Sunteți pe pagina 1din 9

VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF.

CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO


MORALES)

A. POWERS OF THE GOVERNMENT


1. Police power
● President’s ​declaration of martial law​ is an exercise of legislative power​.​ ​(Lagman v.
Medialdea​, GR No. 231658, 4 July 2017)
● Authority to exclude or include an undesirable alien within the country is lodged with the
President.
· Power ​to deport aliens​ is an act of state (​Rosas v. Montor,​ GR No. 204105, 14 October
2015)
· Act of state​ è
i. is an act done by or under the authority of the sovereign power.
ii. The act of a delegate of a state ​is a political question​.

● Examples of exercise of police power:


· Billboard regulations​ (Churchill v. Rafferty, GR No. L-10572, 21 December 1915)
i. Rationale: general welfare clause
ii. Unsightly advertisements or signs, or signboards or billboards which are
offensive to the sight are not disassociated from the general welfare of the
public.
iii. Aesthetics can be regulated by the police power of the state, as long as it is
justified by public interest and safety.
· But, note that in​ DPWH v. City Advertising Ventures​ (GR No. 182944 dated 9
November 2016) which involves the putting down of advertisements considered as
obstructions to certain infrastructure by DPWH, it was held that police power cannot
be exercised to the detriment of contractual rights.

2. Eminent domain
● Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Bataan v. Garcia ​(GR No. 174964, 5 October 2016): Even if a
property is registered under a private person’s name, if the land is actually a property of the
government, there can be no property subject to eminent domain
· Character and value of the property will be assessed ​at the time of taking​.
i. Plans​ to convert the land from agricultural to residential or commercial made
even before the time of taking is immaterial in assessing the value of the
property.
· Taking​ contemplates transfer of full beneficial rights
· Reverse eminent domain / inverse condemnation proceeding​ - the private owner, not
the expropriator, initiate the eminent domain proceeding
· Two phases of eminent domain:
ii. Condemnation stage​ – whereby eminent domain court determines if there is
need to expropriate the property
iii. Just compensation stage​ – determination of compensation to the private
party/owner; exclusively a judicial prerogative
1. To peg just compensation as the minimum of assessed value or
market value is unconstitutional.
2. Note that the Land Bank of the Philippines has preliminary authority to
determining just compensation. The agrarian reform court, however,
is not necessarily bound to take the Land Bank determination.
3. If the property taken becomes obsolete, or rendered without public
use, the expropriation case does not necessarily become moot or
terminated. It will be used in determining whether damages were
sustained to the property, and the corresponding compensation
therefor.
· Expropriation can be based on a specific authorization to expropriate such as ​by law​.
This is considered a political matter.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 1 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

3. Taxation
· Double taxation -
i. The power to tax includes power to destroy but this only true ​if used as an
implement of police power​.
· Exemptions in constitution
ii. Art XIV, Section 4: Subject to conditions prescribed by law, all grants,
endowments, donations, or contributions used ACTUALLY, DIRECTLY, and
EXCLUSIVELY for educational purposes shall be exempt from tax.
iii. Art VI, Section 28:
1. The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress
shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.
2. The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within
specified limits, and subject to such limitations and restrictions as it
may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and
wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of
the national development program of the Government.
3. Charitable institutions, churches and personages or convents
appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and all lands,
buildings, and improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used
for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall be exempt
from taxation.
4. No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the
concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress.
· On religious / charitable / educational purposes - if ​actually, directly, and exclusively
used (ADE) - exempt from realty taxes
iv. Note: It is the ​nature of the use​ of the property which determines the purpose
v. Thus, if income and lease rental are plowed back for educational purposes,
Article XIV, Section 4 applies (i.e., non-taxable income)

· Vote required for tax exemption: ​Absolute majority​ of all members of the Congress
(Article VI, Section 28(4)).
vi. Vote required for repeal of tax exemption: two opinions:
1. absolute majority also
2. simple majority vote (rationale: strictissimi juris principle)

B. BILL OF RIGHTS

4. Searches and Seizures; determination of probable cause; in flagrante


· ​Cojuangco v. People ​– the preliminary investigation was done by PCGG; PI was
invalid, but the invalidity of the PI was later validated by determination of judge
· Any effort to quash a search warrant should be filed before the issuing court having
jurisdiction over the place / area of search.
i. Exception: if there is a compelling reason to do otherwise.
ii. Note: RTC Manila / QC can issue warrants re: illegal drugs, possession that
can be applicable in the whole country
· One warrant one offense rule
iii. It is acceptable to have one offense, but multiple accounts in one warrant
· A warrant must not be general​. If it is so, it is invalid, unconstitutional, and must be
quashed.

·​ Question: Do you need probable cause in warrantless searches and seizures?


Answer: Yes, the probable cause is the warrantless arrest itself.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 2 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

· Case: There was a buy bust operation. Person to be apprehended went inside a shanty
area, and inside a particular house. In that house was the owner of the house who
was smoking marijuana. Police apprehended both the pusher and the owner of the
house.
Held: Proper, with in flagrante delicto as reason.

· Case: Police officer riding a motorcycle at 30kph. He witnessed an actual drug


transaction.
Held: Not in flagrante, as it is impossible to witness such transaction given his
speed.

· Two cases of in flagrante delicto in drugs cases:


viii. Buy bust
ix. Drugs in transit

· How far should the apprehending officer be from the culprit to justify warrantless arrest?
x. 5 m away - OK
xi. 10 m away - OK
xii. 50 m away - one SC decision held that this can be, provided that the bag was
transparent.
xiii. Basic question: ​Is it practicable for the officer to know?

· Case​: If problem uses the words “peeked” / “peeped”


xiv. Held: Invalid arrest or search. This is not even justified under plain
view doctrine.

· Case: Officer is 20 meters away from the house subject of a seizure. Thereat was a
hut/bahay-kubo wherein there was a marijuana.
xv. Held: Area 20 m. away is not part of the searchable area.
xvi. However, adjacent house can be considered as a searchable area.

· Case: Search warrant includes only firearms. Drugs were also found in the area.
xvii. Held: Seizure of drugs is valid under the plain view doctrine. Drugs are
illegal.

· ​Three (3) elements of plain view doctrine​:


xviii. Lawful intrusion in the area
xix. Inadvertence (thus, opening of a cabinet or kneeling down to look at floor
under the bed, not being inadvertent, do not fall under the plain view doctrine)
xx. Thing seized is subject to seizure because the thing is illegal per se

· Case: There was a tip that Aling Rosa was carrying drugs in her bayong. Meanwhile,
Aling Rosa travelled, and alighted the bus. Thereafter, she was waiting for a tricycle
when the police stopped her and searched inside her bayong.
xxi. Held: Invalid warrantless arrest and seizure. There was no buy bust; no
drugs in transit (since Aling Rosa already alighted the bus).

· Case: Luz v. People (GR No. 197788, 29 February 2012). Luz was flagged down by a
police officer because he was riding a motorcycle without a helmet. A bodily search
was then conducted. Drugs and paraphernalia were seen.
xxii. Held: invalid search. Traffic violation does not give rise to a valid search and
seizure of drugs.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 3 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

· Case: Homar v. People (GR No. 182534, 2 Sep 2015). Homar was apprehended for
jaywalking. Shabu was confiscated from him. He was arrested. Police says there
was lawful search incident to a lawful warrantless arrest.
xxiii. Held: Seized items were inadmissible. The waiver of an illegal warrantless
arrest does not also mean a waiver of the inadmissibility of evidence seized
during an illegal warrantless arrest.

· Rule: if there is no seasonable objection to the search warrant, there is an implied


waiver. This is a procedural rule.
xxiv. However, if the issue is the ​absence of knowledge of probable cause​, the
arrest can never be valid because this is an issue involving a constitutional
right.

5. Privacy of communication and correspondence


· Ople v. Torres ​(GR No. 127685, 23 July 1998)
i. There is no law authorizing issuance of executive orders. Thus, the ID system
at that time was unconstitutional.
· KMU Director General v. NEDA​ (GR No. 167798, 19 April 2006)
ii. Issuance of an ID system within the executive branch is within the competence
of the Executive to streamline processes

· There is no violation of right to privacy if search was ​done by private citizens​.


iii. People v. Marti (1991) involving a proprietor of a courier company​ à
admissible
iv. Search by guidance counselor​ à chain of custody rule is not applicable
v. Search by port authorities​ à violation of right to privacy since port officials are
agents of the government
vi. Miguel v. People (GR 227038, 31 July 2017) involving Bantay-bayan​ à
violated right to privacy. Rules of unlawful search and seizure will apply.

· Concept of reduced expectation of privacy


vii. One can claim right to privacy but it is not absolute. One must always invoke
reasonable expectations of privacy.
6. Due Process
The right to due process depends on the kind of power being exercised by the body
· If quasi-legislative (rule-making power): ​publication of the rules (official gazette
or newspaper of general circulation) + filing 3 certified true copies with UPLC
i. Quasi-legislative: Order issued applies to all of the same kind
ii.​ Consumer Foundation​ case: regulatory power of DEPED to fix
tuition fees. Order was issued allowing all private schools to
increase fees as long as not exceeding 15%. This is
quasi-legislative.
·​ If quasi-judicial: notice and hearing
iii. Quasi-judicial: Order applies only to one entity
iv.PhilComSat case, Vigan Electric Company case: This is
quasi-judicial.
v. ​What is notice and hearing?
a. GR: Not a trial type hearing, but a mere
opportunity to be heard (ex: submission of
pleadings)
b. Exception: If it is a civil service case (ex: illegal
dismissal, disciplinary cases) and discipline of
local elective officials, this needs formal
investigation which is in the nature of trial.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 4 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

c. Is ombudsman required to conduct formal


investigation? NO. Apply general rule.
i. What must administrative decision contain for it to be valid? Facts
and law on which decision was based.
§ Basic Principles (ONLY UNDER QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS):
o Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies: Before seeking judicial remedy
before the court, exhaust all admin remedies ONLY if such remedies are
required by law.
· Effect: Vulnerable to dismissal for lack of cause of action.

Example: PNP officer charged administratively before NAPOLCOLM who


convicted him. What is his remedy? First, elevate it to Secretary of DILG,
which affirmed decision. This may be appealed to Civil Service.

o Doctrine of primary jurisdiction:


· Suspend judicial proceedings and order parties to bring the issue to
administrative body expert on said issue.
· These are usually technical issues.

Levels of scrutiny for substantive due process:


i. Strict
1. There is compelling state interest.
2. Reasonable relationship between measure and governmental
objective
3. Measure is least intrusive
ii. Heightened or immediate
1. There is governmental objective, and also compelling state interest to
justify measure.
iii. Rational basis
1. All that need is needed to be shown is that there is a legitimate
governmental objective reasonably linked with measure.

7. Freedom of expression
Clear and present danger rule​ è test used to determine limitations on the freedom of
speech.
· Low-value expressions​ (express incitement, false statements of facts, obscenity, fighting
words) are subject to ​prior restraint​.

· Content-based regulation - based on the substance of the speech subject to strict test
scrutiny
· Content-neutral regulation - without regard to the substance.

· Models of freedom of expression


i. Deliberative democracy
ii. Self-expression
iii. Marker for group identity
iv. Free marketplace of ideas
v. Measure of majoritarian rule
vi. Safety valve theory (to provide ventilation of dissatisfaction)

· Case: 1-Utak v. COMELEC (GR No. 206020, 14 April 2015); involves the
vii. Prohibition of Comelec for PUVs to display campaign materials
viii. Prohibition upon transportation terminals

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 5 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

ix. Held: PUVs are still privately owned so preventing them to express their
favored candidates is not warranted (prior restraint).

8. Rights during custodial investigation


Custodial investigation​ - Any questioning by law enforcement officers after a person has been
taken into custody.
· Two basic principles:
i. Must not be a general inquiry
ii. There must be restraint upon his liberty.
· Case: A bank manager was accused of misappropriation of bank funds.
· Held: His sworn statement during the bank’s internal investigation is admissible because
the measure only lies against the government.

· Case: Press interviews; accused was behind bars when he was interviewed by the
press
iii. Held: OK; interview not under custodial investigation
iv. XPN: if police officer is present during the interview, to the point that the
presence was coercing or intimidating, the same can be covered by custodial
investigation.

C. LEGISLATIVE POWER
9. Legislative power
· Power to make, amend, repeal laws
· Exercised by the Congress except those reserved to the people by way of initiative and
referendum
· Cases: Abakada Guro v. Partylist; Macalintal v. COMELEC, Belgica v. Executive
Secretary
i. If law has been passed, execution is with the executive
ii. BUT always be mindful of the facts è spot the actual function/s in the
enumeration which is/are proscribed.

· Three reasons / rationale re: non-encroachment of the executive function by the


legislative
iii. It interferes with the enforcement of the law
iv. Every amendment of the rule would be amendment of the law.
v. SC has the power to nullify administrative issuances.

· Case: Araullo v. Aquino (GR 209287, 3 January 2015)


vi. Held:
1. Concept of savings – certified to be existing by the national treasury
vii. No cross border transfers
viii. Transfer should be for augmenting existing items of appropriation.

· Three classes oversight functions


ix. Legislative scrutiny
x. Legislative investigation (Section 21) inherent
1. In aid of legislation
a. Legislative investigations cannot be invoked for fishing of
evidence for a criminal proceeding
2. Duly published rules of procedure (note: congress is not a continuing
body so every congress needs to publish rules)
a. Publication
b. Promulgation è to make known
xi. Note: Rules of impeachment requires promulgation.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 6 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

D. CITIZENSHIP
10. Rules on citizenship
· Bengzon v. HRET: A Filipino who takes the oath of allegiance under RA 9225
re-acquires his original citizenship and does not merely become naturalized.
iii. Cases:
1. Lost citizenship before 2003 - when they take the oath of allegiance,
they only reacquire their citizenship. The law is prospective in
application
2. After 2003 - considered retained (i.e., never to have lost of citizenship)
a. Case: In 2005, one became a US Citizen. In 2007, he takes
oath.
b. Held: his offspring born in 2006 is considered a Filipino
(retroacts)

· Note that citizenship and residence are different concepts.


iv. One’s oath of renunciation, thereby terminating his naturalized Canadian
status, does not make him ipso facto abandon his residence.

E. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
11. Administrative law
§ Treatment of aliens:
o Deportation
o Expulsion: ambassadors, consuls, diplomatic officials
o Extradition
· 2 states involved: requesting state and requested state (state of refuge)
· Governed by extradition treaty. But requesting state is not precluded from
requesting in the absence of treaty. In that case, however, it is not a
matter of right.
· Is the offense committed within the list of offense in treaty? (doctrine of
specialty)
a. What offense cannot be extradited? Political and religious
offenses are not extraditable.
i. What if assassinated the president but motive is political?
YES, this is an exception.
· If not within the list provided in the treaty, extradition also covers all other
offenses covered by double criminality, which states that offense subject
of extradition must be punishable by both states.
b. Muñoz case.
o Refugee ​[CANDELARIA’S FAVE]​: Non-refoulement principle (nonreturn of alien
to his/her country) (Basis is UN Convention on Refugees)
· 3 elements of refugee:
c. Outside territory of state (beyond the territorial sea)
d. Lack of protection from government
e. His/her government is the one persecuting him/her
· What if he has not left the territory of his country yet? He is not a refugee,
but an internationally displaced person
§ 2 generations international human rights law
o 1​st gen: Subject matter is political and civil rights. Language of law used is
negative (bill of rights). To enforce political rights, government does not need to
appropriate funds for implementation.
o 2​nd gen: Subject matter is socioeconomic rights (right to education, health, labor).
Language of law is positive. Appropriation is a must to implement.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 7 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

F. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE


12. Local government
· Validity of ordinances
o Requisites: Must comply with due process (Sec. 1 of Bill of Rights) and equal
protection of the law.
§ Due process: Publication + Posting – If barangay, posting alone suffices.
o This is subordinate legislation. An ordinance cannot amend a statute.
· Power of LGU to resolve boundary disputes.
o Jurisdiction (Sec. 118):
§ If between barangays from same municipality, Sangguniang Bayan has
jurisdiction.
§ If between barangays from difference municipality, Joint Sangguniang
Bayan.
§ If between two municipalities of same province, Sangguniang Panlalawigan
has jurisdiction.
§ If between two municipalities of different provinces, joint sangguniang
panlalawigan.
§ If between independent component city and municipality of same province?
Law is silent. Apply BP 129, RTC has original jurisdiction.
o Procedure
§ Amicable settlement to be conducted by whoever has jurisdiction.
§ If this fails, call for formal hearing. Output is decision.
§ Decision may be appealed to RTC.
§ Antique v. Calabocal case
· Boundary dispute between mun. of Mindoro and mun. of Antique.
· If a party is not amenable to amicable settlement and formal
hearing, SC held that RTC correctly exercised ORIGINAL
jurisdiction.
· Power of eminent domain.
o First question to ask: Who is the expropriator? Is this national or local?
§ If local, there must be valid and definite offer to buy property before filing
expropriation case. They must also enact expropriation ordinance, not
just mere resolution.
· No valid offer if property offered to be bought is different from
property subject to expropriation case (Jesus is Lord case)
· As long as there is a valid complaint and as long as there is 15%
deposit made by LGU, absence of offer will not make the
expropriation case invalid (Cordova case).
· How to reconcile: If no mention of deposit, apply Jesus is Lord
Case. If there is a deposit involved, apply Cordova case.
· Doctrine of Condonation
o This is applicable only to elected officials.
o This is applicable only to administrative cases (Jalosjos case).
o There must be two terms of that elected official (prior and subsequent term)
§ Boundary between prior and subsequent terms, there must be an election
where the office who committed the offense was re-elected.
§ Administrative offense must have been committed in the prior term.
Otherwise, doctrine will not apply.
§ Administrative case is now deemed forgiven.
o What is the legal basis of this doctrine? American jurisprudence from 1959.
o This is otherwise known as Aguinaldo Doctrine.
o ABANDONED IN THE BINAY CASE. Applicable only to cases ​FILED AFTER
BINAY CASE even if decided after it ​[BERBANABE PONENCIA].

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 8 OF 9


VILLASIS LAST MINUTE LECTURE - POLITICAL LAW (PROF. CARLO CRUZ AND DEAN HILARIO
MORALES)

§ Ratio: Contravenes accountability provision in the Constitution. Only


President can grant pardon, which cannot be delegated to the people.
Sec. 40 provides that if penalty is removal, accessory penalty is
perpetual disqualification.

G. ELECTION LAW
13. Party-List System​ ​[CANDE FAVORITE]
· What are the 4 parameters of party list system?
o 20% allocation
o 2% threshold
o 3-seat limit
o Proportional representation.
· If there are 200 district representatives, how many party list reps? 50 reps. RATIO AND
PROPORTIONALITY OF DISTRICT REP TO PARTY-LIST REP IS 4:1.
· House of Representatives:
o District Rep
o Party list reps:
§ Sectoral – This must be marginalized and underrepresented (not only the party
but also the nominee)
· Except: youth, elderly, women, and professional (Paglaong case)
§ National political parties – need not be marginalized and underrepresented
§ Regional political parties - need not be marginalized and underrepresented
· Nominate minimum of 5 reps.
o Maximum of 3 will take position. 2 will be successors.
§ 2% = 1 seat
o Nominee must be member of the party at least 6 months before election.
o Youth rep must be 25-30 y/o.
· Legal personality of person who can question the election of the 1​st​ nominee.
· Seat distribution:
o 1​st​ round: qualifying seat (as soon as you reach 2% threshold) + additional seat
o There is 2​nd​ round of distribution under Banat case.
§ No more 2% threshold.
§ Use percentage vote ranking until all seats are filled.

· Substitution presupposes end of deadline.


o Who can be substituted? Only members of political party. Independent candidates
cannot be substituted except those running in barangay elections.
o Grounds for substitution: Death, disqualification, withdrawal
§ If automated and ballots are deemed printed, only two grounds are allowed:
death and disqualification. Withdrawal is only allowed if substitute bears
same surname.
o If COC is cancelled, one is no longer a candidate and therefore cannot be substituted.

VILLASIS POLI LMT: Page 9 OF 9

S-ar putea să vă placă și