1966, 18 SCRA 120). {B) CanXYZCorp. sue the Bureau of Customs tocollect rentals for the delivered cranes? (5%) Seana ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2013 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS W POLITICAL LAW SUGGESTEDANSWER: (B) No, X¥Z Corporation cannot sue the Bureau of Customs to collect rentals for the delivered cranes. The contract was a necessary incident to the performance of its governmental function. To properly collect the revenues and customs duties, the Bureau of Customs must check to determine ifthe declaration ofthe importers tallies with the landed merchandise. The cranes are needed to haul the landed merchandise toa suitable place for inspection (Mobil Philippines Exploration, Inc. v. Customs Arrastre Service, G.R. No. L-23139, December 17, 1966, 18 SCRA 1120), ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: No, XYZ Corporation cannot sue the Bureau of Customs, because it has no juridical personality separate from that of the Republic of the Philippines (Mobil Philippines Exploration, Inc. v. Customs Arrastre Service, G.R. No. L-23139, December 17, 1966, 18 SCRA 1120}. ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: ‘Yes, XYZ Corporation may sue the Bureau of Customs because the contract is connected with a proprietary function, the operationof the arrastre service (Philippine Refining Company v. Court of Appeals, 256 SCRA 667, May 8, 1996). Besides, XYZ Corporation leased its van cranes, because the Bureau of Customs undertook to pay its rentals. Justice and equity demand that the Bureau of Customs should not be allowed to invoke state immunity from suit (Republic v. Unimex-Micro Electronics GmBH, G.R. No, 166309-10, November 25, 2008, 518 SCRA 19), an. While Congress was in session, the President appointed eight Acting Secretaries. A group of Senators from the minority bloc questioned the validity of the appointments in 4 petition before the Supreme Court on the ground that 36 “SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2013 BAR EXAMINATION “QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW while Congress is in session, no appointment that " requires confirmation by the Commission on Appointments, gan be made without the latter’s consent, and that an undersecretary should instead be designated as Acting "Secretary. Should the petition be granted? (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: No, the petition should not be granted. The Department Head is an alter egoofthe President and must ‘enjoy his confidence even if the appointment will be merely temporary. The Senators cannot require the President to designate an Undersecretary to be the temporary alter ego of the President (Pimentel, Jr. v. Ermita, G.R. No. 164978, October 13, 2008, 472 SCRA 587). A robbery with homicide had taken place and Lito, Baciong and Rollie were invited for questioning based on the information furnished by a neighbor that he saw them come Out of the victim's house at about the time of the robbery/ kalling, The police confronted the three with this and other information they had gathered, and pointedly accused them of committing the crime Lito initially resisted, but eventually broke down and admitted his participation in the crime. Blated by this break and desirous of securirig a written confession soonest, the police called City Attorney Juars Buan to serve as the trio's Counsel and to advise them about their rights during the investigation. Badong and Rollie, weakened in spirit by Lito’s early admission, likewise admitted their participation. The trio thus signed a joint extrajudicial confession which served as the main evidence against them at their trial. They were convicted based on their confession. ‘Should the judgment of conviction be affirmed or reversed on appeal? (5%) = ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2019 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ‘SUGGESTED ANSWER: The judgment of conviction should be reversed on appeal. It relied mainly on the extrajudicial confession of the accused. The lawyer assisting them must be independent. City Attorney Juan Buan is not independent. As City Attorney, he provided legal support to the City Mayor in performing his duties, which include the maintenance of peace and order (People v. Sunga, G.R. No. 126029, March 27, 2003, 399 SCRA 624). ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: ‘The judgment of conviction should be affirmed if the accused failed to object when their extrajudicial confession was offered in evidence, which has rendered it admissible (People v. Samus, G.R. No. 135957-58, September 17, 2002, 389 SCRA Congress enacted a law providing for trial by jury for those charged with crimes or offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. The law provides for the qualifications of members of the jury, the guidelines for the bar and bench for their selection, the manner a trial by jury shall operate, and the procedures to be followed. Is the law constitutional? (6%) ‘SUGGESTED ANSWER: ‘The law providing for trial by jury is unconstitutional because of the omission in Article VIII, Section 5(5) of the 1987 Constitution of the provisions in Article VIII, Section 13 of the 1935 Constitution and Article X, Section 5(5) 1973 Constitution, which both authorized the Legislature to repeal, alter or supplement the rules of procedure promulgated by the Supreme Court. Congress can no longer enact any law governing rules of procedure for the courts (Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R.No. 132601, October 12, 1998, 301 SCRA 96). 38, | ANSWERS TO THE 2013 BAR EXAMINATION IN POLITICAL LAW .TERNATIVE ANSWER: ‘The law is valid, because the grant of a right to trial jory involves a substantive law and is within the ;petence of Congress (Article VIII, Section 5(5) of the :7 Constitution). v. Asa leading member of the Lapiang Mandirigma in the use of Representatives, you were tasked by the party to te the moves to impeach the President because he mntered into an executive agreement with the US ybassador for the use of the former Subic Naval Base by the IS Navy, for free, ‘e,, without need to pay rent nor any kind ‘of fees as a show of goodwill to the U.S. because of the ‘continuing harmonious RP-US relations. Cite at least two (2) grounds for impeachment and explain why you chose them. (6%) ‘SUGGESTED ANSWER: ‘The President canbe impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust. The Supreme Court has already ruled that the provision in Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution requires a treaty even for the mere temporary presence of foreign troops in the Philippines (Bayan v. Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, October 10,2000, 342 SCRA 499). The President cannot claim, therefore, that he acted in good faith. (Report of the Special Committee in the Impeachment of President Quirino, Congressional Record of the House of Representatives, Vol. IV, p. 1553). Betrayal of public trust Includes violation of the oath of the office of the President (Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. Il, p.272). In his oath of office, the President swore to preserve and defend the Constitution (Article VII, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution). 29 ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2019 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The President can be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution and graft and corruption (Article XI, 3ection 2). By entering into the executive agreement, the resident violated Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and corrupt Practices Act because of the undue injury to the Republic of the Philippines. M Congress passed Republic Act No. 7711 to comply with, he United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In a petition filed with the Supreme Court, Anak TY Tocos, an association of Nlocano professionals, argued that Republic Act No. 7711 discarded the definition of the Philippine ritory under the Treaty of Paris and in related treaties; :xcluded the Kalayaan Islands and the Scarborough Shoals tom the Philippine Archipelagic baselines; aid converted nternal waters into archipelagic waters Is the petition meritorious? (6%) 3UGGESTEDANSWER: No, the petition is not meritorious. The United Nations 2onvention on the Law of the Sea has nothing to do with ‘he acquisition or loss of territory. It merely regulates sea-use rights over maritime zones, contiguous zones, sxclusive economic zones, and continental shelves which t delimits. The Kalayaan Islands and the Scarborough Shoals are located at an appreciable distance from the rearest shoreline of the Philippine archipelago. Astraight vaseline loped around them from the nearest baseline vill violate Article 47(3) and Article 47(2) of the United tations Convention on the Law of the Sea IIT. Whether che bodies of water lying landward of the baselines of the *hilippines are internal waters or archipelagic waters, ‘he Philippines retains jurisdiction over them (Magallona ).Ermita, G.R. No. 187167, July 16, 2011,655 SCRA 476). ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2013 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW vu. ‘As he was entering a bar, Arnold - who was holding an unlit cigarette in his right hand ~ was handed a match box bby someone standing near the doorway. Arnold unthinkingly ‘opened the matchbox to light his cigarette and as he did so, ‘a sprinkle of dried leaves fell out, which the guard noticed. ‘The guard immediately frisked Arnold, grabbed the matchbox, and sniffed its contents. After confirming that the matchbox contained marijuana, he immediately arrested Arnold and called in the police. At the police station, the guard narrated to the police that he personally caught Arnold in possession of dried marijuana leaves. Arnold did not contest the guard’s statement, nt and refused to give any written statement. Later in court, the guard testified and narrated the statements he gave the police over Arnold's counsel's objections. While Arnoid presented his cwn witnesses to prove that his possession and apprehension had been set-up, he himself did not testify ‘The court convicted Arnold, relying largely on his admission of the charge by silence at the police mvestigation and during trial From the constitutional law perspective, was the court correct ir SUGGESTED ANSWER. ‘The court was wrong in relying on the silence of ‘Amold during the police investigation and during the trial. Under Article Ill, Section 12 ofthe 1987 Constitution, he had the right to remain silent. His silence cannot be taken asa tacit admission, otherwise, his right to remain silent would be rendered nugatory. Considering that his right against self-incrimination protects his right to remain silent, he cannot be penalized for exercising it (People v. Galvez, G.R. No. 157221, March 30, 2007, 519 SCRAS521). ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2013 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: ‘The court correctly convicted Arnold. There is no showing that the evidence for the prosecution was {eStericient. When Arnold remained silent, he runs the ier of an inference of guilt from non-production of Usldence in his behalf (People v, Solis, G-R. No, 124127, June 29, 1998, 128 SCRA 217). vm. | Bobby, an incoming third year college student, was denied admission by his university, a premiere educational oetitution in Manila, after he failed in three (3) major subjects in his sophomore year. The denial of admiesion suri faocd on the tiniversity’s rules and admission policies Nnable to cope with the depression that his non- admission triggered, Bobby committed suicide. ‘His family admiSthe_ school for damages, citing the school’s grossly soeasonable rules that resulted in the deniel of admission, ‘They argued that these rules violated Bobby's human rights ang the priority consideration that the Constitution gives {0 the education of the youth: You are counsel for the university. Explain your arguments in support of the university's case. (674) SUGGESTED ANSWER: {I shall argue that under Article XIV, Section 5(2) of the 1987 Constitution, the educational institution enjoys te demic freedom. Academic freedom includes its rights sevGrescribe academic standards, policies and qualifications for the admission of « student (Universtty aYgan Agustin, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 100588, March 7, 1994, 230 SCRA 761)- ‘SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO THE 2019 BAR EXAMINATION ‘QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW x Conrad is widely known in the neighborhood as a drag addict. He is also suspected of being a member of the _Retorious *Akyat-Condo Gang” that has previously broken Fito and looted condominium units in the area. Sratired Army Colonel Sangre ~Wwhois known as.an anti, terrorism fighter who disdained human and constitutional Soy and has been nicknamed ‘terror of Mindanao’ -is now Te ocad of Security of Capricorn Land Corporation, the tre ner and developer of Sagittarius Estates where a series of fobberies has recently taken place.

    You might also like