Side A ------ Side B

How is the Bill of Rights strengthened inthe 1987 Constitution? ------ A

The framers of the 1987 Constitutionand the people who ratified it made sure
thatprovisions institutionalizing people power wereincorporated in the fundamental
law, Brieflydiscuss at least two such provisions. ------ A

Is the concept of People Powerrecognized in the Constitution? Discuss briefly.

(3%) ------ A

Is "people power" recognized by the1987 Constitution? Explain fully. ------ A

BNN Republic has a defense treaty withEVA Federation. According to the

Republic'sSecretary of Defense, the treaty allowstemporary basing of friendly
foreign troops incase of training exercises for the war onterrorism. The Majority
Leader of the Senatecontends that whether temporary or not, thebasing of foreign
troops however friendly isprohibited by the Constitution of BNN whichprovides that,
"No foreign military bases shallbe allowed in BNN territory."In case there is indeed
an irreconcilable conflictbetween a provision of the treaty and aprovision of the
Constitution, in a jurisdictionand legal system like ours, which shouldprevail: the
provision of the treaty or of theConstitution? Why? Explain with reasons,briefly.
(5%) ------ A

1. a) What is the principal identifying featureof a presidential form of government?

Explain.(2.5%)b) What are the essential characteristics of aparliamentary form of
government? (2.5%) ------ A

What do you understand by thearchipelagic doctrine? Is this reflected in the1987

Constitution? ------ A

Distinguish: The contiguous zone andthe exclusive economic zone. ------ A

In the desire to improve the fishingmethods of the fishermen, the Bureau

ofFisheries, with the approval of the President,entered into a memorandum of
agreement toallow Thai fishermen to fish within 200 milesfrom the Philippine sea
coasts on the conditionthat Filipino fishermen be allowed to use Thaifishing
equipment and vessels, and to learnmodern technology in fishing and canning.1) Is
the agreement valid? ------ A

Enumerate the rights of the coastal statein the exclusive economic zone.
(3%) ------ A

Distinguish: The flag state and the flagof convenience. ------ A

A law was passed dividing thePhilippines into three regions (Luzon, Visayas,and
Mindanao), each constituting anindependent state except on matters of
foreignrelations, national defense and nationaltaxation, which are vested in the
Centralgovernment. Is the law valid? Explain. ------ A

Distinguish: The territorial sea and theinternal waters of the Philippines. ------ A

Article II. Section 3, of the 1987Constitution expresses, in part, that the

"ArmedForces of the Philippines is the protector of thepeople and (of) the State."
Describe briefly whatthis provision means. Is the Philippine NationalPolice covered
by the same mandate? ------ A

What do you understand by the "Doctrineof Incorporation" in Constitutional

Law? ------ A

The Philippines has become a member ofthe World Trade Organization (WTO)
andresultantly agreed that it "shall ensure theconformity of its laws, regulations
andadministrative procedures with its obligations asprovided in the annexed
Agreements." This isassailed as unconstitutional because thisundertaking unduly
limits, restricts and impairsPhilippine sovereignty and means amongothers that
Congress could not pass legislationthat will be good for our national interest
andgeneral welfare if such legislation will notconform with the WTO Agreements.
Refute thisargument. (5%) ------ A

The Secretary of Justice had recentlyruled that the President may negotiate for
amodification or extension of military basesagreement with the United States
regardless ofthe "no nukes" provisions in the 1987Constitution. The President
forthwithannounced that she finds the same opinion"acceptable" and will adopt it.
The Senators onthe other hand, led by the Senate President,are skeptical, and had
even warned that notreaty or international agreement may go intoeffect without the
concurrence of two-thirds ofall members of the Senate.A former senator had said, "it
is completelywrong, if not erroneous," and "is an amendmentof the Constitution by
misinterpretation." Somemembers of the Lower House agree withSecretary
Ordonez, while others lament thelatter's opinion as "questionable, unfortunate,and
without any basis at all."Do you or do you not agree with theaforementioned ruling
of the Department ofJustice? Why? ------ A

State whether or not the law is constitutional.Explain briefly.1. A law changing the
design of thePhilippine flag. (2%) ------ A

What Constitutional provisions institutionalizethe principle of civilian supremacy?

(2.5%) ------ A

In February 1990, the Ministry of theArmy. Republic of Indonesia, invited bids for
thesupply of 500,000 pairs of combat boots for theuse of the Indonesian Army. The
Marikina ShoeCorporation, a Philippine corporation, which hasno branch office and
no assets in Indonesia,submitted a bid to supply 500,000 pairs of combat boots at
U.S. $30 per pair delivered inJakarta on or before 30 October 1990. Thecontract was
awarded by the Ministry of theArmy to Marikina Shoe Corporation and wassigned by
the parties in Jakarta. Marikina ShoeCorporation was able to deliver only
200,000pairs of combat boots in Jakarta by 30 October1990 and it received
payment for 100,000 pairsor a total of U.S. $3,000,000.00. The Ministry ofthe Army
promised to pay for the other 100,000pairs already delivered as soon as
theremaining 300,000 pairs of combat boots aredelivered, at which time the said
300,000 pairswill also be paid for. Marikina Shoe Corporationfailed to deliver any
more combat boots.On 1 June 1991, the Republic of Indonesia filedan action before
the Regional Trial Court ofPasig. Rizal, to compel Marikina ShoeCorporation to
perform the balance of itsobligations under the contract and for damages.In its
Answer, Marikina Shoe Corporation setsup a counterclaim for U.S.
$3,000,000.00representing the payment for the 100,000 pairsof combat boots
already delivered but unpaid.Indonesia moved to dismiss the counterclaim,asserting
that it is entitled to sovereignImmunity from suit. The trial court denied themotion
to dismiss and issued two writs ofgarnishment upon Indonesian Governmentfunds
deposited in the Philippine National Bankand Far East Bank. Indonesia went to the
Courtof Appeals on a petition for certiorari under Rule65 of the Rules of Court.How
would the Court of Appeals decide thecase? ------ A

The Republic of the Balau (formerlyPalau Islands) opened and operated in Manilaan
office engaged in trading Balau productswith Philippine products. In one
transaction,the local buyer complained that the Balaugoods delivered to him were
substandard andhe sued the Republic of Balau, before theRegional Trial Court of
Pasig, for damages.a) How can the Republic of Balau invoke itssovereign immunity?
Explain.b) Will such defense of sovereign immunityprosper? Explain. ------ A

A property owner filed an action directlyin court against the Republic of the
Philippines seeking payment for a parcel of land which thenational government
utilized for a road wideningproject.(1) Can the government invoke the doctrine
ofnon-suitability of the state?(2) In connection with the preceding question,can the
property owner garnish publicfunds to satisfy his claim for payment?Explain your
answers. ------ A

Johnny was employed as a driver by theMunicipality of Calumpit, Bulacan. While

drivingrecklessly a municipal dump truck with its loadof sand for the repair of
municipal streets,Johnny hit a jeepney. Two passengers of thejeepney were
killed.The Sangguniang Bayan passed an ordinanceappropriating P300,000 as
compensation forthe heirs of the victims.1) Is the municipality liable for the
negligenceof Johnny?2) Is the municipal ordinance valid? ------ A

The Northern Luzon Irrigation Authority(NLIA) was established by a legislative

charterto strengthen the irrigation systems that supplywater to farms and
commercial growers in thearea. While the NLIA is able to generaterevenues through
its operations, it receives anannual appropriation from Congress. The NLIAis
authorized to "exercise all the powers of acorporation under the Corporation
Code."Due to a miscalculation by some of itsemployees, there was a massive
irrigationoverflow causing a flash flood in Barrio Zanjera.A child drowned in the
incident and his parentsnow file suit against The NLIA for damages.May the NLIA
validly invoke the immunity of theState from suit? Discuss thoroughly. ------ A

1.) What do you understand by stateimmunity from suit? Explain. (2%)2.) How may
consent of the state to besued be given? Explain. (2%) ------ A

The employees of the PhilippineTobacco Administration (PTA) sued to

recoverovertime pay. In resisting such claim, the PTAtheorized that it is performing
governmentalfunctions. Decide and explain. (2%) ------ A

(a) "X" filed a case against the Republic of thePhilippines for damages caused his
yacht,which was rammed by a navy vessel.(b) "X" also sued in another case
theSecretary of Public Works and theRepublic of the Philippines for payment ofthe
compensation of the value of his land,which was used as part of the tarmac ofthe
Cebu International Airport, without priorexpropriation proceedings.The Solicitor
General moved to dismiss the twocases invoking state immunity from suit
Decide. ------ A

It is said that "waiver of immunity by theState does not mean a concession of

itsliability". What are the implications of thisphrase? ------ A

Devi is the owner of a piece of land.Without prior expropriation or negotiated

sale,the national government used a portion thereoffor the widening of the national
highway. Devifiled a money claim with the Commission onAudit which was denied.
Left with no otherrecourse, Devi filed a complaint for recovery ofproperty and/or
damages against the Secretaryof Public Works and Highways and theRepublic of the
Philippines, The defendantmoved for dismissal of the complaintcontending that the
government cannot be suedwithout its consent. The RTC dismissed thecomplaint.
On appeal, how would you decidethe case. ------ A

What is the state policy on:a) working women?b) ecology?c) the symbols of
statehood?d) cultural minorities?e) science and technology? ------ A

Does the 1987 Constitution provide for apolicy of transparency in matters of

publicinterest? Explain. ------ A

State at least three constitutionalprovisions reflecting the State policy

ontransparency in matters of public interest. Whatis the purpose of said policy?
(5%) ------ A

Congress passed a law relating toofficials and employees who had served in
theGovernment for the period from September 21,1972 up to February 25, 1986.(a)
One provision of the law declared allofficials from the rank of assistant head ofa
department, bureau, office or agency"Unfit" for continued service in thegovernment
and declared their respectivepositions vacant.(b) Another provision required all the
otherofficials and employees to take an oath ofloyalty to the flag and government
as acondition for their continued employment.Are the two provisions valid?
Why? ------ A

Executive Orders Nos. 1 and 2 issued byPresident Corazon C. Aquino created

thePresidential Commission on Good Government(PCGG) and empowered it to
sequester anyproperty shown prima facie to be ill-gottenwealth of the late President
Marcos, hisrelatives and cronies. Executive Order No. 14vests on the Sandiganbayan
jurisdiction to tryhidden wealth cases. On April 14, 1986, afteran investigation, the
PCGG sequestered theassets of X Corporation, Inc.(1) X Corporation, Inc. claimed
that PresidentAquino, as President, could not lawfullyissue Executive Orders Nos. 1,
2 and 14,which have the force of law, on the groundthat legislation is a function of
Congress.Decide.(2) Said corporation also questioned thevalidity of the three
executive orders on theground that they are bills of attainder and,therefore,
unconstitutional. Decide. ------ A

Rafael, Carlos and Joseph wereaccused of murder before the Regional TrialCourt of
Manila. Accused Joseph turned statewitness against his co-accused Rafael
andCarlos, and was accordingly discharged fromthe information. Among the
evidence presentedby the prosecution was an extrajudicialconfession made by
Joseph during thecustodial Investigation, implicating Rafael andCarlos who, he said,
together with him(Joseph), committed the crime. Theextrajudicial confession was
executed withoutthe assistance of counsel.Accused Rafael and Carlos
vehementlyobjected on the ground that said extrajudicialconfession was
inadmissible in evidenceagainst them.Rule on whether the said
extrajudicialconfession is admissible in evidence or not.(5%) ------ A

An information for parricide was filedagainst Danny. After the NBI found
aneyewitness to the commission of the crime.Danny was placed in a police line-up
where hewas identified as the one who shot the victim.After the line-up, Danny
made a confession to anewspaper reporter who interviewed him.1) Can Danny claim
that his identification bythe eyewitness be excluded on the groundthat the line-up
was made without benefitof his counsel?2) Can Danny claim that his confession
beexcluded on the ground that he was notafforded his "Miranda" rights? ------ A

A, while on board a passenger jeep onenight, was held up by a group of

threeteenagers who forcibly divested her of herwatch, necklace and wallet
containing P100.00.That done, the trio jumped off the passengerjeep and fled. B,
the jeep driver, and Acomplained to the police to whom they gavedescription of the
culprits. According to the jeepdriver, he would be able to identify the culprits
ifpresented to him. Next morning A and B weresummoned to the police station
where fivepersons were lined up before them foridentification. A and B positively
identified Cand D as the culprits. After preliminaryinvestigation. C and D and one
John Doe werecharged with robbery in an information filedagainst them in court. C
and D set up, indefense, the illegality of their apprehension,arrest and confinement
based on theidentification made of them by A and B at apolice line-up at which they
were not assistedby counsel. How would you resolve the issuesraised by C and
D? ------ A

Armando Salamanca, a notorious policecharacter, came under custodial

investigationfor a robbery in Caloocan City. From the outset,the police officers
informed him of his right toremain silent, and also his right to have acounsel of his
choice, if he could afford one or ifnot, the government would provide him withsuch
counsel.He thanked the police investigators, anddeclared that he fully understands
the rightsenumerated to him, but that, he is voluntarilywaiving them. Claiming that
he sincerelydesires to atone for his misdeeds, he gave awritten statement on his
participation in thecrime under investigation.In the course of the trial of the criminal
case forthe same robbery, the written admission ofSalamanca which he gave during
the custodialinvestigation, was presented as the onlyevidence of his guilt. If you
were his counsel,what would you do? Explain your answer. ------ A

In his extrajudicial confession executedbefore the police authorities, Jose

Walangtakotadmitted killing his girlfriend in a fit of jealousy.This admission was
made after the followinganswer and question to wit:T - Ikaw ay may karapatan pa
rin kumuha ngserbisyo ng isang abogado para makatulongmo sa imbestigasyong ito
at kung wala kangmakuha, ikaw ay aming bibigyan ng librengabogado, ano ngayon
ang iyong masasabi?""S - Nandiyan naman po si Fiscal (point toAssistant Fiscal
Aniceto Malaputo) kaya hindiko na kinakailanganang abogado."During the trial. Jose
Walangtakot repudiatedhis confession contending that it was madewithout the
assistance of counsel and thereforeInadmissible in evidence. Decide. ------ A

On October 1, 1985, Ramos wasarrested by a security guard because heappeared to

be "suspicious" and brought to apolice precinct where in the course of
theinvestigation he admitted he was the killer in anunsolved homicide committed a
week earlier.The proceedings of his investigation were put inwriting and dated
October 1, 1985, and the onlyparticipation of counsel assigned to him was hismere
presence and signature on the statement.The admissibility of the statement of
Ramoswas placed in issue but the prosecution claimsthat the confession was taken
on October 1,1985 and the 1987 Constitution providing forthe right to counsel of
choice and opportunity toretain, took effect only on February 2, 1987 andcannot be
given retroactive effect. Rule on this.(3%) ------ A

One day a passenger bus conductorfound a man's handbag left in the bus. Whenthe
conductor opened the bag, he found insidea catling card with the owner's name
(DanteGalang) and address, a few hundred peso bills,and a small plastic bag
containing a whitepowdery substance. He brought the powderysubstance to the
National Bureau ofInvestigation for laboratory examination and itwas determined to
be methamphetaminehydrochloride or shabu, a prohibited drug.Dante Galang was
subsequently traced andfound and brought to the NBI Office where headmitted
ownership of the handbag and itscontents. In the course of the interrogation byNBI
agents, and without the presence andassistance of counsel, Galang was made
tosign a receipt for the plastic bag and its shabucontents. Galang was charged with
illegalpossession of prohibited drugs and wasconvicted.On appeal he contends that
-A. The plastic bag and its contents areinadmissible in evidence being the productof
an illegal search and seizure; (3%) andB. The receipt he signed is also
inadmissibleas his rights under custodial investigationwere not observed.
(2%)Decide the case with reasons. ------ A

Johann learned that the police werelooking for him in connection with the rape of
an 18-year old girl, a neighbor. He went to thepolice station a week later and
presentedhimself to the desk sergeant. Coincidentally, therape victim was in the
premises executing anextrajudicial statement. Johann, along with six(6) other
suspects, were placed in a police lineupand the girl pointed to him as the
rapist.Johann was arrested and locked up in a cell.Johann was charged with rape in
court but priorto arraignment invoked his right to preliminaryinvestigation. This was
denied by the judge,and thus, trial proceeded. After the prosecutionpresented
several witnesses, Johann throughcounsel, invoked the right to bail and filed
amotion therefor, which was denied outright bythe Judge. Johann now files a petition
forcertiorari before the Court of Appeals arguingthat:2) He should have been
informed of his rightto be represented by counsel prior to hisidentification via the
police line up. Decide. ------ A

Some police operatives, acting under alawfully issued warrant for the purpose
ofsearching for firearms in the House of X locatedat No. 10 Shaw Boulevard, Pasig,
MetroManila, found, instead of firearms, tenkilograms of cocaine.(1) May the said
police operatives lawfullyseize the cocaine? Explain your answer.(2) May X
successfully challenge the legalityof the search on the ground that thepeace officers
did not inform him abouthis right to remain silent and his right tocounsel? Explain
your answer.(3) Suppose the peace officers were able tofind unlicensed firearms in
the house inan adjacent lot, that is. No, 12 ShawBoulevard, which is also owned by
X.May they lawfully seize the saidunlicensed firearms? Explain youranswer. ------ A

Larry was an overnight guest in a motel.After he checked out the following day,
thechambermaid found an attache case which shesurmised was left behind by Larry.
She turned itover to the manager who, to determine thename and address of the
owner, opened theattache case and saw packages which had apeculiar smell and
upon squeezing felt likedried leaves. His curiosity aroused, themanager made an
opening on one of thepackages and took several grams of thecontents thereof. He
took the packages to theNBI, and in the presence of agents, opened thepackages,
the contents of which uponlaboratory examination, turned out to bemarijuana
flowering tops, Larry wassubsequently found, brought to the NBI Officewhere he
admitted ownership of the attachecase and the packages. He was made to sign
areceipt for the packages. Larry was charged incourt for possession of prohibited
drugs. Hewas convicted. On appeal, he now poses thefollowing issues:1) The
packages are inadmissible in evidencebeing the product of an illegal search
andseizure; 2) Neither is the receipt he signed admissible,his rights under custodial
investigation nothaving been observed. Decide. ------ A

A, who was arrested as a suspect in amurder case was not represented by

counselduring the "question and answer" stage.However, before he was asked to
sign hisstatements to the police investigator, the latterprovided A with a counsel,
who happened to beat the police station. After conferring with A, thecounsel told the
police investigator that A wasready to sign the statements.Can the statements of A
be presented in courtas his confession? Explain. ------ A

Pursuing reports that great quantities ofprohibited drugs are being smuggled
atnighttime through the shores of Cavite, theSouthern Luzon Command set up
checkpointsat the end of the Cavite coastal road to search passing motor vehicles. A
19-year old boy, whofinished fifth grade, while driving, was stoppedby the
authorities at the checkpoint. Withoutany objection from him, his car was
inspected,and the search yielded marijuana leaves hiddenin the trunk compartment
of the car. Theprohibited drug was promptly seized, and theboy was brought to the
police station forquestioning.(1) Was the search without warrant legal?(2) Before
interrogation, the policeman on dutyinformed the boy in English that he does
"havea right to remain silent and the right to counsel."However, there was no
counsel available as itwas midnight. He declared orally that he did notneed any
lawyer as he was innocent, since hewas only bringing the marijuana leaves to
hisemployer in Quezon City and was not a druguser. He was charged with illegal
possession ofprohibited drugs. Is his waiver of the right tocounsel valid? ------ A

The Filipino seamen detained at KotaKinabalu, allegedly fishing in

Malaysianterritorial waters, had been acquitted, after trial,by the sessions court in
the same city. Theycould not be released and returned to thePhilippines, because
the prosecution hadappealed the judgment of acquittal to theSupreme Court of
Malaysia.Assume the situations had been reversed and aMalaysian had been
apprehended in Shasi,Sulu, for an alleged offense, charged before theRegional Trial
Court and after trial acquitted.May the Provincial Fiscal of Sulu appeal suchjudgment
of acquittal to the Supreme Court, likewhat the Malaysians did in the case of
theFilipino fishermen at Kota Kinabalu? Explainyour answer. ------ A

A Pajero driven by Joe sideswiped amotorcycle driven by Nelson resulting indamage

to the motorcycle and injuries toNelson. Joe sped on without giving assistanceto
Nelson. The Fiscal filed two informationsagainst Joe, to wit: (1) reckless
imprudenceresulting in damage to property with physicalinjuries under Art. 365,
RPC, before the RTC;and (2) abandonment of one's victim under par.2 Art 275,
before the MTC.Joe was arraigned, tried and convicted forabandonment of one's
victim in the MTC. Heappealed to the RTC. It was only a year laterthat he was
arraigned in the recklessimprudence charge before the RTC. Hepleaded not
guilty.Subsequently, the RTC affirmed the decision ofthe MTC relative to the
abandonment of one'svictim charge. Joe filed a petition for reviewbefore the Court
of Appeals, invoking his rightto double Jeopardy, contending that theprosecution for
abandonment under Art. 275 ofthe Revised Penal Code is a bar to theprosecution for
negligence under Article 365 ofthe same Code. Decide. ------ A

The Sangguniang Panlungsod of Manilaapproved an ordinance (No. 1000)

prohibitingthe operation in the streets within the city limitsof taxicab units over
eight years old (from yearof manufacture). The imposable penalty forviolation
thereof is a fine of P4,000.00 orimprisonment for one year upon the erringoperator.
Thereafter and while the cityordinance was already in effect. Congressenacted a law
(Republic Act No. 500)prohibiting the operation in the streets of citiesthroughout the
country of taxicab units beyondten years old. The imposable penalty forviolation
thereof is the same as in OrdinanceNo. 1000. A, an owner/operator of a taxicab
unitoperating in the City of Manila, was chargedwith violation of the city ordinance.
Uponarraignment, he pleaded not guilty; whereupon,trial was set five days
thereafter. For failure ofthe witnesses to appear at the trial, the CityCourt dismissed
the case against A. The CityProsecutor of Manila forthwith filed anotherinformation
in the same court charging A withviolation of Republic Act No. 500 for operatingthe
taxicab unit subject of the information in thefirst case. The accused moved to
dismiss thesecond case against him invoking doubleJeopardy.How would you rule on
A's motion if you werethe Judge? ------ A

Discuss the right of every accused againstdouble jeopardy? (2%) ------ A