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

Sec 7 & 8. RESERVED EXECUTIVE POWERS

Pending the election and organization of the Congress,
the incumbent Pres shall continue to exercise
legislative powers” which she would lose ONLY when
“the first congress in convened.”
Sec 7. Until a law is passed, the Pres may fill by
appointment from a list of nominees by the respective
sectors the seats reserved for sectoral representation.

POLITICAL LAW- AGPALO

Constitution, aside from an allocation of power is also
a social contract whereby the people have surrendered
their sovereign powers to the State for the common
good.
Sovereignty “ultimate power/ absolute right to
govern”.
- Relate to: Right to revolution is an inherent
right of the people to cast out their rulers,