Nachura and Case Doctrines (Midterms)

Political Law Review SBCA AY 2013-2014 Commissioner Sarmiento
GENERAL PRINCIPLES document scattered in various sources. Such as:

1. Statutes
Political Law – branch of public law which deals with the organization and operation 2. Judicial Decisions
of the governmental organs of the State with the inhabitants of its territory. 3. Commentaries
SCOPE Enacted (Conventional) Evolved (Cumulative)

1. Constitutional Law – study of maintenance of the proper balance between Formally struck off at a definite time and Result of political Evolution, not
authority as represented by the three inherent powers of the state and place following a conscious or deliberate inaugurated at any specific time, changes
liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. effort by accretion
1. Administrative Law – branch of public law which fixes the organization of
government, determines the competence of the administrative authorities Rigid Flexible
who execute the law, and indicates to the individual remedies for the Amended only by a formal and usually Changed by Ordinary Legislation
violation of his rights. difficult process
2. Law on Municipal corporations
3. Law of Public Officers Qualities
4. Election Laws  Broad – Not only that it covers all persons and things within the territory
BASIS but comprehensive enough to provide for every contingency.
1. 1987 Constitution
2. 1973 and 1935 Constitution  Brief – Confine itself to basic principles. More adjustable to change
3. Other organic Laws made to apply to the Philippines such as:  Definite – Prevent ambiguity which could result in confusion and
a. Philippine Bill of 1902 divisiveness
b. Jones Law of 191
c. Tydings Mcduffie Law of 1934 Essential Parts
4. Statutes, EO and Decrees and judicial decisions 1. Constitution of Liberty – sets forth fundamental and political rights and
5. U.S. Constitution imposing limitatios on the powers of government as means of securing
6. UN Charter enjoyment of those rights. (Bill of Rights)
7. International Peace Treaties 2. Constitution of Government – Outlines organization of Government,
8. Biak-na-Bato Constitution Enumerating its Powers, laying down certain rules relative to its
9. Malolos Constitution administration and defining the electorate. (Arts. VI, VII, VIII and IX)
10. Japanese Occupation Constitution 3. Constitution of Sovereignty – points out the mode or procedure in
accordance with which formal changes in the fundamental law may be
brought about. (Art. XVII)
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION 4. Social Justice and human Rights – Economic, Social and Cultural. (Art.
XIII)
Constitution - body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of
sovereignty are habitually exercised. Interpretation/ Construction
1. Written Instrument 1. Verba Legis – Words in the Constitution must be given their ordinary
2. Enacted by Direct Action of the People meaning except where technical terms are employed
3. Where Fundamental powers of the Government are established, limited and 2. Ratio legis et anima – where there is ambiguity, words must be interpreted
defined in accordance with the intent of the Framers. Bear in mind object sought to
4. Powers are distribute be accomplished and evils sought to be prevented or remedied.
5. For safe and useful exercise 3. Ut magis valeat quam pereat – interpreted as a whole.
6. For the benefit of the Body Politic
Purpose  In case of Doubt, Provisions should be considered self-executing,
1. Prescribe the Framework of a system of the Government mandatory rather than directory, and prospective rather than retroactive.
2. Assign respective powers and duties
3. Establish Certain First Principles on which the Government is Founded  Self Executing Provisions – A provision which is complete in itself and
becomes operative without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation,
Classification or that which supplies a sufficient rule by means of which the right it grants
Written Unwritten may be enjoyed or protected, is self-executing.
Precepts are embodied in one Not integrated into a single, concrete form, Example: Bill of Rights
THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 1

 Sandoval: Not a Self-executing provision- Requires an Implementing Law.

 Non-self executing - Provision which lays down a general principle is Defensor Santiago vs. COMELEC:
usually not self-executing. RA 6735 provides for 3 types of People’s Initiative:
Example: Art. 2. Declaration of Principles and State Policies 1. On the Constitution;
Exception: Sec. 16, Art. 2- The state shall protect and advance the right of the 2. Statutes;
peole to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and 3. Ordinances
harmony of nature. The SC coined this as an “Intergenerational The supposedly implementing law, RA 6735 was declared as
Responsibility” (Oposa vs. FActoran) unconstitutional as it covers BOTH amendment AND REVISIONS, contrary
to the provision of Art. 17, Sec. 2. However, the law as found to be
 The provisions of the constitution are presumed to be SELF-EXECUTING incomplete as regards amendment, so the constitutional provision remains
rather than non-self executing as was held in the case of Manila Prince Hotel non self-executing87 (But See Lambino vs. COMELEC where it was held
vs. GSIS. Thus Sec. 10(2), Art. 12 of the Constitution is Self-Executing. that RA 6735 was constitutional).
d. Constitutional Commission (Note that there is no mention of a

Amendment vs. Revision Constitutional Commission in Art. XVII) *
Amendment Revision Brief Background:
Adds, reduces, deletes, without altering A change that alters a basic principle of 1935 Constitutional Convention Members Elected by
the basic principle involved. the Constitution like altering the the people
principle of separation of powers or 1973 Constitutional Convention Members Elected by
system of checks and balances. the people
1987 Constitutional Commission Members appointed
Change alters the substantial entirety of by the President
the Constitution.
Specific Provision (Piecemeal) Several Provisions (Overhaul) 2. Ratification. (Art. XVII, Sec. 4). Proposed amendment shall become part of
the Constitution when ratified by a majority if the votes cast in a plebiscite
held not earlier than 60 nor later than 90 days after the approval of the
Tests to determine amendment or revision (Lambino vs. COMELEC) proposal by congress or the Constitutional Convention. Or after the
Quantitative Qualitative certification by the COMELEC of the Sufficiency of the petition or initiatie
Whether the proposed change is so Whether the change will accomplish such under Sec. 2, Art. XVII.
extensive in its provisions as to change far-reaching changes in the nature of our
directly the substance entirety basic governmental plan Power of Judicial Review
1. Judicial Review – Power of the courts to test the validity of executive and
Steps in Amendatory Process legislative acts in light of their conformity with Constitution. This is not an
1. Proposal Art. XVII, Sec. 1-3- A proposed amendment may come from: assertion of superiority by the courts over the other departments but merely
a. Congress by a vote of ¾ of all its members. an expression of the supremacy of the Constitution
- Congress acts as a “constituent assembly” directly for the purpose 2. Judicial Power – includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
of amendment or revision. controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and
- Not a legislative act enforceable and determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of
b. Constitutional Convention – called into existence either by: discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
i. 2/3 vote of all the members of the Congress; branch or instrumentality.
ii. Calling of People - Majority vote of all members of Functions
Congress with the question of whether or not to 1. Checking
call a convention to be resolved by the people in a 2. Legitimating
plebiscite; 3. Symbolic
c. People, through the power of initiative-
1. Petition; Requisites
2. Signed by: 1. Actual Case or controversy – conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite
legal claims which can be resolved on the basis of existing law and
- At least 12% of the total number of registered voter
jurisprudence.
- Every legislative district must be represented by at least 3%  A request for advisory opinion is not an actual case or
controversy.

 ICJ may render advisory opinions duties, affords no protection, if the statue had no existence.
a. To resolve contention cases creates office, inoperative, as if it Certain legal effects prior to its
b. Directed to General Assembly, Security Council, other organs of had not been passed at all declaration of unconstitutionality
the UN. may be recognized.
 Must not be moot and academic - One that ceases to present a
justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events Partial Unconstitutionality
Exceptions to the rule on Mootness: 1. Legislature must be willing to retain the valid portions usually shown by
a. Grave violation of the Constitution the presence of a separability clause
b. Exceptional Character of the situation and paramount public 2. Valid portion can stand independently
interest is involved
c. Constitutional issues raised require formulation of principles to CASE DOCTRINES
guide the bench, the bar and the public
d. Case is capable of repetition yet evasive of review. CHREA VS CHR
From the 1987 Constitution and the Administrative Code, it is abundantly
2. Question must be raised by a proper party – One who has sustained or is clear that the CHR is not among the class of Constitutional Commissions. As
in imminent danger of sustaining an injury as a result of the act complained expressed in the oft-repeated maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the
of. “Locus Standi” express mention of one person, thing, act or consequence excludes all others.
- Locus Standi – a right of appearance in a court of justice on a Stated otherwise, expressium facit cessare tacitum – what is expressed puts an end
given question. to what is implied.
- Direct Injury Test – a person who impugns the validity of a Nor is there any legal basis to support the contention that the CHR enjoys
statute must have a personal and substantial interest in the fiscal autonomy. In essence, fiscal autonomy entails freedom from outside control
case such that he has sustained or will sustain direct injury and limitations, other than those provided by law. It is the freedom to allocate and
as a result. utilize funds granted by law, in accordance with law, and pursuant to the wisdom
- Liberal Approach: and dispatch its needs may require from time to time.
a. Constitutional Issues Being a member of the fiscal autonomy group does not vest the agency with
b. Taxpayers – claim of illegal disbursement of public the authority to reclassify, upgrade, and create positions without approval of the
funds DBM. While the members of the Group are authorized to formulate and
c. Voters – obvious interest in the validity of the election implement the organizational structures of their respective offices and determine
law the compensation of their personnel, such authority is not absolute and must be
d. Concerned citizens – transcendental importance exercised within the parameters of the Unified Position Classification and
e. Legislators – Official action complained of infringes Compensation System established under RA 6758 more popularly known as the
their prerogatives as legislators Compensation Standardization Law.
- Facial Challenge – exception to the rule that a party can
question the validity of a statute only if as applied to him is GALICTO VS AQUINO
unconstitutional. May be invoked only to challenge a statue Locus standi or legal standing has been defined as a personal and
when it operates in the area of freedom of expression. substantial interest in a case such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct
injury as a result of the governmental act that is being challenged. The gist of the
- Overbreadth Doctrine – permits a party to challenge the
validity of a statue even though, as applied to him, it is not question on standing is whether a party alleges such personal stake in the
unconstitutional but may be to others. outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpens
the presentation of issues upon which the court depends for illumination of
- Void-for-Vagueness – a law is facially invalid if men of difficult constitutional questions.” This requirement of standing relates to the
common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning constitutional mandate that this Court settle only actual cases or controversies.
and differ as to its application.
Thus, as a general rule, a party is allowed to “raise a constitutional
3. Raised at the earliest opportunity – Pleadings
question” when (1) he can show that he will personally suffer some actual or
4. Decision of Constitutional question is determinative of the case itself – on
threatened injury because of the allegedly illegal conduct of the government; (2)
the basis of Separation of Powers. the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action; and (3) the injury is likely to
be redressed by a favorable action.
Effects of Declaration of unconstitutionality
Jurisprudence defines interest as “material interest, an interest in issue and
Orthodox Modern to be affected by the decree, as distinguished from mere interest in the question
Unconstitutional Act is not a law, Refuse to recognize the law and involved, or a mere incidental interest. By real interest is meant a present
confers no rights, imposes no determine the rights of the parties as

substantial interest, as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, independent action in exercising their respective mandates; lack of independence
contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest.” would result in the inability of one branch of government to check the arbitrary or
self-interest assertions of another or others.
MANILA PRINCE HOTEL VS GSIS Decisional independence "refers to a judge’s ability to render decisions free
The Manila Hotel or, for that matter, 51% of the MHC, is not just any from political or popular influence based solely on the individual facts and
commodity to be sold to the highest bidder solely for the sake of privatization. applicable law.” On the other hand, institutional independence "describes the
The Manila Hotel has played and continues to play a significant role as an separation of the judicial branch from the executive and legislative branches of
authentic repository of twentieth century Philippine history and culture. This is government.” Simply put, institutional independence refers to the "collective
the plain and simple meaning of the Filipino First Policy provision of the independence of the judiciary as a body."
Philippine Constitution. And this Court, heeding the clarion call of the
Constitution and accepting the duty of being the elderly watchman of the nation, SANIDAD VS COMELEC
will continue to respect and protect the sanctity of the Constitution. It was thus Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution that what was granted to the Comelec
ordered that GSIS accepts the matching bid of petitioner MANILA PRINCE was the power to supervise and regulate the use and enjoyment of franchises,
HOTEL CORPORATION to purchase the subject 51% of the shares of the Manila permits or other grants issued for the operation of transportation or other public
Hotel Corporation at P44.00 per share and thereafter to execute the necessary utilities, media of communication or information to the end that equal
clearances and to do such other acts and deeds as may be necessary for purpose. opportunity, time and space, and the right to reply, including reasonable, equal
rates therefor, for public information campaigns and forums among candidates
KILOSBAYAN VS GUINGONA are ensured. Neither Article IX-C of the Constitution nor Section 11-b, 2nd
As to the preliminary issue, the Court resolved to set aside the procedural paragraph of RA 6646 (“a columnist, commentator, announcer or personality, who
technicality in view of the importance of the issues raised. The Court adopted the is a candidate for any elective office is required to take a leave of absence from his
liberal policy on locus standi to allow the ordinary taxpayers, members of work during the campaign period”) can be construed to mean that the Comelec
Congress, and even association of planters, and non-profit civic organizations to has also been granted the right to supervise and regulate the exercise by media
initiate and prosecute actions to question the validity or constitutionality of laws, practitioners themselves of their right to expression during plebiscite periods.
acts, decisions, or rulings of various government agencies or instrumentalities. Media practitioners exercising their freedom of expression during plebiscite
As to the substantive issue, the Court agrees with the petitioners whether periods are neither the franchise holders nor the candidates. In fact, there are no
the contract in question is one of lease or whether the PGMC is merely an candidates involved in a plebiscite. Therefore, Section 19 of Comelec Resolution
independent contractor should not be decided on the basis of the title or 2167 has no statutory basis.
designation of the contract but by the intent of the parties, which may be gathered
from the provisions of the contract itself. Animus homini est anima scripti. The LAMP VS SECRETARY OF DBM
intention of the party is the soul of the instrument. The gist of the question of standing is whether a party alleges “such a
personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete
COA OPINION ON PROPERTIES PURCHASED BY RETIRED CHIEF adverseness which sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so
JUSTICE/ ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT largely depends for illumination of difficult constitutional questions. Here, the
The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in our system of sufficient interest preventing the illegal expenditure of money raised by taxation
government. It obtains not through express provision but by actual division in our required in taxpayers’ suits is established. Thus, in the claim that PDAF funds
Constitution. Each department of the government has exclusive cognizance of have been illegally disbursed and wasted through the enforcement of an invalid
matters within its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own sphere. But it does or unconstitutional law, LAMP should be allowed to sue.
not follow from the fact that the three powers are to be kept separate and distinct In determining whether or not a statute is unconstitutional, the Court does not
that the Constitution intended them to be absolutely unrestrained and lose sight of the presumption of validity accorded to statutory acts of Congress. To
independent of each other. The Constitution has provided for an elaborate system justify the nullification of the law or its implementation, there must be a clear and
of checks and balances to secure coordination in the workings of the various unequivocal, not a doubtful, breach of the Constitution. In case of doubt in the
departments of the government. x x x And the judiciary in turn, with the Supreme sufficiency of proof establishing unconstitutionality, the Court must sustain
Court as the final arbiter, effectively checks the other departments in the exercise legislation because “to invalidate [a law] based on x x x baseless supposition is an
of its power to determine the law, and hence to declare executive and legislative affront to the wisdom not only of the legislature that passed it but also of the
acts void if violative of the Constitution. executive which approved it.”
The concept of the independence of the three branches of government, on the
other hand, extends from the notion that the powers of government must be POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
divided to avoid concentration of these powers in any one branch; the division, it 1. there must be an actual case or controversy calling for the exercise of judicial
is hoped, would avoid any single branch from lording its power over the other power;
branches or the citizenry. To achieve this purpose, the divided power must be 2. the person challenging the act must have the standing to question the validity of
wielded by co-equal branches of government that are equally capable of the subject act or issuance; otherwise stated, he must have a personal and

substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained, or will sustain, direct The Court agrees with the Solicitor General that the issuance of
injury as a result of its enforcement; Proclamation 435, declaring that the state of rebellion has ceased to exist, has
3. the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity; rendered the case moot. As a rule, courts do not adjudicate moot cases, judicial
power being limited to the determination of “actual controversies.” Nevertheless,
DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO VS COMELEC courts will decide a question, otherwise moot, if it is “capable of repetition yet
Sec. 2, Art XVII of the Constitution is not self executory, thus, without evading review.” The present case is one such case. Once before, the President on
implementing legislation the same cannot operate. Although the Constitution has 1 May 2001 declared a state of rebellion and called upon the AFP and the PNP to
recognized or granted the right, the people cannot exercise it if Congress does not suppress the rebellion through Proclamation 38 and General Order 1. On that
provide for its implementation. The portion of COMELEC Resolution No. 2300 occasion, “‘an angry and violent mob armed with explosives, firearms, bladed
which prescribes rules and regulations on the conduct of initiative on weapons, clubs, stones and other deadly weapons’ assaulted and attempted to
amendments to the Constitution, is void. It has been an established rule that what break into Malacañang.” Petitions were filed before the Supreme Court assailing
has been delegated, cannot be delegated (potestas delegata non delegari potest). the validity of the President’s declaration. Five days after such declaration,
The delegation of the power to the COMELEC being invalid, the latter cannot however, the President lifted the same. The mootness of the petitions in Lacson v.
validly promulgate rules and regulations to implement the exercise of the right to Perez and accompanying cases precluded the Court from addressing the
people’s initiative. The lifting of the term limits was held to be that of a revision, constitutionality of the declaration. To prevent similar questions from reemerging,
as it would affect other provisions of the Constitution such as the synchronization the Supreme Court seized the opportunity to finally lay to rest the validity of the
of elections, the constitutional guarantee of equal access to opportunities for declaration of a state of rebellion in the exercise of the President’s calling out
public service, and prohibiting political dynasties. A revision cannot be done by power, the mootness of the petitions notwithstanding.
initiative. However, considering the Court’s decision in the above Issue, the issue
of whether or notthe petition is a revision or amendment has become academic. DAVID ET AL VS PRES. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
Generally, Congress is the repository of emergency powers. This is evident
SALONGA VS PANO in the tenor of Section 23 (2), Article VI authorizing it to delegate such powers to
The setting aside or declaring void, in proper cases, of intrusions of State the President. Certainly, a body cannot delegate a power not reposed upon it.
authority into areas reserved by the Bill of Rights for the individual as However, knowing that during grave emergencies, it may not be possible or
constitutionally protected spheres where even the awesome powers of practicable for Congress to meet and exercise its powers, the Framers of our
Government may not enter at will is not the totality of the Court's functions. The Constitution deemed it wise to allow Congress to grant emergency powers to the
Court also has the duty to formulate guiding and controlling constitutional President, subject to certain conditions, thus:
principles, precepts, doctrines, or rules. It has the symbolic function of educating There must be a war or other emergency.
bench and bar on the extent of protection given by constitutional guarantees. The delegation must be for a limited period only
The delegation must be subject to such restrictions as the Congress may prescribe.
TANADA VS ANGARA The emergency powers must be exercised to carry out a national policy declared
In rendering this Decision, this Court never forgets that the Senate, whose by Congress
act is under review, is one of two sovereign houses of Congress and is thus The President is authorized to declare a state of national emergency.
entitled to great respect in its actions. It is itself a constitutional body independent However, without legislation, she has no power to take over privately-owned
and coordinate, and thus its actions are presumed regular and done in good faith. public utility or business affected with public interest. The President cannot
Unless convincing proof and persuasive arguments are presented to overthrow decide whether exceptional circumstances exist warranting the take over of
such presumptions, this Court will resolve every doubt in its favor. Using the privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest. Nor
foregoing well-accepted definition of grave abuse of discretion and the can she determine when such exceptional circumstances have ceased. Likewise,
presumption of regularity in the Senate’s processes, this Court cannot find any without legislation, the President has no power to point out the types of
cogent reason to impute grave abuse of discretion to the Senate’s exercise of its businesses affected with public interest that should be taken over. In short, the
power of concurrence in the WTO Agreement granted it by Sec. 21 of Article VII President has no absolute authority to exercise all the powers of the State under
of the Constitution. Section 17, Article VII in the absence of an emergency powers act passed by
That the Senate, after deliberation and voting, voluntarily and Congress
overwhelmingly gave its consent to the WTO Agreement thereby making it “a
part of the law of the land” is a legitimate exercise of its sovereign duty and FORTUN VS MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
power. Under the 1987 Constitution the President and the Congress act in tandem
What the Senate did was a valid exercise of its authority. As to whether in exercising the power to proclaim martial law or suspend the privilege of the writ
such exercise was wise, beneficial or viable is outside the realm of judicial inquiry of habeas corpus. They exercise the power, not only sequentially, but in a sense
and review. That is a matter between the elected policy makers and the people. jointly since, after the President has initiated the proclamation or the suspension,
only the Congress can maintain the same based on its own evaluation of the
SANLAKAS VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY situation on the ground, a power that the President does not have.

Consequently, although the Constitution reserves to the Supreme Court the ARTICLE III. Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in
power to review the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation or their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches
suspension in a proper suit, it is implicit that the Court must allow Congress to and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable,
exercise its own review powers, which is automatic rather than initiated. Only and no search warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to
when Congress defaults in its express duty to defend the Constitution through be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or
such review should the Supreme Court step in as its final rampart. The affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
constitutional validity of the President’s proclamation of martial law or particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus is first a political question in the hands of to be seized.
Congress before it becomes a justiciable one in the hands of the Court. ARTICLE XIII. Section 1. The Congress shall give highest
priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of
BAYAN VS SEC. ERMITA all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political
Their right as citizens to engage in peaceful assembly and exercise the right inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth
of petition, as guaranteed by the Constitution, is directly affected by B.P. No. 880. and political power for the common good.
B.P. 880 is not an absolute ban of public assemblies but a restriction that simply
regulates the time, place and manner of the assemblies. It refers to all kinds of b) Citizens
public assemblies that would use public places. The reference to “lawful cause” PREAMBLE
does not make it content-based because assemblies really have to be for lawful ARTICLE II. Section 2. The Philippine renounces war as an
causes, otherwise they would not be “peaceable” and entitled to protection. instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of
Maximum tolerance1 is for the protection and benefit of all rallyists and is international law as part of the law of the land and adheres too the policy
independent of the content of the expressions in the rally. There is, likewise, no of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all
prior restraint, since the content of the speech is not relevant to the regulation. nations.
The so-called calibrated preemptive response policy has no place in our legal Section 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the
firmament and must be struck down as a darkness that shrouds freedom. It people. The Government may call upon the people to defend the State
merely confuses our people and is used by some police agents to justify abuses. and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under
Insofar as it would purport to differ from or be in lieu of maximum tolerance, this conditions provided by law, to render personally, military or civil service.
was declared null and void. ARTICLE III. Section 7. The right of the people to information on
matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records,
ROQUE VS COMELEC and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
Speculations and conjectures are not equivalent to proof; they have little, if decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy
any, probative value and, surely, cannot be the basis of a sound judgment. development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as
may be provided by law.
GONZALES III VS OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
President has power to remove the deputy Ombudsman as long as the acts c) Electors
constitute betrayal of public trust. ARTICLE VII. Section 4. The President and the Vice-President
shall be elected by the direct vote of the people for a terms of six years
which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June following the next
PHILIPPINES AS A STATE day of the election and shall end at noon of the same six years thereafter.
The President shall not be eligible for any reelection. No person who has
State - a community of persons, more or less numerous permanently occupying a succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years
definite portion of territory, independent of external control and possessing a shall be qualified for election for the same office at any time.
government to which a great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience.
2. Territory
State Nation Government Art. 1 RA 3046; RA 5446
legal and juristic concept Ethnic or racial concept Instrumentality of the State
through which the will of a. The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago with all
the State is implemented the islands and waters embraced therein, and all opther territories
and realized over which the Philipoines has sovereignty or jurisdiction,
consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aeraila domains, including its
Elements of State: territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other
1. People submarine areas” (sec. , Art II)
a) Inhabitants b. Components: Terestrial, Fluvial, Maritime and Aerial domains

c. The Philipine Archipelago: but coastal state enjoys preferential right over marine
1. Treaty of Paris – Cession of Philippine Islands by Spain to US resources found within these zones.
2. Treaty between Spain and US at Washington – Cagayan, Sulu
and Sibuto 3. Government
3. Treaty between US and Great Britain – Turtle and Mangsee Government – The agency or instrumentality through which the will of the
Islands state is formulated, expressed and realized.
d. Other territoties:
1. 1935 Constitution – Batanes Government of the Philippines - the corporate governemnt entity thorugh
2. 1973 Constitution, Art. 1 – Belonging to the Philippines by which the functions of the government are eof the government are ecised
historic right or legal title throughout the Philippines, including, save as the contrary appears from the
e. Archipelago Doctrine – The waters around, between and context, the various arms thorugh which political authority is made effective
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their in the Philippines, whether pertaining to the autonomous regions, the
breadth and dimension form part of the internal waterls of the provincial, city, municipal or barangay subdivisions or other forms of local
Philippines. government.(Sec. 2 (1) Administrative Code of 1987)
 Archipelago, which consists of a number of islands separated by Functions

bodies of water should be treated as one integral unit. a) Constituent – mandatory, constituting the very bonds of society
 Straight baseline method such as maintenace of peace and order, regulation of property and
property rights.
b) Ministrant- discretionary, intended to promote the welfare,

progress and prosperity of the people.
c) Parens Patriae – the parent of the state. The government may act as
guardian of the rightsof the people who may be disadvantaged or
suffering from some disability or misfortune.
Classification
De jure vs. De Facto
Kinds of De facto:
1. Takes possession or control of, or usurps by forcec or by the voice
of the majority the rightful legal government and maintains itself
against the will of the latter
2. Established by the inhabitants of a territory who rise in
insurrection against the parent state
3. Which is established by invading forces of an enemy who occupy
a territory in the course of war – de facto government of
paramount force.
Presidential Parliamentary
Separation of executive and legislative Fusion of both executive and legislative
powers powers in Parliament, although the actual
exercise of the executive powers is vested
in a Prime minister who is chosen by, and
accountable to, Parliament
Unitary Federal
 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea –(April 30, 1982):
Single, centralized government Consists of autonomous state
a. Contiguous Zone of 12 miles and Exclusive Economic Zone
of 200 miles -Not technically part of the territory of the State exercising powers over both internal and government units merged into a single
external affairs of the State state, with the national government

exercising a limited degree of power over

the domestic affairs but generally full 3. Extraterritorial:
direction of the external affairs of the a. Assertion of personal jurisdiction over its nationals abroad;
State. punish certain offenses committed outside the territory
against its national interests even if offenders are resident
4. Sovereignty aliens;
b. Relations with other states or territories when it establishes a
Sovereignty – the supreme and uncontrollable power inherent in the State colonial protectorate, condominium, or administers a trust
by which the State is governed. territory or occupies enemy territory in the course of war;
c. When local state waives its jurisdiction over persons and
Kinds: things within its territory as when a foreign army stationed
1. Legal – power to issue final commands therein remains under the jurisdiction of the sending state;
2. Political – Sum total of all the influences which lie behind the law d. Principle of extra-territoriality as illustrated by immunities
3. Internal – Supreme power over everything within its territory of the head of state in a foreign country;
4. External – Independence from external control e. Enjoyment of easements and servitudes;
Characteristics: f. Jurisdiction in the high seas, pirates right to visit and search
1. Permanence and doctrine of hot pursuit;
2. Exclusiveness g. Limited jurisdiction over the contiguous zone and
3. Comprehensiveness patrimonial sea, to prevent infringement of its customs,
4. Absoluteness fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations.
5. Indivisibility
6. Inalienability State immunity from suit
7. Imprescriptibility
“The state cannot be sued without its consent” (Sec. 3, Art. XVII)
 Effects of Change in sovereignty – Political laws are abrogated.  Even if the constitution provide no such provision, the state shall still be
 Effects of Belligerent Occupation – No Change in Sovereignty. immune from suit by virtue of Sec. 2, Art. II. “xxx and adopts the generally
 Political laws except the law on treason are suspended (Laurel vs. accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and
Misa) adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation and
amity with all nations. (US vs. Guinto)
Dominium Imperium Justice Holmes: There can be no legal right against the authority which makes
Capacity to own or acquire property Authority possessed by the State the law on which the right depends. However may be sued if it gives its
including lands held by the State in its embraced in the concept of sovereignty consent whether express of implied. “Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty”
proprietary capacity Immunity is enjoyed by other states – “par in parem non habet imperium”
Head of state is a presonofication of the State and is inviolable and thus enjoys
Jurisdiction: immunity from suit.
1. Territorial Foreign Agent – immune if it can be established that he is acting within the
Exempted are: directives of the sending state. It is removed once agent is sued in his
a. Foreign states and head of States, dimplomatic representatives and individual capacity. Such as when act was done with malice or in bad faith or
consuls to a certain degree; beyond his authority or jurisdiction.
b. Foreign State property including embassies, consulates and public
vessels engaged in non- commercial activities; Suits against the Government
c. Acts of State; 1. Incorporated – If charter provides that agency can sue and be sued, the suit
d. Foreign merchant vessels exercising: will lie, including one for tort. The provision in the charter constitutes
- Rights of innocent passage express consent on the part of the State.
2. Unincorporated - Inquire into the principal functions of the agency
- Involuntary entry
a. Governmental – No suit without consent
- Arrival under stress b. If Proprietary – Suit will lie. State descends to the level of an individual
e. Foreign armies passing through or stationed;
f. Such other persons including UN. Test to determine if suit is against the State – If upon the decision, the enforcement
of the same require an affirmative act from the State such as the appropriation of the
2. Personal – power of the state over its nationals which may be exercised needed amount to satisfy the judgment.
even if the individual is outside the territory

 Damnum Absque Injuria may be a lawful defense (Mun. Of La Union

Suit against Public Officers – doctrine of state immunity applies to complaints filed vs. Firme)
against officials of the State for acts performed by them in the discharge of their duties
within the scope of their authority. CASE DOCTRINES
Public Officers are PERSONALLY liable if act was unauthorized. As when Ultra Vires REPUBLIC VS SANTOS III
or attended by malice, bad faith or gross negligence. The process of drying up of a river to form dry land involved the recession
of the water level from the river banks, and the dried up land did not equate to
Need for Consent – Consent may be either express or implied. accretion, which was the gradual and imperceptible deposition of soil on the river
Express Consent – by an act of the legislative body, in a general or special law. banks through the effects of the current. In accretion, the water level did not
1. General Law recede and was more or less maintained. Hence, respondents as the riparian
a. Act 3083 – Money Claims of government arising from contract owners had no legal right to claim ownership of the subject property.
whether express or implied with the Philippine Government. Article 502 of the Civil Code expressly declares that rivers and their natural
b. PD 1445- General Auditing Law. Before suing the state, one must beds are public dominions of the state. It follows that the river beds that dry up,
first file with the Commission on Audit continue to belong to the state as its property of public dominion, unless there is
an express law that provides that the dried up river beds should belong to some
2. Special law – embodied in a statue and cannot be given by a mere other person.
counsel
a. Art. 1280, Civil Code- Damages when acting through a special COLLECTOR VS CAMPOS RUEDA
agent Even on the assumption then that Tangier is bereft of international
b. Art. 2189, Civil Code – Defective roads, bridges, canals etc. personality, petitioner has not successfully made out a case. It bears repeating four
c. Sec. 24, LGC – Death, Injury, damage caused by the government days after the filing of this petition, in Collector that of Internal Revenue v. De
d. Charters of GOCC Lara, 16 it was specifically held by the Court: "Considering the State of California
Implied Consent as a foreign country in relation to section 122 of our Tax Code we believe and
1. When the State commences litigation, it becomes vulnerable to hold, as did the Tax Court, that the Ancilliary Administrator is entitled the
counterclaim exemption from the inheritance tax on the intangible personal property found in
 Speaks of a compulsory counterclaim only the Philippines." 17 There can be no doubt that California as a state in the
2. When the State enters into a business contract, in Jus gestionis American Union was in the alleged requisite of international personality.
(Commercial/proprietary acts). If Jus Imperii (sovereign acts) no Nonetheless, it was held to be a foreign country within the meaning of Section 122
implied consent. of the National Internal Revenue Code.
 USA vs. Ruiz - Not every contract is deemed to be a waiver. SHIPSIDE INC VS CA
Only those falling under ACTA JURE GESTIONIS may subject Article 1144(3) provides that an action upon a judgment "must be brought
the Sate to suits. within 10 years from the time the right of action accrues." On the other hand,
Scope of Consent - Consent to be sued does not include consent to execution of Section 6, Rule 39 provides that a final and executory judgment or order may be
judgment against it. executed on motion within five (5) years from the date of its entry, but that after
 Such execution will require another waiver since the government funds the lapse of such time, and before it is barred by the statute of limitations, a
or properties may not be seized under writs of execution or garnishment judgment may be enforced by action. Taking these two provisions into
unless such disbursement is covered by the corresponding consideration, it is plain that an action for revival of judgment must be brought
appropriation as required by law. within ten years from the time said judgment becomes final. While it is true that
prescription does not run against the State, the same may not be invoked by the
Suitability vs. Liability – Liability will have to be determined by the Court on the government in this case since it is no longer interested in the subject matter. While
basis of the evidence and the applicable law. Camp Wallace may have belonged to the government at the time Rafael Galvez's
 Execution will require another waiver because the power of the courts title was ordered cancelled in Land Registration Case No. N-361, the same no
end when the judgment is rendered (Republic vs. Villasor) longer holds true today. With the transfer of Camp Wallace to the BCDA, the
 But funds belonging to GOCC whose charters provide that they can sue government no longer has a right or interest to protect. Consequently, the
and be sued are not exempt from garnishment (PNB vs. Pabalan) Republic is not a real party in interest and it may not institute the instant action.
 Municipality funds are public in character and even though the carter Nor may it raise the defense of imprescriptibility, the same being applicable only
provides that it can sue and be sued, such funds may not be garnished in cases where the government is a party in interest.
unless by a corresponding appropriation ordinance duly passed by the
Sanggunian Bayan. (Mun. Of San Miguel, Bulacam vs. Fernandez)

CABANAS VS PILAPIL PERALTA VS DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

It is buttressed by its adherence to the concept that the judiciary, as an The belligerent occupant at that time was the government instrumentality
agency of the State acting as parens patriae, is called upon whenever a pending which controlled the Philippines. It therefore had the power to create the court to
suit of litigation affects one who is a minor to accord priority to his best interest. It enforce the criminal laws which it had adopted. The SC said that during the
may happen, that family relations may press their respective claims. It would be occupation, the occupant may set up courts for the administration of justice and
more in consonance not only with the natural order of things but the tradition of maintenance of public order. So Ordinance 7, the law which created such court is
the country for a parent to be preferred. Certainly the judiciary as the valid.
instrumentality of the State in its role of parens patriae, cannot remain insensible The SC based this ruling on the principle of international law which states
to the validity of her plea. In a recent case, 9 there is this quotation from an that: the criminal jurisdiction established by the invader in the occupied territory
opinion of the United States Supreme Court: "This prerogative of parens patriae is finds its source from the martial law that is in force during the war.
inherent in the supreme power of every State, whether that power is lodged in a It was within the power of the belligerent occupant to promulgate Act 65, which
royal person or in the legislature, and has no affinity to those arbitrary powers penalizes the crimes of robbery and other offenses. Although such crimes
which are sometimes exerted by irresponsible monarchs to the great detriment of were already defined in the Revised Penal Code, they were modified in Act 65
the people and the destruction of their liberties." What is more, there is this with heavier penalties. This modification was demanded by military necessity,
constitutional provision vitalizing this concept. It reads: "The State shall incident of the state of war and necessary for the control of the country by the
strengthen the family as a basic social institution."If, as the Constitution so wisely occupant and the protection and safety of the army of the occupation.
dictates, it is the family as a unit that has to be strengthened, it does not admit of During a belligerent occupation, the political laws of the occupied territory
doubt that even if a stronger case were presented for the uncle, still deference to a are merely suspended, subject to revival under the principle of jus postliminium
constitutional mandate would have led the lower court to decide as it did. upon the end of the occupation. But non-political laws are deemed continued
unless changed by the belligerent occupant since they are intended to govern the
LAUREL VS MISA relations of individuals as among themselves.
A citizen or subject owes, not a qualified and temporary, but an absolute All judgments of political nature of the courts during the Japanese regime ceased
and permanent allegiance, which consists in the obligation of fidelity and to be valid upon the restoration of the national government by virtue of the
obedience to his government of sovereign. The absolute and permanent allegiance principle of postliminium. Though no redress can be claimed by the prisoner as to
of the inhabitants of a territory occupied by the enemy to their legitimate the sentence he has already served, the law that convicted him has also ceased
government or sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy occupation, validity. As such the detained prisoner must be released. The writ of habeas
because the sovereignty of the government or sovereign de jure is not transferred corpus was granted.
thereby the occupier. Sovereignty itself is not suspended and subsists during Postliminium – a principle of public international law that provides for the
enemy occupation, the allegiance of the inhabitants to their legitimate government invalidity of all illegitimate acts that an occupant may have performed on a given
or sovereign subsists and therefore there is no such thing as suspended allegiance, territory after its recapture by the legitimate sovereign.
the basic theory on which the petitioner’s contention rests.
Considering that, since the preservation of the allegiance or the obligation of SEAFDEC-AQD VS NLRC
fidelity and obedience of a citizen or subject to his government or sovereign does One of the basic immunities of an international organization is immunity
not demand from him a positive action, but only passive attitude or forbearance from local jurisdiction; that it is immune from the legal writs and processes issued
from adhering to the enemy by giving the latter aid and comfort, the occupant has by the tribunals of the country where it is found. The reason for this is that the
no power, as a corollary of the preceding consideration, to repeal or suspend the host government may interfere in their operations or even influence or control its
operation of the law of treason, essential for the preservation of the allegiance policies and decisions of the organization, and subjection to local jurisdiction
owed by the inhabitants to their legitimate government, or compel them to adhere would impair the capacity of such body to discharge its responsibilities
and give aid and comfort to him; because it is evident that such action is not impartially on behalf of its member-states. Being an intergovernmental
demanded by the exigencies of the military service or not necessary for the control organization, SEAFDEC including its Departments (AQD), enjoys functional
of the inhabitants and the safety and protection of his army, and because it is independence and freedom from control of the state in whose territory its office is
tantamount to practically transfer temporarily to the occupant their allegiance to located. Pursuant to its being signatory to the Agreement, the RP agreed that its
the titular government or sovereign; and that, therefore, if an inhabitant of the national laws and regulations shall apply only insofar as its contribution to
occupied territory were compelled illegally by the military occupant, through SEAFDEC of ‘an agreed amount of money, movable and immovable property and
force, threat or intimidation, to give him aid and comfort, the former may lawfully services necessary for the establishment and operation of the Center’ are
resist and die if necessary as a hero, or submit thereto without becoming a traitor. concerned. It expressly waived the application of the Philippine laws on the
The Philippine Republic has the right to prosecute Treason committed during disbursement of funds of petitioner SEAFDEC-AQD.
Japanese occupation.
MINUCHER VS CA
If the acts giving rise to a suit are those of a foreign government done by its
foreign agent, although not necessarily a diplomatic personage, but acting in his

official capacity, the complaint could be barred by the immunity of the foreign proprietary in nature." Overtime work in the Bureau of Printing is done only
sovereign from suit without its consent. Suing a representative of a state is when the interest of the service so requires (sec. 566, Rev. Adm. Code).The
believed to be, in effect, suing the state itself. The proscription is not accorded for additional work it executes for private persons, was done upon request, as
the benefit of an individual but for the State, in whose service he is, under the distinguished from those solicited, and only "as the requirements of Government
maxim - par in parem, non habet imperium - that all states are sovereign equals work will permit" (sec. 1654, Rev. Adm. Code), As shown by the uncontradicted
and cannot assert jurisdiction over one another. evidence of the petitioners, most of these works consist of orders for greeting
"While the doctrine (of state immunity) appears to prohibit only suits cards during Christmas from government officials, and for printing of checks of
against the state without its consent, it is also applicable to complaints filed private banking institutions. On those greeting cards, the Government seal, of
against officials of the state for acts allegedly performed by them in the discharge which only the Bureau of Printing is authorized to use, is embossed, and on the
of their duties. (United States of America vs. Guinto) bank cheeks, only the Bureau of Printing can print the reproduction of the official
This immunity principle, however, has its limitations (Shauf vs. Court of documentary stamps appearing thereon. The additional work it executes for
Appeals): private parties is merely incidental to its function, and although such work may
When public official is made to account in his capacity as such for acts be deemed proprietary in character, there is no showing that the employees
contrary to law and injurious to the rights of the plaintiff. performing said proprietary function are separate and distinct from those
where the public official is being sued in his private and personal capacity as an employed in its general governmental functions.
ordinary citizen. Indeed, as an office of the Government, without any corporate or juridical
where the public official acts without authority or in excess of the powers vested personality, the Bureau of Printing cannot be sued. (Sec. 1, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
in him. Any suit, action or proceeding against it, if it were to produce any effect, would
A foreign agent, operating within a territory, can be cloaked with immunity actually be a suit, action or proceeding against the Government itself, and the rule
from suit but only as long as it can be established that he is acting within the is settled that the Government cannot be sued without its consent, much less over
directives of the sending state. The consent of the host state is an indispensable its objection.
requirement of basic courtesy between the two sovereigns.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE VS NLRC
PHILIPPINE TOURISM AUTHORITY VS PGDE The basic postulate enshrined in the constitution that "(t)he State may not be
The application of the state immunity is proper only when the proceedings sued without its consent. The rule, in any case, is not really absolute. The doctrine
arise out of sovereign transactions and not in cases of commercial activities or only conveys, "the state may not be sued without its consent. Express consent may
economic affairs. The state, in entering into a business contract, descends to the be made through a general law 13 or a special law The general law waiving the
level of an individual and is deemed to have tacitly given its consent to be sued. immunity of the state from suit is found in Act No. 3083, where the Philippine
Since the Intramuros Golf Course expansion Projects partakes of a government "consents and submits to be sued upon any money claims involving
proprietary character entered into between PTA and PHILGOLF, PTA cannot liability arising from contract, express or implied, which could serve as a basis of
avoid its financial liability by merely invoking immunity from suit. civil action between private parties. Implied consent, on the other hand, is
conceded when the State itself commences litigation, thus opening itself to a
SSS VA CA counterclaim 16 or when it enters into a contract. This rule, relied upon by the
The SSS was of the belief that it was acting in the legitimate exercise of its NLRC and the private respondents, is not, however, without qualification. Not all
right under the mortgage contract in the face of irregular payments made by contracts entered into by the government operate as a waiver of its non-suability;
private respondents, and placed reliance on the automatic acceleration clause in distinction must still be made between one which is executed in the exercise of its
the contract. The filing alone of the foreclosure application should not be a ground sovereign function and another which is done in its proprietary capacity. , The
for an award of moral damages in the same way that a clearly unfounded civil claims of private respondents clearly constitute money claims. Act No. 3083,
action is not among the grounds for moral damages. No proof has been submitted aforecited, gives the consent of the State to be "sued upon any moneyed claim
that the SSS had acted in a wanton, reckless and oppressive manner. However, involving liability arising from contract, express or implied, . . . Pursuant,
there was clear negligence on the part of SSS when they mistook the loan account however, to Commonwealth Act ("C.A.") No. 327, as amended by Presidential
of Socorro J. Cruz for that of private respondent Socorro C. Cruz. The SSS can be Decree ("P.D.") No. 1145, the money claim first be brought to the Commission on
held liable for nominal damages. This type of damages is not for the purpose of Audit. The Labor code, in relation to Act No. 3083, provides the legal basis for the
indemnifying private respondents for any loss suffered by them but to vindicate State liability but the prosecution, enforcement or satisfaction thereof must still be
or recognize their rights which have been violated or invaded by petitioner SSS. pursued in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in C.A. No. 327,
as amended by P.D. 1445.
BUREAU OF PRINTING VS BUREAU OF PRNTING EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION SANDERS VS VERIDIANO
It is true, as stated in the order complained of, that the Bureau of Printing The SC stated that the acts in question were performed by the American
receives outside jobs and that many of its employees are paid for overtime work, officers in the discharge of their official duties. The letters were made in the course
but these facts do not justify the conclusion that its functions are "exclusively of their official functions such that the letters were of official character. Thus, the

officers were being sued not in their personal capacity but as officers of the US vice of its own sovereign character, so as to render the corporation subject to the
government. Since the officers were acting within the scope of their authority, it is rules of law governing private corporations.
the government, and not the officers who are responsible for the acts.
As such, the case will not prosper unless the US government itself is made MUNICIPALITY OF MAKATI VS CA
party to the case. However, under the doctrine of state immunity, the US cannot In this jurisdiction, well-settled is the rule that public funds are not subject
be made a party unless they give their consent. We follow this principle of to levy and execution, unless otherwise provided for by statute. Municipal
international law as mandated in the Constitution. revenues derived from taxes, licenses and market fees, and which are intended
Lastly, the SC said that since the questioned acts were done in the Olongapo primarily and exclusively for the purpose of financing the governmental activities
Naval base, by officers in the performance of official duties, against employees and functions of the municipality, are exempt from execution. Absent a showing
who themselves were Americans, the case is an internal matter that can be that the municipal council of Makati has passed an ordinance appropriating the
resolved in the said base. (Note: during this time there was still no VFA.) said amount from its public funds deposited in their PNB account, no levy under
execution may be validly effected. However, this court orders petitioner to pay for
REPUBLIC VS SANDOVAL the said land which has been in their use already. This Court will not condone
The SC stated that the acts in question were performed by the American petitioner's blatant refusal to settle its legal obligation arising from expropriation
officers in the discharge of their official duties. The letters were made in the course of land they are already enjoying. The State's power of eminent domain should be
of their official functions such that the letters were of official character. Thus, the exercised within the bounds of fair play and justice.
officers were being sued not in their personal capacity but as officers of the US
government. Since the officers were acting within the scope of their authority, it is FONTANILLA VS MALIAMAN
the government, and not the officers who are responsible for the acts. The functions of government have been classified into governmental or
As such, the case will not prosper unless the US government itself is made constituent and proprietary or ministrant. The former involves the exercise of
party to the case. However, under the doctrine of state immunity, the US cannot sovereignty and considered as compulsory; the latter connotes merely the exercise
be made a party unless they give their consent. We follow this principle of of proprietary functions and thus considered as optional.
international law as mandated in the Constitution. The court concluded that the National Irrigation Administration is a
Lastly, the SC said that since the questioned acts were done in the Olongapo government agency with a juridical personality separate and distinct from the
Naval base, by officers in the performance of official duties, against employees government. It is not a mere agency of the government but a corporate body
who themselves were Americans, the case is an internal matter that can be performing proprietary functions. Therefore, it may be held liable for the damages
resolved in the said base. (Note: during this time there was still no VFA.) caused by the negligent act of its driver who was not its special agent.
US VS RUIZ PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO VS GRP PEACE PANEL ON

The traditional role of the state immunity exempts a state from being sued ANCESTRAL DOMAIN
in the courts of another state without its consent or waiver. This rule is necessary The power of judicial review is limited to actual cases or controversies.
consequence of the principle of independence and equality of states. However, the Courts decline to issue advisory opinions or to resolve hypothetical or feigned
rules of international law are not petrified; they are continually and evolving and problems, or mere academic questions. The limitation of the power of judicial
because the activities of states have multiplied. It has been necessary to review to actual cases and controversies defines the role assigned to the judiciary
distinguish them between sovereign and governmental acts and private, in a tripartite allocation of power, to assure that the courts will not intrude into
commercial and proprietory acts. The result is that state immunity now extends areas committed to the other branches of government.
only to sovereign and governmental acts. An actual case or controversy involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion
The restrictive application of state immunity is proper only when the proceedings of opposite legal claims, susceptible of judicial resolution as distinguished from a
arise out of commercial transactions of the foreign sovereign. Its commercial hypothetical or abstract difference or dispute. There must be a contrariety of legal
activities or economic affairs. A state may be descended to the level of an rights that can be interpreted and enforced on the basis of existing law and
individual and can thus be deemed to have tacitly given its consent to be sued. jurisprudence. The Court can decide the constitutionality of an act or treaty only
Only when it enters into business contracts. It does not apply where the conracts when a proper case between opposing parties is submitted for judicial
relates the exercise of its sovereign function. determination.
Related to the requirement of an actual case or controversy is the
RCBC VS DE CASTRO requirement of ripeness. A question is ripe for adjudication when the act being
It is well-settled that when the government enters into commercial business, challenged has had a direct adverse effect on the individual challenging it. For a
it abandons its sovereign capacity and is to be treated like any other corporation. case to be considered ripe for adjudication, it is a prerequisite that something had
Accordingly, garnishment was the appropriate remedy for the prevailing then been accomplished or performed by either branch before a court may come
party which could proceed against the funds of a corporate entity even if owned into the picture,[60] and the petitioner must allege the existence of an immediate
or controlled by the government inasmuch as by engaging in a particular business or threatened injury to itself as a result of the challenged action. He must show
thru the instrumentality of a corporation, the government divests itself pro hac

that he has sustained or is immediately in danger of sustaining some direct injury  Cannot be bargained away through treaty or contract (Stone vs.
as a result of the act complained of. Mississippi)
For a party to have locus standi, one must allege “such a personal stake in  Taxing power may be used as implement of police power
the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which
sharpens the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends for  Eminent domain may be used as an implement of police power.
illumination of difficult constitutional questions.” (Association of Small Landowners vs. Sec. Of Agrarian Reform)
 Retroactive application of Police power may reasonably impair vested
rights or contracts. Applicable not only to future contracts but also to
FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE those already in existence.
 Like all rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter, their exercise
Inherent powers of the State: may be so regulated pursuant to the police power of the State to
1. Police Power; safeguard health, morals, peace, education, order, safety and the
2. Eminent domain; general welfare of the people.
3. Taxation.
Similarities Who exercises Police Power?
1. Inherent in the State, even without need of express grant  Inherently vested in the legislature.
2. Necessary and indispensable, state cannot be effective without them  May be delegated to:
3. Methods by which the State interferes with private property - President
4. Presuppose equivalent compensation - Administrative Bodies
5. Exercised primarily by the legislature - Law-making bodies of local Government units (Sec. 16, RA 7160)
Distinction  RA 6939 and PD 269 do not authorize the President or any
Police Power Eminent Domain Taxation administrative body to take over the internal management of a
Regulation cooperative.
Both liberty and Property Property  Unlike legislative bodies of LGU, RA 7294 does not empower the
property MMDA to enact ordinances for the inhabitants of Manila.
Who Exercises?
Government Government and Government Limitations (Test for Valid exercise)
Private entities 1. Lawful Subject – Interest of public in general as distinguished from those of
Property taken a particular class, require the exercise of the power. Activity or property
Noxious or intended Wholesome and Wholesome and sought to be regulated affects the general welfare. (Taxicab Operators vs.
for noxious purpose devoted to public use devoted to public use BOT)
or purpose or purpose
Compensation 2. Lawful means – Means employed are reasonably necessary to the
Intangible, altruistic Full and fair Protection given accomplishment of the purpose and not duly oppressive on the individual.
feeling equivalent of property and/or public (Ynot vs. IAC)
taken improvements
instituted by the 3. Additional Limitations
government i. Express Grant by Law
ii. Within Territorial Limits
iii. Must not be contrary to law (act may be regulated not
Limitation – Bill of rights. Courts may annul improvident exercise of Police prohibited)
Power (Quezon City vs. Ericta)
Requisites for a valid ordinance
A. POLICE POWER 1. Must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
- The power of promoting public welfare by restraining and regulating the 2. Must not be unfair or oppressive
use of liberty and property. 3. Must not be partial or discriminatory
4. Must not prohibit, rather regulate trade
Scope: The most pervasive, least limitable and most demanding of the three powers. 5. Must not be unreasonable
“Salus Populi est suprema lex” “sic uteretuo ut aliuenum non laedas” 6. Must be general in application and consistent with Public Policy (Tatel
vs. Municipality of Virac)

B. POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN Who Exercises power of Eminent Domain?

Also known as the power of expropriation  Congress, may be delegated to:
- President
 ART. III Sec. 9: Private property shall not be taken for public use without just - Administrative Bodies
compensation. - LGU
 ART. XII. Section 18. The State may, in the interest of national welfare or - Private Enterprises performing public service
defense, establish and operate vital industries and, upon payment of just  LGU have no inherent power of eminent domain; the can exercise only when
compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other private expressly authorized by Legislature. (Sec. 19 of LGC confers such power to local
enterprises to be operated by the Government. governments but the power is not absolute; it is subject to statutory
 ART. XIII. Sec. 4. The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program requirements (Masikip vs. City of Pasig)
 RP vs. CA: Power of Eminent domain must by enabling law, be delegated to
founded on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to local governments by the national legislature and thus, can only be as broad or
own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other confined as the real authority would want to be.
farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State  Exercise of right of Eminent Domain, whether directly by the state or agents.
shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, Necessarily in derogation of private rights. STRICT CONSTRUCTION will be
subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may made against the agency exercising the power. Respondent failed to prove the
prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity written, definite and valid offer to acquire property under RA 7610.
considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining
Requisites for Exercise:
retention limits, the State shall respect the right of small land owners. The State 1. Necessity
shall further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.  Munic. Of Meycauayan Bulacan vs. IAC: When power is exercised by
 ART. XII. Sec. 9. The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, the Legislature, the question of necessity is generally a political
in cooperation with the private sector, a continuing program of urban land question.
reform and housing which will make available at affordable cost decent housing  Republic vs. La Orden: When exercised by a delegate, the
and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers determination of whether there is genuine necessity for the exercise is a
justiciable question.
and resettlement areas. It shall also promote adequate employment
 RTC has the power to inquire into the legality of the exercise of the
opportunities to such citizens. In the implementation of such program the State right of eminent domain and determine whether there is a genuine
shall respect the rights of small property owners. necessity for it. (BARDILLON VS. LAGUNA)
Police Power Eminent Domain

Promote Public welfare by Inherent right of the state 2. Private Property
restraining and regulating to condemn private  City of Manila vs. Chinese Community: Private property already
the use of liberty and property to public use devoted to public use cannot be expropriated by delegated of
property upon payment of just legislature acting under a general grant of authority.
compensation  RP vs. PLDT: All private property capable of ownership may be
Property condemned is Private property to be used expropriated except money and choses of action. Even services may
noxious or intended for a for some public purpose be subject to eminent domain.
noxious purpose
No compensation Just Compensation 3. Taking
 May include trespass without actual eviction;
 An ejectment suit should not ordinarily prevail over the State’s power of  Material impairment of the value of the property;
eminent Domain. (Republic vs. Tagle)  Prevention of the ordinary uses for which the property was intended
 Jurisdiction over a complaint for eminent domain is with the RTC. Requisites for valid taking (Republic vs. Castelvi):
Determination of amount of just Compensation is merely incidental to the 1. Expropriator enters property;
expropriation suit. (Bgy. San Roque, Talisay, Cebu vs. Heirs of Francisco Pastor) 2. Entry must not be for more than a momentary period;
 No such thing as Plaintiff’s matter of right to dismiss because landowner may 3. Under warrant or color of authority;
have already suffered damages as of the time of the taking. Always subject to 4. Property devoted to public use or otherwise informally
court approval. (NAPOCOR vs. Pobre) appropriated or injuriously affected;

5. Utilization must be in such a way as to oust the owner and Who may be entitled to just Compensation:
deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of property. 1. Owner
2. Mortgagee
4. Public Use 3. Lessee
 Public use is the general concept of meeting public need or public 4. Vendee in possession of an executory contract
exigency. It is not confined to actual use by the public in its traditional
sence. When does title pass? After payment
 Public use includes broader notion of indirect public benefit or
advantage, including, in particular, urban land reform and housing. Right of landowner in case of non-payment of Just Compensation:
(Filstream vs, CA) - Cannot recover land but only demand payment
 Condemnation of private lands in a piecemeal fashion, or the random - But in RP vs. Lim, 57 years has passed, it is a deliberate refusal
expropriation of small lots to accommodate no more than a few tenants to pay hence, owner has a right to recover possession.
or squatters, is certainly not the condemnation for public use
contemplated by the constitution. This results to deprivation without Writ of Possession – issuance is ministerial upon:
perceptible benefit to the public. Prior to passage of Ordinance 1843,  Filing of a complaint for expropriation sufficient in form
there was no evidence of a valid and definite offer to buy petitioner’s and substance
property as required by RA 7160. (Lagcao vs. Judge Labra)  Deposit made by the government of the amount equivalent
to 15% o fair market value.
5. Just Compensation  Determination of public purpose is not a condition
 The full and fair equivalent of the property taken; precedent before the court may issue a writ of possession.
 Fair market value of property;
 That sum of money which a person, desirous but not compelled to buy C. TAXATION
and an owner, willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a - The power by which the sovereign, through its law-making body to levy
price to be given and received therefor. enforced proportional contributions from persons and properties to raise revenue to
 Just compensation means not only the correct amount to be paid to the defray the necessary expenses of the government.
owner of the land but also payment within a reasonable time from its
taking. (Eslaban vs. De Onorio) Nature and Scope: Attribute of sovereignty. Inherent in the State. Power to tax is
unlimited in its range, acknowledging in its very nature no limits, so that security
against its abuse is to be found only in the responsibility of the legislature which
Judicial Prerogative – ascertainment of what constitutes just compensation imposes the tax on the constituency who are to pay it. Must onot be exercised
is a judicial prerogative which fixes payment on the basis of the assessment arbitrarily.
by assessor or the declared valuation by the owner is unconstitutional. - Taxation is a power emanating from necessity.
Need to Appoint commissioners – Indispensable in order to give the Who may exercise:
parties the opportunity ot present evidence on the issue of just 1. Legislature
compensation. Trial with aid of commissioners is a substantial right. 2. Local Legislative Bodies
3. President when granted delegated tariff powers
But courts are not bound by the commissioner’s findings, they may Limitations:
substitute their own estimate if: 1. Due Process of law – Tax should not be confiscatory
1. Commissioners applied illegal principles to the evidence 2. Equal Protection – Uniform and equitable
submitted to them 3. Public Purpose
2. Disregarded a clear preponderance of evidence
3. Amount allowed is grossly inadequate or excessive - Tax for special purpose is treated as a special fund so that when
purpose it already fulfilled, any balance shall be transferred to the
Compensation may be in the form of: general funds of the Government
1. Money Double Taxation
2. Bonds (ASLP vs. Sec. Of Agrarian Reform) 1. Same subject
2. Same Jurisdiction
Reckoning point of market value – either as of the date of the taking or 3. Same Period
filing of the complaint, whichever comes first. 4. Same Purpose

Tax Exemptions – No law granting any tax exemptions shall be passed without the PPI VS COMELEC
concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress To compel print media companies to donate "Comelec-space" amounts to
1. Charitable institutions, churches, parsonages, convents, mosques non "taking" of private personal property for public use or purposes. Therequisites
profit cemeteries and all lands and buildings and improvements ADE for a lawful taking of private property for public use are: necessity for the taking;
use for religious, charitable or educational purposes shall be exempt and the legal authority to effect the taking. The element of necessity for the taking
from taxation. has not been shown by respondent Comelec. It has not been suggested that the
2. All revenues and assets of non-stock, non-profit educational institutions members of PPI are unwilling to sell print space at their normal rates to Comelec
used ADE for educational purposes shall be exempt from taxes and for election purposes. Similarly, it has not been suggested, let alone
duties. demonstrated, that Comelec has been granted the power of eminent domain
3. Donations or contributions used ADE for educational purposes shall be either by the Constitution or by the legislative authority. A reasonable
exempt from tax relationship between that power and the enforcement and administration of
4. Where tax is granted gratuitously, it may be revoked at will but not if election laws by Comelec must be shown; it is not casually to be assumed.
granted for a valuable consideration. The taking of private property for public use is, of course, authorized by the
Constitution, but not without payment of "just compensation" (Article III, Section
Police Power Tax 9). And apparently the necessity of paying compensation for "Comelec space" is
Regulation is primary purpose and Generation of revenue is primary precisely what is sought to be avoided by respondent Commission Resolution
revenue is incidental; purpose and regulation is merely No. 2772 does not provide a constitutional basis for compelling publishers,
incidental against their will, to provide free print space for Comelec purposes. This does not
constitute a valid exercise of the power of eminent domain.
License fee Tax
Police measure Revenue Measure TIO VS VRB
Amount collected is limited to the cost of Unlimited provided it is not confiscatory The title of the decree, which calls for the creation of the VRB is
permit and reasonable police regulation comprehensive enough to include the purposes expressed in its Preamble and
reasonably covered all its provisions. It is unnecessary to express all those
Kinds of License Fee: objectives in the title or that the latter be an index to the body of the decree.
1. Useful occupations or enterprises The foregoing provision is allied and germane to, and is reasonably
2. Non-useful, as when license fee is imposed in order to discourage non- necessary for the accomplishment of, the general object of the decree, which is
useful occupations or enterprises, amount may be exorbitant. the regulation of the video industry through the VRB as expressed in its title. The
Supremacy of national government over local government tax provision is not inconsistent with nor foreign to the general subject and title.
As a tool for regulation it is simply one of the regulatory and control mechanisms
- When local government invoke the power to tax on national
scattered throughout the decree.
government, the exercise of the power is construed against local
governments.
ORTIGAS VS CA
Ordinances, in exercise of police power, may be given retroactive effect and
CASE DOCTRINES
impair vested rights and contracts. Generally, laws are to be construed as having
only prospective operation and that only laws existing at the time of the
NY TIMES VS US
execution of a contract are applicable thereto and not later statutes, unless the
A prior restraint could not be imposed on publication of the Pentagon
latter are specifically intended to have retroactive effect. A later law which
Papers. The whole Court noted that the government "carries a heavy burden of
enlarges, abridges, or in any manner changes the intent of the parties to the
showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint" and stated that the
contract necessarily impairs the contract itself and cannot be given retroactive
government had failed to meet that burden. The Court could not agree on a
effect without violating the constitutional prohibition against impairment of
precise standard for determining when the government may impose a prior
contracts. But said principles admit exceptions. One involves police power. A
restraint on free speech, or even whether the government could ever impose a
law enacted in the exercise of police power to regulate or govern certain activities
prior restraint. In concurring opinions Justices Black and Douglas both stated, in
or transactions could be given retroactive effect and may reasonably impair
very strong language, that prior restraints on the freedom of expression are never
vested rights or contracts. Police power legislation is applicable not only to
justified, no matter what the circumstances. Black, commenting on the
future contracts, but equally to those already in existence. Non impairment of
government's argument that prior restraints might be justified in certain
contracts or vested rights clauses will have to yield to the legitimate exercise of
circumstances, stated, "I can imagine no greater perversion of history… . Both the
police power. Moreover, statutes in exercise of valid police power must be read
history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press
into every contract.
must be left free to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship,
injunctions or prior restraints."

CHAVEZ VS ROMULO qualifications and none of the disqualifications. Furthermore, it must appear that
The right to bear arms is a mere statutory privilege, not a constitutional he has fully complied with all the conditions and requirements imposed by the
right. It is a mere statutory creation. Being a mere statutory creation, the right to law and the licensing authority. Should doubt taint or mar the compliance as
bear arms cannot be considered an inalienable or absolute right. The right of being less than satisfactory, then the privilege will not issue. For said privilege is
individuals to bear arms is not absolute, but is subject to regulation. The distinguishable from a matter of right, which may be demanded if denied. Thus,
maintenance of peace and order and the protection of the people against violence without a definite showing that the aforesaid requirements and conditions have
are constitutional duties of the State, and the right to bear arms is to be construed been satisfactorily met, the courts may not grant the writ of mandamus to secure
in connection and in harmony with these constitutional duties. said privilege without thwarting the legislative will.
It is not a contract, property or a property right protected by the due process
clause of the Constitution. Consequently, a PTCFOR, just like ordinary licenses in JMM PROMOTION AND MANAGEMENT INC VS CA
other regulated fields, may be revoked any time. At any rate, assuming that No right is absolute, and the proper regulation of a profession, calling,
petitioner’s PTCFOR constitutes a property right protected by the Constitution, business or trade has always been upheld as legitimate subject of a valid exercise
the same cannot be considered as absolute as to be placed beyond the reach of of police power by the State, particularly when their conduct affects either the
the State’s police power. All property in the state is held subject to its general execution of legitimate govt. functions, the preservation of the State, the public
regulations, necessary to the common good and general welfare. The basis for the health, and welfare and public morals. Police power of the State is a power
issuance fo the Guidelines was the need for peace and order in the society owing coextensive with self-protection. It is the inherent and plenary power of the State
to the proliferation of crimes, particularly those committed by the New People’s which enables it to prohibit all things hurtful to the comfort, safety, and welfare
Army. of society. Thus, police power concerns govt. enactments which precisely
interfere with personal liberty or property in order to promote the general
MMDA VS BEL AIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION welfare or the common good.
The powers of the MMDA are limited to the following acts: formulation,
coordination, regulation, implementation, preparation, management, monitoring, DELA CRUZ VS PARAS
setting of policies, installation of a system and administration. There is no Police power is granted to municipal corporations in general terms as
syllable in R. A. No. 7924 that grants the MMDA police power, let alone follows: "General power of council to enact ordinances and make regulations. - The
legislative power. municipal council shall enact such ordinances and make such regulations, not
A local government is a "political subdivision of a nation or state which is repugnant to law, as may be necessary to carry into effect and discharge the
constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs." LGU’s are a "body powers and duties conferred upon it by law and such as shall seem necessary
politic and corporate" - one endowed with powers as a political subdivision of and proper to provide for the health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve
the National Government and as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants the morals, peace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the municipality and
of its territory. Our Congress delegated police power to the local government the inhabitants thereof, and for the protection of property therein.
units in the Local Government Code of 1991. This delegation is found in Section It is a general rule that ordinances passed by virtue of the implied power
16 of the same Code, known as the general welfare clause. found in the general welfare clause must be reasonable, consonant with the
general powersand purposes of the corporation, and not inconsistent with the
PRC VS DE GUZMAN laws or policy of the State." 15 If night clubs were merely then regulated and not
It is true that this Court has upheld the constitutional right of every citizen prohibited, certainly the assailed ordinance would pass the test of validity. This
to select a profession or course of study subject to a fair, reasonable, and Court had stressed reasonableness, consonant with the general powers and
equitable admission and academic requirements. But like all rights and freedoms purposes of municipal corporations, as well as consistency with the laws or
guaranteed by the Charter, their exercise may be so regulated pursuant to the policy of the State. The purpose sought to be achieved could have been attained
police power of the State to safeguard health, morals, peace, education, order, by reasonable restrictions rather than by an absolute prohibition.
safety, and general welfare of the people. Thus, persons who desire to engage in
the learned professions requiring scientific or technical knowledge may be REPUBLIC VS PLDT
required to take an examination as a prerequisite to engaging in their chosen Nominally, of course, the power of eminent domain results in the taking or
careers. This regulation takes particular pertinence in the field of medicine, to appropriation of title to, and possession of, the expropriated property; but no
protect the public from the potentially deadly effects of incompetence and cogent reason appears why the said power may not be availed of to impose only
ignorance among those who would practice medicine. In the present case, the a burden upon the owner of condemned property, without loss of title and
aforementioned guidelines are provided for in Rep. Act No. 2382, as amended, possession. It is unquestionable that real property may, through expropriation,
which prescribes the requirements for admission to the practice of medicine, the be subjected to an easement of right of way. The use of the PLDT's lines and
qualifications of candidates for the board examinations, the scope and conduct of services to allow inter-service connection between both telephone systems is not
the examinations, the grounds for denying the issuance of a physician’s license, much different. In either case private property is subjected to a burden for public
or revoking a license that has been issued. Verily, to be granted the privilege to use and benefit. If, under section 6, Article XIII, of the Constitution, the State
practice medicine, the applicant must show that he possesses all the may, in the interest of national welfare, transfer utilities to public ownership

upon payment of just compensation, there is no reason why the State may not ESLABAN VS DE ONORIO
require a public utility to render services in the general interest, provided just Under the Land Registration Act, the only servitude which a private
compensation is paid therefor. Ultimately, the beneficiary of the interconnecting property owner is required to recognize in favor of the government is the
service would be the users of both telephone systems, so that the condemnation easement of a "public highway, way, private way established by law, or any
would be for public use. government canal or lateral thereof where the certificate of title does not state
that the boundaries thereof have been pre-determined." This implies that the
JIL CHRISTIAN SCHOOL FOUNDATION VS MUNICIPALITY OF PASIG same should have been pre-existing at the time of the registration of the land in
The exercise of the right of eminent domain, whether directly by the State or order that the registered owner may be compelled to respect it. Conversely,
by its authorized agents, is necessarily in derogation of private rights. Therefore where the easement is not pre-existing and is sought to be imposed only after the
it must be strictly construed against the party exercising such power. The he land has been registered under the Land Registration Act, proper expropriation
burden of proof of compliance with the requisites is on the party exercising it. proceedings should be had, and just compensation paid to the registered owner
Respondent failed to prove that a valid offer was made and the same was thereof.
rejected. The letter only evidenced a desire to acquire the subject property. The Indeed, the rule is that where private property is needed for conversion to
letter is not a valid and definite offer to purchase a specific portion of the some public use, the first thing obviously that the government should do is to
property for a price certain. offer to buy it. If the owner is willing to sell and the parties can agree on the price
In the absence of legislative restriction, the grantee of the power of eminent and the other conditions of the sale, a voluntary transaction can then be
domain may determine the location and route of the land to be taken unless such concluded and the transfer effected without the necessity of a judicial action.
determination is capricious and wantonly injurious. Expropriation is justified so Otherwise, the government will use its power of eminent domain, subject to the
long as it is for the public good and there is genuine necessity of public character. payment of just compensation, to acquire private property in order to devote it to
public use.
FILSTREAM INTERNATIONAL INC VS CA
Private lands rank last in the order of priority for purposes of socialized REPUBLIC VS CA
housing. In the same vein, expropriation proceedings are to be resorted to only Although DAR has primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate
when the other modes of acquisition have been exhausted. Compliance with agrarian reform matters and exclusive jurisdiction over all matters involving the
these conditions must be deemed mandatory because these are the only implementation of agrarian reform, §57 of RA 6657, also provides that: “Special
safeguards in securing the right of owners of private property to due process Agrarian Courts shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over all petitions
when their property is expropriated for public use. for the determination of just compensation and prosecution of criminal offenses
under the law.
LAGCAO VS JUDGE LABRA
LGUs have no inherent power of eminent domain and can exercise it only LANDBANK VS CA
when expressly authorized by the legislature. By virtue of RA 7160 specifically Section 16(e) of RA 6657 provides as follows:
Section 19 thereof, Congress conferred upon LGUs the power to expropriate. Upon receipt by the landowner of the corresponding payment or, in case of
However, the exercise by the LGUs of the power of eminent domain is not rejection or no response from the landowner, upon the deposit with an accessible
absolute. It is limited by Sections 1 and 3 of Art. 3 of the Constitution. The bank designated by the DAR of the compensation in cash or in LBP bonds in
exercise of the power of eminent domain drastically affects a landowner’s right accordance with this Act, the DAR shall take immediate possession of the land
to private property, which is as much a constitutionally-protected right necessary and shall request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer Certificate of
for the preservation and enhancement of personal dignity and intimately Title (TCT) in the name of the Republic of the Philippines.
connected with the rights to life and liberty. The foundation of the right to It is very explicit therefrom that the deposit must be made only in "cash" or
exercise eminent domain is genuine necessity and that necessity must be of in "LBP bonds". Nowhere does it appear nor can it be inferred that the deposit
public character. can be made in any other form. If it were the intention to include a "trust
Furthermore, RA 7279 is the law that governs the local expropriation of account" among the valid modes of deposit, that should have been made express,
property for purpose of an urban land reform and housing. Sections 9 and 10 or at least, qualifying words ought to have appeared from which it can be fairly
thereof provide that private lands rank last in the order of priority for purposes deduced that a "trust account" is allowed. In sum, there is no ambiguity in
of socialized housing. In the same vein, expropriation proceedings may be Section 16(e) of RA 6657 to warrant an expanded construction of the term
resorted only after the other modes of acquisition are exhausted. Compliance "deposit".
with these conditions is mandatory because these are the only safeguards of
oftentimes helpless owners of private property against what may be a tyrannical
violation of due process when their property is forcibly taken from them PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES
allegedly for public records.
Preamble
1. Does not confer rights nor impose duties

2. Indicates authorship of the constitution ; enumerates the primary aims and Permissible Delegation
aspirations of the framers; and serves as an aid in the construction o f the 1. President
constitution. a. Tariff powers
b. Emergency Powers
Republicanism
“The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides Declaration of Exercise of
in the people and all government authority emanates from them” (Sec. 1, Art. II) Emergency Emergency Power
1. Essential Features: No legitimate Constitutional Issue
a. Representation constitutional Arises
b. Renovation objection can be
2. Manifestations: GRABIS made
a. Government of laws and not of men (Villavicencio vs. Lucban)
b. Rule of Majority (Plurality in Elections) 2. People
c. Accountability of public officials a. Referendum
d. Bill of Rights b. Plebiscite
e. Legislature cannot pass irrepealable laws
f. Separation of powers Referendum Plebiscite
g. Delegation of Powers Power of the electorate to approve Electoral process by which an
h. Social Justice or reject legislation through an initiative on the Constitution is
election called for the purpose. approved or rejected by the
Separation of Powers people
 Purpose: Prevent concentration of authority in one person or group of 2 Classes:
persons that might lead to an irreversible error or abuse in its exercise to a. Referendum on statutes – petition
the detriment of republican institutions. to approve or reject an act or law
 To secure action, forestall overaction, prevent despotism and to obtain passed by Congress.
efficiency. (Tuason vs. ROD)
b. Referendum on local law –
 Application: Not doctrinaire not with pedantic rigor; independence but petition to approve or reject a law,
interdependence resolution or ordinance enacted by
- Witness protection law does not violate separation of powers. regional assemblies and local
Exectuive power includes the power to enforce and prosecute the legislative bodies.
offenders giving the executive department the latitude.
- Pimentel vs. Exec. Secretary – President has not transmitted the treaty
(Rome statute) Pimentel filed for mandamus against the president. 3. Delegation to local government units – not regarded as a transfer of
Transmission is discretionary. President may not be compelled by general legislative power but a grant of authority to prescribe local
mandamus. regulations according to immemorial practice subject to interposition of
the superior in cases of necessity. Local legislature are more
Checks and balances knowledgeable on matters of local concern.
Allows one department resist encroachments upon its prerogatives or to 4. Delegation to Administrative Bodies – Power of Subordinate
rectify mistakes or excesses committed by the other deparments – Veto power of the legislation
president as check on improvident legislation - Must conform to a the sufficient and valid standard of fair and equitable
employment practices.
Principle of Blending Powers: Tests for Valid Delegation – must concur
Powers are not confined exclusively within one department but are 1. Completeness Test – law must be complete in all its essential terms
assigned to or shared by several departments- Enactment of General Appropriations when it leaves the legislature so that there will be nothing left for
Law the delegate to do when it reaches him except to enforce it.
2. Sufficient Standard Test – Map out boundaries of the delegate’s
Delegation of Powers
authority by defining legislative police and indicate circumstances
“Potestas delegata non potest delegare” what has been delegated cannot be
under which it is to be pursued and effected.
further delegated.
- To prevent total transference of legislative power.

Role of the Judiciary:  Person’s right to life, liberty and due process
Art. VIII- includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual  Pacta Sunt Servanda- agreements must be kept
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to Transformation Incorporation
lack or exces of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the International law principle be By mere constitutional declaration,
Government.” transformed into domestic law through a international law is deemed to have the
constitutional mechanism such as local force of domestic law
 When courts mediate to allocate constitutional boundaries or legislation
invalidates the acts of a coordinate body, what it upholds is not its
own superiority but the supremacy of the Constitution. (Angara vs.  The doctrine of incorporation is applied whenever municipal tribunals
Electoral Commission) or courts are conformed with situations in which there appears to be a
Tests to determine valid exercise of given power: conflict between a rule of international law and the provisions of the
1. Whether or not the power has been constitutionally conferred upon constitution or statute of the local state.
the department claiming its exercise. (Expressed) 1. Efforts must be exerted to harmonize them
2. Doctrine of necessary implication- grant of express power carries with 2. If irreconcilable, and a choice has to be made between
it all powers that may be reasonable inferred from it. International law and municipal law, MUNICIPAL law should
3. Inherent or Incidental – not expressly conferred nor implied. Ex. be upheld.
President’s power to deport undesirable aliens which may be  In cases were international law is given an equal footing to municipal
exercised independently of constitutional or statutory authority. “Act law, the doctrine of Lex posterior derogate priori takes effect.
of State” (Marcos vs. Manglapus)
Civilian Supremacy- At all times supreme over the military. The AFP is the protector
Justiciable Question Political question of the people and the state its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the
Implies: Question of Policy. integrity of the national territory.
1. A given right, legally demandable
and enforceable Questions which under the constitution Duty of Government to defend the State – The prime duty of the government is to
2. An act or omission violative of such are to be decided by the people in their serve and protect the people. The government may call upon the people to defend the
right sovereign capacity, or in regard to which state and in the fulfilment thereof all citizens may be required, under conditions
3. Remedy granted by law for such full discretionary authority has been provided by law to render personal, military or civil service.
breach delegated to the legislative or executive
branch of government. Separation of Church and State – Inviolable
Concerned with legality Concerned with wisdom
Independent foreign policy and nuclear-free Philippines – Consistent with national
The Incorporation Clause interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.
- The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts  Prohibition applies only to NUCLEAR WEAPONS, does not extend to
the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the aw of the land, and Nuclear plants.
adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with Just and dynamic social order- that will ensure the prosperity and independence of
all nations. the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that will provide
adequate social service, promote full employment, a rising standard of living and an
Renunciation of War improved quality of life for all
Historical Development
a. Covenant of the League of Nations – provided the right to go to war. Promotion of Social justice – in all phases of national development.
b. Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 – General Treaty for the Renunciation of
War. Ratified by 62 States Respect for human dignity and human rights
c. Charter of UN – Prohibits threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of State. Family and Youth
Doctrine of Incorporation
- Applies rules of international law in a number of cases even if such rules Fundamental equality of men and women
had not previously been subject of statutory enactments because these generally
accepted principles of international law are automatically part of our own laws. Promotion of health and ecology – The state shall protect and advance the right of the
 Renunciation of war people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of
 Sovereign immunity nature.

independent of each other. The Constitution has provided for an elaborate

Priority to education, Science, technology system of checks and balances to secure coordination in the workings of the
various departments of the government. The overlapping and interlacing of
Protection to Labor- The state affirms labor as a pimary social economic force. It shall functions and duties between the several departments, however, sometimes
protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare. make it hard to say just where one leaves off and the other begins. In cases of
conflict, the judicial department is the only constitutional organ which can be
Self-Reliant and independent economic order called upon to determine the proper allocation of powers between the several
departments and among the integral and constituent units thereof.
Land Reform
MARCOS VS MANGLAPUS
Indigenous cultural communites It cannot be denied that the Pres, upon whom executive power is vested,
has unstated residual powers which are implied from the grant of executive
Independent people’s organizations power and which are necessary for her to comply with her duties under the
Consti. The powers of the Pres are not limited to what are expressly enumerated
in the article on the Exec Dept and in scattered provisions of the Consti. This is
Communication and information in nation-building so, notwithstanding the avowed intent of the members of the Consti Commission
of 1986 to limit the powers of the Pres as a reaction to the abuses under the
Autonomy of local governments regime of Marcos, for the result was a limitation of specific power of the
President, particularly those relating to the commander-in-chief clause, but not a
Equal access of opportunities for public service – guarantee equal access to diminution of the general grant of executive power. Among the duties of the Pres
opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by under the Consti, in compliance with her oath of office, is to protect and promote
law. the interest and welfare of the people. Her decision to bar the return of the
Marcoses and subsequently, the remains of Marcos at the present time and under
Honest public service and full public disclosure – Subject to reasonable conditions present circumstances is in compliance with this bounden duty. In the absence of
prescribed by law, the state adopts and implements a policy of full public disclosure a clear showing that she had acted with arbitrariness in arriving at this decision,
of all its transactions involving public interest. the Court will not enjoin the implementation of this decision.
CASE DOCTRINES DISSENTING: CRUZ: Marcos dead is only an unpleasant memory, not a bolt of
lightning to whip the blood. It is only a dead body waiting to be interred in this
VILLAVICENCIO VS LUCBAN country. PARAS: The former Pres, although already dead, is still entitled to
The supreme court said that the mayor's acts were not legal. His intent of certain rights. The alleged threats to national security have remained unproved
exterminating vice was commendable, but there was no law saying that he could and consequently, unpersuasive. PADILLA: Marcos is a Filipino and, as such,
force Filipino women to change their domicile from manila to another place. The entitled to return to, die and be buried in this country. SARMIENTO: I have gone
women, said the court, although in a sense "lepers of society" were still Filipino to lengths to locate in the four comers of the Consti, by direct grant or by
citizens and such they were entitled to the constitutional enjoyed by all other implication, the President's supposed "residual" power to forbid citizens from
Filipino citizens. The right to freedom of domicile was such a fundamental right entering the motherland. I have found none. For, if the Constitution has imposed
that its suppression could considered tantamount to slavery. limitations on specific powers of the Pres, it has, a fortiori, prescribed a
diminution of executive power. The Charter says that the right may only be
TUASON VS REGISTER OF DEEDS OF CALOOCAN CITY restricted by: (1) a court order; or (2) by fiat of law. Had the fundamental law
The Supreme Court ruled that PD 293 is Unconstitutional. In issuing PD intended a presidential imprimatur, it would have said so. It would have also
293, Mr. Marcos exercised a clearly judicial function. He made a determination of completed the symmetry: judicial, congressional, and executive restraints on the
facts, applied the law to said facts declaring what the legal rights of parties were right. No amount of presumed residual executive power can amend the Charter.
in the premises. Furthermore, PD 293 is violative of due process and equal It is well to note that the Bill of Rights stands primarily, a limitation not only
protection of the law. against legislative encroachments on individual liberties, but more so, against
presidential intrusions. And especially so, because the Pres is the caretaker of the
ANGARA VS ELECTORAL COMMISSION military establishment that has, several times over, been unkind to part of the
The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in our system of population it has also sworn to protect.
government. Each department of the government has exclusive cognizance of
matters within its jurisdiction and is supreme within its own sphere. But it does CASIBANG VS AQUINO
not follow from the fact that the three powers are to be kept separate and distinct Political question – it is concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not
that the Constitution intended them to be absolutely unrestrained and legality of a particular measure.

Justiciable question – implies a given right, legally demandable and enforceable, As to the question of standard, a legislative standard need not be expressed.
an action or omission violative of such right and a remedy granted by law for It may simply be gathered or implied. Nor need it be found in the law challenged
said breach of right. because it may be embodied in other statutes on the same subject as that of the
challenged legislation.
GARCIA VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY With respect to the power to merge existing administrative regions, the standard
The Court held that the levying of the customs duties on imported goods is to be found in the same policy underlying the grant to the President in R.A.
has the effect of protecting local industries. Simultaneously, however, the very No. 5435 of the power to reorganize the Executive Department, to wit: "to
same customs duties also produces governmental revenue. In the instant case, promote simplicity, economy and efficiency in the government to enable it to
since the Philippines produces 10-15% of the crude oil consumed here, the pursue programs consistent with national goals for accelerated social and
imposition of increased tariff rates and special duty on imported crude oil may economic development and to improve the service in the transaction of the
be seen to have some “protective” impact upon indigenous oil production. public business."
ARANETA VS DINGLASAN KURODA VS JALANDONI

The SC ruled that Act No. 671 became inoperative when Congress met in In accordance with the generally accepted principle of international law, all
regular session on May 25, 1946. Since the assailed executive orders were issued those person military or civilian who have been guilty of planning, preparing or
after the said date, they were issued without authority of law. Commonwealth waging war of aggression and of the commission of crimes and offenses
Act No. 671 does not fix the duration of its effectiveness, but Article VI of the consequential and incidental thereto in violation of laws and customs of war, of
Constitution provides that any law passed by virtue thereof should be "for a humanity and civilization are held accountable therefore.
limited period." Emergency, in order to justify the delegation of emergency The rules and regulation of the Hague and Geneva conventions form part of
powers, must be temporary or it cannot be said to be an emergency. It is to be and are wholly based on the generally accepted principals of international law.
presumed that Commonwealth Act No. 671 was approved with this limitation in Such rules and principles therefore form part of the law of our nation even if the
view. The assertion that new legislation is needed to repeal the act would not be Philippines was not a signatory to the conventions embodying them for our
in harmony with the Constitution. If a new and different law were necessary to Constitution has been deliberately general and extensive in its scope and is not
terminate the delegation, the period for the delegation, would be unlimited, confined to the recognition of rule and principle of international as continued in
indefinite, negative and uncertain; that which was intended to meet a temporary treaties to which our government may have been or shall be a signatory.
emergency may become permanent law. After the convening of Congress new
legislation had to be approved if the continuation of the emergency powers, or SECRETARY OF JUSTICE VS LANTION
some of them, was desired. The fact that Congress was able to hold a regular The evaluation process made by the DOJ sets the wheels for the extradition
session denotes that the emergency such as war which caused congress to process which may ultimately result in the deprivation of the liberty of the
delegate its legislative powers to the president no longer existed. The holding of prospective extradite. A favorable action in an extradition request exposes a
a regular session by Congress has made the Emergency Powers Act person to eventual extradition to a foreign country, thus exhibiting the penal
automatically inoperative. aspect of the process. The evaluation process itself is like a preliminary
investigation since both procedures may have the same result – the arrest and
CHIONGBIAN VS ORBOS imprisonment of the respondent. Clearly, there’s an impending threat to a
Thus the creation and subsequent reorganization of administrative regions prospective extraditee’s liberty as early as during the evaluation stage. Thus, the
have been by the President pursuant to authority granted to him by law. In extraditee must be accorded due process rights of notice & hearing. The SC ruled
conferring on the President the power "to merge [by administrative that the private respondent be furnished a copy of the extradition request and its
determination] the existing regions" following the establishment of the supporting papers and to give him a reasonable period of time within which to
Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, Congress merely followed the file his comment with supporting evidence.
pattern set in previous legislation dating back to the initial organization of The doctrine of incorporation is applied whenever municipal tribunals are
administrative regions in 1972. The choice of the President as delegate is logical confronted with situations in which there appears to be a conflict between a rule
because the division of the country into regions is intended to facilitate not only of international law and the provisions of the constitution or statute of the local
the administration of local governments but also the direction of executive state. Efforts should be done to harmonize them. In a situation, however, where
departments which the law requires should have regional offices. As this Court the conflict is irreconcilable and a choice has to be made between a rule of
observed in Abbas, "while the power to merge administrative regions is not international law and municipal law, jurisprudence dictates that municipal law
expressly provided for in the Constitution, it is a power which has traditionally should be upheld by the municipal courts. The doctrine of incorporation decrees
been lodged with the President to facilitate the exercise of the power of general that rules of international law are given equal standing, but are not superior to,
supervision over local governments [see Art. X, §4 of the Constitution]." The national legislative enactments.
regions themselves are not territorial and political divisions like provinces, cities,
municipalities and barangays but are "mere groupings of contiguous provinces Panganiban, dissenting: There are essentially 2 stages in extradition: 1.
for administrative purposes." Preliminary or evaluation stage (where the executive authority of the requested

state ascertains whether the extradition request is supported by the documents conception may at least be approximated. Social justice means the promotion of
and information required under the extradition treaty) and 2. The extradition the welfare of all the people, the adoption by the Government of measures
hearing. This instant petition refers only to the first stage which generally does calculated to insure economic stability of all the competent elements of society,
not include the grant of notice and hearing to the prospective extraditee. The through the maintenance of a proper economic and social equilibrium in the
evaluation stage is essentially ministerial wherein there is merely an interrelations of the members of the community, constitutionally, through the
ascertainment of whether the extradition request is accompanied by proper adoption of measures legally justifiable, or extra-constitutionally, through the
requirements set forth by extradition laws and treaties. In the case at bar, there is exercise of powers underlying the existence of all governments on the time-
really no threat of any deprivation of his liberty at the present stage of the honored principle of salus populi est suprema lex. Social justice, therefore, must
extradition process. His requests will constitute “over-due process” and be founded on the recognition of the necessity of interdependence among divers
unnecessarily delay the proceedings. and diverse units of a society and of the protection that should be equally and
evenly extended to all groups as a combined force in our social and economic
Puno, dissenting: In extradition proceedings, there is no accused and the guilt or life, consistent with the fundamental and paramount objective of the state of
innocence will not be passed upon by our executive officials nor by the promoting the health, comfort, and quiet of all persons, and of bringing about
extradition judge. Hence constitutional rights that are only relevant to determine "the greatest good to the greatest number."
the guilt and innocence of an accused cannot be invoked by an extraditee. Case at
bar does not involve guilt or innocence of an accused but the interpretation of an POSTIGO VS PTSE
extradition treaty where at stake is our government’s international obligation to In the present case, respondent is a non-profit but private corporation
surrender to a foreign state a citizen of its own so he can be tried for an alleged organized under the Corporation Code, and the petitioners are covered by the
offense committed within that jurisdiction. Labor Code, and not by the Civil Service Law. Since the petitioners are
employees in the private sector, they are entitled to the retirement benefits of
ALIH VS CASTRO R.A. 7641. Even assuming that by virtue of their compulsory inclusion in the
The respondents cannot even plead the urgency of the raid because it was in GSIS, the petitioners became employees in the public sector, they are still entitled
fact not urgent. They knew where the petitioners were. They had every to the benefits of R.A 7641 since they are not covered by the Civil Service Law
opportunity to get a search warrant before making the raid. If they were worried and its regulations. The accommodation under R.A. 7641 extending GSIS
that the weapons inside the compound would be spirited away, they could have coverage to PTSI employees did not take away from the petitioners the beneficial
surrounded the premises in the meantime, as a preventive measure. coverage afforded by R.A. 7641. Hence, the retirement pay payable under Art.
If follows that as the search of the petitioners' premises was violative of the 287 of the Labor Code should be considered apart from the retirement benefits
Constitution, all the firearms and ammunition taken from the raided compound claimable by the petitioners under the Social Security Law or, as in this case, the
are inadmissible in evidence in any of the proceedings against the petitioners. GSIS Law.
These articles are "fruits of the poisonous tree."
PT&T VS NLRC
LIM VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Upon the other hand, a requirement that a woman employee must remain
From the perspective of international law, a treaty is favored over municipal unmarried could be justified as a "bona fide occupational qualification," or
law pursuant to the principle of pacta sunct servanda. Furthermore, a party to a BFOQ, where the particular requirements of the job would justify the same, but
treaty is not allowed to invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification not on the ground of a general principle, such as the desirability of spreading
for its failure to perform a treaty. However, the constitution has vested the courts work in the workplace. A requirement of that nature would be valid provided it
to review, revise , reverse, modify, or affirm, on appeal on certiorari any treaty in reflects an inherent quality reasonably necessary for satisfactory job performance.
violation of the constitution. PT & T's policy is not only in derogation of the provisions of Article 136 of the
Constitution authorizes the nullification of a treaty, not only when it Labor Code on the right of a woman to be free from any kind of stipulation
conflicts with the fundamental law, but, also, when it runs counter to an act of against marriage in connection with her employment, but it likewise assaults
congress. Notwithstanding the principle on pacta sunct servanda, from the good morals and public policy, tending as it does to deprive a woman of the
perspective of municipal law, the international law cannot reign supreme over freedom to choose her status, a privilege that by all accounts inheres in the
the local laws. Thus, notwithstanding any provision in the UN charter allowing individual as an intangible and inalienable right. Carried to its logical
foreign troops to engaged in offensive combat activities in the country, the US consequences, it may even be said that PT & T's policy against legitimate marital
personnel engaging in the Balikatan 02-1 pursuant to the VFA may not engage in bonds would encourage illicit or common-law relations and subvert the
any offensive combat therein. sacrament of marriage. In the final reckoning, the danger of just such a policy
against marriage followed by PT & T PT & T is that it strikes at the very essence,
CALALANG VS WILLIAMS ideals and purpose of marriage as an inviolable social institution and, ultimately,
Social justice is "neither communism, nor despotism, nor atomism, nor of the family as the foundation of the nation.
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

OPOSA VS FACTORAN distinctions. Women Domestic workers abroad are being ill treated in a massive
While the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is to be found under the basis, there’s no evidence that men suffers the same.
Declaration of Principles and State Policies and not under the Bill of Rights, it The deployment ban is not a violation of the right to travel because the right
does not follow that it is less important than any of the civil and political rights to travel is subject, among other things to the requirements of public safety.
enumerated in the latter. Such a right belongs to a different category of rights It is a settled rule that police power is primarily lodged in the legislative,
altogether for it concerns nothing less than self-preservation and self- but is doesn’t mean that such power may not be validly delegated, the Labor
perpetuation — aptly and fittingly stressed by the petitioners — the code vest the DOLE with the rule making powers in the enforcement whereof.
advancement of which may even be said to predate all governments and
constitutions. As a matter of fact, these basic rights need not even be written in ASSOCIATION OF PHILIPPINE COCONUT DESSICATORS VS PHILCOA
the Constitution for they are assumed to exist from the inception of humankind. Our Constitutions, beginning with the 1935 document, have repudiated
If they are now explicitly mentioned in the fundamental charter, it is because of laissez-faire as an economic principle. Although the present Constitution
the well-founded fear of its framers that unless the rights to a balanced and enshrines free enterprise as a policy, it nonetheless reserves to the government
healthful ecology and to health are mandated as state policies by the Constitution the power to intervene whenever necessary to promote the general welfare.
itself, thereby highlighting their continuing importance and imposing upon the At all events, any change in policy must be made by the legislative
state a solemn obligation to preserve the first and protect and advance the department of the government. The regulatory system has been set up by law. It
second, the day would not be too far when all else would be lost not only for the is beyond the power of an administrative agency to dismantle it.
present generation, but also for those to come — generations which stand to
inherit nothing but parched earth incapable of sustaining life. The right to a BASCO VS PAGCOR
balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the correlative duty to refrain from Suffice it to state that these provisions are merely statements of principles
impairing the environment. and policies. As such, they are basically not self – executing, meaning a law
should be passed by Congress to clearly define and effectuate such principles.
VILLAR VS TIP Every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality. Therefore,
What cannot be stressed too sufficiently is that among the most important for PD 1869 to be nullified, it must be shown that there is a clear and unequivocal
social, economic, and cultural rights is the right to education not only in the breach of the Constitution, not merely a doubtful and equivocal one. In other
elementary and high school grades but also on the college level. The words, the grounds for nullity must be clear and beyond reasonable doubt. Based
constitutional provision as to the State maintaining "a system of free public on the grounds raised by petitioners to challenge the constitutionality of PD 1869,
elementary education and, in areas where finances permit, establish and the Court finds that petitioners have failed to overcome the presumption. The
maintain a system of free public education" up to the high school level does not dismissal of this petition is therefore, inevitable. But as to whether PD 1869
per se exclude the exercise of that right in colleges and universities. remains a wise legislation considering the issues of “morality, monopoly, trend
Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides: to free enterprise, privatization as well as the state principles on social justice,
"Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the role of youth and educational values” being raised, is up for the Congress to
elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. determine.
Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and
higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit." PAMATONG VS COMELEC
There is no constitutional right to run for or hold public office and,
SORIAO VS PINEDA particularly, to seek the presidency. What is recognized is merely a privilege
The Court of Appeals, invoking The 1987 Constitution and the Universal subject to limitations imposed by law.
Declaration of Human Rights, ordered Araceli R. Pineda, Head Teacher II of Juan Section 26, Article II of the Constitution neither bestows such a right nor
C. Angara Memorial High School, Dinalungan, Aurora to allow Louie Soriao to elevates the privilege to the level of an enforceable right. There is nothing in the
enroll and to study after he was meted out a disciplinary action without due plain language of the provision which suggests such a thrust or justifies an
process of law,(Sec 1 & 2 Art XIV, Sec 13 & 17 Art II) interpretation of the sort. The "equal access" provision is a subsumed part of
Article II of the Constitution, entitled "Declaration of Principles and State
PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF SERVICE EXPORTERS VS DRILON Policies." The provisions under the Article are generally considered not self-
The department order applies only to female contract workers but it does executing, and there is no plausible reason for according a different treatment to
not make an undue discrimination between sexes, equality before the law under the "equal access" provision. Like the rest of the policies enumerated in Article II,
the constitution does not import a perfect identity rights among all men and the provision does not contain any judicially enforceable constitutional right but
women, it admits classifications, provided that 1. Such classifications rest on merely specifies a guideline for legislative or executive action. The disregard of
substantial distinctions; 2. They are germane to the purposes of the law;3. They the provision does not give rise to any cause of action before the courts. An
are not confined to existing conditions; 4. They all apply equally to all members inquiry into the intent of the framers produces the same determination that the
of the same class. The classification made to female workers rest on substantial provision is not self-executory.

The privilege of equal access to opportunities to public office may be

subjected to limitations. Some valid limitations specifically on the privilege to Civil Rights Political Rights
seek elective office are found in the provisions of the Omnibus Election Code on
"Nuisance Candidates" and a COMELEC Resolution outlining the instances Rights that belong to every citizen of the Right to participate directly or indirectly
wherein the COMELEC may motu proprio refuse to give due course to or cancel state or country and are not connected in the establishment or administration of
a Certificate of Candidacy. As long as the limitations apply to everybody equally with the organization or administration of the government.
without discrimination, however, the equal access clause is not violated. Equality the government. Rights appertaining to a
is not sacrificed as long as the burdens engendered by the limitations are meant person by virtue of his citizenship in a
to be borne by any one who is minded to file a certificate of candidacy. Herein, state or community. Rights capable of
there is no showing that any person is exempt from the limitations or the being enforced or redressed in a civil
burdens which they create. action.
- Property - Right of Suffrage
LEGASPI VS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION - Marriage - Right to hold public
It is clear therefore, that government agencies are without discretion in office
- Equal Protection
refusing disclosure of, or access to, information of public concern. They may only
- Freedom of Contract - Right to petition
impose reasonable regulation requirements on the manner in which the said
right may be exercised. The right, however, is not absolute; information affecting - Rights appurtenant to
national security is an exception to the rule. citizenship vis-avis the
It is the burden of the government agency concerned to prove that the management of
information requested is not of public concern, or if it is of public concern, the government
law exempts it. To safeguard the constitutional right, every denial of access by
the government agency concerned is subject to review by the courts, and in the I. Due Process of Law
proper case, access may be compelled by a writ of Mandamus. Origin
Book of Susana, Old Testament
AQUINO-SARMIENTO VS MORATO By the 39th chapter of Magna Carta wrung by the barons from King John,
What may be provided for by the Legislature are reasonable conditions and the despot promised that “no man shall be take or imprisoned or disseized or
limitations upon the access to be afforded which must, of necessity, be consistent outlawed or in any manner destroyed; nor shall we go upon him, nor send upon
with the declared State Policy of full public disclosure of all transactions him, but by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.
involving public interest (Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 28).
The decisions of the Board and the individual voting slips accomplished by Definition
the members concerned are acts made pursuant to their official functions, and as 1. A law that hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and
such, are neither personal nor private in nature but rather public in character. renders judgment only after trial.
They are, therefore, public records access to which is guaranteed to the citizenry 2. Responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of
by no less than the fundamental law of the land. Being a public right, the exercise justice.
thereof cannot be made contingent on the discretion, nay, whim and caprice, of 3. The embodiment of the sporting idea of fair play
the agency charged with the custody of the official records sought to be
examined. The constitutional recognition of the citizen's right of access to official Protects:
records cannot be made dependent upon the consent of the members of the 1. All persons
board concerned, otherwise, the said right would be rendered nugatory. 2. Artificial persons only insofar as their property is concerned
BILL OF RIGHTS a) Life – right of the individual to his body in its completeness, free from
dismemberment and extends to the use of god-given faculties which make life
- The set of presecriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and political enjoyable
rights of the individual and imposing limitations on the powers of b) Liberty – right to exist and the right to be free from arbitrary personal restraint
government as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights. or servitude. Includes the right of the citizens to be free to use his faculties in all
lawful ways
- Designed to preserve the ideals of liberty, equality and security against the c) Property – anything that can come under the right of ownership and be the
assaults of opportunism, expediency of the passing hour, the erosion of small subject of contract. Represents more than the things a person owns. It includes the
encroachments, and the scorn and derision of those who have no patience right to secure, use and dispose of them
with general principles.
- Public office is not property, but one unlawfully ousted from it may
- Any governmental action in violation of the Bill of rights is void institute an action to recover the same
- Self-executing

- Mining license is a privilege that may be revoked by the one giving it - Preliminary investigation conducted by the DOJ is merely inquisitorial, it is
- License to carry firearm is neither a property nor a property right not a trial on the merits, and its sole purpose is to determine whether a crime
has been committed and whether the respondent therein is probably guilty of
Aspects the crime. It is not the occasion for the full and exhaustive display of the
a) Substantive – this serves as a restriction on government’s law and rule-making parties’ evidence.
powers.
Requisites: Preliminary investigation is not a constitutional right, but is merely a right
1. Interests of public in general as distinguished from those of a conferred by statute. The absence of a preliminary investigation does not impair
particular class the validity of the information or otherwise render the same defective.
2. Means employed are reasonably necessary for the - But when there is a statutory grant of P.I., denial of the same is an
accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive on infringement of the due process clause. In such case, the right to preliminary
individuals investigation is substantive, not merely formal or technical. Denial of the
b) Procedural – restriction on actions of judicial and quasi judicial bodies. same is denial of due process.
Requisites:
1. Impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and Preliminary investigation is an inquiry whether:
deternine the matter before it. 1. A crime has been committed
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person 2. Whether there is probable cause that the accused is guilty thereof
3. Summons
Administrative due process
4. Voluntary appearance Ang Tibay vs. CIR
5. Defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard 1. Right to a hearing which includes the right to present one’s case and
6. Not all cases require a trial-type hearing. Due process in labor submit evidence in support thereof;
cases before a labor arbiter is satisfied when the parties are given 2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
the opportunity to submit their position papers (Mariveles vs. CA)
3. The decision must have something to support itself
7. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing
4. The evidence must be substantial
Publication as part of due process – Publication is imperative to the validity of 5. Decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing or
laws, PDs and Eos, administrative rules and regulations and is an indispensable at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties
part of due process. 6. The tribunal or any of its judges must act on its own independent
consideration of the facts and the law of the controversy and not simply
Appeal is not a constitutional right it is but a mere statutory right allowed or
accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision
denied by the legislature in its discretion.
7. The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its
Preliminary investigation decision in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding will know
- Held before an accused is placed on trial to secure the innocent against the various issues involved and the reasons for the decision.
hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution and to protect him from the
trouble, expenses and anxiety of a public trial. It is also intended to protect the Due process in quasi-judicial proceedings before the COMELEC requires notice
state from having to conduct useless and expensive trials. and hearing.
- Preliminary investigation is required to be conducted before the filing of a
complaint or information for an offense where the penalty prescribed by law Equal Protection of the laws
is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, without regard to the fine. “ x x x nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws”.
- If an accused is lawfully arrested WITHOUT A WARRANT involving an
offense which requires a preliminary investigation, the complaint or Persons protected: All persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike
information may be filed by a prosecutor without need of such investigation both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed.
provided an inquest has been conducted in accordance with existing rules. 1. Natural Persons
- Lack of preliminary investigation is not a ground for a motion to quash. 2. Juridical persons only insofar as their property is concerned.
The case must be suspended with respect to the petitioner even if the case is Scope of Equality
already undergoing trial. The right is not waived by the filing of the motion to 1. Economic
be admitted to bail. But the right is waived when the accused fails to invoke it 2. Political
before or at the time of entering a plea at arraignment. 3. Social

Valid Classification – persons or things ostensibly similarly situated may See also Harvey vs. Santiago where the court upheld the validity of the
nonetheless be treated differently if there is a basis for valid classification. arrest of pedophiles on orders by then Immigration Commissioner Miriam
Requisites: Santiago.
1. Substantial distinction
2. Germane to the purpose of the law Requisites of a Valid Warrant
3. Not limited to existing conditions only 1. Probable cause - Such facts and circumstances antecedent to the issuance of
4. Must apply to all members of the same class the warrant that in themselves are sufficient to induce a cautious man to
rely on them and act in pursuance thereof.
II. Searches and seizures a. Must refer to one specific offense
Scope:
Applies to all persons including aliens whether accused of a crime or not. 2. Determination of probable cause personally by a judge
Warrant of arrest
- The right is personal, it may be invoked only by the person entitled to  It is sufficient that the judge personally determine the probable
it. cause. It is not necessary that he should personally examine the
- The right applies as a distraint directed only against the government complainant and his witnesses. Hearing is not necessary for the
and its agencies tasked with the enforcement of the law. The protection determination of the existence of probable cause for the issuance of
cannot extend to acts committed by private individuals so as to bring a warrant of arrest.
them within the ambit of alleged unlawful intrusion by the  Need not conduct a de novo hearing, it is sufficient that the judge
government. should personally evaluate the report and supporting documents
- What constitutes a reasonable or unreasonable search is purely a submitted by the prosecution.
judicial question. i. The judge personally evaluates the report and supporting
- Objections to the warrant of arrest must be made before the accused documents submitted byt he fiscal regarding the existence
enters his plea of probable cause and, on the basis thereof issue a warrant
- The issuance of the warrant of arrest against the person invalidly of arrest;
detained will cure the defect of that detention or at least deny him the ii. If on the basis thereof, he finds no probable cause, he may
right to be released. disregard the prosecutor’s report and require the
submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid him
The conspicuous illegality of the arrest cannot affect the jurisdiction of the trial in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of probable
court, because even in instances not allowed by law, a warrantless arrest is not a cause.
jurisdictional defect and any objection thereto is waived when the person arrested Search warrant
submits to arraignment without any objection. Sec. 4, Rule 126. The judge must personally examine in the form
of searching questions and answers in writing and under oath, the
1. Where a criminal case is pending, the court wherein it is filed or the complainants and nay witnesses he may produce on facts personally known
assigned branch thereof has primary jurisdiction to issue the search to them, and attach to the record their sworn statements together with any
warrant affidavits submitted.
2. Where no such criminal case has been filed, the executive judge or 3. After examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
their lawful substitutes, in the areas and for the offense contemplated
witnesses he may produce.
in Circular 1-91, shall have primary jurisdiction.
4. Particularity of description
a. Readily identify the properties to be seized and thus prevent them
This does not mean that a Court whose territorial jurisdiction does not embrace
from seizing the wrong items
the place to be searched cannot issue a search warrant therefor, where the
b. Leave said peace officers with no discretion regarding the articles
obtention of such search warrant is necessitated and justified by compelling to be seized
consideration of urgency, subject, time and place.
 General warrants or scatter-shot warrant is void
Only a judge may validly issue a warrant.
Exception: Orders of arrest may be issued by administrative authoritites,
Warrant of Arrest Search Warrant
but only for the purpose of carrying out final finding of a violation of law,
for example a order of deportation or an order of contempt but not for the If it contains the names of the persons to - Description is as specific as the
sole purpose of investigation or prosecution. be arrested. circumstances will ordinarily allow;
- Description expresses a conclusion of
fact not of law;

- Things described are limited to those  Appellant is estopped from questioning the illegality of his arrest
which bear direct relation to the offense when he voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the
for which the warrant is being issued court by entering a plea of not guilty and by participating in the
A John Doe warrant will satisfy the No general warrant trial
constitutional requirement of  But the waiver extends only to the illegal arrest and not to the
particularity of description if there is search made incident thereto.
some description persona which will  But, when the arrest is incipiently illegal. Any subsequent search
enable the officer to identify the accused is similarly illegal.
Properties subject to seizure Warrantless Searches

1. Subject of the offense 1) Voluntarily waived.
2. Stolen or embezzled property and other proceeds or fruits of the offense a) The right exists
3. Property used or intended to be used as means for the commission of an b) Person involved had knowledge either actual or constructive of
offense the existence of such right
c) Said person had an actual intention to relinquish the right.
Conduct of the search
1. In the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any member of his Consent must be unequivocal, specific and intelligently given,
family; or in the absence uncontaminated by any duress or coercion.
2. In the presence of two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion, - Mere silence and failure to object is not a waiver
residing in the same locality. - Waiver must be given by the person whose right is
3. The officers may use force in entering the premises provided it is violated.
justified. 2) Stop-and-frisk
- Must precede the arrest for the principle to apply
Warrantless Arrests - Apprehending officer must have a genuine reason in accordance with
1) When the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing his experience and the surrounding conditions to warrant the belief
or is attempting to commit an offence in his presence that the person searched has weapons or contraband concealed about
(i) Continuing offense him.
(ii) See/hear is equivalent to presence
(iii) Hot pursuit 3) When the search is an incident to a lawful arrest
Requisites of in flagrante delicto  The arrest must precede the search. The process cannot be
a) the person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that reversed.
he had just committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to  Officer must have been spurred by probable cause in effecting the
commit a crime; and arrest
b) such overt act is done in the presence or within the view of the  But take note of the case of People vs. Sucro, where the search not
arresting officer preceded by an arrest was held valid because said search was
effected on the basis of probable cause. And also the case of
2) When the offense had just been committed and there is probable cause People vs. Tangliben where the court held the warrantless search
to believe, based on his personal knowledge of facts or of other valid because the officers, faced with on-the-spot information, had
circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed the offense to act quickly.
a) Immediacy - Offense has just been committed  Search must be made only within the area where he has
b) Personal knowledge - Person making the arrest has probable immediate control.
cause to believe, based on his personal knowledge of facts or
of other circumstances that the person to be arrested had 4) Search of vessels and aircraft
committed it. Why?
a. Equipped with powerful motors that enable them to elude
3) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a pursuit
penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or b. Seizure would be an incident to a lawful arrest
temporarily confined while his case is pending or has escaped while
being transferred from one confinement to another. 5) Moving vehicles
4) When the right is voluntarily waived Why? - Not practical to secure a warrant because vehicle can be moved
quickly out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant may be sought.

Exclusionary rule: Evidence obtained in violation of Sec. 2, Article III

Checkpoint may either be: shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding because it is
a. Routine inspection- permissible when it is limited to a mere visual the fruit of the poisonous tree. (Sec. 3 (2), Art. III)
search where the occupants are not subjected to a physical or body
searcg. III. Privacy of Communication and Correspondence
b. Extensive search –constitutionally permissible only if the officers - The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except
conducting the search had reasonable or probable cause to believe that upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires
the motorist is an offender or they will filnd the instrumentality or otherwise as prescribed by law. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or
evidence pertaining to a crime in the vehicle to be searched. the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose or proceeding.
6) Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire, Exceptions:
sanitary and building regulations a. Lawful order of the court
b. When public safety or order requires otherwise
7) When prohibited articles are in plain view
IV. Freedom of Expression
Requisites (People vs. Musa) - No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression
a. Prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless arrest in or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and
which the police are legally present in the pursuit of their petition the government for redress of greievances.
official duties
b. Evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who have Aspects:
the right to be where they are 1. Freedom from censorship or prior restraint – need not be total
c. Evidence must be immediate and apparent suppression. Even restriction of circulation constitutes censorship.
d. Plain view justified the seizure 2. Freedom from subsequent punishment – individual would hesitate to
Plain view – if the object itself is plainly exposed to sight. speak for fear that he might be held to account for his speech.
a. Libel – Public and malicious imputation of a crime, vice or
 Where the object seized is inside a closed package, the object is defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition,
not in plain view and, therefore, cannot be seized without a status or circumstance tending to cause the dishonour,
warrant. However, if the package proclaims its contents, whether discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person.
by its distinctive configuration, its transparency, or if its contents b. Obscenity – guidelines:
are obvious to an observer, then the contents are in plain view 3. Whether the average person, applying contemporary standards,
and may be seized. If the package is such that an experienced would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient
observer could infer from its appearance that it contains interest
prohibited articles, then the article is deemed in plain view. 4. Whether the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way,
People vs. Slanguit – When the valid portion of the search warrant has sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law
been executed, the palin view doctrine can no longer provide any basis for 5. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic,
admitting the other items subsequently found. political, or scientific value.
“Immediately apparent” – does not require an unduy high degree of Tests of Valid Government Interference
certainty as to the incriminating character of evidence. It requires merely a) Clear and Present Danger Rule – Whether the words are used in
that the seizure be presumptively reasonable assuming that there is such circumstances and of such a nature as to create a clear and
probable cause to associate the property with criminal activity. That a present danger that they will bring about substantive evils that the
NEXUS exists between the viewed object and criminal activity State has the right to prevent.
b) Dangerous Tendency Rule – If the words uttered create a
8) Search under exigent and emergency circumstances dangerous tendency of a n evil which the State has the right to
prevent, then such words are punishable. It is sufficient if the
Guanzon vs. De Villa upheld the validity of “areal target oning” or natural tendency and the probable effects of the utterance were to
“saturation drives” as valid exercise of the military powers of the bring about the substantive evil that the legislative body seeks to
President. prevent.
c) Balancing of Interests Test – When particular conduct is regulated
in the interest of public order, and the regulation results in an
indirect, conditional or partial abridgement of speech, the duty of

the courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests a. Matters recognized as privileged information rooted in separation of
demands the greater protection under the particular circumstances powers
presented. b. Information on military and diplomatic secrets
c. Information affecting national security
Assemble and Petition – The right to assemble is not subject to prior restraint. d. Information of investigations of crimes by law enforcement agencies
It may not be conditioned upon the prior issuance of a permit or authorization before the prosecution of the accused
from government authorities. Such right must be exercised in such a way as e. Trade and Industrial Secrets
will not prejudice the public welfare.
VIII. Right to form associations
V. Freedom of Religion - The right of the people including those employed in the public and private
- No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the sectors, to form unions, associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law
free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and shall not be abridged.
worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No
religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights. Scope – Includes right not to join or, to disaffiliate from the association.
Two guarantees: The right to strike – Even if the right expressly guarantees the right to form
1. Non-establishment Clause – reinforces separation of Church and State. unions in public and private sectors, members of the civil service may not declare
2. Freedom of religious profession and worship a strike to enforce economic demands.
Free Exercise Clause IX. Non-Impairment Clause

- No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed
Aspects of freedom of religious profession and worship
a. Right to Believe – Absolute Impairment – anything that diminishes the efficacy of the contract. There is
b. Right to act on one’s belief – subject to regulation substantial impairment when the law charges the terms of a legal contract
c. Compelling State interest test between the parties, either in the time or mode of performance, or imposes new
i. First inquiry – Whether respondent’s right to religious conditions, or dispenses with those expressed, or authorizes for its satisfaction
freedom has been burdened something different from that provided in its terms
ii. Second Inquiry – Ascertain respondent’s sincerity in her
religious belief Limitations:
i. Police Power – Public Welfare is superior to private rights.
VI. Liberty of Abode and Travel ii. Eminent Domain
iii. Taxation
- The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by
law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the X. Free access to Courts
right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety - Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance
or public health, as may be provided by law. shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.
Limitations Miranda Doctrine

i. Abode: Lawful order of the court - First institutionalized in the 1973 constitution
ii. Travel: Interest of national security, public safety and public health; lawful
order of the court Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the
right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and
VII. Right to Information independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the
- The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These Rights cannot be waive
recognized. Access to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to except in writing and in the presence of counsel. No torture, force, violence, threat,
official acts, transactions or decisions, as well as to government research data used intimidation, or any other means which vitiates the free will shall be used against
as basis for policy development shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such him. Secret detention places, solitary incommunicado or other similar forms of
limitations as may be provided by law. detention are prohibited. Any confession or admission obtained in violation of
this or Seciton 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. The law
Scope : inclusions of negotiations leading to the consummation of the transaction. shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as
Exceptions – does not extend to:

compensation to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practice, and 5) No torture, force, etc. Which vitiates the free will shall be used
their families. Sec.. 2 (d), RA 7438 provides that any extra-judicial confession made by
a person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation shall be:
Rights are available only during custodial investigation a. In writing
b. Signed by such person in the presence of his counsel or in
Custodial Investigation – Any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers the latter’s absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the presence
after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of of any of the parents, older brothers and sisters, his spouse,
action in any significant way. The rule begins to operate as soon as the the municipal mayor, the municipal judge, district school
investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an unsolved crime and direction supervisor, priest/minister as chosen by him.
is then aimed upon a particular suspect who has been taken into custody and to 6) Secret detention places etc. Are prohibited
whom the police would then direct interrogatory questions which tend to elicit 7) Confessions/admissions obtained in violation of rights are inadmissible
incriminating statements. in evidence
Two kinds:
 RA 7438 – Custodial Investigation shall include the practice of issuing an a. Coerced confessions, the product of third degree methods
“invitation” to a person who is investigated in connection with an offense he such as torture, force, violence, threat and intimidation
is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to the liability of the b. Uncounselled statements given without the benefit of
inviting officer for any violation of the law. Miranda warning
The alleged constitutional infringement during the custodial
 Police Line-up – not considered a part of custodial inquest (Subject to some investigation is relevant and material only where an
exceptions laid by the court) because it is conducted before the state of extrajudicial confession or admission from the accused
investigation. becomes the basis of conviction.
People vs. Samolde – Even as the extrajudicial confession was in writing and
Not considered as custodial investigation: signed by counsel, because the accused was not given the Miranda warnings, the
1. Normal audit investigation confession was held inadmissible in evidence.
2. Inestigation conducted by Court Administrator
3. Investigation conducted by an employer People vs. Andan – Voluntary but uncounselled confession of accused to the
4. Investigation conducted by civil service commission Mayor and to the media was admissible in evidence. Constitutional procedures on
5. Counter affidavit submitted during preliminary investigation custodial investigation do not apply to the spontaneous statements not elicited
6. A person signs a booking sheet and an arrest report through questioning by the authorities, but given in an ordinary manner whereby
the accused orally admitted having committed the crime.
Rights guaranteed by this provision refer to testimonial compulsion only.
Waiver:
Rights available to the Accused 1. Must be writing and made in the presence of counsel
1) Right to Remain Silent 2. No retroactive effect
2) Competent and independent counsel – must be willing to safeguard the 3. Burden of proof – on the prosecution. The presumption that official
constitutional rights of the accused, as distinguished from one who duty has been regularly performed cannot prevail over the presumption
would merely be giving a routine, preremptory and meaningless recital of innocence
of the individual constitutional rights (PP vs. Bagnate) 4. What may be waived:
- The mere pro forma appointment of a counsel de officio who a. Right to remain silent
fails to genuinely protect the interests of the accused merits b. Right to counsel
disapprobation. - But not the right to be informed of these rights.
Exclusionary rule – confession or admission obtained in violation of Sec. 12 and
- Critical Pre-trial stages – custodial investigation before or after
Sec. 17, Art. III shall be inadmissible in evidence.
charges have been filed, and non-custodial interrogation after
the accused has been formally charged are considered critical Confession – declaration made voluntarily and without compulsion or
pre-trial stages in the criminal process which would require inducement by a person acknowledging that he has committed or participated in
the assistance of a counsel the commission of a crime. But before it can be admitted in evidence, the
3) To be informed of such rights - transmission of meaningful information constitution demands strict compliance with the requirements of the Bill of rights.
than just the ceremonial and perfunctory recitation of an abstract a. Fruit of the Poisonous tree – once the primary source is shown to
constitutional principle. have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary or derivative evidence
4) Rights cannot be waived except in writing and signed by his counsel

derived from it is inadmissible. Evidence illegally obtained by the 2. The court, in its discretion, may allow the accused to continue on provisional
state should not be used to gain other evidence. liberty under the same bail bond during the period to appeal subject to the
b. Receipt of seized property inadmissible consent of the bondsman.
c. Re-enactment 3. If the court imposed a penalty of imprisonment exceeding six years but not
d. Res Gestae – declaration of the accused acknowledging guilt made to more than 20 years, the accused shall be denied bail. Or bail previously
the police desk officer after the crime was committed may be given in granted be cancelled, upon a showing by the prosecution, with notice to the
evidence against him by the police officer to whom the admission was accused, of the following or similar circumstances:
made as part of res gestae a. Accused is a recidivist, quasi recidivist or habitual delinquent,
e. Waiver of the exclusionary rule - for failure of the accused to object to hanituality
the offer in evidence, the uncounselled confession was admitted in b. Accused is found to have previously escaped from legal confinement,
evidence. evaded sentence or has violated the conditions of his bail without
valid justification
XI. Right to Bail c. Accused committed the offense while on probation, parole, or under
- All persons except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua conditional pardon
when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient d. Circumstances of the accused or his case indicate the probability of
sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to flight if released on bail
bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is e. Undue risk that during the pendency of the appeal, the accused may
suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required. commit another crime
Bail – security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished Whether as a matter of right or discretion, a hearing has to be made because, in
by him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before the court as may fixing the amount, the judge is required to take into account a number of factors
be required. The right to bail emanates form the right to be presumed innocent. such as:
1. Character and reputation
Who may invoke 2. Forfeiture of other bonds.
- a person in custody of the law who may by reason of the presumption of
innocence he enjoys, be allowed provisional liberty upon filing a security When bail shall be denied:
to guarantee his appearance before any court, as required have yet been 1. Accused is charged with a capital offense or offense punishable by reclusion
filed. perpetua or higher when evidence of guilt is strong.
- May be invoked by a person under detention, even if no formal charges Standards for fixing bail:
have yet been filed. a. Financial ability of the accused
b. Nature and circumstances of the offense
Exceptions: c. Penalty for the offense charged
a. When charged with an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua and d. Character and reputation of the accused
evidence of guilt is strong. e. Age and health
b. Not available to military f. Weight of the evidence against him
Duty of the Court - When the accused is charged with an offense punished by g. Probability of his appearing at the trial
reclusion perpetua, a hearing on the motion for bail shall be conducted by the h. Forfeiture of the bonds by him
judge to determine whther or not the evidence of quilt is strong, i. Fact that he was a fugitive from justice when arrested
j. Pendency of other cases in which he is under bond
Bail as a matter of right – All persons in custody shall:
a. Before conviction by the MeTC, MTC, MCTC and Constitutional rights of the accused
b. Before conviction by RTC of an offense not punishable by death, RP or 1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process
Life Imprisonment of law
Be admitted to bail as a matter of right with sufficient sureties or be released on 2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shal:
recognizance as prescribed by law. a. Be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved
b. Shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel
Bail when discretionary c. To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
1. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, RP or life d. To have a speedy impartial and public trial
imprisonment, the court , on application, may admit the accused to bail. e. To meet the witnesses face to face

f. To have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and

the production of evidence in his behalf. Scope: only testimonial compulsion. Does not apply where the evidence sought to
g. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the be excluded is not an incriminating statement but an object evidence.
absence of the accused, provided that he has been duly notified and his
failure to appear is unjustifiable. Non-detention by reason of political beliefs or aspirations
No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political or religious beliefs.
Criminal Due process
1. Accused has been heard in a court of competent jurisdiction Involuntary Servitude
2. Accused is proceeded against under the orderly process of law - No involuntary servitude in any from shall exist axcept as punishment for a crim
3. Accused has been given notice and the opportunity to be heard and whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
4. Judgment rendered was within the authority of a constitutional law. Exceptions:
1. Punishement for a crime whereof one has been duly convicted
Habeas Corpus 2. Service in defense of State
- The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of 3. Naval Enlistment
invasion or rebellion when public safety requires it. 4. Posse Comitatus
5. Return to work order in industries affected with public interest
Writ of Habeas Corpus – A writ issued by a court directed to a person detaining 6. Patria potestas
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 Prohibited Punishments
to receive whatever the court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in his behalf. 1. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed,
 Available to restore an individual subjected to physical Restraint. unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be
60 Duration reduced to RP
48 Submit a Report in person and in writing to Congress 2. The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment
24 Convene, voting jointly by vote of at least majority may revoke such against any prisoner or detainee, or the use of substandard or
proclamation or suspension inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt
with by law.
30 Supreme court may review in appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen the
sufficiency of the factual basis for the proclamation of martial law or the Non-Imprisonment for debt
suspension of the privilege of the writ and promulgate thirty days from filing - No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax
3 Any person arrested during the suspension of the writ shall be judicially
charged other wise released. Double Jeopardy
- No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an
Speedy Disposition of Cases act is punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall
- All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of cases before all judicial, constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act.
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies. Requisites:
1. Valid complaint or information
Self Incrimination 2. Filed before a competent court
- No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. 3. To which he had pleaded
4. Defendant was previously acquitted or convicted or the cases
Availability – not only in criminal prosecution but also in all other government dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent
proceedings including civil actions and administrative or legislative SC: Filing of an MR after acquittal is a violation of Double Jeopardy.
investigations. Claimed not only by the accused but also by any witness to whom Galman case is Pro Hac Vice
a question calling for an incriminating answer is addressed.
Ex Post Facto Law and Bill of Attainder
Rule - No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted
Ordinary witness –may be invoked only when incriminating question is
asked Kinds of Ex post facto laws:
Accused/Respondent – may not be compelled to take the witness stand 1. Every law that makes criminal an action done before the passage of the law
altogether and which was innocent when done and punishes such action

2. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was when order for the demolition of the stalls, sari-sari stores and carinderia of the private
committed respondents can fall within the compartment of "human rights violations
3. Every law that changes punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the involving civil and political rights" intended by the Constitution.
law annexed to the crime when committed
4. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less or different ERMITA MALATE HOTEL & MOTEL OPERATORS VS CITY OF MANILA
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense The Ordinance is a valid exercise of police power to minimize certain
in order to convict the offender practices hurtful to public morals. There is no violation o constitutional due
5. Every law which, assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect process for being reasonable and the ordinance is enjoys the presumption of
imposes a penalty or the deprivation of a right for something which when constitutionality absent any irregularity on its face. Taxation may be made to
done was lawful implement a police power and the amount, object, and instance of taxation is
6. Every law which deprives persons accused of a crime of some lawful dependent upon the local legislative body. Judgment of lower court reversed and
protection to which they have become entitled, such as the protection of a injunction lifted.
former conviction or acquittal or of a proclamation of amnesty
PICHAY VS OFFICE OF DEPUTY EXEUTIVE SECRETARY
Characteristics Presidential appointees come under the direct disciplining authority of the
1. Refers to criminal matters President. This proceeds from the well settled principle that, in the absence of a
2. Retroactive contrary law, the power to remove or to discipline is lodged in the same
3. Prejudicial to the accused authority on which the power to appoint is vested. Having the power to remove
and/or discipline presidential appointees, the President has the corollary
Bill of Attainder authority to investigate such public officials and look into their conduct in office.
- A legislative act that inflicts punishment without trial Petitioner is a presidential appointee occupying the high-level position of
- Substitutes legislative fiat for a judicial determination of guilt Chairman of the LWUA. Necessarily, he comes under the disciplinary
jurisdiction of the President, who is well within his right to order an
CASE DOCTRINES investigation into matters that require his informed decision.
There are substantial distinctions that set apart presidential appointees
SIMON VS CHR occupying upper-level positions in government from non-presidential
Recalling the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission, aforequoted, appointees and those that occupy the lower positions in government. Substantial
it is readily apparent that the delegates envisioned a Commission on Human distinctions clearly exist between elective officials and appointive officials. The
Rights that would focus its attention to the more severe cases of human rights former occupy their office by virtue of the mandate of the electorate. They are
violations. Delegate Garcia, for instance, mentioned such areas as the "(1) elected to an office for a definite term and may be removed therefrom only upon
protection of rights of political detainees, (2) treatment of prisoners and the stringent conditions. On the other hand, appointive officials hold their office by
prevention of tortures, (3) fair and public trials, (4) cases of disappearances, (5) virtue of their designation thereto by an appointing authority. Some appointive
salvagings and hamletting, and (6) other crimes committed against the religious." officials hold their office in a permanent capacity and are entitled to security of
While the enumeration has not likely been meant to have any preclusive effect, tenure while others serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.
more than just expressing a statement of priority, it is, nonetheless, significant for
the tone it has set. WHITE LIGHT CORPORATION ET AL VS CITY OF MANILA
In any event, the delegates did not apparently take comfort in peremptorily The SC ruled that the said ordinance is null and void as it indeed infringes
making a conclusive delineation of the CHR's scope of investigatorial upon individual liberty. It also violates the due process clause which serves as a
jurisdiction. They have thus seen it fit to resolve, instead, that "Congress may guaranty for protection against arbitrary regulation or seizure. The said
provide for other cases of violations of human rights that should fall within the ordinance invades private rights. Note that not all who goes into motels and
authority of the Commission, taking into account its recommendation." In the hotels for wash up rate are really there for obscene purposes only. Some are
particular case at hand, there is no cavil that what are sought to be demolished tourists who needed rest or to “wash up” or to freshen up. Hence, the infidelity
are the stalls, sari-sari stores and carinderia, as well as temporary shanties, sought to be avoided by the said ordinance is more or less subjected only to a
erected by private respondents on a land which is planned to be developed into a limited group of people. The SC reiterates that individual rights may be
"People's Park". More than that, the land adjoins the North EDSA of Quezon City adversely affected only to the extent that may fairly be required by the legitimate
which, this Court can take judicial notice of, is a busy national highway. The demands of public interest or public welfare.
consequent danger to life and limb is not thus to be likewise simply ignored. It is
indeed paradoxical that a right which is claimed to have been violated is one that SILAHIS INTERNATIONAL HOTEL INC VS SOLUTA
cannot, in the first place, even be invoked, if it is, in fact, extant. Be that as it may, Article 32 speaks of an officer or employee or person "directly or indirectly"
looking at the standards hereinabove discoursed vis-avis the responsible for the violation of the constitutional rights and liberties of another.
circumstances obtaining in this instance, we are not prepared to conclude that the Hence, it is not the actor alone who must answer for damages under Article 32;

the person indirectly responsible has also to answer for the damages or injury
caused to the aggrieved party. Such being the case, petitioners, together with JAVIER VS COMELEC
Maniego and Villanueva, the ones who orchestrated the illegal search, are jointly The SC has repeatedly and consistently demanded “the cold neutrality of an
and severally liable for actual, moral and exemplary damages to herein impartial judge” as the indispensable imperative of due process. To bolster that
individual respondents in accordance with the earlier-quoted pertinent provision requirement, we have held that the judge must not only be impartial but must
of Article 32, in relation to Article 2219(6) and (10) of the Civil Code which also appear to be impartial as an added assurance to the parties that his decision
provides: will be just. The litigants are entitled to no less than that. They should be sure
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous that when their rights are violated they can go to a judge who shall give them
cases, among others, (6) Illegal search and (10) Acts and action referred to in justice. They must trust the judge, otherwise they will not go to him at all. They
Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34 and 35. must believe in his sense of fairness, otherwise they will not seek his judgment.
Without such confidence, there would be no point in invoking his action for the
RUBI VS PROVINCIAL BOARD OF MINDORO justice they expect. Due process is intended to insure that confidence by
The term "non-Christian" it was said, refers not to religious belief, but in a requiring compliance with what Justice Frankfurter calls the rudiments of fair
way to geographical area, and more directly to natives of the Philippine Islands play. Fair play calls for equal justice. There cannot be equal justice where a suitor
of a low grade of civilization. On the other hand, none of the provisions of the approaches a court already committed to the other party and with a judgment
Philippine Organic Law could have had the effect of denying to the Government already made and waiting only to be formalized after the litigants shall have
of the Philippine Islands, acting through its Legislature, the right to exercise that undergone the charade of a formal hearing. Judicial (and also extrajudicial)
most essential, insistent, and illimitable of powers, the sovereign police power, in proceedings are not orchestrated plays in which the parties are supposed to
the promotion of the general welfare and the public interest. when to advance make the motions and reach the denouement according to a prepared script.
the public welfare, the law was found to be a legitimate exertion of the police There is no writer to foreordain the ending. The judge will reach his conclusions
power, And it is unnecessary to add that the prompt registration of titles to land only after all the evidence is in and all the arguments are filed, on the basis of the
in the Philippines constitutes an advancement of the public interests, for, besides established facts and the pertinent law.
promoting peace and good order among landowners in particular and the people
in general, it helps increase the industries of the country, and makes for the GALMAN VS SANDIGANBAYAN
development of the natural resources, with the consequent progress of the The Supreme Court held that the prosecution was deprived of due process
general prosperity. And these ends are pursued in a special manner by the State and fair opportunity to prosecute and prove their case which grossly violates the
through the exercise of its police power. due process clause. There could be no double jeopardy since legal jeopardy
The Supreme Court held that the resolution of the provincial board of attaches only (a) upon a valid indictment, (b) before a competent court, (c) after
Mindoro was neither discriminatory nor class legislation, and stated among other arraignment, (d) a valid plea having been entered; and (e) the case was dismissed
things: ". . . one cannot hold that the liberty of the citizen is unduly interfered or otherwise terminated without the express consent of the accused. The lower
with when the degree of civilization of the Manguianes is considered. They are court that rendered the judgment of acquittal was not competent as it was ousted
restrained for their own good and the general good of the Philippines. Nor can of its jurisdiction when it violated the right of the prosecution to due process. In
one say that due process of law has not been followed. To go back to our effect the first jeopardy was never terminated, and the remand of the criminal
definition of due process of law and equal protection of the laws, there exists a case for further hearing and trial before the lower courts amounts merely to a
law; the law seems to be reasonable; it is enforced according to the regular continuation of the first jeopardy, and does not expose the accused to a second
methods of procedure prescribed; and it applies alike to all of a class." jeopardy.
The court further contends that the previous trial was a mock trial where
LIBANAN VS SANDIGANBAYAN the authoritarian President ordered the Sandiganbayan and Tanod Bayan to rig
The Court ruled that the term "office" used in the law could apply to any and closely monitor the trial which was undertaken with due pressure to the
office which the officer charged might currently be holding and not necessarily judiciary. The court’s decision of acquittal is one void of jurisdiction owing to its
the particular office under which he was charged. The suspension order cannot failure in observing due process during the trial therefore the judgment was also
amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law. Public office is deemed void and double jeopardy cannot be invoked. More so the trial was one
"a public agency or trust,"and it is not the property envisioned by the vitiated with lack of due process on the account of collusion between the lower
Constitutional provision which petitioner invokes. court and Sandiganbayan for the rendition of a pre-determined verdict of the
accused.
ORQUIOLA VS TANDANG SORA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
As builders in good faith and innocent purchasers for value, petitioners PEOPLE VS CASTILLO
have rights over the subject property and hence they are proper parties in It is the judge’s prerogative and duty to ask clarificatory questions to eek
interest in any case thereon. Consequently, private respondents should have out the truth. After careful examination of the records, it appears that the assailed
impleaded them in Civil Case. Since they failed to do so, petitioners cannot be questions by the judge were merely clarificatory in nature.
reached by the decision in said case.

Allegations of bias on the part of the trial court should be received with caution, the Court of Appeals, the denial of petitioners’ motion for postponement is
especially when the queries by the judge did not prejudice the accused. The dictated by the motion itself. We cannot allow petitioners to argue that their right
propriety of a judge’s queries is determined not by their quantity but by their to due process has been infringed.
quality and in any event, by the test of whether the defendant was prejudiced by In The Philippine American Life & General Insurance Company vs Enario,
such questioning. Upon evaluation, even if all questions and answers we reiterated that the essence of due process is to be found in the reasonable
propounded by the judge were eliminated, the appellant would still be opportunity to be heard and to submit any evidence one may have in support of
convicted. one’s defense. Where the opportunity to be heard, either through verbal
arguments or pleadings, is accorded, and the party can present its side or defend
CARAS VS CA its interest in due course, there is no denial of procedural due process.
There is no mention of when the demand to pay was made, whether before
or after the checks were dishonoured so that within 5 banking days from receipt SAJOT VS CA
of such notice she could pay the check fully or make arrangements for such While litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is a truism that every case
payment. must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an
The testimony of Panuelos, the branch manager of PCI Bank where orderly and speedy administration of justice.
petitioner maintained her checking account indicates that the bank also failed to Petitioner contends that the Court of Appeals denied him the right to due
send notice to the petitioner for her to pay the value of the checks or make process when it dismissed his appeal because of his counsel's negligence.
arrangements for their payment within 5 days from the dishonour of the said We do not agree. Petitioner was himself guilty of neglect. He was aware of
checks. The absence of notice of dishonour necessarily deprives an accused an his conviction and of the requirement of filing an appellant's brief. His excuse
opportunity to preclude a criminat prosecution. Accordingly, procedural due that he relied on the services of his counsel and that he was busy is "flimsy".
process clearly enjoins that a notice of dishonour ne actually served on the “Equally busy people have in one way or the other learned how to cope with the
petitioner. same problem he had. Were we to accept his excuse, this Court would have to
open cases dismissed many years ago on the ground of counsel's neglect. In
ZALDIVAR VS SANDIGANBAYAN many cases, the fact is that counsel's negligence is matched by his client's own
Under either the "clear and present danger" test or the "balancing-of-interest negligence."
test," the Court held that the statements made by respondent Gonzalez are of We note that even during the trial of the estafa case before the lower court,
such a nature and were made in such a manner and under such circumstances, as petitioner never appeared in court except during the arraignment. Thus, the
to transcend the permissible limits of free speech. What is here at stake is the court issued a warrant for his arrest and interpreted his non-appearance as
authority of the Supreme Court to confront and prevent a "substantive evil" "flight." Petitioner's lack of vigilance as found by the trial court in its decision is
consisting not only of the obstruction of a free and fair hearing of a particular emphasized when his counsel in the instant petition filed a motion to withdraw
case but also the avoidance of the broader evil of the degradation of the judicial primarily on the ground of irreconcilable professional relationship between
system of a country and the destruction of the standards of professional conduct Attorney Florentino Temporal and petitioner. Despite petitioner's repeated
required from members of the bar and officers of the courts, which has some assurances relayed by phone, letters and telegrams that he will meet with Atty.
implications to the society. Temporal to formulate the appellant's brief, he never did so. Moreover, petitioner
paid Atty. Temporal's professional fees with checks drawn against closed
VILLARUEL VS FERNANDO accounts.
Due process, in essence, is simply an opportunity to be heard and this
opportunity was not denied petitioner. ROQUE VS OMBUDSMAN
Throughout the proceedings in the trial court as well as in the Court of The delay of 6 years was unjustified. RA 6770 mandates that the
Appeals, petitioner had the opportunity to present his side but he failed to do so. Ombudsman must act promptly on complaints before him. Moreover, it violated
Clearly, petitioner’s former counsel, the OSG, was negligent. This negligence, the constitutional provision on the speedy disposition of cases. Although the
however, binds petitioner. The trial and appellate courts correctly ruled that the respondents attempted to justify the six months needed by Ombudsman Desierto
negligence of the OSG could not relieve petitioner of the effects such negligence to review the recommentdation of Deputy Ombudsman Gervasio, no explanation
and prevent the decision of the trial court from becoming final and executory. was given why it took almost six years for the latter to resolve the Complaints.
SY VS ANDOK'S LITSON CORPORATION ANG TIBAY VS CHR

What constitutes a valid ground to excuse litigants and their counsels from There cardinal primary rights which must be respected even in proceedings
appearing at the pre-trial under Section 4, Rule 18 of the Rules of Court is subject of this character: the right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one's
to the sound discretion of a judge. Such discretion was shown by the trial court, cause and submit evidence in support thereof; The tribunal must consider the
which was correct in putting into effect the consequence of petitioners’ non- evidence presented; The decision must have something to support itself; The
appearance at the pre-trial. While Sy filed an Urgent Motion to Reset Pre-trial, evidence must be substantial; (5) The decision must be based on the evidence
she cannot assume that her motion would be automatically granted. As found by presented at the hearing; or at least contained in the record and disclosed to

the parties affected; The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its own environment, safety, dangers and risks to life and limb, and accessibility to social,
independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy, and not civic, and spiritual activities.
simply accept the views of a subordinate; The Board or body should, in all The constitutional prohibition against impairing contractual obligations is
controversial questions, render its decision in such manner that the parties to the not absolute and is not to be read with literal exactness . It is restricted to
proceeding can know the various Issue involved, and the reason for the decision contracts with respect to property or some object of value and which confer
rendered. rights that maybe asserted in a court of justice; it has no application to statutes
relating to public subjects within the domain of the general legislative powers of
DUMLAO VS COMELEC the State and involving the public rights and public welfare of the entire
There are standards that have to be followed in the exercise of the function community affected by it. It does not prevent a proper exercise by the State of its
of judicial review, namely: (1) the existence of an appropriate case; (2) an interest police power by enacting regulations reasonably necessary to secure the health,
personal and substantial by the party raising the constitutional question; (3) the safety, morals; comfort, or general welfare of the community, even though
plea that the function be exercised at the earliest opportunity; and (4) the contracts may thereby be affected, for such matters cannot be placed by contract
necessity that the constitutional question be passed upon in order to decide the beyond the power of the State to regulate and control them. The freedom to
case. contract is not absolute; all contracts and all rights are subject to the police power
The constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws is subject to of the State and not only may regulations which affect them be established by the
rational classification. If the groupings are based on reasonable and real State, but all such regulations must be subject to change from time to time, as the
differentiations, one class can be treated and regulated differently from another general, well-being of the community may require, or as the circumstances may
class. For purposes of public service, employees 65 years of age, have been change, or as experience may demonstrate the necessity. And under the Civil
validly classified differently from younger employees. Employees attaining that Code, contracts of labor are explicitly subject to the police power of the State
age are subject to compulsory retirement, while those of younger ages are not so because they are not ordinary contracts but are impresses with public interest.
compulsorily retirable.
PEOPLE VS JALOSJOS
CONFERENCE OF MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES VS POEA All top officials of Government-executive, legislative, and judicial are
The principle, of non-delegation of powers is applicable to all the three subject to the majesty of law. There is an unfortunate misimpression in the public
major powers of the Government. In the case of legislative power, such occasions mind that election or appointment to high government office, by itself, frees the
have become more and more frequent, if not necessary. This had led to the official from the common restraints of general law. Privilege has to be granted by
observation that the delegation of legislative power has become the rule and its law, not inferred from the duties of a position. The immunity from arrest or
non-delegation the exception. The reason is the increasing complexity of the task detention of Senators and members of the House of Representatives arises from a
of government and the growing inability of the legislature to cope directly with provision of the Constitution. The history of the provision shows that privilege
the myriad problems demanding its attention. Specialization even in legislation has always been granted in a restrictive sense. The provision granting an
has become necessary. These solutions may, however, be expected from its exemption as a special privilege cannot be extended beyond the ordinary
delegates, who are supposed to be experts in the particular fields assigned to meaning of its terms. The present Constitution adheres to the same restrictive
them. With the proliferation of specialized activities and their attendant peculiar rule.
problems, the national legislature has found it more and more necessary to The Constitution guarantees that no person shall be denied the equal
entrust to administrative agencies the authority to issue rules to carry out the protection of laws. This simply means that all persons similarly situated shall be
general provisions of the statute. This is called the "power of subordinate treated alike both in rights enjoyed and responsibilities imposed. The organs of
legislation." government may not show any undue favoritism or hostility to any person.
With this power, administrative bodies may implement the broad policies Neither partiality not prejudice shall be displayed.
laid down in a statute by "filling in" the details which the Congress may not have The performance of legitimate and even essential duties by public officers
the opportunity or competence to provide. This is effected by their promulgation has never been an excuse to free a person validly in prison. Jalosjos claimed that
of supplementary regulations, such as the implementing rules. These the duty to legislative ranks highest in the hierarchy of government. The
regulations have the force and effect of law. importance of a function depends on the need to its exercise. Never has the call
It is an established principle of constitutional law that the guaranty of equal of a particular duty lifted a prisoner into a different classification from those
protection of the laws is not violated by legislation based on reasonable others who are validly restrained by law. The election to the position of
classification. And for the classification to be reasonable, it (1) must rest on Congressman is not a reasonable classification in criminal law enforcement. The
substantial distinctions; (2) must be germane to the purpose of the law; (3) must functions and duties of the office are not substantial distinctions which lift him
not be limited to existing conditions only; and (4) must apply equally to all from the class of prisoners interrupted in their freedom and restricted in liberty
members of the same class. of movement. Lawful arrest and confinement are germane to the purposes of the
There can be no dispute about the dissimilarities between land-based and law and apply to all those belonging to the same class. Imprisonment is the
sea-based Filipino overseas workers in terms of, among other things, work restraint of a man's personal liberty; coercion exercised upon a person to prevent
the free exercise of his power of locomotion. The functions and duties of the

office are not substantial distinctions which lift him from the class of prisoners fishing evidence of the commission of a crime. But, then, this fishing expedition
interrupted in their freedom and restricted in liberty of movement. Lawful arrest is indicative of the absence of evidence to establish a probable cause.
and confinement are germane to the purposes of the law and apply to all those
belonging to the same class.It can be seen from the foregoing that incarceration, PEOPLE VS BELOCURA
by its nature, changes an individual's status in society. Prison officials have the No arrest, search and seizure can be made without a valid warrant issued
job of preserving the security as well as of attempting to provide rehabilitation by a competent judicial authority. So sacred are the right of personal security and
that prepares inmates for re-entry into the social mainstream. Necessarily, both privacy and the right from unreasonable searches and seizures that no less than
these demands require the curtailment and elimination of certain rights. the Constitution ordains in Section 2 of its Article III.
The consequence of a violation of the guarantees against a violation of
STONEHILL VS DIOKNO personal security and privacy and against unreasonable searches and seizures is
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and the exclusion of the evidence thereby obtained. This rule of exclusion is set down
effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no in Section 3(2), Article III of the Constitution
warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, to be determined by the judge after Even so, the right against warrantless arrest, and the right against
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he warrantless search and seizure are not absolute. There are circumstances in
may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the which the arrest, or search and seizure, although warrantless, are nonetheless
persons or things to be seized. Two points must be stressed in connection with valid or reasonable. Among the circumstances are those mentioned in Section 5,
this constitutional mandate, namely: (1) that no warrant shall issue but upon Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, which lists down when a warrantless arrest may
probable cause, to be determined by the judge in the manner set forth in said be lawfully made by a peace officer or a private person, namely: When, in his
provision; and (2) that the warrant shall particularly describe the things to be presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is
seized. attempting to commit an offense; When an offense has in fact just been
None of these requirements has been complied with in the contested committed, and he has personal knowledge of facts indicating that the
warrants. No specific offense had been alleged in said applications. The person to be arrested has committed it; and When the person to be arrested is a
averments thereof with respect to the offense committed were abstract. It was prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he
impossible for the judges who issued the warrants to have found the existence of is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while his case is pending, or
probable cause, for the same presupposes the introduction of competent proof has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another.
that the party against whom it is sought has performed particular acts, or On the other hand, the constitutional proscription against warrantless
committed specific omissions, violating a given provision of our criminal laws. searches and seizures admits of the following exceptions, namely: (a)
As a matter of fact, the applications involved in this case do not allege any warrantless search incidental to a lawful arrest recognized under Section 13, Rule
specific acts performed by herein petitioners. To uphold the validity of the 126 of the Rules of Court; (b) seizure of evidence under plain view; (c) search of a
warrants in question would be to wipe out completely one of the most moving vehicle; (d)consented warrantless search; (e) customs search; (f)
fundamental rights guaranteed in our Constitution, for it would place the stop-and-frisk situations (Terry search); and (g) exigent and emergency
sanctity of the domicile and the privacy of communication and correspondence circumstances. In these exceptional situations, the necessity for a search warrant
at the mercy of the whims caprice or passion of peace officers. This is precisely is dispensed with.
the evil sought to be remedied by the constitutional provision above quoted. SC To be caught in flagrante delicto necessarily implies the positive
deemed it fit to amend Section 3 of Rule 122 of the former Rules of Court by identification of the culprit by an eyewitness or eyewitnesses. Such
providing in that "a search warrant shall not issue but upon probable cause in identification is a direct evidence of culpability, because it "proves the fact in
connection with one specific offense. The grave violation of the Constitution dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption." Even by his own
made in the application for the contested search warrants was compounded by admission, he was actually committing a crime in the presence or within the
the description therein made of the effects to be searched for and seized. Thus, view of the arresting policemen. The arrest was valid, and the arresting
the warrants authorized the search for and seizure of records pertaining to all policemen thereby became cloaked with the authority to validly search his
business transactions of petitioners herein, regardless of whether the transactions person and effects for weapons or any other article he might use in the
were legal or illegal . commission of the crime or was the fruit of the crime or might be used as
The position taken in the Moncado case must be abandoned. To be sure, if evidence in the trial of the case, and to seize from him and the area within his
the applicant for a search warrant has competent evidence to establish probable reach or under his control, like the jeep, such weapon or other article. The
cause of the commission of a given crime by the party against whom the warrant evident purpose of the incidental search was to protect the arresting policemen
is intended, then there is no reason why the applicant should not comply with from being harmed by him with the use of a concealed weapon. Accordingly, the
the requirements of the fundamental law. Upon the other hand, if he has no such warrantless character of the arrest could not by itself be the basis of his acquittal.
competent evidence, then it is not possible for the Judge to find that there is An evaluation of the totality of the evidence on record indicates, however,
probable cause, and, hence, no justification for the issuance of the warrant. The that the corpus delicti of the crime charged was not established beyond
only possible explanation (not justification) for its issuance is the necessity of reasonable doubt. What must be proved beyond reasonable doubt is the fact of
possession of the prohibited drug itself. This may be done by presenting the

police officer who actually recovered the prohibited drugs as a witness, being the what the subversive books and instructions are; what the manuals not otherwise
person who has the direct knowledge of the possession. available to the public contain to make them subversive or to enable them to be
used for the crime of rebellion. There is absent a definite guideline to the
GAMBOA VS CHAN searching team as to what items might be lawfully seized thus giving the officers
The right to privacy, as an inherent concept of liberty, has long been of the law discretion regarding what articles they should seize as, in fact, taken
recognized as a constitutional right. also were a portable typewriter and 2 wooden boxes. It is thus in the nature of a
The right to privacy as such is accorded recognition independently of its general warrant and infringes on the constitutional mandate requiring particular
identification with liberty; in itself, it is fully deserving of constitutional description of the things to be seized. Search warrants of general description are
protection. The language of Prof. Emerson is particularly apt: "The concept of considered null and void for being too general.
limited government has always included the idea that governmental powers stop
short of certain intrusions into the personal life of the citizen. This is indeed one GARCIA VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
of the basic distinctions between absolute and limited government. Ultimate and The application of Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code in the Articles of
pervasive control of the individual, in all aspects of his life, is the hallmark of the War is in accordance with the Equal Protection Clause of the 1987 Constitution.
absolute state. In contrast, a system of limited government, safeguards a private According to a long line of decisions, equal protection simply requires that all
sector, which belongs to the individual, firmly distinguishing it from the public persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as to rights
sector, which the state can control. Protection of this private sector — protection, conferred and responsibilities imposed. It requires public bodies and institutions
in other words, of the dignity and integrity of the individual — has become to treat similarly situated individuals in a similar manner. The purpose of the
increasingly important as modern society has developed. All the forces of a equal protection clause is to secure every person within a state's jurisdiction
technological age — industrialization, urbanization, and organization — operate against intentional and arbitrary discrimination, whether occasioned by the
to narrow the area of privacy and facilitate intrusion into it. In modern terms, the express terms of a statute or by its improper execution through the state's duly-
capacity to maintain and support this enclave of private life marks the difference constituted authorities. In other words, the concept of equal justice under the law
between a democratic and a totalitarian society." requires the state to govern impartially, and it may not draw distinctions
The writ of habeas data is an independent and summary remedy designed between individuals solely on differences that are irrelevant to a legitimate
to protect the image, privacy, honor, information, and freedom of information of governmental objective. It, however, does not require the universal application of
an individual, and to provide a forum to enforce one’s right to the truth and to the laws to all persons or things without distinction. What it simply requires is
informational privacy. It seeks to protect a person’s right to control information equality among equals as determined according to a valid classification. Indeed,
regarding oneself, particularly in instances in which such information is being the equal protection clause permits classification. Such classification, however, to
collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends. It must be be valid must pass the test of reasonableness. The test has four requisites: (1) the
emphasized that in order for the privilege of the writ to be granted, there must classification rests on substantial distinctions; (2) it is germane to the purpose of
exist a nexus between the right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, the law; (3) it is not limited to existing conditions only; and (4) it applies equally
liberty or security on the other. to all members of the same class. "Superficial differences do not make for a valid
Habeas data. – The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person classification." In the present case, petitioner belongs to the class of those who
whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an have been convicted by any court, thus, he is entitled to the rights accorded to
unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private them. Clearly, there is no substantial distinction between those who are
individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data convicted of offenses which are criminal in nature under military courts and the
information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the civil courts. Furthermore, following the same reasoning, petitioner is also entitled
aggrieved party. to the basic and time honored principle that penal statutes are construed strictly
against the State and liberally in favor of the accused. It must be remembered
NOLASCO VS PANO that the provisions of the Articles of War which the petitioner violated are penal
Section 3, Article IV of the Constitution, guarantees the right of the people in nature.
to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable No less than our Constitution guarantees the right not just to a speedy trial
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose. It also specifically but to the speedy disposition of cases. However, it needs to be underscored that
provides that no Search Warrant shall issue except upon probable cause to be speedy disposition is a relative and flexible concept. A mere mathematical
determined by the Judge or such other responsible officer as may be authorized reckoning of the time involved is not sufficient. Particular regard must be taken
by law, after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the of the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case. In determining whether or
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched not the right to the speedy disposition of cases has been violated, this Court has
and the things to be seized. laid down the following guidelines: (1) the length of the delay; (2) the reasons for
It is evident that the Search Warrant authorizes the seizure of personal such delay; (3) the assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused; and (4)
properties vaguely described and not particularized. It is an all- embracing the prejudice caused by the delay.
description which includes everything conceivable regarding the Communist
Party of the Philippines and the National Democratic Front. It does not specify

PEOPLE VS CA Thus, such notice fell short of the requirement of law that an employee must be
Dismissal of this petition is inevitable in view of the principle of double afforded the benefit of the two-notice rule in dismissal cases that will allow the
jeopardy, making it unnecessary to address and extrapolate on the numerous employee to substantiate the charges specified in the notice with full knowledge
factual issues raised by Tee against the CA's Decision dated July 28, 2011 and the at the outset that the investigation to be conducted may result in his dismissal or
procedural lapses Ando attributes to Tee. The mere fact that the decision being suspension from employment.
brought for this Court's review is one for acquittal alerts one's attention to a
possible violation of the rule against double jeopardy. US VS BUSTOS
In People v. Hon. Tria-Tirona, this Court reiterated that mistrial is the only The interest of society and the maintenance of good government demand a
exception to the well-settled, even axiomatic, principle that acquittal is full discussion of public affairs. Completely liberty to comment on the conduct of
immediately final and cannot be appealed on the ground of double jeopardy. public men is a scalpel in the case of free speech. Men in public life may suffer
This Court was categorical in stating that a re-examination of the evidence under a hostile and an unjust accusation; the wound can be assuaged with the
without a finding of mistrial will violate the right to repose of an accused, which balm of a clear conscience. A public officer must not be too thin-skinned with
is what is protected by the rule against double jeopardy. reference to comment upon his official acts.
Only thus can the intelligence and the dignity of the individual be exalted.
MAQUILING VS PTSI The guaranties of a free speech and a free press include the right to criticize
With respect to rank-and-file personnel, loss of trust and confidence as judicial conduct. The administration of the law is a matter of vital public concern.
ground for valid dismissal requires proof of involvement in the alleged events in Whether the law is wisely or badly enforced is, therefore, a fit subject for proper
question and that mere uncorroborated assertions and accusations by the comment. The sword of Damocles in the hands of a judge does not hang
employer will not suffice. But as regards a managerial employee, mere existence suspended over the individual who dares to assert his prerogative as a citizen
of a basis for believing that such employee has breached the trust of his employer and to stand up bravely before any official. On the contrary, it is a duty which
would suffice for his dismissal. every one owes to society or to the State to assist in the investigation of any
The notices required before an employee may be validly dismissed are: A written alleged misconduct. It is further the duty of all who know of any official
notice served on the employee specifying the grounds for termination and giving dereliction on the part of a magistrate to bring the facts to the notice of those
the employee reasonable opportunity to explain his/her side; a hearing or whose duty it is to inquire into and punish them. Public policy, the welfare of
conference wherein the employee, with the assistance of counsel if so desired, is society, and the orderly administration of government have demanded
given opportunity to respond to the charge, present his evidence or rebut protection for public opinion. The inevitable and incontestable result has been
evidence presented against him/her; and written notice of termination served on the development and adoption of the doctrine of privilege. The doctrine of
the employee indicating that upon due consideration of all the circumstances, privileged communications rests upon public policy, though, as an incidental
grounds have been established to justify termination. The twin requirements of result, it may afford immunity to the evil-disposed and malignant slanderer.
notice and hearing constitute elements of due process in cases of employee’s Privilege is classified as either absolute or qualified. With the first, we are
dismissal. The requirement of notice is intended to inform the employee not concerned. As to qualified privilege, it is as the words suggest a prima facie
concerned of the employer’s intent to dismiss and the reason for the proposed privilege which may be lost by proof of malice. A communication made bona
dismissal. Upon the other hand, the requirement of hearing affords the employee fide upon any subject-matter in which the party communicating has an interest,
an opportunity to answer his employer’s charges against him and accordingly to or in reference to which has a duty, is privileged, if made to a person having a
defend himself therefrom before dismissal is effected. corresponding interest or duty, although it contained criminatory matter which
Clearly, the first notice must inform outright the employee that an without this privilege would be slanderous and actionable. The duty under
investigation will be conducted on the charges particularized therein, which, if which a party is privileged is sufficient if it is social or moral in its nature and
proven, will result to his dismissal. Such notice must not only contain a plain this person in good faith believes he is acting in pursuance thereof although in
statement of the charges of malfeasance or misfeasance but must categorically fact he is mistaken. The privilege is not defeated by the mere fact that the
state the effect on his employment if the charges are proven to be true. This communication is made in intemperate terms. A further element of the law of
notice will afford the employee an opportunity to avail all defenses and privilege concerns the person to whom the complaint should be made. The rule
exhaust all remedies to refute the allegations hurled against him for what is at is that if a party applies to the wrong person through some natural and honest
stake is his very life and limb his employment. Otherwise, the employee mistake as to the respective functions of various officials such unintentional error
may just disregard the notice as a warning without any disastrous consequence will not take the case out of the privilege.
to be anticipated. Absent such statement, the first notice falls short of the In the usual case malice can be presumed from defamatory words. Privilege
requirement of due process. It is worthy to note that the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC destroy that presumption. The onus of proving malice then lies on the plaintiff.
and the Court of Appeals all agree in concluding that procedural due process in The plaintiff must bring home to the defendant the existence of malice as the true
the instant case was not observed. It must be noted that the first notice was a motive of his conduct. Falsehood and the absence of probable cause will amount
mere instruction to explain the matters enumerated therein. It did not apprise Dr. to proof of malice. The ultimate test is that of bona fides.
Maquiling of any investigation to be conducted or being conducted that will
warrant his dismissal from service if found guilty of charges specified therein.

LUZ VS PEOPLE of the police power of the state (citations omitted). One limitation on the contract
The roadside questioning of a motorist detained pursuant to a routine traffic clause arises from the police power, the reason being that public welfare is
stop does not fall under custodial interrogation, nor can it be considered a formal superior to private rights (citation omitted). The situation here, is like that in
arrest, by virtue of the nature of questioning, the expectations of the motorist and eminent domain proceedings, where the state expropriates private property for
the officer, and the length of time the procedure is conducted. public use, and the only condition to be complied with is the payment of just
compensation. Technically, the condemnation proceedings do not impair the
BALDOZA VS DIMAANO contract to destroy its obligations, but merely appropriate or take for public use
The Constitution now expressly recognizes that the people are entitled to (citation omitted). As the Land Bank is obliged to settle the obligations secured
information on matters of public concern and thus are expressly granted access by the mortgage, the mortgagee is not left without any compensation.
to official records, as well as documents of official acts, or transactions, or
decisions, subject to such limitations imposed by law. The incorporation of this PEOPLE VS JUDGE AYSON
right in the Constitution is a recognition of the fundamental role of free exchange Section 20 of the 1987 constitution provides that the right against self-
of information in a democracy. Information is needed to enable the members of incrimination (only to witnesses other than accused, unless what is asked is
society to cope with the exigencies of the times. Maintaining the flow of such relating to a different crime charged- not present in case at bar).
information depends on protection for both its acquisition and its dissemination This is accorded to every person who gives evidence, whether voluntarily
since, if either process is interrupted, the flow inevitably ceases. The access to or under compulsion of subpoena, in any civil, criminal, or administrative
public records predicated on the right of the people to acquire information on proceeding. The right is not to "be compelled to be a witness against himself.” It
matters of public concern. Undoubtedly in a democracy, the public has a prescribes an "option of refusal to answer incriminating questions and not a
legitimate interest in matters of social and political significance. However, prohibition of inquiry." the right can be claimed only when the specific question,
restrictions on access to certain records may be imposed by law. Thus, access incriminatory in character, is actually put to the witness. It cannot be claimed at
restrictions imposed to control civil insurrection have been permitted upon a any other time. It does not give a witness the right to disregard a subpoena, to
showing of immediate and impending danger that renders ordinary means of decline to appear before the court at the time appointed, or to refuse to testify
control inadequate to maintain order. altogether. It is a right that a witness knows or should know. He must claim it
and could be waived.
SOCIAL SECURITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION VS CA The judge should admit the evidence in court as the accused was not under
Government employees may, therefore, through their unions or custodial investigation when his statements were taken. One cannot invoke
associations, either petition the Congress for the betterment of the terms and violation of the right to counsel in administrative proceeding. The right to self
conditions of employment which are within the ambit of legislation or negotiate incrimination and custodial investigation are accorded only when the accused is
with the appropriate government agencies for the improvement of those which subjected to custodial inquest which involves the questioning initiated by police
are not fixed by law. If there be any unresolved grievances, the dispute may be authorities after a person is taken in custody or deprived of his freedom in any
referred to the Public Sector Labor - Management Council for appropriate action. way. Because the statements were obtained beyond the purview of custodial
But employees in the civil service may not resort to strikes, walk-outs and other investigation the evidence should be admitted in court.
temporary work stoppages, like workers in the private sector, to pressure the Rights in custodial interrogation as laid down in miranda v. Arizona: the
Govemment to accede to their demands. As now provided under Sec. 4, Rule III rights of the accused include: he shall have the right to remain silent and to
of the Rules and Regulations to Govern the Exercise of the Right of Government- counsel, and to be informed of such right. nor force, violence, threat,
Employees to Self- Organization, which took effect after the instant dispute intimidation, or any other means which vitiates the free will shall be used against
arose, "[t]he terms and conditions of employment in the government, including him. any confession obtained in violation of these rights shall be inadmissible in
any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof and government- owned and evidence. He must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to
controlled corporations with original charters are governed by law and remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law,
employees therein shall not strike for the purpose of securing changes thereof." that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford
an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so
PNB VS REMIGIO desires. Opportunity to exercise those rights must be afforded to him
We are aware that a ruling that lands covered by P.D. No. 27 may not be the throughout the interrogation. After such warnings have been given, such
object of the foreclosure proceedings after the promulgation of said decree on opportunity afforded him, the individual may knowingly and intelligently waive
October 21, 1972, would concede that P.D. No. 27 had the effect of impairing the these rights and agree to answer or make a statement. But unless and until such
obligation of the duly executed mortgage contracts affecting said lands. There is warnings and waivers are demonstrated by the prosecution at the trial, no
no question, however, that the land reform program of the government as evidence obtained as a result of interrogation can be used against him.
accelerated under P.D. No. 27 and mandated by the Constitution itself (Art. XIV,
Sec. 12), was undertaken in the exercise of the police power of the state. It is PEOPLE VS BRAVO
settled in a long line of decisions of the Supreme Court that the Constitutional The mantle of protection under this constitutional provision covers the
guaranty of non-impairment of obligations of contract is limited by the exercise period from the time a person is taken into custody for investigation of his

possible participation in the commission of a crime or from the time he is singled As Section 9, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides: Sec.
out as a suspect in the commission of a crime although not yet in custody. Law 9. Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground therefor. — The failure of the
enforcement agencies are required to effectively communicate the rights of a accused to assert any ground of a motion to quash before he pleads to the
person under investigation and to insure that it is fully understood. Any measure complaint or information, either because he did not file a motion to quash or
short of this requirement is considered a denial of such right. . Any information failed to allege the same in said motion, shall be deemed a waiver of any
or admission given by a person while in custody which may appear harmless or objections except those based on the grounds provided for in paragraphs (a), (b),
innocuous at the time without the competent assistance of an independent (g) and (i) of Section 3 of this Rule.
counsel should be struck down as inadmissible. It has been held, however, that Police line-up is not part of the custodial investigation; hence, the right to
an admission made to news reporters or to a confidant of the accused is not counsel guaranteed by the Constitution cannot yet be invoked at this stage.
covered by the exclusionary rule. The right to be assisted by counsel attaches only during custodial
investigation and cannot be claimed by the accused during identification in a
GAMBOA VS CRUZ police line-up because it is not part of the custodial investigation process. This is
The right to counsel attaches upon the start of an investigation, i.e. when the because during a police line-up, the process has not yet shifted from the
investigating officer starts to ask questions to elicit information and/or investigatory to the accusatory and it is usually the witness or the complainant
confessions or admissions from the respondent/accused. At such point or stage, who is interrogated and who gives a statement in the course of the line-up.
the person being interrogated must be assisted by counsel to avoid the pernicious An exception to this rule is when the accused had been the focus of police
practice of extorting false or coerced admissions or confessions from the lips of attention at the start of the investigation. In the case at bench, appellant was
the person undergoing interrogation, for the commission of an offense. identified in a police line-up by prosecution witnesses from a group of persons
Any person under investigation must, among other things, be assisted by gathered for the purpose. However, there was no proof that appellant was
counsel. The provisions of the Constitution are clear. They leave no room for interrogated at all or that a statement or confession was extracted from him.
equivocation. Accordingly, in several cases, this Court has consistently held that During the police line-up, the accusatory process had not yet commenced.
no custodial investigation shall be conducted unless it be in the presence of Assuming there was interrogation, any allegation of violation of rights
counsel, engaged by the person arrested, or by any person in his behalf, or during custodial investigation is relevant and material only to cases in which an
appointed by the court upon petition either of the detainee himself, or by anyone extrajudicial admission or confession extracted from the accused becomes the
in his behalf, and that, while the right may be waived, the waiver shall not be basis of their conviction. Here, appellant was convicted based on the testimony of
valid unless made in writing and in the presence of counsel. a prosecution witness and not on his alleged uncounseled confession or
admission.
PEOPLE VS LARA REQUISITES OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE: Under Section 4, Rule
Any objections to the legality of the warrantless arrest should have been 133 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, circumstantial evidence sufficed
raised in a motion to quash duly filed before the accused enters his plea; to convict upon the concurrence of the following requisites: (a) there is more than
otherwise, it is deemed waived. one circumstance; (b) the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven;
Further, that the accused was illegally arrested is not a ground to set aside and (c) the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a
conviction duly arrived at and based on evidence that sufficiently establishes conviction beyond reasonable doubt. · It is not only by direct evidence that an
culpability: accused may be convicted of the crime for which he is charged. Resort to
Jurisdiction over the person of the accused may be acquired through circumstantial evidence is essential since to insist on direct testimony would, in
compulsory process such as a warrant of arrest or through his voluntary many cases, result in setting felons free and denying proper protection to the
appearance, such as when he surrenders to the police or to the court. community.
Any objection to the arrest or acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of
the accused must be made before he enters his plea, otherwise the objection is PEOPLE VS BANDULA
deemed waived. An accused submits to the jurisdiction of the trial court upon The right to counsel attaches upon the start of an investigation, i.e., when the
entering a plea and participating actively in the trial and this precludes him investigating officer starts to ask questions to elicit information and/or
invoking any irregularities that may have attended his arrest. In voluntarily confessions or admissions from respondent/accused. At such point or stage, the
submitting himself to the court by entering a plea, instead of filing a motion to person being interrogated must be assisted by counsel to avoid the pernicious
quash the information for lack of jurisdiction over his person, accused-appellant practice of extorting false or coerced admissions or confessions from the lips of
is deemed to have waived his right to assail the legality of his arrest. the person undergoing interrogation for the commission of the offense." Hence, if
Furthermore, the illegal arrest of an accused is not a sufficient ground to there is no counsel at the start of the custodial investigation, any statement
reverse and set aside a conviction that was arrived upon a complaint duly filed elicited from the accused is inadmissible in evidence against him. Custodial
and a trial conducted without error. The warrantless arrest, even if illegal, cannot investigation is the stage where the police investigation is no longer a general
render void all other proceedings including those leading to the conviction of the inquiry into an unsolved crime but has began to focus on a particular suspect
appellants and his co-accused, nor can the state be deprived of its right to convict who had been taken into custody by the police who carry out a process of
the guilty when all the facts on record point to their culpability. interrogation that lends itself to elicit incriminating statements. It is when

questions are initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken application for bail regardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses to
into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of
way. enabling the court to exercise its sound discretion (3) Decide whether the
The Constitution also requires that counsel be independent. Obviously, he evidence of guilt of the accused is strong based on the summary of evidence of
cannot be a special counsel, public or private prosecutor, counsel of the police, or the prosecution (4) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused
a municipal attorney whose interest is admittedly adverse to the accused. upon the approval of the bailbond. Otherwise, petition should be denied.
Granting that Atty. Zerna assisted accused Dionanao and Bandula when they Judge Clapis displayed gross ignorance of the law in his failure to hear and
executed their respective extrajudicial confessions, still their confessions are consider the evidence of the prosecution against the accused in the
inadmissible in evidence considering that Atty. Zerna does not qualify as an hearing for bail. Judges are reminded that they have a duty to maintain
independent counsel. As a legal officer of the municipality, he provides legal professional competence at all times in order to preserve the faith of the public in
assistance and support to the mayor and the municipality in carrying out the the courts. Any error committed in the performance of their judicial functions
delivery of basic services to the people, including the maintenance of peace and which is attributable to their unfamiliarity with the laws and established
order. It is thus seriously doubted whether he can effectively undertake the jurisprudence only serves to erode the confidence of the community in the ability
defense of the accused without running into conflict of interests. He is no better of the courts to dispense justice. The Court reiterates its statement inMutilan v.
than a fiscal or prosecutor who cannot represent the accused during custodial Adiong that "A judge owes the public and the court the duty to be proficient in
investigations. the law and is expected to keep abreast of laws and prevailing jurisprudence.
Ignorance of the law by a judge can easily be the mainspring of injustice.
ABERCA VS VER
The complaint in this litigation alleges facts showing with abundant clarity NARCISO VS CRUZ
and details, how plaintiffs' constitutional rights and liberties mentioned in Article "When the grant of bail is discretionary, the prosecution has the burden of
32 of the Civil Code were violated and impaired by defendants. The complaint showing that the evidence of guilt against the accused is strong. However, the
speaks of, among others, searches made without search warrants or based on determination of whether or not the evidence of guilt is strong, being a matter of
irregularly issued or substantially defective warrants; seizures and confiscation, judicial discretion, remains with the judge. ‘This discretion by the very nature of
without proper receipts, of cash and personal effects belonging to plaintiffs and things, may rightly be exercised only after the evidence is submitted to the court
other items of property which were not subversive and illegal nor covered by the at the hearing. Since the discretion is directed to the weight of the evidence and
search warrants; arrest and detention of plaintiffs without warrant or under since evidence cannot properly be weighed if not duly exhibited or produced
irregular, improper and illegal circumstances; detention of plaintiffs at several before the court, it is obvious that a proper exercise of judicial discretion requires
undisclosed places of 'safehouses" where they were kept incommunicado and that the evidence of guilt be submitted to the court, the petitioner having the
subjected to physical and psychological torture and other inhuman, degrading right of cross examination and to introduce his own evidence in rebuttal.’
and brutal treatment for the purpose of extracting incriminatory statements. The "Consequently, in the application for bail of a person charged with a capital
complaint contains a detailed recital of abuses perpetrated upon the plaintiffs offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, a hearing,
violative of their constitutional rights. whether summary or otherwise in the discretion of the court, must actually be
Secondly, neither can it be said that only those shown to have participated conducted to determine whether or not the evidence of guilt against the accused
"directly" should be held liable. Article 32 of the Civil Code encompasses within is strong. ‘A summary hearing means such brief and speedy method of receiving
the ambit of its provisions those directly, as well as indirectly, responsible for its and considering the evidence of guilt as is practicable and consistent with the
violation. purpose of hearing which is merely to determine the weight of evidence for the
The responsibility of the defendants, whether direct or indirect, is amply set purposes of bail. On such hearing, the court does not sit to try the merits or to
forth in the complaint. It is well established in our law and jurisprudence that a enter into any nice inquiry as to the weight that ought to be allowed to the
motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint states no cause of action evidence for or against the accused, nor will it speculate on the outcome of the
must be based on what appears on the face of the complaint. 6 To determine the trial or on what further evidence may be therein offered and admitted. The
sufficiency of the cause of action, only the facts alleged in the complaint, and no course of inquiry may be left to the discretion of the court which may confine
others, should be considered. 7 For this purpose, the motion to dismiss must itself to receiving such evidence as has reference to substantial matters, avoiding
hypothetically admit the truth of the facts alleged in the complaint. unnecessary thoroughness in the examination and cross examination.’ If a party
is denied the opportunity to be heard, there would be a violation of procedural
GACAD VS CLAPIS due process."
Nothing in the questioned Order reveals the participation of the prosecution
in the hearing for bail or the presentation of prosecution evidence. This is GOVERNMENT OF HONGKONG VS OLALIA
contrary to the requirements laid down in the case of Basco v. Rapatalo , where Bearing in mind the purpose of extradition proceedings, the premise behind
the Court outlined the duties of a trial judge in the event that an application for the issuance of the arrest warrant and the "temporary detention" is the possibility
bail is filed:Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail Or of flight of the potential extraditee. This is based on the assumption that such
require him to submit his recommendation; (2) Conduct a hearing of the extraditee is a fugitive from justice. Given the foregoing, the prospective

extraditee thus bears the onus probandi of showing that he or she is not a flight would have shattering repercussions. It would undeniably cast clouds of doubt
risk and should be granted bail. upon the institutional integrity of the Commission as a quasi-judicial agency, and
Section 2(a) of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1069 (The Philippine in the process, render it less effective in fulfilling its mandate as an impartial and
Extradition Law) defines "extradition" as "the removal of an accused from the objective dispenser of administrative justice. It is settled that a court or an
Philippines with the object of placing him at the disposal of foreign authorities to administrative tribunal must not only be actually impartial but must be seen to
enable the requesting state or government to hold him in connection with any be so, otherwise the general public would not have any trust and confidence in it.
criminal investigation directed against him or the execution of a penalty imposed
on him under the penal or criminal law of the requesting state or government." CITIZENSHIP
The Philippines, along with the other members of the family of nations,
committed to uphold the fundamental human rights as well as value the worth
and dignity of every person. Clearly, the right of a prospective extraditee to What is Citizenship?
apply for bail in this jurisdiction must be viewed in the light of the various treaty - Membership in a political community which is personal and more or less
obligations of the Philippines concerning respect for the promotion and permanent in character.
protection of human rights.
Under these treaties, the presumption lies in favor of human liberty. Thus, What is Nationality?
the Philippines should see to it that the right to liberty of every individual is not Membership in any class or form of political community. Does not include
impaired. Extradition is not a trial to determine the guilt or innocence of the right or privilege of exercising political and civil rights.
potential extraditee. Nor is it a full-blown civil action, but one that is merely
administrative in character. Its object is to prevent the escape of a person accused Nationals – democratic
or convicted of a crime and to secure his return to the state from which he fled, Subject – monarchical
for the purpose of trial or punishment. It does not necessarily mean that in
keeping with its treaty obligations, the Philippines should diminish a potential What are the Modes of Acquiring citizenship?
extraditees rights to life, liberty, and due process. More so, where these rights are 1. By Birth
guaranteed, not only by our Constitution, but also by international conventions, a. Jus sanguinis
to which the Philippines is a party. We should not, therefore, deprive an b. Jus Soli
extraditee of his right to apply for bail, provided that a certain standard for the 2. Naturalization
grant is satisfactorily met. In his Separate Opinion in Purganan, then Associate 3. Marriage
Justice Puno, proposed that a new standard which he termed "clear and Before adoption of 1935 Constitution
convincing evidence" should be used in granting bail in extradition cases.  Jus Sanguinis – all inhabitants who were Spanish subjects on Aprill 11, 1899,
According to him, this standard should be lower than proof beyond reasonable residing in the islands who did not declare intention of preserving Spanish
doubt but higher than preponderance of evidence. The potential extradite must nationality
prove by "clear and convincing evidence" that he is not a flight risk and will  Jus Soli – Res judicata
abide with all the orders and processes of the extradition court. In this case, there
is no showing that private respondent presented evidence to show tha the is not After Adoption of 1935 Constitution
a flight risk. Only jus sanguinis
POLLO VS CONSTANTINO DAVID Natural Born citizens – Those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without
Even conceding for a moment that there is no such administrative policy, having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine Citizenship. Those
there is no doubt in the mind of the Commission that the search of Pollo’s who elect Philippine Citizenship shall be deemed natural-born citizens. (Sec. 2, Art.
computer has successfully passed the test of reasonableness for warrantless IV)
searches in the workplace as enunciated in the above-discussed American
authorities. It bears emphasis that the Commission pursued the search in its Types of Natural Born Citizens:
capacity as a government employer and that it was undertaken in connection 1. Those without having to perform any act
with an investigation involving a work-related misconduct, one of the 2. Born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino Mothers who elect Phiippine
circumstances exempted from the warrant requirement. At the inception of the Citizenship
search, a complaint was received recounting that a certain division chief in the Marriage – Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship,
CSCRO No. IV was “lawyering” for parties having pending cases with the said unless by their act or omission they are deemed under the law, to have renounced it.
regional office or in the Commission. The nature of the imputation was serious, (Sec. 4. Art. IV)
as it was grievously disturbing. If, indeed, a CSC employee was found to be
furtively engaged in the practice of “lawyering” for parties with pending cases Dual Allegiance – Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and
before the Commission would be a highly repugnant scenario, then such a case shall be dealt with by law. (Sec. 5 Article IV)

- Not a self-executing provision CA 473

Attack on citizenship must be made through a direct and not collateral proceeding. Qualifications:
1. Not less than 21 years old on the date of the hearing of the petition
Res judicata does not ordinarily apply to questions of citizenship. Except: 2. Resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not less than 10 years.
1. Resolved by the court or administrative body as a material issue in the May be reduced to 5 if:
controversy after a full-blown hearing a. Honorably held office in the Government
2. Active participation of Sol-Gen or representative b. Established new industry or introduced new invention
3. Finding of citizenship is affirmed by the SC. c. Married to a Filipino woman
d. Been engaged as a teacher in the Philippines public or private not
Citizens of the Philippines established for particular nationality or race or any of the
1. Those citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1987 branches of education or industry for a period of not less than two
Constitution years
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines e. Good moral character, believes in the principle underlying the
3. Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers who elect Philippine Constitution, conducted himself in a proper and
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority irreproachable manner in relation with the government and
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. community
f. Own real estate worth not less than P5,000.00 or must have some
Naturalization known lucrative trade, profession or lawful occupation
- Act of Formally adopting a foreigner into the political body of a nation by clothing g. Speak and write English or Spanish and any of the principal
him with privileges of a citizen. Philippine languages
h. Enrolled minor children of school age in any public or private
A. Modes of Naturalization schools where phlippine history, government and civics are taight
1. Direct:
a. Individual through administrative proceedings Disqualifications
b. Special Act of legislature 1. Opposed to organized government or affiliated with those opposed
c. Collective nationality as a result of cession or subjugation 2. Defending or teaching necessity or propriety of violence, personal assault or
d. Adoption of orphan minors as nationals of the State where they assassination for the success or predominance of their ideas
are born 3. Polygamists or believers in polygamy
2. Derivative: 4. Convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude
a. Wife of naturalized husband 5. Suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious disease
b. Minor children of naturalized person 6. Not mingled socially with Filipinos, who have not envinced a sincere desire
c. Alien women upon marriage to Filipino to learn and embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipinos
7. Citizens or subjects or nations at war with Philippines, during such war
B. Doctrine of indelible Allegiance – individual is compelled to retain 8. Home country does not grant the same right to Filipinos to become
original nationality even if he has already renounced or forfeited it under naturalized
the laws of the state whose nationality he has acquired
Procedure
C. Direct Naturalization under Philippine Laws: 1. File a declaration of intention 1 year before petition.
1. Judicial (CA 473) Except:
2. Administrative (RA 9139) a. Born in Philippines AND received primary and secondary
3. Legislative education in public or private schools
b. Resided in the Philippines for 30 years or more before filing the
petition and enrolled children in elementary and high schools
De Guzman Manzano recognized by the Government
De Guzman is a dual citizen by virue of Manzano is a dual citizen by virtue of c. Widow and minor children of an alien who has declared his
RA 9225 on Naturalization the interplay of Jus Soli and Jus intention but dies before naturalization
Sanguinis 2. File petition.
Therefore de Guzman must perform a It is enough that MAnzano files his - Accompanied by affidavit of 2 credible, citizens of the Philippines who
separate act of renounciation by a C.O.C. personally know the petitioner as character witnesses.
Personal and Sworn Renounciation 3. Publication of Petition
a. Petition and Notice of hearing

b. Once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in the O.G. and in a - It is discretionary and usually conferred on an alien who has made outstanding
newspaper of general circulation in the province where the contributions to the country.
applicant resides
c. Copies posted in the office of Clerk of Court or in the building What is Administrative Naturalization?
where the same is located - It is a law granting Philippine Citizenship by administrative
d. Indicate names of witnesses proceedings to aliens BORN and RESIDING in the Philippines.
- Publication is a jurisdictional requirement. Non-compliance
whether it be the fault of the applicant or clerk of court is fatal. CA 473 RA 9139
- Contents of notice of hearing and petition must be complete, copied Judicial Administrative
verbatim. Incompleteness is no publication at all. Cognized by Courts Cognized by Special Committee on
4. Actual residence during proceedings Naturalization
5. Hearing of Petition Aliens of any class Native-born aliens who lived in the
6. Promulgation of decision Philippines all their lives
7. Hearing after two years proving: Lived in Philippines continuously for Lived in the Philippines all throughout
a. Applicant has not left the Philippines 10/5 years their lives
b. Dedicated himself continuously to a lawful calling or profession
c. Not convicted of any offense or violation of rules Intention of the legislature was to make the process of acquiring Philippine
d. Not committed an act prejudicial to the interest of the nation or Citizenship less tedious, less technical and more encouraging.
contrary to any Government announced policies
8. Oath taking and issuance of Certificate of Naturalization Nonetheless, native-born aliens have the choice to apply for judicial or administrative
naturalization.
What are the Effects of Naturalization?
1. Vests citizenship on wife if she may be lawfully naturalized What is the Special Committee on naturalization?
2. Minor children born IN the Philippines before naturalization are considered - It is the committee which has the power to approve, deny or reject applications for
citizens of the Philippines naturalization under RA 9139. It is composed of:
3. Minor child born OUTSIDE the Philippines who as RESIDING in the
Philippines at the time of naturalization is considered a Filipino Citizen
4. Minor child born OUTSIDE the Philippines before naturalization shall be
considered Filipino ONLY during minority unless he begins to reside Solicitor General
permanently in the Philippines
5. Child born OUTSIDE the Philippines after naturalization shall be (Chairman)
considered a Filipino provided that he registers as such before any
Philippine consulate within one year after attaining majority age and takes
his oath of allegiance.
Secretary of Foreign National Security
What are the grounds for denaturalization?
1. Naturalization certificate is obtained fraudulently or illegally Affairs or Adviser
2. If within 5 years, he returns to his native country or to some foreign country Representative
and establishes residence there. (Member) (member)
- 1 year stay in the native country, or 2 year stay in a foreign country
shall be prima facie evidence of intent to take up residence in the same Qualifications vis-a-vis CA 475
3. Invalid declaration of intent
4. Minor children failed to graduate through the fault of parent either by RA 9139 CA 473
neglecting to support or transferring them Born in the Philippines and residing since Need not be born here, resided
5. Allowed himself to be used as a dummy birth continuously for 10/5 years
What are the effects of denaturalization? Not less than 18 years of age at the time Not less than 21 years at the time of
1. If the ground affects the intrinsic validity of proceedings – divests wife and of FILING petition HEARING of the petition
children of their derivative naturalization Good moral Character, believes in Same
2. If personal to denaturalized – wife and children shall retain constitution, conducted himself in proper
and irreproachable manner in relation
When is there naturalization by direct legislative action?

with government and community 1. False statement or misrepresentation or any violation of law, rules and
Have received primary or secondary Same regulations in connection with the petition or if he obtains Philippine
education in any public or private citizenship fraudulently or illegally
institution which teaches history, 2. If within 5 years, he shall establish permanent residence in foreign
government and civics. As well as minor country.
childred - Remaining for 1 year in his country of origin or 2 years in any foreign
Known lucrative business, profession or Same country is prima facie evidence of intent to permanently reside therein
occupation 3. If allowed himself or his wife or child to be used as a dummy
Able to read, write and speak Filipino Able to read, write and speak English or 4. If he, wife, child, commits any act inimical to national security
AND any of the dialects of the Spanish and any principal Filipino
Philippines languages Loss and Reacquisition of Philippine Citizenship
Mingled with Filipinos and envinced a Same I. Loss of Citizenship
desire to learn and embrace the customs 1) Naturalization in foreign country.
and traditions and ideals of the Filipino - Take note of RA 9225 which declares that all Philippine citizens who
people become citizens of another country shall not be deemed to have
lost their Philippine Citizenship
Disqualifications - Natural-born citizens who lost citizenship may re-acquire citizenship
Same as CA 473
upon taking an oath of allegiance.
Procedure
1. File petition with Special Committee 2) Express renunciation of citizenship
2. Publication of pertinent portions of petition once a week for 3 consecutive - Must be expressly made
weeks in a newspaper of general circulation.
3. Copies posted in any public or conspicuous area 3) Subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution of a
4. Copies furnished to DFA, Bureau of Immigration and Deportation and Civil foreign country upon attaining the age of 21. Except when the Philippines is
registrar, NBI who shall post copies of petition in any public or conspicuous at war with that country. (Principle of indelible allegiance)
areas.
5. Within 30 days from posting, submit to Committee a report stating whether 4) Rendering service to or accepting commission in the armed forces of a
applicant has derogatory record on file or any information adverse to foreign country. Except:
petitioner’s application a. Philippines has a defensive or offensive pact of alliance with the
6. Within 60 days, committee shall review information and allow applicant to said foreign country; OR
explain, answer or refute the information b. Said foreign country maintains armed forces in Philippines with
7. Committee approves or denies the 0petition the consent of Philippines
8. Within 30 days, applicant shall pay P100,000 to committee
9. Applicant takes the oath of allegiance and a certificate of naturalization shall 5) Cancellation of certificate of naturalization
issue 6) Having been declared by competent authority as a deserter of the Armed
10. Within 5 days after the applicant has taken the oath, Bureau of Immigration forces in time of war.
shall forward a copy of the oath to the proper local civil registrar and
thereafter cancel the petitioner’s alien certificate of registration II. Reacquisition of Citizenship
1) Under RA 9225, by taking the oath of allegiance required of former
Status of Alien wife and Children natural-born citizens
- They may file a petition for cancellation of their alien certificates of 2) By naturalization provided the applicant does not possess any of the
registration with the Committee subject to payment of fees. disqualifications prescribed in naturalization
- But if the applicant is a married WOMAN, her husband does not benefit 3) By repatriation
from naturalization. But her minor children may still file a petition for
4) By direct act of the Congress
cancellation of their alien registration certificate.
Cancellation of Certificate of Naturalization Effect if Repatriation – allows the person to recover, or return to his original
Special Committee may cancel certificates of naturalization in the following cases: status before he lost his Philippine citizenship (Bengzon III v. House of
Representatives)

CASE DOCTRINES Filipino citizens regardless of whether such children are legitimate or
illegitimate.
MERCADO VS MANZANO Amicus curiae Joaquin G. Bernas, SJ, is most convincing; he questioned the
To begin with, dual citizenship is different from dual allegiance. Dual relevance of legitimacy or illegitimacy to elective public service. “What possible
citizenship arises when, as a result of the concurrent application of the different state interest can there be for disqualifying an illegitimate child from
laws of two or more states, a person is simultaneously considered a national by becoming a public officer. It was not the fault of the child that his parents had
the said states. It may arise when a person whose parents are citizens of a state illicit liaison. Why deprive the child of the fullness of political rights for no fault
which adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis is born in a state which follows of his own? To disqualify an illegitimate child from holding an important public
the doctrine of jus soli. Such a person, ipso facto and without any voluntary act office is to punish him for the indiscretion of his parents. If there is neither justice
on his part, is concurrently considered a citizen of both states. Considering the nor rationality in the distinction, then the distinction transgresses the equal
citizenship clause of our Constitution, it is possible for the following classes of protection clause and must be reprobated. When the Constitution says: “The
Filipino citizens to possess dual citizenship: (1) Those born of Filipino fathers following are citizens of the Philippines … ‘Those whose fathers are citizens of
and/or mothers in foreign countries which follow the principle of jus soli; (2) the Philippines’”, the Constitution means just that without invidious distinction.
Those born in the Philippines of Filipino mothers and alien fathers if by the laws Ubi lex non distinguit ne nos distinguere debemus, especially if the distinction
of their fathers’ country such children are citizens of that country; (3) Those who has no textual foundation in the Constitution, serves no state interest, and even
marry aliens if by the laws of the latter’s country the former are considered imposes an injustice on an innocent child. To hold that the illegitimate
citizens, unless by their act or omission they are deemed to have renounced child follows the citizenship of his Filipino mother but that an illegitimate child
Philippine citizenship. does not follow the citizenship of his Filipino father would be to make an
Dual allegiance, on the other hand, refers to the situation in which a person invidious discrimination.”
simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two or more states. While
dual citizenship is involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of an individual’s CO VS HRET
volition. The filing of sworn statement or formal declaration is a requirement for
To recapitulate, by declaring in his COC that he is a Filipino citizen; that he those who still have to elect citizenship. For those already Filipinos when the
is not a permanent resident or immigrant of another country; that he will defend time to elect came up, there are acts of deliberate choice which cannot be less
and support the Constitution of the Philippines and bear true faith and allegiance binding. Entering a profession open only to Filipinos, serving in public office
thereto and that he does so without mental reservation, Manzano has, as far as where citizenship is a qualification, voting during election time, running for
the laws of this country are concerned, effectively repudiated his American public office, and other categorical acts of similar nature are themselves formal
citizenship and anything which he may have said before as a dual citizen. manifestations of choice for these persons.
Manzano’s oath of allegiance to the Philippines, when considered with the fact
that he has spent his youth and adulthood, received his education, practiced his BENGZON III VS HRET
profession as an artist, and taken part in past elections in this country, leaves no Filipino citizens who have lost their citizenship may however reacquire the
doubt of his election of Philippine citizenship. same in the manner provided by law. Commonwealth Act. No. (C.A. No. 63),
enumerates the three modes by which Philippine citizenship may be reacquired
TECSON VS COMELEC by a former citizen: (1) by naturalization, (2) by repatriation, and (3) by direct act
Aristotle described the "citizen" to refer to a man who shared in the of Congress.
administration of justice and in the holding of an office. The concept of Repatriation may be had under various statutes by those who lost their
citizenship had undergone changes over the centuries. Civil citizenship in the citizenship due to: (1) desertion of the armed forces; services in the armed forces
1700s established the rights necessary for individual freedom. Political of the allied forces in World War II; (3) service in the Armed Forces of the United
citizenship in the 1800s encompassed the right to participate in the exercise of States at any other time, (4) marriage of a Filipino woman to an alien; and (5)
political power. Social citizenship in the 1900s laid emphasis on the right of the political economic necessity. Repatriation simply consists of the taking of an oath
citizen to economic well-being and social security. Today, an ongoing and final of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippine and registering said oath in the
stage of development, in keeping with the rapidly shrinking global village, might Local Civil Registry of the place where the person concerned resides or last
well be the internationalization of citizenship. The term "natural-born citizens," is resided. Moreover, repatriation results in the recovery of the original nationality.
defined to include "those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without This means that a naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship will be restored to
having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship." his prior status as a naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other hand, if he was
Having died in 1954 at 84 years old, FPJ’s grandfather Lorenzo Pou would originally a natural-born citizen before he lost his Philippine citizenship, he will
have been born under Spanish rule and would have benefited from the “en be restored to his former status as a natural-born Filipino.
masse Filipinization” that the Philippine Bill had effected in 1902. That
citizenship (of Lorenzo Pou), if acquired, would thereby extend to his son, Allan CORDORA VS COMELEC
F. Poe, father of FPJ. The 1935 Constitution, during which regime respondent The twin requirements of swearing to an Oath of Allegiance and executing a
FPJ has seen first light, confers citizenship to all persons whose fathers are Renunciation of Foreign Citizenship are for cases which involve natural-born

Filipinos who later became naturalized citizens oF another country and thereafter Congress or local legislative
ran for elective office in the Philippines. In the present case, Tambunting, a body for action
natural-born Filipino, did not subsequently become a naturalized citizen of Cannot be subject to both I and R:
another country. Hence, the twin requirements in R.A. No. 9225 (the Citizenship 1. Petition embracing more than one subject
Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003) do not apply to him. 2. Statutes involving emergency measures
DE GUZMAN VS COMELEC
For a natural born Filipino, who reacquired or retained his Philippine
citizenship under R.A. 9225, to run for public office, he must: (1) meet the Local Initiative:
qualifications for holding such public office as required by the Constitution and 1. Not less than 2,000 registered voters in case of autonomous regions
existing laws; and (2) make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all 2. Not less than 1,000 in case of provinces and cities
foreign citizenships before any public officer authorized to administer an oath. 3. 100 in municipalities
4. 50 in case of barangays
LABO VS COMELEC  File a petition with the Regional Assembly or local legislative body,
At the time petitioner Labo filed his petition on May 15, 1992, the May 9, respectively, proposing the adoption, enactment, repeal, or amendment of
1992 resolution of respondent Comelec cancelling his (Labo’s) certificate of any law, ordinance or resolution.
candidacy had already become final and executory a day earlier, or on May 14,
1992, said resolution having been received by petitioner Labo on the same day it Limitations
was promulgated, i.e., May 9, 1992 and in the interim no restraining order was 1. Shall not be exercised more than once a year
issued by this Court. 2. Shall extend only to subjects or matters which are within the legal powers of
The resolution cancelling Labo’s certificate of candidacy on the ground that the local legislative bodies to enact
he is not a Filipino citizen having acquired finality on May 14, 1992 constrains the 3. At any time, before initiative is held, the local legislative body shall adopt in
SC to rule against his proclamation as Mayor of Baguio City. toto the proposition presented.
Sec. 39 of the LGC provides that an elective local official must be a citizen of
the Philippines. Undoubtedly, petitioner Labo, not being a Filipino citizen, lacks Congress
the fundamental qualification for the contested office. Philippine citizenship is an - The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall
indispensable requirement for holding an elective office. The fact that he was consist of a senate and a house of representatives, except to the extent reserved to the
elected by the majority of the electorate is of no moment. people by the provision on initiative and referendum. (Section 1. Article VI)
 Shows a Bi-cameral Congress.

THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT Bi-Cameral Conference Committee – Compromises differences between
the senate and the HR. Members of which come from both houses. As such,
The Legislative Power it can go beyond the mandate of both houses. (Philippine Judges Assoc. Vs.
1. The Power to propose, enact, amend and repeal laws Prado)
2. Vested in the Congress, except to the extent reserved to the people by the
provision on initiative and referendum. House of Rep. Senate Party-List Nominees
Qualifications
“Reserved to the People” - is not a self-executing provision, but is a mandate by the Natural Born Citizen Natural Born Citizen Natural Born citizen
constitution.
At least 25 years old At least 35 years old At least 25 years old
 In this light, Congress has enacted RA 6735 which is limited only to Youth sector: cannot be
Initiatives on Statutes. (Defensor-Santiago vs. COMELEC) older than 30
Read and Write (except Read and Write
Initiative Referendum party list representative)
Propose amendments to Constitution or Power of the electorate to approve or Registered voter in the Registered Voter Bona fide member of
to propose and enact legislation through reject legislation through an election district in which he shall be the party or
an election called for the purpose called for the purpose elected organization which he
- Initiative on Statute - Referendum on Statutes seeks to represent for at
- Initiative on Local Legislation - Referendum on Local Laws least 90 days preceding
- Indirect initiative – exercise of the day of the election
initiative by the people Resident in the district for a Resident of the Philippines
through a proposition sent to period of not less than one for not less than 2 years

year preceding the day of the immediately preceding the

election day of the election. Veteran’s Federation vs.
Term COMELEC – NO
Three years commencing at Six years, commencing at 3 years ROUND-OFF
noon on the 30th day of June noon on the 30th day of  If will violate
next following their election June next following their 20% threshold.
elections
Limitation
Shall not serve for more than No senator shall serve for
3 consecutive terms. more than 2 consecutive  “unless otherwise provided by law” – taken in relation with Sec. 5 (4) Art.
terms. Voluntary VI on Reapportionment of Legislative districts. So strictly speaking, may be
renunciation of office for less may be more.
any length of time shall
not be considered as an  The creation of a new province by a Regional Assembly of ARMM is
interruption in the unconstitutional as it is not within its powers. Its power to create
continuity of his service government units extends only to Barangays and Municipalities. Only
for the full term for which congress has the power to create provinces., and consequently another
elected. position for a representative. (SEMA vs. COMELEC)
Requisites:
Composition 1. In accordance with the LGC
A. Senate 2. Plebiscite
- The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at the 3. Not contrary to the Constitution
large by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law. (Section 2.
Article VI) Apportionment of legislative districts
A justiciable question.
B. House of Representatives
- Not more than 250 members, unless otherwise provided by law consisting of: Apportionment shall be made in accordance with the number of respective
inhabitants, on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio:
District Representatives Party-list representatives Sectoral Representatives i. Each city with not less than 250,000 inhabitants shall be entitled to
Elected from legislative Shall constitute 20% of the (For 3 consecutive terms at least one representative
districts apportioned total number of after the ratification of the ii. Each province, irrespective or number of inhabitants is entitled to
among the provinces, representatives, elected Constitution) One hald of at least one representative
cities, and metropolitan through a party-list system the seats allocated to iii. Each legis. District shall comprise contiguous, compact and
Manila area of registered national, party-list representatives adjacent territory. To prevent Gerrymandering
regional, and sectoral shall be filled as provided
parties or organizations by law, by selection or  Gerrymandering- is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage
election from labor, for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundaries to
 20% of the total peasant, urban poor, create partisan, incumbent-protected districts.
number of indigenous cultural
representatives communities, women, The Party-list System (RA 7941)
– INCLUDING youth and such other A mechanism of proportional representation in the election of
THOSE UNDER sectors as may be representatives to the HR from national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations
THE PARTY provided by law. Except or coalitions thereof registered with the COMELEC.
LIST. the religious sector.
 So: Definition of Terms
District HR = 1. Party – either a political party or a sectoral party or a coalition of
200 parties
Party-List = 20 2. Political party – organized group of citizens advocating an ideology or
= 220 platform, principles and policies for the general conduct of
 220 x 20% = 44.1 government and which, as the most immediate means of securing their
 Simply put: 4:1

adoption, regularly nominates and supports certain of its leaders and b. Advocates violence or unlawful means to seek its goal
members as candidates for public office. c. Foreign party or organization
 National – constituency is spread over the geographical territory d. Receiving support from any foreign gov’t, foreign political party
of at least a majority of the regions whether directly or indirectly for partisan election purposes
 Regional – Its constituency is spread over the geographical e. Violates or fails to comply with election rules and regulations
territory of at least a majority of the cities and provinces f. Declares untruthful statements in its petition
comprising the region g. Ceased to exist for at least one year
 Sectoral – organized group of citizens belonging to any of the h. Fails to participate in the last two preceding elections or fails to
following sectors: obtain at least 2% of the votes cast under the party-list system in the
a. Labor two preceding elections for the constituency in which it has
b. Peasant registered.
c. Fisherfolk
d. Urban poor Nomination of party-list representatives
e. Indigenous cultural communities 1. Each party shall submit to COMELEC not later than 45 days before the
f. Elderly election
g. Handicapped 2. List of names, not less than 5 from which party-list representatives
h. Women shall be chosen in case it obtains the required number of votes.
i. Youth Limitations:
j. Veterans a. Person may be nominated in one list only
k. Overseas workers and professionals b. Consent of such person must be obtained
 Sectoral organization – group of citizens or a coalition of groups c. No candidate for elective office or a person who has lost his
of citizens who share similar physical attributes or characteristics, bid for an elective office
employment, interests or concerns d. No change allowed unless submitted to COMELEC except:
 Coalition – an aggrupation of duly registered national, regional, - Nominee dies
sectoral parties or organizations for political and/or election - Withdraws in writing his nomination
purposes. - Incapacitated
- In which case, the name of the substitute
 ANG BAGONG BAYANI vs. COMELEC – Party-list system is a borrowed nominee shall be replaced
concept from the Parliamentary form of government. It opens up our
political system to those not yet part of the system. It is a Social justice tool Manner of Voting
to give more law to those who have less in life. “SO that Justice may at least 1. Every voter entitled to two votes
be approximated.” i. Candidate for HR in his legislative district
ii. Vote for the party, organization or coalition he wants
Registration; Manifestation to Participate in the Party-List System represented in HR
- Any organized group of persons may register as a party, organization or coalition for Number
purposes of the party-list system by: - Party-list representatives shall constitute 20% of the total number of the members of
1. Filing a petition with the COMELEC HR including those under party-list.
2. Not later than 90 days before the election
3. Petition must be verified by its president or secretary stating its desire Procedure for allocating votes:
to participate in the party-list system as a national, regional or sectoral a. Parties, organizations and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to
party, organization or coalition the lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the
elections
 Any party already registered, need not register anew, but must file within b. Parties, organizations and coalitions receiving at least 2% of the total
90 days before the election a manifestation of its desire to participate in the votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one-seat each
party-list system.
- Provided that those garnering more than 2% of the votes shall be
entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes
Refusal and/or Cancellation
1. Motu proprio or upon verified complaint. - Provided further that each party, organization or coalitions shall
2. Refuse, cancel after due notice and hearing, the registration of any national, be entitled to not more than 3 seats.
regional or sectoral party on the ff. Grounds:
a. Religious sect/ denomination Four Inviolable parameters (Veterans Federation Party vs. COMELEC)

1) The 20% allocation – the combined number of all party-list congressmen shall 5. Party must not be an adjunct of an entity or project funded by the
not exceed 20% of the total membership of the HR (INCLUDING THE PARTY government
LIST) 6. Party and nominees must comply with the requirements of the law
7. Nominee must also represent a marginalized or under-represented sector
2) The 2% threshold – Only those parties garnering at least 2% of total valid 8. Nominee must be able to contribute to the formulation and enactment of
votes cast for the party-list system are qualified to have a seat in the house appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation
o Example: (Ang Bagong Bayani – OFW Labor Party vs. COMELEC)
 10M votes cast
 2% x 10M = 200k Choosing Party-list Representatives
 For every 200k = 1 seat - Proclaimed by the COMELEC based on the list of names submitted by the respective
 But only to the extent of 3 seats. parties, according to their raking
o What do you do with remaining seats: Effect of change of affiliation

COMELEC: Give it to unqualified, as is expected in a democratic Forfeit his seat. Provided that if changes political party or sectoral affiliation
society. within 6 months before an election, he shall not be eligible for nomination as party-list
SC: NO! The issue of democracy lies with congress, not with representative under his new party or organization.
COMELEC.
The 20 % allocation is merely a ceiling, not mandatory. Vacancy
Shall be automatically filled by the next representative from the list of
3) The 3-seat limit – each qualified party, regardless of the number of votes it nominees in the order submitted to the COMELEC by the same party who shall serve
actually obtained, is entitled to a maximum of 3 seats the unexpired term. If list is exhausted, the party shall submit additional nominees.
- 1 qualifying
Election
- 2 additional
1. Regular
o To avoid one party-list getting all the seats 2. Special – elected member shall serve only for the unexpired portion of
the term
4) Proportional representation – Additional seats which a qualified party is
Salaries
entitled to shall be computed in “proportion to their total number of votes”
1. Determined by law
o Formula for additional seats= 2. No increase until after the expiration of the full term of all member of
Congress.
Votes cast for Qualified Party x Alloted seats for
First P
Privileges
Votes cast for First Party
1. Freedom from arrest
- In all offenses punishable by not more that 6 years imprisonment
 2nd ANG BAGONG BAYANI CASE vs. COMELEC - While Congress is in Session
Issue: What do you do with the votes cast for the unqualified party, are the
VALID or STRAY VOTES? Under the RPC- VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY
HELD: STRAY VOTES. - Penalty of Prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
1. RA 7941 expressly provides that votes cast for an Unqualified Party shall use force, intimidation, threats or fraud to prevent any member
shall NOT be counted. of National Assembly from attending the meetings of the Assembly or
2. The Labo Doctrine is not applicable on disenfranchisement is not of any of its committees... from expressing his opinions or casting his
applicable because the doctrine involves SINGLE elective positions. vote.
- Penalty of Prision correccional shall be imposed upon any public
Guidelines for entitlement of seats officer or employee who shall, while the Assembly is in regular or
1. Represent marginalized and under-represented sectors special session:
2. Major political parties must comply with this statutory policy a. Arrest or search any member thereof except:
3. Party must be subject to the express constitutional prohibition against - Such member has committed a crime punished by a penalty higher
religious sects than prision mayor. (6 years and 1 day to 12 years)
o Religious denominations cannot be registered as a political party.  To reconcile, it must be “a penalty of prision mayor or Higher”
But, a religious individual may run in an elective position.
4. Party must not be disqualified under RA 7491 2. Freedom of Speech and Debate

No member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any Sessions
speech or debate in the congress or in any committee thereof.
 Any other place – Even in Courts Regular Special
Once a year on the 4th Monday of Called by the President at any time,
 But if delivered in the Senate or HR, he may be subject to Disciplinary July, unless a different date is fixed usually to consider legislative
actions. (Osmena vs. Pendaton) by law, and shall continue for such measures which the president may
number of days as it may determine designate in his call
until 30 days before the opening of
 Member of Congress may be held to account for such speech or debate by its next regular session, exclusive of
the HR to which it belongs Saturdays, Sundays and legal
Holidays.
Disqualifications
1. Incompatible Office
“ No Senator or Member of the HR may hold any other office or Joint Sessions
employment in the Government or any subdivision, agency, or
instrumentality thereof including GOCC or their subsidiaries during his Voting Separately Voting Jointly
term without forfeiting his seat.” 1. Choosing the president Revoke or extend proclamation
 Forfeiture of the seat shall be automatic 2. Determine President’s disability suspending the privilege of the Writ of
 Except when member holds office in ex-officio capacity. 3. Confirming nomination of the Habeas Corpus or placing the
2. Forbidden Office VP Philippines under martial Law
“Neither shall he be appointed to any office which may have been created 4. Declaring the existence of state of
or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was war
elected.” 5. Proposing constitutional
 The ban shall last only for the duration of the term for which the amendments
member of Congress was elected.
Incompatible Seat Forbidden Office Adjournment

Member of Congress may be validly Even if he is willing to forfeit his Neither House during the sessions of Congress shall, without the consent of
appointed to an incompatible office. office, he may NOT be appointed. the other adjourn for more than 3 days, nor to any other place than that in which the 2
But if he accepts, he automatically Houses shall be Sitting.
forfeits his seat.
Officers
Other Inhibitions 1. Senate President
1. Cannot appear as counsel before any: 2. Speaker of the House
a. Court of justice  Majority vote of all its respective members
b. Electoral Tribunal  Each house shall choose such other officers as it may deem necessary
c. Quasi-judicial or administrative Bodies
2. Directly or Indirectly be interested financially in any: Quorum
a. Contract Majority of each House, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day
b. Franchise and may compel the attendance of absent members in such manner and under such
c. Privilege Granted by the Government, during his term of office penalties as such House may determine.
 He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of  The basis in determining the existence of a quorum in the Senate shall be the
the Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he total number of senators who are in the country and within the coercive
may be called upon to act on account of his office. jurisdiction of the Senate.
 What is prohibited is PERSONALLY appearing as counsel
 Upon assumption of Office, must make a full disclosure of Discipline of members
financial and business interest. House may punish members for disorderly behaviour.
 Notify the house of any potential conflict of interest that Suspend a member with concurrence of 2/3 of all its members for not more
may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of than 60 days or expel a member.
which they are authors.  Grounds for disorderly behaviour is a Political question.

Records and books of account  HRET may assume jurisdiction only after the winning candidate
Preserved and open to the public in accordance with law. shall have been duly proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed
Audited by COA which shall publish annually an itemized list of amounts functions of office
paid to and expenses incurred for each member.  Decision of HRET reviewable by Certiorari under Rule 65
Legislative journal and Congressional Record 2. Commission on Appointments

Matters which, under the constitution are to be entered into the journal 25 Members
1. Yeas and nays on 3rd and final reading of a bill Composition
2. Veto message of the President - Senate president – ex officio Chairman
3. Yeas and Nays on the repassing of a bill vetoed by the President - 12 senators
4. Yeas and Nays on any question at the request of 1/5 of members present - 12 members of HR
 Only LEGISLATIVE COMPONENTS
 These will prevail over enrolled Bill  A tool for CHECKS and BALANCES
 Elected by each house on the basis or proportional
Enrolled Bill Theory representation from the political parties registered under the
1. Duly introduced and finally passed by both Houses party-list system represented therein.
2. Authenticated by the proper officers of each  Chairman shall not vote except in case of a tie
3. Approved by the President
 Conclusive upon the courts as regards tenor of measure passed by Powers
Congress and approved by the President.  Act on all appointments submitted to it within 30 days of
 No nee d to look into whether the bill was duly or regularly enacted, Congress from their submission.
by virtue of Separation of Powers.  Commission shall rule by a majority vote of its members
 Court is bound under the doctrine of Sep. Of powers by the contents  Shall meet only while congress is in session at the call of
of a duly authenticated measure of the legislature chairman or a majority of all its members
 Enrolled Bill prevails over Journal Entry, except to matters which,  The COA is independent of the two Houses of Congress. Its
under the Constitution are required to be entered in the Journal- employees are not technically employees of Congress.
such as those enumerated above. (Arroyo vs. De Venecia)  Has the power to promulgate its own rules and regulations
Congressional Record – Each House shall also keep a Record of its
proceedings. Powers of Congress
I. General Legislative Power – power to propose, enact, amend and repeal laws.
Bodies Attached to Congress Limitations
1. Electoral Tribunals a) Substantive
Two Electoral Tribunals, SET and HRET – 9 members each b) Express
Composition  Bill of Rights
- 3 SC justices – designated by the Chief Justice ( Judicial  On Taxation
Component)  Constitutional appellate jurisdiction of the SC
- 6 members of House concerned- chosen on the basis of  No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be passé
proportional representation from political parties c) Implied
registered under the party-list system represented
 Non-delegation of powers
therein. (Legislative Component)
 Prohibition against passage of irrepealable laws.
- Senior justice – Chairman
d) Procedural
 HRET is a non partisan-court – independent of Congress and - Only one subject to be expressed in the title thereof
devoid of partisan influence and consideration.
 Disloyalty to the party and breach of party discipline are not  Liberal Interpretation on Titles- Need not be an Index, otherwise a
valid grounds for expulsion Kilometric Title will result.
 Members of HRET enjoy security of tenure  Purpose of Titles:
o Prevents Riders
Power
o Prevents Hodge podge or Log Rolling
Sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns and
qualifications of their respective members. o Apprise People of Subject of Legislation

b. Send Back to original House with Objections

Three readings on separate days – except when President certifies to its
immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency  Veto is Overriden by vote of 2/3 of all its Members.
 Doctrine of Inappropriate Provision
Legislative Process  Concerns General Appropriation Bill
A. Requirements as to bills  This is a result of vetoing an appropriate provision otherwise, the
1. Only one subject to be expressed in the title thereof doctrine applies.
2. The following shall always originate from HR:  Such vetoed Inappropriate provision does not affect those which the
a. Appropriation President does not veto or object to. Such provision then becomes
b. Revenue/ Tariff Bills an “ITEM”
c. Bills authorizing increase of public debt  President fails to act upon the Bill 30 days from receipt
d. Bills of local application  The Bill automatically becomes a Law
e. Private Bills  There is no Pocket Veto
 Pocket Veto- Available in American Government where the
 Tolentiono vs. Secretary of Finance – Senate has the power to President does not act and congress adjourns, in which case the bill
concur with amendments. Even Amendments by substitution. Only does not become a law.
the BILL must originate from the HR.
II. Power of Appropriation
B. Three Readings  The power of the purse belongs to congress, subject only to the veto power of
- No Bill shall become a law unless it has passed 3 readings on separate days the president.
and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its  Power of appropriation carries with it the power to specify the project or
members 3 days before its passage. Except when president certifies to its activity to be funded under the appropriation law. It can be as broad as
immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency. Congress wants it to be.
Bi-Cameral Conference Committee A. Need for appropriation

 Results may go beyond its mandate. - No money shall be paid out of the Treasure except in pursuance of an
 From the Bi-Cameral Committee, send the bill back to Both appropriation made by law.
Houses. B. Appropriation Law
 No need to undergo 3 readings - Statute, the primary and specific purpose of which is to authorize the
 Subject to votation release of public funds from the Treasury
If Yeas Prevail C. Classification
o Signed by: Senate President and Speaker of the House a. General Appropriation Law – Passed annually to provide for the
o Certified and Transmitted to the President which then becomes financial operations of the entire government during one fiscal
an enrolled bill period
If Nays Prevail b. Special appropriation law – designed for a specific purpose
o Bill is not Killed D. Implied limitations on appropriation measures
o Another Bi-cameral Committee is convened to come up with the a. Devoted to Public Purpose
version applicable to Both Houses b. Sum must be determinate or at least determinable
E. Constitutional limitations on Special Appropriation measures
C. Approval of Bills a. Specify public purpose
Bill becomes a law in any of the following cases: b. Supported by funds actually available as certified by National
a. President approves and signs the Bill Treasurer
b. President Vetoes the Bill F. Constitutional Rules on General Appropriations Law
a. Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by the
Two Kinds of Veto President
a. General Veto b. The form, content and manner of preparation of the budget shall be
b. Line Veto – line veto or partial veto is invalid. It is allowed only for prescribed by law
particular items in an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill. (Bengzon c. No provision or enactment shall be embraced unless it relates
vs. Drilon) specifically to some particular appropriation
Effects of Veto d. Strictly follow the procedure for approving appropriations for other
a. Does not Become a Law departments and agencies

e. Prohibition against transfer of appropriation 3. Legislative Supervision

f. Prohibition against appropriation for sectarian benefit Scrutinize exercise of delegated law-making and permits the congress to
g. Automatic appropriation retain such power.
G. Impoundment – refusal by the president for whatever reason to spend
funds made available by congress. Failure to spend or obligate budget Excercised through:
authority of any type. Legislative Veto – the legislature can block or modify
administrative action taken under a statute. May be negative or
II. Power of Taxation affirmative. Subject to serious questions involving the principle
Limitations of separation of powers.
1. Uniform and equitable. Progressive system of Taxation.
2. Charitable institutions etc. All lands, buildings ADE used for religious, Power to Punish contempt - may include imprisonment, for the
charitable, or educational purposes exempt from taxation duration of the session. Senate being a continuing body, may
3. All revenues, assets on non-stock, non-profit educational institutions order imprisonment for an indefinite period. But always
used ADE for educational purposes exempt from taxes and duties consider due process.
4. Law granting tax exemption shall be passed only with the concurrence
of the majority of all the members of congress. Cannot be pardoned – by virtue of separation of powers
III. Congressional Oversight Power 4. War Powers

1. Legislative Scrutiny Vote of 2/3 of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting separately,
a. Budget Hearing may declare existence of a state of war.
b. Question Hour
5. Board of Canvassers in election of President
 Heads of department may upon their own initiative, with the consent of the Congress may validly delegate the initial determination of the authenticity
President or upon request of either House, appear before and be heard by and due execution of the certificates of canvass to a joint Congressional
such House on any matter pertaining to their departments. Committee composed of The HR and of the Senate.
o Own initiative – Borrowed from the Parliamentary form of Government 6. Power to call special election for President and Vice president
 Executive Officers or Cabinet Members may validly refuse to appear if 7. Power to judge President’s physical fitness to discharge the functions of
called without the consent of the president. This is not Mandatory. the presidency
Confirmation of Appointments - Nomination made by the President in the 8. Power to revoke or extend suspension of the privilege of the Writ of
event of a vacancy in the office of VP, from among the members of Congress Habeas Corpus or declaration of martial law
confirmed by a majority vote of all the members of both houses of Congress,
separately. 9. Power to concur in presidential amnesties. Concurrence of majority of all
the members of congress.
2. Power of Legislative investigation.
 Congress may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, in accordance with 10. Power to concur in treaties or international agreements. Concurrence of at
duly published rules of procedure. least 2/3 of all the members of the Senate
 Rights of persons appearing therein or affected by such inquiry shall be
respected.
 You cannot expect congress to enact good laws if you deny it the power
to investigate.
 Even if this is not found in the Constitution, the power still exists as it is
Inherent (Arnault vs. Nazareno)
Limitations:
a. In aid of legislation
b. In accordance with duly published rules of procedure
c. Rights of persons appearing in or affected by such, inquiry shall
be respected

11. Power of Impeachment Tolosa, and public announcement to represent the 1st District in Congress after
she returned from US exile and almost three years before the 1995 elections,
12. Power relative to natural resources showed her decision to re-establish her domicile there (domicilium voluntarium
or domicile of choice), satisfying the minimum residency requirement.
13. Power to propose amendments to the Constitution
BANAT VS COMELEC
Section 5(1), Article VI of the Constitution states that the “House of
Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty
members, unless otherwise fixed by law.” The House of Representatives shall be
composed of district representatives and party-list representatives. The
CASE DOCTRINES Constitution allows the legislature to modify the number of the members of the
House of Representatives.
TOBIAS VS ABALOS Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution, on the other hand, states the ratio
The SC upheld the validity of RA 7675. Contrary to petitioners' assertion, of party-list representatives to the total number of representatives. We compute
the creation of a separate congressional district for Mandaluyong is not a subject the number of seats available to party-list representatives from the number of
separate and distinct from the subject of its conversion into a highly urbanized legislative districts. On this point, we do not deviate from the first formula in
city but is a natural and logical consequence of its conversion into a highly Veterans, thus:
urbanized city. Verily, the title of R.A. No. 7675, "An Act Converting the No. Of seats available to party-list representatives = [No. Of seats available
Municipality of Mandaluyong Into a Highly Urbanized City of Mandaluyong" to legislative districts / 0.80] x .20
necessarily includes and contemplates the subject treated under Section 49 This formula allows for the corresponding increase in the number of seats
regarding the creation of a separate congressional district for Mandaluyong. As available for party-list representatives whenever a legislative district is created
to thecontention that the assailed law violates the present limit on the number of by law. Since the 14th Congress of the Philippines has 220 district
representatives as set forth in the Constitution, a reading of the applicable representatives, there are 55 seats available to party-list representatives.
provision, Article VI, Section 5(1), as aforequoted, shows that the present limit of Neither the Constitution nor R.A.7941 mandates the filling-up of the entire
250 members is not absolute. The Constitution clearly provides that the House of 20% allocation of party-list representatives found in the Constitution. The
Representatives shall be composed of not more than 250 members, "unless Constitution, in paragraph 1, Section 5 of Article VI, left the determination of the
otherwise provided by law." The inescapable import of the latter clause is that number of the members of the House of Representatives to Congress: “The
the present composition of Congress may be increased, if Congress itself so House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and
mandates through a legislative enactment. Therefore, the increase in fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, x x x.”
congressional representation mandated by R.A. No. 7675 is not unconstitutional. After prescribing the ratio of the number of party-list representatives to the
total number of representatives, the Constitution left the manner of allocating the
MARCOS VS COMELEC seats available to party-list representatives to the wisdom of the legislature.
Residence – where one stays at the moment; involves the intent to leave The 20% allocation of party-list representatives is merely a ceiling; party-list
when the purpose for which the resident has taken up his abode ends. representatives cannot be more than 20% of the members of the House of
Domicile – where one stays permanently characterized by actual residence Representatives.
or physical presence at one point, with animus manendi (intent to stay if The Constitution left to Congress the determination of the manner of
present) or animus revertendi (intent to return if absent). allocating the seats for party-list representatives. Congress enacted R.A. 7941,
It is the fact of residence, not a statement in a certificate of candidacy which paragraphs (a) and (b) of Section 11 and Section 12 of which provide:
ought to be decisive in determining whether or not an individual has satisfied Section 11. Number of Party-List Representatives. — x x x In determining
the constitution’s residency requirement. the allocation of seats for the second vote, the following procedure shall be
Her marriage to Ferdinand Marcos did not necessarily result in the loss of observed: (a) The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the
that domicile in favor of a new one since (1) a woman follows only the actual highest to the lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the
residence of her husband and not his domicile and (2) as a rule, change of elections. (b) The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two
domicile is proved only by the concurrence of three elements, (1) actual removal percent (2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to
from original domicile, (2) intent to abandon domicile, and (3) acts effecting that one seat each: Provided, That those garnering more than two percent (2%) of the
intent. IMR may have practically left Leyte, but the animus revertendi remained votes shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of
as evinced by her celebrating her birthdays, fiestas and important milestones in votes: Provided, finally, That each party, organization, or coalition shall be
Tacloban and Tolosa, and her careful cultivation of a political base in that district, entitled to not more than three (3) seats.
thereby negating the last two requirements. Assuming but not conceding that she The Court determined that only 17 party-list candidates received at least 2%
lost her domicile when, by her acts she proved her intent to follow her husband’s from the total number of votes cast for party-list candidates (total votes cast for
domicile, her act of writing the PCGG for the recovery of her “ancestral” house in the party list = 15, 950,900). The 17 qualified party-list candidates, or the two-

percenters, are the party-list candidates that are “entitled to one seat each,” or the are filled up. The three-seat cap, as a limitation to the number of seats that a
guaranteed seat. In this first round of seat allocation, we distributed 17 qualified party-list organization may occupy, remains a valid statutory device
guaranteed seats. The second clause of Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 7941 provides that prevents any party from dominating the party-list elections. Seats for party-
that “those garnering more than two percent (2%) of the votes shall be entitled to list representatives shall thus be allocated in accordance with the procedure.
additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes.” This is where The Constitutional Commission adopted a multi-party system that allowed
petitioners’ problem with the formula in Veterans lies. Veterans interprets the all political parties to participate in the party-list elections. They wanted to open
clause “in proportion to their total number of votes” to be in proportion to the up the system, and would like very much for the sectors to be there. That is why
votes of the first party. This interpretation is contrary to the express language of they put a ceiling on the number of representatives from any single party that
R.A. No. 7941.This Court finds that the 2% threshold makes it mathematically can sit within the 50[55] allocated under the party list system.
impossible to achieve the maximum number of available party list seats when the Neither the Constitution nor R.A. No. 7941 prohibits major political parties
number of available party list seats exceeds 50. The continued operation of the from participating in the party-list system. On the contrary, the framers of the
two percent threshold in the distribution of the additional seats frustrates the Constitution clearly intended the major political parties to participate in party-
attainment of the permissive ceiling that 20% of the members of the House of list elections through their sectoral wings.
Representatives shall consist of party-list representatives. In defining a “party” that participates in party-list elections as either “a
In determining the allocation of seats for party-list representatives under political party or a sectoral party,” R.A. 7941 also clearly intended that major
Section 11 of R.A. No. 7941, the following procedure shall be observed:1. The political parties will participate in the party-list elections. Excluding the major
parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to the political parties in party-list elections is manifestly against the Constitution, the
lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections intent of the Constitutional Commission, and R.A. No. 7941.
2. The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least two percent (2%) of This Court cannot engage in socio-political engineering and judicially
the total votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one guaranteed legislate the exclusion of major political parties from the party-list elections in
seat each 3. Those garnering sufficient number of votes, according to the ranking patent violation of the Constitution and the law.
in paragraph 1, shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total Read together, R.A. No. 7941 and the deliberations of the Constitutional
number of votes until all the additional seats are allocated 4. Each party, Commission state that major political parties are allowed to establish, or form
organization, or coalition shall be entitled to not more than three (3) seats. coalitions with, sectoral organizations for electoral or political purposes.
In computing the additional seats, the guaranteed seats shall no longer be
included because they have already been allocated, at one seat each, to every NACHURA, Separate Opinion:
two-percenter. Thus, the remaining available seats for allocation as “additional To provide the mechanics for the implementation of the party-list system,
seats” are the maximum seats reserved under the Party List System less the Congress enacted R.A. No. 7941, Section 11 of which sets, among others, the
guaranteed seats. inviolable parameter that a party, sectoral organization or coalition, must obtain
Fractional seats are disregarded in the absence of a provision in R.A. No. at least two percent (2%) of the total votes cast for the party-list system in order
7941 allowing for a rounding off of fractional seats. to claim one seat in the House of Representatives. This is referred to as the
Total no. Of votes cast for the Party-list = 15, 950,900 threshold vote, or the minimum vote requirement. Here lies the crux of its
Total no. Of Seats allocated for Party list representatives = 55 (ISSUE 1) unconstitutionality. Given this fixed 2% threshold vote, the maximum
No. Of seats guaranteed to those who met the 2% threshold (FIRST ROUND) = number of seats in the House of Representatives which may be occupied by
17 party-list representatives can never exceed fifty (50) because [100% / 2% = 50].
No. Of seats available for SECOND ROUND = 38 [55-17=38] In other words, there will never be a situation where the number of party-list
1. Get the percentage of votes garnered by each party-list candidate is arrived at representatives will exceed 50, regardless of the number of district
by dividing the no. of votes garnered by each party by the total no. of votes cast representatives. By virtue of the rigid 2% threshold requirement, the number of
for party-list candidates [hereinafter PERCENTAGE]. seats that the political parties, organizations or coalitions registered under the
Votes garnered by the party x total no. of votes cast = PERCENTAGE (%) party-list system could ever aspire for would still be limited to only 50 even if
2. Multiply the PERCENTAGE by the remaining available seats, which is 38 to 100 [400 district seats x 80%] party-list seats are available. Accordingly, this
get the party’s share in the remaining additional seats. stigmatizes the 2% minimum vote requirement in R.A. 7941. A legal provision
% x 38 = party’s ADDITIONAL seat that poses an insurmountable barrier to the full implementation and realization
(The whole integer, i.e. if product is 2.79, the whole integer is 2, is the additional of the constitutional provision on the party-list system should be declared void.
share of the party. DO NOT ROUND UP.) Even if the 20% allocation is not required to be filled up, and R.A. 7941,
3. Assign one party-list seat to each of the parties next in rank until all available enacted by Congress for the precise purpose of implementing the constitutional
seats are completely distributed. provision, contains a condition that places the constitutional ceiling completely
4. Finally, apply the 3-seat cap to determine the number of seats each qualified beyond reach, totally impossible of realization, then we must strike down the
party-list candidate is entitled. offending condition as an affront to the fundamental law. [He then presents a
In the May 2007 Elections, the Court applied the said formula which formula which I DO NOT get but which effectively lowers the threshold to
resulted in 36 winning party-list organizations and ALL the 55 party-list seats 1%]. This 1%, is the more logical and equitable formula. It would

judiciously respond to the inevitable changes in the composition of the House of nation.
Representatives; it would open opportunities for the broadest people’s
representation in the House of Representatives; and more importantly, it would ATONG PAGLAUM VS COMELEC
not violate the Constitution. The 1987 Constitution provides the basis for the party-list system of
representation. Simply put, the party-list system is intended to democratize
ANG BAGONG BAYANI VS COEMELEC political power by giving political parties that cannot win in legislative district
The SC ruled that both under the Constitution and RA 7941 (The Party-List elections a chance to win seats in the House of Representatives. The voter elects
Law), political parties can participate in the party-list elections. two representatives in the House of Representatives: one for his or her legislative
The Constitution provides in Art. VI., Sec. 5, that the members of the House district, and another for his or her party-list group or organization of choice.
of Representatives may “be elected through a party-list system of registered The phrase "marginalized and underrepresented" should refer only to the
national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations.” RA 7941 expressly sectors in Section 5 that are, by their nature, economically "marginalized and
defines a party as “either a political or sectoral party or a coalition of parties.” underrepresented." These sectors are: labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor,
The SC declared that though political parties can participate in the party-list indigenous cultural communities, handicapped, veterans, overseas workers, and
elections, not any political party can do so. other similar sectors. For these sectors, a majority of the members of the sectoral
The Constitution states, “For three consecutive years after the ratification of party must belong to the "marginalized and underrepresented." The nominees of
this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list the sectoral party either must belong to the sector, or must have a track record of
representatives shall be filled as provided by law, by selection or election from advocacy for the sector represented. Belonging to the "marginalized and
the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, underrepresented" sector does not mean one must "wallow in poverty,
youth and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious destitution or infirmity." It is sufficient that one, or his or her sector, is below the
sector.” middle class. More specifically, the economically "marginalized and
Congress enacted RA 7941 because it deemed that the said provision was underrepresented" are those who fall in the low income group as classified by the
not self-executory considering that the section contained the phrases “in National Statistical Coordination Board. The recognition that national and
accordance with law” and “as may be provided by law. RA 7941 declared as its regional parties, as well as sectoral parties of professionals, the elderly, women
policy that the party-list system should “enable Filipino citizens belonging to and the youth, need not be "marginalized and underrepresented" will allow
marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties, and who small ideology-based and cause-oriented parties who lack "welldefined political
lack well-defined political constituencies but who could contribute to the constituencies" a chance to win seats in the House of Representatives. On the
formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation other hand, limiting to the "marginalized and underrepresented" the sectoral
as a whole to become members of the House of Representatives.” parties for labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
The SC concluded that under this law, the party-list representative must be communities, handicapped, veterans, overseas workers, and other sectors that by
Filipino citizens 1. who belong to marginalized and underrepresented sectors, their nature are economically at the margins of society, will give the
organizations and parties, and 2. who lack well defined constituencies. The SC "marginalized and underrepresented" an opportunity to likewise win seats in the
further said that it is not enough for the candidate to claim representation of the House of Representatives.
marginalized and underrepresented because representation is easy to claim.
The party-list organization must factually and truly represent the marginalized
and underrepresented constituencies. LIGOT VS MATHAY
Guidelines in selection and approval of party-list applicants: It is self-evident that the "rate of pay as provided by law" for members of
1. The party must represent marginalized and under-represented Congress retiring on December 30, 1969 such as petitioner must necessarily be
sectors. P7,200.00 per annum, the compensation they received "as provided by law" and
2. Major political parties must comply with this statutory policy. the Constitution during their term of office, since the increase could be operative
3. Religious sects are expressly prohibited by the Constitution from only from December 30, 1969 for incoming members of Congress.
participating in the party-list The herein claimant-retiree was unable to receive the increased salary of
system P32,000.00 per annum for Members of Congress precisely because of the
4. The party must not be an adjunct of an entity funded by the ,constitutional ban. To allow him now to collect such amount in the guise of
government. retirement gratuity defies logic. Nor does it stand to reason that while he could
5. The party and nominees must comply with the requirements of the not legally receive such rate as salary while still in the service, he would now be
law. allowed to enjoy it thereafter by virtue of his retirement."
6. The nominee must also represent a marginalized or under-
represented sector. SAMPAYAN VS DAZA
7. The party must not be disqualified under RA 7941. The SC voted to dismiss the petition. First, the case is already moot and
8. The nominee must be able to contribute to the formulation and academic for it is evident from the manifestation filed by petitioners dated April
enactment of the appropriate legislation that will benefit the 6, 1992 that they seek to unseat respondent from his position as Congressman for

the duration of his term of office commencing June 30, 1987 and ending June 30, CoA for the first group of appointments and leaving with the President,
1992. Secondly, jurisdiction of this case rightfully pertains to the House Electoral without such confirmation, the appointment of the other officers.
Tribunal. Under Section 17 of Article VI of the 1987 Constitution, it is the House
Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the PHILIPPINE JUDGES ASSOCIATION VS PRADO
election, returns and qualification of its members. Since petitioners challenge the The title of the bill is not required to be an index to the body of the act, or to
qualifications of Congressman Daza, the appropriate remedy should have been be as comprehensive as to cover every single detail of the measure. It has been
to file a petition to cancel respondent Daza's certificate of candidacy before the held that if the title fairly indicates the general subject, and reasonably covers all
election or a quo warranto case with the House Electoral Tribunal within ten [10] the provisions of the act, and is not calculated to mislead the legislature or the
days after Daza's proclamation. Third, a writ of prohibition can no longer be people, there is sufficient compliance with the constitutional requirement. In the
issued against respondent since his term has already expired. A writ or case at bar, the repealing clause which includes the withdrawal of franking
prohibition is not intended to provide for acts already consummated. Fourth, as a privileges is merely the effect and not the subject of the statute; and it is the
de facto public officer, respondent cannot be made to reimburse funds disbursed subject, not the effect of a law, which is required to be briefly expressed in its
during his term of office because his acts are as valid as those of a de jure officer. title.
Moreover, as a de facto officer, he is entitled to emoluments for actual services While a conference committee is the mechanism for compromising
rendered. differences between the Senate and the House, it is not limited in its jurisdiction
to this question. It may propose an entirely new provision. The court also added
SARMIENTO VS MISON that said the bill in question was duly approved by the Senate and the House of
The President shall nominate and, with the consent of the CoA, appoint the Representatives. It was enrolled with its certification by Senate President and
heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and Speaker of the House of Representatives. It was then presented to and approved
consuls, or officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, by President the President. Under the doctrine of separation powers, the Court
and other officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution. He may not inquire beyond the certification of the approval of a bill from the
shall also appoint all otherwise provided for by law, and those whom he may be presiding officers of Congress. An enrolled bill is conclusive upon the Judiciary.
authorized by law to appoint. The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment The court therefore declined to look into the petitioners' charges. Both the
of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in the other courts, or in the enrolled bill and the legislative journals certify that the measure was duly
heads of the departments, agencies, commissions or boards. enacted. The court is bound by such official assurances from a coordinate
The President shall have the power to make appointments during the recess department of the government.
of the Congress, whether voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall
be effective only until disapproval by the CoA or until the next adjournment of COMELEC VS JUDGE PADILLA
the Congress. No rule of law is better settled than that mandamus does not lie to enforce
It is readily apparent that under the aforesaid provision of the Constitution, the performance of contractual obligations. There are other adequate remedies in
there are 4 groups or officers whom the President shall appoint, which are: law. Moreover, worth stressing is the judicial caution that mandamus applies as
1. The heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public a remedy only where petitioner's right is founded clearly in law and not when it
ministers and consuls, officers of the armed forces from the rank of is doubtful. The alleged contract, relied upon by Photokina as source of its rights
colonel or naval captain, and other officers whose appointments are which it seeks to be protected, is being disputed, not only on the ground that it
vested in him in the Constitution; was not perfected but also because it is illegal and against public policy.
2. All other officers of the Government whose appointments are not
otherwise provided for by law; BENGZON VS SENATE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE
3. Those whom the President may be authorized by law to appoint; In cases of conflict, the judicial department is the only constitutional organ
4. Officers lower in rank (note: under the 1935 Constitution, it is inferior which can be called upon to determine the proper allocation of powers between
officers) whose appointments the Congress may by law vest in the the several departments and among the integral or constituents units. The
President alone. separation of powers is a fundamental principle in our system of government. It
The first group of officers is clearly appointed with the consent of the CoA. obtains not through express provision but by actual division in our constitution.
Their appointments are initiated by nomination and, if the nomination is Each department of the government has exclusive cognizance of matters within
confirmed by the CoA, the President appoints. (Under the 1935 Constitution, its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own sphere. But it does nto follow from
almost all the presidential appointments required a confirmation. While in the the fact that the three powers are to be kept separate and distinct that the
1973 Constitution, consistent with the authoritarian pattern in which it was constitution intended them to be absolutely unrestrained and independent of
molded the absolute power of appointment in the Presidents with hardly any each other.
check on the part of the legislature.) Given the two extremes, one in the 1935 On the second issue, no; the power of both houses to conduct inquiries us
Constitution and another in the 1973 Constitution, the framers of the 1987 not absolute or unlimited, its exercise is circumscribed by the provision of the
Constitution struck a “middle ground” by requiring the confirmation of the constitution that the investigation must be in aid of legislation in accordance with
the rules of the congress and that the rights of the person under investigation

must be respected. The speech of Enrile clearly manifests that the there is no
proposed legislation in light of the senate investigation on the matter; in fact, the
sole reason for such investigation was to “investigate on the possible violations
of RA 3019”. This the senate cannot do for it has no jurisdiction on investigating,
for the purpose of determining criminal liability, violations of penal laws.
In the case of Arnault vs. Nazareno, the court rules that the inquiry must be
material or necessary to the exercise of a power vested by the constitution, such
as the power to legislate or expel a member. The power of congress to conduct
investigations is inherent in the legislative process; that power is broad. But
broad as it is, there is no general authority to expose the private affairs of
individuals without justification in terms of functions of congress. Since congress
can investigate only those areas which it may potentially legislate or appropriate,
it cannot inquire into matters which are within the exclusive province of the
other branches of the government.
PALPARAN VS HRET
It is for the HRET to interpret the meaning of this particular qualification of
a nominee□the need for him or her to be a bona fide member or a representative
of his party-list organization□in the context of the facts that characterize
petitioners Abayon and Palparan□s relation to Aangat Tayo and
Bantay,respectively, and the marginalized and underrepresented interests that
they presumably embody. Petitioners Abayon and Palparan of course point out
that the authority to determine the qualifications of a party-list nominee belongs
to the party or organization that nominated him. This is true, initially. The right
to examine the fitness of aspiring nominees and, eventually, to choose five from
among them after all belongs to the party or organization that nominates them.
But where an allegation is made that the party or organization had chosen and
allowed a disqualified nominee to become its party-list representative in the
lower House and enjoy the secured tenure that goes with the position, the
resolution of the dispute is taken out of its hand.
Parenthetically, although the Party-List System Act does not so state, the
COMELEC seems to believe,when it resolved the challenge to petitioner Abayon,
that it has the power to do so as an incident of its authority to approve the
registration of party-list organizations. But the Court need not resolve this
question since it is not raised here and has not been argued by the parties. What
is inevitable is that Section 17, Article VI of the Constitution provides that the
HRET shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to, among other things, the
qualifications of the members of the House of Representatives. Since, as pointed
out above, party-list nominees are "elected members" of the House of
Representatives no less than the district representatives are, the HRET has
jurisdiction to hear and pass upon their qualifications. By analogy with the cases
of district representatives, once the party or organization of the party-list
nominee has been proclaimed and the nominee has taken his oath and assumed
office as member of the House of Representatives, the COMELEC s jurisdiction □
over election contests relating to his qualifications ends and the HRET□s own
jurisdiction begins.

Nachura and Case Doctrines (Midterms)

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Nachura and Case Doctrines (Midterms)

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Political Law Review SBCA AY 2013-2014 Commissioner Sarmiento

GENERAL PRINCIPLES document scattered in various sources. Such as:

SCOPE Enacted (Conventional) Evolved (Cumulative)

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 1

 Sandoval: Not a Self-executing provision- Requires an Implementing Law.

d. Constitutional Commission (Note that there is no mention of a

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 2

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 3

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 4

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 5

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 6

 Archipelago, which consists of a number of islands separated by Functions

b) Ministrant- discretionary, intended to promote the welfare,

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 7

exercising a limited degree of power over

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 8

 Damnum Absque Injuria may be a lawful defense (Mun. Of La Union

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 9

CABANAS VS PILAPIL PERALTA VS DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 10

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 11

US VS RUIZ PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO VS GRP PEACE PANEL ON

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 12

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 13

B. POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN Who Exercises power of Eminent Domain?

Police Power Eminent Domain

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 14

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 15

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 16

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 17

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 18

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 19

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 20

independent of each other. The Constitution has provided for an elaborate

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 21

ARANETA VS DINGLASAN KURODA VS JALANDONI

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 22

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 23

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 24

The privilege of equal access to opportunities to public office may be

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 25

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 26

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 27

Properties subject to seizure Warrantless Searches

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 28

Exclusionary rule: Evidence obtained in violation of Sec. 2, Article III

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 29

Free Exercise Clause IX. Non-Impairment Clause

Limitations Miranda Doctrine

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 30

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 31

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 32

f. To have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 33

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 34

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 35

SY VS ANDOK'S LITSON CORPORATION ANG TIBAY VS CHR

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 36

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 37

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 38

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 39

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 40

THE MONMON COMMISSION Catalla. Precion. Sta.Maria. Triños-Peralta 41