1. Enumerate the elements of a State and give a brief explanation for each of the elements.

(3)
The essential elements of a State are: (1) people; (2) territory; (3) government; and sovereignty. People
refers to the inhabitants of the State. It is generally agreed that they must numerous enough to be self-sufficing
and to defend themselves and small enough to be easily administered. Territory is the fixed of the surface of the
Earth inhabited by the people of the State. It must neither be too big as to be difficult to administer and defend
nor too small as to be unable to provide for the needs of the population. Government is the agency or the
instrumentality through which the will of the state is formulated, expressed and realized. No particular form of
government is prescribed so long as it can represent its inhabitants. Sovereignty is the supreme and
uncontrollable power inherent in a State by which that State is governed.

2. Explain the archipelago doctrine. (4)

Under the Archipelago Doctrine, we connect the outermost points of our archipelago with straight
baselines and consider all the waters enclosed thereby as internal waters. The entire archipelago is regarded as
one independent unit instead of being fragmented into so many thousand islands.

3. What is the doctrine of Parens Patriae? (4)

Parens Patriae or guardian of the rights of the people is one of the most important tasks of the
government. In the case of Government of Philippine Islands vs. Monte de Piedad, the plaintiff filed an action to
recover the contributions collected during the Spanish regime for the victims of the earthquake. The defendant
questioned the competence of the plaintiff to file an action contending that the suit could only be instituted by
the intended beneficiaries. The Supreme Court rejected the view and upheld the right of the plaintiff to file a case
for the State as parens patriae in representation of legitimate claimants.

4. Differentiate De Jure Government from De Facto Government. (3)

A De Jure Government has a rightful title but no power or control, either because this has been
withdrawn from it or because it has not yet actually entered into the exercise thereof. On the other hand, a De
Facto Government is a government of fact i.e, it actually exercises power or control but without legal title.

5. Differentiate Administration from Government. (3)

Administration is the group of persons in whose hands the reins of government are for the time being.
Government, on the other hand, is the instrumentality or agency through which the will of the State is
formulated, expressed or realized. The administration runs the government, as a machinist operates his machine.
Administration is transitional whereas government is permanent.

6. What is the “royal prerogative of dishonesty”? How may a person overcome this “royal prerogative
of dishonesty” in order to seek redress? (5)
Article XVI, Sec. 3 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides that “the state cannot be sued without its
consent.” It is based on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right against the authority who
make the law on which the right depends.” This is why the doctrine is derisively called the “royal prerogative of
dishonesty” because it grants the state the prerogative to defeat any legitimate claim against it by simply
invoking its non-suability. Fortunately, however, the doctrine has a built in qualification that the State may, if it so
desires, divest itself of the sovereign immunity and thereby voluntarily open itself to suit. In fine, a person may
overcome this so called royal prerogative if the State gives consent to be sued.
The States' consent may be given expressly or impliedly. Express consent may be made through a
general law or a special law. Implied consent, on the other hand, is conceded when the State itself commences
litigation, thus opening itself to a counterclaim or when it enters into a contract. Not all contracts entered into by
the government operate as a waiver of its non-suability; distinction must still be made between one which is
executed in the exercise of its sovereign function and another which is done in its proprietary capacity. If the
individual can show that the contract is entered into by the State in its proprietary capacity then a suit can
prosper.

7. Are incorporated government agencies always suable? Explain. (4)

 Generally, yes. An incorporated government agency, as evidenced by its Charter, has a personality of its
own, distinct and separate from that of the Government. If the agency is incorporated the test of its suability is
found in its charter. The rule is that it is suable if its charter says so. If its Charter does not provide the power to
sue and be sued, then it is not always suable. However, one will be hard-pressed to find a Charter which does not
provide a power to sue and be sued.
8. Are incorporated government agencies performing governmental functions exempt from suit?
Explain. (4)
No. The rule is that an incorporated agency is suable if its charter says so, and this is true regardless of
the functions it is performing. In Bermoy vs PNU, the defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that it is
performing a governmental function, that is, the education of the youth. The Supreme Court rejected the
argument saying that the charter of the college provided that it could sue and be sued, which meant that, even
assuming governmental functions the State had thereby waived its immunity.

9. Does the government’s act of filing an action conclusively arise to suability on the part of the
government? Explain. (5)
No. In the case of Lim vs. Brownell, where the Philippine government, as the successor in interest of the
United States to the properties being claimed by the latter, filed a complaint in intervention to join the defendant
in invoking the doctrine of State immunity to secure the dismissal of the case. As the Philippine government was
not asking for any affirmative relief from the plaintiff but had intervened only for the purpose of resisting his
claim, the Supreme Court ruled that no implied waiver of immunity could be assumed.

10. Does the performance of proprietary acts by an unincorporated government agency conclusively
give rise to suability? (5)
No. It has to be proved that the unincorporated government agency is engaged solely in proprietary
functions before it can be sued. In Bureau of Printing vs. Bureau of Printing Employees Association , the Supreme
Court ruled that while the Bureau of Printing is allowed to undertake private printing jobs, it cannot be pretended
that it is thereby an industrial or business concern. The additional work it executes for private parties is merely
incidental to its function, and although such work may be deemed proprietary in character, there is no showing
that the employees performing said proprietary function are separate and distinct from those employed in its
general governmental functions.

11. What are the manifestations of republicanism? Explain. (4)

The manifestations of republicanism are as follows: (1) the existence of Bill of Rights; (2) the rule of
majority; (3) the observance of the principle that ours is a government of laws and not of men; (4) the presence
of elections; (5) the observance of the principle of separation of powers and the doctrine of checks and balances;
(6) the accountability of public officers; (7) the legislature cannot pass irrepealable laws; and (8) state immunity.

12. May a citizen refuse an appointment/commission for the defense of the state on the ground of
his/her religious beliefs? Explain. (4)
No. Art. II, Sec. 4 of the Constitution provides the right of the Government to require compulsory military
service as a consequence of its duty to defend the State and is reciprocal with its duty to defend the life, liberty,
and property of the citizen. As held by the Supreme Court in People vs. Lagman, a person may be compelled by
force, if need be, against his will, against his pecuniary interests, and even against his religious or political
convictions, to take his place in the ranks of the army of his country, and risk the chance of being shot down in
its defense.

13. Explain the proper action to be done in the event that a generally accepted principle cannot be
harmonized with a municipal law. Cite appropriate jurisprudence. (4)
14. Differentiate political question from a justiciable question in the context of the judiciary’s role of
interpreting laws. (4)
In Tanada vs. Cuenco, the Supreme Court defined political question as those questions which, under the
Constitution, are to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full discretionary
authority has been delegated to the Legislature or executive branch of the Government. It is concerned with
issues dependent upon the wisdom, not legality, of a contested act. Where the vortex of the controversy refers to
the legality or validity of a contested act, that matter is a justiciable question. It is well-settled doctrine that
political questions are not within the province of the judiciary, except to the extent that power to deal with such
questions has been conferred upon the courts by express constitutional or statutory provisions. Accordingly,
considerations affecting the wisdom, efficacy and practicality of a law are not within the ambit of judicial review.

15. Explain the seemingly paradoxical statement that while the Supreme Court has the final say on the
interpretation of laws; equality exists among the three co-equal branches of the government. (5)
The fact that the Supreme Court has the final say on the interpretation of laws does not diminish the
equality of the three branches. This is because when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries,
it does not assert any superiority over the other departments; it does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of
the legislature, but only asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to determine
conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the
rights which that instrument secures and guarantees to them. When the Court mediates to invalidate acts of
another branch, what it is upholding is not its own supremacy but the supremacy of the Constitution. Thus, the
three branches remain co-equal.

16. What are the possible instances of delegation of legislative powers? Briefly explain each exception.
(5)
Delegation of powers is permitted in the following cases. First, the delegation of tariff powers to the
President. This delegation allows the chief executive to act expediently on certain matters affecting the national
economy. Second, the delegation of emergency powers to the President. This is done because of the fact that in
times of emergency or war, it is not likely that a quorum can be convened in the Congress to enable it to do
business. Third, delegation to the people at large. This is exercised primarily through plebiscite and referendum.
Fourth, delegation to local governments. It is to be noted that what were expressly delegated are the powers of
eminent domain and police power. Local governments have no inherent power of taxation. Lastly, delegation to
administrative bodies. With the advent of specialized activities and their particular problems, the Legislative found
it more and more necessary to entrust to administrative agencies the power of subordinate legislation.

17. Citing the appropriate jurisprudence and applying the respective rulings contained therein, explain
fully the requisites for a valid delegation of legislative powers. (5)
Although the Congress may delegate to another branch of the government the power to fill in the details
in the execution, enforcement or administration of a law, it is essential, to forestall a violation of the principle of
separation of powers, that said law must pass two tests, to wit, (1) completeness test; and (2) sufficient standard
test. A law is complete if it sets forth the policy to be executed, carried out, or implemented by the delegate such
that there is nothing left for the delegate to do but to enforce the law. On the other hand, a standard is sufficient
if it defines legislative policy, marks its limits, maps out its boundaries and specifies the public agency to apply it.
In the case of Pelaez vs. Auditor General, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2 tests, which had theretofore been
applied alternatively, must now be applied together or concurrently.

18. A group of enthusiastic freshman law students all at least 25 years of age, established a political
party named “A BEDAN” for the purpose of participating in the 2016 Elections. Assuming they pass
the assessment of the COMELEC and are included in the ballot for the party list system. How many
votes do they need to obtain in order to gain the maximum seats allowed if the total number of
registered voters is 20, 587, 123 while the votes actually cast is 12, 356, 897? Explain. (6)
Banat vs. COMELEC
19. Congressman Kambal is a duly elected representative of the First District of Manila. During his
incumbency, he was charged with slight physical injuries resulting from an altercation he had with
a female cheer leader while watching the blow-out win by the San Beda Red Lions in the NCAA. A
vigilant women’s group is calling for his arrest while the Congressional session is recess saying that
the Congressman’s act is nothing short of a “disorderly behavior”? Decide. (7)
Art. VI, Sec. 11 of the Constitution provides two requisites before a Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives could avail of the immunity from arrest. These are (1) the offense shall be punishable by not
more than six years imprisonment; and (2) the Congress must be in session.
In the case at bar, Congressman Kambal is charged with slight physical injuries which is a light felony. It
is punishable with an imprisonment of one day to 30 days which is less than six years. Also, the contention that
Congressman Kambal may be arrested because the Congressional session is recess is untenable. A session begins
when the Congress convenes and ends when it adjourns. A recess, by contrast, does not terminate a session, but
only suspends it temporarily. It is no doubt that the two requisites are present in this case. Hence, Congressman
Kambal could not be arrested.

20. Congresswoman Sumanqui filed a tax bill in the House of Representatives on September 3, 2015.
Unknown to the Congresswoman, Senator Hilario filed a similar tax bill on the same subject matter
on September 2, 2015. Assuming the bill passes into law, will the same be eventually declared
unconstitutional or is there a scenario by which the measure can be considered valid. Explain fully.
(10)
The bill will eventually be declared unconstitutional. Art. VI, Sec. 24 of the Constitution provides that “all
appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public debt, bills of local application, and
private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur
with amendments.”

It is evident from the aforementioned provision that revenue bills are required to originate exclusively in
the House of Representatives, the Senate cannot enact revenue measures of its own without such bills. After a
revenue bill is passed and sent over to it by the House, however, the Senate certainly can pass its own version on
the same subject matter. In the case at bar, it was Senator Hilario who initiated a bill not Congressman
Sumanqui. Thus, the bill is passed in violation of Art. VI, Sec. 24 of the Constitution. It is important to note that
this requirement is in keeping with the adage that there could be no taxation without representation. The House
of Representatives being more numerous in membership is said to be more representative of the people.
Moreover, its members are presumed to be more familiar with the needs of the country in regard to the
enactment of the legislation involved.