CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!

ICAL LA" 3

Article I The Archipelago Doctrine - teaches that the outermost points of our terrestrial domain are to be connected with straight baselines and all waters enclosed thereby shall be considered as our internal waters. As internal waters, they are subject to the exclusi e jurisdiction of the !hilippines. Archipelagic sealanes are to be laid on these waters o er which foreign ships will ha e the right of passage as if they were open seas. Thus, baselines laws are nothing but statutory mechanisms for "#$%&' III 'tates parties to delimit with precision the extent of their maritime (ones and continental shel es. In turn, this gi es notice to the rest of the international community of the scope of the maritime space and submarine areas within which 'tates parties exercise treaty-based rights, namely, the exercise of so ereignty o er territorial waters )Article *+, the jurisdiction to enforce customs, fiscal, immigration, and sanitation laws in the contiguous (one )Article ,,+, and the right to exploit the li ing and non-li ing resources in the exclusi e economic (one )Article -.+ and continental shelf )Article //+. 0Magallona v. Ermita - 1.2 #o. 34/3./, August 3., *5336 "# $on ention on the %aw of the 'ea - Territorial 'ea - pro ides for a uniform breadth of 3* miles from the low-water mar7 of the coast. $ontiguous 8one - 3* miles from the outer limits of the territorial sea exercise of 9protecti e jurisdiction: in a (one of the high seas contiguous to its territorial sea, the coastal state may exercise the control necessary to !re ent and !unish infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations within its territory or territorial sea. ;conomic 8one or !atrimonial 'ea - extending *55 miles from the low water mar7 of the coastal state all li ing and non-li ing resources found therein belong exclusi ely to the coastal state. The $ontinental 'helf refers to 0a6 the seabed and the subsoil of the submarine areas adjacent to the coast but outside of the territorial sea, to a depth of *55 meters, or beyond that limit, to where the depth of the subjacent waters admits of the exploitation of the natural resources of the said areas, and 0b6 to the seabed and subsoil of similar areas adjacent to the coasts of the islands. The costal state has the ;<$%"'I=; so ereign right to explore the continental shelf and to exploit its natural resources, and no one else may do so without its consent.

>hether referred to as !hilippine 9internal waters: under Article I of the $onstitution or as 9archipelagic waters: under "#$%&' III )Article ?@ 036+, the !hilippines exercises so ereignty o er the body of water lying landward of the baselines, including the air space o er it and the submarine areas underneath. xxx The imposition of these passage rights 0right of innocent passage and the right of transit passage through international straits6 through archipelagic waters under "#$%&' III was a concession by archipelagic 'tates, in exchange for their right to claim all the waters landward of their baselines, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast, as archipelagic waters subject to their territorial so ereignty. 0Magallona v. Ermita - 1.2 #o. 34/3./, August 3., *5336 !etitionersA argument that the BI1 now lies outside !hilippine territory because the baselines that 2A @-** draws do not enclose the BI1 is negated by 2A @-** itself. 'ection * of the law commits to text the !hilippinesA continued claim of so ereignty and jurisdiction o er the BI1 and the 'carborough 'hoalC ';$. *. The baselines in the following areas o er which the !hilippines li7ewise exercises so ereignty and jurisdiction shall be determined as 92egime of Islands: under the 2epublic of the !hilippines consistent with Article 3*3 of the "nited #ations $on ention on the %aw of the 'ea )"#$%&'+C a+ The Balayaan Island 1roup as constituted under !residential Decree #o. 3-@. and b+ Dajo de Easinloc, also 7nown as 'carborough 'hoal. 0Magallona v. Ermita - 1.2 #o. 34/3./, August 3., *5336

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *

The &pen 'eas res communes but a state may exercise jurisdiction on the open seas o er its essels, o er pirates, in the exercise of the right to isit and search and under the doctrine of hot pursuit. &uter space, li7e the open seas, is res communes and #&T susceptible to disco ery and occupation not subject to national appropriation by claim of so ereignty. A state is responsible for whate er injury or damage any object it sends to outer space may cause. The Dangsamoro Furidical ;ntity 0DF;6 xxx is not merely an expanded ersion of the A2EE, the status of its relationship with the national go ernment being fundamentally different from that of the A2EE. Indeed, DF; is a state in all but name as it meets the criteria of a state laid down in the Eonte ideo $on ention, namely, a permanent population, a defined territory, a go ernment, and a capacity to enter into relations with other states. ; en assuming arguendo that the E&A-AD would not necessarily se er any portion of !hilippine territory, the spirit animating it which has betrayed itself by its use of the concept of association runs counter to the national so ereignty and territorial integrity of the 2epublic. 0!#$ rovin%$ o& Nort# Cota'ato v. !#$ (ov$rnm$nt o& t#$ R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ $a%$ an$l on An%$+tral Domain 12 #o. 34,-@3, &ctober 3?, *5546

A2TI$%; II - generally not a source of enforceable rights ;<$;!T the Incorporation $lause and 'ection *4 on the policy of public disclosure duty to disclose 0which presents a '!%;#DID 'GEE;T2G to Article II, 'ection / on the 2ight to Information6. 'ection 3. on ecology has been implemented by law. #ote that the $onstitution now describes the !hilippines as, not only a republican but also a, democratic 'tate. #&T; pro isions on initiati e on national legislation 0Article =I ),*+6 and initiati e on amendment of the $onstitution. 0Article =II )*+6. - Desides, the 3@4/ $onstitution accords to the citi(ens a greater participation in the affairs of go ernment. Indeed, it pro ides for peopleHs initiati e, the right to information on matters of public concern )including the right to 7now the state of health of their !resident+, as well as the right to file cases Iuestioning the factual bases for the suspension of the pri ilege of writ of habeas corpus or declaration of martial law. These pro isions enlarge the peopleAs right in the political as well as the judicial field. It grants them the right to interfere in the affairs of go ernment and challenge any act tending to prejudice their interest. 0 $tition$r Organi,ation+ v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. / (.R. No+. 101032/31, April 35, *53*6 - ';; also Article II 0*,6 The 'tate shall encourage nongo ernmental, community based, or sectoral organi(ations that pro ide the welfare of the nation. Article < 03?6 The !resident shall pro ide for regional de elopment councils xxx composed of local go ernment officials, xxx and representati es from nongo ernmental organi(ations xxx Article < 0346 The $ongress shall enact an organic act for each autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the regional consultati e commission composed of representati es appointed by the !resident from a list of nominees from multisectoral bodies. x x x. Article <II 0@6 The $ongress may establish an independent economic and planning agency headed by the !resident, which shall, after consultations with the xxx arious pri ate sectors xxx Article <III 03-6 The 'tate shall respect the role of independent peopleAs organi(ations. Article <III 03.6 The right of the people and their organi(ations to effecti e and reasonable participation at all le els of social, political and economic decisionma7ing shall not be abridged. Article <=I 03*6 The $ongress may create a consultati e body to ad ise the !resident on policies affecting indigenous cultural communities, the majority of the members of which shall come from the communities.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,

>hate er good is done by the go ernment is attributed to the 'tate but e ery harm inflicted on the people is imputed not to the 'tate but to the go ernment alone. 'uch injury may justify the replacement of the go ernment by re olution, theoretically at the behest of the 'tate, in a de elopment 7nown as direct 'tate action. ar$n+ atria$ guardian of the rights of the people Soriano v. Lag*ar3ia 01.2. #o. 3.?/4-, April *@, *55@6 -&ffensi e language in tele ision may be regulated or e en banned for the sa7e of the children. Fustification )ar$n+ )atria$. A belligerent occupation would ha e no effect on the continued effecti ity of the law on treason. Accordingly, political laws, li7e the $onstitution, were merely suspended, subject to re i al under the jus postliminium upon the end of the occupation. 'uspension of political laws affects only the ci ilians, and not the soldiers or 9enemies in arms.: 0R*&&. v. C#i$& o& Sta&& 6 Also does not apply to treason 0La*r$l v. Mi+a6. #on-political laws, li7e the $i il $ode, remain effecti e, unless changed by the belligerent occupant. Fudicial decisions, such as a con iction for defamation, are alid during a belligerent occupation except those of a political complexion. 2ight to 'elf-Determination right to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural de elopment. #&T; Article II 0/6 The 'tate shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states the paramount consideration shall be national so ereignty, territorial integrity, national interest and the right to self-determination. Internal self-determination a peopleAs pursuit of its political, economic, social and cultural de elopment within the framewor7 of an existing state. - ;xternal selfdetermination - the establishment of a so ereign and independent 'tate, the free association or integration with an independent 'tate or the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people. The peopleAs right to selfdetermination should not, howe er, be understood as extending to a unilateral right of secession. Distinguish the Incorporation $lause or Doctrine of Incorporation from the Doctrine of Transformation accepted rules of international law must first be enacted into legislation.

A stipulation in a treaty or executi e agreement pro iding for a state with the option to wai e its criminal jurisdiction to prosecute foreigners who commit crimes within its territory is not to be considered as an abdication of its so ereignty. &n the rationale that the !hilippines has adopted the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, a portion of so ereignty may be wai ed without iolating the $onstitution. 'uch wai er does not amount to an unconstitutional diminution or depri ation of jurisdiction of !hilippine courts. 04a.an M*na v. Rom*lo - 1.2. #o. 3-@.34, Jebruary 3, *5336 "nder international law, there is no difference between treaties and executi e agreements in terms of their binding effects on the contracting states concerned, as long as the negotiating functionaries ha e remained within their powers. #either, on the domestic sphere, can one be held alid if it iolates the $onstitution. Authorities are, howe er, agreed that one is distinct from another for accepted reasons apart from the concurrence-reIuirement aspect. As has been obser ed by "' constitutional scholars, a treaty has greater 9dignity: than an executi e agreement, because its constitutional efficacy is beyond doubt, a treaty ha ing behind it the authority of the !resident, the 'enate, and the peopleK a ratified treaty, unli7e an executi e agreement, ta7es precedence o er any prior statutory enactment. 04a.an M*na v. Rom*lo - 1.2. #o. 3-@.34, Jebruary 3, *5336 The terms 9exchange of notes: and 9executi e agreements: ha e been used interchangeably, exchange of notes being considered a form of executi e agreement that becomes binding through executi e action. 04a.an M*na v. Rom*lo - 1.2. #o. 3-@.34, Jebruary 3, *5336 2enunciation of war as an instrument of national policy should be read with Article =I 0*,6036 a declaration of the existence of a state of war may be made upon two-thirds ote of both Louses, in joint session assembled, oting separately. The "#IT;D #ATI&#' - 'ecurity $ouncil Galta Jormula procedural matters are decided by any @ or more members. #on-procedural matters those that may reIuire the $ouncil to in o7e measures of enforcement - at least @ members including all the permanent members. #o member is allowed to ote on Iuestions concerning the pacific settlement of a dispute to which it is a party. "nli7e in the 1eneral Assembly, the characteri(ation of a Iuestion is considered a nonprocedural matter in the 'ecurity $ouncil. #oteC =eto and Double =eto prerogati e of a permanent member.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ?

International $ourt of Fustice judicial organ of the "# which functions in accordance with the 'tatute, of which all the members are considered ipso facto parties. ; en nonmembers may be parties to the 'tatute on conditions to be determined in each case by the 1eneral Assembly upon the recommendation of the 'ecurity $ouncil. Eay decide contentious cases and render ad isory opinions, upon reIuest of the 1eneral Assembly or the 'ecurity $ouncil, as well as other organs of the "#, when authori(ed by the 1eneral Assembly, on legal Iuestions arising within the scope of their acti ities. &nly members may be parties in contentious cases. Furisdiction of the $ourt is based on the consent of the parties as manifested under the 9optional jurisdiction clause: or the 9compromissary clause.: Article II, 'ection ,. $i ilian authority is, at all times, supreme o er the military. - 'ee Article =II, 'ection 34 (*3ani v. S$nga 1.2. #o. 3/53.-, August 3-, *55. gag order against a general prohibiting him from testifying in a legislati e inIuiry - =alid. Fustification military powers. Contin$ntal St$$l Man*&a%t*ring Cor)oration v. Montano - 1.2. #o. 34*4,., &ctober 3,, *55@ - an unborn child can be considered a dependent. The term child can be understood to include the unborn fetus in the motherAs womb. Article II, 'ection 3@. The 'tate shall de elop a self-reliant and independent national economy effecti ely controlled by Jilipinos. 2etail Trade %iberali(ation Act of *555 - to the extent that 2.A. 4/.*, the 2etail Trade %iberali(ation Act, lessens the restraint on the foreignersA right to property or to engage in an ordinarily lawful business, it cannot be said that the law amounts to a denial of the JilipinosA right to property and to due process of law. Jilipinos continue to ha e the right to engage in the 7inds of retail business to which the law in Iuestion has permitted the entry of foreign in estors. Jirst, aliens can only engage in retail trade business subject to the categories abo eenumeratedK 'econd, only nationals from, or juridical entities formed or incorporated in countries which allow the entry of Jilipino retailers shall be allowed to engage in retail trade businessK and Third, Iualified foreign retailers shall not be allowed to engage in certain retailing acti ities outside their accredited stores through the use of mobile or rolling stores or carts, the use of sales representati es, door-to-door selling, restaurants and sari-sari stores and such other similar retailing acti ities. 0E+)ina v. Zamora - 1.2. #o. 3?,4--, 'eptember *3, *535, Abad6

Indigenous peoples situated within states do not ha e a general right to independence or secession from those states under international law, but they do ha e rights amounting to what was discussed abo e as the right to internal self-determination. The Declaration clearly recogni(ed the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination, encompassing the right to autonomy or selfgo ernment, in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, and to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the 'tate. 'elfgo ernment, as used in international legal discourse pertaining to indigenous peoples, has been understood as eIui alent to 9internal self-determination.: 0!#$ rovin%$ o& Nort# Cota'ato v. !#$ (ov$rnm$nt o& t#$ R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ $a%$ an$l on An%$+tral Domain 12 #o. 34,-@3, &ctober 3?, *5546 Article II, 'ection *4. 'ubject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the 'tate adopts and implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions in ol ing public interest. - Article <II, 'ection *3 Joreign loans may only be incurred in accordance with law and the regulation of the monetary authority. Information on foreign loans obtained or guaranteed by the 1o ernment shall be made a ailable to the public. - '!%;#DID 'GEE;T2G between 'ection *4 and Article III, 'ection / on the right to information.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" -

A2TI$%; =I %egislati e power - appropriation, taxation, expropriation - not exclusi e to $ongress initiati e and referendum may be exercised directly by the people 2A ./,-. The power to grant immunity from prosecution is essentially a legislati e prerogati e springs from its authority to define and prescribe punishment for crimes. 05*arto v. t#$ 6onora'l$ Om'*3+man Sim$on Mar%$lo / (.R. No. 1270028 O%to'$r 98 2011, 'econd Di ision, Drion6 The supermajority ote reIuirement set forth in 'ection 3, Article <=II of 2A #o. @5-? 0'ection 3, Article <=II of 2A #o. @5-? pro idesC 9$onsistent with the pro isions of the $onstitution, this &rganic Act may be reamended or re ised by the $ongress of the !hilippines upon a ote of two-thirds )*M,+ of the Eembers of the Louse of 2epresentati es and of the 'enate oting separately.:6 is unconstitutional for iolating the principle that $ongress cannot pass irrepealable laws. 0Dat* Mi%#a$l A'a+ :i3a v. S$nat$ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@.*/3, Jebruary *4, *53*, ;n Danc, Drion6 >e rule out the first option holdo er for those who were elected in executi e and legislati e positions in the A2EE during the *554-*533 term as an option that $ongress could ha e chosen because a holdo er iolates 'ection 4, Article < of the $onstitution. xxx. Thus, the term of three years for local officials should stay at three ),+ years as fixed by the $onstitution and cannot be extended by holdo er by $ongress. xxx. If it will be claimed that the holdo er period is effecti ely another term mandated by $ongress, the net result is for $ongress to create a new term and to appoint the occupant for the new term. This iew li7e the extension of the electi e term is constitutionally infirm because $ongress cannot do indirectly what it cannot do directly, i.e., to act in a way that would effecti ely extend the term of the incumbents. xxx. $ongress cannot also create a new term and effecti ely appoint the occupant of the position for the new term. This is effecti ely an act of appointment by $ongress and an unconstitutional intrusion into the constitutional appointment power of the !resident. 0!imentel . ;rmita, 1.2. #o. 3.?@/4, &ctober 3,, *55-6 Lence, holdo er whiche er way it is iewed is a constitutionally infirm option that $ongress could not ha e underta7en. 0Dat* Mi%#a$l A'a+ :i3a v. S$nat$ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ 1.2. #o. 3@.*/3, &ctober 34, *533, ;n Danc, Drion6 The !resident, $ongress and the $ourt cannot create directly franchises for the operation of a public utility that are exclusi e in character. 0'ection 33, Article <II of the 3@4/ $onstitution6

#on-legislati e powers of $ongress can ass of presidential elections 0=II, -6, declaration of existence of a state of war 0=II, *, )*+6, confirmation of amnesties 0=II, 3@6, and of presidential appointments 0=II, 3.6, amendment or re ision of the $onstitution 0<=II6, and impeachment 0<I6. $ongress is not a continuing body. 0%eague of $ities of the !hilippines . $&E;%;$ - 1.2. #o. 3/.@-3, #o ember 34, *5546 The 'enate as an institution is 9continuing,: as it is not dissol ed as an entity with each national election or change in the composition of its members. Lowe er, in the conduct of its day-to-day business the 'enate of each $ongress acts separately and independently of the 'enate of the $ongress before it. Accordingly, all pending matters and proceedings, i.e., unpassed bills and e en legislati e in estigations, of the 'enate of a particular $ongress are considered terminated upon the expiration of that $ongress and it is merely optional on the 'enate of the succeeding $ongress to ta7e up such unfinished matters, not in the same status, but as if presented for the first time. 01arcillano . Louse of 2epresentati es - 1.2. #o. 3/5,,4, December *,, *5546 D"T #&T; Arnault . #a(areno the 'enate is a continuing body for purposes of its power of contempt. A law pro iding for the establishment of a congressional o ersight committee which would ha e the authority to disappro e regulations promulgated by the executi e Dranch in its enforcement of a law is unconstitutional. %egislati e =eto - entitles $ongress, pursuant to its 9o ersight functions,: to disappro e 0or appro e6 administrati e regulations promulgated by the ;xecuti e Dranch, pursuant to a alidly delegated power, in the course of its enforcement of a duly enacted law. 0A %;1I'%ATI=; =;T& I' "#$&#'TIT"TI&#A%.6

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" .

The acts done by $ongress purportedly in the exercise of its o ersight powers may be di ided into three categories, namelyC scrutiny - to determine economy and efficiency of the operation of go ernment acti itiesK in estigation under 'ection *3K and super ision which connotes a continuing and informed awareness on the part of a congressional committee regarding executi e operations in a gi en administrati e area. >hile both congressional scrutiny and in estigation in ol e inIuiry into past executi e branch actions in order to influence future executi e branch performance, congressional super ision allows $ongress to scrutini(e the exercise of delegated law-ma7ing authority, and permits $ongress to retain part of that delegated authority. xxx. The reIuirement that the implementing rules of a law be subjected to appro al by $ongress as a condition for their effecti ity iolates the cardinal constitutional principles of bicameralism and the rule on presentment. ; ery bill passed by $ongress must be presented to the !resident for appro al or eto. In the absence of presentment to the !resident, no bill passed by $ongress can become a law. - The so-called 9rule on presentment: pertains to the submission of a bill to the !resident for his appropriate action. 0A'a;a3a (*ro art. Li+t <. *ri+ima - 1.2. #o. 3../3- August 3?, *554, $orona6 'ee Ma%alintal v. COMELEC, 1.2. 3-/53,, Fuly 35, *55, $&E;%;$ rules implementing 2A @34@ subject to appro al by $ongressional o ersight committee I#=A%ID constitutes a legislati e etoK contradicts the independence of the $&E;%;$. So%ial =*+ti%$ So%i$t. v. Dang$ro*+ Dr*g+ 4oar3 1.2. #o. 3-/4/5, #o ember ,, *554 law 0'ec. ,.)g+ of 2A @3.-6 reIuiring candidates for senator to be certified illegaldrug clean unconstitutional list of constitutional Iualifications exclusi e, may not be 9enlarged: by $ongress. 6$rr$ra v. COMELEC - The law clearly pro ides that the basis for districting shall be the number of the inhabitants of a city or a pro ince, not the number of registered oters therein. ;ach additional legislati e district in a city need not ha e *-5,555 inhabitants pro ided that the initial or original district formed in said city had, at the time of its establishment, a population of *-5,555. 0Eariano . $&E;%;$6

$ongress may not authori(e the A2EE to create pro inces and cities because the power to create them inherently in ol es the power to create a legislati e district, which only $ongress possesses. The A2EE may, howe er, be authori(ed by law to create municipalities and barangays. Euslim Eindanao Autonomy Act 0S$ma v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3//-@/, Fuly 3., *5546 A proposed pro ince composed of one or more islands need not comply with the *,555 sIuare meter contiguous territory reIuirement under the %ocal 1o ernment $ode, as pro ided for under the exemptions in the I22 of the %1$. 0 Navarro v. Ermita 1.2. #o. 3455-5, April 3*, *5336 A>*ino v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 34@/@,, April /, *535 - 'ection -),+ of the $onstitution reIuires a *-5,555 minimum population only for a city to be entitled to a representati e, but not so for a pro ince. The 9*-5,555 inhabitants: reIuirement does not apply to creation of additional legislati e districts for a pro ince. 4aga'*.o v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3/.@/5, December 4, *554 a law is passed increasing $D&As legislati e district from one to two. #o need for a plebiscite under Article <, 'ection 35, because the territory remains a single unit. %o7in . $&E;%;$ 1.2. #o. 345??,, Fune **, *535, Dersamin the $&E;%;$ cannot issue implementing rules and regulations that pro ide an additional ground - when the 9nomination is withdrawn by the party: - for the substitution of a party-list nominee not written in 2epublic Act )2.A.+ #o. /@?3. Amor$+ v. 6RE! 1.2. #o. 34@.55, Fune *@, *535 - a party-list nominee who changes his sectoral affiliation within the same party will only be eligible for nomination under the new sectoral affiliation if the change has been effected at least six months before the elections. 4ANA! v. COMELEC, 1.2. #o. 3/@*/3, Fuly 4, *55@ - for e ery four district representati es, there shall be one party-list representati e. There is no need for legislation to create an additional party-list seat whene er four additional legislati e districts are created by law. 'ection -)*+, Article =I of the 3@4/ $onstitution automatically creates such additional party-list seat. The filling-up of all a ailable party-list seats is not mandatory. Jour parameters in a !hilippine-style party-list election systemC

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" /

3.

Twenty percent of the total number of the membership of the Louse of 2epresentati es is the maximum number of seats a ailable to party-list organi(ations, such that there is automatically one party-list seat for e ery four existing legislati e districts. 1arnering two percent of the total otes cast in the party-list elections guarantees a party-list organi(ation one seat. The guaranteed seats shall be distributed in a first round of seat allocation to parties recei ing at least two percent of the total party-list otes. The additional seats, that is, the remaining seats after allocation of the guaranteed seats, shall be distributed to the party-list organi(ations including those that recei ed less than two percent of the total otes. The continued operation of the two percent threshold as it applies to the allocation of the additional seats is now unconstitutional because this threshold mathematically and physically pre ents the filling up of the a ailable party-list seats. The additional seats shall be distributed to the parties in a second round of seat allocation according to the two-step procedure laid down in the Decision of *3 April *55@ as clarified in this 2esolution.

*.

,.

0Two-'tep !rocedure - The percentage of otes garnered by each party-list candidate is arri ed at by di iding the number of otes garnered by each party by 3-,@-5,@55, the total number of otes cast for party-list candidates. There are two steps in the second round of seat allocation. Jirst, the percentage is multiplied by the remaining a ailable seats, ,4, which is the difference between the -maximum seats reser ed under the !arty-%ist 'ystem and the 3/ guaranteed seats of the twopercenters. The whole integer of the product of the percentage and of the remaining a ailable seats corresponds to a partyAs share in the remaining a ailable seats. 'econd, we assign one party-list seat to each of the parties next in ran7 until all a ailable seats are completely distributed. >e distributed all of the remaining ,4 seats in the second round of seat allocation.6 ?. The three-seat cap is constitutional. The threeseat cap is intended by the %egislature to pre ent any party from dominating the party-list system. There is no iolation of the $onstitution because the 3@4/ $onstitution does not reIuire absolute proportionality for the partylist system. The well-settled rule is that courts will not Iuestion the wisdom of the %egislature as long as it is not iolati e of the $onstitution.

Thus, the party-list system is composed of three different groupsC )3+ national parties or organi(ationsK )*+ regional parties or organi(ationsK and ),+ sectoral parties or organi(ations. #ational and regional parties or organi(ations are different from sectoral parties or organi(ations. #ational and regional parties or organi(ations need not be organi(ed along sectoral lines and need not represent any particular sector. 0 Atong agla*m8 In%. v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ 1.2. #o. *5,/.., April *, *53,, ;n Danc, $arpio6

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 4

"nder the party-list system, an ideology-based or cause-oriented political party is clearly different from a sectoral party. A political party need not be organi(ed as a sectoral party and need not represent any particular sector. There is no reIuirement in 2.A. #o. /@?3 that a national or regional political party must represent a 9marginali(ed and underrepresented: sector. It is sufficient that the political party consists of citi(ens who ad ocate the same ideology or platform, or the same go ernance principles and policies, regardless of their economic status as citi(ens. 'ection - of 2.A. #o. /@?3 states that 9the sectors shall include labor, peasant, fisherfol7, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, eterans, o erseas wor7ers, and professionals.: 0Atong agla*m8 In%. v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. *5,/.., April *, *53,, ;n Danc, $arpio6 In determining who may participate in the coming 3, Eay *53, and subseIuent party-list elections, the $&E;%;$ shall adhere to the following parametersC 3. Three different groups may participate in the party-list systemC )3+ national parties or organi(ations, )*+ regional parties or organi(ations, and ),+ sectoral parties or organi(ations. *. #ational parties or organi(ations and regional parties or organi(ations do not need to organi(e along sectoral lines and do not need to represent any 9marginali(ed and underrepresented: sector. ,. !olitical parties can participate in party-list elections pro ided they register under the party-list system and do not field candidates in legislati e district elections. A political party, whether major or not, that fields candidates in legislati e district elections can participate in partylist elections only through its sectoral wing that can separately register under the party-list system. The sectoral wing is by itself an independent sectoral party, and is lin7ed to a political party through a coalition.

?. 'ectoral parties or organi(ations may either be 9marginali(ed and underrepresented: or lac7ing in 9well-defined political constituencies.: It is enough that their principal ad ocacy pertains to the special interest and concerns of their sector. The sectors that are 9marginali(ed and underrepresented: include labor, peasant, fisherfol7, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, eterans, and o erseas wor7ers. The sectors that lac7 9welldefined political constituencies: include professionals, the elderly, women, and the youth. -. A majority of the members of sectoral parties or organi(ations that represent the 9marginali(ed and underrepresented: must belong to the 9marginali(ed and underrepresented: sector they represent. 'imilarly, a majority of the members of sectoral parties or organi(ations that lac7 9welldefined political constituencies: must belong to the sector they represent. The nominees of sectoral parties or organi(ations that represent the 9marginali(ed and underrepresented,: or that represent those who lac7 9welldefined political constituencies,: either must belong to their respecti e sectors, or must ha e a trac7 record of ad ocacy for their respecti e sectors. The nominees of national and regional parties or organi(ations must be bona-fide members of such parties or organi(ations. .. #ational, regional, and sectoral parties or organi(ations shall not be disIualified if some of their nominees are disIualified, pro ided that they ha e at least one nominee who remains Iualified. 0Atong agla*m8 In%. v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. *5,/.., April *, *53,, ;n Danc, $arpio6

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" @

There is no arguing that the $&E;%;$ 2esolution dated Fanuary -, *535 granting %!1EAAs registration has since become final. 'uch finality, howe er, pertains only to the 2esolution itself and not to the accreditation of %!1EA as a party-list organi(ation. xxx Lowe er, the 2esolution did not create in %!1EAAs fa or a perpetual and indefeasible right to its accreditation as a party-list organi(ation. #either did it grant finality and indefeasibility to the factual findings of the $&E;%;$ on the Iualifications of the group. Doth the accreditation and the facts substantiating the same can be re iewed and re o7ed at any time by the $&E;%;$, motu propio, or upon the instance of any interested party thru a complaint for cancellation, as set forth in 'ection . of 2.A. #o. /@?3. 0Da.ao v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. 3@,.?,, Fanuary *@, *53,, ;n Danc, 2eyes6 A'a.on v. 6RE! 1.2. #o. 34@?.., Jebruary 33, *535, Abad there are two 7inds of congressmen elected from legislati e districts and those elected through the party-list system. &nce elected, the party-list representati e has the same rights, pri ileges and duties as the district representati e. They are also subject to the same term limitation of three years for a maximum of three consecuti e terms. The consistent judicial holding is that the L2;T has jurisdiction to pass upon the Iualifications of party-list nominees after their proclamation and assumption of office. Lim;ai%#ong v. COMELEC - 1.2. #os. 3/44,3-,*, April 3, *55@ - once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, ta7en his oath, and assumed office as a Eember of the Louse of 2epresentati es, the jurisdiction of the Louse of 2epresentati es ;lectoral Tribunal begins o er election contests relating to his election, returns, and Iualifications, and mere allegation as to the in alidity of her proclamation does not di est the ;lectoral Tribunal of its jurisdiction. Ten-day prescripti e period under the 3@@4 L2;T 2ules does not apply to disIualification cases based on citi(enship. Deing a continuing reIuirement, one who assails a memberHs citi(enship or lac7 of it may still Iuestion the same at any time, the ten-day prescripti e period notwithstanding. D"T it is the 'tate, through its representati es designated by statute that may Iuestion the illegally or in alidly procured certificate of naturali(ation in the appropriate denaturali(ation proceedings. It is plainly not a matter that may be raised by pri ate persons in an election case in ol ing the naturali(ed citi(enAs descendant.

The set up embodied in the $onstitution and statutes characteri(es the resolution of electoral contests as essentially an exercise of judicial power. xxx At the higher le els city, pro incial, and regional, as well as congressional and senatorial exclusi e and original jurisdiction is lodged in the $&E;%;$ and in the Louse of 2epresentati es and 'enate ;lectoral Tribunals, which are not, strictly and literally spea7ing, courts of law. Although not courts of law, they are, nonetheless, empowered to resol e election contests which in ol e, in essence, an exercise of judicial power, because of the explicit constitutional empowerment found in 'ection *)*+, Article I<-$ )for the $&E;%;$+ and 'ection 3/, Article =I )for the 'enate and Louse ;lectoral Tribunals+ of the $onstitution. Desides, when the $&E;%;$, the L2;T, and the ';T decide election contests, their decisions are still subject to judicial re iew ia a petition for certiorari filed by the proper party if there is a showing that the decision was rendered with gra e abuse of discretion tantamount to lac7 or excess of jurisdiction. 0Ma%alintal v. r$+i3$ntial El$%toral !ri'*nal - 1.2. #o. 3@3.34, #o ember *,, *535 and Fune /, *5336 Navarro v. Ermita 1.2. #o. 3455-5, Jebruary 35, *535, !eralta - 91errymandering: is a term employed to describe an apportionment of representati e districts so contri ed as to gi e an unfair ad antage to the party in power. xxx The $onstitution proscribes gerrymandering, as it mandates each legislati e district to comprise, as far as practicable, a contiguous, compact and adjacent territory. The commencement of the terms and the regular election of legislators may be changed by law. An increase in their salaries shall ta7e effect after the expiration of the full term of all the Eembers of the 'enate and the Louse of 2epresentati es appro ing such increase. Instances when ote needs to be recorded at the reIuest of 3M- 03., ?6, ote on third reading 0*., *6, o erriding ote in case of eto 0*/, 36, L2 impeachment ote 0<I, ,, ,6.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 35

2;E;ED;2 the implied public purpose and amount must be determinate or determinable -and constitutional limitations Article =I, sections *?, */ )*+ and *@ )3+ and )*+ of $ongressA power of appropriation, particularly the prohibition against $ongress from increasing the budget proposed by the !resident and on the transfer of appropriations - #a(areth . =illar - the 'upreme $ourt clarified that the power conferred upon the !resident to transfer appropriations could well be extended to his $abinet 'ecretaries as alter egos under the Ndoctrine of Iualified political agencyA 9Thus, in the instant case, the authority granted to the D&'T by the ;xecuti e 'ecretary, being one of the alter egos of the !resident, was legal and alid but in so far as the use of agencyAs sa ings for the year *555 only. Although *555 budget was reenacted in *553, the authority granted on the use of sa ings did not necessarily extend to the succeeding year.: The $ommission on Appointments shall rule by a majority of all its Eembers. im$nt$l v. Ermita The !resident may not be compelled to submit his 9acting: appointments to the $A for confirmation. A3 int$rim appointments shall remain effecti e only until disappro al by the $ommission on Appointments or until the adjournment of the next special or regular session of $ongress. 0(*$varra v. Ino%$nt$+6 In a +)$%ial session, the $ongress may consider 9general legislation or only such subjects as the !resident may designate.: In a r$g*lar session, 9the power of the $ongress is not circumscribed except by limitations imposed by organic law.: 0in Aran$ta v. Dingla+an6 ;lectoral Tribunals shall be the sole judges of all contests relating to the election, returns and Iualifications of their respecti e 9Eembers: the jurisdiction of an ;lectoral Tribunal begins once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, ta7en his oath, and assumed office, for it is only after the occurrence of these e ents that a candidate can be considered as either a Eember of the Louse of 2epresentati es or a 'enator. According to the 'upreme $ourt, to be considered a 9Eember: of the Louse of 2epresentati es, 9there must be a concurrence of the following reIuisitesC )a+ a alid proclamation, )b+ a proper oath, and )c+ assumption of office.: It stressed that a 9proper oath: would be one ta7en before the 'pea7er of the Louse of 2epresentati es 9in open session,: consistent with the pro isions of 'ection . of 2ule II )Eembership+ of the 2ules of the Louse of 2epresentati es. 0R$.$+ v. COMELEC 1.2. #o. *5/*.?, Fune *-, *53,6

N$ri v. S$nat$ Committ$$ on A%%o*nta'ilit. o& *'li% O&&i%$r+ - 1.2. #o. 345.?,, Earch *-, *554 - 'ection *3 relates to the power to conduct inIuiries in aid of legislation. Its aim is to elicit information that may be used for legislation. &n the other hand, 'ection ** pertains to the power to conduct a Iuestion hour, the objecti e of which is to obtain information in pursuit of $ongressA o ersight function. 'imply stated, while both powers allow $ongress or any of its committees to conduct inIuiry, their objecti es are different. ;xecuti e !ri ilege - (ar%illano v. 6o*+$ o& R$)r$+$ntativ$+ - 1.2. #o. 3/5,,4, December *,, *554 - The 'enate cannot be allowed to continue with the conduct of the Iuestioned legislati e inIuiry without duly published rules of procedure, in clear derogation of the constitutional reIuirement. #ew session, new publication of rules. A:4A?AN v. A>*ino - 1.2. #o. 3/5-3., Fuly 3., *554 - executi e pri ilege with respect to the pri ilege for diplomatic negotiations may be in o7ed not only against citi(ensA demands for information, but also in the context of legislati e in estigations. - D$ la a, v. S$nat$ - 1.2. #o. 34?4?@, Jebruary 3,, *55@ - subject of a legislati e inIuiry is a political Iuestion. N$ri v. S$nat$ Committ$$ on A%%o*nta'ilit. o& *'li% O&&i%$r+ - 1.2. #o. 345.?,, 'eptember ?, *554, E2 the !residentAs claim of executi e pri ilege is not merely founded on her generali(ed interest in confidentiality. The %etter dated #o ember 3-, *55/ of ;xecuti e 'ecretary ;rmita specified presidential communications pri ilege in relation to diplomatic and economic relations with another so ereign nation as the bases for the claim. $ongress must not reIuire the ;xecuti e to state the reasons for the claim with such particularity as to compel disclosure of the information which the pri ilege is meant to protect. - N$ri v. S$nat$ Committ$$ on A%%o*nta'ilit. o& *'li% O&&i%$r+ - 1.2. #o. 345.?,, 'eptember ?, *554, 2esolution on Eotion for 2econsideration 036 executi e pri ilege - doctrine of 9operational proximity: - the main consideration is to limit the a ailability of executi e pri ilege only to officials who stand proximate to the !resident, not only by reason of their function, but also by reason of their positions in the ;xecuti eAs organi(ational structure. 0*6 It must be stressed that the !residentAs claim of executi e pri ilege is not merely founded on her generali(ed interest in confidentiality. The %etter dated #o ember 3-, *55/ of ;xecuti e 'ecretary ;rmita specified presidential communications pri ilege in relation to diplomatic and economic relations with another so ereign nation as the bases for the claim.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 33

Davi3 v. Arro.o 1.2. #o. 3/3,@., Eay ,, *55. The !resident may not in o7e 'ection 3/ of Article <II, which would authori(e her during the emergency to temporarily ta7e o er or direct the operation of any pri ately owned public utility or business affected with public interest without authority from $ongress. D"T the !resident alone can declare a state of national emergency, howe er, without legislation, he has no power to ta7e o er pri ately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest. !ol$ntino v. S$%r$tar. o& Finan%$ presidential certification 0economic emergency6 does away with the reIuirements of three readings on separate days and distribution of final copies three days before enactment #ote Article =II, 'ection 35 simultaneous acancies in the offices of the !resident and the =ice-!resident - The bill calling such special election shall be deemed certified under paragraph *, 'ection *., Article =3 of this $onstitution and shall become law upon its appro al on third reading by the $ongress. #o special election shall be called if the acancy occurs within eighteen months before the date of the next presidential election. Although not pro ided for in the $onstitution, $ongress has established the so-called Con&$r$n%$ Committ$$, composed of representati es from the 'enate and the Louse of 2epresentati es, which is a 9mechanism for compromising differences: between their respecti e ersions of a bill or joint resolution. It has been ruled that 9it is within the power of a conference committee to include in its report an entirely new pro ision that is not found either in the Louse bill or in the 'enate bill: and whate er changes may be agreed upon by the $onference $ommittee need not undergo another 9three readings: in the 'enate and the Louse of 2epresentati es. 0!ol$ntino v. S$%r$tar. o& Finan%$6 !artial eto general rule appro e entirely or disappro e in toto, except with respect to appropriations bills. 'ince building permit fees are not charges on property, they are not impositions from which petitioner is exempt. 0Angeles "ni ersity Joundation . $ity of Angeles -1.2. #o. 34@@@@, Fune */, *53*, Jirst Di ision, =illarama6 Any proposal to enact laws or appro e or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the $ongress shall be alid only if ratified by a majority of the otes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than forty-fi e days but not later than ninety days after the certification by the $ommission on ;lections of the sufficiency of the petition. A2TI$%; =II 2e iew $enter Association of the !hilippines . ;xecuti e 'ecretary - 1.2. #o. 3455?., April *, *55@ The !resident may not

amend 2A //** through an ;xecuti e &rder without a prior legislation granting her such power. The !resident is granted &rdinance !owers under $hapter *, Doo7 III of ;xecuti e &rder #o. *@* )Administrati e $ode of 3@4/+ and may issue any of the followingC xxx 'ec. *. ;xecuti e &rders. O Acts of the !resident pro iding for rules of a general or permanent character in implementation or execution of constitutional or statutory powers shall be promulgated in executi e orders. 'ec. ,. Administrati e &rders. O Acts of the !resident which relate to particular aspect of go ernmental operations in pursuance of his duties as administrati e head shall be promulgated in administrati e orders. 'ec. ?. !roclamations. O Acts of the !resident 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, shall be promulgated in proclamations which shall ha e the force of an executi e order. 'ec. -. Eemorandum &rders. O Acts of the !resident on matters of administrati e detail or of subordinate or temporary interest which only concern a particular officer or office of the 1o ernment shall be embodied in memorandum orders. 'ec. .. Eemorandum $irculars. O Acts of the !resident on matters relating to internal administration, which the !resident desires to bring to the attention of all or some of the departments, agencies, bureaus or offices of the 1o ernment, for information or compliance, shall be embodied in memorandum circulars. 'ec. /. 1eneral or 'pecial &rders. O Acts and commands of the !resident in his capacity as $ommander-in-$hief of the Armed Jorces of the !hilippines shall be issued as general or special orders. $learly, the abolition of the !A1$ and the transfer of its functions to a di ision specially created within the &D;'%A is properly within the prerogati e of the !resident under his continuing Pdelegated legislati e authority to reorgani(eP his own office pursuant to ;.&. *@*. 0!ichay . &ffice of the Deputy ;xecuti e 'ecretary for %egal Affairs In estigati e and Adjudication Di ision - 1.2. #o. 3@.?*-, Fuly *?, *53*6 !#$ rovin%$ o& Nort# Cota'ato v. !#$ (ov$rnm$nt o& t#$ R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ $a%$ an$l on An%$+tral Domain 12 #o. 34,-@3, &ctober 3?, *554 036 That the authority of the !resident to conduct peace negotiations with rebel groups is not explicitly mentioned in the $onstitution does not mean that she has no such authority. As $hief ;xecuti e, the !resident has the general responsibility to promote public peace, and as $ommander-in-$hief, she has the more specific duty to pre ent and suppress rebellion and lawless iolence. 0*6 >hile the !resident does not possess constituent powers as those powers may be exercised only by $ongress, a $onstitutional $on ention, or the people through initiati e and referendum she may submit proposals for constitutional change to $ongress in a manner that does not in ol e the arrogation of constituent powers. It will be obser ed that the !resident has authority, as stated in her oath of office, only to preser e and defend the

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3*

$onstitution. 'uch presidential power does not, howe er, extend to allowing her to change the $onstitution, but simply to recommend proposed amendments or re ision. Divinagra%ia v. Con+oli3at$3 4roa3%a+ting S.+t$m8 In%. - 1.2. #o. 3.**/*, April /, *55@ The pro isions of 'ection - of 2.A. #o. /?// and 'ection , of 2.A. #o. /-4*, in relation to 'ection 33 of 2.A. #o. ,@5*, authori(e the !resident of the !hilippines to exercise considerable infringements on the right of the franchisees to operate their enterprises and the right to free expression. 'uch authority finds corollary constitutional justification as well under 'ection 3/, Article <II, xxx >e do not doubt that the !resident or the 'tate can exercise such authority through the #T$, which remains an agency within the executi e branch of go ernment, but such can be exercised only under limited and rather drastic circumstances. They still do not est in the #T$ the broad authority to cancel licenses and permits. xxx the #T$, in the exercise of its prerogati e to grant pro isional authorities to operate or certificates of public con enience, may ne ertheless not cancel legislati e franchises, which only $ongress can do.

The !residentAs 9executi e pri ilege: co ers all presidential communications. 0A:4A?AN v. A>*ino - 1.2. #o. 3/5-3., Fuly 3., *554 howe er, the pri ilege accorded to presidential communications is not absolute, one significant Iualification being that 9the ;xecuti e cannot, any more than the other branches of go ernment, in o7e a general confidentiality pri ilege to shield its officials and employees from in estigations by the proper go ernmental institutions into possible criminal wrongdoing.: This Iualification applies whether the pri ilege is being in o7ed in the context of a judicial trial or a congressional in estigation conducted in aid of legislation.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3,

S$nat$ v. Ermita 036 ;xecuti e pri ilege, which includes con ersations and correspondence between the !resident and the public official co ered by this executi e order ) Almont$ v+. <a+>*$, - 1.2. #o. @-,./, *, Eay 3@@-K C#av$, v. *'li% E+tat$+ A*t#orit., 1.2. #o. 3,,*-5, @ Fuly *55*+K military, diplomatic and other national security matters which in the interest of national security should not be di ulged )Almont$ v+. <a+>*$,, 1.2. #o. @-,./, *, Eay 3@@-K C#av$, v. r$+i3$ntial Commi++ion on (oo3 (ov$rnm$nt, 1.2. #o. 3,5/3., @ December 3@@4+K information between intergo ernment agencies prior to the conclusion of treaties and executi e agreements )C#av$, v. r$+i3$ntial Commi++ion on (oo3 (ov$rnm$nt, 1.2. #o. 3,5/3., @ December 3@@4+K discussion in close-door $abinet meetings )C#av$, v. r$+i3$ntial Commi++ion on (oo3 (ov$rnm$nt, 1.2. #o. 3,5/3., @ December 3@@4+K and matters affecting national security and public order )C#av$, v. *'li% E+tat$+ A*t#orit., 1.2. #o. 3,,*-5, @ Fuly *55*+, EAG D; I#=&B;D against this legislati e power. 0*6 D"T note that executi e officials are not exempt by the mere fact that they are department heads. &nly one executi e official may be exempted from this power O the !resident on whom executi e power is ested, hence, beyond the reach of $ongress except through the power of impeachment. A claim of pri ilege, being a claim of exemption from an obligation to disclose information, must, therefore, be clearly asserted, and not merely implied. In light of this highly exceptional nature of the pri ilege, the $ourt finds it essential to limit to the !resident the power to in o7e the pri ilege. 'he may of course authori(e the ;xecuti e 'ecretary to in o7e the pri ilege on her behalf, in which case the ;xecuti e 'ecretary must state that the authority is 9Dy order of the !resident,: which means that he personally consulted with her. The pri ilege being an extraordinary power, it must be wielded only by the highest official in the executi e hierarchy. In other words, the !resident may not authori(e her subordinates to exercise such power. 0,6 That a type of information is recogni(ed as pri ileged does not, howe er, necessarily mean that it would be considered pri ileged in all instances. Jor in determining the alidity of a claim of pri ilege, the Iuestion that must be as7ed is not only whether the reIuested information falls within one of the traditional pri ileges, but also whether that pri ilege should be honored in a gi en procedural setting.

A:4A?AN v. A>*ino - 1.2. #o. 3/5-3., Fuly 3., *554 036 9secrecy of negotiations with foreign countries is not iolati e of the constitutional pro isions of freedom of speech or of the press nor of the freedom of access to information.: 0 $o)l$+ Mov$m$nt &or r$++ Fr$$3om @ M FA v. Mangla)*+ 6 9Information on inter-go ernment exchanges prior to the conclusion of treaties and executi e agreements may be subject to reasonable safeguards for the sa7e of national interest.: 0C#av$, v. C((6 Diplomatic negotiations, therefore, are recogni(ed as pri ileged in this jurisdiction, the F!;!A negotiations constituting no exception. It bears emphasisK howe er, that such pri ilege is only presumpti e. Jor as 'enate . ;rmita holds, recogni(ing a type of information as pri ileged does not mean that it will be considered pri ileged in all instances. &nly after a consideration of the context in which the claim is made may it be determined if there is a public interest that calls for the disclosure of the desired information, strong enough to o ercome its traditionally pri ileged status. 0*6 InformerAs !ri ilege - the pri ilege of the 1o ernment not to disclose the identity of a person or persons who furnish information of iolations of law to officers charged with the enforcement of that law. 0,6 !ri ilege accorded to presidential communications, which are presumed pri ileged without distinguishing between those which in ol e matters of national security and those which do not, the rationale for the pri ilege being that a fran7 exchange of exploratory ideas and assessments, free from the glare of publicity and pressure by interested parties, is essential to protect the independence of decision-ma7ing of those tas7ed to exercise !residential, %egislati e and Fudicial power. It bears emphasis, howe er, that the pri ilege accorded to presidential communications is not absolute, one significant Iualification being that 9the ;xecuti e cannot, any more than the other branches of go ernment, in o7e a general confidentiality pri ilege to shield its officials and employees from in estigations by the proper go ernmental institutions into possible criminal wrongdoing.: This Iualification applies whether the pri ilege is being in o7ed in the context of a judicial trial or a congressional in estigation conducted in aid of legislation. 0?6 Deliberati e !rocess !ri ilege - co ers documents reflecting ad isory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which go ernmental decisions and policies are formulated. #otably, the pri ileged status of such documents rests, not on the need to protect national security but, on the 9ob ious reali(ation that officials will not communicate candidly among themsel es if each remar7 is a potential item of disco ery and front page news,: the objecti e of the pri ilege being to enhance the Iuality of agency decisions.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3?

The so-called 9deliberati e process pri ilege: refers to the decision-ma7ing of executi e officials. N$ri v. S$nat$ Committ$$ on A%%o*nta'ilit. o& *'li% O&&i%$r+ - 1.2. #o. 345.?,, Earch *-, *554 -036 !residential $ommunications !ri ilege applies to decision-ma7ing of the !residentK rooted in the constitutional principle of separation of power and the !residentAs uniIue constitutional role. The elements of presidential communications pri ilege are - 3+ The protected communication must relate to a 9Iuintessential and non-delegable presidential power.: *+ The communication must be authored or 9solicited and recei ed: by a close ad isor of the !resident or the !resident himself. The judicial test is that an ad isor must be in 9operational proximity: with the !resident. The presidential communications pri ilege remains a Iualified pri ilege that may be o ercome by a showing of adeIuate need, such that the information sought 9li7ely contains important e idence: and by the una ailability of the information elsewhere by an appropriate in estigating authority. 0*6 Deliberati e !rocess !ri ilege applies to decision-ma7ing of executi e officialsK based on common law pri ilege. 0,6 "nli7e the deliberati e process pri ilege, the presidential communications pri ilege applies to documents in their entirety, and co ers final and post-decisional materials as well as pre-deliberati e ones As a conseIuence, congressional or judicial negation of the presidential communications pri ilege is always subject to greater scrutiny than denial of the deliberati e process pri ilege. The commencement of the term of the !resident may be changed only by constitutional amendment. #ote the commencement of the terms of legislators may be changed by law, so long as such change would not alter the length of their terms. !ursuant to the doctrine of command responsibility, the !resident, as the $ommander-in-$hief of the AJ!, can be held liable for affront against the petitionerAs rights to life, liberty and security as long as substantial e idence exist to show that he or she had exhibited in ol ement in or can be imputed with 7nowledge of the iolations, or had failed to exercise necessary and reasonable diligence in conducting the necessary in estigations reIuired under the rules. The $ourt also stresses that rule that the presidential immunity from suit exists only in concurrence with the presidentAs incumbency. 0Ro3rig*$, v. Ma%a)agal Arro.o, 1.2. #o. 3@345-, #o ember 3-, *533, citing E+tra3a v. D$+i$rto, 1.2. #os. 3?./35-3-, 3?./,4, Earch *, *553, ,-, '$2A ?-*6

In Civil Li'$rti$+ Union v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. , 01.2. #o. 4,4@., Jebruary **, 3@@3, 3@? '$2A ,3/6 this $ourt explained that the prohibition contained in 'ection 3,, Article =II of the 3@4/ $onstitution does not apply to posts occupied by the ;xecuti e officials specified therein without additional compensation in an ex-officio capacity as pro ided by law and as reIuired by the primary function of said officialHs office. F*na v. Ermita 1.2. #o. 34?/?5, Jebruary 33, *535 - The 3@4/ $onstitution in prohibiting dual or multiple offices, as well as incompatible offices, refers to the holding of the office, and not to the nature of the appointment or designation, words which were not e en found in 'ection 3,, Article =II nor in 'ection /, paragraph *, Article I<-D. To 9hold: an office means to 9possess or occupy: the same, or 9to be in possession and administration,: which implies nothing less than the actual discharge of the functions and duties of the office. D$ Ca+tro v. =*3i%ial an3 4ar Co*n%il - 1. 2. #o. 3@355*, Earch 3/, *535 'ection 3- does not apply to the Fudiciary. "nder the $onstitution, it is mandatory for the FD$ to submit to the !resident the list of nominees to fill a acancy in the 'upreme $ourt in order to enable the !resident to appoint one of them within the @5-day period from the occurrence of the acancy. Sarmi$nto v. Mi+on confirmation is reIuired only for the heads of the executi e departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or officers of the armed forces from the ran7 of colonel or na al captain, and other officers whose appointments are ested in him in this $onstitution. 4a*ti+ta v. Salonga $ommissioner of Luman 2ights not subject to confirmationK not included in the first sentence. 5*into+/D$l$+ v. Commi++ion on A))ointm$nt+ sectoral representati es reIuired confirmationK included in the first sentence. Cal3$ron v. Caral$ #%2$ commissioners do not reIuire confirmation. $onstitutional $ommissioners reIuire confirmation. Eembers of the Fudiciary do not reIuire confirmation, only FD$ nomination. Fudicial and Dar $ouncil 0regular members6 reIuire confirmation. &mbudsman and Deputy &mbudsmen no confirmation, just FD$ nomination. Soriano III v. Li+ta - 12 3-,443, *? Earch *55, #ow that the !hilippine $oast 1uard is under the D&T$ and no longer part of the !hilippine #a y or the Armed Jorces of the !hilippines, the promotions and appointments of respondent officers of the !$1, or any !$1 officer from the ran7 of captain and higher for that matter, do not reIuire confirmation by the $A.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3-

1i en that the !resident deri es his power to appoint &I$s in the A2EE regional go ernment from law, it falls under the classification of presidential appointments co ered by the second sentence of 'ection 3., Article =II of the $onstitutionK the !residentAs appointment power thus rests on clear constitutional basis. 0Dat* Mi%#a$l A'a+ :i3a v. S$nat$ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ 1.2. #o. 3@.*/3, Jebruary *4, *53*, ;n Danc, Drion6 The petitioners also jointly assert that 2A #o. 353-,, in granting the !resident the power to appoint &I$s in electi e positions, iolates 'ection 3., Article < of the $onstitution, 0'ection 3.. The !resident shall exercise general super ision o er autonomous regions to ensure that laws are faithfully executed.6 which merely grants the !resident the power of super ision o er autonomous regions. This is an o erly restricti e interpretation of the !residentAs appointment power. There is no incompatibility between the !residentAs power of super ision o er local go ernments and autonomous regions, and the power granted to the !resident, within the specific confines of 2A #o. 353-,, to appoint &I$s. xxx. &nce the !resident has appointed the &I$s for the offices of the 1o ernor, =ice 1o ernor and members of the 2egional %egislati e Assembly, these same officials will remain in office until they are replaced by the duly elected officials in the Eay *53, elections. #othing in this pro ision e en hints that the !resident has the power to recall the appointments he already made. $learly, the petitionersA fears in this regard are more apparent than real. BDat* Mi%#a$l A'a+ :i3a v. S$nat$ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@.*/3, Jebruary *4, *53*, ;n Danc, Drion6 The power granted to the !resident, ia 2A #o. 353-,, to appoint members of the 2egional %egislati e Assembly is comparable to the power granted by D! 443 )the &mnibus ;lection $ode+ to the !resident to fill any acancy for any cause in the 2egional %egislati e Assembly )then called the 'angguniang !ampoo7+. 0'ection ,-. Jilling of acancy. - !ending an election to fill a acancy arising from any cause in the 'angguniang !ampoo7, the acancy shall be filled by the !resident, upon recommendation of the 'angguniang !ampoo7C !ro ided, That the appointee shall come from the same pro ince or sector of the member being replaced.6 0Dat* Mi%#a$l A'a+ :i3a v. S$nat$ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@.*/3, Jebruary *4, *53*, ;n Danc, Drion6

1enerally, the power to appoint ested in the !resident includes the power to ma7e temporary appointments, unless he is otherwise specifically prohibited by the $onstitution or by the law, or where an acting appointment is repugnant to the nature of the office in ol ed. 0Ca'iling v. a'*alan, 1.2. #os. %-*3/.? and %-*3/.-, Eay ,3, 3@.-, 3? '$2A */?6 The !residentAs power to issue an acting appointment is particularly authori(ed by the Administrati e $ode of 3@4/ );xecuti e &rder #o. *@*+. 1enerally, the purpose for staggering the term of office is to minimi(e the appointing authorityAs opportunity to appoint a majority of the members of a collegial body. It also intended to ensure the continuity of the body and its policies. A staggered term of office, howe er, is not a statutory prohibition, direct or indirect, against the issuance of acting or temporary appointment. It does not negate the authority to issue acting or temporary appointments that the Administrati e $ode grants. 0($n$ral v. Urro - 1.2. #o. 3@3-.5, Earch *@, *5336 Sangg*niang 4aranga. o& Don Mariano Mar%o+ v. Martin$, - 1.2. #o. 3/5.*., Earch ,, *554 - the !resident is without any power to remo e elected officials, since the power is exclusi ely ested in the proper courts as expressly pro ided for in the last paragraph of 'ection .5 of the %ocal 1o ernment $ode. 0Salalima v. (*ingona8 =r.6 Lo)$, v. CSC - the authority of the $'$ is only to determine whether or not the appointees possess the legal Iualifications and the appropriate eligibility, nothing else. L*$go v. CSC the $'$ may not appro e as 9temporary: an appointment designated as 9permanent: by the appointing authority.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3.

The

$'$ classified the position of 1raft In estigation &fficer III as belonging to the $areer ;xecuti e 'er iceK appointee to the position reIuired to acIuire $;' eligibility 0$;' officers, under the Administrati e $ode, are appointed by the !resident6. &mbudsman challenges the classification, saying that it impairs his appointment prerogati e as guaranteed under the $onstitution. '$C classification would result in absurdity 0a6 it would est in the !resident the power to appoint an employee of the &mbudsman, in iolation of the $onstitution, or 0b6 it would include in the $;' a position not occupied by a presidential appointee, contrary to the Administrati e $ode. The $'$ may not classify a position 01raft In estigation &fficer III of the &ffice of the &mbudsman6 as belonging to the $areer ;xecuti e 'er ice and reIuire an appointee thereto to acIuire $;' eligibility, because $;' officers are appointed by the !resident. This derogates the appointing power of the &mbudsman. A $;' appointment not effected by the !resident is contrary to the pro isions of the Administrati e $ode. 0O&&i%$ o& t#$ Om'*3+man v. Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion, ?-3 '$2A -/56

The designation of Agra as Acting 'ecretary of Fustice concurrently with his position of Acting 'olicitor 1eneral was unconstitutional and oid for being in iolation of the constitutional prohibition under 'ection 3,, Article =II of the 3@4/ $onstitution. Deing designated as the Acting 'ecretary of Fustice concurrently with his position of Acting 'olicitor 1eneral, therefore, Agra was undoubtedly co ered by 'ection 3,, Article =II, whose text and spirit were too clear to be differently read. Lence, Agra could not alidly hold any other office or employment during his tenure as the Acting 'olicitor 1eneral, because the $onstitution has not otherwise so pro ided. xxx It is eIually remar7able, therefore, that AgraAs designation as the Acting 'ecretary of Fustice was not in an ex officio capacity, by which he would ha e been alidly authori(ed to concurrently hold the two positions due to the holding of one office being the conseIuence of holding the other. 0F*na v. Agra - 1.2. #o. 3@3.??, Jebruary 3@, *53,, ;n Danc, Dersamin6 "nder the doctrine of implication, the power to appoint carries with it the power to remo e. 0Ag*irr$8 =r. v. D$ Ca+tro , ,/4 !hil. /3? )3@@@+6 As a general rule, therefore, all officers appointed by the !resident are also remo able by him. 0$ru(, $arlo %., The %aw of !ublic &fficers, 3-?-3-- )3@@*+6 The exception to this is when the law expressly pro ides otherwise - that is, when the power to remo e is expressly ested in an office or authority other than the appointing power. xxx In gi ing the !resident the power to remo e a Deputy &mbudsman and 'pecial !rosecutor, $ongress simply laid down in express terms an authority that is already implied from the !residentHs constitutional authority to appoint the aforesaid officials in the &ffice of the &mbudsman. 0 (on,al$+ v. O&&i%$ o& t#$ r$+i3$nt - 1.2. #o. 3@.*,3, 'eptember ?, *53*, ;n Danc, !erlasDernabe6 !ower of control - Aran$ta8 $t al. v. 6on. M. (atmaitan8 $t al., 0353 !hil. ,*4 )3@-/+6 - if a certain power or authority is ested by law upon the Department 'ecretary, then such power or authority may be exercised directly by the !resident, who exercises super ision and control o er the departments.

Mati'ag v. 4$ni)a.o - 1.2. #o. 3?@5,., April *, *55* - An a3 int$rim appointment is a permanent appointment because it ta7es effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the !resident once the appointee has Iualified into office. An a3 int$rim appointment that has lapsed by inaction of the $ommission on Appointments does not constitute a term of office. The period from the time the ad interim appointment is made to the time it lapses is neither a fixed term nor an unexpired term. 0F$talino v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. 3@34@5, December 5?, *53*, ;n Danc, Drion6

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3/

Ang$l$+ v. (ait$ - 1.2. #o. 3.-*/., #o ember *-, *55@ - Eemorandum $ircular #o. -4, promulgated by the &ffice of the !resident on Fune ,5, 3@@, - no appeal from or petition for re iew of decisionsMordersMresolutions of the 'ecretary of Fustice on preliminary in estigations of criminal cases shall be entertained by the &ffice of the !resident, except those in ol ing offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. - The !residentHs act of delegating authority to the 'ecretary of Fustice by irtue of said Eemorandum $ircular is well within the pur iew of the doctrine of Iualified political agency. Dut the doctrine of Iualified political agency could not be extended to the acts of the Doard of Directors of TID$&2! despite some of its members being themsel es the appointees of the !resident to the $abinet. xxx 'uch $abinet members sat on the Doard of Directors of TID$&2! $- o&&i%io, or by reason of their office or function, not because of their direct appointment to the Doard by the !resident. ; idently, it was the law, not the !resident, that sat them in the Doard. 0 !ra3$ an3 Inv$+tm$nt D$v$lo)m$nt Cor)oration o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. Manalang/D$migillo6 The !hilippine Truth $ommission 0!T$6 - The creation of the !T$ finds justification under 'ection 3/, Article =II of the $onstitution, imposing upon the !resident the duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. 0'ection 3/, Article =II6 04iraogo v. !#$ #ili))in$ !r*t# Commi++ion o& 2010 - 1.2. #o. 3@*@,-, December /, *5356 Santo+ v. (o - 1.2. #o. 3-.543, &ctober 3@, *55- - 'ince the D&F is not a Iuasi-judicial body and it is not one of those agencies whose decisions, orders or resolutions are appealable to the $ourt of Appeals under 2ule ?,, the resolution of the 'ecretary of Fustice finding probable cause to indict petitioners for estafa is, therefore, not appealable to the $ourt of Appeals ia a petition for re iew under 2ule ?,. It is e ident that under the 3@4/ $onstitution the !resident and the $ongress act in tandem in exercising the power to proclaim martial law or suspend the pri ilege of the writ of habeas corpus. They exercise the power, not only seIuentially, but in a sense jointly since, after the !resident has initiated the proclamation or the suspension, only the $ongress can maintain the same based on its own e aluation of the situation on the ground, a power that the !resident does not ha e. $onseIuently, although the $onstitution reser es to the 'upreme $ourt the power to re iew the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation or suspension in a proper suit, it is implicit that the $ourt must allow $ongress to exercise its own re iew powers, which is automatic rather than initiated. &nly when $ongress defaults in its express duty to defend the $onstitution through such re iew

should the 'upreme $ourt step in as its final rampart. The constitutional alidity of the !residentAs proclamation of martial law or suspension of the writ of habeas corpus is first a political Iuestion in the hands of $ongress before it becomes a justiciable one in the hands of the $ourt. 0Fort*n v. Arro.o - 1.2. #o. 3@5*@,, Earch *5, *53*6 C*lanag v. Dir$%tor o& ri+on+ criminal and administrati e remedies for iolation of conditional pardon are not mutually exclusi e and may be successi ely a ailed of by the !resident for the punishment of the conditional pardon. recommitmentMcriminal prosecution for iolation of conditional pardonMcriminal prosecution for new offense if iolation of the condition constitutes a separate criminal offense. E+)*$la+ v. rovin%ial "ar3$n o& 4o#ol conditional pardonee committed usurpation of public functions. #ew case dismissed for lac7 of witnesses. !resident ordered his commitment. '$ sustained saying mere commission, not con iction reIuired for recommitment. 0Affirmed in S*m*long v. (on,al$+6 Amnesty commonly denotes a general pardon to rebels for their treason or other high political offenses, or the forgi eness which one so ereign grants to the subjects of another, who ha e offended, by some breach, the law of nations. Amnesty loo7s bac7ward, and abolishes and puts into obli ion, the offense itselfK it so o erloo7s and obliterates the offense with which he is charged, that the person released by amnesty stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense. x x x !ardon is granted by the $hief ;xecuti e and as such it is a pri ate act which must be pleaded and pro ed by the person pardoned, because the courts ta7e no notice thereofK while amnesty by !roclamation of the $hief ;xecuti e with the concurrence of $ongress, is a public act of which the courts should ta7e judicial notice. x x x: 0Mag3alo ara +a ag'a'ago - 1.2. #o. 3@5/@,, Fune 3@, *53*, ;n Danc, 'ereno6 im$nt$l v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. - the power to ratify is ested in the !resident, subject to the concurrence of the 'enate.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 34

The $ontract Agreement xxx between #orthrail and $#E;1 does not parta7e of the nature of an executi e agreement. It is merely an ordinary commercial contract that can be Iuestioned before the local courts. 0C#ina National Ma%#in$r. C E>*i)m$nt Cor)oration v. Sta. Maria - 1.2. #o. 34--/*, Jebruary /, *53*, ;n Danc, 'ereno6 R*'ri%o v. Arro.o - 1.2. #o. 34,4/3, Jebruary 34, *535 - the !resident, during his tenure of office or actual incumbency, may not be sued in any ci il or criminal case, and there is no need to pro ide for it in the $onstitution or law. In Mar%o+ v. C#i$& o& Sta&&8 Arm$3 For%$+ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ 04@ !hil, *?. )3@-3+6, this $ourt ruled that a court-martial case is a criminal case and the 1eneral $ourt Eartial is a PcourtP a7in to any other courts. In the case of Ramon R*&&. v+. C#i$& o& Sta&& o& t#$ #ili))in$ Arm., ?, &ff. 1a(., 4--, we did not hold that the word PcourtP in general used in our $onstitution does not include a $ourt-EartialK what we held is that the words Pinferior courtsP used in connection with the appellate jurisdiction of the 'upreme $ourt to Pre iew on appeal certiorari or writ of error, as the law or rules of court may pro ide, final judgments of inferior courts in all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is death or life imprisonment,P as pro ided for in section *, Article =III, of the $onstitution, do not refer to $ourts-Eartial or Eilitary $ourts. The fact that a judgment of con iction, not of acIuittal, rendered by a court-martial must be appro ed by the re iewing authority before it can be executed )Article of >ar ?.+, does not change or affect the character of a court-martial as a court. A judgment of the $ourt of Jirst Instance imposing death penalty must also be appro ed by the 'upreme $ourt before it can be executed. 0(ar%ia v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. - 1.2. #o. 3@4--?, Fuly ,5, *53*, Third Di ision, !eralta6 The power to confirm a sentence of the !resident, as $ommander-in-$hief, includes the power to appro e or disappro e the entire or any part of the sentence gi en by the court martial. 0(ar%ia v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. 1.2. #o. 3@4--?, Fuly ,5, *53*, Third Di ision, !eralta6 Li'$ral art. v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3@3//3, Eay ., *535 - A facial objection is meritorious if, expressly and on the face of the petition, what is e ident as cited grounds are erroneous applications of the law rather than gra e abuse of discretion amounting to lac7 or excess of jurisdiction.

The issuance of subseIuent resolutions by the $ourt is simply an exercise of judicial power under Art. =III of the $onstitution, because the execution of the Decision is but an integral part of the adjudicati e function of the $ourt. xxx >ith the final and executory judgment in EEDA, the writ of continuing mandamus issued in EEDA means that until petitioner-agencies ha e shown full compliance with the $ourtAs orders, the $ourt exercises continuing jurisdiction o er them until full execution of the judgment. 0MMDA v. Con%$rn$3 R$+i3$nt+ o& Manila 4a. - 1.2. #os. 3/3@?/-?4, Jebruary 3-, *5336 $o)l$ v. S$+'r$no - The 'upreme $ourt as guardian of the legal profession has ultimate powers o er attorneys. Its authority to discipline lawyers stems from its constitutional prerogati e to regulate the practice of law and the admission of the persons to engage therein )'ection -)-+, Article <, The 3@/, !hilippine $onstitutionK In R$ C*nanan, @? !hil. -,?, 3@-?+. Apart from the constitutional mandate, the disciplinary authority of the 'upreme $ourt o er attorneys is an inherent power incidental to its proper administration of justice and essential to an orderly discharge of its judicial functions )!$Dan v. C*+i, -/ '$2A 3-?K In R$ Alma%$n, ,3 '$2A -.*K 6ila3o v. Davi3, 4? !hil. -/,K In the Eatter of the ID! Eembership Dues DelinIuency of ;dillon, 1.2. #o. A$-3@*4 0ID! Adm. $ase #o. DD-36 August ,, 3@/4+. Jurthermore, attorneys are the courtHs constituency - to aid in the administration of justice )Doge '. 'tate, ,@ #; /?-+. A lawyer occupies what may be termed a Iuasi-judicial office since he is in fact an officer of the court, and li7e the court itself, an instrument or agency to ad ance the ends of justice ) :$rlin v. C*l;in, .5 A%2 4-3+ Da id . Arroyo !!35*3 recalled !!353/. '$ not moot and academic - The 9moot and academic: principle is not a magical formula that can automatically dissuade the courts in resol ing a case. $ourts will decide cases, otherwise moot and academic, ifC first, there is a gra e iolation of the $onstitutionK second, the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is in ol edK third, when constitutional issue raised reIuires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the publicK and fourth, the case is capable of repetition yet e ading re iew.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" 3@

The expiration of the term generally renders an election protest moot and academic 0 Sal$+ v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3/?..46 D"T said case may still be resol ed for purposes of formulating controlling principles to guide the bench, bar and the public 0Ati$n,a v. <illaro+a6, or in the case of determining a Iuestion in ol ing the one-year residency reIuirement for those running for public office, which is one capable of repetition, under the doctrine of repetition yet e ading re iew. 0(a.o v. <$r%$l$+6K or notwithstanding the election and proclamation of a new set of municipal officers, to pre ent a repetition of the acts complained of 0Al'aEa v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+6K or despite the appro al by the $i il 'er ice $ommission of the Iuestioned appointments, to a oid a repetition 0Altr$+ v. Em)l$o - 1.2. #o. 345@4., December 35, *5546K or the demise of one of the accused, to pre ent a miscarriage of justice against a co-accused 0Con+tantino v. $o)l$ - 1.2. #o. 3?5.-., 'eptember 3,, *55/6K or e en the separation of the petitioner from go ernment ser ice, because other penalties may be imposed upon her 0 agano v. Na,arro - 1.2. #o. 3?@5/*, 'eptember *3, *55/6. im$nt$l8 =r. v. Ag*irr$ - by the mere enactment of the Iuestioned law or the appro al of the challenged action, the dispute is said to ha e ripened into a judicial contro ersy e en without any other o ert act. ;arliest &pportunity if not raised in pleadings, cannot be considered at trial and, if not considered at trial, cannot be considered on appeal. In criminal cases, constitutional Iuestion can be raised any time in the discretion of the court. In ci il cases, Iuestion can be raised at any stage if it is necessary to the determination of the case itself. In e ery case, except where there is estoppel or laches 0!iDam v. Si'ong#ano.6, constitutional Iuestion may be raised at any stage if it in ol es the jurisdiction of the court. #ecessity of Deciding $onstitutional Questions justification -separation of powers 0 tria+ )oliti%a )rin%i)l$6 lant$r+ ro3*%t+ In%. v. F$rti)#il Cor)oration 1.2. #o. 3..55., Earch 3?, *554 - The general rule is that an unconstitutional law is oid. The doctrine of operati e fact, as an exception to the general rule, only applies as a matter of eIuity and fair play. The operati e fact doctrine also applies to 0executi e orders and6 executi e acts subseIuently declared as in alid. 06a%i$n3a L*i+ita8 In%or)orat$3 v. r$+i3$ntial Agrarian R$&orm Co*n%il - 1.2. #o. 3/3353, #o ember **, *5336

4$ng,on v. Drilon fiscal autonomy means freedom from outside control. $ongress could not ha e car ed out an exemption for the 1'I' from the payment of legal fees without transgressing another eIually important institutional safeguard of the $ourtAs independence - fiscal autonomy. 02eC !etition for 2ecognition of the ;xemption of the 1o ernment 'er ice Insurance 'ystem )1'I'+ for !ayment of %egal Jees,id. at *5@ citing 'ection ,, Article =III of the $onstitution, 90t6he Fudiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.:6 Jiscal autonomy recogni(es the power and authority of the $ourt to le y, assess and collect fees 0Id., citing Deng(on . Drilon, 1.2. #o. 35,-*?, 3- April 3@@*, *54 '$2A 3,,, 3-56 including legal fees. xxx. Any exemption from the payment of legal fees granted by $ongress to go ernment-owned or controlled corporations and local go ernment units will necessarily reduce the FDJ and the 'AFJ. "ndoubtedly, such situation is constitutionally infirm for it impairs the $ourtAs guaranteed fiscal autonomy and erodes its independence. 0 In t#$ Matt$r o& Clari&i%ation o& E-$m)tion &rom a.m$nt o& All Co*rt an3 S#$ri&&+ F$$+ A.E. #o. 3*-*-5,-5, Earch 3,, *53*, ;n Danc, !ere(6 A acancy in the 'upreme $ourt must be filled within ninety days from the occurrence thereof. A acancy in the lower courts must be filled within ninety days from the submission of the list of nominees. 0=acancies in the &ffices of the &mbudsman and Deputy &mbudsmen shall be filled within three months after they occur.6

Forti%# v. Corona di ision decides with a ,-* ote. E2 denied with a *-* ote. !etitioner as7s that the matter be ta7en to the court en banc. '$ denies reIuestC the word 9decided: must refer to 9cases.: 92esol ed: must refer to 9matters.: lant$r+ ro3*%t+ In%. v. F$rti)#il Cor)oration 1.2. #o. 3..55., Earch 3?, *554, 2eyes 2egional Trial $ourts )2T$+ ha e the authority and jurisdiction to consider the constitutionality of statutes, executi e orders, presidential decrees and other issuances. D"T note 4riti+# Am$ri%an !o'a%%o v. Cama%#o, 1.2. #o. 3.,-4,, August *5, *554 the $ourt of Tax Appeals cannot pass upon the constitutionality of a statute. 2ules of procedure of special courts and Iuasijudicial bodies shall remain effecti e unless disappro ed by the '$. #ational !ower $orporation 0A.E. #&. 5--35-*5'$, Earch 35, *5356 and 1'I' 0A.E. #o. 54-*-53-5, Jebruary 33, *5356 and the %and Dan7 of the !hilippines 0Lan3 4an; o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. Riv$ra - 1.2. #o. 34*?,3, #o ember 3/, *5536 are not exempt from paying filing fees.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *5

Am)ong v CSC - 1.2. #o. 3./@3., August *., *554 - administrati e jurisdiction o er a court employee belongs to the 'upreme $ourt, regardless of whether the offense was committed before or after employment in the judiciary. >ith respect to the power of the $ourt, 'ection ).+, Article =III of the 3@4/ $onstitution pro ides that the 9'upreme $ourt shall ha e administrati e super ision o er all courts and the personnel thereof.: This pro ision empowers the $ourt to o ersee all matters relating to the effecti e super ision and management of all courts and personnel under it. 2ecogni(ing this mandate, Eemorandum $ircular #o. *. of the &ffice of the !resident, dated Fuly ,3, 3@4., considers the 'upreme $ourt exempt and with authority to promulgate its own rules and regulations on foreign tra els. Thus, the $ourt came out with &$A $ircular #o. ?@-*55, )D+. 0L$av$ Divi+ion v. 6$*+3$n+ A.E. #o. !-33-*@*/, December 3,, *5336 The regular members of the Fudicial and Dar $ouncil ha e staggered terms. $ongress may designate only one )3+ representati e to the FD$. 0C#av$, v. =*3i%ial an3 4ar Co*n%il - 1.2. #o. *5**?*, Fuly 3/, *53*6 Caoi'$+8 =r. v. Om'*3+man - The &mbudsman is duty bound to ha e all cases against judges and court personnel filed before it, referred to the 'upreme $ourt for determination as to whether an administrati e aspect is in ol ed therein. Soli3 6om$+8 In%. v. La+$rna - 1.2. #o. 3..5-3, April 4, *554 'ection 3? does not apply to decisions in administrati e proceedings, li7e those rendered by the &ffice of the !resident. D"T note the cardinal rights of parties in administrati e proceedings in the landmar7 case of Ang !i'a. v. CIR. A2TI$%; I<-A - #ili))in$ LaF.$r+ A++o%iation v. Agrava rules of procedure should not encroach upon the constitutional prerogati es of other bodies, li7e the '$. Mar%ol$ta v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 343,//, April *?, *55@ - 'ection - )a+ of 2ule , of the $omelec 2ules of !rocedure and 'ection / of Article I<-A of the $onstitution reIuire that a majority ote of all the members of the $omelec, and not only those who participated and too7 part in the deliberations, is necessary for the pronouncement of a decision, resolution, order or ruling. Jinal decisions, orders or rulings of $onstitutional $ommissions may be appealed to the 'upreme $ourt - by way of a petition for certiorari under 2ule .?, with respect to the $&E;%;$ and The $&A, and 2ule ?, with respect to the $'$.

(*$vara v. COMELEC the $&E;%;$As contempt power can be exercised only in connection with its power of adjudication, and may not be in o7ed in connection with its exercise of purely administrati e functions. 4lan%o v. COMELEC, 1.2. #o. 3453.?, Fune 3/, *554 The 'upreme $ourt has no power to re iew ia %$rtiorari an interlocutory order or e en a final resolution of a Di ision of the $&E;%;$, only final orders, rulings or decisions of the $&E;%;$ en banc, unless the 2esolution sought to be set aside is a nullity. Fili)ina+ Engin$$ring an3 Ma%#in$ S#o) v. F$rr$r only orders or rulings issued in connection with the $&E;%;$As Iuasi-judicial power can be the subject of certiorari proceedings under section /. 2esolutions awarding contracts should be the subject of ordinary ci il actions before trial courts. To sum up, the $ourt restates its ruling on 'ec. 3)*+, Art. I<)D+ of the $onstitution, i(C 3. The appointment of members of any of the three constitutional commissions, after the expiration of the une en terms of office of the first set of commissioners, shall always be for a fixed term of se en )/+ yearsK an appointment for a lesser period is oid and unconstitutional. The appointing authority cannot alidly shorten the full term of se en )/+ years in case of the expiration of the term as this will result in the distortion of the rotational system prescribed by the $onstitution. *. Appointments to acancies resulting from certain causes )death, resignation, disability or impeachment+ shall only be for the unexpired portion of the term of the predecessor, but such appointments cannot be less than the unexpired portion as this will li7ewise disrupt the staggering of terms laid down under 'ec. 3)*+, Art. I<)D+. ,. Eembers of the $ommission, e.g. $&A, $&E;%;$ or $'$, who were appointed for a full term of se en years and who ser ed the entire period, are barred from reappointment to any position in the $ommission. $orollarily, the first appointees in the $ommission under the $onstitution are also co ered by the prohibition against reappointment.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *3

?. A commissioner who resigns after ser ing in the $ommission for less than se en years is eligible for an appointment to the position of $hairman for the unexpired portion of the term of the departing chairman. 'uch appointment is not co ered by the ban on reappointment, pro ided that the aggregate period of the length of ser ice as commissioner and the unexpired period of the term of the predecessor will not exceed se en )/+ years and pro ided further that the acancy in the position of $hairman resulted from death, resignation, disability or remo al by impeachment. The $ourt clarifies that 9reappointment: found in 'ec. 3)*+, Art. I<)D+ means a mo ement to one and the same office )$ommissioner to $ommissioner or $hairman to $hairman+. &n the other hand, an appointment in ol ing a mo ement to a different position or office )$ommissioner to $hairman+ would constitute a new appointment and, hence, not, in the strict legal sense, a reappointment barred under the $onstitution. -. Any member of the $ommission cannot be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity. 0F*na v. !#$ C#airman8 Commi++ion on A*3it - 1.2. #o. 3@*/@3, April *?, *53*6

A2TI$%; I<-D $&EEI''I&#

TL;

$I=I%

';2=I$;

Dut while the grant of the $'$As rule-ma7ing power is untouchable by $ongress, the laws that the $'$ interprets and enforces fall within the prerogati e of $ongress. As an administrati e agency, the $'$As Iuasilegislati e power is subject to the same limitations applicable to other administrati e bodies. The rules that the $'$ formulates must not o erride, but must be in harmony with, the law it see7s to apply and implement. 0!ra3$ an3 Inv$+tm$nt D$v$lo)m$nt Cor)oration o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion 1.2. #o. 34**?@, Earch -, *53,6 Manila Int$rnational Air)ort A*t#orit. v. Cit. o& a+a. - 1.2. #o. 3.,5/*, April *, *55@ The EIAA is a go ernment 9instrumentality: that does not Iualify as a 9go ernmentowned or controlled corporation.: The term go ernment 9instrumentality: is broader than the term 9go ernment-owned or controlled corporation.: The fact that two terms ha e separate definitions means that while a go ernment 9instrumentality: may include a 9go ernment-owned or controlled corporation,: there may be a go ernment 9instrumentality: that will not Iualify as a 9go ernment-owned or controlled corporation.: "! ran7s with EIAA, a go ernment instrumentality exercising corporate powers but not organi(ed as a stoc7 or non-stoc7 corporation. >hile said corporations are go ernment instrumentalities, they are loosely called go ernment corporate entities but not go ernment-owned and controlled corporations in the strict sense. 0%oc7heed Detecti e and >atchman Agency, Inc. . "ni ersity of the !hilippines - 1.2. #o. 34-@34, April 34, *53*6 Dased on all of the foregoing, the inescapable conclusion is that the $'$ may ta7e cogni(ance of an administrati e case filed directly with it against an official or employee of a chartered state college or uni ersity. This is regardless of whether the complainant is a pri ate citi(en or a member of the ci il ser ice and such original jurisdiction is shared with the Doard of 2egents of the school. 0Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion v. Co*rt o& A))$al+ - 1.2. #o. 3/.3.*, &ctober @, *53*6

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" **

>hich Iuasi-judicial agency has jurisdiction to hear and decide complaints for illegal dismissal against an adjunct go ernment agency engaged in proprietary functionR The Armed Jorces of the !hilippines $ommissary and ;xchange 'er ices )AJ!$;'+ is a unitMfacility of the Armed Jorces of the !hilippines )AJ!+ organi(ed pursuant to %etter of Instruction )%&I+ #o. ,3, which was issued on #o ember *5, 3@/* by then !resident Jerdinand Earcos. 'ince it cannot be denied that petitioners are go ernment employees, the proper body that has jurisdiction to hear the case is the $'$. 06i3algo v. R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ - 1.2. #o. 3/@/@,, Fuly -, *5356 In (ar%ia v. Molina 01.2. #os. 3-/,4, S 3/?3,/, August 35, *535, .*/ '$2A -?56, we declared the formal charges issued by petitioner 1o ernment 'er ice Insurance 'ystem !resident without prior conduct of a preliminary in estigation as null and oid. 0Salva v. <all$ 1. 2. #o. 3@,//,, April *, *53,6 Amor$+ v. CSC - 1.2. #o. 3/55@,, April *@, *55@ the mere fact that a particular position belongs to the career ser ice does not automatically confer security of tenure on its occupant. 'uch right will ha e to depend on the nature of his appointment, which in turn depends on his eligibility or lac7 of it. !ol$ntino v. 3$ =$+*+ acceptance of a temporary appointment di ests the temporary appointee of constitutional security of tenure against remo al without cause e en if he is a ci il ser ice eligible. Rom*al3$, v. CSC a personAs acceptance of a temporary appointment results in the termination of official relations with his former permanent position, to which he may not demand reinstatement if his temporary appointment is not renewed. Mat*ran v. Maglana where a temporary employee acIuires ci il ser ice eligibility during his tenure as such, his temporary appointment does not thereby automatically become permanent. Am'a+ v. 4*$na+$3a e en if appointment is temporary, appointee may not be remo ed at will if appointment is for a fixed period.

A go ernment employee holding a casual or temporary employment cannot be terminated within the period of his employment except for cause. Thus, they may be laid-off anytime before the expiration of the employment period pro ided any of the following occursC )3+ when their ser ices are no longer neededK )*+ funds are no longer a ailableK ),+ the project has already been completedMfinishedK or )?+ their performance are below par. ;Iually important, they are entitled to due process especially if they are to be remo ed for more serious causes or for causes other than the reasons mentioned in $'$ Jorm #o. 553. This is pursuant to 'ection *, Article I<)D+ of the $onstitution and 'ection ?. of the $i il 'er ice %aw. The reason for this is that their termination from the ser ice could carry a penalty affecting their rights and future employment in the go ernment. 0 CSO v. La)i3 - 1.2. #o. 3@3@?5, April 3*, *5336 2A .4-5 temporary employees / years may be granted ci il ser ice eligibility that will Iualify them for permanent appointment to their positions. Da,a v. L*go 1.2 #o. 3.4@@@, April ,5, *554 - a probationary employee may only be terminated for a just cause, that is, unsatisfactory conduct or want of capacity. !rimarily confidential one which denotes not only confidence in the aptitude of the appointee for the duties of the office but primarily close intimacy which ensures freedom of intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgi ings or betrayals of personal trust or confidential matters of state 0D$ lo+ Santo+ v. Mallar$6K or one declared to be so upon recommendation of the $'$ 0Sala,ar v. Mat#a.6 D"T see A(COR v. Angara 0in ol ing to7en attendants at the !A1$&2, whose positions are, by law, classified, as primarily confidential6, citing A(COR v. Rillora,a8 CSC v. Sala+ an3 in$ro v. 6$%#anova an executi e or legislati e declaration that a position is primarily confidential, highly technical or policy-determining is not conclusi e upon the courts, the true test being the nature of the position. These employees still ha e security of tenure, and are exempt only from the reIuirement of competiti e examinations. ;xamples pri ate secretaries 0Cor)*+ v. C*a3$rno6 bodyguards 04orr$+ v. CA6 city legal officer 0Ca3i$nt$ v. Santo+6 and pro incial attorney 0(rino v. CSC6 Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion v. Sala+ - a dri er is not a confidential employee. 0'ee R$G <$#i%*lar A%%i3$nt - A.E. #o. *554-3,-'$, #o ember 3@, *5546

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *,

Cor)*+ v. C*a3$rno the three classes exempted from competiti e examsK enjoy security of tenure. #epotism appointment or designation of relati es within the ,rd degree of consanguinity of affinity prohibited except 036 persons appointed in a confidential capacity 0*6 teachers 0,6 members of the AJ! 0?6 physicians applies e en to designations. In the local go ernment career ser ice, the prohibition against nepotism extends to the relati es of the appointing or recommending authority, within the fourth ci il degree of consanguinity or affinity. The nepotism rule co ers all 7inds of appointments whether original, promotional, transfer and reemployment regardless of status including casuals and contractuals except consultants. );mphasis supplied.+ 01aleos . !eople - 1.2. #os. 3/?/,5-,/, Jebruary @, *5336 The principal distinctions between a detail 0mo ement from one agency to another 0;xecuti e &rder *@*, Doo7 =, Title 3, 'ubtitle A, $hapter -, 'ection *. ).+6 and reassignment 0reassignment from one organi(ational unit to another in the same agency -;.&. *@*, Doo7 =, Title 3, 'ubtitle A, $hapter -, 'ection *. )/+6 lie in the place where the employee is to be mo ed and in its effecti ity pending appeal with the $'$. Dased on the definition, a detail reIuires a mo ement from one agency to another while a reassignment reIuires a mo ement within the same agency. Eoreo er, pending appeal with the $'$, an order to detail is immediately executory, whereas a reassignment order does not become immediately effecti e. 0R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. a%#$%o 1.2. #o. 3/45*3, Fanuary *-, *53*6

!eriod

of pre enti e suspension pending in estigation cannot be deducted from the penalty, because pre enti e suspension is not a penalty. 05*im'o v. ($rva%io6 !re enti e suspension pending appeal is actually puniti eK so, if exonerated, respondent is entitled to be reinstated with full pay for the period of suspension 0pending appeal6. Lowe er, if penalty or con iction is affirmed, the period of pre enti e suspension pending appeal becomes part of the penalty of suspension or dismissal. 0(loria v. CA6

Univ$r+it. o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. R$gino As a component of the $i il 'er ice, "! is therefore go erned by !D 45/ and administrati e cases in ol ing the discipline of its employees come under the appellate jurisdiction of the $i il 'er ice $ommission. All members of the ci il ser ice are under the jurisdiction of the $'$, unless otherwise pro ided by law. 2A ?./5 under Eagna $arta for !ublic 'chool Teachers schools ha e exclusi e jurisdiction o er public school teachers. Dut '$ has declared $'$ and &mbudsman ha e concurrent jurisdiction.

The present legal basis for an award of bac7 salaries is 'ection ?/, Doo7 = of the Administrati e $ode of 3@4/ 9)?+ An appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory, and in case the penalty is suspension or remo al, the respondent shall be considered as ha ing been under pre enti e suspension during the pendency of the appeal in the e ent he wins an appeal.: This pro ision, howe er, on its face, does not support a claim for bac7 salaries since it does not expressly pro ide for bac7 salaries during this periodK our established rulings hold that bac7 salaries may not be awarded for the period of pre enti e suspension 06on. (loria v. CA, ,.- !hil. /?? )3@@@+6 as the law itself authori(es its imposition so that its legality is beyond Iuestion. To resol e the seeming conflict, the $ourt crafted two conditions before an employee may be entitled to bac7 salariesC a+ the employee must be found innocent of the charges and b+ his suspension must be unjustified. 0 4angali+an v. CA, ,?* !hil. -4. )3@@/+6 The reasoning behind these conditions runs this wayC although an employee is considered under pre enti e suspension during the pendency of a successful appeal, the law itself only authori(es pre enti e suspension for a fixed periodK hence, his suspension beyond this fixed period is unjustified and must be compensated. 0Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion v. Cr*, - 1.2. #o. 34/4-4, August @, *533, ;n Danc, Drion6 !eriods $'$ @5 days - !ublic officers with pending criminal cases @5 days - %ocal electi e officials %ocal 1o ernment $ode .5 days - Anti-1raft %aw suspension )$n3$nt$ lit$ @5 days - &mbudsman six months

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *?

An illegally terminated ci il ser ice employee is entitled to bac7 salaries limited only to a maximum period of fi e years, and not full bac7 salaries from his illegal termination up to his reinstatement. 0?$n;o v. (*ngon, 1.2. #os. 3.-?-5 S 3.-?-*, August 3,, *55@, -@- '$2A -.*, -456 The illegally dismissed go ernment employee shall be paid bac7 salaries at the rate he was recei ing when he was terminated unIualified by salary increases and without deduction from earnings recei ed elsewhere during the period of his illegal dismissal. 04al>*i3ra v. CFI o& Ca)i,, Dranch II. #o. %?5?@5, &ctober *4, 3@//, 45 '$2A 3*,6 Deing an incumbent at the time, 1alang would ha e continued to recei e 2ATA, Eeal Allowance and 2ice 'ubsidy, separate from his salary, had he not been illegally dismissed from ser ice. 0(alang v. Lan3 4an; o& t#$ #ili))in$+ - 1.2. #o. 3/-*/., Eay ,3, *5336 CSC v. Da%o.%o. - the go ernment party that can appeal the decision in administrati e cases must be the party prosecuting the case and not the disciplining authority or tribunal which heard the administrati e case. 0&ffice of the &mbudsman . %iggayu 1.2. #o. 3/?*@/, Fune *5, *53*6 5*into v. COMELEC 1.2. #o. 34@.@4, December 3, *55@, #achuraM0E26 Jebruary **, *535, !uno - "nder 'ection 3, of 2A @,.@, which reiterates 'ection .. of the &mnibus ;lection $ode, any person holding a public appointi e office or position, including acti e members of the Armed Jorces of the !hilippines, and officers and employees in go ernment-owned or -controlled corporations, shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy. "pon the other hand, an elected official is not deemed to ha e resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy for the same or any other elected office or position. In fine, an elected official may run for another position without forfeiting his seat.

A2TI$%; I<-$ ;%;$TI&#'

TL;

$&EEI''I&#

&#

;lecti e officials can be appointed to ci ilian posts during their term, but they shall be considered as ha ing forfeited their electi e seats upon acceptance of said ci ilian posts. "nless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position, no appointi e official shall hold any other office or employment in the 1o ernment or any subdi ision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including 1o ernment-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries. #ot applicable to !resident, =ice-!resident, Eembers of the $abinet, and their deputies or assistants, who can hold other offices only if allowed under the $onstitution. 0Article =II, 'ection 3,6 Civil Li'$rti$+ Union v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *-

Mar%ol$ta v. 4orra - A.$. #o. //,*, Earch ,5, *55@ - complaint for disbarment against $&E;%;$ $ommissioners an impeachable officer who is a member of the Dar cannot be disbarred without first being impeached 0=ar>*$ v. Om'*3+man8 In R$G Ra*l M. (on,al$+ an3 C*$n%o v. F$rnan 6 It bears emphasis that the pro ision that majority of $omelec members should be lawyers pertains to the desired composition of the $omelec. >hile the appointing authority may follow such constitutional mandate, the appointment of a full complement of lawyers in the $omelec membership is not precluded. !ower to enforce and administer election laws Includes the power to annul an illegal registry of otersK cancel a proclamation made by a board of can assersK oust a candidate already proclaimedK reject nuisance candidates 0D"T $omelec may not refuse to gi e due course to a certificate of candidacy duly accomplished and filed its duty is ministerial6K postpone or continue elections 0O%am)o v. COMELEC6K declare a failure of elections 0&mnibus ;lection $odeMSan%#$, v. COMELEC6 #ili))in$ r$++ In+tit*t$ v. COMELEC 0*?? '$2A*/*6 a $&E;%;$ resolution reIuired newspapers to pro ide it with free space of not less than T page for the common use of political parties and candidates. '$C "nconstitutional constituted 9Ta7ing: of pri ate property without payment of just compensation. !$l$%omm*ni%ation+ an3 4roa3%a+t Attorn$.+ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. COMELEC 0*4@ '$2A ,,/6 D! 443, 'ection @* reIuires radio and T= stations to gi e free air time to the $&E;%;$ to be used as the $&E;%;$ hour for broadcasting information regarding candidates. $hallenged on the ground of being unconstitutional for constituting ta7ing without just compensation, the '$ said the law was a alid regulation by the 'tate of the use of the 'tateAs air wa es. =alid exercise of the police power.

r$+'it$rio v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3/444?, Fune ,5, *554 - a failure of election may be declared only in the three instances stated in 'ection . of the &;$C the election has not been heldK the election has been suspended before the hour fixed by lawK and the preparation and the transmission of the election returns ha e gi en rise to the conseIuent failure to elect, meaning nobody emerged as the winner. Jurthermore, the reason for such failure of election should be force majeure, iolence, terrorism, fraud or other analogous causes. Jinally, before the $&E;%;$ can grant a erified petition see7ing to declare a failure of election, the concurrence of * conditions must be established, namelyC )3+ no oting has ta7en place in the precincts concerned on the date fixed by law or, e en if there was oting, the election ne ertheless resulted in a failure to electK and )*+ the otes cast would affect the result of the election. Sang%o)an v. COMELEC 1. 2. #o. 3/5*3. , Earch 3*, *554 the annulment of election can only be done when the $&E;%;$ finds that an election was itiated by widespread and per asi e terrorism and election frauds, which resulted in the submission at gunpoint of falsified and tampered election returns, and it is impossible to purge the illegal from the alid returns, so that there are no returns worthy of faith and credit and from which would be gauged a fair and true expression of the popular will. 0San%#$, v. COMELEC6 Fla*ta v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 34?-4., Fuly **, *55@ - In D*r$m3$+ v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+, this $ourt sustained the power of the $&E;%;$ en banc to order a correction of the 'tatement of =otes to ma7e it conform to the election returns. 4$3ol v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3/@4,5, December ,, *55@ - The $&E;%;$ has Iuasi-judicial, Iuasi-legislati e and administrati e powers. $&#T;E!T power sustained because it was exercised in connection with its Iuasijudicial power8 i.$., an in estigation into alleged massi e electoral fraud. A'ain,a v. Ar$llano 12 #o. 343.??, December 4, *554 - "nder 'ection -, 2ule */ of the $&E;%;$ 2ules of !rocedure, correction of manifest errors in the tabulation or tallying of results during the can assing may be filed directly with the $ommission, e en after a proclamation of the winning candidates. Despite the proclamation of the winning candidates, the $&E;%;$ still has jurisdiction to correct manifest errors in the election returns for the 'angguniang Dayan candidates. A 9manifest error: is one that is isible to the eye or ob ious to the understandingK that which is open, palpable, incontro ertible, needing no e idence to ma7e it more clear.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *.

D*r$m3$+ v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - a preproclamation contro ersy is not proper after a proclamation has been made, only if there had been a alid proclamation. Flor$+ v. COMELEC '$ declared as unconstitutional a law pro iding that decisions of the municipal or metropolitan trial courts in barangay elections may be appealed to regional trial courts.

&mnibus ;lection $ode - 'ection .4 petition for disIualification based on commission of prohibited acts 0e.g., ote-buying, terrorism, o erspending, unlawful electioneering6 and the possession of a permanent resident status in a foreign country may be filed anytime after the deadline for filing of $o$s but before proclamation person disIualified is prohibited from continuing as a candidate. 'ection /4 petition to deny due course to or cancel a $ertificate of $andidacy 0$o$6 based on false material misrepresentations 0on material matters - statements regarding age, residence, citi(enship or nonpossession of natural-born Jilipino status , eligibility, as when one, although precluded from running for a fourth term because of the three-term limit rule, claims to be nonetheless Iualified, or when one claims to be eligible despite his disIualification on the basis of an accessory penalty imposed upon him in connection with his con iction in a criminal case - the false representation must consist of a deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform, or hide a fact which would otherwise render a candidate ineligible. In other words, it must be made with an intention to decei e the electorate as to oneAs Iualification for public office. 6 in the $o$ - must be filed within fi e days from the deadline for filing of $o$s, or not later than *- days from the filing of the Iuestioned $o$ person disIualified is not treated as a candidate at all has been li7ened to a petition for Iuo warranto, but is filed before, and not after, proclamation. A candidate may be substituted if he dies, is disIualified or withdraws. 'ubstitutions in cases of death or disIualification may usually be made until midday of election day. An earlier deadline is usually prescribed for substitutions by reason of withdrawal. "nder 'ection 3* of 2.A. #o. @55., in order to ob iate confusion, the name of the substitute candidate should, as much as possible, bear the same surname as that of the substituted candidate. 0F$3$ri%o v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ , 1.2. #o. 3@@.3*, Fanuary **, *53,6 Thus, in F$3$ri%o v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ , the $ourt in alidated the substitution of a candidate for mayor who Fit#3r$F her candidacy for purposes of substituting her husband as candidate for go ernor because of the latterAs death. It said that, while her substitution of her husband because of his death may ha e been alid because said substitution may be done until midday of election day, her substitution as a candidate for mayor was in alid because the deadline for the same had long prescribed. The $ourt stressed that her substitution as a mayoralty candidate was not by reason of her death or disIualification. A candidate whose certificate of candidacy is cancelled or denied due course may li7ewise not be substituted. 0!alaga v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+, 1.2. #o. 3@.45?, &ctober @, *53*K !agolino v. 6RE! an3 L*%. !orr$+, 1.2. #o. *5**5*, Earch 3@, *53,K see Miran3a v. A'a.a, 1.2. #o. 3,.,-3, Fuly *4, 3@@@, ,33 '$2A .3/6 9A cancelled certificate of

a%i&i%a3or v. COMELEC 1.2. #o. 3/4*-@, Earch 3,, *55@ The $&E;%;$ sitting en banc, howe er, does not ha e the authority to hear and decide election cases, including pre-proclamation contro ersies in the first instance, as the $&E;%;$ in di ision has such authority. The $&E;%;$ en banc can exercise jurisdiction only on motions for reconsideration of the resolution or decision of the $&E;%;$ in di ision. !ursuant to 2ule 34 of the &mnibus ;lection $ode, decisions and resolutions of any di ision of the $&E;%;$ in special cases become final and executory after the lapse of fi e days, unless a timely motion for reconsideration is lodged with the $&E;%;$ en banc. &nly final orders of the $&E;%;$ in Di ision may be raised before the $&E;%;$ en banc. $learly, the assailed status Iuo ante &rder, being interlocutory, should first be resol ed by the $&E;%;$ Jirst Di ision ia a motion for reconsideration. 0Ca.$tano v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3@,4?., April 3*, *5336 F$rnan3$, v. COMELEC 1.2. #o. 3/.*@., Fune ,5, *554 - trial courts of limited jurisdiction ha e exclusi e original jurisdiction o er election protests in ol ing barangay officials, which include the 'B chairman. Ug3ora%ion v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3/@4-3, April 34, *554 the certificate of candidacy of a green card holder who states therein that he is a resident may be denied due course or cancelled on the ground of material misrepresentation. =*+tim'a+t$ v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3/@?3,, #o ember *4, *554 036 the use of a name other than that stated in the certificate of birth is not a material misrepresentation, as 9material misrepresentation: under the earlier-Iuoted 'ection /4 of the &mnibus ;lection $ode refers to 9Iualifications for electi e office.: 0*6 a petition for disIualification based on material misrepresentation in the certificate of candidacy is different from an election protest. The purpose of an election protest is to ascertain whether the candidate proclaimed elected by the board of can assers is really the lawful choice of the electorate.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" */

candidacy oid a' initio cannot gi e rise to a alid candidacy, and much less to alid otes.: 0Arat$a v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+, 1.2. #o. 3@-**@, &ctober @, *53*6 In Arat$a v. COMELEC, the 'upreme $ourt ac7nowledged that there may be instances when the grounds for both sections .4 and /4 may o erlap, as when a candidate who represents that he is a resident of the place where he see7s election but is actually a permanent resident or immigrant to a foreign country, in which case, he would clearly also not be a resident of the place where he see7s election for at least one year immediately preceding the day of the election. In such cases, the $ourt clarified that one who would li7e to assail the candidacy of that person may a ail himself of either remedy. N*i+an%$ %an3i3at$+ H +tra. vot$+ - 9>e hold that the rule in 2esolution #o. ?33. considering the otes cast for a nuisance candidate declared as such in a final judgment, particularly where such nuisance candidate has the same surname as that of the legitimate candidate, not stray but counted in fa or of the latter, remains a good law.: 0 D$ la Cr*, v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ , 1.2. #o. 3@***3, #o ember 3,, *53*6 4lan%o v. COMELEC, 1.2. #o. 3***-4 - otebuying has its criminal and electoral aspects. Its criminal aspect to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused cannot be the subject of summary hearing. Lowe er, its electoral aspect to ascertain whether the offender should be disIualified from office can be determined in an administrati e proceeding that is summary in character. Dlanco . $&E;%;$, 1.2. #o. 3453.?, Fune 3/, *554 petitioner was earlier found administrati ely, and not criminally, liable for ote-buying, and disIualified under 'ection .4 of the &mnibus ;lection $ode. In 1.2. #o. 3***-4, petitioner was disIualified from continuing as a candidate only in the Eay 4, 3@@- elections. A'a.on v. COMELEC an3 Ra*l Da,a - 12 #o. 343*@-, April *, *55@ - abduction of a oter, the 7illing of a political leader, the threats which pre ented the holding of the campaign sorties, and the intimidation of oters, or of terrorism 0also massi e ote-buying and bribery6 are proper grounds for an election protest, not a preproclamation contro ersy - illegal composition or proceedings of the board of can assers, can assed election returns are incomplete, contain material defects, appear to be tampered with or falsified, or contain discrepancies in the same returns or in other authentic copies thereofK election returns were prepared under duress, threats, coercion, or intimidation, or they are ob iously manufactured or not authenticK substitute or fraudulent returns in contro erted polling places were can assed, the results of which materially affected the standing of the aggrie ed candidate or candidates. In fact, had Abayon timely filed an election protest, bearing the same allegations and raising identical issues, it would ha e been gi en due course. The ten-day period for filing an

election contest or a petition for Iuo warranto cannot be considered suspended with the filing thereof. O%am)o v. 6o*+$ o& R$)r$+$ntativ$+ El$%toral !ri'*nal / a subseIuent disIualification of a winning candidate will not entitle his opponent, the candidate who recei ed the second highest number of otes to be declared the winner. #&T; - in subseIuent decisions of the 'upreme $ourt, it made clear that its earlier rulings holding that the second-placer cannot be proclaimed winner if the first-placer is disIualified or declared ineligible should be limited to situations where the certificate of candidacy of the first-placer was alid at the time of filing but subseIuently had to be cancelled because of a iolation of law that too7 place, or a legal impediment that too7 effect, after the filing of the certificate of candidacy. If the certificate of candidacy is oid a' initio, then legally the person who filed such oid certificate of candidacy was ne er a candidate in the elections at any time. All otes for such non-candidate should therefore be considered as stray otes and should not be counted. Thus, such non-candidate can ne er be a first-placer in the elections. If a certificate of candidacy oid a' initio is cancelled on the day, or before the day, of the election, pre ailing jurisprudence holds that all otes for that candidate are stray otes. 0$ayat . $&E;%;$, 1.2. #o. 3.,//., April *?, *55/, -** '$2A *,6 If a certificate of candidacy oid a' initio is cancelled one day or more after the elections, all otes for such candidate should also be stray otes because the certificate of candidacy is oid from the ery beginning. This, according to the 'upreme $ourt, is the more eIuitable and logical approach on the effect of the cancellation of a certificate of candidacy that is oid a' initio. &therwise, a certificate of candidacy oid a' initio can operate to defeat one or more alid certificates of candidacy for the same position. 0Falosjos . $ommission on ;lections, 1.2. #o. 3@,*,/, &ctober @, *53*6 Ati$n,a v. COMELEC 1.2. #o. 344@*5, Jebruary 3., *535, Abad - the $&E;%;$ may resol e an intra-party leadership dispute, in a proper case brought before it, as an incident of its power to register political parties. Li'$ral art. v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3@3//3, Eay ., *535 - political coalitions need to register in accordance with the established norms and procedures, if they are to be recogni(ed as such and be gi en the benefits accorded by law to registered coalitions.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *4

4ANA! v. COMELEC, 1.2. #&. 3//-54, August /, *55@ - It is clear that the grant of the 9exclusi e power: to in estigate and prosecute election offenses to the $&E;%;$ was not by irtue of the $onstitution but by D! 443, a legislati e enactment. Dino v. Olivar$, 1.2. #o. 3/5??/, December ?, *55@ - It is clear that the $hief 'tate !rosecutor, all !ro incial and $ity Jiscals, andMor their respecti e assistants ha e been gi en continuing authority, as deputies of the $ommission, to conduct a preliminary in estigation of complaints in ol ing election offenses under the election laws and to prosecute the same. 'uch authority may be re o7ed or withdrawn anytime by the $&E;%;$, either expressly or impliedly, when in its judgment such re ocation or withdrawal is necessary to protect the integrity of the process to promote the common good, or where it belie es that successful prosecution of the case can be done by the $&E;%;$. Erig*$l v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 3@5-*., Jebruary *., *535 - The 'pecial 'econd Di ision of the $&E;%;$ clearly acted with gra e abuse of discretion when it immediately transferred to the $ommission en banc a case that ought to be heard and decided by a di ision. 'uch action cannot be done without running afoul of 'ection ,, Article I<$ of the 3@4/ $onstitution. Instead of peremptorily transferring the case to the $ommission en banc, the 'pecial 'econd Di ision of $&E;%;$, should ha e instead assigned another $ommissioner as additional member of its 'pecial 'econd Di ision, not only to fill in the seat temporarily acated by $ommissioner Jerrer, but more importantly so that the reIuired Iuorum may be attained. Thus, it is the $ourt, under its power to re iew decisions, orders, or resolutions of the $&E;%;$ pro ided under 'ection /, Article I<-A of the 3@4/ $onstitution and 'ection 3, 2ule ,/ of the $&E;%;$ 2ules of !rocedure that has jurisdiction to hear the instant petition. In this case, the $&E;%;$ ;n Danc cannot be compelled to resol e %ayugAs Eotion for 2econsideration of the 2esolution dated Fune 3-, *535 that was filed on Fuly *4, *535 after said 2esolution had already attained finality. In fact, the $&E;%;$ 'econd Di ision denied the same Eotion in its &rder dated August ?, *535 precisely for the reason that it was filed out of time. 0La.*g v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. 3@*@4?, Jebruary *4, *53*6

'ince it is the $&E;%;$ which has jurisdiction to ta7e cogni(ance of an appeal from the decision of the regional trial court in election contests in ol ing electi e municipal officials, then it is also the $&E;%;$ which has jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. $learly, petitioner erred in in o7ing this $ourtHs power to issue said extraordinary writ. 0(alang v. ($ronimo - 1.2. #o. 3@*/@,, Jebruary **, *533K see also Dulilis . #ue( 1. 2. #o. 3@-@-,, August @, *5336 There is no Iuestion, therefore, that the $ourt has no jurisdiction to ta7e cogni(ance of the petition for certiorari assailing the denial by the $&E;%;$ Jirst Di ision of the special affirmati e defenses of the petitioner. The proper remedy is for the petitioner to wait for the $&E;%;$ Jirst Di ision to first decide the protest on its merits, and if the result should aggrie e him, to appeal the denial of his special affirmati e defenses to the $&E;%;$ en banc along with the other errors committed by the Di ision upon the merits xxx &therwise stated, the $ourt has no power to re iew on certiorari an interlocutory order or e en a final resolution issued by a Di ision of the $&E;%;$. 0Am'il v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. 3?,,@4, &ctober *-, *555, ,?? '$2A ,-4, ,.--,..K Caga+ v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. 3@?3,@, Fanuary *?, *53*6 "nder the exception, therefore, the 0'upreme6 $ourt may ta7e cogni(ance of a petition for certiorari under 2ule .? to re iew an interlocutory order issued by a Di ision of the $&E;%;$ on the ground of the issuance being made without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction or with gra e abuse of discretion amounting to lac7 or excess of jurisdiction when it does not appear to be specifically pro ided under the $&E;%;$ 2ules of !rocedure that the matter is one that the $&E;%;$ en banc may sit and consider, or a Di ision is not authori(ed to act, or the members of the Di ision unanimously ote to refer to the $&E;%;$ en banc. &f necessity, the aggrie ed party can directly resort to the $ourt because the $&E;%;$ en banc is not the proper forum in which the matter concerning the assailed interlocutory order can be re iewed. 0 :#o v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ -1.2. #o. 3*?5,,, 'eptember *-, 3@@/, */@ '$2A ?.,, ?/3?/,K Caga+ v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ 1.2. #o. 3@?3,@, Fanuary *?, *53*6 #ot all criminal offenses committed during the election period are election offenses.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" *@

The election period may be changed by resolution of the $ommission on ;lections. The election period may, under the $onstitution, commence earlier than ninety days before the day of election. - 'pecial case Article =II, 'ection 35 special election, to be called within / days after acancy, and must be held not earlier than ?- days nor later than .5 days from such call. $n$ra v. COMELEC - 1. 2. #o. 343.3,, #o ember *-, *55@ - 9any person who files his certificate of candidacy within 0the filing6 period shall only be considered a candidate at the start of the campaign period for which he filed his certificate of candidacy.: A2TI$%; I<-D TL; $&EEI''I&# &# A"DIT Ri$l v. "rig#t Insular Auditor denied a claim for payment of his salary for ser ices as a temporary cler7 of the 'enate on the ground that his ser ices were unnecessary. '$C in alidMthis is a matter within the peculiar pro ince of the %egislature and for which its members are responsible to their constituents. Insular Auditor cannot Iuestion the necessity of an appropriation D"T in Mat*t$ v. 6$rnan3$, Insular Auditor refused to authori(e payment under a contract, which was no ated without a second public bidding. '$C alid because the Insular Auditor can reject an account that is demonstrably unlawful. #ili))in$ So%i$t. &or t#$ r$v$ntion o& Cr*$lt. to Animal+ v. Commi++ion on A*3it - 1.2. #o. 3.@/-*, 'eptember *-, *55/ - !etitioner is D;$%A2;D a pri ate domestic corporation subject to the jurisdiction of the 'ecurities and ;xchange $ommission. The Doy 'couts of the !hilippines is a public corporation and its funds are subject to the $&AAs audit jurisdiction. 04o. S%o*t+ o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. Commi++ion on A*3it - 1.2. #o. 3//3,3, Fune /, *5336 %ocal water districts, such as the %E>D, are 1&$$s with special charter. !.D. #o. 3@4 constitutes the special charter by irtue of which local water districts exist. 0 F$li%iano v. Aran$, - 1.2. #o. 3.-.?3, August *-, *5356 %1"s, though granted local fiscal autonomy, are still within the audit jurisdiction of the $&A. 0<$lo+o v. Commi++ion on A*3it - 1.2. #o. 3@,.//, 'eptember ., *533, ;n Danc, !eralta6

San%#$, v. Commi++ion on A*3it - 1.2. #o. 3*/-?-, April *,, *554 - The $ourt had therefore pre iously upheld the authority of the $&A to disappro e payments which it finds excessi e and disad antageous to the 1o ernmentK to determine the meaning of 9public bidding: and when there is 9failure: in the biddingK to disallow expenditures which it finds unnecessary according to its rules e en if disallowance will mean discontinuance of foreign aidK to disallow a contract e en after it has been executed and goods ha e been deli ered. %i7ewise, we sustained the findings of the $&A disallowing the disbursements of the #ational Lome Eortgage Jinance $orporation for failure to submit certain documentary reIuirements and for being irregular and excessi e. >e ha e also ruled that the final determination of the Department of Jinance and the DI2 as to a personAs entitlement to an informerAs reward is conclusi e only upon the executi e agencies concerned and not on the $&A, the latter being an independent constitutional commission. The $&A is traditionally gi en free rein in the exercise of its constitutional duty to examine and audit expenditures of public funds especially those which are palpably beyond what is allowed by law. 04ar'o v Commi++ion on A*3it 1.2. #o. 3-/-?*, &ctober 35, *5546 - in Ro3ol&o S. 3$ =$+*+ BCat'alogan "at$r Di+tri%tI v. COA , the $ourt upheld the authority and jurisdiction of the $&A to rule on the legality of the disbursement of go ernment funds by a water district and declared that such power does not conflict with the jurisdiction of the courts, the DDE, and the %>"A. 'ection *0*6 the critical function of the $&A authori(es it to =;T& disbursements. a%$t$ v. A%ting C#airman o& t#$ COA monetary claims must be acted upon by the $&A within .5 days. Jailure to do so within said period would not result in the automatic appro al of the claim pursuant to section3 of $A ,*/. '$C #&, claimant can file petition for mandamus to compel $&A to render a decision. Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion v. o'r$ , ?,4 '$2A ,,? - >hile the determination of lea e benefits is within the functions of the $i il 'er ice $ommission as the central personnel agency of the go ernment, the duty to examine accounts and expenditures relating to such benefits properly pertains to the $ommission on Audit. ; en as the 'upreme $ourt recogni(es the $i il 'er ice $ommissionAs jurisdiction in this case, it is not exclusi e as it is shared with the $ommission on Audit.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,5

N6MFC v. A'a.ari 1.2. #o. 3..-54, &ctober *, *55@ - De that as it may, assuming for the sa7e of argument that execution by garnishment could proceed in this case against the funds of petitioner, it must bear stress that the latter is a go ernment-owned or controlled corporation with a charter of its own. Its juridical personality is separate and distinct from the go ernment and it can sue and be sued in its name. As such, while indeed it cannot e ade the effects of the execution of an ad erse judgment and may not ordinarily place its funds beyond an order of garnishment issued in ordinary cases, it is imperati e in order for execution to ensue that a claim for the payment of the judgment award be first filed with the $ommission on Audit )$&A+. An absolution from a criminal charge is not a bar to an administrati e prosecution or ice ersa. The criminal case filed before the &ffice of the &mbudsman is distinct and separate from the proceedings on the disallowance before the $&A. 'o also, the dismissal by Eargarito !. 1er acio, Fr., Deputy &mbudsman for Eindanao, of the criminal charges against petitioners does not necessarily foreclose the matter of their possible liability as warranted by the findings of the $&A. 0Soria v. Commi++ion on A*3it - 1.2. #o. 3./*3@, Jebruary 4, *5336 >ith respect to the liability of petitioner, we li7ewise affirm the $&AAs ruling that he is personally and solidarily liable for the disallowed amount. The doctrine of separate personality of a corporation finds no application because $DA is not a pri ate entity but a go ernment agency created by irtue of 2epublic Act #o. .@,@ in compliance with the pro isions of 'ection 3-, Article <II of the 3@4/ $onstitution. Eoreo er, respondents satisfactorily established that petitioner acted in bad faith when he pre ailed upon the DA!-T;$ to modify the initial result of the technical e aluation of the computers by imposing an irrele ant grading system that was intended to fa or one of the bidders, after the bids had been opened. 0<$r+o,a v. Carag*$ - 1.2. #o. 3-/4,4, Earch 4, *5336 A2TI$%; < %&$A% 1&=;2#E;#T 2;$A%% - 'ection /5 of the %ocal 1o ernment $ode !ercentage reIuirements at least *-U in the case of %1"s with a oting population of not more than *5,555MAt least *5U in the case of %1"s with a oting population of at least *5,555 but not more than /-,555, pro ided petitioners shall not be less than -,555MAt least 3-U in the case of %1"s with a oting population of at least /-,555 but not more than ,55,555, pro ided petitioners shall not be less than 3-,555MAt least 35U in case the oting population exceeds ,55,555, pro ided petitioners shall not be less than ?-,555

4atanga+ CA!<8 In%. v. Co*rt o& A))$al+ - the %1" did not ha e the authority to grant franchises to operate a $AT= system because it was the #ational Telecommunications $ommission )#T$+ that had the power under ;& #os. *5- and ?,. to regulate $AT= operations. ;& *5mandated the #T$ to grant certificates of authority to $AT= operators while ;& ?,. ested on the #T$ the power to regulate and super ise the $AT= industry. So%ial =*+ti%$ So%i$t. v. Ati$n,a - 1.2. #o. 3-.5-*, Jebruary 3,, *554 - 'ection ? of Article < of the $onstitution confines the !residentAs power o er %1"s to one of general super ision. 'uper isory power, when contrasted with control, is the power of mere o ersight o er an inferior bodyK it does not include any restraining authority o er such body. It does not allow the super isor to annul the acts of the subordinate. Lere, what the D&; see7s to do is to set aside an ordinance enacted by local officials, a power that not e en its principal, the !resident, has. Thus, the !resident and his or her alter egos, the department heads, cannot interfere with the acti ities of local go ernments, so long as they act within the scope of their authority. Accordingly, the D&; cannot substitute its own discretion for the discretion exercised by the sanggunian of the $ity of Eanila. In local affairs, the wisdom of local officials must pre ail as long as they are acting within the parameters of the $onstitution and the law.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,3

1o ernors do not ha e emergency military powers. - 2espondents cannot rely on paragraph 3, subparagraph ) ii+ of Article ?.- 0of the %ocal 1o ernment $ode6, as the said pro ision expressly refers to calamities and disasters, whether man-made or natural. The go ernor, as local chief executi e of the pro ince, is certainly empowered to enact and implement emergency measures during these occurrences. Dut the 7idnapping incident in the case at bar cannot be considered as a calamity or a disaster. 2espondents cannot find any legal mooring under this pro ision to justify their actions. !aragraph *, subparagraph ) i+ of the same pro ision is eIually inapplicable for two reasons. Jirst, the Armed Jorces of the !hilippines does not fall under the category of a 9national law enforcement agency,: to which the #ational !olice $ommission )#A!&%$&E+ and its departments belong. Its mandate is to uphold the so ereignty of the !hilippines, support the $onstitution, and defend the 2epublic against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Its aim is also to secure the integrity of the national territory. 'econd, there was no e idence or e en an allegation on record that the local police forces were inadeIuate to cope with the situation or apprehend the iolators. If they were inadeIuate, the recourse of the pro incial go ernor was to as7 the assistance of the 'ecretary of Interior and %ocal 1o ernment, or such other authori(ed officials, for the assistance of national law enforcement agencies. 00=amar M. :*la.an8 $t al. v+. (ov. A'3*+a;*r M. !an $t%.8 $t al . - 1.2. #o. 34/*@4, Fuly ,, *53*, ;n Danc, 'ereno6 Three-Term %imit 3. >hen a permanent acancy occurs in an electi e position and the official merely assumed the position pursuant to the rules on succession under the %1$, then his ser ice for the unexpired portion of the term of the replaced official cannot be treated as one full term as contemplated under the subject constitutional and statutory pro ision that ser ice cannot be counted in the application of any term limit )Dorja, Fr. . $ommission on ;lections and Fose T. $apco, Fr. 01.2. #o. 3,,?@-, 'eptember ,, 3@@4, *@- '$2A 3-/ )3@@4+6+. 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 in oluntary se erance or interruption )Eontebon . $ommission on ;lections 01.2. #o. 345???, April 4, *554, --3 '$2A -5 )*554++.

*. An electi e official, who has ser ed for three consecuti e terms and who did not see7 the electi e position for what could be his fourth term, but later won in a recall election, had an interruption in the continuity of the officialAs ser ice. Jor, he had become in the interim, i.e., from the end of the ,rd term up to the recall election, a pri ate citi(en )Adormeo . $ommission on ;lections 01.2. #o. 3?/@*/, Jebruary ?, *55*, ,/. '$2A @5 )*55*+6 and 'ocrates . $ommission on ;lections 01.2. #o. 3-?-3*, #o ember 3*, *55*, ,@3 '$2A ?-/6+. ,. The abolition of an electi e local office due to the con ersion of a municipality to a city does not, by itself, wor7 to interrupt the incumbent officialAs continuity of ser ice )%atasa . $ommission on ;lections. - 1.2. #o. 3-?4*@, December 35, *55,, ?3/ '$2A .53 )*55,+. ?. !re enti e suspension is not a term-interrupting e ent as the electi e officerAs continued stay and entitlement to the office remain unaffected during the period of suspension, although he is barred from exercising the functions of his office during this period )Aldo ino, Fr. . $&E;%;$, 1.2. #o. 34?4,., December *,, *55@, .5@ '$2A *,?+. -. >hen a candidate is proclaimed as winner for an electi e position and assumes office, his term is interrupted when he loses in an election protest and is ousted from office, thus disenabling him from ser ing what would otherwise be the unexpired portion of his term of office had the protest been dismissed )%on(anida . $ommission on ;lections, 1.2. #o. 3,-3-5, Fuly *4, 3@@@, ,33 '$2A .5* )3@@@+and Di(on . $ommission on ;lections 01.2. #o. 34*544, Fanuary ,5, *55@, -// '$2A -4@ )*55@++. The brea7 or interruption need not be for a full term of three years or for the major part of the ,-year termK an interruption for any length of time, pro ided the cause is in oluntary, is sufficient to brea7 the continuity of ser ice )'ocrates . $ommission on ;lections 01.2. #o. 3-?-3*, #o ember 3*, *55*, ,@3 '$2A ?-/6, citing %on(anida . $ommission on ;lections, 1.2. #o. 3,-3-5, Fuly *4, 3@@@, ,33 '$2A .5* )3@@@++.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,*

.. >hen an official is defeated in an election protest and said decision becomes final after said official had ser ed the full term for said office, then his loss in the election contest does not constitute an interruption since he has managed to ser e the term from start to finish. Lis full ser ice, despite the defeat, should be counted in the application of term limits because the nullification of his proclamation came after the expiration of the term )&ng . Alegre, 1.2. #os. 3.,*@- S 3.,,-?, Fanuary *,, *55., ?/@ '$2A ?/, )*55.+and 2i era III . $ommission on ;lections 01.2. #os. 3./-@3 S 3/5-//, Eay @, *55/, -*, '$2A ?3 )*55/++. There can be no Iuibbling that, during the term *55?-*55/, and with the enforcement of the decision of the election protest in his fa or, Abundo assumed the mayoralty post only on Eay @, *55. and ser ed the term until Fune ,5, *55/ or for a period of a little o er one year and one month. $onseIuently, unli7e Eayor &ng in &ng and Eayor Eorales in 2i era, it cannot be said that Eayor Abundo was able to ser e fully the entire *55?-*55/ term to which he was otherwise entitled. 0A'*n3o v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. *53/3., Fanuary 4, *53,, ;n Danc, =elasco6 La%$3a v. COMELEC - 1.2. #o. 34*4./, #o ember *-, *554 punong barangay of municipality of 'orsogon for 3st two terms. Dy the time he was elected for his , rd term, the municipality had been merged with another municipality to form the $ity of 'orsogon. Territorial jurisdiction and inhabitants the same. Lata+a v. COMELEC affirmed. DisIualified for a fourth term. A winner who dislodges in a recall election an incumbent electi e local official merely ser ed the balance of the latterAs term of officeK it is not a full three-year term. It also goes without saying that an incumbent electi e local official against whom a recall election is initiated and who ne ertheless wins in a recall election must be iewed as being a continuing term of office and not as a brea7 in rec7oning three consecuti e terms. - A recall election term then, not being a full three-year term, is not to be counted or used as a basis for disIualification whether it is held prior or subseIuent to the nine-year full three-term limit. 0M$n3o,a v. COMELEC #&T E;#TI&#;D in A'*n3o v. Commi++ion on El$%tion+ - 1.2. #o. *53/3., Fanuary 4, *53,6

A2TI$%; <I A$&"#TADI%ITG &J !"D%I$ &JJI$;2' $o)l$ v. 4$ni)a.o - 1.2. #o. 3-??/,, April *?, *55@ a $&E;%;$ $ommissioner may not be charged with libel without first being impeached. 0The 2T$, not the &mbudsman, or the 'andiganbayan, has jurisdiction o er libel charges le eled against public officers.6 D;T2AGA% &J !"D%I$ T2"'T - Pacts which are just short of being criminal but constitute gross faithlessness against public trust, tyrannical abuse of power, inexcusable negligence of duty, fa oritism, and gross exercise of discretionary powers.P In other words, acts that should constitute betrayal of public trust as to warrant remo al from office may be less than criminal but must be attended by bad faith and of such gra ity and seriousness as the other grounds for impeachment. 0(on,al$+ v. O&&i%$ o& t#$ r$+i3$nt - 1.2. #o. 3@.*,3, 'eptember ?, *53*, ;n Danc, !erlas-Dernabe6 Lence, where betrayal of public trust, for purposes of impeachment, was not intended to co er all 7inds of official wrongdoing and plain errors of judgment, this should remain true e en for purposes of remo ing a Deputy &mbudsman and 'pecial !rosecutor from office. Lence, the fact that the grounds for impeachment ha e been made statutory grounds for the remo al by the !resident of a Deputy &mbudsman and 'pecial !rosecutor cannot diminish the seriousness of their nature nor the acuity of their scope. Detrayal of public trust could not suddenly Po erreachP to co er acts that are not icious or male olent on the same le el as the other grounds for impeachment. 0(on,al$+ v. O&&i%$ o& t#$ r$+i3$nt - 1.2. #o. 3@.*,3, 'eptember ?, *53*, ;n Danc, !erlas-Dernabe6 The Louse of 2epresentati es shall ha e the exclusi e power to initiate all cases of impeachment. Indubitably, an impeachment is not a judicial proceeding, but rather a political exercise. 0(*ti$rr$, v. !#$ 6o*+$ o& R$)r$+$ntativ$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@,?-@, Earch 4, *5336 Fran%i+%o v. 6R - 1.2. #o. 3.5*.3 #o ember 35, *55, - 9Vinitiation ta7es place by the act of filing of the impeachment complaint A#D referral to the Louse of $ommittee on FusticeV:

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,,

2eferring the complaint to the proper committee ignites the impeachment proceeding. >ith a simultaneous referral of multiple complaints filed, more than one lighted matchstic7s 0+i%6 light the candle at the same time. >hat is important is that there should only be &#; $A#D%; that is 7indled in a year, such that once the candle starts burning, subseIuent matchstic7s can no longer re7indle the candle. 0(*ti$rr$, v. !#$ 6o*+$ o& R$)r$+$ntativ$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@,?-@, Jebruary 3-, *5336 #o impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year. $ontrary to petitionerAs emphasis on impeachment complaint, what the $onstitution mentions is impeachment 9proceedings.: 'uffice it to state that the $onstitution allows the indictment for multiple impeachment offenses, with each charge representing an article of impeachment, assembled in one set 7nown as the 9Articles of Impeachment.: It, therefore, follows that an impeachment complaint need not allege only one impeachable offense. 0(*ti$rr$, v. !#$ 6o*+$ o& R$)r$+$ntativ$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@,?-@, Jebruary 3-, *5336 A person no longer in office may still be impeached penaltyC disIualification from public office. !romulgation must thus be used in the context in which it is generally understoodOthat is, to ma7e 7nown. It is within the discretion of $ongress to determine on how to promulgate its Impeachment 2ules, in much the same way that the Fudiciary is permitted to determine that to promulgate a decision means to deli er the decision to the cler7 of court for filing and publication. It is not for this $ourt to tell a co-eIual branch of go ernment how to promulgate when the $onstitution itself has not prescribed a specific method of promulgation 0(*ti$rr$, v. !#$ 6o*+$ o& R$)r$+$ntativ$+ - 1.2. #o. 3@,?-@, Jebruary 3-, *5336 To reiterate, when the $onstitution uses the word 9promulgate,: it does not necessarily mean to publish in the &fficial 1a(ette or in a newspaper of general circulation. !romulgation, as used in 'ection ,)4+, Article <I of the $onstitution, suitably ta7es the meaning of 9to ma7e 7nown: as it should be generally understood. 01utierre( . The Louse of 2epresentati es - 1.2. #o. 3@,?-@, Earch 4, *5336

'andiganbayan -&riginal Furisdiction 0a6 iolations of Anti-1raft and $orrupt !ractices Act, where the accused are officials occupying the following positions, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity &fficial of the ;xecuti e Dranch with the position of regional director or higher or with a salary grade le el */, including pro incial go ernors, icego ernors, board members, pro incial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other pro incial department headsMcity mayors, ice-mayors, city councilors, city treasurers, assessors, engineers and other city department headsMofficials of the diplomatic ser ice from consuls or higherM!A-!AJ colonels or !# captains and all officers of higher ran7Mofficers of the !#! while occupying the position of pro incial director and those holding the ran7 of senior superintendent or higherMcity or pro incial prosecutors and their assistants and officials and prosecutors in the &ffice of the &mbudsman and 'pecial !rosecutorMpresidents, directors, trustees or managers of 1&$$s, state uni ersities or educational institutions or foundations M Eembers of $ongress and officials with '1*/ and up M Eembers of the judiciary without prejudice to the $onstitution M $hairmen and Eembers of the $onstitutional $ommissions without prejudice to the $onstitution M All other national and local officials with '1*/ or higher. M 0b6 other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by public officials and employees mentioned abo e in relation to their office 0where the penalty prescribed by law is higher than prision correccional or imprisonment for six years or a fine of !.,555.55 0Eadarang . 'andiganbayan6 M 0c6 ci il and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with ;& #os. 3, *, 3? and 3?-A issued in 3@4. seIuestration cases. &riginal Furisdiction o er petitions for writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunction and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, pro ided that jurisdiction o er these petitions shall not be exclusi e of the '$. Appellate Furisdiction o er final judgments, resolutions or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or their appellate jurisdiction.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,?

Ca'all$ro v. San3igan'a.an - 1.2. #os. 3,/,---4, 'eptember *-, *55/ - iolations of 2A #o. ,53@ by a municipal mayor come within the exclusi e original jurisdiction of the 'andiganbayan because under 2A #o. ./-4, otherwise 7nown as the $ompensation and !osition $lassification Act of 3@4@, municipal mayors are local officials classified as 1rade 9*/.: 0 4ina. v. San3igan'a.an6 - The 'andiganbayan has jurisdiction o er a member of the 'angguniang !anlungsod whose salary grade is below */ and charged with iolation of The Auditing $ode of the !hilippines. 0 $o)l$ v. San3igan'a.an - 1.2. #o. 3.@55?, 'eptember 3-, *5356 $arandang was correct in insisting that being a pri ate indi idual he was not subject to the administrati e authority of the &mbudsman and to the criminal jurisdiction of the 'andiganbayan because 2adio !hilippines #etwor7, Inc. )2!#+, was not a go ernmentowned or -controlled corporation, although seIuestered by the !$11K hence, he was not a public official or employee. 0A,ar%on v. San3igan'a.an, 1.2. #o. 33.5,,, Jebruary *., 3@@/, *.4 '$2A /?/6 0Caran3ang v. D$+i$rto - 1.2. #o. 3?45/., Fanuary 33, *5336 $o)l$ v. San3igan'a.an 'andiganbayan has jurisdiction o er presidents, directors, trustees or managers of all 1&$$s, whether or not with original charters Ora) v. San3igan'a.an judges may be prosecuted before the 'andiganbayan e en if they come under the administrati e super ision of the '$. Administrati e charges shall defer filing of criminal charges based on the same offense by the 'pecial !rosecutor before the 'andiganbayan. D"T - 4al+amo v. S*an 0citing Rallo+ v. (a;o and Call$Da v. Sant$li%$+6 an administrati e case against a judge must be held in abeyance if the basis for the administrati e case is a case pending re iew by or appeal before the $A.

The primary jurisdiction of the &mbudsman to in estigate any act or omission of a public officer or employee applies only in cases cogni(able by the 'andiganbayan. In cases cogni(able by regular courts, the &mbudsman has concurrent jurisdiction with other in estigati e agencies of go ernment. 0O&&i%$ o& t#$ Om'*3+man v. Ro3rig*$, 1.2. #o. 3/*/55, Fuly *,, *5356 E+tan3art$ v. $o)l$ 1.2. #os. 3-.4-3---, Jebruary 34, *554 - when the $ity !rosecutor is deputi(ed by the &ffice of the &mbudsman, he comes under the 9super ision and control: of the &mbudsman which means that he is subject to the power of the &mbudsman to direct, re iew, appro e, re erse or modify the prosecutorAs decision. Aware of the constitutional imperati e of shielding the &ffice of the &mbudsman from political influences and the discretionary acts of the executi e, $ongress laid down two restrictions on the !residentHs exercise of such power of remo al o er a Deputy &mbudsman, namelyC )3+ that the remo al of the Deputy &mbudsman must be for any of the grounds pro ided for the remo al of the &mbudsman and )*+ that there must be obser ance of due process. xxx Thus, it cannot be rightly said that gi ing the !resident the power to remo e a Deputy &mbudsman, or a 'pecial !rosecutor for that matter, would diminish or compromise the constitutional independence of the &ffice of the &mbudsman. It is, precisely, a measure of protection of the independence of the &mbudsmanHs Deputies and 'pecial !rosecutor in the discharge of their duties that their remo al can only be had on grounds pro ided by law. 0(on,al$+ v. O&&i%$ o& t#$ r$+i3$nt - 1.2. #o. 3@.*,3, 'eptember ?, *53*, ;n Danc, !erlasDernabe6

>hile it is true that the interlocutory order issued by the 2T$ is re iewable by %$rtiorari, the same was incorrectly filed with the $A. Eagno should ha e filed the petition for certiorari with the 'andiganbayan, which has exclusi e appellate jurisdiction o er the 2T$ since the accused are public officials charged of committing crimes in their capacity as In estigators of the #ational Dureau of In estigation. 0Magno v. $o)l$ 1.2. #o. 3/3-?*, April ., *5336 The &ED"D'EA# is the A$TI=I'T >AT$LEA#W 0Om'*3+man v. Ra%#o - 1.2. #o. 34-.4-, Fanuary ,3, *5336

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,-

"nIuestionably, the &mbudsman is possessed of jurisdiction to discipline his own people and mete out administrati e sanctions upon them, including the extreme penalty of dismissal from the ser ice. Lowe er, it is eIually without Iuestion that the !resident has concurrent authority with respect to remo al from office of the Deputy &mbudsman and 'pecial !rosecutor, albeit under specified conditions. $onsidering the principles attending concurrence of jurisdiction where the &ffice of the !resident was the first to initiate a case against petitioner 1on(ales, prudence should ha e prompted the &mbudsman to desist from proceeding separately against petitioner through its Internal Affairs Doard, and to defer instead to the !residentHs assumption of authority, especially when the administrati e charge in ol ed Pdemanding and soliciting a sum of moneyP which constitutes either graft and corruption or bribery, both of which are grounds reser ed for the !residentHs exercise of his authority to remo e a Deputy &mbudsman. 0(on,al$+ v. O&&i%$ o& t#$ r$+i3$nt - 1.2. #o. 3@.*,3, 'eptember ?, *53*, ;n Danc, !erlas-Dernabe6 U. v. San3igan'a.an 1.2 .#o. 35-@.--/5, Earch *5, *553 The &mbudsman can conduct preliminary in estigations and prosecute criminal cases in ol ing public officers and employeesK not only those within the jurisdiction of the 'andiganbayan, but those falling within the jurisdiction of regular courts as well. The &mbudsman need not conduct a preliminary in estigation upon receipt of a complaint. Indeed, we ha e said in :n$%#t v. D$+i$rto 0,-, !hil. ?@? )3@@4+6 and later in Eamburao, Inc. . &ffice of the &mbudsman 0,@4 !hil. /.* )*555+6 and Baraan . &ffice of the &mbudsman 0?/. !hil. -,. )*55?+6 that should in estigating officers find a complaint utterly de oid of merit, they may recommend its outright dismissal. Eoreo er, it is also within their discretion to determine whether or not preliminary in estigation should be conducted. The $ourt has undoubtedly ac7nowledged the powers of the &mbudsman to dismiss a complaint outright without a preliminary in estigation in !#$ r$+i3$ntial A3 6o% Fa%t/Fin3ing Committ$$ on 4$#$+t Loan+ v. D$+i$rto . 0?,/ !hil. /5* )*55*+6 >e reiterate that the &mbudsman has full discretion to determine whether a criminal case should be filed, including whether a preliminary in estigation is warranted. The $ourt therefore gi es due deference to the &mbudsmanAs decision to no longer conduct a preliminary in estigation in this case on the criminal charges le elled against respondent =elasco. 0=*3g$ Ang$l$+ v. (*ti$rr$, 1.2. #os. 34@3.3 S 34@3/,, Earch *3, *53*, 'econd Di ision, 'ereno6

!2I=AT; T2A#'A$TI&#' - the &mbudsman can in estigate on its own or on complaint by any person any act or omission of any public official or employee when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, or improper It does not reIuire that the act or omission be related to or be connected with or arise from the performance of official duty. 0'ee Santo+ v. Ra+alan, citing <a+>*$, v. 6o'illa/Alinio, 1.2. #os. 33443,-3?, April 4, 3@@/, */3 '$2A ./, /?6 The $ourt has repeatedly ruled that the power of the &mbudsman to in estigate offenses in ol ing public officials is not exclusi e, but is concurrent with other similarly authori(ed agencies of the go ernment in relation to the offense charged. 0 6ona+an v. an$l o& Inv$+tigating ro+$%*tor+ o& t#$ D$)artm$nt o& =*+ti%$, 1.2. #o. 3-@/?/, April 3,, *55?, ?*/ '$2A ?.6 Therefore, with respect to petitioners, the &mbudsman may share its authority to conduct an in estigation concerning administrati e charges against them with other agencies 0li7e the !residential Anti-1raft $ommission or the $i il 'er ice $ommission6. 0 La%+on v. E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. - 1.2. #os. 3.-,@@ and 3.-?/-, Eay ,5, *5336 O&&i%$ o& t#$ Om'*3+man v. M$3rano - 1.2. #o. 3//-45, &ctober 3/, *554 - the administrati e disciplinary authority of the &mbudsman o er a public school teacher is not an exclusi e power but is concurrent with the proper committee of the Dep;d, which has concurrent jurisdiction under the pro isions of the Eagna $arta for !ublic 'chool Teachers. alma v. Forti%# there are * 7inds of administrati e cases against municipal officers 036 those related to the discharge of the functions of their office 0neglect of duty, oppression, corruption or other forms of maladministration of office6 and 0*6 those not so connected with said functions. "nder the *nd category, when the crime in ol ing moral turpitude is not lin7ed with the performance of official duties, con iction by final judgment is reIuired as a condition precedent to administrati e action.

O&&i%$ o& t#$ Om'*3+man v. 3$ Sa#ag*n 1.2. #o. 3./@4*, August 3,, *554,?/ administrati e offenses do not prescribe.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,.

M$l%#or v. (iron$lla - the period 0of one year6 stated in 'ection *5)-+ of 2.A. #o. .//5 does not refer to the prescription of the offense but to the discretion gi en to the &mbudsman on whether it would in estigate a particular administrati e offense. The use of the word 9may: in the pro ision is construed as permissi e and operating to confer discretion. It is, therefore, discretionary upon the &mbudsman whether or not to conduct an in estigation of a complaint e en if it was filed after one year from the occurrence of the act or omission complained of. The principle of r$+ D*3i%ata would not preclude the &mbudsman from ordering another re iew of a complaint, for he or she may re o7e, repeal or abrogate the acts or pre ious rulings of a predecessor in office. 0 Alvar$, v. $o)l$ - 1.2. #o. 3@*-@3, Fune *@, *5336 The doctrine in Mont$ma.or v. 4*n3alian 0?-, !hil. 3-4, 3.@ )*55,+6 that r$+ D*3i%ata applies only to judicial or Iuasi-judicial proceedings, and not to the exercise of administrati e powers, has been abandoned in subseIuent cases 04orlongan v. 4*$nav$nt*raK ;xecuti e Fudge Dasilia . Fudge Decamon, ?4/ !hil. ?@5 )*55?+K Atty. De =era . Fudge %ayague, ,@- !hil. *-, )*555+6 which ha e since applied the principle of r$+ D*3i%ata to administrati e cases. The decision of the &mbudsman is immediately executory pending appeal and may not be stayed by the filing of an appeal or the issuance of an injuncti e writ. The aforementioned 'ection / is also clear in pro iding that in case the penalty is remo al and the respondent wins his appeal, he shall be considered as ha ing been under pre enti e suspension and shall be paid the salary and such other emoluments that he did not recei e by reason of the remo al. The $AAs issuance of a preliminary mandatory injunction, staying the penalty of dismissal imposed by the &mbudsman in this administrati e case, is thus an encroachment on the rule-ma7ing powers of the &mbudsman under 'ection 3, )4+, Article <I of the $onstitution, and 'ections 34 and */ of 2.A. #o. .//5, which grants the &ffice of the &mbudsman the authority to promulgate its own rules of procedure. The issuance of an injuncti e writ renders nugatory the pro isions of 'ection /, 2ule III of the 2ules of !rocedure of the &ffice of the &mbudsman. 0Fa%*ra v. Co*rt o& A))$al+ - 1.2. #o. 3..?@-, Jebruary 3., *5336

In Soriano v. Ca'ai+, 1.2. #o. 3-/3/-, Fune *3, *55/, -*- '$2A *.3, *.- this $ourt had the occasion to discuss the appropriate recourse to ta7e from decisions or resolutions of the &mbudsman, and said - In Jabian, we ruled that appeals from the decisions of the &ffice of the &mbudsman in administrati e disciplinary cases should be ta7en to the $ourt of Appeals by way of a petition for re iew under 2ule ?, of the 3@@/ 2ules of $i il !rocedure, as amended. Lere, petitionerAs complaint is criminal in nature. In E+tra3a v. D$+i$rto, we held that the remedy of aggrie ed parties from resolutions of the &ffice of the &mbudsman finding probable cause in criminal cases or non-administrati e cases, when tainted with gra e abuse of discretion, is to file an original action for certiorari with this $ourt, not with the $ourt of Appeals. In cases when the aggrie ed party is Iuestioning the &ffice of the &mbudsmanAs finding of lac7 of probable cause, as in this case, there is li7ewise the remedy of certiorari under 2ule .- to be filed with this $ourt and not with the $ourt of Appeals. 04$longilot v. C*a - 1.2. #o. 3.5@,,, #o ember *?, *5356 The &mbudsman has the constitutional power to directly remo e from go ernment ser ice an erring public official other than a member of $ongress and the Fudiciary. 02epublic of the !hilippines . Dajao 1.2. #o. 3.5-@., Earch *5, *55@6 'ection 3-. The right of the 'tate to reco er properties unlawfully acIuired by public officials or employees, from them or from their nominees or transferees, shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel. A2TI$%; <II #ATI&#A% ;$&#&EG A#D !AT2IE&#G R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. Im)$rial Cr$3it Cor)oration - 1.2. #o. 3/,544, Fune *-, *554 - under the 2egalian doctrine, the 'tate is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land. This is premised on the basic doctrine that all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within pri ate ownership are presumed to belong to the 'tate. 'ecretary of the Department of ;n ironment and #atural 2esources . Gap - 1.2. #o. 3.//5/, &ctober 4, *554 - lands of the public domain are classified into agricultural, forest or timber 03@,- $onstitution6 and national par7s 03@4/ $onstitution6. &nly agricultural lands may be alienated, but a prior positi e act of the 1o ernment, declaring land as alienable and disposable, by way of proclamation, executi e order, administrati e action, report, statute, or certification, is reIuired.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,/

Roman Cat#oli% A3mini+trator o& Davao Dio%$+$8 In%. v. Lan3 R$gi+tration Commi++ion a religious corporation controlled by nonJilipinos cannot acIuire and own lands e en for religious purposes. R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. !.A.N. ro)$rti$+ 1.2. #o. 3-?@-,, Fune *., *554 The 3@4/ $onstitution absolutely prohibits pri ate corporations from acIuiring any 7ind of alienable land of the public domain. The length of possession of the land by the corporation cannot be tac7ed on to complete the statutory ,5 years acIuisiti e prescripti e period. &nly an indi idual can a ail of such acIuisiti e prescription since both the 3@/, and 3@4/ $onstitutions prohibit corporations from acIuiring lands of the public domain. Lan3 4an; o& t#$ #ili))in$+ v. R$)*'li% o& t#$ #ili))in$+ - 1.2. #o. 3-54*?, Jebruary ?, *554, 2eyes - J&2;'T lands are outside the commerce of man and unsusceptible of pri ate appropriation in any form. A certificate of title is oid when it co ers property of public domain classified as forest, timber or mineral lands. 4orrom$o v. D$+%allar - 1.2. #o. 3-@,35, Jebruary *?, *55@ - The transfer of land from Agro-Eacro De elopment $orporation to Fambrich, who is an Austrian, would ha e been declared in alid if challenged, had not Fambrich con eyed the properties to petitioner who is a Jilipino citi(en. 'ince the ban on aliens is intended to preser e the nationAs land for future generations of Jilipinos, that aim is achie ed by ma7ing lawful the acIuisition of real estate by aliens who became Jilipino citi(ens by naturali(ation or those transfers made by aliens to Jilipino citi(ens. As the property in dispute is already in the hands of a Iualified person, a Jilipino citi(en, there would be no more public policy to be protected. The objecti e of the constitutional pro ision to 7eep our lands in Jilipino hands has been achie ed. 0Unit$3 C#*r%# 4oar3 &or "orl3 Mini+tri$+6

6o v. (*i - 1.2. #o. 3,533-, Fuly 3., *554 - in M*ll$r v. M*ll$r, 0-55 '$2A .-6 wherein the respondent, a 1erman national, was see7ing reimbursement of funds claimed by him to be gi en in trust to his petitioner wife, a !hilippine citi(en, for the purchase of a property in Antipolo, the $ourt, in rejecting the claim, ruled thatC 2espondent was aware of the constitutional prohibition and expressly admitted his 7nowledge thereof to this $ourt. Le declared that he had the Antipolo property titled in the name of the petitioner because of the said prohibition. Lis attempt at subseIuently asserting or claiming a right on the said property cannot be sustained. The $ourt of Appeals erred in holding that an implied trust was created and resulted by operation of law in iew of petitionerHs marriage to respondent. 'a e for the exception pro ided in cases of hereditary succession, respondentHs disIualification from owning lands in the !hilippines is absolute. #ot e en an ownership in trust is allowed. Desides, where the purchase is made in iolation of an existing statute and in e asion of its express pro ision, no trust can result in fa or of the party who is guilty of the fraud. To hold otherwise would allow circum ention of the constitutional prohibition. Lulst . !2 Duilders, Inc. - 1.2. #o. 3-.,.?, 'eptember *-, *554 - "nder 2epublic Act )2.A.+ #o. ?/*., otherwise 7nown as the $ondominium Act, foreign nationals can own !hilippine real estate through the purchase of condominium units or townhouses constituted under the $ondominium principle with $ondominium $ertificates of Title. $onsidering that the rights and liabilities of the parties under the $ontract to 'ell is co ered by the $ondominium Act wherein petitioner as unit owner was simply a member of the $ondominium $orporation and the land remained owned by respondent, then the constitutional proscription against aliens owning real property does not apply to the present case. The term 9capital: in 'ection 33, Article <II of the $onstitution refers only to shares of stoc7 entitled to ote in the election of directors, and thus in the present case only to common shares, and not to the total outstanding capital stoc7 comprising both common and non- oting preferred shares. 0(am'oa v. Finan%$ S$%r$tar. - 1.2. #o. 3/.-/@, Fune *4, *5336

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,4

'ince the constitutional reIuirement of at least .5 percent Jilipino ownership applies not only to oting control of the corporation but also to the beneficial ownership of the corporation, it is therefore imperati e that such reIuirement apply uniformly and across the board to all classes of shares, regardless of nomenclature and category, comprising the capital of a corporation. xxx The $onstitution expressly declares as 'tate policy the de elopment of an economy Peffecti ely controlledP by Jilipinos. $onsistent with such 'tate policy, the $onstitution explicitly reser es the ownership and operation of public utilities to !hilippine nationals, who are defined in the Joreign In estments Act of 3@@3 as Jilipino citi(ens, or corporations or associations at least .5 percent of whose capital with oting rights belongs to Jilipinos. The JIAAs implementing rules explain that P0f6or stoc7s to be deemed owned and held by !hilippine citi(ens or !hilippine nationals, mere legal title is not enough to meet the reIuired Jilipino eIuity. Jull beneficial ownership of the stoc7s, coupled with appropriate oting rights is essential.P In effect, the JIA clarifies, reiterates and confirms the interpretation that the term PcapitalP in 'ection 33, Article <II of the 3@4/ $onstitution refers to shares with oting rights, as well as with full beneficial ownership. This is precisely because the right to ote in the election of directors, coupled with full beneficial ownership of stoc7s, translates to effecti e control of a corporation. xxx The 3@,-, 3@/, and 3@4/ $onstitutions ha e the same .5 percent Jilipino ownership and control reIuirement for public utilities li7e !%DT. Any de iation from this reIuirement necessitates an amendment to the $onstitution as exemplified by the !arity Amendment. This $ourt has no power to amend the $onstitution for its power and duty is only to faithfully apply and interpret the $onstitution. 06$ir+ o& "il+on (am'oa v. Finan%$ S$%r$tar. - 1.2. #o. 3/.-/@, &ctober @, *53*6 'ection 3?. xxx The practice of all professions in the !hilippines shall be limited to Jilipino citi(ens, sa e in cases prescribed by law. A2TI$%; <III '&$IA% F"'TI$; A#D L"EA# 2I1LT' S$rrano v. (allant Maritim$ S$rvi%$+8 In% . - 1.2. #o. 3./.3?, Earch *?, *55@ the pro isions of Article <III are not judicially enforceable, particularly 'ection , thereof. Article <III, by itself, without the application of the eIual protection clause, has no life or force of its own.

The wording of the pro ision is uneIui ocalthe farmers and regular farmwor7ers ha e a right T& &># DI2;$T%G &2 $&%%;$TI=;%G TL; %A#D' TL;G TI%%. The basic law allows two )*+ modes of land distributionOdirect and indirect ownership. Direct transfer to indi idual farmers is the most commonly used method by DA2 and widely accepted. Indirect transfer through collecti e ownership of the agricultural land is the alternati e to direct ownership of agricultural land by indi idual farmers. The aforeIuoted 'ec. ? ;<!2;''%G authori(es collecti e ownership by farmers. #o language can be found in the 3@4/ $onstitution that disIualifies or prohibits corporations or cooperati es of farmers from being the legal entity through which collecti e ownership can be exercised. xxx. $learly, wor7ersA cooperati es or associations under 'ec. *@ of 2A ..-/ and corporations or associations under the succeeding 'ec. ,3, as differentiated from indi idual farmers, are authori(ed ehicles for the collecti e ownership of agricultural land. $ooperati es can be registered with the $ooperati e De elopment Authority and acIuire legal personality of their own, while corporations are juridical persons under the $orporation $ode. Thus, 'ec. ,3 is constitutional as it simply implements 'ec. ? of Art. <III of the $onstitution that land can be owned $&%%;$TI=;%G by farmers. xxx. 06a%i$n3a L*i+ita In%or)orat$3 v. L*i+ita In3*+trial ar; Cor)oration 12 #o. 3/3353, Fuly -, *533,6 The 'tate shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between wor7ers and employers and the preferential use of oluntary modes in settling disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace. 0!#$ Univ$r+it. o& t#$ Imma%*lat$ Con%$)tion v. NLRC - 1.2. #o. 3433?., Fanuary *., *5336 'ection 35. "rban or rural poor dwellers shall not be e icted nor their dwelling demolished, except in accordance with law and in a just and humane manner. #o resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall be underta7en without adeIuate consultation with them and the communities where they are to be relocated. Ana; Min3anao art./Li+t (ro*) v. !#$ E-$%*tiv$ S$%r$tar. - 1.2. #o. 3..5-*, August *@, *55/ - !enalty for failure on the part of the go ernment to consult could only be reflected in the ballot box and would not nullify go ernment action. A2TI$%; <I= ;D"$ATI&#, '$I;#$; A#D T;$L#&%&1G, A2T', $"%T"2; A#D '!&2T'

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ,@

'ection ,. - All educational institutions shall include the study of the $onstitution as part of the curricula. They shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster lo e of humanity, respect for human rights, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical de elopment of the country, teach the rights and duties of citi(enship, strengthen ethical and spiritual alues, de elop moral character and personal discipline, encourage critical and creati e thin7ing, broaden scientific and technological 7nowledge, and promote ocational efficiency. At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools within the regular class hours by instructors designated or appro ed by the religious authorities of the religion to which the children or wards belong, without additional cost to the 1o ernment. ;ducational institutions, other than those established by religious groups and mission boards, shall be owned solely by citi(ens of the !hilippines or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citi(ens. The $ongress may, howe er, reIuire increased Jilipino eIuity participation in all educational institutions. The control and administration of educational institutions shall be ested in citi(ens of the !hilippines. #o educational institution shall be established exclusi ely for aliens and no group of aliens shall comprise more than one-third of the enrollment in any school. The pro isions of this sub section shall not apply to schools established for foreign diplomatic personnel and their dependents and, unless otherwise pro ided by law, for other foreign temporary residents. All re enues and assets of non-stoc7, nonprofit educational institutions used actually, directly, and exclusi ely for educational purposes shall be exempt from taxes and duties. "pon the dissolution or cessation of the corporate existence of such institutions, their assets shall be disposed of in the manner pro ided by law. !roprietary educational institutions, including those cooperati ely owned, may li7ewise be entitled to such exemptions, subject to the limitations pro ided by law, including restrictions on di idends and pro isions for rein estment. 'ubject to conditions prescribed by law, all grants, endowments, donations, or contributions used actually, directly, and exclusi ely for educational purposes shall be exempt from tax.

Institutional academic freedom - consists of four essential freedoms to determine for itself on academic groundsC )3+ who may teachK )*+ what may be taughtK ),+ how it shall be taughtK and )?+ who may be admitted to study. #ote that these four essential freedoms are gi en to the uni ersity as an institution, not to the professors or to the researchers in that institution. 0Fustice Jelix Jran7furter6 $amacho s. $orresis - 1.2. #o. 3,?,/*., August **, *55*K ,4/ '$2A .*4K .,.-.,/ -PAcademic freedom is twotiered O that of the academic institution and the teacherHs. Civil S$rvi%$ Commi++ion v. SoDor - 1.2. #o. 3.4/.., Eay **, *554 - >hile a schoolAs academic freedom entitles it to determine 9who may teach,: said academic freedom may not be in o7ed because the administrati e charges against the respondent, i.e., nepotism, dishonesty, falsification of official documents, gra e misconduct, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the ser ice, are classified as gra e offenses under ci il ser ice rules, punishable with suspension or e en dismissal. Although 'ection ? of 2.A. #o. 4*@* grants to the board 0of the school6 the power to remo e school faculty members, administrati e officials, and employees for cause, this power is not exclusi e in the matter of disciplining and remo ing its employees and officials. Deing a non-career ci il ser ant does not remo e respondent from the ambit of the $'$. $areer or noncareer, a ci il ser ice official or employee, is within the jurisdiction of the $'$. ; ery citi(en has a right to select a profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable, and eIuitable admission and academic reIuirements. 'ection /. Jor purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the !hilippines are Jilipino and, until otherwise pro ided by law, ;nglish. A2TI$%; <= TL; JAEI%G 'il erio . 2epublic - 1.2. #o. 3/?.4@, &ctober **, *55/, $orona - sex reassignment In our system of go ernment, it is for the legislature, should it choose to do so, to determine what guidelines should go ern the recognition of the effects of sex reassignment. The need for legislati e guidelines becomes particularly important in this case where the claims asserted are statute-based. It might be theoretically possible for this $ourt to write a protocol on when a person may be recogni(ed as ha ing successfully changed his sex. Lowe er, this $ourt has no authority to fashion a law on that matter, or on anything else. The $ourt cannot enact a law where no law exists. It can only apply or interpret the written word of its co-eIual branch of go ernment, $ongress.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ?5

'ection ,. The 'tate shall defend 036 The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious con ictions and the demands of responsible parenthoodK 0*6 The right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their de elopment. A2TI$%; <=I 1;#;2A% !2&=I'I&#' The !hilippine flag may be changed only by constitutional amendment. The national anthem may be changed by law, subject to ratification in a referendum. 'TAT; IEE"#ITG - "nder the !2I#$I!%; &J '&=;2;I1# ;"A%ITG &J 'TAT;' A=AI%AD%; to foreign states insofar as they are sought to be sued in the courts of the local state. 0'yIuia . Almeda %ope(6 There are two conflicting concepts of so ereign immunity, each widely held and firmly established. According to the classical or absolute theory, a so ereign cannot, without its consent, be made a respondent in the courts of another so ereign. According to the newer or restricti e theory, the immunity of the so ereign is recogni(ed only with regard to public acts or acts jure imperii of a state, but not with regard to pri ate acts or acts jure gestionis. );mphasis suppliedK citations omitted.+ xxx The restricti e theory came about because of the entry of so ereign states into purely commercial acti ities remotely connected with the discharge of go ernmental functions. This is particularly true with respect to the $ommunist states which too7 control of nationali(ed business acti ities and international trading. 06ol. S$$ v. Ro+ario 1.2. #o. 353@?@, 3 December 3@@?, *,4 '$2A -*?, -,-, cited in C#ina National Ma%#in$r. C E>*i)m$nt Cor)oration v. Sta. Maria - 1.2. #o. 34--/*, Jebruary /, *53*, ;n Danc, 'ereno6 San3$r+ v. <$ri3iano suit for damages for defamatory remar7s statements were made by petitioners as officers of the "' 1o ernment considered suit against the state. IJ A '"IT A'B' J&2 affirmati e relief on the part of the 'tate, li7e the passage of a special appropriations law, then it is against it, and the 'tate may in o7e its immunity. &therwise, it is only a suit against its officers, which can act on the relief prayed for in the suit without further 'tate inter ention.

(ar%ia v. C#i$& o& Sta&& claim for damages for injuries was considered a suit against the 'tate, since the latter would need to appropriate funds to satisfy the claim. - R*i, v. Ca'a#*g claim for payment of architectural fees, for which appropriations had already been made was considered a suit against the 'ecretary of #ational defense alone, and did not in ol e the 'tate. / Santiago v. R$)*'li% suit purely for the re ocation of a donation on the ground of the failure of the 1o ernment to comply with its obligations is not a suit against the 'tate. If a go ernment agency is incorporated, the test of its suability is found in its charter. The simple rule is that it is suable if its charter says so, and this is true regardless of the functions it is performing. Eunicipal corporations, for example, li7e pro inces and cities, are agencies of the 'tate when they are engaged in go ernmental functions and therefore should enjoy the so ereign immunity from suit. #e ertheless, they are subject to suit e en in the performance of such functions because their charter pro ides that they can sue and be sued. If it is not incorporated, it is necessary to determine the nature of the functions in which the agency is engaged, so as to hold it suable if they are proprietary and not suable if they are go ernmental. The test in e ery case is the nature of the primary functions being discharged. E"#I$I!A% $&2!&2ATI&#' may be suable because their charters grant them the competence to sue and be suedK D"T they are generally not liable for torts committed by them in the discharge of go ernmental functions and can be held answerable only if it can be shown that they were acting in a proprietary capacity. 0 ala&o- v. rovin%$ o& Ilo%o+ Nort$ where the injury occurred in connection with the repair of streetsK and !orio v. Fontanilla where a municipality was held liale for a tort committed in connection with the celebration of a town fiesta, which was considered a proprietary function. In this case, people were injured when the stage for the fiesta collapsed.6 $&#';#T ;<!2;'' 1eneral %aw $A ,*/, as amended 0claims against go ernment to be filed with the $&A 'pecial %aw Eerritt . 1o ernment special law which allowed a person to sue the !hilippine 1o ernment for injuries he sustained when his motorcycle collided with a go ernment ambulance. 01o ernment e entually found not to be liable, because the ambulance was dri en by a regular dri er, who was not considered to be a special agent of the go ernment.6 IE!%I;D when the 'tate institutes a complaint D"T #&T;

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ?3

Froilan v. an Ori$ntal S#i))ing Co. where the go ernment was held to ha e impliedly allowed itself to be sued when it filed a complaint in inter ention for the purpose of asserting a claim for affirmati e relief against the plaintiff, to wit, the reco ery of a essel. Lim v. 4roFn$ll the 'tate is not considered to ha e impliedly wai ed its immunity when it files, as successor-in-interest, a complaint in inter ention to join the defendant in in o7ing the doctrine of 'tate immunity to secure the dismissal of the action. Its purpose was merely to resist the claim. Lence. #o wai er of state immunity. implied wai er when the 1o ernment enters into a contract, but, as ruled by the 'upreme $ourt in "'A . 2ui(, suability would follow only if the contract is entered into by the state in its proprietary capacity. 1o ernmental contracts 0such as for the repair of whar es6 do not result in implied wai er of the immunity of the 'tate from suit. #ote USA v. (*into, where the 'upreme $ourt said that the operation by the "' 1o ernment of restaurants in $amp Fohn Lay in Daguio $ity, and of barber shops in $lar7 Air Dase not co ered by the doctrine of state immunity. 2epublic . =illasor when the 'tate consents to be sued, it does not thereby also consent to the execution of any judgment against it. 'uch execution will reIuire another wai er. >e further obser e the doctrine of so ereign immunity cannot be successfully in o7ed to defeat a alid claim for compensation arising from the ta7ing without just compensation and without the proper expropriation proceedings being first resorted to of the plaintiffsA property. 0R$)*'li% v. San3igan'a.an, 1.2. #o. @5?/4, #o . *, 3@@3, *5? '$2A *3*, *,3K Mini+t$rio v. Co*rt o& Fir+t In+tan%$ o& C$'* , #o. %-,3.,-, Aug. ,3, 3@/3, ?5 '$2A ?.?K Santiago v. R$)*'li%, #o. %-?4*3?, Dec. 3@, 3@/4, 4/ '$2A *@?6

In

#ational ;lectrification Administration . Eorales, the order of garnishment against the #;A funds to implement the 2T$ Decision was in issue, and we said that the $&A had exclusi e jurisdiction to decide on the allowance or disallowance of money claims arising from the implementation of 2epublic Act #o. ./-4. >e obser ed therein that 9the 2T$ acted prudently in halting implementation of the writ of execution to allow the parties recourse to the processes of the $&A.: 0'ee #ational ;lectrification Administration . Eorales, 1.2. #o. 3-?*55, Fuly *?, *55/, -*4 '$2A /@, 43.6 In fact, we e en stated there that 9it is not for this $ourt to preempt the action of the $&A on the post-audit to be conducted by it per its Indorsement dated Earch *,, *555.: 0Id., cited in Agra . $ommission on Audit - 1. 2. #o. 3./45/, December ., *533, ;n Danc, %eonardo-de $astro6

#o member of the armed forces in the acti e ser ice shall, at any time, be appointed or designated in any capacity to a ci ilian position in the 1o ernment, including go ernment-owned or controlled corporations or any of their subsidiaries. %aws on retirement of military officers shall not allow extension of their ser ice. The tour of duty of the $hief of 'taff of the armed forces shall not exceed three years. Lowe er, in times of war or other national emergency declared by the $ongress, the !resident may extend such tour of duty. 'ection .. The 'tate shall establish and maintain one police force, which shall be national in scope and ci ilian in character, to be administered and controlled by a national police commission. The authority of local executi es o er the police units in their jurisdiction shall be pro ided by law. 'ection 33. 036 The ownership and management of mass media shall be limited to citi(ens of the !hilippines, or to corporations, cooperati es or associations, wholly-owned and managed by such citi(ens. 0*6 The $ongress shall regulate or prohibit monopolies in commercial mass media when the public interest so reIuires. #o combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition therein shall be allowed.

CARLO L. CRUZS 2013 REMINDERS FOR OLI!ICAL LA" ?*

The ad ertising industry is impressed with public interest, and shall be regulated by law for the protection of consumers and the promotion of the general welfare. &nly Jilipino citi(ens or corporations or associations at least se enty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citi(ens shall be allowed to engage in the ad ertising industry. The participation of foreign in estors in the go erning body of entities in such industry shall be limited to their proportionate share in the capital thereof, and all the executi e and managing officers of such entities must be citi(ens of the !hilippines. A2TI$%; <=II AE;#DE;#T &2 2;=I'I&# $hanges in the $onstitution may be effected by a mere modification in its interpretation. !eople . !omar declared a law granting maternity lea e pri ileges as unconstitutional, for iolating the nonimpairment clause. %ambino . $&E;%;$ - 1.2. #o. 3/?3-,, &ctober *-, *55. - 036 Two essential elements must be present. Jirst, the people must author and thus sign the entire proposal. #o agent or representati e can sign on their behalf. 'econd, as an initiati e upon a petition, the proposal must be embodied in a petition. The full text of the proposed amendments may be either written on the face of the petition, or attached to it. If so attached, the petition must state the fact of such attachment. The framers of the $onstitution intended, and wrote, a clear distinction between 9amendment: and 9re ision: of the $onstitution. A peopleAs initiati e can only propose amendments to the $onstitution since the $onstitution itself limits initiati es to amendments. 2e ision broadly implies a change that alters a basic principle in the constitution, li7e altering the principle of separation of powers or the system of chec7s-and-balances. There is also re ision if the change alters the substantial entirety of the constitution, as when the change affects substantial pro isions of the constitution. &n the other hand, amendment broadly refers to a change that adds, reduces, or deletes without altering the basic principle in ol ed. 2e ision generally affects se eral pro isions of the constitution, while amendment generally affects only the specific pro ision being amended. The Iuantitati e test as7s whether the proposed change is 9so extensi e in its pro isions as to change directly the Nsubstantial entiretyA of the constitution by the deletion or alteration of numerous existing pro isions.: The court examines only the number of pro isions affected and does not consider the degree of the change.

The Iualitati e test inIuires into the Iualitati e effects of the proposed change in the constitution. The main inIuiry is whether the change will 9accomplish such far reaching changes in the nature of our basic go ernmental plan as to amount to a re ision.: >hether there is an alteration in the structure of go ernment is a proper subject of inIuiry. Thus, 9a change in the nature of 0the6 basic go ernmental plan: includes 9change in its fundamental framewor7 or the fundamental powers of its Dranches.: A change in the nature of the basic go ernmental plan also includes changes that 9jeopardi(e the traditional form of go ernment and the system of chec7 and balances.: A change in the structure of go ernment is a re ision of the $onstitution. A shift from a Dicameral-!residential to a "nicameral!arliamentary system, in ol ing the abolition of the &ffice of the !resident and the abolition of one chamber of $ongress, is beyond doubt a re ision, not a mere amendment. Im'ong v. COMELEC $ongress, acting as a constituent assembly, may, with the concurrence of two thirds of all its members, call a constitutional con ention in general terms only. Thereafter, the same $ongress, acting this time as a legislati e body, may pass the necessary implementing law pro iding for the details of the constitutional con ention. (on,al$+ v. COMELEC 0reiterated in &ccena . $&E;%;$6 plebiscite may be scheduled on the same day as the regular elections. #ote FD% 2eyesA dissent there must be fair submission, intelligent consent or rejection. !ol$ntino v. COMELEC no piecemeal ratification. >hole proposal must be submitted for appro al, so the people can ha e a proper 9frame of reference.: