POLITICAL LAW (Consti 1-2, Admin, Law of P.
O CHAPTER 3- Concept of the State
and Law on Municipal Corpo)
- Branch of public law which deals with the
organization and operations of the governmental
organs of the State and defines the relations of the
State with the inhabitants of its territory.
NECESSITY FOR THE STUDY:
Every Citizen, regardless of calling, should understand
the mechanics and motivations of his government. This
is must be because “sovereignty resides in the people
and all government authority emanates from them”.
- Art XIV, Sec 3(1)- “ All educational institutions
shall include the study of the consti as part of the
curricula.
CHAPTER 2. The Constitution of the Philippines
1987 Phil Con 4th fundamental law to govern the PH
since it became independent on July 4, 1946.
1st Commonwealth Constitution (1935)
2nd 1973 Constitution (Martial Law)
3rd Freedom Constitution (Revolutionary Constitution-
Cory’s Regime after martial law, pending the adoption
of permanent constitution)
OUTSTANDING FEATURES: (1987)
- LENGTHY. Inclusion of provisions that should
have been embodied only in implementing statutes
to be enacted by the legislature.
 Sounds like a political speech rather than a
formal document stating only basic precepts. 
 Inclusion of certain topics that certainly, by any
criterion HAVE NO PLACE IN THE CONSTI. :D
a. 1935 Provisions in re: Executive and
legislative ( Revival of the Bicameral Congress)
- Independence of the Judiciary. They can decide
on political questions originally beyond their
jurisdiction.
b. 1973 Provisions in re: ConCom and Local
Gov’t.
- Bill of Rights have been bolstered.
SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION Basic
and paramount law to which all other laws must conform
and to which all persons, including the highest officials
of the land, must defer.
- No act shall be valid, however noble the
intentions, if it conflicts with the constitution.
1
STATE a community of persons, more or less
numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of
territory, possessed of an independent gov’t organized
for political ends to which the great body of inhabitants
render habitual obedience.
STATE VS. NATION VS. GOV’T VS.
ADMINISTRATION
NATION Actually consist of several states; Racial or
ethnic concept.
Ex.
1. Arab Nation ( Egypt, Iraq, Saudi, etc)
2. USA/UK (one state composed of several
nations)
State Legal concept
Government only an element of the State; State is the
principal, Gov’t is only an agent; State itself is an
abstraction, it is the gov’t that externalizes the state and
articulates its will.
Administration group of persons in whose hands the
reins of the gov’t are for the time being. Transitional
whereas Government is permanent.
ELEMENTS: (People, Territory, Gov’t and
Sovereignty)
Note: BANGSAMORO MOA. “Associated State”
 Unconstitutional. The concept presupposes that
the associated entity (BJE) is a state and implies
that the same is on its way to independence.
A. PEOPLE inhabitants of the state
- No legal requirement. “Numerous enough to be
self-sufficing and to defend themselves and
small enough to be easily administered and
sustained”
B. TERRITORY fixed portion of the surface of the
earth inhabited by the people of the state.
- PRACTICAL requirement. “Neither too big as
to be difficult to be administer and defend nor
too small as to be unable to provide for the
needs of the population.
1. Terrestrial Domain Land Mass
2. Maritime/Fluvial Domain Internal and External
Waters
3. Aerial Domain Air space above L & W.
Basis: NATIONAL TERRITORY. Art 1 of the 1987
PhilCon
NOTE: This article deleted the reference to the
territories we claim “by historical right or legal title”
BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN an outright or formal
abandonment of such claim, which was best left to a
judicial body capable of passing judgment over the
issue.
 The definition of the baselines of the territorial sea
of the PH Archipelago (RA 5446) is w/o prejudice to
the delineation of the territorial sea around the
territory of Sabbah, over w/c the PH has acquired
dominion and sovereignty.
(Sabbah Historic right or legal title)
 xx The waters around, b/w, and connecting the
islands of the archipelago, regardless of their
breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal
waters of the PH” xx (Archipelago doctrine)
- We connect the outermost points of our archipelago
with straight baselines and consider all the waters
enclosed thereby as internal waters. The entire
archipelago is regarded as one integrated unit instead
of being fragmented into so many thousand islands.
a. As for our territorial seas now defined according
to Jamaica Convention on the Law of the Sea.
b. UNCLOS ICodified among others, the
“sovereign right of States parties over their
territorial sea, the breadth of which, however was
left undetermined, and which served as basis for the
passage in 1961by Congress of RA 3046 “
demarcating the maritime baselines of the PH as an
archipelagic State”.
- 1984 PH ratified UNCLOS III, which among
others “prescribe the water-land ratio, length, and
contour of baselines of archipelagic states, like the
PH.
Consequently, Congress amended RA 3046 by
enacting RA 9522, which it was believed would
make RA 3046 “complaint” with the provisions of
UNCLOS III in so far as the determination of the
prescribe the water-land ratio, length, and contour
of baselines of our archipelago is concerned.
C. GOVERNMENT Agency or instrumentality
through which the will of the state is formulated,
expressed and carried out.
 From the viewpoint of Int’l law No required
form of gov’t, provided only that the gov’t is able to
represent the State in its dealings with other states.
 Constitution Our government has to be
democratic and republican state.
- Whatever good done by the gov’t is attributed to
the State but every harm inflicted on the people
is imputed not to the State but to the gov’t alone.
2
Such injury may justify the replacement of the
gov’t by revolution, theoretically at the behest of
the State, in a development known as DIRECT
STATE ACTION.
 FUNCTIONS
a. Constituent The very bonds of society and are
therefore COMPULSORY.
b. Ministrant undertaken to advance the general
interest of society, such as public works, charity and
regulation of trade and industry. OPTIONAL.
- To our SC, the distinction b/w constituent and
ministrant functions is not relevant. It is NOW
OBLIGATORY on the State to promote social
justice.
 DOCTRINE OF PARENS PATRIAE-
“Guardian of the rights of the people”
Gov’t of the Philippine Islands vs. Monte de Piedad-
Money collected were never distributed and instead
deposited with defendant bank. An action for recovery
was filed later by the gov’t. Defendant bank questioned
the competence of the plaintiff, contending that the suit
could only be instituted by the beneficiaries themselves/
heirs. The state can file the case for the State as parens
patiae in representation of the legitimate claimants.
Cabanas Vs. Pilapil- Gov’t acting for the state as parens
patriae chose the mother of an illegitimate child as against
his uncle to be the trustee of the insurance proceeds left
him by his father, who had expressly designated the
uncle.
Soriano vs. Laguardia- Suspension of religious television
program. Necessity of protecting the children from
unprotected speech.
De la cruz vs. Gracia- SC allowed the registration of an
illegitimate child using the surname of his deceased
father, declaring that it is the policy of the FC to liberalize
the rule on the investigation of the paternity and filiation
of children, especially of illegitimate children.
 DE JURE AND DE FACTO GOVERNMENTS
- Regardless of their form, gov’ts are either de
jure or de facto.
A. De jure government has rightful title but no power
of control, either because this has been withdrawn
from it or because it has not yet actually entered into
the exercise thereof.
B. De facto government is a government of fact, that is,
it actually exercises power or control but without
legal title.
 1. The gov’t that gets possession and control of, or
usurps, by force or by voice of the majority, the
rightful legal government and maintains itself
against the will of the latter.
2. That established as an independent government
by the inhabitants of a country who rise in
insurrection against the parent state.
3. That which is established and maintained by
military forces who invade and occupy a
territory of the enemy in the course of the war,
and which is denominated as a government of
paramount force.
**Its existence is maintained by active military power
w/in the territories, and against the rightful authority of
an established and lawful gov’t. They are obeyed in civil
matters by private citizens who, by acts of obedience
rendered submission to such force, do not become
responsible, as wrongdoers, for those acts though not
warranted by the laws of the rightful gov’t.
**In re: Corazon Aquino Regime.
The people accepted the gov’t of PresCOn which is in
effective control of the entire country so that it is not
merely a de facto gov’t but in fact and law a de jure
gov’t. Moreover, the community of nations has
recognized the legitimacy of the present gov’t.
D. SOVEREIGNTY supreme and uncontrollable
power inherent in a State by which the State is
governed.
1. Legal S authority which the power to issue final
commands.
 Congress
2. Political S.  Power behind the legal sovereign, or
a sum of the influences that operate upon it.
 Different Sectors that mold PUBLIC OPINION
3. Internal Control its domestic affairs
4. External Direct its relations with other states.
“INDEPENDENCE”
 CHARACTERISTICS (ICE PA!)
Imprescriptible, Inalienable, Indivisible. Comprehensive,
Exclusive, Permanent, Absolute
EFFECTS:
A. S. is not suspended although ACTS OF
SOVEREIGNTY cannot be exercised by the
legitimate authority.
3
- S. over the PH remained with the USA during
the Japanese Occupation of our country although
the Americans could not exercise control over
the occupied territory at the time.
- What the Belligerent Occupant took over was
only the exercise of the Acts of Sovereignty.
1. There being no change of sovereignty during
Belligerent Occupation, the POLITICAL LAWS of
the occupied territory are merely SUSPENDED,
subject to REVIVAL under the JUS
POSTLIMINUM upon the end of occupation.
MUNICIPAL LAWS (Non-political laws) are
deemed continued unless changes by the Belligerent
Occupant since they only governed private relations
and are not generally affected by the changes in
regimes or rulers.
2. The rules suspending political laws affects only the
civilian inhabitants of the occupied territory and is
not intended to bind the enemies in arms.
- RUFFY VS. CHIEF OF STAFF
 Members of the Armed Forces continued to be
covered by the National Defense Act, Articles I
of War and other laws relating to the Armed
Forces during the Japanese Occupation.
- (LAUREL VS. MISA)
 The rules suspending political laws does not
apply to LAW ON TREASON although political
in character.
 Belligerent O. has no power to suspend the operation
of the law of treason, essential
 for the preservation of the allegiance owed by the
inhabitants to their legit gov’t or compel them to
adhere and give aid or comfort to him; BECAUSE
IT IS EVIDENT THAT SUCH ACTION IS NOT
NECESSARY FOR THE CONTROL OF THE
INHABITANTS OR THE SAFETY AND
PROTECTION OF HIS ARMY- Because it is
tantamount to practically transferring temporarily to
the occupant the allegiance to the titular gov’t.
3. Judicial Decisions, valid during the occupation and
even beyond except those of a political complexion,
which are AUTOMATICALLY ANNULLED upon
the restoration of the legitimate authority.
- Person convicted of a political crime shall be
released.
B. Where there is CHANGE OF SOVEREIGNTY,
political laws of the former sovereignty are not
merely suspended BUT ABROGATED ipso facto
unless they are retained or re-enacted by the positive
act of the new sovereign.
 - MUNICIPAL LAWS (Non-political laws) are
deemed continued unless changes by the
Belligerent Occupant since they only governed
private relations and are not generally affected
by the changes in regimes or rulers UNLESS
they are changed by the new sovereign or
contrary to its institution.
 ACT OF STATE
- Act done by the sovereign power of a country,
or its delegates, within the limits of the power
vested in him.
- It cannot be questioned or made the subject of
legal proceeding in any court of law.
 With reference to POLITICAL LAW:
- Act of State are those acts done by the Political
Department of the Gov’t and not subject to
judicial review.
Ex. President’s exercise of Diplomatic power.
CHAPTER 4- The Doctrine of State Immunity
“The State cannot be sued without its consent”
(PhilCon, Art 16, Sec 3)
- Merely a recognition of the Sovereign Character of
the State and an express affirmation of the unwritten
rule insulating it from the jurisdiction of the courts
of justice.
JUSTIFICATIONS: (non-suability)
Justice Holmes: “There can be no legal right against the
authority which makes the law on which the right
depends”
- It will divert the time and resources of the State from
the more pressing matters demanding its attention, to
the prejudice of the public welfare.
- Also available to foreign states in so far as they are
sought to be sued in the courts of the local state.
(Public International law)
 Another basis: Sovereign Equality of States
“Par in parem non habet imperium”- one state
cannot assert jurisdiction over another.
- A necessary consequence of the principles of
independence and equality of States.
Exceptions: FS may sued in the Host States.
1. FS may be sued in the host state if ENGAGED
REGULARLY therein in a business or trade; or
2. Even if not so engaged, on the basis of its
contract in the host state which may be
considered as purely commercial, private and
proprietary acts (jus gestionis), BUT not with
4
respect to contracts entered into by it as
governmental or sovereign acts (jus imperri).
Jus imperri Not absolute. Exercise of Power of
Eminent Domain , No payment of JC.
FOR CLARITY: 2 scenarios where a state may be said
to have descended to the level of an individual and can
thus be deemed to have tacitly given its consent to be
sued only when it enters into business contracts.
a. FS engaged in the activity in the regular course
of business.
(Automatic: The mantle of immunity shall be
deemed to have been waived)
b. Enters into a contract AND the character of the
contract is purely commercial, private and
proprietary.
Hence: The fact the the FS enters into a contract with a
private party in the host state would not necessarily
result in the waiver of its sovereign immunity. The
character of the said contract would still need to be
determined. 
NOTE:
- Not any agency of a foreign state may properly
invoke the latter’s sovereign immunity to ward suit
against it.
a. Even if the agency contends that it performs
gov’t functions. Such designation (Primary
contractor) does not automatically grant it
immunity.
 Presumption: GOCC therefore can be sued and
sued in the absence of evidence to the contrary
(that it enjoys the immunity from suit accorded
to its parent country)
APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE:
- Actions are rarely instituted directly against the
Republic of the PH, presumably because such a step
will provoke resort to the doctrine of State Immunity
and possible dismissal of the complaint for lack of
jurisdiction.
- So, the usual practice is to file such claims not
against the State itself but, so as to avoid the
appearance of its involvement, AGAINST THE
OFFICER of the government who is supposed to
discharge the responsibility or grant the redress
 It is important then to determine if the STATE
IS THE REAL P.I, that is, that the claim if
proved will be a direct liability of the State and
not merely of the officer impleaded.
 IF THIS IS SHOWN, the action can be
dismissed as a suit against the state unless it
immunity has been previously waived.
a. Garcia vs. Chief of Staff it is a suit against
the state since it would need the appropriation of
public funds to satisfy the judgement if the claim
were allowed.
b. Sanders vs. Veridiano 2 american employees
of the Subic Naval Base sued its superior for
damages.
 ACTED IN BEHALF OF THE GOV’T and
w/in the scope of authority.
- Hence, award will have to be satisfied by the
gov’t and not by the petitioners personally. This
will require the appropriation of necessary
amount to cover the damages, making the suit
against the gov’t without its consent. –
DISMISSED!
c. UP vs. Dizon An award against the petitioner
would require an appropriation by Congress
considering that such monetary liabilities were
not covered by the appropriation earmarked for
said project
d. Ruiz vs. Cabahug Action against Sec. of
National Defense in his official capacity for
payment of Archi’s PF for which AN
APPROPRIATION HAD ALREADY BEEN
MADE. As far as the State is concerned, it had
already discharged its obligation and since
actual payment was now the sole responsibility
of the defendant, the action was therefore
properly against the defendant ONLY.
- PUBLIC OFFICIAL CAN BE SUED IN HIS
OFFICIAL CAPACITY WITHOUT THE
NECESSITY OF FIRST OBTAINING THE
CONSENT OF THE STATE TO BE SUED.
ULTIMATE TEST:
 Assuming the decision is rendered against the
Public officer, enforcement thereof will require an
AFFIRMATIVE ACT FROM THE STATE, such
as an appropriation of the needed fund to satisfy
the judgement.
Yes= against the state and its inclusion as party
defendant is necessary.
No= P.O himself can alone comply with the decision of
the court w/o the necessity of involving the state.
IF ACTED W/O or in excess of jurisdiction Any
injury caused by him is his personal liability, & cannot
be imputed against the state.
5
NOTE! DFA is the only authority to make a
determination of immunity from suit ( Determination
that s state/instrumentality is entitled to sovereign/
diplomatic immunity) although the court would not be
precluded from making an inquiry into the intrinsic
correctness of such certificate.
 Such determination is a POLITICAL
QUESTION. Hence, where the plea of immunity
is recognized and affirmed by the executive
branch, it is the duty of the courts to accept this
claim so as not to embarrass the gov’t in
conducting the country’s foreign relations.
WAIVER OF IMMUNITY “Royal prerogative of
dishonesty”
 State gives its consent. State, may divest itself of
its sovereign immunity thereby voluntarily open
itself to suit.
 EXPRESS or IMPLIED
a. Express manifested through a GL/ SL
A.1= GENERAL LAW
1. Act No. 3083- “ The gov’t of PH Islands hereby
consents and submits to be sued upon any
moneyed claim involving liability arising from
contract, express or implied, which could be
serve as basis of civil action b/w private parties.
2. CA No. 327 as amended by PD 1445- a claim
against the gov’t must first be filed with the
Commission on Audit, which must act upon it
w/in 60 days. Rejection of the claim will
authorize the claimant to elevate the matter to
the SC on certiorari and in effect sue the State
with its consent.
Ex. Writs of Execution (money claims against
gov’t)
A.2. SPECIAL LAW
> The express consent of the state to be sued must be
embodied in a duly enacted statue and may not be given
by a mere counsel of the gov’t. (Republic v. Purisima)
- The waiver of the counsel is not binding upon the state.
Incidentally, where the defendant is the RP, service of
summons must be made on the SolGenm.
> Amigable v. Cuenca (Nonpayment of JC)
- The doctrine cannot be used to perpetuate injustice on a
citizen.
When the gov’t takes private property for public use,
conditioned upon the payment of JC, to be judicially
ascertained, it makes manifest that it submits to the
jurisdiction of the court. Hence, doctrine of immunity
cannot be properly invoked even though the exercise of
the power of eminent domain is jus imperii
Santiago vs. Republic (Suit did not involve money claim
against the state: Revocation of Donation).
- Suit could proper.
b. Implied
1. State commences litigation
A. When the state itself files a complaint, the defendant
is entitled to file a counterclaim against it.
a. Froilan v. Pan Oriental Shipping Co.
- Gov’t filed a complaint in intervention fr the
purpose of asserting an affirmative relief: recovery
of vessel.
b. Lim v. Brownwell. Gov’t as successor-in-interest of
the US to the properties claimed from the latter
filed a complaint in intervention, joined the
defendant in invoking the doctrine of immunity to
secure the dismissal of the action.
- Since in this case the gov’t was not asking for any
affirmative relief but had intervened only for the
purpose of resisting his claim= No implied waiver.
2. Enters into a contract ( held liable, has given its consent to be sued.
commercial/private/proprietary)
a. Republic v. Sandiganbayan- State is then deemed to
have divested itself of the mantle of immunity and
descended to the level of the ordinary individual.
Having done so, it becomes subject to judicial action
and processes.
 Note: When the state gives its consent to be sued, it
does not thereby consent to the execution of the
judgment against it. (RP vs. Villasor) Such execution
will require another waiver, lacking of which the
decision cannot be enforced against the State.
“Public funds cannot be the object of garnishment
proceedings even if the consent to be sued had been
previously granted and the state liability adjudged.
The power of the courts ends when the judgment is
rendered, since government funds and properties
may not be seized under writs of execution/
garnishment to satisfy such judgments, is based on
obvious considerations of public policy.
Disbursements of public funds must be covered by
the corresponding appropriation as required by law”
(Commissioner of Public Highways vs. San diego)
 (UP v. Dizon) SC emphasized the fundamental rule
that gov’t properties are not subject to levy and
execution:
6
- “A distinction must be made b/w gov’t funds and
properties for public use and those not held for
public use.
a. Properties held for public uses- not subject to
levy and sale under execution. The same rule
applies to funds in the hands of a Public officer
and taxes due to a municipal corporation.
b. Properties owned by Municipal corporation in
its proprietary capacity, property not used for
public purpose but for quasi private purposes=
Subject to execution.
c. Property held for public purposes is not subject
to execution merely because it is temporarily
used for private purposes. If the public use is
wholly abandoned, such property becomes
subject to execution.
SUIT AGAINST GOVERNMENT AGENCIES:
- Where suit is filed not against the gov’t itself or
its officials BUT AGAINST one of its
ENTITIES, it must be ascertained WON the
State, as the principal that may ultimately be
1  Ascertain first WON the agency impleaded is
ST
INCORPORATED OR UNINCORPORATED.
a. Incorporated Has a charter of its own that
invests it with a separate juridical personality.
(SSS/UP/City of Manila)
Effect: The test of its suability is found in its charter.
If its charter says so, this is true regardless of the
functions it is performing.
Ex. Municipal Corporations (Provinces and Cities).
- They are agencies of the state when they are
engaged in gov’t functions and therefore should
enjoy the sovereign immunity. Nevertheless, they
are subject to suit even in the performance of such
functions because their charter provided that they
can sue and be sued.
b. Unincorporated no separate juridical personality
but is MERGED in the general machinery of the
gov’t (DOJ, Bureau of Mines)
Effect: Since it has no charter and therefore has no
separate juridical personality, any suit filed against it is
necessarily an action against the Philippine Gov’t of
which it is part.
- This being so, it is necessary to determine the
NATURE of the functions in w/c the agency is
engaged, so as to hold it suable if they are
proprietary and not suable if they are
governmental.
 - Also, the non-suability of the State is available
to the agency even if it shown that it is engaged
not only in gov’t functions but also, as a
SIDELINE, or INCIDENTALLY, in
proprietary capacity. (Necessary incident to its
primary function)
EXEMPTION FROM LEGAL REQUIREMENTS:
1. Not required to put up a bond, or an appeal bond
since it can be assumed that it is ALWAYS
SOLVENT.
GR: This exemption does not apply to GOCC’s because
they have legal personality distinct from their
shareholders. Thus, while their majority SH, the state,
will always be presumed solvent, such exemption does
not extend to the GOCC itself.
Exemption: When the GOCC becomes a gov’t
machinery to carry out a decared gov’t policy, it
becomes similarly situated as its majority SH as there is
the assurance that the gov’t will necessarily fund its
primary functions.
2. Cannot be generally asked to pay the legal fees
prescribed in the RC or the cost of the suit. (LBP in
the performance of its gov’t function in agrarian
reform proceedings= exempt)
Exemption: National Power Corporation and GSIS
are not exempt from paying filing fees.
3. Interest is also not chargeable against it except when
it has expressly stipulated to pay it or when the
interest is allowed by an act of the legislature or in
eminent domain cases where damages sustained by
the owner take the form of interest at the legal rate.
4. Statutes of Limitation do not run against the State
unless the contrary is expressly provided by law.
Except: State is engaged in private business
SUABILITY VS. LIABILITY
- The mere fact that the State is suable does not
mean that it is liable. Waiver of immunity does
not mean concession of its liability, when,
therefore, the State allows itself to be sued, all it
does in effect is to give the other party an
opportunity to prove, if it can, that the state is
liable.
Ex. Municipal corporations are suable because their
charters grant them the competence to sue and be
sued. Nevertheless, they can only be held liable if it
can be shown that they were acting in a proprietary
capacity when the tort was committed.
7
CHAPTER 5: FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND
STATE POLICIES(Art 2, PhilCon)
- Lay down the rules underlying our system of
government and must therefore be adhered to in the
conduct of public affairs and the resolution of public
issues.
- Objective and limitations of governmental action in
pursuit of the general goals announced in the
Preamble.
- SC considered some of the provisions as “mere
legislative guides, which absent enabling legislation,
do not embody enforceable constitutional rights”.
(non-self executing)
Examples:
Sec. 5 - maintenance of peace and order
Sec 18- labor as primary social and economic force
Sec 4- citizens may be required to render personal
military or civil service “under conditions provided by
law”
Sec 26- a clear policy against political dynasties;
Guarantees equal access to opportunities for public
service. However, the definition of ‘political dynasties”
has been left to Congress, which, to date, or more than 2
decades after the present constitution became effective,
has been unable, or unwilling, to implement this clear
constitutional policy.
 As the SC have pointed out, there are some
provisions in the Consti that need not even have to
be written therein.
 By contrast, “the gov’t cannot point to the absence
of an implementing legislation as an excuse in not
effecting such policy”.
PREAMBLE
- Unlike in the 1935 Consti, the present consti is not
couched in the 3rd person but in the 1st.
 Deepen the sense of involvement and
participation in the promulgation of the consti.
 Not a source of substantial rights since its purpose is
only to introduce the constitution.
 However, its function is not merely rhetorical as, in
the first place, it serves to indicate the authors of the
consti, to wit, “we the sovereign Filipino people”
- It enumerates the primary aims and aspirations of
the framers and are also helpful as an AID in the
construction and interpretation of the consti.
- It makes reference to an “Almighty god”. (Vast
majority of the Filipino people believe in an
almighty god)
 Certain sectors finds this to be inconsistent with
the policy of separation of church and state and
 the establishment clause and somehow lessens
the significance of the provisions of Art 6, Sec
29, which prohibits appropriations for sectarian
purposes.
 The constitution grants tax exemptions to
religious institutions and allows optional
religious instruction in our public schools and
even full foreign ownership of religious schools.
 Prayers preceding or marking gov’t activities-
Some consider this as offensive to religious
freedom, which includes freedom not to believe.
- Estrada v. Escritor- respondent cohabited with a
person other than her husband. Such
arrangement was sanctioned under here religion.
 SC: Dismissed the suit invoking “benevolent
neutrality approach” which gives room for
accommodation of religious exercises as
required by the FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE.
A clear exercise of her fundamental right to
freedom of religion.
- “The heart has reasons of its own which reason
does not know”.  Deviation of the circumstances
of their marriage from usual societal pattern cannot
be considered as a defiance of contemporary social
mores. (Chua-Qua vs. Clave)
REPUBLICANISM
Sec 1. “The PH is a democratic AND republican state.
Sovereignty resides in the people and all government
authority emanates from them”
- Every citizen is an individual repository of
sovereignty. The citizenry and not the
officialdom is recognized as the origin, and
therefore also the restriction, of all gov’t
authority.
- Accords citizen’s greater participation in the
affairs of the gov’t.
 Right to interfere in the affairs of the gov’t and
challenge any act tending to prejudice their interest.
a. Initiative. Referendum. Plebiscite
- Directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject
any act or law or part thereof passed by Congress or
local legislative body. (Act 6, Sec 32)
- Directly propose amendments to the constitution
on initiative. (Art 17, Sec2)
b. Right to information (Health of the pres)
c. Right to file cases questioning the factual bases
for the suspension of the privilege of HC or
declaration of ML.
8
Republic a representative gov’t, a gov’t run by and
for the people. The essence of republicanism is
representation and renovation, the selection of the
citizenry of a corps of public functionaries who derive
their mandate from the people and act on their behalf,
serving for a limited period only, after which they are
replaced or retained at the option of their principal as a
public trust and shall, according to the constitution, “be
accountable to the people”.
- “Ours is a gov’t of law and of men”. No one is
above the law; all must bow to its majesty.
 While sovereign powers are delegated to the
agencies of gov’t, sovereignty itself remains
with the people, by whom and for whom all
gov’t exists and acts. (Yick Wo v. Hopkins)
- Nobility of intention is insufficient to validate an
unauthorized act.(Villavicencio v. Lukban)
 Mayor deported 170 prostitutes from Manila to
Davao in his desire to protect morals and health.
SC condemned his act since there is no law or
even an ordinance authorizing his act.
- It is not a pure democracy where the people govern
themselves directly.
THE DEFENSE OF THE STATE
Sec 4. The prime duty of the gov’t is to serve and
protect the people. The gov’t may call upon the people
to defend the State and, in fulfillment thereof, all
citizens may be required, under the conditions provided
by law, to render personal military or civil service.
- By virtue of this right, a State may take up all
necessary effort to repel any threat to its security.
Relate to: National Defense Act (CA No. 1),
“Armed forces of the PH shall be composed of a
citizen armed forces which shall undergo military
training and serve, as may be provided by law.
COMPULSORY MILITARY SERVICE.
- . It does NOT VIOLATE the constitution. The right
of the gov’t to require CMT is a necessary
consequence of its duty to protect and defend the
State and is reciprocal with its duty to defend the
LLP of the citizen.
THE INCORPORATION CLAUSE
Sec 2. “The Ph renounces war as an instrument of
national policy, adopts the generally accepted -
principle of international law as part of the law of the
land, and adheres to the policy of peace, equality,
justice, freedom, cooperation and amity with all
nations”.
- Mem of the FAMILY OF NATIONS= bound by the
generally accepted principles of IL, which are
automatically considered as part of the law of the
land. (Doctrine of Incorporation)
 Effect: Application of rules of IL although they
had not been previously converted into statutory
enactments.
A. Pharmaceutical and Health care assoc. vs. Health
Secretary
- IL can become part of the DL either by
transformation or incorporation.
1. TRANSFORMATION IL be transformed into
DL through a constitutional mechanism such as local
legislation.
Example:
a. Treaties (Pursuant to Art 7, Sec 21) “No treaty shall
be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least
2/3 of ALL members of the Senate”.
- It must go through a process prescribed by the
Constitution for it to be transformed into
municipal law.
2. INCORPORATION By mere constitutional
declaration, IL is deemed to have the force of DL.
a. Mijares vs. Ranada- “generally accepted principles
of IL, by virtue of the incorporation law form part of
the laws of the land EVEN IF THEY DO NOT
DERIVE FROM TREATY OBLIGATIONS”.
Examples:
a. Renunciation of war as an instrument of national
policy.
**Congress is empowered to declare NOT WAR, but
“the existence of a state of war” presumably
commenced/ provoked by the enemy state.
b. Principle of sovereign immunity
c. Pacta sunt servanda
(Meaning, although PH is not a signatory to a
particular treaty/ international agreement, it may
still bind the PH if the same is embodied GAP of IL)
 In case of conflict b/w IL and ML:
1. HARMONIZE ,so as to give effect to both. For this
purpose, it should be presumed that ML was enacted
with proper regard for the GAP of IL.
2. IRRECONCILABLE.
a. Ichong v. Hernandez: (Invalidation of Retain trade
Nationalization ActGround: contravene several
treaties concluded by us which, under the rule of
pacta sunt servanda, a GAP of IL should be
observed by us in GF.
9
 It is the statute that should be upheld because it
represented an exercise of the police power of the
state which, being inherent, could not be bargained
away or surrendered through the medium of a
treaty.
b. Magalona v. Ermita (Necessity of the passage of
RA 9552, which provided for NEW BASELINES
for our archipelago, considering the permissive text
of UNCLOS III, on which said law was based)
- SC ruled in favor of the law. It would actually be
more beneficial for the PH to have “internationally
accepted baselines” or baselines complaint with the
provisions of UNCLOS III. Nevertheless, the
prerogative of choosing this option belongs to
Congress, not to this Court.
- Absent an UNCLOS III complaint baselines law, an
archipelagic state like the PH will find itself devoid
or internationally accepted baselines from where the
breadth of its maritime zones and continental shelf is
measured. The enactment of UNCLOS III complaint
baselines law for the PH and adjacent areas, as
embodied in RA 9552, allows an internationally
recognized delimitation of the breadth of the PH
maritime zones and continental shelf. (Safeguard our
maritime zones)
c. Bayan Muna v. Romulo (Stipulation in a treaty/EA
providing for a State with the OPTION to waive its
criminal jurisdiction over foreigners who comit
crime w/in its territory IS NOT ABDICATION OF
ITS SOVEREIGNTY.
- By virtue of the doctrine of incorporation, a
portion of a state’s sovereignty may be waived
w/o violating the constitution. Such waiver does
not amount to an unconstitutional deprivation of
jurisdiction of PH Courts.
- Treaty has greater dignity than an EA; a ratified
treaty, unlike an EA takes precedence over any
PRIOR STATUTORY ENACTMENT.
REARING OF THE YOUTH
Sec 12. “The State recognizes the sanctity of family life
and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution.* It shall equally protect
the life of the mother, and the life of the unborn from
conception. The natural and primary right and duty of
the parents in the rearing of the youth for civil efficiency
and the development of moral character shall receive
the aid and support of the gov’t. ***
- *Better home, the better the nation. It is in the
family where children are born and molded
 either to become useful citizens of the country or
troublemakers in the community.
 It is not closing the door on divorce, which is left for
the legislature to allow in its discretion.
- **Seems to suggest a policy against abortion.
 Unborn child: dependent; Child:unborn fetus from
the mother’s womb.
- ***State intervention Police power: During the
child’s formative years, through the school where it
is under the supervision and regulation of the state.
Sec 13. “The state recognizes the vital role of the youth
in nation building*, and shall promote and protect their
physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual and social well-
being** It shall indicate in the youth patriotism and
nationalism and encourage their involvement in public
and civic affairs”
- *Responsibility, maturity and competence of the
youth in the discussion and solution of public
issues vital force in nation building.
- **Prepare them when they assume their
responsibility of leadership
WOMEN
- RA 9262 VAWC law. Unconstitutional for
violating EPC? NO. “The unequal power
relationship b/w man and women and the fact that
women are more likely than men to be victims of
violence, not to mention the widespread gender bias
and prejudice against women as basic distinctions
b/w men and women which justify the
“classification under the law” (Garcia vs. Drilon:
2013)
SOCIAL JUSTICE
“SJ is not only meant to favor the poor. They apply with
equal force to those who, notwithstanding their more
comfortable position in life, are equally deserving of
protection from the courts. SJ is not a license to trample
on the rights of the rich in the guise of defensing the
poor, where no act of injustice or abuse is being
committed against them” (Adriano v. Tanco; 2010)
- One cannot invoke SJ at the expense of the common
welfare. (Petitioner’s refusal to leave the subject
property has hindered the development of the entire
area)
- SJ is not intended to countenanced wrongdoing
simply because it is committed by the
underprivileged. At best it may mitigate the penalty
10
but it certainly will not condone the offense. Those
who invoke SJ may do so only if their hands are
clean and and not simply because they happen to be
poor.
“SJ is neither communism, nor despotism, nor atomism,
nor anarchy, but the humanization of laws and the
equalization of social and economic forces by the State
so that justice in its rational and objectively secular
conception my at least be approximated. “Salus populi
est suprema lex”– (Calalang v. Williams)
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
Sec 6. “The separation of church and state shall be
inviolable”.
- “Strong fences make good neighbors”- delineate
the boundaries b/w 2 institutions and thus avoid
encroachments by one against the other because of
a misunderstanding of the limits of their exclusive
jurisdictions.
- The doctrine cuts both ways. It not only the state
that is prohibited from interfering in purely
ecclesiastical affairs; the Church is likewise barred
from meddling in purely secular matters. The wall
of separation b/w church and stare IS NOT A
WALL OF HOSTILITY. The State in fact
recognizes the beneficial influence of religion in the
enrichment of the nation’s life.
- “Union of Church and State tends to destroy the
gov’t and to degrade religion.
- Courts “must respect and cannot review” matters
that may religious color and are therefore
ecclesiastical affairs”, including a church’s
disconnection of its ties with another entity.
SUPREMACY OF CIVILIAN AUTHORITY
Sec 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over
the military. The AFP is the protector of the people and
the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the
State and the integrity of the national territory.
- Although implicit in a republican system of
gov’t, this provision is necessary in order to
allay all fear of a military takeover of our
civilian gov’t.
Relate: Art 7, Sec 18. “ President, who is a civilian
official shall be the commander-in0chief of all the AFP”.
 Net effect of Art 2, Sec 3 and Art 7, Sec 18. 
President is the ceremonial, administrative and legal
head of the AFP. He is the nation’s supreme military
leader.

LOCAL AUTONOMY: “The State shall ensure the
autonomy of local gov’ts.
Jeffersonian view: Municipal corporations are the small
republics from which the great ones derives its strength.
 Inhabitants will develop its own local resources and
thereby contribute to the progress of the whole
nation,
 Involvement in the direction of public affairs as
member of the body politic.
NOTE: LOCAL AUTONOMY IS NOT
INDEPENDENCE.
ECONOMY- (Art 2, Sec 19-20-21)
Sec 19. The state shall develop a self-reliant and
independent national economy effectively controlled by
Filipinos.
Sec 20. The state recognizes the indispensable role of the
private sector, encourages private enterprise, and
provides incentives to needed investments.
Sec 21. The state shall promote comprehensive rural
development and agrarian reform.
These provisions shall read in consonance with:
1. Art 12, sec 10, which basically gives the Congress
the discretion to reserve to Filipinos certain areas of
investments;
- It can enact laws allowing entry of foreigners
into certain industries not reserved by the
Constitution to Filipino Citizens.
a. Espina v. Zamora Constitutionality of Retail
Trade Liberalization Act, which allowed foreigners
to engage in retail trade in our country.
Cited the case of: Tanada v. Tuvera. “The provisions of
Art II of the 1987 constitution ARE NOT SELF
EXECUTING, legislative failure to pursue such policies
cannot give rise to a cause of action in the courts.
Art 12 of the 1987 Consti- ECONOMIC
NATIONALISM.
 It does not impose a policy of Filipino monopoly of
the economic development. The objective is simply
to PROHIBIT FOREIGN POWERS/INTEREST
from maneuvering our economic policies and ensure
that Filipinos are given preference in all areas of
development.
- Congress open certain areas of the retail trade
business to foreign investments instead of reserving
them exclusively to Filipino citizens.
RA 8762 at some point lessens the restraint on the
foreigners’ right to property or to engage in an
ordinarily lawful business, it cannot be said that the
11
law amounts to a denial of the Filipinos’ right to
property and to due process of law. Filipinos
continue to have the right to engage I the kinds of
retail business to which the law in question has
permitted t entry of foreign investors. (Hence, no vio
of consti)
2. Art 12, sec 11, which reserves franchises for public
utilities to citizens of the PH or to corporations or
associations organized under the laws of the PH, at
least 60% of capital is owned by such citizens.
a. Gamboa v. Finance Secretary Term “capital”
refers to shares of stock entitled to vote.( Common
shares unless preferred shares also have VR)
- 60%- Both the legal and beneficial title must rest
in the hands of Filipino nationals
3. Art 12, sec 12, use of Filipino labor, domestic
materials and locally produced goods and adopt
measures that help them make competitive.
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS (sections 15-17;
22- 24, 26-28)
1. Sec 15 (health) & Sec 16 (balanced and healthful
ecology)- “need not even be written in the consti for
they are ASSUMED TO EXIST from the inception
of humankind.
2. Sec 28 (full public disclosure involving public
interest) SELF EXECUTING PROVISION. It
compliments the right to access to information on
matters of public concern found in the Bill of Rights.
It recognizes the duty of the officialdom to give
information even if nobody demands it.
3. Sec 22 (rights of indigenous cultural
communities)
Province of North Cotabato v. Gov’t of the RP Peace
panel on Ancestral Domain- SC annulled the MOA
establishing BANGSAMORO JURIDICAL ENTITY as
an “associated state”.
 The act of placing a portion of the PH territory in a
status which, in international practice, has generally
been a preparation for independence, is NOT
CONDUCIVE TO NATIONAL UNITY.
 Indigenous people situated w/in states do not have a
general right to independence or secession from
those states under IL, BUT they do have rights
amounting to what was discussed above as right to
internal self determination.
Right to Self-determination Right of the state to
FREELY DETERMINE their political, economic, social
and cultural development.
a. Internal self-determination a people’s pursuit of
its political status and freely pursue their economic,
social and cultural development within the
framework of an existing state.
b. External Self-determination Establishment of a
sovereign and independent state, the free association
or integration with an independent state or the
emergence into any other political status freely
determined by a people.
4. Section 23 (Non- governemental, community based,
or sectoral organizations)
5. Section 26 (equal access to public service and
prohibit political dynasties); Sec 27 (honesty and
integrity in the public service and on measures
against graft and corruption) are to be read in
relation to Art 11, on Accountability of Public
Officers.
CHAPTER 6. SEPARATION OF POWERS
The 3 branches must discharge their functions w/in the
limits of authority conferred by the Consti. Neither the
Congress, the President, nor the Judiciary MAY
ENCROACH on fields allocated to the other branches.
- SC characterized the resolution of by the
Electoral Tribunals of election contests as
“essentially an exercise of judicial power”
although “subject to judicial review- via a
petition for certiorari filed by the proper party- if
there is a showing that the decision was rendered
with GAD tantamount to lack or excess of J.
INTERDEPENDENCE and NOT INDEPENDENCE.
 While it is desirable that there be a certain
degree of independence among them, it is not in
the public interest for them to deal with each
other at arms length or with hostility as this
might result in frustration of common objectives
of the gov’t.
PURPOSE
- Prevent a concentration of authority in one person
or group of persons that might lead to an
irreversible error or abuse to the detriment of our
republican institutions.
- It ordains that each of the 3 great branches of the
gov’t has EXCLUSIVE cognizance of and is
SUPREME in matters falling within its
constitutionally allocated sphere.
Effect:
1. Legislature enactment of laws and may not
enforce/apply them
12
2. Executive enforcement but may not enact/apply
3. Judiciary application of laws and may not enact or
enforce them.
- Courts cannot limit the application of a law/
impose conditions not provided therein. To do
so, “JUDICIAL LEGISLATION”.
BLENDING OF POWERS
When powers are not confined exclusively within 1
dep’t but are in fact SHARED by several departments.
In effect, they may better collaborate with and, in the
process, check each other for the public good.
Effect: Difficulty in classifying which power is
definitely L-E-J.
Illustration # 1: Preparation of the GENERAL
APPROPRIATIONS LAW.
 Begins with the preparation by the president of
the budget, which becomes the basis of the bill
adopted by the Congress and subsequently
submitted by it to the president, who MAY
approve it.
Illustration # 2: Grant of Amnesty by the President.
 Requires the concurrence of a MAJORITY of all
members of the CONGRESS (Senate + House)
Illustration # 3: COMELEC does not ALONE
deputize law enforcement agencies and
instrumentalities of the gov’t for the purpose of honest
and peaceful election BUT with the CONSENT of the
PRESIDENT.
CHECKS AND BALANCES
Compliments doctrine of SP. By means of which, one
department is allowed to RESIST ENCROACHMENTS
upon its prerogatives or to RECTIFY MISTAKES OR
EXCESSES committed by other departments.
- System of Counteraction.
- Ends of the gov’t are better achieved through the
exercise by its agencies of only the powers
assigned to them, subject to the reversal in
proper cases by those constitutionally
authorized.
Illustration # 1: Lawmaking power of the Congress is
checked by the President through his VETO power,
which in turn may be overridden by the legislature.
(Parties: Leg-Exec)
Illustration # 2: Congress may refuse to give
concurrence to an amnesty proclaimed by the President
and the Senate to a treaty he has concluded. (concurred
in by at least 2/3 of ALL members of the Senate”)
(Parties: Leg-Exec)
Illustration # 3: President may nullify a conviction in a
criminal case by pardoning the offender. (Parties: Exec-
Jud)
Illustration # 4: Congress may limit the jurisdiction of
the SC and that of inferior courts and even abolish the
latter tribunals. (Parties: Leg-Jud)
Illustration # 5: Judiciary in general, has the power to
declare invalid an act done by Congress, President and
his subordinates, or ConCom. (Parties: Jud-Leg-Exec)
ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY
While it is the Judiciary which sees to it that the
constitutional distribution of powers among the several
departments is respected and observed, it does not mean
that it is SUPERIOR to the other departments.
What it is upholding is NOT its OWN supremacy, but
the SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION.
DUTY # 1:
Ascertain WON a given power has been validly
exercised by a particular dep’t.
CONSTITUTIONALLY conferred upon the
department, claiming its exercise? Yes? Exercise
sustained.
a. Conferment of power is usually done expressly.
Legislative: Congress; Executive: President;
Judiciary: SC. As may be readily noticed, there is no
problem as to the validity because they naturally
pertain to the agencies in which they have been
reposed.
 BUT this is not always the case!!!
Illustration # 1. POWER TO IMPEACH, essentially
executive, and the power to try and decide
impeachment cases, essentially judicial, ARE expressly
lodged in the CONGRESS, as so too is the power of
investigation which is more exe or judi than legi.
Illustration # 2. SC can exercise the executive power of
removal over judges of inferior courts although
appointed by the president. (Consti permits it)
Illustration # 3. President may be authorized by
Congress to exercise tariff powers and emergency
powers, both of them legislative in nature. . (Consti
permits it)
b. By Doctrine of Implication. “The grant of express
power carries with it all other powers that may be
reasonably inferred from it”.
13
Illustration # 1. Power to punish contempt (essentially
judicial) can be exercised by the legis, more so now, that
they are vested express POWER TO CONDUCT
INVESTIGATION in aid of legislation.
c. INHERENT/INCIDENTAL
Illustration # 1. President, as head of the gov’t, may
independently of constitutional or statutory authority
DEPORT undesirable aliens as an “Act of State”.
Illustration # 2. Congress can punish any person who
IMPUGNS its integrity without proof.
Illustration # 3. Courts may claim contempt power
inherent in the judiciary.
JUSTICIABLE and POLITICAL QUESTIONS
Although the power in question has been constitutionally
conferred by the consti to the dept claiming its exercise,
the power of the judiciary is not yet terminated.
Duty # 2:
Ascertain WON the act in question had been
performed in accordance with the rules laid down by
the Consti. (PROCEDURAL RULE)
 Justiciable Question: Courts can intervene, no
encroachment as it is the particular role of the
courts to ensure proper observance of the
constitution.)
Justiciable Question (Casibang v. Aquino)
“A purely JQ implies a given right, legally demandable
and enforceable, an act or omission violative of such
right, and a remedy granted and sanctioned by law, for
said breach if right”.
 BUT where the matter falls under the discretion of
another department/ people themselves, the
decision reached is in the category of a PQ and
consequently may not be subject to Judicial R.
- Wisdom, efficacy, or practicability of law
Congress.
- Interpretation of certain provisions of the consti,
“other high crimes” as a ground for
impeachment. (Congress)
 NOT THE SAME with respect to the definition of
“betrayal of public trust”, which is among the
grounds for impeachment, when invoked by the
president in removing a non-impeachable officer, ex.
Deputy Ombudsman, pursuant to a statute.
(Gonzales v. Office of the President, 2012)
“Betrayal of public trust” LESS THAN CRIMINAL
but must be ATTENDED BY BF and such gravity and
seriousness as the other grounds for impeachment.
- The legislature could not have intended to redefine
constitutional standards of xx betrayal of public
trust xx and apply them less stringently. The fact
that it have been made statutory ground for the
removal by the president of a DO from office
cannot diminish the seriousness of their nature nor
acuity of their scope. It could not suddenly
“overreach” to cover acts that are not vicious or
malevolent on the same level as the other grounds
for impeachment.
DISTINCTION B/W JQ AND PQ
Illustration no. 1.Suspension/Expulsion of a member
of the Congress, which must be based upon the ground
of “disorderly behavior” and concurred in by at least 2/3
of ALL HIS COLLEAGUES.
- Determination of “disorderly behavior” is a political
question but the disciplinary measure may
nonetheless be disauthorized if it was supported by
LESS THAN the required vote. (Procedural Rule)
TANADA v. CUENCO
Political Question question of policy. It refers to
those questions which, under the consti, are to be
decided by the people in their sovereign capacity; or
in regard to which full discretionary authority has
been delegated to the legislative or executive branch
of the gov’t. It is concerned with issues dependent
upon the WISDOM, not LEGALITY of a particular
measure.
SANIDAD v. COMELEC
Where the vortex of the controversy refers to the legality
or validity of the contested act, that matter is definitely
justiciable. What is in the heels of the court is not the
wisdom of the act of the incumbent president in
proposing amendments, but his CONSTITUTIONAL
AUTHORITY to perform such act or to assume the
power of a constituent assembly. Whether the
amending process confers on the president that
power to propose amendments is therefore a
downright JQ. If the constitution provides how it may be
amended, the judiciary as the interpreter of the consti,
can declare whether the procedure followed or the
authority assumed is valid/not.
APPLICATION OF THE DOCTRINE
14
1. Abueva v. Wood Writ of Mandamus could not be
issued against the president to compel him to
produce certain vouchers relative to the expenses of
an official mission.
2. Severino v. Governor-General  Writ of Mandamus
to call a special election though this duty was
imposed on him by law in mandatory language.
3. In re dick Discretionary power of the Chief
Executive to ascertain the necessity for the
EXPULSION of an ALIEN for the protection of the
national interest.
- In ALL CASES, the powers involved were
discretionary in the executive and therefore not
subject to judicial compulsion.
4. Aytona v. Castillo Appointing Power. Conflict
b/w the outgoing and incoming president. SC
refused to assume jurisdiction on the ground of SP.
5. De la Llana v. Comelec  SC refused to restrain the
HOLDING OF A REFERENDUM= The calling
thereof lay in the exclusive discretion of Pres
Marcos.
6. Custodio v. Senate President Certain provisions
of GA law. SC refused to assume J. It affects the
wisdom and proprietary of the law. Remedy: Resort
to the BAR OF PUBLIC OPINION.
7. Vera v. Avelino 3 senators were prevented from
taking oath via reso of the senate. Went to the SC
and alleged that only the Electoral Tribunal had
jurisdiction over contests relating to their election.
SC refused to assume jurisdiction. Case was not a
“contest” and affirmed the inherent right of the
legislature to determine who shall be admitted to its
membership/punish members.
8. Philippine Coconut Producers Federation v.
Republic. “Corollary to the principle of SP is the
doctrine of primary jurisdiction that the courts will
defer to the decisions of the administrative officers
and agencies by reason of their expertise and
experience in the matters assigned to them.
9. Phil. Bar Assoc v. COMELEC. Snap Elections on
February 7, 1986 by the Batasang Pambansa is a
political question resoluble only by the sovereign
electorate.
IN re: Impeachment Proceeding (ART 2, Sec 3)
 Proper committee of the HR shall submit a report on
an impeachment complaint, together with its
corresponding resolution (Report + Reso) to the
House w/in 60 days from its referral to the same, and
 said reso shall be calendared for consideration by the
House w’in 10 days from receipt.
 A vote of atleast 1/3 of ALL members of the HR
shall be necessary to AFFIRM or OVERRIDE its
counter reso.
10. Barcelon v. Baker and Montenegro (Nature of the
president’s power to determine the existence of the
grounds specified in the constitution for the
suspension of the privilege of the writ of HC)
- This power was discretionary and therefore not
justiciable, on the justification of the superior
competence of the president to assess the peace
and order condition of the country.
This doctrine was abandoned in Lansang v. Garcia.
SC asserted the right to inquire into the factual basis of
the suspension and to annul the same if it appeared from
its own investigation that the grounds invoked by the
president were not actually existing.
However, this decision itself was later abandoned in
Garcia-Padilla v. Enrile, where the original ruling in the
Barcelon and Montenegro case was reinstated to make
the questioned power discretionary.
Latest: NO MORE. See: Art 7, Sec 18, PhilCon
“SC may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by
any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the
privilege of HC or the extension thereof”.
11. Noblejas v. Teehankee. Administrative
Investigation of an executive official should be
undertaken by the President and not the SC even if
it was provided by law that such official had the
rank and provileges of a judge of the RTC.
- Neither may the SC be compelled by law to act as a
mere BOARD OF ARBITRATORS, an essentially
executive body, particularly because whatever
decisions it might make in the discharge of its admin
functions would ultimately have to be reviewed by
the SAME MEMBERS in the exercise of its judicial
functions.
BASIS: ART 8, sec 12. “Members of the SC and of
other courts established by law SHALL NOT be
designated to ANY AGENCY performing QUASI-J or
ADMINISTRATIVE F.
POLITICAL QUESTION under the 1987 Consti
Scope of PQ appears to have been constricted because
of the new definition of JUDICIAL POWER, which
now “includes the duty… to determine whether or not
there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch
or instrumentality of the Gov’t. Estrada v. Desierto.
Effect: Judicial Review is available even against the
Executive and Legislative Dept’s, including the
president and the Congress, in the exercise of their
discretionary power.
 Art 7, Sec 18. “SC may review, in an appropriate
proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of
the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law
or the suspension of the privilege of HC or the
extension thereof”.
The PROBLEM is: It is not clear what discretionary
acts are subject to JR, outside of those specifically
mentioned in the Constitution, and what acts remain
prerogatives of the political departments that, even with
the enlargement of judicial power, cannot be examined
by the courts of justice.
- In any event: “The courts have no right to DIRECTLY
decide matters over which FULL DISCRETIONARY
AUTHORITY has been delegated to the Exec. Branch,
or to substitute their own judgments for that of the Exec.
Branch (ex. DOJ).
- Courts will not interfere with the executive
determination of probable cause for the purpose of filing
an information, IN THE ABSENCE OF GRAVE
ABUSE OF DISCRETION:
 “It must be so patent and gross as to amount to
an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal
to perform appositive duty enjoined by law or to
act at all in contemplation of law, such as where
the power is exercised in an arbitrary and
despotic manner”
1. Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of
P.O. “Senate gravely abused its discretion in citing
the petitioner for contempt for his refusal to answer
questions in the course of a legislative inquiry.
Reason: There is a legitimate claim of EXECUTIVE
PRIVILEGE”.
2. Lawyers Against Monopoly and Poverty v. Sec of
Budget and Management. “PDAF is constitutional.
The proper procedure appeared to have been
followed and petitioner had not adequately
established that the said law constituted an
ENCROACHMENT ON EXEC. POWER by
enabling legislators to propose and choose the
projects for which said fund is to be used.
15
 - To justify nullification: CLEAR AND
UNEQUIVOCAL and NOT A DOUBTFUL
BREACH of the Consti. In case of doubt, the
Court must sustain the legislation because to
invalidate a law based on BASELESS
SUPPOSITION is an affront to the wisdom not
only of the legislature that passed it but also of
the executive which approved it.
3. Belgica v. Executive Secretary- Ruling in the
Lawyers Against Monopoly and Poverty v. Sec of
Budget and Management HAS BEEN
ABANDONED.
- SC nullified a similar PDAF Article in the 2013
GAA, stating among others “ THE 2013 PDAF
as well as ALL OTHER PROVISIONS of law
which similarly allow legislators to wield any
form of POST ENACTMENT AUTHORITY in
the implementation or enforcement of the
budget, unrelated to congressional oversight,
AS VIOLATIVE OF THE SP principle and
thus UNCONSTITUTIONAL”.
- 2013 PDAF Article confers post-enactment
identification authority to individual legislators,
violates the principle of NON – entities and at the same time enable it to
DELEGABILITY since said legislators are
effectively allowed to individually exercise the
power of appropriation which as settled in
Philconsa- is lodged in CONGRESS.
4. Petitioner Organization v. Executive Secretary.
Issue: Assumption of SC of jurisdiction over the
petitions questioning the constitutionality of certain
Eos issued by the President considering that the
were NO “ONGOING PROCEEDINGS” before any
board or tribunal which would have warranted its
exercise of its power of judicial review.
- “Where there are serious allegations that a
law has infringed the Consti, it becomes not only the
right but the duty of the court to look into such
allegations and, when warranted, uphold the supremacy
of the Consti. Also, where the issues involved PUBLIC
INTEREST, the court has the discretion to brush aside
technicalities of procedure.
CHAPTER 7. DELEGATION OF POWERS
“Potestas delegata non delegari potest”
- What has been delegated cannot be delegated. It is
based upon the ethical principle that such delegated
power constitutes not only a right but a duty to be
performed by the delegate through the
16
instrumentality of his own judgment and not through
the intervening mind of another.
- A further delegation of such power, unless permitted
by the sovereign power, would constitute a negation
of this duty in violation of the trust reposed in the
delate mandated to discharge it directly.
- This principle is APPLICABLE to ALL the 3 major
powers of the gov’t but is especially important in the
case of the legislative power because of the many
instances when its delegation is permitted.
 Observation: Delegation (LP) has become the
rule and non-delegation the exception:
Increasing complexities of the task of the gov’t
and the growing inability of the legislature to
cope directly with the many problems
demanding its attention.
Ex. Regulation of common carriers.
- Congress may then create an administrative
body like the LTFRB and empower it to
promulgate the needed rules and regulations,
subject only to certain statutory limitations pre-
determined by the legislature itself.
- Better left to be solved by more capable
tackle the more serious problems.
PERMISSIBLE DELEGATION:
1. Tariff Power to the Pres
2. Emergency powers to the Pres
3. D. to the people at large
4. D. to local gov’t
5. D. to Administrative bodies
A. TARIFF POWERS [Sec 28 (2)]
- Pres is granted STAND-BY or FLEXIBLE TP in the
Tariff and Customs Code conformably to the above
provision.
Reason: Necessity + Expediency, of giving the pres the
authority to act immediately on certain matters
affecting the national economy lest delay result in
hardship to the people.
B. EMERGENCY POWERS [Sec 23 (2)]
- In times of WAR or other NATIONAL
EMERGENCY, it is not likely that a quorum can
be convened in the Congress to enable it to do
business. Assuming such quorum, there is still the
decisiveness and delay inherent in the lawmaking
 process that may hamper effective solution of the
problems caused by the emergency.
EFFECT: President becomes in effect a
CONSTITUTIONAL DICTATOR. But in strict legal
theory, there is no total abdication of legislative
authority in his favor.
- Subject to certain restrictions= AGENT rather
than a replacement of the legislature.
 CONDITIONS:
1. There must be a war or other national emergency.
2. It must be limited for a LIMITED PERIOD.
3. Subject to such RESTRICTIONS as the Congress
may provide.
4. EP must be exercised to carry out a NATIONAL
POLICY declared by Congress.
- EP are self-liquidating unless sooner withdrawn,
in the sense that they will automatically cease upon
the end of the emergency that justified their
delegation.
- Conferment of EP on the Pres is NOT
MANDATORY. The Congress may choose to on to
its legislative power and validly refuse to delegate it;
or should it decide to so, limit its duration and
terminate it even before the end of the emergency.
- Existence of EMERGENCY does not automatically
confer EP on the Pres. “Emergency itself cannot and
should not create power”.
- The mere continuance of the emergency does not
necessarily continue the President’s EP if they have
been granted to him for a shorter period.
- EP that is “necessary and proper” only for the
purpose of carrying out a national policy.
A. Emergency Powers Cases
- Exercise by Pres Quirino of EP. At stake was the
validity of certain executive orders promulgated by
Pres. Quirino providing specifically for the
appropriation of public funds in the operation of the
NG and the conduct of the 1949 elections, the
control of the exports, and the regulation of rentals
of residential lots and buildings. EOs INVALID
because:
“CA 671 became inoperative when Congress met
in regular session in May 25, 1948 and that Eos No
were issued w/o authority of law”
Despite this decision, Pres. Quirino continued exercising
EP, promulgating 2 EOs appropriating public funds for
public works and the relief of typhoon victims. These
acts were challenged in the second Emergency Power
17
Cases, where the additional circumstance appeared that
the Congress had passed House Bill No. 727 repealing
all EMERGENCY Powers Acts except that this measure
had been vetoed by the Pres.
- “National Assembly intended it to be only for a
limited period. If it be contended that the Act has not
yet been duly repealed, and such step is necessary to
a cessation of the EP delegated to the Pres, the
result would be obvious unconstitutional, since it
may never be repealed by the Congress, or if the
latter ever attempts to do so, the Pres may wield his
veto. The situation will make the Congress and the
Pres to determine the indefinite duration of the
delegation of LP in palpable violation of the
constitutional provision that any grant thereunder
must be for a limited period, necessarily to be fixed
by law itself and not dependent the will of the
Congress/Pres”.
A. David v. Arroyo (2006). SC declared that, while the
PRESIDENT ALONE can declare a state of
national emergency, he MAY NOT INVOKE this
provision to authorize him during the emergency
“to temporarily take over or direct the operation of
any privately owned public utility or business
affected w/ public interest w/o authority from
Congress.”
B. Divinagracia v. Consolidated Broadcasting System
Inc. (2009). SC acknowledged that the Pres has been
authorized “ to exercise considerable infringements
on the right of the franchisees to operate their
enterprise”. The court cited RA 7477 Se. 5, which
provides that Pres in times of national emergency
may take over and operate stations in the interest of
public interest, or authorize the temporary
use/operation thereof by any agency of the Gov’t,
UPON DUE COMPENSATION to the grantee, for
the use of said stations during the period when they
shall be so operated.
DELEGATION TO THE PEOPLE
“xx except in those cases where, by the consti, the
people have expressly reserved to themselves a power
of decision, the function of legislation cannot be
exercised by them, even to the extent of accepting or
rejecting a law which has been framed for their
consideration xx”
 The people have voluntarily surrendered that power
when they adopted the consti. (Democratic and
Republican State)- “by representation”.
Referendum a method of submitting an important
legislative measure to a DIRECT VOTE of the whole
people.
 Art 17, Sec 3 (c)- power of the electorate to
APPROVE or REJECT a LEGISLATION
through an election called for the purpose.
Plebiscite “decree of the people”; questions submitted
to the people are intended to work more permanent
changes in the political structure, ex. PROPOSAL TO
AMEND THE CONSTITUTION.
 Art 17, Sec 3 (e)- The electoral process by
which an initiative on the CONSTITUTION is
approved or rejected by the people.
DELEGATION TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
- LGU’s are more knowledgeable than the NG on
matters of purely local concern and are therefore in a
better position to enact necessary and appropriate
legislation thereon.
- NO transfer of genera legislative power.
- Power of ED and, under the GWC, the police
power have been expressly delegated by the
legislature to the Local lawmaking bodies; PT is,
however, derived by them directly from the consti,
subject to limitations that may be imposed by the
Congress.
DELEGATION TO ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
Reason: (same,same LGU). With the proliferation of
specialized activities, the Congress has found it more
necessary to entrust to Admin Agencies the “POWER
OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION’.
- With this power, admin bodies may implement
the broad policies laid down in a statute by
“filling in” the details which the Congress may
not have the opportunity or competence to
provide. (Ex. IRR)These regulations have the
force and effect of law.
For an Admin Regulation to be VALID,
1. Promulgation must be authorized by the legislature;
2. Must be w/in the scope of the authority given by the
legislature;
3. It must be promulgated in accordance w/ prescribe
procedure; and
4. Reasonable.
TESTS OF DELEGATION
18
QUESTION: WON the delegation has been validly
made.
- IN ALL CASES, it must be circumscribed by
LEGISLATIVE RESTRICTIONS. Otherwise,
delegation itself in legal effect an ABDICATION OF
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY, a total surrender by the
legislature of its prerogatives in favor of the delegate.
1.THE COMPLETENESS TEST
- The law must be complete (sets forth therein the
policy to be executed, carried out or implemented by
the delegate) when it leaves the legislature so that
there will be nothing left for the delegate to do
EXCEPT TO ENFORCE IT.
 If there are GAPS that will prevent its
enforcement unless they are first filled, the
delegate will then have the opportunity to step
into the shoes of the legislature and to exercise
a discretion especially legislative in order to
repair the omissions. THIS IS INVALID D.
2. SUFFICIENT STANDARD TEST
- Intended to map out the boundaries of the
delegate’s authority by defining the legislative
policy and indicating the circumstances under
w/c it is to be pursued and effected.
- Prevent a total transference of legislative power
from the lawmaking body to the delegate, who is
NOT ALLOWED to step into the shoes of the
legislature and exercise a power essentially
legislative.
- Usually indicated in the law delegating the
legislative power.
THE PELAEZ CASE
Issue: Validity of Sec 68 of the Revised Admin
Code empowering the Pres to create, merge, divide,
abolish or otherwise alter the boundaries of
municipal corporations.
“Although the Congress may delegate to another
branch of the Gov’t the power to fill details in the
execution, enforcement, or administration of law,
it is essential, to forestall a violation of the principle
of SP, that said law must satisfy THE
COMPLETENESS TEST and SUFFICIENT
STANDARD TEST. Indeed, w/o a statutory
declaration of policy to be carried out or
implemented by the pres, which is the essence of
every law, and, without the aforementioned
standard, there would be no means to determine,
with reasonable certainty, whether the delegate has
 acted w/in or beyond the scope of his authority.
Hence, he could arrogate upon himself both the
power to make the law and worse to unmake it.
CHAPTER 8. THE LEGISLATIVE
DEPARTMENT
- New Congress represents a return to Bicameralism
after our recent experiment w/ unicameralism, w/c
was established by the 1973 Consti and, in fact, also
initially provided for in the 1935 before it was
amended in 1940.
- PRESENT: Congress consists of HS and HR.
Some changes:
Art 6, Sec 1. “The LP shall be vested in the Congress of
the PH which shall consist of a Senate and a HR, except
to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on
initiative and referendum. “
POWERS that are NON-LEGISLATIVE in nature:
1. Canvass of the presidential elections
2. Declaration of the existence of war
3. Confirmation of Amnesties
4. Thru COA: presidential appointments
5. Amendment/revision of the Consti
6. Impeachment
SENATE:
1. COMPOSITION
Sec 2. “The senate shall be composed of 24 Senators
who shall be ELECTED AT LARGE* by the qualified
voters of the PH”
- * Intends to make the Senate a training ground for
national leaders and possibly a springboard to the
Presidency. Having a national rather than only a
district constituency, a senator will have a broader
outlook of the problems of the country. With such
perspective, the Senate is likely to be more
circumspect and broad-minded than the HR.
2. QUALIFICATIONS
Sec 3. “No person shall be a Senator unless he is a NB
Citizen of the PH, and, on the day of the election is at
least 35 yrs. of age, able to R&W, a registered voter,
and a resident of the PH for NOT LESS THAN 2
YEARS immediately preceding the day of the election.
1. NB CITIZEN(Art 4, Sec 2)
19
a. Those who are citizens of the PH FROM BIRTH
w/o having to perform any act to acquire or
perfect their PH citizenship.
b. Those who ELECT PH CITIZENSHIP in
accordance w/ par (3), sec (2) hereof.
2. AGE requirement
- 35 yrs old on the DAY of election, that is “when
the polls are opened and the votes are cast, and not
on the day of the proclamation of the winer by the
BOC”.
3. RESIDENCE (Domicile) Place where one
HABITUALLY resides and to which, when he is
absent, he has the INTENTION OF RETURNING.
- One cannot have 2 residences at the same time;
Acquisition of a new residence results in the
forfeiture of the old.
- An intention to abandon his old residence cannot be
inferred from his act in establishing a home
elsewhere/ otherwise conducting his activities
therein, in the absence of a clear showing that he has
decided to adopt a new residence.
Ex. A built a house in Manila and engages in the
practice of law therein. However, he occasionally visits
his relatives and properties in his home province.
EFFECT: Legal residence= HOME prov.
DOMICILE question of intention & circumstances.
Under CIRCUMSTANCES, these 3 rules must be borne
in mind:
1. A man must have a residence/domicile somewhere
2. When once established, it remains until a new one is
acquired.
3. Only 1 domicile at a time.
 If one actually wants to EFFECT CHANGE OF
DOMICILE:
a. There must be an ACTUAL REMOVAL/ ACTUAL
CHANGE of domicile;
b. Bonafide intention of abandoning former place of
residence and establishing a new one; and
c. Definite acts which correspond w/ the purpose.
W/O THE CONCURRENCE OF THESE 3,
DOMICILE OF ORIGIN CONTINUES.
**Voter Registration/ Voting Strong presumption of
residence but NOT CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE.
1. Perez v. Comelec. Person’s registration as voter in
one district other than his original residence is not
 sufficient to conclude that he is not registered
somewhere else or that he has abandoned his
original residence.
2. Limbona v Comelec. Marriage: Change of
residence.
- Presumed to have changed her domicile upon
marriage/ operation of law consistent w/ the
provisions of the Family Code to wit “ spouses shall
have a single family domicile, unless one of them
maintains a separate residence”.
PARTY LIST REP Residence in any part of the PH
DISTRICT REP Residence must be within the
district where he is running.
3. Mitra v COMELEC. (2010) Purpose of residence
requirement. “well represented”
 Prevent strangers/ newcomers unacquainted with
the conditions and needs of a community from
seeking elective offices in that community.
 composition of its members.
 Familiarity with these circumstances can only come
with residency in the constituency to be represented.
 Qualifications:
1. “Continuing requirements”. Must be present the
entire duration of the member’s incumbency.
2. Exclusive. Congress cannot provide by mere
legislation for additional qualifications.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
- Legislative Power remains limited in the sense
that it is subject to substantive and constitutional
limitations. The consti is the basic law to which
all law must conform. No act, however noble
remains to be invalid as long as it is in conflict
with the consti.
3. TERM (Art 6 and Art 18 respectively)
Sec 4. The term of office of the SENATOR shall be 6 yrs.
and shall commence on the noon of June 30 following
their election.
Sec 2. The Senators, Mem of the HR, and the local
officials first elected under this Constitution (1987) shall
serve until noon of June 30, 1992.
Of the Senators elected in the election in 1992, the first
12 obtaining the highest number of votes shall serve for
6 yrs and the remaining 12 for 3 yrs.
 The 24 senators first elected under this
Constitution on the second Monday of May 1987
served a term of only 5 years ending on June 30
1992.
 Of the 24 senators elected in 1992, the first 12
obtaining the highest number of votes served the
full term of 6 yrs. expiring in 1998, and the last 12
served a term of only 3 years ending in 1995.
 The 12 senators elected in 1995 served the full
term of 6 yrs. Those elected in 1998 also served the
full term of 6 years as so too those elected in 2001.
 In other words, beginning 1995, 12 senators were
elected every 3 years, to serve the full term of 6
years, so unlike the HR, the Senate shall not at any
time be completely dissolved. One half of the
membership is retained as the other half is
replaced or re-elected every 3 years.
 “Continuing institution”, as it is not dissolved as
an entity w/ each national election or change in the
Illustration # 1: Senate’s power to punish for contempt
subsists despite periodical dissolution of the
Congress/HR. As long as the Senate, which is a
continuing body, persists in performing the particular
legislative function involved.
To hold otherwise would mean that the senate would
have to resume the investigation at the next and
succeeding sessions and repeat the contempt
proceeding.
- However, with regard to pending/ unfinished matters
of the Senate of a previous congress are considered
terminated upon the expiration of the Congress and it
is merely optional on the Senate of the succeeding
congress to take up such unfinished matters, not in the
same status, but as if presented for the first time.
(Arnault v. Nazareno, 2008)
Art 6, Sec 4. “No senator shall serve for more than 2
CONSECUTIVE terms. Voluntary resignation of the
office for any length of time shall not be considered as
an interruption in the continuity of his service for the
full term for which he was elected. “
 X more than 12 years consecutive years.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE
COMPOSITION:
1. District representative elected directly and
personally, from the territorial unit he is seeking to
represent.
20
2. Party-list representative indirectly, through the
party he represents, which is the one voted for by the
electorate. (Party list listem: 1987 Consti)
Sec 5. “ HR shall be compose of X more than 250
members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be
(1) elected from legislative districts apportioned among
the provinces, cities and the Metropolitan Manila area
xxx and those who, as provided by law, shall be (2)
elected through a party-list system of registered
national. Regional and sectoral parties/org.”
(2) The PLR shall constitute 20% of the total
membership of the HR. For 3 consecutive terms after
the ratification of this constitution, ½ (10%??) of the
seats allocated to to PLR shall be filled, as provided by
law, by selection or election from LABOR, PEASANT,
URBAN POOR, ICC, WOMEN, YOUTH, and such
OTHER sectors as may be provided by laws, EXCEPT
THE RELIGIOUS SECTOR.
(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as
practicable, CONTIGUOUS, COMPACT and
ADJACENT territory. Each city with a population of at
least 250K, or each province, shall have at least ONE
REP.
(4) W/in 3 years following the return of every census,
the Congress shall make a reappointment of legislative
districts based on the standards provided in this section.
A. THE DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES
 250 members were originally provided for in
the HR to be directly elected from the various
legislative districts created by the Ordinance
appended in the 1987 Consti.
 Territory was divided into 13 regions, in turn
comprising 200 districts apportioned among the
P, C, MM in accordance w/ the no. of their
respective inhabitants and on the basis of a
uniform and progressive ratio.
- This initial apportionment shall be subject to
adjustment by the Congress w/in 3 yrs ff. the
return of every enumeration to make the
representation of the entire nation as equitable as
possible. When making such apportionment, the
Congress shall see to it that each city with a
population of at least 250K, or each province,
shall have at least ONE REP.
GERRYMANDERING arrangement of districts in
such a way as to favor the election of preferred
candidates (usually re-electionist) through the inclusion
21
therein only of those areas where they expect to win,
regardless of the resultant shape of such districts.
(“Compact- solid; Contiguous- physical contact;
adjacent- close)
a. Navarro v. Ermita (2011) A proposed province
composed of one or more islands need not comply
with the 2000 sq.meter contiguous territory
requirement under the LGC.
b. Macias v. COMELEC authority for the view that
“The validity of a legislative apportionment
measure is a JUSTICIABLE QUESTION,
involving as it does certain requirements the
interpretation of which does not call for the
exercise of legislative discretion.
c. Herrera v. COMELEC The basis for “districting
is the number of INHABITANTS” of a province/city,
and NOT the no. of its registered inhabitants.
*250K requirement applies ONLY to cities, and NOT to
provinces, although the LGC provides for a min.
population of 250K as an alternative req for the
establishment of a province.
**Additional 250K population req is also NOT
NECESSARY to the creation of an ADDITIONAL
LEG. DISTRICT for cities/provinces.
- Mariano v. Comelec (1995) “ Any province that
may hereafter be created, or any city whose
population may hereafter increases to more than
250K SHALL be entitled in the immediately ff.
election to atleast one member or such number of
members as it may be entitled to on the basis of the
no. of inhabitants xx. ”
Ex. Conversion into a Highly Urbanized city=
automatically resulted in its establishment as a
legislative district. It should be noted that a
PLEBISCITE was necessary for the validity of said
CONVERSION. However, the same may be
dispensed with where NO NEW TERRITORY or
NO CHANGE in an existing territory is made under
the law, and ONLY A REAPPORTIONMENT or
the creation of an additional district is done.
**Power to create legislative districts Only Congress.
That is why in Sema v. COMELEC, the Muslim
Mindanao Autonomay Act, authorizing the gov’t of the
ARMM to CREATE PROVINCES and CITIES=
UNCONSTI. Because such power involves the power to
create legislative district which only Congress possesses.
It may however, be authorized by law to create
MUNICIPALITIES and BRGYs.
B. THE PARTY LIST REPRESENTATIVE
- “shall constitute 20% of the total membership of
the body (HR), including such representatives.
- Selection of the party list representatives are
embodied in RA 7941.
Sec 2. “xx proportional representation in the
election of representatives in the election thru a
party-list system of registered N, R, and Sectoral
parties/org/coalitions thereof, which will enable
Fil Citizens belonging to the marginalized and
underrepresented sectors, and who lack well
defined political constituencies xx to become
members of the HR xx “
a. Atong Paglaum v. COMELEC (2013)
“SC, in setting the parameters for participation in the
party-list elections, clarified that, consistent with the
provisions of sec 5 (1), the PLS provides for 3
different groups, (1) national, (2) regional, (3)
sectoral.
a. N/R DO NOT NEED to organize along sectoral
lines and do not need to represent any
“marginalized and underrepresented” sector.
b. Political Parties can participate in Part-list
elections provided:
1. They register under the PLS; and
2. DO NOT FIELD candidates in legislative
district elections.
- Otherwise, they can only participate in the PLE
only thru its SECTORAL WING that can
separately register under the PLS.
- The sectoral wing is by itself an independent
sectoral party, and is linked to a political
party through a coalition.
C. Sectoral Parties may either be “marginalized and
underrepresented” or lacking in “well-defined
political constituencies”.
- It is enough that their principal advocacies
pertains to special interest/concern of their
sector.
a. Marginalized and Underrepresented
Labor, Peasant, Fisher Folk, Urban Poor,
ICC, Handicapped, Veterans And OW.
b. Lack well defined political constituencies 
Professionals, elderly, women, youth.
- ENUMERATION IS NOT EXCLUSIVE. As long as
such particular org complies with the requirements
of the Consti & RA 7941.
- Majority of its members MUST belong to such
category.
22
- The nominees of sectoral parties that represent them
must either (1) belong to their respective sector or
(2)must have a track record of advocacy for their
respective sector. (to be called a “bona fide” mem)
D. N/R/S shall not be DQ if some of their nominees are
DQ, provided that they have at least ONE OMINEE
who remains qualified.
 PLS is intended to democratize political power
by giving political parties that cannot win in
legislative district elections a chance to win
seats in the HR.
 Not LATER THAN 90 days before election,
any Political Party/Org/ Coalition may file a
VERIFIED PETITION through its president or
secretary for its participation in the PLS,
attaching a copy of its constitution, by laws
platform, officiers and such other relevant info
as may be required by the COMELEC.
 Petition shall be PUBLISHED in at least 2 NP
of GC and, after due notice and hearing, be
resolved w/in 15 days and in no case later than
60 days before election.
 Upon registration, the political group shall
submit to the COMELEC not later than 45
days before election, at least 5 names from w/c
its representatives may be chosen in case it
obtains the required no. of votes.
- Under the law, the names of the PL nominees shall
not be shown on the certified list of participants in
the PLS to be distributed by the COMELEC among
all precints (Conflict: Duty of the COMELEC to
disclose and release the names of the nominees of
the PL groups.
 Only persons who have given their consent in
writing may be named as PL candidates, and in one
list only. Persons who lost in the immediately
preceding election are INELIGIBLE.
 Nominee of the youth sector must at least be 25 but
not more than 30 on the day of the election.
(Amores v. HRET 2010) (hindi na youth ang 31!)
 “No officer or employee in the CS shall engage
directly or indirectly in any electioneering or
partisan political campaign”
 No change of names or alteration of the order of
nominees shall be allowed after it has been filed
EXCEPT:EXCLUSIVE!!! (Death, withdraws in
writing, incapacitated-nominee), in w/c case the
name of the substitute shall be places last in the list.
 Incumbent sectoral reps in the HR who are
nominated in the PLS shall not be considered
resigned.
 Participants in the PLS shall be ranked according to
the no. of votes they received, w/ those getting at
least 2% of the total votes cast for the system to be
entitled to one seat/each. NONE OF THEM
SHALL HAVE MORE THAN 3 SEATS.
 DISQUALIFIED:
a. Religious Sec;
b. Foreign Parties;
c. Parties w/c receive support from FOREIGN
POLITICAL PARTY;
d. Ceased to exist for at least 1 year
e. Failed to participate in the last 2 preceding
elections.
Sec 6. Failure to obtain at least 2% of the votes cast
under PLS in the 2 preceding elections for the
constituency in which it has registered (UNCONSTI!)
BANAT V. COMELEC. “For every 4 district rep, there
shall be one party-list rep”. Hence, there is no need for
legislation to create an additional party-list seat
whenever 4 additional legislative districts are created by
law. – Automatic creation of additional party-list seat.
- BASA PA MORE!!!!!
QUALIFICATIONS:
Sec 6.”No person shall be a member of the HR unless
he is a NBC of the PH and, on the day of the election,
is at least 25, able to R & W, and except the PLR, a
registered voter in the district in which he shall be
elected, resident thereof for a period of not less than 1
year immediately preceding the day of the election”.
 In addition, the PLR must be a bona fide member
(belong/ advocate) of the party he seeks to represent
at least 90 days before the election day.
 Residence:
a. DR must be in the district, not in the province
comprising the district, for 1 year immediately
before the election.
- Ensure familiarity with the conditions and
problems of the constituency sought to be
represented.
23
b. PLR must be a resident of the PH, and not any
particular district for a period of at least 1 year
immediately before the election.
 RA 9225- Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition
Act of 2003.
- NBF citizens who have been, or intended to be
naturalized in a foreign country, shgall upon
taking the oath of allegiance, be deemed to have
reacquired, or shall retain their PH Citizenship.
“Not to have lost their PH citizenship”.
- Unmarried child, below 18 yrs. of those who
reacquire PH Citizenship upon effectivity of this
Act shall likewise be deemed citizens of PH.
- For those running for public police - “make
personal and sworn renunciation of ANY AND
ALL FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP= Ceases to be a
dual citizen.
- Right to VOTE or be ELECTED/ APPOINTED to
any public office CANNOT be exercised by or
extended to those who are CANDIDATES for or
occupying any PUBLIC OFFICE in the country of
which they are naturalize or are in active service as
commissioned or non-commissioned officers in the
armed forces of the country of which they are
nationalized citizens.
- A NBC who either retains or reacquired his
aforesaid citizenship upon taking the second oath of
allegiance where he, this time, makes a personal
and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenship.
 Assailing one’s citizenship according to CA 473
may be done only BY THE STATE, through its
representation designated by the Statute.
- X PRIVATE PERSON
 Right to vote Resided PH (1yr) ***
 Place to vote (6mos)
***Exception: Section 2, ART V. “Absentee Voting for
qualified voters abroad”.
a. Nicolas v. COMELEC. SC upheld the right to be
registered as a voter of a DUAL CITIZEN who was
then concededly a NON-RESIDENT of PH.
Reiterated the ruling in “Macalintal v. COMELEC-
NR to vote under the Oversees Absentee Voting Act.
There is no provision in the Dual Citizen Law (RA
9225) requiring duals to actually establish residence
and physically stay in the PH first before they can
exercise to vote. DUALS SAME AS OVERSEES.
The goal of RA 9189 is to enfranchise as much as
possible all who, save for the residency
 requirements exacted of an ordinary voter under
the ordinary conditions, are qualified to vote.
TERM (SEC 7. 3 YRS- x 3 TERMS=9 YRS)
Purpose: Synchronize Election, which in the case of the
Senate are held every 3 year interval; Pres & VP every 6
years.
 Local Officials 3 years.
a. Abundo v. COMELEC (2013) Rules in
connection with the consecutiveness of terms and
involuntary interruptions thereof in connection with
the application of the rules on their terms for elective
offices both under the Consti and other pertinent
law.
 PERMANENT VACANCY- Elective position
and the official merely assumed (rule on
succession), then his service for the
UNEXPIRED PORTION= X Full term as
contemplated under the subject constitutional
and statutory provision that service cannot be
counted in the application of any term limit.
*If the official runs again for the same
position he held prior to his assumption of the
higher office, then his succession to said
position is by operation of law and is
considered an INVOLUNTARY SEVERANCE
or INTERRUPTION.
 An elective official, who has served for 3 cons.
Terms and who did not seek the elective position
for what could be his 4th term, but LATER
WON in a RECALL ELECTION, had an
interruption in the continuity of the official’s
service. (From end of his term- recall election he
had become a private citizen)
 Abolition of an elective local office
(Conversion Muni- City) X= Interruption of
the incumbent official’s continuity of service.
 X= Preventive Suspension. Elective officer’s
continued stay and entitlement to the office
remain unaffected although he is barred from
exercising the functions of his office during this
period.
 Candidate- Proclaimed Winner and assumes
office is later on ousted from office for losing in
an election protest= INTERRUPTION. Thus
disenabling him from serving what would
otherwise be the unexpired portion of his term of
office had the protest been dismissed.
 The interruption need not be for a full term of 3
years or for the major part of the 3-year term; an
24
interruption FOR ANY LENGTH of time,
provided the cause is INVOLUNTARY, is
sufficient to break the continuity of service.
 Defeated in an election protest and said decision
becomes final after he had served the full term
for said office, then his loss in the election
protest X= INTERRUPTION since he has
managed to serve the term from start-finish.
Nullification of his proclamation came after the
expiration of the term.
ELECTION- 2ND MONDAY of May.
 Every 3 years, ALL the members of the HR and ½
of the senate are up for election, or re-election if still
allowed.
 Filling up of vacancies for the unexpired portion
through SPECIAL ELECTION is not necessary if
the vacany pertained to seat occupied by a PLR in
which case, the same would be filled up by the next
rep from the list of nominees in the order
submitted to the COMELEC who shall serve for
the Unex term. If the list is exhausted, submit
additional nominees.
SALARIES (ART 6)
Sec 10. “xx determined by law. No increase in said
compensation shall take effect until after the expiration
of the FULL TERM of ALL MEMBERS of the SENATE
and the HR approving such increase. “
Sec 20. “Records and book of account of the Congress
shall be preserved and be open to the public xx audited
by the COA which shall publish annually an itemized
list of amounts paid to and expenses incurred for each
member xx”
 No prohibition against receipt of allowances by
the members of the Congress.
 Law allowing retirement benefits immediately
available upon its approval has been
UNCONSTI since it is made available w/o
awaiting the expiration of the FULL TERM of
ALL MEMBERS of the SENATE and the HR
approving such increase. (Phil Cons Assoc v.
Gimenez)
PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITIES
Sec 11. “xx offenses punishable by X 6 yrs. of
imprisonment, be privileged from ARREST while the
Congress is in session. No member shall be questioned
nor held liable in any other place for ANY SPEECH or
DEBATE in the Congress or in any committee thereof.
 2 KINDS OF IMMUNITIES
a. Immunity from arrest ensure representation of the
constituents of the mem of the Cong by preventing
attempts to keep him from attending its sessions.
b. Privilege of Speech and Debate To express views
bearing upon public interest w/o fear of
accountability outside the halls of the legislature for
his inability to support his statements with the usual
evidence required in court. “On matters to be
divulged for the public good”
I- PRIVILEGE FROM ARREST
“Session” does not refer to the day-to-day meetings
of the legislature but to the ENTIRE PERIOD.
(INITIAL CONVENING - FINAL ADJOURNMENT.)
II- PRIVILEGE FROM SPEECH & DEBATE
1. Remarks must be made while the legislature is in
congress; and
2. They must be made in connection with the
discharge of official duties. (Coffin v. Coffin)
a. Jimenez v. Cabangbang “Congress was in recess
and in his private capacity”
 NOT ABSOLUTE. The rule provides that the
legislator may not be questioned “in any other
place”, which means that he may be called to
account for his remarks by his own colleagues in the
Cong itself and, when warranted, punished for
“disorderly behavior”.
a. Pobre v. Defensor-Santiago (2009)
Parliamentary Immunity must not be allowed to be
used as a vehicle to ridicule, demean, and destroy
the reputation of the Court xx nor as armor for
personal wrath and disgust. It is not an individual
privilege accorded to individual members of the
Cong for their personal benefit, but rather for the
people and the institution that represents them.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Sec 12. All members of the Senate and the HR shall,
upon assumption of office, make FULL DISCLOSURE
of their financial and business interests. They shall
notify the house of a potential conflict of interest that
may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of
which THEY ARE AUTHORS.
25
 Prevent their potential for self-aggrandizement
and from using their official positions for
ulterior purposes.
INCOMPATIBLE OR FORBIDDEN OFFICES
Sec 13. xx may hold ANY OTHER OFFICE xx without
forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any
office which may have been created or the emoluments
thereof increased during the term for which he was
elected.
Incompatible offices prevent him from owing loyalty
to another branch of gov’t, to the detriment of the
independence of the legislature and the doctrine of SP.
 PROHIBITION IS NOT ABSOLUTE. What
is not allowed in the simultaneous holding. Any
legislator may hold another office provided he
forfeits his position in the Congress. Forfeiture
of the seat or cessation of his tenure, shall be
automatic upon the holding of the incompatible
office. No resolution is necessary to declare his
position vacant.
a.. Term time during w/c an officer may claim
to hold the office as a matter of right.
b. Tenure period during which the incumbent
actually holds the office.
 NOT EVERY OTHER OFFICE is to be
regarded as incompatible w/ the legislative
position, (Ex. Membership in the Electoral
Tribunals.) or if it can be shown that the 2 nd
office is an EXTENSION OF THE
LEGISLATIVE POSITION/ in aid of legislative
duties. (ex officio mem in the UP Board of
Regents, Treaty Negotiators)
Forbidden Office Legislator cannot be appointed to
any office which may have been created or the
emoluments thereof increased during the term for which
he was elected.
 Prevent trafficking in public office. Future security
at the expense of the public service.
 X APPLY to Elective positions which are filled by
the voters themselves.
 The appointment of the mem of the Cong to the
forbidden office is not allowed only DURING
THE TERM for which he was elected, when such
office was created or emoluments were increased.
After such term, and even if the legislator is re-
elected, the DQ no longer applies.

INHIBITIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS
Sec 14. xx NO xx may personally appear as counsel
before any court or before the Electoral Tribunals or
QJ and other Admin Bodies. Neither shall he, directly
or indirectly, be interested financially** in any
contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege
granted by the Gov’t/any other pol subd/ instrumentality
thereof, including any GOCC, or its subsidiary,
DURING HIS TERM OF OFFICE. He shall not
intervene in any matter before any office of the Gov’t for
his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to
act on account of his office”
 Appearance of the legislator is now barred
before ALL COURTS OF JUSTICE.
 Prevent legislator from exerting undue influence
upon the body where he is appearing.
(Lawyer- legislator may still engage in the
practice, thru some other member of his law
office.)
**Not EVERY CONTRACT IS BARRED. Only those
contracts w/c legislators expects to derive some PROFIT
at the expense of the gov’t.
SESSIONS
Sec 15. “xx convene once every year on the 4th Monday
of July for its regular session, unless a different date is
fixed by law, and shall continue for such number of days
as it may determine until 30 days before the opening of
its next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays
and Legal Holidays. The president may call a special
session at any time.”
- A mandatory recess is prescribed for the 30-day
period (minimum no. may be extended by the Cong
in its discretion) before the opening of the next
regular session, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and
Legal Holidays.
Calling of Special Session by the Pre is NOT
NECESSARY:
a. Cong meets to canvass the presidential elections
b. Pres and VP are both vacated
c. Impeachment Pro particularly when the Pres is the
respondent himself.
a. Araneta v. Dinglasan. SC distinguished Regular and
Special Sessions.
1. Special Cong may consider “general
legislation or only such subject as the Pres may
designate”
26
2. Regular Power of Cong is not circumscribed
except by limitations imposed by organic law.
OFFICERS
Sec 16 (1) “xx Senate shall elect its President and the
HR its Speaker, by a MAJORITY OF VOTE of all its
respective members. Each house shall choose such other
officers as it may deem necessary”
 Pres and Speaker do not have a fixed term and
may be replaced at any time at the pleasure of a
majority vote of all the members of their
respective chambers.
 Other officers usually chosen:
1. Pres pro tempore
2. Speaker pro tempore
3. Majority and Minority floor leaders
4. Chairmen of the various standing and
special committes
5. Secretary and sergeant @ arms* (non-
members of the legislative)
QUORUM
“x x MAJORITY of EACH house x x to do business,
BUT a SMALL NUMBER may adjourn from day to
day and may compel the attendance of absent members
in such manner and under such penalties, as such house
may provide x x
Quorum no. sufficient to transact business which may
be less than the majority of the membership of the
membership. (Majority of Each House)
a. (Avelino v. Cuenco)
 (Petitioner) Senate President adjourned the session
moto propio and walked out, leaving 12 other
members who continued meeting and replaced him
with respondent as Acting Pres. Petitioner filed quo
warranto against responding contending that he had
not been validly elected because 12 mem does not
constitute a majority (quorum of 24 senators).
SC: “12 members were sufficient, being a MAJORITY
OF 23, not 24. The reason was that 1 senator was then in
the US and therefore outside the coercive jurisdiction of
the smaller number of members who could “adjourn
from day to day and may compel the attendance of
absent members in such manner and under such
penalties, as the Senate may provide”.
b. (Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the PH,
2011) SC nullified a law which requires 2/3 vote of
all members of the Cong for imposing more than
what the Consti requires. It gives the law the
character of being “IRREPLACEABLE”. In effect,
it significantly constrict the future legislators’ room
for action and flexibility.
DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS (ART 6, 3)
“x x Concurrence of 2/3 of ALL its MEMBERS,
suspend, or expel a Member. A penalty of suspension,
when imposed, shall X exceed 60 days”
-Unless such rules violated fundamental or individual
rights, the exclusive discretion of each house to
formulate and interpret may not be judicially
reversed. (Unless there is non-compliance with
procedural matters= JUSTICIABLE)
-What constitutes “disorderly behavior” is the
prerogative of the Cong and cannot as a rule be
judicially reviewed.
JOURNALS
“Each house shall keep a Journal of its proceedings,
and from time to time publish the same, excepting such
part= National Security and the yeas and nays on any
question shall, at the request of 1/5 of the Members
present, be entered in the Journal.
Each house shall also keep a record of its proceedings.
“ 2. Recording of the objections of the Pres when he
Journals Record of what is done and past in a
legislative assembly.
a. Authenticating the proceedings
b. Interpretation of laws through a study of the debated
held thereon
c. Informing the public of the conduct of their
legislators.
- Publication of journals is in line with the right to
information on matters of public concern.
a. (US v. Pons) SC refused to go beyond the recital in
the legislative journals, which it held to be
conclusive on the Courts. To do otherwise, it would
violate both the letter and spirit of the organic laws
by which the PH gov’t was brought into existence,
to interfere w/ the legitimate power and functions of
the legislative.
b. VAT Case. (Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance)
27
“Enrolled copy of a bill is conclusive not only of its
provisions but also of its due enactment. It does not
persuade us to look behind the proceedings of a co-
equal branch of the gov’t.
c. Astorga v. Villegas. EB was discovered to have
included other provisions that had in fact been
rejected. Upon learning, both Senate P and Pres
withdrew their signatures from the EB. According
to petitioner, in case of conflict b/w enrolled bill
and journal= EB shall prevail.
X= SC. It had the authority to verify the real content
of the Approved Bill as reported in the Journal. The
reason was that there was actually no enrolled bill
tom speak of in view of withdrawal of signatures of
SP and P.
Enrolled Bill duly introduced, passed by both H,
signed by the proper officers and approved by the P.
Journal Resume or minutes of what transpired during
the session. Transcript of the proceeding during the
session.
d. League of Cities in the PH v. Comelec. Hearings
and deliberations during a previous Congress cannot
be used to interpret bills specified into law in the
next/ subsequent Congresses.
 The ff. are required by the Consti to be recorded
in the journal:
1. Votes w/ respect to the consideration of bills on 3 rd
reading.
vetoes a bill as well as the votes cast by the members
of each house in their reconsideration of a bill
vetoed by the Pres
3. Vote of each member of the HR regarding the
Articles of Incorporation proposed by its committee
that hears an impeachment complaint.
ADJOURNMENT
(5) “Neither House during the sessions of the Congress
shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for
more than 3 days, nor to any other place** than that in
which the 2 Houses shall be sitting.”
 There is need for constant contact and consultation
b/w the 2 bodies it is necessary that there be prior
agreement before either of them decides to adjourn for
MORE THAN 3 days.
**Refers not to the building but to the political unit
where the 2 houses may be sitting. Hence, if both houses
are sitting in the same building in the City of Manila,
either of them may sit in another building in the same
city w/o getting the consent of the other.
ELECTORAL TRIBUNALS ( 9: 3-6)
Sec 17. “S and HR shall each have an Electoral
Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests
relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of
their respective members. Each ET shall be composed
of 9 members, 3 of whom shall be Justices of SC to be
designated by the CJ, and the remaining six shall be the
members of the Senate or HR, who shall be chosen on
the basis of proportional representation from the
political parties/ orgs registered under the PLS
represented therein. The Senior Justice in the ET=
Chairman.”
 Favors multi-party system.
a. Tanada v. Cuenco. The right to nominate to the
legislative seats in the ET belonged to the majority
and minority parties in the chamber, not to the
chamber itself or to the majority party therein if the
minority did not make its own nomination.
a. Abbas v. Senate Electoral Tribunal. The proposed
mass DQ (reason: legislative members of the ET
were among the protestees in the subject protest
where petitioners were the protestants), if sanctioned
would leave the tribunal no althernative but to
abandon a duty that no other court/body can
perform, the performance of which is in the highest
interest as evidenced by its being expressly imposed
by the Consti.
- ET although predominantly legislative in
membership is regarded, in the discharge of their
duties, independent of the legislature, and also of
other departments.
- Decision rendered by the ET in the contests of
which they are the sole judge, are NOT
APPELABLE to the SC except in cases where
there is a clear showing of G-A-D.
 GAD must be established by a clear
showing of arbitrariness and improvidence.
b. Bondoc v. Pineda- As judges, the mem of the ET
must be NON-PARTISAN. Hence, disloyalty to
party and breach of party discipline are not valid
grounds for the expulsion of a mem of the Tribunal.
-Jurisdiction of an ET begins once a winning
candidate has been proclaimed, taken his oath,
and assumed office, for it is only after the
28
occurrence of these events that a candidate can
be considered as either member of S or HR.
 “The proclamation of a candidate following the
election DIVESTS COMELEC of Jurisdiction
over disputes relating to election, returns and
qualifications of the proclaimed winner-
candidate. – Remedy Electoral Protest
before the Electoral Tribunal.
c. Reyes v. COMELEC (2013)
Jurisdiction of HR begins only after the candidate is
considered a member of the HR.
To be considered a member: (Concurrence of all)
a. Valid Proclamation
b. Proper Oath Taken before the Speaker in
“open session”: the 4th Monday of July.
OBSERVATIONS:
1. Term of office commences only at noon of
June 30, it would seem that said oath cannot
be done prior to said date, as the terms of
their predecessors would, before said time
and date, have not yet expired.
2. How can the HR convene and validly hold an “open
session” when it would be only during said “open
session” that they can validly take their “proper
oaths?”
o How can the newly elected members
constitute themselves a quorum when,
upon the convening of the Congress,
they would not yer need to take their
oath, and it would only be after they
shall have been properly established a
quourum can a valid “open session”.
c. Assumption of Office
- At present, filing of election protests and petitions
for Quo warranto shall be filed within 15 days from
the proclamation of the winning candidates. Said 15
days would expire before noon of June 30.
Now what is controlling is the decision in Banat vs.
COMELEC.: Jurisdiction begins from proclamation.
THE COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS
-Limit the president’s appointing power.
Sec 18. x x COA consisting of the SP, as ex officio
Chariman, 12 senators and 12 members of the HR,
elected by each house on the basis of proportional
representation from the political parties and org
registered under the PLS represented therein. The
chairman of the Commission shall not vote, except in a
case of a tie. The Commission shall act on all
appointments submitted to it w/in 30 session days of the
Congress from their submission. The Commission shall
rule by majority vote of all the members. x x
- Ad interim appointments not acted upon at the time
of the adjournement of the Congress, even if the 30
days period has not yet expired= deemed by passed.
Sec 19. ET and COA shall be constituted w/in 30 days
after the S and HR shall have been organized with the
election of SP and Speaker. The COA shall meet only
while the Cong is in session, at the call of its chairman
or a majority of all its members. xx
- The rue that COA shall meet only while the Cong is
in session is the reason why ad interim appointments
are permitted. These appointments are made during
recess, subject to consideration later by the COA, for
confirmation or rejection.
- Ad interim appointments shall be effective only until
disapproval by COA or until the next adjournment
of the Cog, referring to the adjournment of the
regular or special session immediately following the
recess when said appointments were made.
- But where the Cong is in session, the President must
first clear his nominations with the COA, w/c is why
it must be constituted as soon as possible. Unless it
is organized, no appointment can be made by the
Pres in the meantime.
- In case of the ET, the reason is obvious. Considering
the rash of election contests already awaiting to be
filed later. This is why unlike the COA, ET are
supposed to continue functioning even during the
recess.
CHAPTER 9. POWERS OF THE CONGRESS
Classified: Legislative or Non-legislative.
 LEGISLATIVE POWERS includes the specific
powers of appropriation, taxation and
expropriation.
 NON-LEGISLATIVE canvass the presidential
elections POWERS, power to, declare the existence
of a state of war, to give concurrence to treaties
and amnesties, and to impeach.
 IMPLIED POWERS such as the power to punish
contempt in legislative investigations.
 INHERENT POWER to determine its rules of
proceedings and the discipline of its members.
29
I- LEGISLATIVE POWER in general
-Power of lawmaking, the framing and enactment
of laws. This is effected through the adoption of
a bill, once approved, become a statute.
Statute “the written will of the legislature, solemnly
expressed according to the forms necessary to constitute
it the law of the state”.
a. Assoc. of landowners in the Phil v. Sec of Agrarian
Reform. It has since been clarified that the
legislative power is “peculiarly within the province
of the legislature. Neither Martial Law nor a State of
E can justify the President’s exercise of LP by
issuing decrees”.
The power to make laws includes the power to alter and
repeal them.
a. Gonzales v. Hechanova : (EA vs. Statutes)
Pres Macapagal entered into 2 EA for the importation of
cereals w/o complying with a statutory requirement for
the prior obtention from thr NEC of a certification of a
shortage of cereal.
SC- “Statute should prevail. The executive may not
interfere in the performance of the LP of the legislative
except in the exercise of the veto power. He may not
defeat legislative enactments by indirectly repealing the
same through an EA providing for the performance of
the very act prohibited by such laws.”
b. Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Phil.
“Subsequent laws that do not change or revise any
provision in an earlier law, and which merely fill in
gaps or supplement said earlier law, cannot be
considered as amendments of the latter”
c. League of the Cities of the PH v. COMELEC
“Legislative body possesses PLENARY POWERS for
all purposes of civil gov’t. Any power, deemed to be
legislative by USAGE and TRADITION, is necessarily
possessed by Congress, unless Consti has lodged it
elsewhere. “
- Power to grant immunity from prosecution has been
acknowledged as essentially a Legislative
Prerogative. “Power of Cong to define crimes and to
provide for their punishment carries the power to
immunize certain persons from prosecution of
crimes with high political, social and economic
impact.
However, it cannot provide for terms which would go
beyond what the constitution provides.
1. IRREPEALABLE Laws- changed the voting
requirement for amendment to 2/3 of vote of the
members of the HR and Senate voting separately.
(Interferes with the plenary powers of the Congress)
2. Create a new term and appoint the occupant of the
position for the new term= Intrusion of the
appointment power of the Cong.
3. Cannot grant legislative franchise for the operation
of Pus w/c shall be exclusive in character and w/c
shall not be subject to amendments/alteration/repeal
when the common good so requires.
- Laws in general have NO RETRO
EFFECT,especially when it will result in an
impairment of a right unless the contrary is
provided. Statues can be given retroactive effect
when the law itself so expressly provides; in case
of remedial statutes; in case of curative statutes;
in case of laws interpreting others; and in case of
laws creating new rights.
PROCEDURE (Approval of Bills)
1. INTRODUCTION. 
- Bill is introduced by ANY MEMBER of the HR or
the S except for some measures that must originate
in the former chamber.
2. READING
a. First Reading- involves a reading of only a reading
of the NUMBER and TITLE of the measure and it
REFERRAL by the SP or the Speaker to the proper
committee for study.
 The bill may be “killed” in the committee or it may
be recommended for approval, w/ or w/o
amendments, sometimes after public hearings are
first held thereon. If there are other bills of the
same nature/purpose= consolidate into one bill
under common authorship OR AS A
COMMITTEE BILL.
Once reported out, the bill shall be calendared for 2 nd
reading
b. Second Reading- Bill is read in its ENTIRETY,
scrutinized, debated upon and amended when
desired. MOST IMPORTANT in the passage of a
bill.
- Once the Bill is approved on second reading is
printed in its final form and copies thereof are
distributed at 3 days before the 3rd reading.
30
c. Third Reading- members merely vote and explain
them if they are allowed by the rules. NO
FURTHER DEBATE is allowed.
- Once the bill passes 3rd reading, it is sent to the other
chamber where it will undergo the 3 readings.
- No amendment after 3rd reading.
 If there are differences b/w the versions
approved by the 2 chambers, a CONFERENCE
COMMITTEE representing both houses will
draft a compromise measure that, if RATIFIED
by the Senate and HR, will then be submitted to
the President for his consideration.
Conference Committee is allowed by law to include in
its report an entirely new provision that is not found
either in the House Bill or in the Senate Bill.
 “Amendment in the nature of a substitute”, so
long as such amendment is germane to the
subject of the bill before the committee. After
all, its report was not final but needed the
approval of both houses of Congress to become
valid as an act of the legislature department.
 Whatever changes may be agreed upon NEED
NOT UNDERGO another “ 3 readings” in the
Senate and the HR.
- The bill is enrolled when it is approved by the
CONGRESS, authenticated with the signatures of
the S, SP, Sec of each chamber, and approved by the
Pres.
ORIGIN OF THE BILLS (exclusive: HR but S may
propose / concur with amendments.
a. Appropriation Bill
b. Revenue Bill
c. Tariff Bill
d. Bill increasing Public Debt
e. Bill of Local Application
f. Private Bill
1. APPROPRIATION Release of funds from the
public treasury.
2. REVENUE Levies taxes and raises funds for the
gov’t.
3. TARIFF Specifies the rates or duties to be
imposed on imported articles.
4. B. INCREASING PD illustrated by one floating
bonds for public subscription redeemable after a
certain period.
5. B. local app purely local or municipal matters,
like a charter of a city
6. PRIVATE BILLS- A bill granting honorary
citizenship to a distinguished foreigner.
- The ff. are supposed to be initiated by the HR
because it is more numerous in membership and
therefore also more representative of the people.
Members are presumed to be more familiar with
the needs of the country in regard to the enactment
of the legislation involved.
- Senate is, however, allowed much leeway in the
exercise of its power to PROPOSE or CONCUR
with amendments to the bill initiated by the HR.
“amendment by substitution, which may entirely
replace the bill”
- So long as the initiative must come from the HR.
PROHIBITED MEASURES
- Owing to the nature of our gov’t, such as those
impairing the doctrine of SP or providing for the
appointment of elective officials.
- Specific Prohibitions in the Bill of Rights against the
enactment of ex post facto laws, bills of attainder, or
laws impairing the obligation of contracts.
Sec 31.”No law granting a title of royalty or nobility
shall be enacted. “
- Preserve the republican and democratic nature of our
society. “Privilege classes”. “Sovereignty resides in
the people as a whole w/o distinction as to birth or
lineage.
Sec 30. “No law shall be passed increasing the appellate
jurisdiction of the SC w/o its advice or concurrence.”
- Prevent further addition to the present tremendous
case load of the SC. However, such legislation may
be enacted provided SC itself is consulted and gives
its concurrence.
TITLE OF BILLS
“Every bill passed by Congress shall embrace only one
subject which shall expressed in the title thereof”
The purpose of this rule are:
a. Prevent hodgepodge or log-rolling legislation.
- “ Any act containing several subjects dealing
with unrelated matters representing diverse
31
interest, the main object of such combination
being to unite the members of the legislature
who favor any one of the subjects in support of
the whole act;
b. To prevent surprise or fraud upon legislature;
c. To fairly apprise the people, through such
publications of its proceedings as are usually made,
of the subjects of legislation that are being
considered in order that they may have the
opportunity of being heard thereon, by petition or
otherwise, if they should so desire.
The title need not be a complete catalogue of a bill.
1. “It is sufficient that it place the legislature and the
people on their guards as to the number of varied if
related subjects the measure embraces”.
2. Title expresses the general subject and all the
provisions are germane to the general subject.
3. BANAT v. COMELEC. “Title is comprehensive
enough to include subjects related to the general
purpose which the statute seeks to achieve. The title
of a law does not have to be an index of its contents
and will suffice if the matters embodied in the text
are relevant to each other and may be inferred from
the title.
4. COMELEC v. Cruz 2009. “To achieve
synchronization of the barangay and SK elections,
the reconciliation of the varying lengths of the terms
is necessary.
- In any case, a title must not be “ so uncertain that the
average person reading it would not be informed of
the purpose of the enactment or put on inquiry as to
its contents, or which is misleading”
FORMALITIES [Art 6, 26(2)]
(2) “No bill passed by either House become a law unless
it has passed 3 readings on separate days, and printed
copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to
its members 3 days before its passage, except when the
Pres certifies to the necessity of its immediate
enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency.
Upon the last reading, no amendment thereto shall be
allowed, and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately
thereafter, and the yeas and the nays entered in the
Journal.”
**The determination by the President as the existence of
a “public calamity” or “emergency” constitutes
essentially a political question.
**The bill calling for a special election “after the
vacancy in the offices of the Pres and VP” shall be
deemed certified.
APPROVAL OF BILLS (Art 6, Sec 27)
3 methods: (Sign, Overridden, Inaction)
a. President signs it
b. Pres vetoes it but the veto is overridden by 2/3 vote
of ALL members of EACH HOUSE.
c. Inaction by the Pres w/in 30 days after it shall have
been presented to him.
SIGNING Pres identifies himself w/ it and indicates
his approval of its purposes and provisions.
VETO upon any ground sufficient for him. (Unconsti,
Inefficacious, unwise). In every case, he should, in
returning the measure to the House of origin, indicate
his objections- “veto message” so that the same can be
studied by the mem for possible overriding of his veto.
- 2/3 of each house will be sufficient to invalidate the
veto and convert the bill into law.
- Cong may agree with the Pres objections and decide
to revise the measure as he suggests.
 PARTIAL VETO?
GR: Pres must approve or veto in toto.
Exception: Appropriation, Revenue, Tariff Bill. Any
particular item/s of which may be disapproved w/o
affecting the item/s to which he does not object.
INACTION Method employed whenever the pres,
while not convinced of the necessity or validity of the
measure, is nonetheless unwilling to disapprove it. (Pres
believe that its constitutionality rests not w/ him but w.
the judiciary: Bar Flunkers Bill).
- From this, in could be inferred that “law-making” is
a joint act of legislature and Executive. Assuming
that Legislative Veto is a valid Legislative Act with
the force of law, it cannot take effect w/o such
presentment even if approved by both chambers.
- Provision requiring that the IRR of a law be
subjected to approval of Cong is UNCONSTI for
violating doctrine of SP. – Implementation/
Enforcement of law is charged to the Executive
Branch.
a. MACALINTAL v. COMELEC.
CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT. “Power of
32
oversight of the Congress embraces all activities to
enhance its understanding of and influence over the
implementation of legislation it has enacted. It
concerns POST ENACTMENT MEASURES to
make sure that the admin agencies (executive)
perform their functions w/in the authority delegated
to them. “
LEGISLATIVE INQUIRIES
Sec 21. “S or HR or any of its respective committees
may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation* in
accordance with its duly published rules procedure*.
The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such
inquiries shall be respected”.
“Power of inquiry” granted not only to the S or HR,
but also to ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE
COMMITTEES.
- Implied from the express power of legislation.
- In fact a limitation to the conduct of legislative
inquiries.
- *In aid of legislation, whether it be under
consideration already or still to be drafted.
- *Rules of procedure must have been published in
advance for the information and protection of the
witnesses.
a. Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of
Public Officers and Investigations
 “It is incumbent upon the Senate to publish the
rules for its legislative inquiries in EACH
CONGRESS or otherwise make the published
rules clearly state that the same shall be
effective in subsequent Congress or until they
are amended or repealed to sufficiently put
public on notice”
RIGHTS W/C MAY BE INVOKED AGAINST THIS
POWER”
a. President’s Executive Privilege- but “only in
relation to certain types of information of a
sensitive character”. BUT this would not serve to
automatically exempt executive officials from the
duty to disclose information by the mere fact of their
being executive officials.
b. Fiscal autonomy and constitutional independence of
the Judiciary.
B.1. The “subjudice rule”- restricts comments and
disclosures pertaining to judicial proceedings to
avoid prejudicing the issue/ influencing the court or
obstructing the administration of justice.
c. Right to privacy and Self-incrimination. Limitation:
Pertains to his official function.
- The subject of legislative inquiry is a POLITICAL
QUESTION, and the mere filing of a criminal or
administrative complaint before a court/ QJB should
not automatically bar the conduct of legislative
investigation.
- Failure to attend a legitimate legislative
investigation= Legislative Contempt: Imprisonment.
How long?
Senate INDEFINITELY, so long as it does not
violate due process.
HR Until final adjournment of the body.
a. Arnault v. Nazareno- Petitioner was incarcerated
by the Senate until such time as he decided to
answer certain relevant questions.
- Questions that may be raised by the legislative need
- ]not be relevant to any PENDING legislation,
provided only that they are RELEVANT to the
subject matter of the investigation being
conducted. Such investigation may result in the
submission of proposed legislation based upon the
findings of the investigating committee.
APPEARANCE OF DEPARTMENT HEADS
Sec. 22. “The heads of departments may upon their (1)
own initiative, with the consent of the President, or
upon the (2) request of either house, as the rules of
each House shall provide, appear before and be heard
by such House on any matter pertaining to their
departments. Written questions shall be submitted to the
SP or Speaker at least 3 days before their scheduled
appearance. Interpellations shall not be limited to
written questions, but may cover matter related thereto.
When the security of the State or public interest so
requires and the Pres so states in writing, the
appearance shall be conducted in executive session. “
 Enable the Congress to obtain information from the
dept secretaries on the manner they are
implementing the laws it has enacted and also on
matters related to pending or prospective legislation,
usually recommended by the administration itself.
“Sec 21 and 22, although closely related should not be
considered as pertaining to the SAME POWER. Sec 21
relates to the power to conduct inquiries in AID OF
LEGISLATION, the aim of which is to elicit
33
information that may be used for legislation, while
Sec 22 pertains to the power to conduct a question hour,
the objectives of which is to obtain information in
pursuit of Congress’ oversight function.
OBJECTIVES ARE DIFFERENT.
- In sec 22, the Congress merely seeks to be informed
on how DH are implementing the statutes which it
has issued, its right to information is not as
imperative as that of the pres to whom, such DH as
matter of duty must give report. It is in keeping with
the doctrine of SP since it merely REQUEST
their appearance.
- In sec 21, if the Congress request their appearance to
make inquiries in AID OF LEGISLATION, the
appearance is mandatory.
THE POWER OF APPROPRIATION (Art 6, sec 29)
“No law shall be paid out of the treasury except in
pursuance of an appropriation made by law”
a. Nazareth v. Villar. DOST released funds despite its
absence in the GAA. Upon its receipt of notice of
disaalowance from the COA, it obtained authority
from the Office of the Pres to use said agency’s
savings to cover the said amount and used the same
for purposes of requesting the COA to lift the notice
of disallowance.
SC- “Art 6, Sec 29 requires that the GAA be
purposeful, deliberate and precise in its provisions
and stipulations. “x x Any Fund must be proposed by
the officials/agency for submission to and
consideration by the Cong x x ”
Appropriation(measure) a statute the primary and
specific purpose of which is to authorize the release of
public funds from the treasury. (ex GAA)
X= Law creating an office and providing fund thereof.
Main purpose is the creation of the office and release of
fund is merely incidental.
a. General passed annually and is intended to
provide for the financial operation of the entire
gov’t during one FY.
b. Special specific purpose. Ex. Creation of a fund
for the relief of typhoon victims.
A. IMPLIED LIMITATIONS:
1. Public purpose. Main purpose and not merely
incidental.
2. Sum authorized to be released must be
DETERMINATE/ Least determinable.
B. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS:
1. Bill exclusive to HR.
2. Art 6, Sec 25. “Discretionary funds appropriated
for particular official shall be disbursed only for (1)
public purpose to be supported by appropriate
vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be
prescribed by law”
3. Art 6, Sec 25.(4). “A special appropriation bill must
(1) specify the purpose (2) supported by funds
actually available and certified by the National
Treasurer, to be raised by a corresponding revenue
proposal included therein.”
4. In re GAA: “ The Cong may not increase the
appropriations recommended by the Pres for the
operation of the gov’t as specified in the budget”
- Pres knows more about the needed appropriation
than the legislature
- No prohibition to REDUCE. Except: JUDICIARY
- The budget is only a proposal. Used as a basis for
the enactment of the GA law, which is the measure
that authorize release of public funds from the
treasury.
5. Art 6, Sec 29 (2). “ No provision/ enactment shall
be embraced in the GA Bill unless it relates
specifically to some particular appropriation therein.
Any such provision/ enactment shall be limited in its
operation to the appropriation to which it relates”.
- Prevent “riders” or irrelevant provisions that are
included in the GA Bill to ensure approval.
What if rider is included in an Ordinary Bill? The
appropriate provision to be invoked is Art 6, Sec 26 (1)-
2“Every bill must embrace only one subject to be
expressed in the title”
6. “No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer
appropriations; however, the
(EXCLUSIVE )President, SP, Speaker, CJ and
Heads of ConCom may, by law, be authorized to
augment any item in the GAL for their respective
offices from savings in other items of their
respective appropriations.”
 However, transfers of savings in one department
from one item to another in the GAA may be
allowed in the interest of expediency and efficiency.
No violation of DSP since the transfer is made w/in
a department and not from one dep’t to another.
34
a. Nazareth v. Villar “Such power could well be
extended to his Cabinet Secretaries as ALTER
EGOS under the doctrine of QUALIFIED
POLITICAL AGENCY. “Official acts of a Dept
Secretary are deemed acts of the Pres unless
disapproved or reprobated by the latter. “
 CONGRESS: “The individual members of
Congress may only determine the necessity of
the realignment of savings in the allotments for
their operating expenses because they are in the
best position to know whether there are savings
available in some items and whether there are
deficiencies in other items of their operating
expenses that need augmentation. However, it is
the SP and the Speaker who shall approve the
realignment.”
a. Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary
for Legal Affairs Investigative and Adjudication
Division
“Placed upon the President is the power to recommend
the budget necessary for the operation of the gov’t. The
express recognition of the GAA of the Pres authority to
“direct changes in the organizational units or key points
in any dep or agency” often includes “the power of the
president to REORGANIZE THE EXECUTIVE
OFFICES/AGENCIES under him, which is even to
the extent of MODIFYING AND REALIGNING
APPROPRIATIONS for that purpose.
“He is likewise authorize to AUGMENT any item in the
GAL using the savings in other items of the
appropriation for his office. He is allowed to transfer
any fund appropriated for the diff departments of the
Executive w/c is included in the GAA, to any
program/project of any dept, bureau included in the
GAA or approved after its enactment.”
7. Appropriation of public funds for SECTARIAN
PURPOSES. Art 6, Sec 29 (2)
“ x x except if such priest, preacher, minister or
dignitary is assigned to the AF, penal institution or gov’t
orphanages or leprosarium x x “ – serve the gov’t in a
non- ecclesiastical capacity.
Read in con: Religious freedom and Doctrine of SP.
 Neutrality of the state in ecclesiastical matters.
 Prohibition: Appropriation is intended purposely
to benefit religious insti.
 Does not inhibit the use of public property for
religious purposes when the religious character
of such is merely incidental to a temporary use
 w/c is available indiscriminately to the public in
general.
8. AUTOMATIC RE-APPROPRIATION
“ xx If, by the end of the FY, Cong shall have failed to
pass the GA Bill for the ensuing FY the GAL for the
preceding year shall be deemed RE-ENACTED and
shall remain in force and effect until the GA Bill is
Passed by the Cong. xx
9. SPECIAL FUNDS Art 6, Sec 29 (3)
“All money collected on any tax levied for a special
purpose shall be treated as a SF and paid out for
such pupose only. If the purpose for w/c the SF was
created has been fulfilled or abandoned, the
BALANCE, if any, shall be TRANSFERRED to the
general funds of the Gov’t- for general appropriation
in the discretion of the legislature”
THE POWER OF TAXATION
- Inherent power and generally vested in the
legislature subject to the ff. limitations:
1. Uniform and Equitable. Progressive System of
Taxation. Public Purpose.
2. “Charitable Institutions, churches, parsonages, or
convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit
cemeteries, and ALL LANDS A-D-E used for R-E-
C shall be exempt from taxation.  Only REAL
ESTATE TAXES or ad valorem taxes imposed on
the PROPERTY ITSELF!
- Building permit fees are not charges on
property, hence they are not impositions from
which petitioner is exempt.
- Donation to a parish priest for the construction
of a church is subject to DONEE’s tax. The tax
imposed is an excise tax, a tax levied not upon
the church itself but upon the parish priest for
the exercise by him of the privilege of receiving
the donation.
3. “No law granting any tax exemption shall be
passed w/o the concurrence of a MAJORITY OF
ALL MEMBERS OF THE CONGRESS. “
- Absolute majority of the ENTIRE Congress. Tax
exemption represents a withholding of the power to
tax and consequent loss of revenue to the gov’t.
THE POWER OF CONCURRENCE
- The constitution requires the concurrence of the
Cong to an AMNESTY and to a TREATY.
35
 Ex. Art 7, Sec 19 which authorizes the president
to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a
majority of all members of the congress. (Not
membership of each house, okay?)
 Art 7, Sec 21 “No treaty or IA shall be valid and
effective unless concurred in by at least 2/3 of
ALL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE”.
THE WAR POWERS
Sec. 23. “Cong, by a vote of 2/3 of BOTH HOUSES in
joint session assembled, voting separately, and shall
have the sole power to declare the EXISTENCE of a
state of war.”
- Existence only and not declaration of war.
- This provision suggests a war already begun or
provoked by the enemy and the existence of w/c we
are only affirming. WE ARE NOT AGGRESSOR
but merely reacting to an AGGRESSION.
(Acknowledgment of a state of war)
- Although such declaration is the sole act of the
Cong, the Pres may so precipitate or actually begin
hostilities that the legislature will have no choice but
to baptize”
REFERENDUM and INITIATIVE
Sec 32. “The Congress shall, as early as possible,
provide for a system of initiative and referendum, and
the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can
directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject
any act or law or part thereof passed by Cong or local
legislative body after the registration of a petition
therefor signed at least 10% of the total # of registered
voters, of which every legislative district must be
represented by at least 3% of the registered voters
thereof”
 INITIATIVE power of the power to PROPOSE
bills and laws, and to ENACT or REJECT them at
polls, independent of the legislative assembly.
- Right to introduce a matter for legislation either to
the legislature or directly to the voters.
(RA 6735, sec 32)
“Power of the people to propose amendments to the
Constitution or to propose and enact legislation through
an election called for the purpose.
 REFERENDUM right RESERVED to the
people to ADOPT OR REJECT any act or measure
 which has been passed by a legislative body and
w/c in most cases would w/o action on the part of
the electors become a law.
- Method of submitting an important legislative
measure to a direct vote of the whole people.
(RA 6735, sec 32)
“Power of the electorate to approve or reject a legislation
through an election called for the purpose”
RA 6735
A. INITIATIVE
Provides for 3 systems of Initiative.
Initiative on the Constitution- Petition proposing
amendments to the Consti.
SANTIAGO v. COMELEC. SC found RA 6735
incomplete in so far as initiative on amendments to the
Consti is concerned.
1. Initiative on Statutes- petition proposing to enact a
national legislation
2. Initiative on Local legislation- Petition proposing to
enact a regional, provincial, city or municipal or
barangay law, a resolution or ordinance.
 Indirect Initiative Exercise of initiative by the
people through a PROPOSITION sent to the
CONGRESS or Local legislative body for action.
B. REFERENDUM
2 Classes:
a. Referendum on Statutes- Petition to approve or
reject an act or law or part thereof, passed by
Congress.
b. Referendum on Local law- Petition to approve or
reject an act or law or part thereof, passed a regional
assemblies and local legislative body.
HOW:
 At least 10% of the TOTAL # OF THE
REGISTERED VOTERS, of which every legislative
district is represented by at least 3% of the registered
voters thereof, shall SIGN A PETITION for the
purpose and register with the COMELEC.
 A referendum/initiative affecting AUTONOMOUS
REGION, province or City is deemed validly
initiated if the petition thereof is signed by at least
least 10% of the TOTAL # OF THE REGISTERED
VOTERS in the Province or City. of which every
legislative district is represented by at least 3% of
the registered voters therein; Provided however, that
36
if the province or city is composed only of one
legislative district, then at least each municipality in
a province or each barangay in a city should be
represented at least 3% of the registered voters
therein.
 A referendum/initiative on an ordinance passed in a
Municipality is deemed validly initiated if the
petition therefor is signed by at least least 10% of
the TOTAL # OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS in
the Municipality, of which every barangay is
represented by at least 3% of the registered voters
therein;
 A referendum/initiative on barangay reso/ ordinance
is deemed validly initiated if the petition therefor is
signed by at least 10% of the TOTAL # OF THE
REGISTERED VOTERS in the said barangay.
 Within a period of 30 days ff. receipt of the petition,
COMELEC shall, upon determining the sufficiency
of the petition, PUBLISH the same in Fil and Eng at
least twice in NP of G&LC and set the DATE OF
THE INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM which shall
not be earlier than 45 days or later than 90 days
from the determination of the COMELEC of the
sufficiency of the petition.
 The decision of the COMELEC on the findings of
sufficiency/ insufficiency of the petition is
APPEALABLE to the SC w/in 30 days from notice.
IF:
a. There is compliance: The proposition of the
enactment/ approval/ amendment or rejection of
NATIONAL LAW has been approved by a
MAJORITY of the votes cast by all registered
voters of the PH.
Effect:
1. For: Enactment/ approval/ amendment: The
NL proposed for shall become effective 15 days
ff completion of its publication in the OG or in
NP of GC.
2. For: Rejection- NL shall be deemed
REPEALED and the repeal shall become
effective ff. the completion of publication of
the proposition and the certification by the
Commission in the OG or NPGC.
b. Non-compliance NL remain in full force and
effect.
c. A National or Local initiative proposition approved
by a majority of the votes cast in an election called
 for the purpose shall become effective 15 days after
certification and proclamation by the Commission.
- Sec 10 prohibits petition embracing more than 1
subject from being submitted to the electorate and
provides that statutes involving emergency
measures, the enactment of w/c is specifically
vested in the Cong by the constitution cannot be
subject to referendum until 90 days after its
effectivity.
- Sec 11. Any duly accredited people’s organization
may file a petition for indirect initiative with the HR
and other legislative bodies. The procedure to be
followed on the initiative bill shall be the same as
the enactment of any legislative measure before the
HR EXCEPT THAT the said initiative shall have
PRECEDENCE over the pending legislative
measures on the committee.
 LOCAL INITIATIVES:
- Not less than 2K registered voters in case of
Autonomous regions, 1k in case of provinces
and cities, 100 in case of Muni and 50 in case of
barangays, may file a petition with the Regional
Assembly or local legislative body, proposing
the adoption enactment/ repeal/ amendment of
any law/ ordinance of reso.
- If no favorable action is made by local
legislative body w/in 30 days from its
presentation, the proponents through their
authorized rep may invoke their power of
initiative, giving notice thereof to the local
legislative body concerned.
- 2 or more propositions may be submitted in an
initiative.
- Proponents; AR: 120 days; P/C- 90 days; M-
60; B-30 days from notice to COLLECT the
required no. of signatures.
Compliance= Yes.COmelec shall set a date
for the initiative at w/c the proposition shall
be submitted to the registered voters in the
LGU concerned for their approval w/in 90
days from the date of certification by the
COMELEC in case of AR, P/C- 60 days; M-
45; B-30 days
- If proposition is approved= it shall take effect 15
days after the certification by the Commission as
if affirmative action thereon had been made by
37
the local legis body and the local executive
concerned. Failed= Proposition is defeated.
LIMITATIONS:
- The power of local initiative SHALL NOT BE
EXERCISED more than once a year! It shall
extend only to subjects which are w/in the legal
powers of the local legis bodies to enact.
- If at any time before the initiative is held, the LLB
shall adopt IN TOTO the proposition presented,
the initiative shall be cancelled.
- Any proposition/ ordinance or resolution
APPROVED through initiative/referendum shall not
be REPEALED/MODIFIED by the LLB w/in 6
mos from the date and may be
AMENDED/MODIFIED or REPEALED by the
LLB w/in 3 years thereafter by a vote of ¾ of all
its members; provided, however, that in case of
barangays, the period shall be one year.
CHAPTER 10. THE EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT
Art 7, Sec. 1. “The executive power shall be vested in
the Pres of the PH.”
EP power to enforce and administer the laws. In the
exercise of this power, the president assumes a plenitude
of authority and corresponding responsibility.
QUALIFICATIONS: (Art 7, sec 2)
“x x NBC, registered voter, able to R&W, at least 40
yrs. of age on the day of election, and a resident of the
PH for at least 10 years immediately preceding such
election.” Xx
- Exclusive and may not be reduced or increased by
the Congress. (Expressio Unius est exclusion
alterius)
1. NBC of the PH.
 Citizen of the PH from birth w/o having to
perform any act to acquire or perfect his PH
citizenship. He is distinguished from the
naturalized citizen, who acquires his PH
 citizenship after birth by any modes allowed
by law.
 RA 9225- Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition
Act of 2003.
- NBF citizens who have been, or intended to be
naturalized in a foreign country, shall upon
taking the oath of allegiance, be deemed to have
reacquired, or shall retain their PH Citizenship.
“Not to have lost their PH citizenship”.
- Unmarried child, below 18 yrs. of those who
reacquire PH Citizenship upon effectivity of this
Act shall likewise be deemed citizens of PH.
- For those running for public police - “make
personal and sworn renunciation of ANY AND
ALL FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP= Ceases to be a
dual citizen.
- Right to VOTE or be ELECTED/ APPOINTED to
any public office CANNOT be exercised by or
extended to those who are CANDIDATES for or
occupying any PUBLIC OFFICE in the country of
which they are naturalize or are in active service as
commissioned or non-commissioned officers in the
armed forces of the country of which they are
nationalized citizens.
- A NBC who either retains or reacquired his
aforesaid citizenship upon taking the second oath of
allegiance where he, this time, makes a personal
and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenship.
 Assailing one’s citizenship according to CA 473
may be done only BY THE STATE, through its
representation designated by the Statute.
- X PRIVATE PERSON
 Right to vote Resided PH (1yr) ***
 Place to vote (6mos)
***Exception: Section 2, ART V. “Absentee Voting for
qualified voters abroad”.
ELECTION AND PROCLAMATION: (Art 7, Sec 4)
- 2nd Monday of May, unless otherwise provided.
- Canvass of election returns and the proclamation
of winners shall be:
“x x Election Return (P and VP) duly certified by the
BOC, shall be transmitted to the CONGRESS, directed
to the SP. Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the
SP shall:
Not later than 30 days after election, open all the
certificates of canvass in the presence of the S & HR in
38
the joint public session, and the CONGRESS upon
determination of the authenticity and due execution
thereof, CANVASS THE VOTES.
Winner= Highest Votes; Tie= Chosen by the vote of a
majority of all members of BOTH HOUSES, voting
separately.
..If still a tie 
The SC, sitting en banc shall be the SOLE JUDGE of all
election contests relating to the election, returns and
qualifications of the P and VP, and may promulgate its
rules for the purpose. xx (Art 7, Sec 4)
 Congress cannot inquire into or decide questions of
alleged irregularities in the conduct of elections.
This is a ministerial function. As long as the ER are
duly certified and appear to be authentic.
Reason: These are matters appropriate for an
ELECTION PROTEST.
 No special session be called by the Pres. Canvass is
mandated by the Consti.
 In 2010, SC promulgated a rule establishing
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL.
This was challenged in MACALINTAL v. PET on
the ff. grounds:
a. Illegal and Unconsti for vio. of Art 7, Sec 4.
b. Vio. of Art 8,Sec 12, PET exercises QJ function and
therefore a violation of the above mentioned
provision. “x x Members of the SC and other courts
established by law shall not be designated to any
Agency performing QJ and Administrative
Functions”.
1. SC citing TECSON v. COMELEC, “It is an
innovation of the 1987 COnsti. “x x The
establishment of the PET simply constitutionalized
what was statutory before in the 1987 Consti. PET is
not a separate and distinct entity from the SC, albeit
it has functions peculiar only to the tribunal.
2. “The set up embodied in the Consti and statutes
characterizes the resolution of electoral contests as
essentially an exercise of judicial power. When SC
as PET, resolves a P/VP election contests, it
performs what is essentially a judicial power. The
power wielded by the PET is a derivative of the
plenary JP given to Courts of law. PET is an
independent BUT NOT separate from SC.
TERM
“x x term of 6 years which shall begin @ noon of June
30 next following the day of the election and shall not
be eligible for any RE-ELECTION. No person who has
succeeded as President and has served for more than 4
years shall not be qualified for election to the same
office AT ANY TIME.”
VICE PRESIDENT
 Same term of 6 years, and may be removed only
through impeachment process.
 Qualifications, same.
 Eligible for the position of member of the Cabinet
and when appointed as such does not need
confirmation by the COA.
 “No VP shall serve for more than 2 successive
terms.” [Sec 4.(2)] (Compared to Pres; VP is
eligible for re-election)
 “Whenever there is vacancy in the office of the VP
during the term for which he was elected, the Pres
shall nominate a VP from among the S and HR
who shall assume office upon confirmation by a
majority vote of all members of both Houses of
Congress, voting separately.“
PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION
a. Occurring BEFORE the Pres term (Sec 7)
b. Occurring AFTERWARDS (sec 8)
Sec 7.
“ x x If pres-elect fails to qualify, the VP-elect shall
ACT as Pres until the Pres-elect shall have qualified.
If a Pres shall NOT HAVE BEEN CHOSEN, the VP
shall ACT as Pres until a Pres shall have been chosen
and qualified.
If at the beginning of the term of the Pres, the pres-elect
shall have DIED or shall have become
PERMANENTLY DISABLED, the VP-elect shall
BECOME Pres.
Where NO Pres and VP shall have been chosen or
shall qualified, or where both shall DIED or
permanently disabled, the SP, or in case of his
disability the SHR shall ACT as Pres until a Pres or a
VP shall have become chosen and qualified. x x “
Sec 8.
“In case of DEATH, PD, REMOVAL from office, or
RESIGNATION of the P, the VP shall BECOME Pres
to serve the unexpired term. In case of DEATH, PD,
REMOVAL from office, or RESIGNATION of the P
and VP, SP or, in case of his INABILITY, the SHR
39
shall ACT as Pres until a Pres or a VP shall have
become chosen and qualified. x x “
Discussion Sec. 7:
 Cases contemplated:
a. Death/PD of the Pres-elect VP shall BECOME
Pres. 
b. Failure to elect P, as where the canvass of the
presidential elections has not yet been completed, or
where for one reason or another the presidential
election has NOT BEEN HELD.  VP shall ACT
as Pres. 
c. Failure of the P-elect to qualify, that is, to assume
office by taking the oath and entering into the
discharge of his duties.  VP shall ACT as Pres. 
Discussion Sec. 8: Vacancies occurring in the OP
DURING his incumbency and is limited to 4 specified
situations: (D- PD- Removal-Resignation) VP shall
BECOME Pres. 
Estrada v. GMA “ He denied he had resigned and
said had every intention to return after the disturbances
shall have ended but was being prevented from doing
so”
SC held: (Puno)“The resignation cannot be doubted. It
was confirmed by leaving Malacanang. The press
release was petitioner’s valedictory, his final act of
farewell.”
Sec 11.s Whenever the P transmits to the SP AND the
SHR his WRITTEN DECLARATION that he is
UNABLE to discharge the powers and duties of his
office, and until he transmits to them a written
declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties
shall be discharged by the VP as ACTING P.
Whenever a MAJORITY of all members of the
CABINET transmit to the the SP AND the SHR their
WRITTEN DECLARATION that P is UNABLE to
discharge the powers and duties of his office, VP:
ACTING P.
Thereafter, when the P transmits to the SP and SHR his
written declaration that no inability exists, he shall
reassume the power and duties of his office. Meanwhile,
should a MAJORITY OF CABINET mem transmit w/in
5 days to the SP and SHR their written declaration that
the P is UNABLE= Congress shall decide the issue. For
that purpose, the Cong shall convene if not in session,
within 40 hours.
  If the Congress by a vote of 2/3 vote of both
houses, voting separately, that the Pres is unable
to discharge the power and duties of his office,
VP shall act as P; otherwise, P shall continue
exercising the powers and duties of his office.
Sec 12. “ In case of SERIOUS ILLNESS of the P, the
public shall be informed of the state of his health x x”
OFFICE OF PRES AND VP ARE BOTH
VACATED:
Sec 10. The Congress shall, at 10’oclock in the
morning of the 3rd day after the vacancy, convene w/o
need of a call and within 7 days enact a law calling for
a SPECIAL ELECTION to elect a P and a VP to be
held not earlier than 45 days nor later than 60 days
from the time of such call.
The bill calling for such special election shall be deemed
certified under ART 6, Sec 26, par 2 and shall become a
law upon its approval on 3rd reading by Congress.
Appropriations for Special election shall be charged
against any current appropriations and shall be exempt
from the requirements of Art 6, Sec 35, par 4.
It cannot be postponed or suspended. NO SPECIAL
ELECTION shall be called if the vacancy occurs w/in
18 mos before the date of the next presidential election.
OATH OF OFFICE
 Marks his formal assumption of duties.
 Not a source of a substantive power but is merely
intended to deepen the sense of responsibility of the
P and ensure a more conscientious discharge of his
office. (But has been invoked to justify presidential
action)
PERQUISITES and INHIBITIONS
Sec 6. The P shall have an official residence. The
salaries of the P and VP shall be determined by law and
shall not be decreased during their tenure. No increase
in said compensation shall take effect until after the
expiration of the term of the incumbent during which
such increase was approved. They shall not receive
during their tenure any other emolument from the gov’t
or any other source.
40
 Increase/ Decrease- prevent legislature from
weakening their fortitude by appealing to their
avarice or corrupting their integrity by operating on
their necessities.
 Emoluments- refers to ANY COMPENSATION
received for services rendered or from possession of
an office. Any gain/profit which is PECUNIARY IN
CHARACTER.
 Pres cannot accept any employment elsewhere
during his incumbency, although in the case of the
VP, he may be appointed to the Cabinet. However,
VP cannot receive additional compensation in the
second capacity because of the ABSOLUTE
PROHIBITION.
ADDTL INHIBITIONS:
Sec 13. “x x P, VP,Mem of the Cabinet, and their
eputies and assistants shall not, unless otherwise
provided in the Consti, cannot hold any other
employment during their tenure. They shall not,
directly or indirectly practive any OTHER
PROFESSION, participate in any business, or be
financially interested in any contract with, or in any
franchise, or special privilege granted by the Gov’t or
any subd/ agency/ instru thereof, including GOCCs.
They shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the
conduct of their office.
The spouse or relatives by consanguinity/ affinity within
4th civil degree of the P shall not during his tenure be
appointed as Members of the Concom, or Office of the
Ombudsman, or Sec/UnderSec/Chairmen/Heads of
Bureau or offices, including GOCCs and their
subsidiaries.
 Inhibitions are in line with the principle that a public
office is a public trust.
 The prohibition against holding dual/multiple offices
must NOT, however, be construed as applying to
posts occupied by the EOs specified therein w/o
additional compensation in AN EX-OFFICIO
CAPACITY as provided by law and as required
by the primary functions of said official’s office.
Reason: These posts do NO COMPROMISE “any
other office” w/in the contemplation of the prohibition
but are properly an imposition of “additional duties and
functions on said official” .
Ex- officio “from office; virtue of office. Authority
derived from the official character merely, not expressly
conferred upon the individual character, BUT
MERELY ANNEXED TO THE OFFICIAL
POSITION.
Additional duties closely related to and must be
required by the official primary functions. Otherwise, it
would fall under the purview of “any other office”
prohibited by the Consti.
 The prohibition against dual or multiple offices
apply to all appointments or designations, whether
permanent or temporary. PREVENT
CONCENTRATION OF POWERS in the Executive
Dept officials.
 Only exceptions:
a. VP being appointed as member of the Cabinet; and
b. EOs specified therein w/o additional compensation
in AN EX-OFFICIO CAPACITY as provided by
law and as required by the primary functions of said
official’s office.
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
- Essential to his exercise of his powers as the CE,
consistent w/ the principle of separation of powers.
- Power of the gov’t (Pres and High executive branch
officers) to WITHHOLD INFORMATION from the
Congress, Courts, and the Public;
1. “Informer’s Privilege”  Privilege of the gov’t
NOT TO DISCLOSE the identity of person/s who
furnish information on vio of law to officers charged
with the enforcement of law;
- Covers not only High-Profile Cases
2. “Privilege accorded to presidential
communication” Without distinctions b/w those
which involve national security and w/c does not.
Rationale: Essential to protect the independence of
decision-making of those tasked to exercise
Presidential/ legislative and judicial power.
- Applies to the decision making of the pres,
rooted in the constitutional principle of SP and
the Pres unique constitutional role.
ELEMENTS:
1. The protected communication must relate to a “
QUINTESSENTIAL AND NON-DELEGABLE
PRES POWER” (ex. Power to enter in EAs)
2. Communication must be authored or solicited and
received by a close advisor of the Pres (ex. Cabinet
member, Pres himself)
41
3. PCP remains a qualified privilege that may be
overcome by a showing of adequate need (it
contains important evidence)
3. Deliberative Process Privilege covers documents
reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and
deliberations comprising part of a process by w/c
governmental decisions and policies are
formulated.
- Pres communication privilege applies to docs in
their ENTIRETY.
- Communicate candidly- enhance quality agency
decisions.
4. Diplomatic negotiations privilege Encourage a
frank exchange of exploratory ideas b/w the
negotiating parties by shielding such negotiations
from public view.
- Pres “sole organ of the nation in its external
relations, and its sole representative with foreign
nations”
 PRIVILEGE IS NOT ABSOLUTE. Executive
cannot, any more than other branches of the gov’t,
invoke a general confidentiality privilege to shield
its officials and employees from investigations.
(Judical/ Congressional Investigation conducted IN
AID OF legislation)
- That is why, when Cong exercises its power of
inquiry, the only way for Dept heads to
EXEMPT themselves therefrom is by a VALID
CLAIM of privilege. They are not exempt by
mere fact that they dept heads. ONLY THE
PRESIDENT may be exempted on whom
executive power is vested, hence, beyond the
reach of Congress except through the power of
impeachment. (Reason: Highest official of the
Executive branch and Co-equal branch)
[AKBAYAN V. AQUINO]
 SC stressed that EP is recognized only in relation to
certain types of information of a sensitive character.
 IMPLIED NATURE OF THE CLAIM OF
PRIVILEGE:
“Whenever an official fails to be present
invoking EO 464, such invocation must be
construed as a declaration to congress that the
Pres/ Head of office has determined that the
requested information is privilege.
 There is a violation because: “Once the head of
office determines that a certain information is
privilege, such determination is presumed to bear the
Pres authority and has the effect of prohibiting the
 official from appearing before the Cong, subject
only to the EXPRESS PRONOUNCEMENT of the
Pre that it is allowing the appearance of such
official. These therefore authorizes the pres to allow
claim of privilege BY MERE SILENCE.
“x x with respect to info the confidential nature
of which is CRUCIAL to the fulfillment of highly
executive responsibilities x x “
A. NERI v. Senate Committee (2009)
 For the claim to be properly invoked, there must be a
formal claim of privilege, lodged by the DH which
has control over the matter. It requires a “precise
and certain reason” for preserving their
confidentiality.
 At any rate, the Cong may not require the executive
to state the reasons for the claim with such
particularity as to compel disclosure of the
information which the privilege is meant to protect.
PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY
a. (Estrada v. Desierto)
b. Rodriguez v. Arroyo (2011)
- SC “President as C-O-C of the AFP, can be held
liable for affront against the petitioner’s rights to
life, liberty and security as long as substantial
evidence exist to show that he or she had exhibited
involvement in or can be imputed with knowledge of
the violations, or had failed to exercise necessary
investigations required under the rules, “and that”
“former President Arroyo cannot use the presidential
immunity from suit to shield herself from judicial
scrutiny that would assess wheteher, within the
context of amparo proceedings, she was responsible
or accountable for the abduction of Rodriguez. “
 Extends only in concurrence with the president’s
incumbency. (Civil/Criminal and there is no need to
provide for it in the Consti or law). It will be
degrade the dignity of the high office of the Pres, the
Head of State, if he can be dragged into court
litigations while serving as such. Unlike the
legislative and executive branch, only one
constitutes the executive branch, ONLY ONE
CONSTITUTES the Executive branch and anything
which impairs his usefulness necessarily impairs the
operation of the gov’t.
DAVID v. Arroyo xx this however does not mean that
the Pres is not accountable to anyone. Like any other
official, he remains accountable to the people but MAY
BE REMOVED from office ONLY THROUGH
IMPEACHMENT x x
42
CHAPTER 11. POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT
POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT
 Is every power relating to enforcement and
administration of laws to be regarded as belonging
to the Pres by virtue of his office?
Original view: Yes. The enumeration of specific
executive powers are considered as intended merely to
specify the PRINCIPAL articles implied in the definition
of power, LEAVING THE REST TO FLOW FROM
THE GENERAL GRANT of that power.
Reconsidered. Stricter Interpretation:
a. Marcos v. Manglapus. “Powers of the president
cannot be said to be limited only to the specific
powers enumerated in the consti. EP is more than
the sum of specific powers enumerated therein”
b. Phil. Coconut Producers Fed Inc. vs. Republic. x
x “Either pursuant to the RESIDUAL POWER of the
pres or BY FORCE of his enumerated powers that
has control over all matters pertaining to the
disposition og gov’t property including sequestered
assets x x
 The provision in the ADMIN CODE on the so
called “ Residual Powers” of the Pres declares
“UNLESS CONGRESS PROVIDES
OTHERWISE, the pres shal exercise such
OTHER POWERS and functions vested in the
Pres which are provided for under the laws and
which are not specifically enumerated above,
or which are not delegated by the Pres in
accordance with law.
c. Banda v. Ermita. Power of the president to
REORGANIZE the offices and agencies in the
executive dept in line with his constitutionally
granted power of control over executive offices and
by virtue of his previous delegation of the legislative
power to reorganize executive branches.
“Continuing Authority”
d. Authority to conduct peace negotiations with rebel
groups and to declare state of rebellion, are
ALTHOUGH NOT EXPLICITLY MENTIONED in
the Consti, springs in the main from her powers as
 chief executive and at the same time, draws strength
from her Commander-in-chief powers.
e. Issuing Decrees No authority. Within the
province of the legislature. Neither Martial law nor
state of emergency can justify such action.
 “ORDINANCE POWERS” YES.  and may
issue any of the following:
1. EOs rules of a GENERAL or PERMANENT
character in implementation or execution of
constitutional or statutory powers.
2. AOs relate to particular aspects of
governmental operations in pursuance of his duties
as administrative head.
3. MOs matter of administrative detail or of
subordinate or temporary interest w/c only concern
a particular officer/ office of the Gov’t.
4. MCs relating to internal administration, which
the Pres desires to bring to the attention of ALL
or SOME of the Depts/ Agencies, for information or
compliance.
5. Proclamations Fixing a date or declaring a
status or condition of public moment or interest,
upon the existence of which the operation of a
specific law or regulation is made to depend, and
which shall the force of an EO.
6. General or Special Orders Acts and commands of
the Pres in his capacity as Commander-in-chief of
the AFP.
SPECIFIC POWERS of the Pres:
1. APPOINTING POWER
Appointment SELECTION/ DESIGNATION, by the
authority vested with the power, of an individual who is
to exercise the functions of a given office.
How? ORAL or WRITTEN. Commission is the written
evidence of an appointment.
Sec 16. The pres shall nominate and, with the consent of
the COA, appoint the heads of the executive dept’s,
ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or
officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or
naval captain, and other officers whose appointments
are vested in him in this Constitution. He shall also
appoint all OTHER officers of the Gov’t whose
appointments are not otherwise provided for by law, and
those whom he may be authorized by law to appoint.
The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of
other officers lower in rank in the Pres alone, in the
courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies,
commissions, or boards.
43
The pres shall have the power to make appointments
DURING THE RECESS of the Cong, whether voluntary
or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective
only until disapproved by the COA or until the next
adjournment of the Cong. “
a. Permanent Appointments extended to those
persons possessing the requisite eligibility and are
thus protected by the Constitutional provision on
security of tenure.
b. Temporary Appointments given to persons w/o
such eligibility, are revocable at will and w/o the
necessity of just cause or a valid investigation.
- “Upon the understanding that the appointing power
has not yet decided on a permanent appointee”.
a. General v. Urro. Acting appointments may be
made even to offices with staggered terms.
GR: Pres includes the power to make temporary
appointments UNLESS (1) Specifically prohibited by
the Consti (2) acting appointment is repugnant to the
nature of the office involved. (Only limitation)
- Generally, the purpose for staggering the term of
office is to minimize the appointing authority’s
opportunity to appoint a majority of the members
of a collegial body. Also, to ensure the continuity of
the body and its policies.
- A staggered term of office, however, is not a
statutory prohibition, direct or indirect, against the
issuance of an acting or temporary. It does not
negate the authority to issue acting or temporary
appointments that Administrative Code Grants.
 DESIGNATION imposition of additional duties,
usually by law, on a person already in the public
service by virtue of an earlier appointment. (Similar:
Both temporary in nature)
- It does not entail payment of additional benefits
or grant upon the person so designated the right
to claim the salary attached to the office.
- The LEGAL BASIS of an employees’ right to
claim the salary attached thereto is a duly
issued and approved appointment to the
position and not a mere designation.
 Both the TEMP and DESI are NOT SUBJECT TO
confirmation by the COA. Such confirmation, if
given erroneously, will not make the incumbent a
permanent appointee.
 “The pres may temporarily designate an (1) officer
already in the gov’t service or (2) any other
 competent person to perform the functions of an
office in the executive branch. “
- Thus under # (2), the pres may even appoint in
an acting capacity a person not yet in the gov’t
service, as long as the pres deems that person
competent.
 The power to appoint is essentially executive in
nature and the legislative may not interfere with the
exercise of this executive power except in those
instances when the consti expressly allows it to
interfere. Its interference is limited to the power to
prescribe qualification to an appointive office.
Limitations on the executive power to appoint are
construed strictly against the legislature.
6 CATEGORIES OF OFFICIALS WHO ARE
SUBJECT TO THE APPOINTING POWER of the
Pres:
1. Heads of the Executive Depts;
2. Ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;
3. Officers of the AF from the rank of colonel or naval
captain;
4. Other officers whose appointments are vested in him
by the Consti;
5. All other officers of the gov’t whose appointments
are NOT PROVIDED for by law;
6. Those whom he may be authorized by law to
appoint.
 Appointment of the Ombudsman, Member of the SC
and lower courts, VP as member of the Cabibet,
President’s deputies, Commissioner of Customs= x
Confirmation form COA.
 1ST SENTENCE OF SEC. 16, ART 7 is an
EXCLUSIVE ENUMERATION.
 As to “ Officers lower in rank”, the Cong may allow
their appointments to be made by the pres alone, the
courts, and the heads of the departments/agencies.
- “Officers lower in rank” below the rank of or
subordinate to those in whom the power of
appointment is vested.
STEPS in the appointing process:
A. REGULAR APPOINTMENT:
1. Nomination By the President
2. Confirmation Prerogative of COA
3. Issuance of the commission By Pres
B. INTERIM APPOINTMENT:
- Appointment comes before the confirmation, which
is made by the Commission when it reconvenes
following the legislative recess.
44
- Nomination of the regular appointee is made and
approved during the session, when the COA is
authorized to meet.
- The ad interim appointment is made during the
recess and becomes effective then, subject to
confirmation or rejection later, during the next
legislative session.
DISTINCTION B/W REGULAR AND AD
INTERIM APPOINTMENT:
1. WHEN: REG- Legislative session; AD- Recess
2. REG- only after the nomination is confirmed by the
COA; AD- before confirmation
3. REG-once confirmed, continues until the end of the
term of the appointee; AD cease to be valid if
disapproved by the COA or upon the next
adjournment of the Congress.
- In the latter case, the appointment is deemed “by
passed” through the inaction of, and so
disapproved impliedly by, the COA.
A. MATIBAG v. BENIPAYO. “Ad interim
appointment is a permanent appointment because it
takes effect immediately and can no longer be
withdrawn by the pres once the appointee has
qualified into office. The fact that it is subject to
confirmation by the COA does not alter its
permanent character. However, when the ad interim
appointment lapses by inaction of the COA, as when
it fails or refuses to act on the same until the next
adjournment, it would not constitute a term of
office. The period from the time the ad interim
appointment is made to the time it lapses is neither
a fixed nor an expired term.
B. LUEGO v. CSC. Essentially discretionary power
subject only to the condition that the appointee
should possess the qualifications required by law.
- “All that the CSC may do is determine WON the
appointee possesses the qualifications and requisite
appropriate eligibility. If he does, appointment is
granted; If he does not, appointment is denied. “
C. Lacson v. Romero. An appointment is deemed
complete upon acceptance. Pending acceptance,
which is optional to the appointee, the appointment
may still be validly withdrawn.
- Appointment cannot be forced to a citizen except
pursuant to defense of state under Art 2.
D. De Castro v. JBC. Prohibited appointments under
Sec 15 do not cover appointments to the SC.
 - One of the reasons of Sec 15 is to eliminate
midnight appointments from being made by an
outgoing chief executive. It only covers
appointment made in the executive department
and excludes the judiciary. Their establishment
of the JBC and their subjecting the nomination
and screening of candidates for judicial position
to the unhurried and deliberate PROCESS of the
JBC ensured that NO MA may be done in the
judiciary.
- Process: It is mandatory for the JBC to submit
tot eh pres the list of nominees to fill a vacancy
in the SC in order to enable the Pres to appoint
one of them WITHIN 90 DAYS from the
occurrence of the vacancy. The JBC has no
discretion to submit the list to the Pres AFTER
the vacancy occurs, because that shortens the 90
period allowed by the Consti for the pres to
make the appointment.
 By virtue of Sec 16 “ Where there are offices which
have to be filled but the law does not provide the
process for filling them, the Consti recognizes the
power of the Pres to fill the office by appointment.
Any limitation on or qualification to the exercise of
the pres power to appoint should be strictly
construed and must be clearly stated in order to be
recognized. “
2. THE REMOVAL POWER
 From the express power of appointment is the
implied power of the president to remove.
However, it is not correct to say that all officials
appointed by him (pres) are also removable by
him since the consti prescribes certain methods
for the separation from the public service of
some officers.
Examples:
1. Members of the SC, Ombudsman, and ConCom
By impeachment.
**Deputy Ombudsman By Pres. Expressly
conferred upon him said power.
2. Judges of inferior courts By SC
3. Local Elected Officials By proper courts (LGC)
 In all other cases, where the power of removal is
lodged in the pres, the same may be exercises by
him ONLY for cause as may be provided by law
and in accordance with the prescribed administrative
procedure.
Exception:
45
- Members of the Cabinet or to executive officials
whose term of office is determined AT THE
PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.
 At any rate, a REMOVAL PRESUPPOSES
FORCIBLE AND PERMANENT SEPARATION
OF THE INCUMBENT FROM OFFICE
BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF HIS TERM.
3. CONTROL POWER.
“The executive shall have control of all the executive
departments, bureaus and offices. He shall ensure that
the laws be faithfully executed.”
As to decision-making:
- Power of an officer to alter/ modify/ nullify/ set
aside what a subordinate officer had done in the
performance of his duties and to substitute the
judgment of the former for that of the latter.
- Order the doing of an act by a subordinate/ undo
such act/ assume a power directly vested in him by
law. (USURPATION??) – “The pres shall have
control of all the executive dept…”
VS. SUPERVISION:
- Does not cover the authority of ordering the doing/
undoing of an act. It merely sees to it that the rules
are followed, but he himself cannot lay down such
rules or have the discretion to modify such rules.
 DOCTRINE OF QUALIFIED POLITICAL
AGENCY:
“Acts performed/ promulgated by the heads of dept
heads in the regular course of business, unless
disapproved or reprobated by the chief executive, are
PRESUMABLY the act of the chief executive them being
alter egos of the president. “
- Adopted out of practical necessity: Pres cannot
be expected to personally perform the
multifarious functions of the executive office.
Relate to: Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
remedy: “Further appeal from a decision of a cabinet
secretary may be taken to the Office of the president
before resorting to judicial action. “
- NOT ABSOLUTE. Recognized exception is when
there exists a special law that provides for a
different mode of appeal. Such “executive control”
may be limited by the Consti, by law, or by judicial
decisions.
- Doctrine is NOT APPLICABLE: To acts of CS
done in their capacity as ex officio members (BODs
 of GOCC) of a particular office not by appointment
of the Pres but by OPERATION OF LAW.
 Sec 17 is a self-executing provision. The pres
derives his power of control directly from the
consti and not from any implementing legislation.
 The power of control is exercisable by the president
over the ACTS of his subordinates and not
necessarily over the SUBORDINATE himself.
- The pres, through the secretary of justice can
order the provincial fiscal to reverse his actions.
DOJ secretary acting in the regular discharge of
his functions as an alter ego of the pres. As a
subordinate in this department (FOJ), PF is
bound to obey the Secretary’s directives, which
are presumably the acts of the pres of the PH.
 TAKE-CARE CLAUSE
- The power to take care that the laws be faithfully
executed makes the pres a dominant figure in the
admin of the gov’t.
- However, it is not for him to determine the
validity of a law since this is a question
exclusively addresses to the judiciary. Hence,
until and unless a law is declared unconsti, the
pres has a DUTY TO EXECUTE it regardless of
his doubts on its validity. A contrary opinion
would allow him not only to negate the will of
the legislature but also to encroach upon the
prerogatives of the judiciary.
- The pres power to conduct investigations to aid
him in ensuring the faithful execution of laws is
inherent in the pres power. It flows from the
faithful-execution clause of the Consti under Art
7 sec 17. As CE, he represents the gov’t as a
whole and sees to it that all laws are enforced by
the officials and employees of his dept.
4. THE MILITARY POWER
Art 7. Sec. 18. “x x The pres shall be the CIC of all
armed forces of the PH x x In case of invasion or
rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may,
for a period NOT EXCEEDING 60 DAYS, suspend the
privilege of the WHC or place the PH or ANY PART
thereof under MARTIAL LAW. Within 48 hours from
the proclamation of ML/ suspension of WHC, pres shall
submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress.
The Cong, VOTING JOINTLY, by a vote of at least a
46
majority of all its members in regular/ special session,
may revoke such proc/suspension, which revocation
shall NOT BE SET ASIDE BY THE PRES. Upon the
initiative of the pres, the Cong may extend such proc/sus
for a period to be determined by the Cong, if the
invasion/ rebellion shall persist and public safety
requires it.
The Cong, if not in session, shall w/in 24 hours ff.
proc/sus, convene in accordance with its rules w/o need
of a call.
The SC may REVIEW, in an appropriate proceeding
filed BY ANY CITIZEN, the sufficiency of the factual
basis of the proc/sus, and must promulgate its decision
w/in 30 days from its filing.
A state of ML does not suspend the operation of the
Consti, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts/
legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over
civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor
automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall APPLY
ONLY to persons judicially charged for rebellion or
offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion.
During the suspension, any person thus arrested or
detained shall be JUDICIALLY CHARGED within 3
days, otherwise he shall be released.
 Bolsters the principle “civilian authority is, at all
times, supreme over the military”
 By making the pres the CIC, it lessens the danger of
military take-over of the gov’t in vio of its
republican nature.
 Although pres in the CIC, he will be so ONLY if
there are armed forces to command. These forces
will be raised by the Cong in the exercise of its
general legislative power, “citizen to render personal
military or civil service.”
 Military power ENABLE THE PRES TO:
a. Command all the AFP
b. Suspend the PWHC
c. Declare ML
a. COMMAND THE AFP
 Organize Court martials- aid the pres in properly
commanding and enforcing discipline in the
armed forces. They are in fact simply
instrumentalities of the executive power
which may be convened by the pres
 independently of legislation. (X courts w/n the
PH judicial system)
- Hence, in the absence of any declaration of
war/ML, military tribunals CANNOT TRY and
exercise jurisdiction over civilians for civil
offenses committed by them w/c are properly
cognizable by the civil courts. JP exists only in
the courts, which have exclusive power to hear
and determine those matters which affect the
life/liberty/property of a citizen.
 The power to confirm a sentence of the Pres
includes the power to approve or disapprove the
entire or any part of the sentence given by the
court martial. (An exercise by the Pres of his
powers as CIC of all our armed forces)
1. IBP v. Zamora. Pres Estrada deployes the
Marines to join the PNP is visibility patrols
around metro manila for the purpose of crime
prevention. “This so called calling out power”
of the pres involves ordinary police action,
which would ordinarily not entitle him to invoke
a greater power when he wishes to act under a
lesser power.
2. David v. Arroyo. While the pres alone can
declare a STATE OF NATIONAL
EMERGENCY, however, w/o legislation, he
has no power to take over privately owned
public utility or business affected with public
interest.
- Military cannot be ordered to enforce custom
laws, laws governing family and property
relations. ONLY LAWS PERTINENT TO
ITS DUTY TO SUPPRESS LAWLESS
VIOLENCE.
 “CALLING OUT POWER” can only be
exercised by the PRES and NO ONE ELSE.
 DOCTRINE OF COMMAND
RESPONSIBILITY:
- Pres can be held responsible for the actions of his
subordinates if the ff. requisites are present:
a. The existence of a superior-subordinate
relationship b/w the accused as superior and
the perpetrator of the crime as his subordinate;
b. Superior knew or had reason to know that the
crime was about to be or had been committed;
c. Superior failed to take the necessary and
reasonable measures to prevent the criminal acts
or punish perpetrators thereof.
47
A. HABEAS CORPUS
- Suspension of the PWHC is subject to
limitations and may be revoked by the Cong or
the SC.
WHC a writ directed to the person detaining another,
commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at
a designated time and place, with the day and cause of
his caption and detention, to do, to submit to, and
receive whatever the court or judge awarding the writ
shall consider in his behalf.
“LIBERATION OF THOSE WHO MAY BE IN
PRISON W/O SUFFICIENT CAUSE”
- Suspension of the privilege DOES NOT SUSPEND
THE WRIT ITSELF, but only its privilege.
Meaning: When the court receives an application for the
writ, and it finds the petition in the proper form, it will
issue the writ as a matter of course. If the return to the
writ shows that the person in custody was
apprehended and detained in areas where the PWHC
has been suspended, the court will SUSPEND
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS in the action.
 SC has the power to annul the suspension if the
same is not based on either of the 2 grounds,
“invasion or rebellion, when public safety
requires it”.
3. MARTIAL LAW 
- In its strict sense: Law which has application when
the military arm DOES NOT SUPERSEDE civil
authorities but is called upon to aid the Pres in the
maintenance of law and order.
- NO CIVIL RIGHTS OF THE INDI IS
SUSPENDED. No new powers are given to the
executive; the relation of the citizen to their state is
unchanged.
LIMITATIONS ON THE MILITARY POWER:
1. He may call out armed forces only when it is
necessary to prevent or suppress LAWLESS
VIOLENCE, INVASION or REBELLION only.
2. Grounds for the SPWHC and proc of ML are now
limited only to REBELLION or INVASION, when
public safety requires it.
3. The duration shall NOT EXCEED 60 DAYS,
following which it shall AUTOMATICALLY BE
LIFTED.
4. Within 48 hours, Pres shall submit report personally
or in writing to the congress his action. If not in
session, cong shall convene with 24 hours ff. the
suspension/declaration.
5. The Cong may then, voting jointly, by a majority
vote, revoke his action.
6. The revocation may not be set aside by the Pres
7. By the same vote and in the same manner, upon the
initiative of the pres, the suspension/proc maybe
extended for a period to be determined by the Cong
if the invasion or rebellion and the public safety
requires it.
8. The action of the Pres and Cong shall be subject to
review by the SC which shall have the authority to
determine the sufficiency of the factual basis of such
action. THIS MATTER IS NO LONGER
CONSIDERED AS A POLITICAL QUESTION and
1. X = Impeachment.
maybe raised in an appropriate proceeding by any
citizen. SC shall decide w/in 30 days from filing.
“The constitutional validity of the pres proclamation of
ML or SPWHC is first a political question in the hands
of Cong before it becomes a justiciable one in the hands
of the Court” FORTUN v. ARROYO (2012). Also,
although the court may inquire to the factual basis of
such action (pres exercise of such power), it would
generally defer to her judgment on the matter. Unless
there is a showing of GAD, Court will accord respect to
the Pres judgement.
9. ML does not automatically suspend the PWHC or
the operation of the Consti. The civil courts and the
legislative bodies shall remain open. Military courts
and agencies are not conferred jurisdiction over
civilians where the civil courts are functioning.
10. The SPWHC shall apply ONLY TO PERSONS
FACING CHARGES OF REBELLION OR
INVASION.
11. Any person arrested for such offense must be
judicially charged within 3 days, otherwise he shall
be released.
5. THE PARDONING POWER (Sec 19)
“Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise
provided in this Consti, the Pres may grant reprieves,
commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and
forfeitures, AFTER conviction by final judgment.
48
He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the
concurrence of a MAJORITY OF ALL MEMBERS OF
CONG.
- Executive clemency.
- Exercise is discretionary in the Pres and may not
be controlled by the legislature or reversed by
the courts, save only when it contravenes the
limitations provided for by law.
Pardon An act of grace which exempts the individual
on whom it is bestowed from the punishment which the
law inflicts for the crime he has committed.
Commutation reduction or mitigation of the penalty.
(Death- LI)
Reprieve postponement of a sentence to a date certain,
or a stay of execution.
LIMITATIONS:
 X judicial or criminal prosecution and therefore
does not essentially come under the pardoning
power. However, a party CONVICTED in an
impeachment proc is subject to prosecution in an
ordinary criminal action- pardon? YES.
2. Viol. of any election law, rule or regu W/O the
favorable reco of the COMELEC.
3. X = LEGISLATIVE CONTEMPT- vio doctrine o
SP.
4. X = Civil contempt- this would involve the benefit
not of the State itself but of the private litigant
whose rights have been violated by the contemner.
5. X = for the purpose of absolving the pardonee of
civil liability, including judicial cost, since, again,
the interest that is remitted does not belong to the
State but to the private litigant.
6. After CONVICTION by final judgment
7. X restore offices forfeited
 KINDS OF PARDON:(absolute. Conditional.
Plenary. Partial)
a. ABSOLUTE. No strings attached.
- No option but to accept. In this case, AP is similar
to commutation which is also not subject to
acceptance.
b. CONDITIONAL. Convict is required to comply
with certain requirements.
- Offender has the right to reject it since he may feel
that the condition imposed is more onerous than the
penalty sought to be remitted.
- Condition must be so extensive with the penalty
remitted unless otherwise indicated.
- Violation of the condition before the expiration of
the remitted penalty, the pardon itself is deemed
invalidated and the padonee may either be
recommitted by the Pres or prosecuted under the
RPC in w/c case the penalty is PC, except when the
penalty remitted is higher than 6 years, in which
event he shall serve the unexpired portion of his
original sentence.
- The remedies are not mutually exclusive and may
be successively availed of by the pres.
c. PLENARY. Extinguishes all penalties imposed,
including accessory disabilities.
d. PARTIAL. Does not. 
 EFFECTS OF PARDON
- Restore not only the offender’s liberty but also his
civil and political rights. BUT X restore offices
forfeited. It cannot mask the acts constituting the
crime unless grounded on the person’s innocence, it
cannot bring back lost reputation.
 DISTINCTIONS
a. Parole release of the convict from
imprisonment but not restoration of his liberty.
Still in the custody of the law although not under
confinement.
b. Pardon pardonee’s sentence is condones
subject only to reinstatement in case of viol of
the condition attached to the pardon.
c. Parole executive in nature and presupposes
the prior service of part of sentence.
d. Probation Judicial and may be granted even
before actual service of sentence.
 AMNESTY. “May only be granted upon
concurrence of the majority of Cong.
 VERA v. PEOPLE. Amnesty requires previous
admission of guilt since a person would not need
the benefit of amnesty unless he were guilty of
the offense covered by the proclamation.
AMNESTY v. PARDON
a. A is usually addressed to crimes against the
sovereign, to political offenses; P- infractions of the
peace of the State.
b. A is usually to classes or even communities; P
usually addresses to an individual.
c. A, there may or may not be distinct acts or
acceptance, so that if other rights are dependent
upon it and are asserted, there is affirmative
49
evidence of acceptance; in P there must be distinct
acts of acceptance.
d. P does not require concurrence of cong; A does.
e. P is private act of the Pres w/c must be pleaded and
proved by the person pardoned because the courts
do not take judicial notice of it; A is a public act
of which the courts must take JN.
f. P looks forward and relieves the offender from the
consequences of an offense of which he has been
convicted; A looks backward and abolishes and puts
into oblivion the offense itself. “ As if he had
committed no offense”
6. BORROWING POWER
Sec 20. “The pres may contract or guarantee
foreign loans on behalf og the PH with prior
concurrence of the MB, and subject to such
limitation as may be provided by law. The MB shall,
w/in 30 days from the end of every quarter of the
CY, submit to Cong a complete report of its
decisions on applications for loans to be contracted
or guaranteed by the gov’t or GOCC which would
have the effect of increasing the foreign debt.
 The fact that this power is subject to the
concurrence of another entity does not make
such power less executive.
“Quintessential” the most perfect embodiment of
something, the concentrated essence of substance.
“Non deligable” cannot be delegated to another, or
even if delegated, the responsibility remains with the
obligor.
7. DIPLOMATIC POWER
- Enter into treaties and otherwise transact business of
foreign relations.
Sec 21. “No treaty or IA shall be valid and effective
unless concurred by at least 2/3 of ALL members of the
SENATE. (TREATY-MAKING POWER)
- X include executive agreements which can be
concluded w/o necessity of Senate concurrence.
- EA although a treaty within the meaning of that
word, is less formal and deals with a narrower range
of subjects. All that it requires to be effective is (1)
B/w States (2) Written (3) Governed by International
law.
 Under International law, there is no difference
b/w treaties and EA in terms of their binding
effect on the contracting states.
- “Treaties and IA have a limiting effect on the
otherwise encompassing and absolute nature of
sovereignty. – Everytime a state enters into an IA,
it sheds off part of its sovereignty. The constitution,
as drafted, did not envision a reclusive PH isolated
from the rest of the world. The usual underlying
consideration in this partial surrender may be the
greater benefits derived from a reciprocal
undertaking. “
PIMENTEL v. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
“The power to ratify treaty is vested in the Pres,
subject to the concurrence of the Senate”.
The role of the Senate is limited only to giving or
withholding its consent, or concurrence, to the
ratification. Hence, it is w/in the authority of the Pres
to refuse to submit a treaty to the Senate, or having
secured its concurrence, refuse to ratify it. Such
decision cannot be encroached by the Court via a writ of
mandamus.
- While sec 21 requires the concurrence of the senate,
such pertains only to the validity of the treaty, NOT
TO THE CONDUCT of negotiations attendant to its
conclusion.
8. BUDGETARY POWER
Sec 22. “Pres shall submit to the Cong w/in 30 days
form the opening of every regular session, as the
BASIS OF THE GAB, a budget of expenditures and
sources of financing, including receipts from existing
and proposed revenue measure.”
- Best position to determine the needs of the gov’t
and propose the corresponding appropriations
therefor on the basis of existing or expected
sources of revenue.
NOTE: Cong may not increase the appropriations
recommended by the Pres for the operation of the
Gov’t as specified in the budget.
9. INFORMING POWER
Sec 23. Pres shall address the Cong at the opening of
the regular session. He may also appear before it at
any other time.
10. OTHER POWERS
a. Call the Congress for special session
b. Approve or veto Bills
c. Consent to the deputization of gov’t personnel
by COMELEC
d. Discipline its deputies
50
e. By delegation, exercise emergency powers and
tariff powers
CHAPTER 12. THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY. To
maintain independence, the ff. safeguards have been
embodied in the consti.
1. SC is (the only) a constitutional body. It cannot be
abolished nor may its membership or manner of its
meetings be changed by mere legislation.
**All other courts statutory creation.
2. Member of SC may not be removed except by
impeachment.
3. SC may not be deprived of its minimum original and
appellate juris.
4. The appellate juris of SC may not be increased by
law w/o its advice and concurrence.
5. Appointees to the judiciary are now nominated by
the JBC and no longer subject to confirmation by the
COA.
6. SC now has administrative supervision over all
courts and their personnel
7. SC has exclusive power to discipline judges of LC.
8. Mem of SC and all LC have security of tenure, w/c
cannot be undermined by a law reorganizing the
judiciary.
9. X designated to any agency performing QJ or
Admin functions.
10. Salaries may not be reduced during their
continuance in office
11. Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy
12. SC may initiate rules of court
13. Only SC may order the temporary detail of judges
14. SC can appoint all officials and employees of the
judiciary.
 Judicial Power duty of the courts of justice to
settle actual controversies involving rights w/ are
legally demandable and enforceable, and to
determine won there has been GAD amounting to
lack or excess of juris on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the gov’t.*
(Art 8. Sec 1)” vested in one Supreme Court** and in
such lower courts as may be established by law.”
 *The 2nd part represents the broadening of judicial
power to enable the courts to review what was
before forbidden territory, to wit, the discretion of
the political depts. of the gov’t.
 - When the grant of power is qualified/
conditional, the issue of whether the prescribed
qualifications or conditions have been met or
the limitation respected is JUSTICIABLE- the
problem being one of VALIDITY/
LEGALITY, not its wisdom. (IBP v.
ZAMORA)
- Moreover, even if the question were political
in nature, it would still come w/in the court’s
power of review, “x x determine won there is
GAD of discretion amounting to L/E of J”
(Daza v. Singson)
- Also, independently of the determination of
GAD, judicial power may be exercised “when
there are serious allegations that a law has
infringed the Consti- It becomes not only a right
but a duty of the court to UPHOLD THE
SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTI.
 ** Legislature X created even temporary SC.
 JP includes the power of the courts to “alter, modify
or set aside their decisions before they become final
and unalterable.
 It covers as well as the continuing authority of the
SC to enforce its final decisions because the
execution of its decisions is but an integral part of its
adjudicative function. Accordingly, it may issue a
writ of continuing mandamus to ensure
compliance w/ its decision.
a. JURISDICTION
Sec 2. “The Congress shall have the power to define,
prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the various
courts but may not deprive the SC of its jurisdiction
over cases enumerated in Sec 5 hereof”.
- Authority by which the court take cognizance of and
decide cases, the legal right by which judges
exercise their authority.
b. APPOINTMENTS
Sec 9. Members of the SC and judges of lower courts
shall be appointed by the Pres from a list of at least 3
nominees prepared by the JBC for every vacancy. Such
appointments need no confirmation.
For the lower courts, the Pres shall issue the
appointments w/in 90 days from the submission of the
list.
- At least 3: Give pres the leeway in the exercise of
his discretion when he makes his appointment. If
nominee would only be one, the appointment
would be in effect made by the JBC, w/ the pres
51
performing only the mechanical act of formalizing
the commission.
c. QUALIFICATIONS- “Every member of the
judiciary be a person of proven competence,
integrity, probity, and independence”
Sec 7. (1) No person shall be appointed member of the
SC or any lower collegiate court unless he is a NBC of
PH. A mem of SC must be at least 40 years old, and
must have been for 15 years or more a judge of a lower
court or engaged in the practice of law in the PH.
- Qualifications SC mem EXCLUSIVE. May not
be increased or reduced by Cong through
ORDINARY LEGISLATION.
- But in the case of the judges in the LC, Cong is
EXPRESSLY authorized by par (2) to ADD
constitutional qualifications. **It should be noted
tha NBC is not required for courts lower than
collegiate courts.
d. JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL
- Takes the place of COA in the manner of
appointments.
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS:
a. Chief justice (RM: 4 yrs)
b. Sec of Justice (RM: 4 yrs)
c. Rep of the Congress (RM: 4 yrs)
d. Rep of IBP- 4 yrs (appointed)
e. Professor of law- 3 yrs (appointed)
f. Retired member of SC-2 yrs (appointed)
g. Rep of Private Sector- 1 yr (appointed)
h. Sec of SC- ex officio sec of JBC
**First regular members 4-3-2-1 staggered terms, to
be followed with new appointments who shall serve for
the full term of 4 years.
- No need for the confirmation of COA. One instance
where appointments made by the pres may not be
checked by COA.
e. FISCAL AUTONOMY
Sec 3. “The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.
Appropriations for the Judiciary may not be reduced by
the legislature below the amount appropriated for the
previous year and, after approval, shall be
automatically and regularly released”.
- Freedom from outside control.
- Entitles it to levy, assess and collect fees. Any law
which provides for an exemption (GOCCs/LGU)
froms aid fees would be violative of the court’s
fiscal autonomy.
- “sale to the retired justices of specifically
designated properties that they used during their
incumbency has been recognized both as a privilege
and benefit granted as a form of additional
retirement benefit by the Court to its officials and
employees in the exercise of its power of
administrative supervision” – Courts may not be
obstructed from their freedom to use/dispose of their
funds for purpose germane to judicial functions.
f. COMPOSITION OF SC (15 members)
- Enable the court to cope more effectively w its
mounting backlog cases.
- Meet: en banc OR in division (3-5-7 divisions);
fixed by the consti and may not be changed by
statute.
Sec 4. (1) “SC shall be composed of a CJ, and 14
Associate Justice.It may sit en banc or in its division of
3-5-7 members only. Any vacancy shall be filled within
90 days from the occurrence thereof. “
Query: What if the 90-day requirement conflicts with
the prohibition that the Pres cannot appoint w/in 2 mos
immediately following the next presidential election up
to the end of his term? (Sec 15, Art 7- Midnight A?)
De Castro v. JBC (2010). “Pres may provide for
appointments in the judiciary even within the prohibited
time under Sec 15”. This applies to all other
appointments in the judiciary”.
A. EN BANC cases
Sec 4. (2) “x x constitutionality of a treaty, IA or EA or
la, ... and all other cases which under the RC are
required to be heard en banc, including those involving
the constitutionality, application, or operation of PDs,
proclamations, orders, and other regulations, SHALL
BE DECIDED with the concurrence of a MAJORITY of
the members who actually took part in the deliberations
on the issues in the case and voted thereon”.
B. DIVISION cases
Sec 4. (3) “Cases heard by division shall be resolved w/
the concurrence of a MAJORITY of the members who
actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in
the case and voted thereon and in no case, w/o the
concurrence of at least 3 of such members. When the
52
required number is not obtained, the case shall be
decided en banc: Provided: That no doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the court in a decision
rendered en banc or in division may be modified or
reversed except by court sitting en banc.
- There are now 3 divisions of SC with 5 mem
each. 
G. JUDICIAL INQUIRY; Requisites. To invoke the
jurisdiction of the court. (Dumlao v. Comelec)
1. Actual Controversy
2. Question of constitutionality must be raised by the
proper party
3. The constitutional question must be raised at the
earliest opportunity; and
4. The decision of the constitutional question must be
necessary to the determination of the case itself;
a. ACTUAL CASE. – Involves a conflict of legal
rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims
susceptible of judicial resolution.
- Capable of being interpreted and enforced on the
basis of existing law and jurisprudence.
Controversy appropriate for judicial determination.
Touching the legal relations of parties having adverse
legal interest.
- It must be real and substantial admitting of
SPECIFIC RELIEF through a decree that is
conclusive in character, as distinguished from an
opinion advising what the law would be upon a
hypothetical state of facts.
1. Pimentel v/. Aguirre. “Even a singular vio of the
consti and/or the law is enough to awaken judicial
duty. “
2. Province of North Cotabato v Gov’t of the RP
Peace panel on ancestral domain. “ The allegation
that the law or act in question is not yet effective
does not negate ripeness.
3. Philconsa v Villareal. “Petition compelling SHR to
produce the books of account of that body, however
before it could be decided, the 1973 consti abolished
Congress. SC: moot and academic.
 “MOOT & ACADEMIC” principle is not a magic
formula that can automatically dissuade the courts in
resolving a case.
- Courts will discuss moot and academic cases if:
a. There is GRAVE VIO of the Consti
b. The exceptional character of the situation and
the paramount public interest is involved;
 c. The constitutional issue raised requires
formulation of controlling principles to
guide the bench, the bar, and the public;
d. Case is capable of repetition yet evading
review. (1 yr residency requirement of those
running in the P.O, Election offenses
notwithstanding proclamation of municipal
mayors , lawfulness of certain appointments,
despite the approval of CSC= to avoid
repetition.
1. (FUNA V. THE CHAIRMAN ON COA). Court
proceeded to resolve the petition challenging the
appointment of respondent despite his subsequent
resignation. [4 exceptions to the mootness rule are
present]
2. THE PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO V.
THE GOV’T OF THE RP PEACE PANEL ON
ANCESTRAL DOMAIN.(IN re: MOA-AD)
- “ The assertion that the MOA-AD is subject to
further legal enactments including possible
constitutional amendments more than ever provides
impetus for the court to formulate controlling principles
to guide the bench and the bar and the public, and in the
case the gov’t and its negotiating entity.
 Issues involving transcendental importance. (ex.
Construction and operation of international airports)
3. ATIENZA v. VILLAROSA.Court ruled on the
lawfulness of the Governors POs and termination of
casual employments despite the expiration of his
term. Reason: There is compelling reason for the -
Court to resolve the issues presented in order to
clarify the scope of the respective powers of Gov
and V-Gov under the LGC.
b. PROPER PARTY
- one who has sustained or is in immediate
danger of sustaining an injury as a result of the
act complained of. Otherwise, NO LEGAL
PERSONALITY to raise the constitutional
question.
1. PEOPLE V. VERA. “Gov’t of the PH was a
proper party to challenge the constitutionality of the
probation act because, more than any other, it was
the gov’t itself that should be concerned over the
validity of its own laws. “
2. Quo warranto proceeding Proper party is the
person claiming the position subject of the case. The
private person suing must show a clear right to the
contested office.
- TAX PAYER’S SUIT is now recognized.
53
GROUNDS:
(1) Illegal disbursement of PF (2) Tax measure is
unconstitutional (3) illegal purpose (4) there is
wastage of PF through the enforcement of an
invalid or unconsti law (5) loan contracts are
serviced or paid through a disbursement of PF.
 TP must show that (1) the act complained of
directly involves the illegal disbursement of PF
derived from taxation, hence in doing so a law is
violated or some irregularity is committed (2) he
will sustain direct injury from the act.
NOTE: SC retains discretion WON to allow a TP
suit. Being a mere procedural technicality, the
requirement of locus standi may be waived by the court
in the exercise of its discretion.
 Senators are proper parties in suits involving claims
that the official action complained of infringes their
prerogatives as such. (Prohibition of a plebiscite for
the ratification of a proposed consti amendment).
3. SENATE V. ERMITA (2006). Who: PDP Laban
questions the validity of EO 464. X LP
Requisites:
a. Public fund
b. Presence of a clear case of disregard of a
constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public
agency
c. Lack of any party with a MORE DIRECT AND
SPECIFIC INTEREST in raising the questions
being raised.
 X= “general interest” shared w/ the rest of the
citizenry. (IBP case questioning Pres estra order
deploying the Marine to combat criminality in metro
manila)
 Ordinary citizens may be considered as clothed with
locus standi when:
a. Proceeding involves a PUBLIC RIGHT/ Right
to information & Freedom of expression is
invoked;
b. Issues raised by them are of transcendental
importance w/c must be settled early.
- When the issue involves a public right, it is
sufficient that the petitioner is a citizen and has an
interest in the execution of laws.
c. EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY. x x such that if it is
not raised in the pleadings, it cannot be considered
 at trial, and, if not considered on trial, it cannot be
considered on appeal”.
EXCEPTIONS:
a. In crim cases, AT ANY TIME in the discretion
of the court;
b. In civil cases, at ANY STAGE, if it is necessary
to the determination of the case itself;
c. In every case, except where there is estoppel, at
ANY STAGE, if it involves the jurisdiction of the
court.
d. NECESSITY OF DECIDING THE
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION
 The reason why courts will as much as possible
avoid the decision of consti question: Doctrine of
SP w/c enjoins upon each dept a proper respect for
the acts of the other depts.
 “Every law has in its favor the presumption of
regularity. Unless declared invalid, the same is valid
and binding for all intents and purposes”. The theory
is that, as the joint act of the legislative and
executive authorities, a law is supposed to have been
carefully studies and determined to be constitutional
before it was finally enacted. Hence, as long as
there is some other basis that can be used for its
decision, the constitutionality will not be touched
and the case will be decided on some other grounds.
 For reasons of public policy, constitutionality cannot
be COLLATERALLY ATTACKED.
EFFECTS OF A DECLARATION OF NULLITY
a. Orthodox view. (Norton v. Shelby County)
- An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no
rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protection;
it creates no office, IT IS IN LEGAL
CONTEMPLATION, inoperative, as if it had not
been passed. All persons are bound by the
declaration of unconsti.
Exception to the general rule (orthodox view)
Basis: The actual existence of a statute prior to its
declaration of unconsti was an operative fact that might
have consequences w/c could not justly be ignored.
- This “doctrine of operative fact”, as an exception
to the GR, only applies as a matter of equity and
fair play. The past cannot always be erased by a new
judicial declaration. 
- The doctrine is applicable when a declaration of
unconsti will impose an undue burden on those who
have relied on the invalid law.
54
- It can never be invoked to validate an unconsti law.
The unconsti law remains unconsti, but its effects
prior to its declaration as such may be left
undisturbed as a matter if equity and fp.
- Also applies to Executive acts e.g EOs (since they
have the force and effect of a law) later on declared
invalid (Hacienda Luisita v. PARC)
b. Modern view. The court in passing upon the
question of constitutionality does not annul or
repeal the statute if it finds it in conflict with the
consti. It simply refuses to recognize it and
determine the rights of the parties just as if such
statute had no existence. The decision affects the
parties only and there is no judgment against the
statute. The parties to the suit are concluded by the
judgment, but no one else is bound.
PARTIAL UNCONSTITUTIONALITY.
Pursuant to the doctrine of SP, courts hesitate to declare
a law totally unconsti and, as long as possible, it will
salvage valid portions thereof in order to give effect to
the legislative will.
Requisites:
a. Legislature is willing to retain the valid portions
even if the rest if the statute is declared unconsti.
- May be expresses: Separability clause
b. Valid portions can stand independently as a
separate statute.
POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT
a. Original Jurisdiction
Sec 5. (1). “Exercise OJ over cases affecting
ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and
over petitions for certio, prohi, manda, quo, and habeas
corpus”
 Under IL, diplomats, and even consuls to a
lesser extent, are not subject to the jurisdiction
of the courts of the receiving state. In such
instances, the SC can and probably should take
cognizance of the litigation.
 Certio, prohi, manda are special civil actions.
The questions raised here are Q of Juris and
GAD. In quo, title of the respondent and habeas
corpus, a spec pro.
 Although jurisdiction in these matters are
conferred concurrently w/ CA and RTC, the
 nature and importance of the issues raised may
warrant direct resort to the SC.
However, SC maintained though that its
possession of OJ over these petitions does not
give the parties complete liberty or discretion to
file their petition in any of these courts. In the
absence of special reasons, they cannot disregard
the hierarchy of courts by seeking relief directly
from this court despite the fact that the same is
available in the lower tribunals in the exercise
of their original concurrent J.
 PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL COURTESY
based on the hierarchy of courts and applies
only to lower courts in instances where, even if
there is no writ of preliminary injunction or
tro issued by a higher court, it would be proper
for a lower court to suspend its proceedings for
practical and ethical considerations.
- Applies where there is “ a strong probability that
the issues before the HC would be rendered
moot and moribund as a result of the
continuation of the proceedings in the LC or
court of origin”
- This principle cannot be applied to the Pres, who
represents a co-equal branch of the gov’t.
 PRINCIPLE OF HIERARCHY OF
COURTS. Recourse must first be made to the
lower-ranked court exercising concurrent
jurisdiction with a higher court.
b. APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Art 5, Sec 2. x x review, revise, reverse on appeal or
certiorari.. final judgment/ order of LC or other QJB xx
1. All cases in w/c the constitutionality/ validity of any
T/ I/E agreement..
2. x x legality of any tax/ assessment/ penalty related
thereto.
3. x x jurisdiction of LC is in issue
4. x x when penalty is RP or higher
5. x x ONLY AN ERROR/ QUESTION OF LAW.
NOTE: Right to appeal is not embraced in the Due
process of law. As long as an hearing was conducted in
the LC, aggrieved party cannot demand the right to
appeal if the legislature sees to withhold it.
- Right to appeal is a STATUTORY RIGHT
entirely dependent upon the discretion or policy of
the lawmaker. (If the Cong allows it)
55
THIS RULE IS NOT ABSOLUTE! EXCEPTION:
APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF SC via appeal or
certiorari!!!
- Irreducible and may not be withdrawn by
Congress.
- “Provided that only PURE QUESTION OF
LAW arising from decision of LC or Judicial
Tribunals. (ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
ARE NOT INCLUDED!!!) . If mixed CA.
 IN CASE: Administrative Agencies:
A. Question of FACT entirely up to the legislature,
w/o it, appeal canot be taken as a matter of right.
B. Question of LAW INHERENT. Except: Admin
Agencies to SC (Cannot be, not included in this
Sec 2)
Ex. COURT MARTIAL.
NOTE!! LC has jurisdiction to decide constitutional
questions SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY SC.
Ex. RTC. Sandiganbayan (2012- Coconut Producers
vs. RP)
Question: CTA? NO. “X REGULAR COURT/ Lower
Court”
- “Constitutionality or validity of a law/ rule issued
by an AA in the performance of QLF (ex. Issued
RR), regular court have juris to pass upon the
same”
C. TEMPORARY ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES.
“ x x to other stations as public interest may require,
BUT SHALL IN NO CASE EXCEED 6 MOS w/o the
consent of the judge concerned x x “
D. Order a change of venue/ place of trial to avoid a
MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.
Exception to the rule in crim cases that “VENUE IS
JURISDICTIONAL”.
E. RULE MAKING POWER
“Promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of consti rights, pleading, practice, and
procedure in all courts, admission to the practice of
law x x”
Ex. AMPARO RULE. “In light of the prevalence of
extralegal killing and enforced disappearances”.
 LIMITATIONS:
1. Must be uniform for all courts of the same grade
2. Must NOT diminish, increase or modify
substantive rights.
Substantive created and defined by express enactment
as opposed to a mere remedy devised to enforce such
right or obtain redress therefor.
 RULE 108 of the RC authorizes correction only if
CLERICAL ERRORS and NOT MATTER
AFFECTING SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS (Status/
Citizenship*)-beyond the power. Rule 108 provides
only for the procedure or mechanism for the
procedure or mechanism for the proper enforcement
of the substantive law embodied in Art 412 of the
NCC and SO DOES NOT VIO the Consti.
*Pwd= As long as adverse proceeding are held.
 Rules of procedure may be modified at any time
and become effective at once, so long as the
changes does not affect vested rights. THERE IS
NO VESTED RIGHTS TO RULES OF
PROCEDURE, which is why it may be given retro
effect.
 Rules of procedure of SPECIAL COURTS and QJB
shall remain effective unless disapproved by SC.
F. APPOINTMENT OF COURT PERSONNEL
“Appoint ALL official and employees of the
JUDICIARY in accordance w/ the CS law. “
G. ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION OF
COURTS. “xx over all court and personnel
thereof”
- “it is only the SC that can oversee the judges’ and the
court personnel’s compliance with all laws, and take the
proper administrative action against them if they commit
any violation thereof. NO OTHER BRANCH OF THE
GOV’T MAY INTRUDE INTO THIS POWER W/O
RUNNING AFOUL OF THE DOCTRINE OF SP.
(ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECT)
- However, this does not preclude the OMBUDSMAN
from taking cognizance of the criminal cases, or
purely the criminal aspect of cases, against judges,
especially when the admin aspect thereof had been
duly endorsed or referred to the SC for adjudication.
- Lawyers who occupies what may be termed as QJ
office since he performs official functions that are
akin to judges- part of the QJ system of the gov’t.
(Ex. Provincial Adjudicator of the DAR.- TADLIP
v. Atty Bores Jr. 2005
56
TENURE OF JUDGES
Sec 11. “Member of the SC and judges of the LC shall
hold office DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR until they
reach 75 or become incapacitated to discharge the
duties of their office.
SC en banc shall have the power to discipline judges of
LCs or order dismissal by a vote of majority of the
members who actually took part in the deliberations in
the issues in the case and voted thereon.
- Security of tenure until they reach the retirement of
age of 70.
- Members of the judiciary may be removed only in
proper admin proc conducted or ordered by SC.
- Included in the “Judges of LC”-Judges of
Sandiganbayan.
- Power of the Cong to create, reorganize, or even
abolish courts INFERIOR TO SC is plenary. The
security of tenure is not a personal privilege.
Note: Relate to Sec 2. “No law shall be passed
reorganizing the judiciary when it undermines the
security of tenure of its members”
CONSULTATIONS OF THE COURT
Sec 13.“xxThe conclusions of the SC in any case
submitted to it for decision en banc or division shall be
reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a
member for the writing of the opinion of the court”
 As a collegiate court, the SC is required to reach
its conclusions after full deliberation among its
members. The primary purpose of a collegiate
court is precisely to provide for the most
exhaustive deliberation before a conclusion is
reached,
 Once agreement is reached at by the required
majority, a members is assigned as the ponente of
the Court.
 Any member who took no part, or dissented or
abstained must state the reason therefore.
DECISIONS OF THE COURT
Sec 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court w/o
expressing therein CLEARLY and DISTINCTLY the
facts the law on which it is based.
No petition for review/MR shall be refused or denied
w/o stating the legal basis therefor.
- Reason: DUE PROCESS.
- W/O it, losing party cannot pinpoint the possible
errors of the court for review by the higher tribunal.
- Only applies to DECISIONS (Judgement
rendered after the presentation of proof or on
basis of a stipulation of facts). Mere ORDERS are
not covered since they dispose of only
INCIDENTS of the case, such as postponements.
The only exception is an ORDER OF
DISMISSAL ON THE MERITS.
CHUNG v. MONDRAGON. As long as the decision is
COMPLETE, CLEAR and CONCISE, there would be
no breach of the consti mandate. “Brevity should not be
mistaken for Levity”
- Minute Resolutions Nothing wrong. As where the
case is patently w/o merit. In any case, the court is
not duty bound to render signed decisions all the
time. As long as a legal basis is given, minute
resolutions are valid.
- This constitutional mandate is also INAPPLICABLE
to admin cases decided by SC.
- Par 2 of this section is NOT APPLICABLE TO
Administrative Proceedings conducted by
Excecutive / Admin Bodies nd of Military Tribunals
because they are nor court of justice.
PRINCIPLES:
1. SUB JUDICE RULE restricts comments and
disclosures pertaining to judicial proc to avoid
prejudicing the issues, influencing the court or
obstruct the admin of justice. CONTEMPT ka!
2. RES JUDICATA “Final judgment or decree on
the merits by a court of competent juris is
CONCLUSIVE of the rights of the parties or
their privies in all later suits on all points”
3. CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT When a
right or fact has been judicially tried and
determined by a court of competent juris, or when an
opportunity for such trial has been given, the
judgment of the court, as long as it remains
unreversed, should be CONCLUSIVE of the rights
of the parties or their privies. (Bars the re-litigation
of facts already settled)
4. LAW OF THE CASE. Where an appellate court has
made a ruling on a question on appeal and thereafter
remands the case to the LC for further proc; the
question settled by the appellate court becomes the
law of the case at the LC and in any subsequent
appeal.
57
5. STARE DECISIS ET NON QUIETA MOVERE.
“Adhere to precedents, and not to unsettle things
which are established”. When SC has laid down a
principle of law as applicable to a certain state of
facts, it will adhere to that principle, and apply it
to all future cases, where such facts are
substantially the same; regardless of whether the
parties and property are the same. ADHERENCE
TO JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS.
6. FINALITY OF JUDGMENT OR
IMMUTABILITY OF JUDGMENT. Once a
judgment has become final and executory, it may no
longer be modified in any respect, even if the
modification is meant to correct an erroneous
conclusion of fact or law, and regardless of whether
the modification is attempted to be made by the
court rendering it or by the highest court of the land,
as what remains to be done is purely ministerial
enforcement or execution of judgment.
Purpose:
a. Avoid delay
b. Put an end to judicial controversies, at the risk of
occasional errors, which is precisely why courts
exist.
Exemptions:
a. Correction of clerical errors
b. Nunc pro tunc entries which cause no prejudice to
any party
- An entry made now of something w/c was actually
previously done, to have the effect as of the former
date. Its office is not to supply omitted action by the
court, but to supply an omission in the record of
action really had, but omitted through inadvertence
or mistake.
c. Void judgments
d. Whenever circumstances transpire after the finality
of the decision that render its execution unjust and
inequitable.
SALARIES OF JUDGES-
Sec 10. “xx CJ, Associate Justices and of Judges of LC
shall be FIXED BY LAW. During their continuance in
office, their salary cannot be decreased. “
PERFECTO V. MER and Endencia v. DAVID.
- Imposition of income taxes on their salaries was
unconsti because it would result in the reduction
of their salary.
PERIODS FOR DECISION. MANDATORY!!!
“x x within 24 mos from the date of submission for the
SC and unless reduced by the SC, 12 mos for all lower
collegiate courts, and 3 mos for all other LCs.
Deemed submitted for decision/reso: Filing of the last
pleading, brief, memoranda”
CHAPTER 17. ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS.
“Public office is a public trust”
- Underlying reason for the relaxation of
requirements of due process of law in admin
pro.
Note: ADMIN OFFENSES DO NOT PRESCRIBE.
By its very nature, pertain to the character of public o/e.
In disciplining public o/e, the object sought is not the
punishment of the officer but the improvement of the
public service and preservation of the public’s faith in
our gov’t.
I-IMPEACHMENT- Power of cong (senator-judges)
to remove a public o/e for serious crimes or
misconduct.
NATURE: Essentially a non-legislative prerogative and
can be exercised by the CONG only within the limits
provided for by the consti.
A. Impeachable officers: (EXCLUSIVE!) (ART 11,
sec 22)
1. Pres
2. VP
3. Members of the SC
4. Members of the ConCom
5. Ombudsman
- Deputy Ombudsman and Special Pros are
NOT impeachable officers even if the law
provides for the same grounds as removal by
impeachment.
- SANDIGANBAYAN. NO. Can be removed by the
SC. “all judges of the LC (Sandiganbayan included)-
are under the disciplinary power of the SC”.
- Impeachable officers who are members of the Bar
cannot be disbarred w/o first being impeached.
(People v. Benipayo)
B. GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT (Not
exclusive)
a. Culpable vio of the consti
b. Graft and Corruption
58
c. Treason
d. Betrayal of PT- “catch-all” to cover all acts not
punishable by the criminal statutes but nonetheless,
render the offender unfit to continue in office. Ex.
Inexcusable negligence, favoritism, obs of justice.
-Less than criminal but must be attended by bad faith
and of such gravity and seriousness as the other
grounds for impeachment.
e. Bribery
f. Other High crimes
C. PROCEDURE
- Only the HR can INITIATE an impeachment case
by a vote of at least 1/3 of its members.
- SENATE has the sole power to TRY AND
DECIDE such case, which can convict only by a
vote of at least 2/3.
Sec 3 (2). “x x A verified complaint for impeachment
may be filed by (1)ANY MEMBER of HR or (2) any
citizen upon a reso or endorsement by any member
(HR), and referred to the proper committee (C.of
Justice) w/in 3 session days thereafter. The committee,
after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its members,
shall submit its report to the House w/in 60 days from
such referral, together w/ the corresponding reso…
(3)A vote of at least 1/3 of all members of the house
shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable reso or
override its contrary reso.
(4)In case the verified complaint/ reso is filed by (3) 1/3
of all members of the HR, the same shall constitute the
Articles of Impeachment, and trial by senate shall
proceed.
(5)One impeachment pro/ year.
(6) The senate shall have the sole power to try and
decide all cases of impeachment. IF Pres: CJ of SC, but
shall not vote. No person shall be convicted w/o the
concurrence of 2/3 of all mem of SENATE.
(7) Judgment in cases of impeachment: shall not extend
further than removal from office and disqualification
from to hold any office under RP, but the party
convicted shall nevertheless be held liable and subject to
pros, trial and punishment according to law.
“Initiate” operative act: filing of the verified
complaint. Once filed, no other impeachment pro may
be filled against the same official. Meaning: even if
grounded on baseless complaint.
 If no longer in the public service: disqualification
If still: removal and disqualification
 Judgment of the Cong in an impeachment
proceeding is normally not subject to judicial
review because of the vesture in the Senate of the
“sole power to try and decide all cases of
impeachment”.
- Involve the exercise of wisdom and discretion
and therefore come under the category of PQs.
BUT the courts may annul the pro IF there is a
showing of GAD committed by the Cong OR
noncompliance with the procedural req of the
consti (ex. Par2)
 Judgment of conviction is also NOT SUBJECT to
the pardoning power of the pres.
II- THE SANDIGANBAYAN(Art 10. Sec 4)
“xx The present anti-graft court x x”
- OJ over civil and criminal cases involving GAP
and such other offenses committed by public o/e*,
including those in the GOCCs**, in relation to
their office as may be determined by law***.
- Same rank as the CA. 1 presiding judge- 14 assoc.
Sits in 5 divisions/ 3 justices each.
- *Public O/E, whether permanent, acting or interim
capacity, w/ salary grade 27.
- **GOCCs, WON they have original charters.
- ***where the penalty prescribed by law is higher
than PC (6 yrs/ fine of 6K)
 ALL *,**,*** must concur together!!!
- Under RA 3019, Sandiganbayan shall place public
officers under suspension pendete lite for not more
than 90 days. Although this suspension is
mandatory, it requires a prior hearing to determine
the validity of the information.
 This suspension is a mere preventive measure.
“Unless the accused is suspended, he may
frustrate his prosecution or commit further acts
of malfeasance or do both”.
- Appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, reso,
orders of RTCs whether in the exercise of their
original or appellate J.
- Decisions appealable to the SC via petition for
review on certiorari raising purely Q of law (45)
- A private complainant in a crim case before the
sandiganbayan is allowed to appeal only the civil
aspect of the case after its dismissal by said court.
THE OMBUDSMAN
- Constitutional office and therefore may not be
abolished nor its composition be changed by
ORDINARY LEGISLATION.
59
- Appointment of the Ombudsman and its deputies are
not subject to the confirmation of COA.
- Same rank and compensation ConCOm.
- Enjoys fiscal autonomy and the power to appoint its
own o/e in accordance w/ CSC law.
- May be removed only through impeachment.
A. COMPOSITION
- Ombudsman- “Tanodbayan”
- One over-all Deputy
- At least 1 deputy for LuzViMinda
- A separate deputy for the military establishment
may likewise be appointed.
B. APPOINTMENT
- Appointed by the PRES from a list of at least 6
nominees prepared by JBC, and from a list of 3
nominees every vacany thereafter.
C. TERM
- Fixed at 7 years w/o reappointment, and is NOT
STAGGERED.
- Prohibited to run for elective position
immediately following their cessation from
Office.
D. POWERS and FUNCTIONS
Sec 12. “xx act promptly on complainants filed in any
form or manner against public o/e of the gov’t, or any
subd including GOCCs, and shall, in appropriate case,
notify the complainants of the action taken and result
thereof”
 The Ombudsman may delegate the fact-finding
aspect of this function to the NBI.
 Ombudsman exercises both criminal and
administrative jurisdiction.
 Exercises primary jurisdiction to investigate
act/omission of public o/e of a public officer in
CRIM CASES cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
and concurrent juris w/ other investigative
agencies of the gov’t w/ respect to criminal cases
involving public o/e cognizable with the regular
courts.
 It can conduct PI and prosecute criminal and
administrative cases involving not only public
o/e who fall w/in the juris of Sandiganbayan but
also those subject to the jurisdiction of regular
courts as well, even if lower than salary grade
27. (Uy v. Sandiganbayan 2001)
 It need not conduct PI if it finds the complaint
devoid of merit and instead recommends its outright
dismissal. It is also w/in their discretion to determine
whether PI should be conducted.
 GR: SC will not interfere with the Ombudsman’s
exercise of his investigatory and prosecutor power
EXCEPT: GAD.
 Mandamus? YES.
 While the Ombudsman has full discretion to
determine WON a crim case should be filed in the
Sandiganbayan, however, ONCE THE CASE has
been filed with said court, it is the Sandiganbayan,
and no longer the Ombudsman, which has full
control of the case.
 The remedy of aggrieved parties from reso of
the Ombudsmans finding probable cause in
criminal cases or non- admin cases, when
tainted with GAD, is to file an original action
for certiorari under Rule 65 with the SC.
 Has direct disciplinary authority over elected and
appointed officials of the gov’t except those who can
only be removed through Impeachment/ Mem of
congress and the judiciary.
- “Not merely advisory” but “actually mandatory
w/in the bounds of law”.
 Has the power to impose the penalty of removal,
suspension, demotion, fine or censure of a
public o/e (ADMINISTRATIVE
SANCTIONS)
 The prescriptive period of “one year” does not refer
to the prescription of the offense but to the discretion
of the ombudsman on whether it would investigate a
particular administrative complaint.
 Under RA 6770, the Ombudsman or his deputy may
preventively suspend any o/e under his authority
pending an investigation if in his judgment: (without
pay: 6 mos)
a. Evidence of guilt is strong
b. The charge involves dishonesty, oppression,
grave misconduct or neglect of duty
c. Charge would warrant removal from the service
d. Respondents continued stay may prejudice the
case filed against him.
 Preventive suspension, although immediately
executory, may be subject to MR.
 Appeal in ADMIN CASES Court of Appeals,
Rule 43. Such an appeal may be MADE IF THE
PENALTY IS MORE THAN 1 MONTH. Said
penalty shall however be immediately executory
even pending appeal in the CA. It may not be
stayed by the filing of an appeal or the issuance of
an injunctive writ.
 If penalty is less than 1 mo Final and
unappealable. However, it would still be subject to
60
the test of arbitrariness or GAD through a petition
for certiorari under Rule 65 w/c may be filed before
the CA.
 Doctrine of Res Judicata does not apply to
decisions of the Ombudsman. The doctrine applies
only to judicial and QJ proceedings, NOT TO THE
EXERCISE OF ADMIN POWERS.
E. DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN and PERSONNEL of
the office of the ombudsman.
Sec 10. “The o/e of the office of the ombudsman
OTHER THAN THE DEPUTIES (Appointed by the
Pres), shall be appointed by the Ombudsman accdg to
the CSC Law. “
- Not impeachable although the grounds for their
removal are the same as the grounds for
impeachment.
- Power of the pres to remove deputy
ombudsman- justified by the Pres power to
appoint: necessarily carries with it the power to
remove.
- Consistent with the doctrine of primary
jurisdiction, when the Pres takes congnizance of
an admin case against a Deputy Ombudsman,
the latter would be precluded from taking
cognizance over the same. (Concurrence of
jurisdiction)
F. THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR
- “OLD TANODBAYAN”.  Limited to and
charged with the prosecution of graft and corrupt
cases.
- Allowed to retain such powers as had not been
transferred to the Ombudsman.
G. ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH
- Ferret out and recover unlawfully acquired
properties, which are supposed to be forfeited to
the State.
Sec 15. The right of the state x x shall not be barred by
prescription, laches or estoppel x x “
- This provision applies only to CIVIL CASES for
the recovery of ill-gotten wealth, and not to
criminal cases (ex. RA 3019 involving graft and
corrupt). MAY BE BARRED BY
PRESCRIPTION. (15 years)
 If commission of the crime is known, PP shall
commence on the day it was committed. PP shall be
interrupted when the proceedings
- Running of PP will be interrupted filing of
complaint.
- Run again dismissed for reasons not
constituting DJ.
LOANS limited to “business purposes” and does not
include personal purposes.
Sec. 16. “No loan/ guaranty or other form of financial
accommodation for any business purpose may be
granted, directly/indirectly to the PRES,VP,
CABINET, CONGRESS, ConCom, Ombudsman, or
to any firm or entity in w/c they have controlling
interest, during their tenure”
ASSETS AND LIABILITIES (SEC 17)
- ALL PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND
EMPLOYEES.
WHEN: Upon assumption of office and as often as may
be required by law.
- In order to suppress any questionable
accumulation of wealth. “Any public o/e who has
acquired money or property manifestly
disproportionate to his salary or his other lawful
income shall be prima facie presumed to have
illegally acquired it”(Ombudsman v. Rancho 2011)
- Basis of monitoring the income and lifestyle of
public o/e to promote transparency in gov’t.
CHANGE OF CITIZENSHIP
- “ipso facto” lose his title to the office held by him
here in the PH”. At any rate, the phrase “shall be
dealt with by law” leaves the final say on this matter
to the legislature, which could enact the needed law.
- Allegiance necessarily springs from, or is the
essence of citizenship, as a requirement for public
office, such that when the indi voluntarily retains or
maintains his ties w/ a foreign country, he cannot
claim sole allegiance to the RP and would therefore
be disqualified.
DUAL CITIZENSHIP v. DUAL ALLEGIANCE
 Art 4- CITIZENSHIP
- The concern was NOT DC per se but with
naturalized citizens who maintain allegiance to
61
their countries of origin even after
naturalization.
- RA 7160 refers to DUAL ALLEGIANCE
- A person simultaneously owes, by some
POSITIVE ACT, LOYALTY to 2 or more
states.
 Persons with DUAL CITIZENSHIP Their
condition is an unavoidable consequence of
conflicting laws of different states.
- Person is considered as national of both
states.
AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS
“A law that has ceased to grow has ceased to be, and
this is true especially for the supreme and fundamental
law”
 Changed in the constitution may be effected by a
mere modification in its interpretation by the courts.
 However, there are some provisions which are called
“iron rules” which are not malleable to judicial
interpretation. Ex. Age qualifications- composition
of COA.
A. KINDS OF CONSTITUTION
a. Written- embodied in 1 doc/set of documents
b. Unwritten- X integrated into a single, concrete
form.
c. Conventional-an enacted consti, formally
“struck off” at a definite time and place ff. a
conscious effort taken by a constituent body.
d. Cumulative- Result of a political evolution
“not inaugurated at any specific time but
changing by accretion rather than by any
systematic method.
e. Rigid- Can be amended only by formal and
usually difficult process.
f. Flexible- Changed by ordinary legislation
PHIL CON Written. Conventional. Rigid
EFFECT: PERMANENCE in CHARACTER
Positive: Capacity to resist capricious change.
Negative: Unable to adjust to the genuine need of the
people change.
 The Constitution may be changed either by
AMENDMENT or REVISION.
Amendment isolate or piecemeal change only,
 Revision revamp or rewriting of the whole
document.
Lambino v. COMELEC (2006). “Revision implies a
change that ALTERS A BASIC PRINCIPLE IN THE
CONSTI. Amendment on the other hand, Amendment
referes to a change that adds, reduces, or deletes
WITHOUT ALTERING THE BASIC PRINCIPLE IN
THE CONSTI.
 PROCEDURE (Proposal and Ratification)
A. PROPOSAL
1. Directly by the Congress (3/4 of all its members)
- Suggested IF: what is intended is a mere
amendment or change of particular provisions.
(Direct legislative action). Avoid unnecessary
expenditure of public funds and time.
2. Constitutional convention- Vote of 2/3 of all
members of Congress, or by a MAJORITY* vote,
submit to the electorate the question of calling such
a convention. (*If they cannot make up their mind)
SUGGESTED IF: Total overhaul of the Consti.
ConCon- as long as it exists and confines itself w/in the
sphere of its jurisdiction, it must be considered
INDEPENDENT and CO-EQUAL with the other depts
of the gov’t. (FRANTZ v. AUTRY)
 Nevertheless, the choice of the method of proposal
lies in the exclusive discretion of the Congress.
3. (PROPOSE AMENDMENTS ONLY and not
revisions)People though initiative upon a petition
of at least 12% of the total number of registered
voters, of w/c every legislative district must be
represented by at least 3% of the registered voters
therein. No amendment under this section (thru
initiative) shall be authorized w/in 5 yrs following
the ratification of this Consti nor oftener than once
every 5 years thereafter.
Essential elements. The entire proposal on its face is a
petition by the people.
a. People must author and thus sign the entire
proposal- No agent or rep can sign on their
behalf.
b. As an Initiative upon petition, the proposal
must be embodied in a petition.
B. RATIFICATION
62
If under Sec 1 Shall be valid when ratified by a
MAJORITY OF THE VOTE CAST IN A
PLEBISCITE which shall be held not earlier than 60
days nor later than 90 days after the approval of such
amendment or revision.
If under Sec 2 Shall be valid when ratified by a
MAJORITY OF THE VOTE CAST IN A
PLEBISCITE which shall be held not earlier than 60
days nor later than 90 days after the certification by
the COMELEC of the sufficiency of the petition.
 Thus, it involves the people themselves in the
sovereign act of drafting or altering the
fundamental law. In the case of a mere statute,
it suffices that it is enacted by their chosen rep
pursuant to their mandate.
 “60-90 days” reasonable time; intended to
answer present needs/ problems.
 JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS
- Question of validity of the adoption of
amendments to the Consti is regarded as subject
to JR. Courts may inquire WON the prescribed
procedure for amendment has been observed.
CHAPTER 19. TRANSITORY PROVISIONS
- Do not have permanent duration.
- In time become functus officio as the purposes of
the several section thereof are fulfilled.
Sec 1,2 & 5. Deals with elections and have already been
adverted to in Chapter 8. Purpose: Synchronize elections
for local and national officials.
Sec 3 & 4. Existing laws and Treaties.
Sec 3. All existing laws, decrees, EOs, and other
executive issuances NOT INCONSISTENT with this
consti shall remain operative until amended, repealed or
revoked.
- All laws existing at the time of the ratification of
the new consti shall remain in force unless
inconsistent with this consti or changed by the
legislature or the pres.
Sec 4. All existing treaties or IAs which HAVE NOT
BEEN RATIFIED shall not be renewed or extended w/o
the concurrence of at least 2/3 of all members of the
Senate.
- If ratified- No need for the concurrence of
Senate.
Sec 7 & 8. RESERVED EXECUTIVE POWERS
Pending the election and organization of the Congress,
the incumbent Pres shall continue to exercise
legislative powers” which she would lose ONLY when
“the first congress in convened.”
Sec 7. Until a law is passed, the Pres may fill by
appointment from a list of nominees by the respective
sectors the seats reserved for sectoral representation.

POLITICAL LAW- AGPALO

Constitution, aside from an allocation of power is also a
social contract whereby the people have surrendered
their sovereign powers to the State for the common
good.
Sovereignty “ultimate power/ absolute right to
govern”.
- Relate to: Right to revolution is an inherent right
of the people to cast out their rulers, change their
polity..etc. If it succeeds, the existing consti is
abrogated. Ex EDSA I revo.

63