1.

Legislative Veto
A congressional veto is a means whereby the legislature can block or modify administrative action taken under
a statute. It is a form of legislative control in the implementation of particular executive action. The form may
either be negative: subjecting the executive action to disapproval by Congress or affirmative: requiring
approval of the executive action by Congress.
In Philippine Constitution Association vs Enriquez, on the issue of whether Special Provision No. 2 on the
Use of Funds in the appropriation for the modernization of the AFP, GAA of 1994, which requires prior
approval of Congress for the release of the corresponding modernization funds, is unconstitutional, the SC did
not resolve the issue of legislative veto, but instead ruled that any provision blocking an administrative action
in implementing a law or requiring legislative approval for executive acts must be incorporated in a separate or
substantive bill. Thus, since the provision is an inappropriate provision, the President properly vetoed the
same.

2.

Executive Privilege
The right of the President and high-level executive branch officials to withhold information from Congress, the
courts and ultimately, the public.
Senate vs. Ermita: However, the privilege, being an exemption to the obligation to disclose information, the
necessity for withholding the information must be of such a high degree to outweight the public interest in
enforcing that obligation in a particular case.
In Neri vs Senate Committees, the SC upheld the refusal of Neri to answer the question asked during the
Senate inquiry because the information sought by the questions are properly covered by the presidential
communications privilege and executive privilege was validly claimed by the President through the Executive
Secretary.
1. The communications relate to a quintessential and non-delegable power of
the President
2. The communications were received by a close advisor of the President, Neri
being a member of Cabinet by virtue of the proximity test, he is covered by
executive privilege
3. No adequate showing by the respondents of the compelling need for the
information as to justify the limitation of the privilege, nor was there a showing
of the unavailability of the information elsewhere by an appropriate
investigating authority
Loi:
The impairment of functions test:
The court weighs whether the disclosure of the information by the President would affect the
performance of her constitutional duties as opposes to the effect of the non-disclosure of the information to the
constitutional duty of the affected branch.

3. Question Hour
The Heads of department may upon their own initiative, with the consent of the President or upon request of
either House, appear before and be heard by such House on any matter pertaining to
their departments.

Question Hour

Power of Inquiry
in aid of
legislation

who can be called

Department heads

anybody can be
called

subject matter

to obtain
to obtain information information that
in pursuit of Congress' may be used for
oversight function
legislation

call made by

either house

either house

appearance is
mandatory. Only
department heads may way to be exempt
only appear with the
is by a valid claim
consent of the
of executive
President
privilege.
4. Estrada vs Desierto
It is not necessary for a President to be impeached before the filing of criminal charges against him. Criminal
cases can be filed against him after his term even if he was not impeached during his term.
The President is immune from civil or criminal cases during his term or tenure. This is for the practical reason
of the President avoiding unnecessary harassment and distraction which may compromise the exercise of his
duties as President