Course Number: Semester offered:

Course Title: Constitutional Law 1 School Year: 2022-2023

Units: 4 Mode: online
Professor: J.P. Leo Fuentes Asong

A. Course Description
The course undertakes a survey and evaluation of basic principles contained in the
Philippine Constitution.

B. Course Objective/s

1. To familiarize the student with the fundamental premises and design of the
constitutional system and government of the Philippines
2. To expose the student to the guiding principles and applicable doctrines of
constitutional law
3. To cultivate the student’s ability to identify constitutional issues
4. To equip the student with intellectual tools necessary to properly conceptualize
and analyze constitutional issues

C. Course Policies

1. The SKSU College of Law requires compliance with the highest standards of
academic performance, personal integrity, and self-discipline.
2. Students shall come to class decently dressed in appropriate attire.
3. Recording devices are prohibited without express permission.

D. Course Methodology

Because of the coronavirus pandemic, schools have shifted to learning

management systems and other learning platforms. For this course, the professor
shall primarily utilize Google Classroom for the posting of announcements and
lectures.

a. All students are expected to have at least a working knowledge of the

following platforms: Zoom, Loom, Google Meet, and Google Forms.
b. Each student is required to have an official SKSU email address. The
said account shall be used for email correspondence and for exam
purposes. Sending of personal requests via Facebook is prohibited.

In terms of methodology, the course will adhere to blended online learning.1 For
class lectures, the professor shall upload pre-recorded videos on Loom from time

1
The class shall utilize both synchronous and asynchronous learning. “Asynchronous learning is a student-centered
teaching method widely used in online learning. Its basic premise is that learning can occur in different times and
spaces particular to each learner, as opposed to synchronous learning at a same time and place with groups of learners
and their instructor, or one learner and their instructor.” See Finol, Maria Ocando. (2020, March 26). Asynchronous
vs. Synchronous Learning: A Quick Overview. https://www.brynmawr.edu/blendedlearning/asynchronous-vs-
synchronous-learning-quick-overview

1
 to time. The link/s for these videos shall be posted via Google Classroom. Students
are expected to view the video/s within the day they are posted. They are
prohibited from downloading or recording any portion of the pre-recorded lecture/s.
However, they are allowed to take down notes while viewing them.

E. Course Requirements

Course Requirements Grade Breakdown

Exams (3) 90%
Recitation 10%
TOTAL 100%

Graded recitation

Graded recitations shall be conducted real-time primarily through Google

Meet/Zoom. The professor will use Wheel of Names, a free online tool, to pick a
random name from the class list. Students are expected to recite with their video
cameras on.

As a rule, students who fail to show up during a meeting shall be marked

“absent” and shall receive a failing grade if they are called for recitation. They can
only be excused in special and meritorious cases (e.g. emergencies and illness)
with proper documentation (e.g. medical certificate).

F. References

1. Cruz, Isagani. (2014). Philippine Political Law. Central Book Supply.

2. Bernas, Joaquin. (2009). The 1987 Constitution: A Commentary. Rex Book
Store.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COURSE OUTLINE2

I. What is Political Law?

a.) Branches of Political Law

b.) What is Constitutional Law?

II. Nature and Concept of a Constitution

a.) Constitution – defined

b.) Purpose and role
c.) Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy

1. Genuino v. De Lima, April 17, 2018

2
Based on the syllabus of Atty. Vincent Paul Montejo+

2
 d.) Presumption of Constitutionality
e.) Classifications
f.) Essential qualities of a good Constitution
g.) Essential parts of a good written Constitution
h.) Methods of interpreting the constitution

1. Francisco, Jr. v. House of Representatives, November 10, 2003

2. Chavez v. JBC, July 17, 2012; April 16, 2013
3. Imbong v. Ochoa, April 28, 2014
4. David v. SET, September 20, 2016

III. Amendments and Revisions

A. Proposal [Secs. 1 and 2, Art. XVII]

i. By Congress [Sec. 1, Art. XVII]

ii. By Constitutional Convention [Sec. 3, Art. XVII]
iii. By the People through Initiative [Sec. 2, Art. XVII]

1. Defensor-Santiago v. COMELEC, March 19, 1997

2. Lambino v. COMELEC, October 25, 2006
3. Marmeto v. COMELEC, September 26, 2017

B. Ratification

i. In case amendments proposed by Congress or Convention [Sec. 4(1), Art. XVII]

ii. In case of amendments proposed through initiative [Sec. 4(2), Art. XVII]
iii. Plebiscite to be called by Congress and supervised by COMELEC, but the initiative on
the Constitution will be called by COMELEC

C. National/Local Initiative and Referendum [Sec. 32, Art. VI]

IV. Self-executing and non-self-executing provisions

1. Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, February 3, 1997

2. Council of Teachers and Staff v. Secretary of Education, October 9, 2018; March 5, 2019

V. State Principles and Policies

1. Oposa v. Factoran, July 30, 1993

2. Tañada v. Angara, May 2, 1997; National Federation of Hog Farmers v. BOI, June 23,
2020
3. Pamatong v. COMELEC, April 13, 2004
4. Imbong v. Ochoa, April 28, 2014
5. Sereno v. Committee on Trade, February 1, 2016
6. Re: Letter of Tony Q. Valenciano, March 7, 2017
7. The Salvation Army v. SSS, G.R. No. 230095, September 15, 2021

VI. Fundamental Powers of the State

1. Police Power

3
 a. Manila Memorial v. DSWD, December 3, 2013
b. Zabal v. Duterte, February 12, 2019
c. Maynilad v. Secretary of DENR, August 6, 2019
d. Pimentel v. LEB, September 10, 2019

2. Eminent Domain

a. City Government of Valenzuela v. Abacan, April 3, 2019

3. Taxation

VII. State Immunity/Non-Suability of the State

a.) Basis: Sec. 3, Art. XVI

b.) When is a suit against the State

1. Air Transportation Office v. Ramos, February 23, 2011

2. Arigo v. Swift, September 16, 2014
3. City of Bacolod v. Phuture Visions, January 17, 2018
4. Republic v. Fetalvero, February 4, 2019 (liability)
5. Philippine Textile Research Institute v. CA, October 9, 2019
6. Taisei Shimizu Joint Venture v. COA, June 2, 2020
7. BPI v. Central Bank, October 12, 2020
8. V.C. Ponce v. COA, January 26, 2021

c.) Consent to be sued – How given

1. Express Consent

a.) Money claims arising from Contract

b.) Incorporation of GOCCs

2. Implied Consent

a.) Government enters into business contracts

b.) Inequitable claim to immunity
c.) Government initiates a complaint; open to counterclaim

VIII. National Territory

1. Nicolas v. Romulo, February 11, 2009

2. Magallona v. Ermita, August 16, 2011
3. Saguisag v. Ochoa, January 12, 2016; July 26, 2016
4. Republic v. Provincial Government of Palawan, December 4, 2018; January 21,
2020
5. Republic of the Philippines vs. China, Permanent Court of Arbitration, July 12,
2016
6. Jardeleza, Francis. (Special Issue). “How the Sea was Won.” Ateneo Law Journal.
March 2017.

a) The Archipelagic Doctrine (Art. I)

b) The Philippine Archipelago

1. Treaty Limits

4
 i. Article III, Treaty of Paris
ii. Treaty of Washington (November 7, 1900)
iii. Treaty between US and Great Britain (February 2, 1930)

2. Methods of Determining Bases

i. R.A. 3046 – June 17, 1961

ii. R.A. 5446 – September 8, 1968
iii. R.A. 9552 – March 3, 2009

3. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

IX. Citizenship

§ Modes of Acquiring Citizenship

§ Who are Citizens (Sec. 1, Art. IV)

1. Mercado v. Manzano, May 26, 1999

2. Co vs. HRET, July 30, 1999
3. Bengson III v. HRET, May 7, 2001
4. Tecson v. COMELEC, March 3, 2004
8. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, March 8, 2016
9. David v. SET, September 20, 2016

§ Election of Philippine Citizenship

See: C.A. 625 – June 7, 1941

1. In re: Application of Ching, Bar Matter No. 941, October 1, 1999

2. Republic v. Lim, January 13, 2004
3. Ma v. Fernandez, July 26, 2010
4. Republic v. Sagun, February 5, 2012

§ Natural-born Citizens (Sec. 2, Art. IV)

1. Who must be Natural-born Citizens?

a) President – Sec. 2, Art. VII

b) Vice President – Sec. 3, Art.VII
c) Members of Congress – Sec. 3 & 6, Art. VI
d) Justices of the Supreme Court and Lower Collegiate Courts – Sec.
8, Art. VIII
e) Ombudsman and Deputies – Sec. 8, Art.XI
f) Constitutional Commission Members – Sec. 1 (1), Art. IX-B; Sec.
1 (1), Art. IX-C; Sec. 1 (1), Art. IX-D
g) Central Monetary Authority Members – Sec. 20, Art. XII
h) CHR Members – Sec. 17 (2), Art. XIII

§ Naturalized Citizens

Read: R.A. 9139 (June 8, 2001) and C.A. 473 (June 17, 1939)

a) Who are qualified

b) Declaration of Intention
c) Procedure

5
 d) When Decision is Executory (Sec. 1, R.A. 530)

1. Republic v. Li Ching Chung, March 20, 2013

2. Republic v. Batuigas, October 7, 2013
3. Republic v. Huang Te Fu, March 18, 2015
4. Republic v. Karbasi, July 29, 2015
5. Republic v. Go Pei Hung, April 4, 2018

A. Loss of Citizenship
B. Re-acquisition or Repatriation

Read: i. Sec. 4, C.A. 63

ii. R.A. 8171 – October 23, 1995
iii. R.A. 9225 – August 29, 2003

1. Tabasa v. CA, August 29, 2006 [R.A. 8171]

2. Jacot v. Dal, November 7, 2008
3. Cordora v. COMELEC and Tambunting, February 19, 2009
4. De Guzman v. COMELEC, June 19, 2009
5. Sobejana-Condon v. COMELEC, August 10, 2012
6. Maquiling v. COMELEC, April 16, 2013; July 2, 2013
7. In Re: Petition to Re-acquire the Privilege to Practice Law in the
Philippines, B.M. No. 2112, July 24, 2012
8. David v. Agbay, March 18, 2015
9. Arnado v. COMELEC, August 18, 2015
10. Caballero v. COMELEC, September 22, 2015
11. Chua v. COMELEC, April 5, 2016
12. Tan v. Crisologo, November 8, 2017
13. Gana-Carait (2022)

§ Dual Allegiance

Read: a.) Sec. 5, Art. IV

b.) Sec. 40 (d), LGC of 1991 [dual allegiance]

X. THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

A. Legislative Power

I. Scope
II. Limitations

(1) Substantive Limitations

a.) Express substantive limitations

i. Bill of Rights (Art. III)

ii. Secs. 25 and 28, Art. VI
iii. Sec. 4(3), Art. XIV
iv. Sec. 29, Art. VI
v. Sec. 30, Art. VI
vi. Sec. 31, Art. VI

b.) Implied substantive limitations

1. Non-delegation of Legislative Power

6
 a.) Exceptions:

1. Secs. 23(2) and 28(2) – delegation to the President

2. Sec. 32, Art. VI – delegation to the people
3. Sec. 5, Art. X – delegation to LGUs
4. Delegation to administrative agencies

b. Tests of Valid Delegation

1. ABAKADA vs. Purisima, August 14, 2008

2. DOTR v. Philippine Petroleum Sea Transport, July 24, 2018
3. Council of Teachers v. Secretary of Education, October 9, 2018;
March 5, 2019
4. KMU v. Aquino, April 2, 2019
5. Acosta v. Ochoa, October 15, 2019
6. Pantaleon v. MMDA, November 17, 2020
7. Lagman v. Ochoa, November 3, 2020

2. Prohibition against Passage of Irrepealable Laws

(2) Procedural Limitations [Secs. 26-27, Art. VI]

B. Congress

1. Composition, Qualifications, and Term of Office

a.) Senate [Secs. 2-4, Art. VI]

1. David v. SET, September 20, 2016

b.) House of Representatives [Secs. 5-6, Art. VI; Sec. 7, Art. XVIII]

1. Cabigao v. COMELEC, November 9, 2021

2. Apportionment of Districts

1. Sema v. COMELEC, July 16, 2008

2. Bagabuyo v. COMELEC, December 8, 2008
3. Aldaba v. COMELEC, January 25, 2010; March 25, 2010
4. Aquino III v. COMELEC, April 7, 2010
5. Navarro v. Ermita, April 12, 2011
6. Naval v. COMELEC, July 8, 2014

3. THE PARTY LIST SYSTEM [R.A. 7941 – March 3, 1995]

1. BANAT v. COMELEC, April 21, 2009; July 8, 2009

2. Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC, April 2, 2013
3. A-IPRA v. COMELEC, April 16, 2013
4. COCOFED v. COMELEC, August 6, 2013
5. ANAD v. COMELEC, September 10, 2013
6. AKMA-PTM v. COMELEC, June 16, 2015
7. Lico v. COMELEC, September 29, 2015

7
 8. ANGKLA v. COMELEC, September 15, 2020

4. Election

a.) Regular election [Sec. 8, Art. VI]

b.) Special election [Sec. 9, Art. VI]

1. Tolentino v. COMELEC, January 21, 2004

2. Bañas-Nograles v. COMELEC, September 10, 2019

5. Salaries, Privileges, and Disqualifications

a.) Salaries [Sec. 10, Art. VI; Sec. 17, Art. XVIII]
b.) Immunity from Arrest [Sec. 11, Art. VI]

1. People v. Jalosjos, February 3, 2000

2. Trillanes v. Pimentel, June 27, 2008

c.) Speech and Debate Clause [Sec. 11, Art. VI]

1. Osmeña v. Pendatun, October 28, 1960

2. Jimenez v. Cabangbang, August 3, 1966
3. People v. Jalosjos, February 3, 2000
4. Pobre v. Defensor-Santiago, August 25, 2009
5. Trillanes v. Castillo-Marigomen, March 14, 2018

d.) Disqualifications

(1) Incompatible and Forbidden Offices

a. Liban v. Gordon, January 18, 2011

(2) Other prohibitions

a.) [Sec. 14, Art. VI]

1. Belgica v. Ochoa, November 19, 2013

b.) [Sec. 16, Art. XI]

e.) Duty to Disclose [Sec. 17, Art. XI; Secs. 12 and 20, Art. VI]

6. Sessions

(1) Regular sessions [Secs. 15 and 16(5), Art. VI]

(2) Special sessions [Sec. 15, Art. VI; Secs. 10-11 and 18(3), Art. VII]

7. Internal Government of Congress

a.) Election of officers [Sec. 16(1), Art. VI]

1. Santiago v. Guingona, November 18, 1998

2. Baguilat v. Alvarez, July 25, 2017

b.) Quorum and voting majorities [Sec. 16(2), Art. VI]

c.) Rules of proceedings [Secs. 16(3) and 21, Art. VI]

8
 1. Garcillano v. HR Committees, December 23, 2008
2. Dela Paz v. Senate, February 13, 2009
3. Pimentel v. Senate Committee of the Whole, March 8, 2011
4. Baguilat v. Alvarez, July 25, 2017
5. Lagman v. Medialdea, February 19, 2019

d.) Discipline of members [Sec. 16(3), Art. VI]

1. Santiago v. Sandiganbayan, April 18, 2001

e.) Journal and Congressional Records [Sec. 16(4), Art. VI]

(1) The Enrolled Bill Theory

a) Arroyo v. De Venecia, August 14, 1997

b) ABAKADA v. Ermita, September 1, 2005
c) Council of Teachers and Staff v. Secretary of Education, October
9, 2018; March 5, 2019

(2) Probative Value of the Journal

(3) Matters required to be Entered in the Journal

a) Yeas and Nays on any question at the request of 1/5 of members present
[Sec. 16(4), Art. VI]
b) Yeas and Nays on Third and Final Reading of a bill [Sec. 26(2), Art.VI]
c) Veto message of the President [Sec. 27(1), Art. VI]
d) Yeas and Nays on the repassing of a bill vetoed by the President [Sec.
27(1), Art. VI]
e) Summary of proceedings

(4) Journal Entry Rule vs. Enrolled Bill Theory

a) Astorga v. Villegas, April 30, 1974

b) Arroyo v. De Venecia, August 14, 1997

(5) Congressional Record [Sec. 16(4), par. 2, Art. VI]

8. Electoral Tribunal [Secs. 17 and 19, Art. VI]

a.) Composition

1. Pimentel v. HRET, November 29, 2002

2. Reyes v. HRET, October 16, 2018

b.) Nature of Function

c.) Independence of the Electoral Tribunals

1. Bondoc v. Pineda, September 26, 1991

d.) Jurisdiction/Powers

1. Lico v. COMELEC, September 29, 2015

2. Rivera v. COMELEC, April 19, 2016
3. Abayon v. HRET, May 3, 2016

9
 4. David v. SET, September 20, 2016
5. Tolentino v. SET, May 11, 2021
6. Penson v. COMELEC, September 28, 2021

e.) Judicial Review of Decisions of Electoral Tribunals

1. Vilando v. HRET, August 23, 2011

2. Ty-Delgado v. HRET, January 26, 2016
3. David v. SET, September 20, 2016

9. Commission on Appointments [Secs. 18 and 19, Art. VI]

1. Pimentel v. HRET, November 29, 2002

10. Aids to Legislation

A. Legislative inquiries in aid of legislation [Sec. 21, Art. VI]

1. Senate v. Ermita, April 20, 2006

2. Sabio v. Gordon, October 17, 2006
3. Standard Chartered v. Senate, December 7, 2007
4. Neri v. Senate, March 25, 2008; September 4, 2008
5. Garcillano v. HR Committees, December 23, 2008
6. Romero v. Estrada, April 2, 2009
7. Pimentel v. Senate Committee of the Whole, March 8, 2011
8. PHILCOMSAT v. Senate, June 19, 2012
9. Balag v. Senate, July 3, 2018
10. Agcaoili v. Fariñas, July 3, 2018
11. Calida v. Trillanes, September 3, 2019

B. Question Hour [Sec. 22, Art. VI]

1. Senate v. Ermita, April 20, 2006

11. LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

a.) Requirements as to bills

(1) One-subject/one-title rule [Sec. 26(1), Art. VI]

1. Fariñas v. Executive Secretary, December 10, 2003

2. Giron v. COMELEC, January 22, 2013
3. Imbong v. Ochoa, April 28, 2014

b.) Procedure for the passage of bills [Sec. 26(2), Art. VI]

1. Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, August 25, 1994; October 30, 1995

2. ABAKADA v. Ermita, September 1, 2005
3. Ang Nars Party-List v. Executive Secretary, October 8, 2019

c.) Requirements as to certain laws

10
 (a) Appropriation laws [Secs. 24-25, Art. VI; Sec. 22, Art. VII]

1. Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, August 25, 1994; October 30,

1995
2. ABAKADA v. Ermita, September 1, 2005
3. Belgica v. Ochoa, November 19, 2013
4. Araullo v. Aquino, July 1, 2014; February 3, 2015
5. Dela Cruz v. Ochoa, January 23, 2018
6. Belgica v. Executive Secretary, October 8, 2019

(b) Tax laws [Sec. 28, Art. VI; Sec. 4 (3) (4), Art. XIV]

1. ABAKADA v. Ermita, September 1, 2005

d.) The President’s Veto Power [Sec. 27, Art. VI]

a.) Qualified and absolute veto

b.) Legislative veto –

1. ABAKADA v. Purisima, August 14, 2008

2. Belgica v. Ochoa, November 19, 2013

12. OTHER POWERS OF CONGRESS

A. Act as Board of Canvassers for Presidential and Vice Presidential elections [Sec.
4(4), Art. VII]

1. Macalintal v. COMELEC, July 10, 2003

2. Brillantes v. COMELEC, June 15, 2004

B. Call special election for President and Vice President [Sec. 10, Art. VII]
C. Revoke or extend suspension of the privilege of habeas corpus or declaration of
martial law [Sec. 18, Art. VII]
D. Concur in grant of amnesties [Sec. 19, Art. VII]
E. Confirm certain appointments [Secs. 9 and 16, Art. VII]
F. Concur in treaties [Sec. 21, Art. VII; Sec. 25, Art. XVIII]
G. Declaration of existence of state of war and delegation of emergency powers [Sec.
23, Art. VI]

1. David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, March 3, 2006

H. Be the judge of the President’s physical fitness or capacity [Sec. 11(4), Art. VII]
I. Power with regard to the utilization of natural resources [Sec. 2, Art. XII]

XI. THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

The President

A. Executive Power

1) Residual Powers

a.) Marcos v. Manglapus, September 15, 1989; October 27, 1989

11
 2) Executive/Presidential Immunity

a.) Estrada v. Desierto, March 2, 2001

b.) De Lima v. Duterte, October 15, 2019
c.) Nepomuceno v. Duterte, May 11, 2021

3) Executive Privilege

a.) Senate v. Ermita, April 20, 2006

b.) Neri v. Senate, March 25, 2008; September 4, 2008

B. President - Qualifications, Election, Term and Oath [Secs. 2, 4 and 5, Art. VII]

1. Tecson v. COMELEC, March 3, 2004

2. Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, March 8, 2016

*Vice President - Qualifications, Election, Term and Oath [Secs. 3, 4 and 5, Art.
VII]

(a) Privilege and salary (Sec. 6, Art. VII)

(b) Prohibitions (Secs. 3(2) and 13, Art. VII)
(c) Succession (Sec. 9, Art. VII)
(d) Removal (Secs. 2 and 3, Art. XI)
(e) Functions
(f) Right of succession (Secs. 8 and 11, Art. VII)
(g) Membership in Cabinet (Sec. 3(2), Art. VII)

C. Privilege and salary [Sec. 6, Art. VII]

D. Succession

1. At the beginning of the term [Secs. 7 and 10, Art. VII]

2. During the term [Secs. 8 and 10, Art. VII]
3. Temporary disability [Secs. 11 and 12, Art. VII]

E. Prohibitions [Sec. 13, Art. VII]

1. Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, February 22, 1991

2. Public Interest v. Elma, June 30, 2006; March 5, 2007
3. Funa v. Ermita, February 11, 2010
4. Funa v. Agra, February 19, 2013

Note: Compare prohibitions against OTHER officials

1. Sec. 13, Art. VI

2. Sec. 12, Art. VIII
3. Sec. 2, Art. IX-A
4. Sec. 7, Art. IX-B

EXCEPTIONS to the rule prohibiting executive officials from holding additional

positions:

(1) Vice President as member of the Cabinet [Sec. 3, Art. VII]

(2) Secretary of Justice as member of Judicial and Bar Council [Sec. 8(1), Art. VIII)
(3) Ex officio positions

12
F. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT

(1) POWER OF APPOINTMENT

A. LIMITATIONS ON APPOINTING POWER OF ACTING

PRESIDENT [Secs. 14-15, Art. VII]
B. LIMITATIONS ON THE APPOINTING POWER OF THE
PRESIDENT [Secs. 13 and 15, Art. VII]

1. De Castro v. JBC, March 17, 2010; April 20, 2010

2. Velicaria-Garafil v. OP, June 16, 2015

C. WITH THE CONSENT OF THE COMMISSION ON

APPOINTMENTS

1. Manalo v. Sistoza, August 11, 1999

2. Matibag v. Benipayo, April 2, 2002
3. Pimentel v. Ermita, October 13, 2005

a.) Heads of Departments [Sec. 16, Art. VII]

b.) Ambassadors, Public Ministers, Consuls [Sec. 16, Art. VII]
c.) Officers of the Armed Forces from the rank of Colonel and
Naval Captain [Sec. 16, Art. VII]
d.) Chairman and Members of the Constitutional Commissions
[Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-B; Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-C; Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-D]
e.) Regular Members of the Judicial and Bar Council [Sec. 8(2),
Art. VIII]
f.) Sectoral representatives [Sec. 7, Art. XVIII]

D. INTERIM OR RECESS APPOINTMENTS [Sec. 19, Art. VI; Sec.

16(2), Art. VII]

1. De Rama v. CA, February 28, 2001

2. Matibag v. Benipayo, April 2, 2002

E. TEMPORARY DESIGNATIONS [E.O. 292, BOOK III, Sec. 7]

The President may designate an officer already in the

government service or any other competent person to
perform the function of all office in the executive branch,
appointment to which is vested in him by law, when:
(a) The officer regularly appointed to the office is
unable to perform his duties by reason of illness,
absence or any other cause; or
(b) There exists a vacancy.
In no case shall a temporary designation exceed one
(1) year.

F. UPON RECOMMENDATION OF THE JUDICIAL AND BAR

COUNCIL

1. Members of the Supreme Court and all other courts [Sec. 9, Art.
VIII]
2. Ombudsman and Deputies [Sec. 9, Art. XI]

(2) POWER OF CONTROL [Sec. 17, Art. VII]

13
 Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency

a.) Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB v. Zamora, July 10, 2001

b.) Rufino v. Endriga, July 21, 2006
c.) Banda v. Ermita, April 20, 2010
d.) Hontiveros-Baraquel v. TRB, February 23, 2015
e.) Philippine Institute for Development Studies v. COA, August 20, 2019

(3) GENERAL SUPERVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND

AUTONOMOUS REGIONS [Secs. 4 and 16, Art. X]

a.) Villafuerte v. Robredo, December 10, 2014

b.) Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Bataan v. Garcia, October 5, 2016

(4) POWERS OF COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF [Sec. 18, Art. VII; Sec. 13,

Art. III, Sec. 1 (2), Art. VIII]

a.) IBP v. Zamora, August 15, 2000

b.) David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, May 3, 2006
c.) Kulayan v. Tan, July 3, 2012
d.) Lagman vs. Medialdea, July 4, 2017; December 5, 2017
e.) Padilla v. Congress, July 25, 2017
f.) Lagman v. Pimentel, February 6, 2018 (2nd extension)
g.) Lagman v. Medialdea, February 19, 2019 (3rd extension); September 3,
2019

(5) EXECUTIVE CLEMENCIES [Sec. 19, Art. VII]

(a) Pardon distinguished from Probation

(b) Pardon distinguished from Parole
(c) Pardon distinguished from Amnesty
(d) Effects of Pardon
(e) Sanctions for violations of conditional pardons
(f) Does the pardoning power apply to administrative cases?
(g) Who may avail of amnesty

1. Llamas v. Orbos, October 15, 1991

2. Magdalo v. COMELEC, June 19, 2012
3. Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC, January 21, 2015
4. Tiu v. Natividad, June 15, 2016

(6) POWER OVER FOREIGN AFFAIRS [Sec. 21, Art. VII]

A. Treaty Making [Sec. 21, Art. VII]

B. Treaty distinguished from Executive Agreements

a.) Bayan v. Zamora, October 10, 2000

b.) Lim v. Executive Secretary, April 11, 2002
c.) Pimentel v. Romulo, July 6, 2005
d.) Nicolas v. Romulo, February 11, 2009
e.) Vinuya v. Romulo, April 28, 2010; August 13, 2014
f.) Saguisag v. Ochoa, January 12, 2016; July 26, 2016
g.) Intellectual Property Assn of the PH v. Ochoa, July 19, 2016
h.) Pangilinan v. Cayetano, March 16, 2021

14
 (7) CONTRACTING AND GUARANTEEING FOREIGN LOANS [Sec.
20, Art. VII; Sec. 21, Art. XII]

a.) Constantino v. Cuisia, October 13, 2005

b.) Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas v. Aurora Pacific Economic
Zone and Free Port Authority, G.R. No. 198688, November 24, 2020

(8) EMERGENCY POWERS [Sec. 23(2), Art. VI]

(9) POWER OVER LEGISLATION

a.) Address Congress (Sec. 23, Art. VII)

b.) Preparation and submission of budget (Sec. 22, Art. VII)
c.) Veto power (Sec. 27, Art. VI)
d.) Emergency powers [Sec. 23(2), Art. VI)
e.) Fixing of tariff rates [Sec. 28(2), Art. VI]

XII. ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS [Art. XI]

The Power of Impeachment

a.) Corona v. Senate, July 17, 2012

b.) Republic v. Sereno, May 11, 2018; June 19, 2018

1. Who are subject to impeachment [Sec. 2, Art. XI]

a.) Ombudsman v. CA, March 4, 2005

b.) Gonzales v. Office of the President, January 28, 2014

2. Grounds for impeachment [Sec. 2, Art. XI]

3. Procedure for impeachment [Sec. 3(1) – (6), Art. XI]

a.) Gutierrez v. HoR Committee on Justice, February 15, 2011; March 8, 2011

4. Consequence of impeachment [Sec. 3(7), Art. XI]

a.) Estrada v. Desierto, March 2, 2001

b.) Francisco v. House of Representatives, November 10, 2003
c.) Re: Letter of Mrs. Ma. Cristina Roco Corona, January 12, 2021

XIII. THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

1. Judicial Power

a.) Cudia v. Superintendent of PMA, February 24, 2015

b.) Carpio-Morales v. CA, November 150, 2015
c.) PHILCONSA v. GPH, November 29, 2016

(1) Sec. 1, Art. VIII

(2) Sec. 5, Art. VIII

a.) Chavez v. JBC, July 17, 2012; April 16, 2013

b.) Umali v. JBC, July 25, 2017

15
 (3) Sec. 18 (3), Art. VII
(4) Sec. 4(7), Art. VII

a.) Tecson v. COMELEC, March 3, 2004

b.) Legarda v. De Castro, January 18, 2008
c.) Macalintal v. PET, November 23, 2010; June 7, 2011

(5) Sec. 7, Art. IX-A

2. Judicial Review

a) How Judicial Review is exercised

b) Functions of Judicial Review

1. Checking
2. Legitimating
3. Symbolic

c) Requisites of Judicial Review

a) Actual case; Ripeness

b) Legal standing (Locus standi)
c) Question raised must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity
d) Question must be the very lis mota

1. Oposa v. Factoran, July 30, 1993

2. IBP v. Zamora, August 15, 2000
3. Francisco v. House of Representatives, November 10, 2003
4. Senate v. Ermita, April 20, 2006
5. David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, May 3, 2006
6. Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Peace Panel, October 14, 2008
7. Biraogo v. PTC, December 7, 2010
8. Belgica v. Ochoa, November 19, 2013
9. Imbong v. Ochoa, April 8, 2014
10. Araullo v. Aquino, July 1, 2014; February 3, 2015
11. In the Matter of: Save the Supreme Court Judicial Independence, January 21, 2015
12. Resident Marine Mammals v. Reyes, April 21, 2015
13. Ocampo v. Enriquez, November 8, 2016; August 8, 2017
14. Knights of Rizal v. DMCI Homes, Inc., April 25, 2017
15. The Provincial Bus Operators Association of the Philippines (PBOAP), et al v. DOLE and
LTFRB, July 17, 2018
16. Private Hospitals Association of the Philippines (PHAPi) v. Medialdea, November 6, 2018
17. Zabal v. Duterte, February 12, 2019
18. GIOS-Samar, Inc. v. DOTC and CAAP, March 12, 2019
19. Inmates of New Bilibid Prison v. De Lima, June 25, 2019
20. Falcis v. Civil Registrar, September 3, 2019
21. Calida v. Trillanes, September 3, 2019
22. Pimentel v. LEB, September 10, 2019
23. Venus Commercial Co, Inc. DOH and FDA, November 18, 2021
24. Calleja v. Medialdea, December 7, 2021

Political vs. Justiciable Question

1. Vinuya v. Romulo, April 28, 2010; August 13, 2014

2. The Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC, January 21, 2015; July 5, 2016

16
 3. Saguisag v. Ochoa, January 12, 2016; July 26, 2016

Effects of Unconstitutionality

See: Article 7, Civil Code

a.) Two views: Orthodox and Modern

b.) Operative Fact Doctrine

1. Belgica v. Ochoa, November 19, 2013

2. Araullo v. Aquino, July 1, 2014; February 3, 2015
3. Mandanas v. Ochoa, July 3, 2018; April 10, 2019
4. Municipality of Tupi v. Faustino, August 20, 2019

I. The Supreme Court

A. Composition [Sec. 4, Art. VIII]

B. Appointment and Qualifications [Secs. 7(1), 8(5), 9, Art. VIII]

1. De Castro vs. JBC, March 17, 2010; April 20, 2010

2. Republic v. Sereno, May 11, 2018; June 19, 2018

C. Salary [Sec. 17, Art. VIII; Sec. 17, Art. XVIII]

D. Security of Tenure [Sec. 2 and 11, Art. VIII]
E. Removal [Sec. 11, Art. VIII; Sec. 2, Art. IX]
F. Fiscal Autonomy [Sec. 3, Art. VIII]

1. Re: COA Opinion, July 31, 2012

2. Mandanas v. Ochoa, July 3, 2018

G. Judicial restraint
H. Safeguards of Judicial independence
I. Congressional Power over Jurisdiction of Supreme Court [Sec. 2(1), Art. VIII; Sec. 30,
Art. VI]

1. Fabian vs. Desierto, September 16, 1998; Ancheta vs. Villa, January 15, 2020

J. Administrative Powers

(1) Supervision of lower courts

a.) In re: Request for Guidance, October 1, 2013

(2) Temporarily assign judges to other stations in the public interest [Sec. 5(3), Art.
VIII]
(3) Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice [Sec. 5(4),
Art. VIII]
(4) Discipline of judges [Sec. 11, Art. VIII]
(5) Appointment of officials and employees of entire judiciary [Sec. 5(6), Art. VIII]

K. Rule Making

1. Sec. 5(5), Art. VIII

a.) Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, January 19, 1999

17
 b.) Estipona v. Lobrigo, August 15, 2017; Sayre v. Xenos, February 18, 2020
c.) Gios-Samar, Inc. v. DOTC, March 12, 2019
d.) Pimentel v. LEB, September 10, 2019

2. Sec. 14(2), Art. XII [Practice of Professions]

L. Prohibition against Quasi-Judicial and Administrative Work of Judges [Sec. 12, Art.
VIII]

1. Chavez vs. JBC, July 17, 2012; April 16, 2013

M. Report on the Judiciary [Sec. 16, Art. VIII]

N. Manner of Sitting and Votes Required [Sec. 4, Art. VIII]

See Rule 56, sec. 7 (1997 Rules); Rule 125, sec. 3 (2000 Rules)

O. Requirements as to Decisions [Sec. 13 – 14, Art. VIII]

1. Solid Homes v. Spouses Jurado, September 2, 2019

P. Mandatory Period for Deciding Cases

(1) Sec. 15, Art. VIII

(2) Sec. 18(3), Art. VII
(3) Secs. 12 – 14, Art. XVIII

a.) Re: Complaint-Affidavit of Elvira N. Enalbes, January 22, 2019

III. Lower Courts

A. Qualifications and Appointment

(1) Sec. 7, Art. VIII

(2) Sec. 8(5), Art. VIII
(3) Sec. 9, Art. VIII

a.) Re: Seniority among Four Appointments, September 28, 2010

B. Salary [Sec. 10, Art. VIII]

C. Congressional Power to Reorganize and Security of Tenure [Sec. 11, Art. VIII; Sec.
2(2), Art. VIII]
D. Removal [Sec. 11, Art. VIII]
E. Jurisdiction [Sec. 1, Art. VIII]
F. Requirements as to Preparation of Decisions [Sec. 15, Art. VIII]
G. Mandatory Period for Deciding Cases [Sec. 15, Art. VIII; Sec. 12-14, Art. XVIII]

a.) OCA v. Bustamante, April 7, 2014

b.) Pagdanganan v. CA, September 5, 2018
c.) OCA v. Guiling, June 18, 2019

IV. The Judicial and Bar Council [Sec. 8, Art. VIII]

1. De Castro v. JBC, March 17, 2010; April 20, 2010

2. Dulay v. JBC, July 3, 2012
3. Chavez v. JBC, July 17, 2012; April 16, 2013

18
 4. Jardeleza v. Sereno, August 19, 2014
5. Villanueva v. JBC, April 7, 2015
6. Aguinaldo v. Aquino, November 29, 2016; February 21, 2017
7. Umali v. JBC, July 25, 2017
8. Republic v. Sereno, May 11, 2018

V. Automatic Release of Appropriations for the Judiciary [Sec. 3, Art. VIII]

VI. Court Martial

1. Garcia v. Executive Secretary, July 30, 2012

XIV. THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS

A. Common provisions
B. Institutional independence safeguards
C. Powers and functions
D. Composition and qualifications
E. Prohibited offices and interests

I. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

A. Composition and Qualifications of Commissioners [Sec. 1(1), Art. IX-B; Sec. 13(2),
Art. VII]
B. Powers
C. Appointment and Term of Office of Commissioners; Rule against Reappointment [Sec.
1(2), Art. IX-B]
D. Appointment of Personnel of CSC [Sec. 4, Art. IX-A]
E. Salary [Sec. 3, Art. IX-A; Sec. 17, Art. XVIII]
F. Disqualifications [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A]
G. Impeachment [Sec. 2, Art. XI]
H. Scope of the Civil Service [Sec. 2(1), Art. IX-B]
I. Review of Decisions [Sec. 7, Art. IX-A]
J. Fiscal Autonomy [Sec. 5, Art. IX-A]

1. Gaminde v. COA, December 13, 2000

2. Funa v. CSC Chairman Duque, November 25, 2014
3. Abad v. Dela Cruz, March 18, 2015
4. CESB v. CSC, March 3, 2017
5. Feliciano v. DND, November 8, 2017
6. Ifurung v. Carpio-Morales, April 24, 2018
7. COURAGE v. Abad, November 10, 2020

II. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

A. Composition and Qualifications of Commissioners [Sec. 1(1), Art. IX-C; Sec.

13(2), Art. VII]
B. Appointment and Term of Office of Commissioners; Rule against Reappointment
[Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-C]
C. Appointment of Personnel [Sec. 4, Art. IX-A]
D. Functions

1. Administrative [Sec. 2(1)(4)(5)(7)(8)(9), Art. IX-C]

2. Adjudicatory [Sec. 2(3) and (3) Art. IX-C]
3. Rule-making [Sec. 6, Art. IX-A]
4. Regulatory [Sec. 4, Art. IX-C]

19
 E. Salary [Sec. 3, Art. IX-A; Sec. 17, Art. XVIII]
F. Disqualifications [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A]
G. Impeachment [Sec. 2, Art. XI]
H. Fiscal Autonomy [Sec. 5, Art. IX-A]

1. Cayetano v. Monsod, September 3, 1991

2. Legaspi v. COMELEC, April 19, 2016
3. PADPAO v. COMELEC, October 3, 2017

III. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

A. Composition and Qualifications [Sec. 1(1), Art. IX-D; Sec. 13(2), Art. VII]
B. Appointment and Term of Commissioners [Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-D]
C. Appointment of COA Personnel [Sec. 4, Art. IX-A]
D. Salary [Sec. 3, Art. IX-A; Sec. 17, Art. XVIII]
E. Disqualifications [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A]
F. Functions [Secs. 2-3, Art. IX-D; Sec. 20, Art. VI; Sec. 6, Art. IX-A]
G. Fiscal Autonomy [Sec. 5, Art. IX-A]
H. Impeachment [Sec. 2, Art. XI]

1. Funa v. Villar, April 24, 2012

2. Funa v. Manila Office, February 4, 2014
3. Fernando v. COA, December 4, 2018
4. Oriondo v. COA, June 4, 2019
5. Chozas v. COA, October 8, 2019
6. Taisei Shimizu Joint Venture v. COA, June 2, 2020

XV. Social Justice and Human Rights

A. Concept of social justice

1. Calalang v. Williams, December 2, 1940

B. Commission on Human Rights

1. Composition and Qualifications [Sec. 17, Art. XIII]

a.) Bautista v. Salonga, April 13, 1989

2. Powers and Functions [Secs. 18 and 19, Art. XIII]

a.) Cariño v. CHR, December 2, 1991

b.) Simon v. CHR, January 5, 1994

3. Fiscal Autonomy [Sec. 17(4), Art. XIII]

1. CHREA v. CHR, July 21, 2006

--- Nothing follows ---

20