Constitutional Law 1 Notes

7/27/2019 Constitutional Law 1 Notes

1/60


2/60

authority to the U.S.

Maritime boundaries

Internal waters within baseline

Territorial sea 12 nm. from baseline. Part of sovereign; all laws apply; right of innocentpassage.

Contiguous zone 24 nm. from baseline. Limited jurisdiction relating to fiscal, customs,immigration and sanitary matters.

Exclusive Economic Zone 200 nm. from end territorial sea. State has sovereign rights forthe purpose of exploration, exploitation, conservation and management of the naturalresources.

PRINCIPLES AND POLICIESPrinciples: binding rules which must be observed in the conduct of governmentPolicies: guidelines for the orientation of the state

These principles in Article are not intended to be self-executing principles ready forenforcement through the courts. They are used by the judiciary as aids or as guides in theexercise of its power of judicial review, and by the legislature in its enactment of laws.[Taada v. Angara]

Basic ideological principle and policies that underlie the Constitution

Shed lights or serve as guide for all departments of the government in the implementation of

the Constitution

Section 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in thepeople and all government authority emanates from them.

4 ELEMENTS OF A STATE:

1. PEOPLE2. TERRITORY3. SOVEREIGNTY4. GOVERNMENT

State: a community ofPERSONS, more or less numerous, permanently occupying a definite portionof TERRITORY, INDEPENDENT of external control, and possessing an organized GOVERNMENT towhich the great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience

People: a community of persons, sufficient in number and capable of maintaining the continuedexistence of the community and held together by a common bond of law

Government: that institution or aggregate of institutions by which an independent society makes andcarries out those rules of action which are necessary to enable men to live in a social state, or which

Page 2


3/60

are imposed upon the people forming the society by those who possess the power or authority ofprescribing them.FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT:

1. Ministrant/Proprietary: optional functions of government intended for achieving a better life forthe community

The principles for determining whether gov't will exercise these functions:

a) that a gov't should do for the public welfare those things that private capital would not naturallyundertake;

b) that a gov't should do those things which by its very nature it is better equipped to administerfor the public welfare than any private entity.

2. Constituent/Governmental: the functions which constitute the very bonds of society (Pres.Wilsons enumeration is Bacani v. NACOCO):

a) The keeping of order and providing the protection of persons and property form violence androbbery

b) The fixing of legal relations between husband and wife and between parents and children

c) The regulation of the holding, transmission and interchange of property, and thedetermination of its debt or for crime

d) The determination of contract rights between individuals

e) The definition and punishment of crime

f) The administration of justice in civil cases

g) The determination of political duties, privileges, and relations of citizens

h) Dealings of the state with foreign powers: the preservation of the state from externaldanger or encroachment and the advancement of the national interest

Importance of distinction: It is useful to distinguish between governmental and proprietaryfunctions when an unincorporated agency of government claims privileges which flow fromsovereignty, e.g., immunity from suit. If the agency performs governmental functions, it may claimthe privileges; otherwise, it cannot.

ACCFA v. CUGCO: Agrarian reform, though not strictly governmental under Bacani, was consideredto be governmental because of the social justice mandate of the Constitution. The Court said that thegrowing complexities of modern society have rendered the traditional classification of functions quite

unrealistic. (e.g., housing is considered governmental; supply of water for a price is proprietary)

PVTA v. CIR: The Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration, which was established to promote thetobacco industry and improve living conditions of tobacco farmers was considered to performgovernmental functions.

REPUBLIC V. CFI: The Rice and Corn Administration, which was established to stabilize prices of riceand corn, was considered to perform governmental functions.

Page 3


4/60

WHAT IS A REPUBLICAN STATE?

A state wherein all government authority emanates from the people and is exercised byrepresentative chosen by the people.

WHY IS THE PHILIPPINES CALLED A DEMOCRATIC STATE?

Due to the direct democracy given by the Constitution to the people, such as initiative andreferendum. It is also a monument to the EDSA I Revolution which re-won freedom throughdirect action of the people

DE JURE AND DE FACTO GOVERNMENTS:

De Jure: established by authority of the legitimate sovereignDe Facto: established in defiance of the legitimate sovereign

Three kinds of De Facto governments:

1. In a proper and legal sense, is that government that gets possession and control of, or usurpsby force or by the voice of the majority, the rightful and legal government and maintains itselfagainst the will of the latter (e.g., Cromwell as protectorate of the people)

2. Established as an independent govt by inhabitants of a country who rise in insurrectionagainst the parent state (e.g., Southern Confederacy in revolt against the Union)

3. That which is established and maintained by military forces who invade and occupy a territory ofthe enemy in the course of war, and which is denominated by a government of paramountforce (e.g., Castine in Maine reduced to a British possession in 1812 war; Tampico, Mexicooccupied by U.S. forces in U.S.-Mexican war)

Characteristics of a government of paramount force:

The belligerent occupant generally respectsmunicipal laws (Civil Code, InsuranceCode, etc.), or those that enforce public order and regulate the social and commercial lifeof the country, unless they are incompatible with new order of things.

Laws of a political nature or affecting political relations, such as the right to bear arms,the freedom of the press, and the right to travel freely in the territory occupied areconsidered suspended during the military occupation.

Judicial acts and proceedings which are not of a political complexion (defamationas opposed to treason) remain valid even beyond the occupation.

CO KIM CHAN V. VALDEZ: The government during the Japanese occupation was a de factogovernment. Judicial acts and proceedings which were not of a political nature initiated under thatregime could continue despite liberation. Under the principle of postliminy, the fact that a territorywhich has been occupied by an enemy comes again into the power of its legitimate government orsovereignty, does not, except in a very few cases, wipe out the effects of acts done by an invader.

LETTER OF ASSOCIATE JUSTICE PUNO: The government established right after EDSA1 de jure; itwas established by authority of the legitimate sovereign: the people.It was revolutionary; it saw the complete overthrow of the established government by those

Page 4


5/60

previously subject to it. Hence, the existing legal system was abolished. The appointments made tothe old courts have no relation to appointments made to the newly established courts andrank/seniority may be disregarded in making new appointments.

SOVEREIGNTY

Sovereignty (two kinds):

Legal: supreme power to make law; lodged in the people Political: sum total of all the influences in a state, legal and non-legal, which determine the

course of law

PEOPLE V. GOZO: The Philippine government did not abdicate its sovereignty over the territoryoccupied by the US bases; it merely gave the US government preferential jurisdiction in the areas.Any state may, by its consent, express or implied, submit to a restriction of its sovereign rights andrestrain what is otherwise plenary this is known as auto-limitation.

Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts thegenerally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land andadheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity withall nations.

War Only offensive war is renounced. The power to wage defensive war is the essence of

sovereignty.

International law

The law of nations is adopted under the doctrine of transformation. Other jurisdictions apply

the doctrine of transformation, whereby international law is transformed into municipal law bysome constitutional machinery, e.g., a law.

Only customary international law and treaties which have become part of customary law are

made part of the law of the land.

Amity

Amity with all nations does not mean automatic diplomatic recognition with all nations. It is anideal to be aimed at. Diplomatic recognition, however, remains a matter of executivediscretion

TAADA V. ANGARA: In upholding the validity of the WTO Agreement, the Court said that thePhilippines, by treaty, voluntarily surrendered some aspects of its sovereignty in exchange for greaterbenefits. Under the treaty, the Philippines has certain obligation which it must comply with inaccordance with one of the oldest and most fundamental rules in international law: pacta suntservanda - international agreements must be performed in good faith.

BAYAN V. ZAMORA: The SC held that the Visiting Forces Agreement was valid. As a member of thefamily of nations, the Philippines agrees to be bound by the generally accepted rules for the conduct of

Page 5


6/60

its international relations. We cannot plead our municipal law, including the Constitution, as aconvenient excuse for non-compliance with out obligations, duties, and responsibilities underinternational law.

LIM V. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY: Under the doctrine of incorporation as applied in most countries,rules of international law are given a standing equal, not superior, to national legislation. Though froman international law perspective, a treaty may be favored over municipal law, our Constitution

espouses the opposing view. The SC is given the power to judge the validity of a treaty and treatiesare always subject to qualification by subsequent laws.

Section 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces ofthe Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure thesovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.

The armed forces can be a legitimate instrument for the overthrow of a civilian government

which has ceased to serve the people.

IBP V. ZAMORA: The deployment of marines by Estrada to address peace and order issues did notviolate the civilian supremacy clause because their participation is limited. Authority over the patrolswas with the civilian police who were merely assisted by the soldiers. What we have here is mutualsupport and cooperation, not derogation of civilian supremacy.

Section 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. TheGovernment may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof,all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personalmilitary or civil service.

Conditions for military or civil service must be established by law.

Not involuntary servitude. It is the supreme and noble duty of a citizen to contribute to the

defense of the nation.

Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property,and the promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all thepeople of the blessings of democracy.

KILOSBAYAN V. MORATO: A lotto gaming contract was not invalidated under the peace and orderprovision. This principle is not self-executing. The morality of gambling is not a justiciable issue.

Section 6. The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.

Page 6


7/60

Enunciated in Article III Section 5, No law shall be made respecting an establishment ofreligion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religiousprofession and worship, without discrimination or preference shall forever be allowed. Noreligious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

STATE POLICIES

Section 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with otherstates the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity,national interest, and the right to self-determination.

LIM V. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY: There is an antipathy towards foreign influence in general. Foreigntroops may be allowed in the country only by way of direct exception.

Section 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues apolicy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.

Only weapons are banned. Peaceful uses of nuclear energy are allowed. Nuclear capable

vessels are also allowed provided they are not armed.

The ban on nuclear weapons is not absolute; there may be deviation if national interest

requires.

BAYAN V. ZAMORA: The SC did not discuss whether the VFA violated the nuclear weapons ban,although the issue was raised.

Section 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure theprosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty throughpolicies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a risingstandard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.

Section 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development.

When the law can be interpreted in more ways than one, an interpretation that favors the

underprivileged must be followed.

Social justice is the equalization of economic, political, and social (EPS) opportunities with

special emphasis on the duty of the State to tilt the balance of social forces in favor of thedisadvantaged in life. Justice for the common tao; those who have less in life shall have morein law

Page 7


8/60

Section 11. The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respectfor human rights.

Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthenthe family as a basic autonomous social institution.

It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civicefficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of theGovernment.

The family is anterior to the State and is not a creature of the State. It protects the family

from the instrumentalization by the State

This provisions will not prohibit the legislature from enacting a law on divorce

Family heterosexual relationship, whether formalized by marriage or not

Presumptions are resolved in favor of marriage

Abortion is not allowed although the unborn may be sacrificed to save the mother.

With regard to manner of education, the primary and natural right belongs to the parents. The

government has the secondary and supportive role based on parens patria to protect personswho, because of age or other incapacity, are at a disadvantage

ROE V. WADE: In the US, abortion may be done during the first six months of pregnancy at themothers discretion. This is not allowed in the Philippines.

The right of the parents to rear their children is superior to the right of the state.

MEYER V. NEBRASKA: A law prohibiting the teaching of the German language to students wasdeclared invalid.

PIERCE V. SOCIETY OF SISTERS: A law which required children from 8 to 16 to be sent to publicschools only was declared to be an unreasonable interference with the liberty of the parents to reartheir children.Standing: the private corporations (schools) were allowed to assert the rights of the parents becausetheir business was threatened by unconstitutional compulsion upon the parents.

WISCONSIN V. YODER: The right of the Amish community to educate their own was upheld againsta law requiring formal public or private schooling. The community was able to prove that their mode of

education adequately met the purpose of the law. A claim of parens patriae cannot be sustainedagainst a free exercise claim where the interest of the state is not substantially injured.The right of the children was not discussed by the majority but Justice Douglas, in his dissent said thatthe childrens rights should be respected because it is their future that is at stake.

GINSBERG V. NEW YORK: A law prohibiting the sale of girlie magazines to minors was upheld. Thewell-being of children is within the States power to regulate. Though upbringing of children is theprimary right of the parents, this law merely assists or supports parents in exercising that right byrecognizing that parental supervision is not always present. The legislature makes a valid presumption

Page 8


9/60

that parents would not want these materials readily available to their children.If parents want their children to have access to the magazines, they are free to make the purchase fortheir children.

Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall

promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being.It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage theirinvolvement in public and civic affairs.

Section 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure thebefore the law of women and men.

Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instillhealth consciousness among them.

Section 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced andhealthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

Article 14 (women) doesnt automatically repeal the Civil Code provisions law jurisprudence onthe matter, what it does is to give a mandate to legislature to remove, when they make laws,existing inequalities. The general idea is for the law to ignore sex where sex is not a relevantfactor in determining rights and duties. Nor is the provision meant to ignore customs andtraditions.

This article does not add anything more to what the equal protection clause alreadyguarantees

OPOSA V. FACTORAN: The right to a balanced and healthful ecology is self-executing and if violated,gives rise to a cause of action. It does not even have to be included in the Constitution because it isgrounded on the most primary right of self-preservation. The petitioners were allowed to sue on theirown behalf and on behalf of succeeding generations based on the concept of intergenerationalresponsibility.

LLDA V. CA: The LLDAs right to issue a cease and desist order against Caloocan City was upheldbased on its broad power to regulate projects around the lake and the Constitutional right of thelakeside dwellers to a balanced and healthful ecology.

Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture,and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promotetotal human liberation and development.

Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect therights of workers and promote their welfare.

Page 9


10/60

Section 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economyeffectively controlled by Filipinos.

Section 20. The State recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector, encouragesprivate enterprise, and provides incentives to needed investments.

Section 21. The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and agrarianreform.

Section 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous culturalcommunities within the framework of national unity and development.

Section 23. The State shall encourage non-governmental, community- based, or sectoralorganizations that promote the welfare of the nation.

Section 24. The State recognizes the vital role of communication and information in nation-building.

Section 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.

Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, andprohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.

Section 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and takepositive and effective measures against graft and corruption.

Section 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts andimplements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving publicinterest.

Labor is called a primary social economic force meaning the human factor has primacy over

Page 10


11/60

the nonhuman factors in production.

Any doubt in interpretation as regards national economy and patrimony must be resolved infavor of Filipinos

This includes not only agrarian reform, but also encompasses a broad spectrum of social,economic, human, cultural, political, and even industrial development

LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Section 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines whichshall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reservedto the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.

Legislative power: the authority to make laws and to alter or repeal them (MAR)

Scope of Legislative power: Plenary

Consequences of Legislative power:

Non-delegable: power is vested only in Congress; due to Separation of Powers and thedoctrine potestas delegate delegari non potest

No irrepealable laws: such will in effect reduce future legislative power; only the Constitutioncan limit legislative power

Limitations:

Substantive: as regards contents of law, must be lawful Procedural: as regards manner of passage of law

Advantages of bicameralism:

1. Allows for a body with a national perspective to check the parochial tendency of districtrepresentatives

2. Allows for a more careful study of legislation3. Makes legislature less susceptible to control by the executive4. Serves as a training ground for national leaders

Advantages of unicameralism

1. Simplicity of organization resulting in:2. Economy3. Efficiency4. Facility in pinpointing responsibility for legislation5. Avoidance of duplicate legislation

Two kinds of legislative power in republican systems:

Page 11


12/60

1. Original: possessed by the sovereign people2. Derivative: delegated by the sovereign people to the legislative bodies and is subordinate to

the original power of the people

Legislative power may also be classified into:

1. Constituent: power to amend or revise the constitution2. Ordinary: power to pass ordinary laws

Two limits on legislative power:

1. Substantive: limits the intrinsic validity of the law2. Procedural: limits the manner of passing laws

Delegation of Powers

Delegata potestas non potest delegari - What has been delegated cannot be delegated:Premised on the ethical principle that delegated power constitutes not only a right but a duty to beperformed by the delegate through the instrumentality of his own judgment and not through the

intervening mind of another.

Exceptions/Permissible Delegation:

P Delegation to the people at large

EDelegation of emergency powers to thePresident

T Delegation oftariffpowers to the PresidentA Delegation to administrative bodiesL Delegation to localgovernments

Delegation to the people at large:

Initiative: power of the people to propose amendments to the Constitution or to propose andenact legislation through an election called for the purpose**after registration of a petition signed by at least 10% of the total number of registered voters,of which every legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered votersthereof

Referendum: method of submitting an important legislative measure to a direct vote of thewhole people

Plebiscite: device to obtain a direct popular vote on a matter of political importance in order tocreate some more or less permanent political conditione.g. Constitutional amendments

Delegation of emergency powers to the President (art. vi, 23(2)):

Conditions:

1. There must be war or other national emergency2. The delegation must be for a limited period3. The delegation must be subject to such restrictions as Congress may prescribe4. The emergency powers must be exercised to carry out a national policy declared by Congress Unless such emergency powers are withdrawn by resolution, they continue until the next

adjournment of the legislature (the session called after the adjournment of the first sessionwhen the emergency powers were delegated).

Page 12


13/60

Delegation of tariff powers to the President (art. vi, 28(2)):

The reason for this delegation is the necessity of giving the President authority to act

immediately on certain matters affecting the national economy because delay could result inthe hardship of the people.

It is recognized that the legislative process is too slow for the quick solutions needed for

economic problems.

Delegation to administrative bodies:

Power of Subordinate Legislation: authority entrusted to administrative agencies to issue rules tocarry out the general provisions of the statute

Based on the recognition that the proliferation of specialized activities and their attendant

peculiar problems has made it necessary to entrust to administrative bodies the power ofsubordinate legislation

With this power, administrative bodies may implement the broad policies laid out in a statute

by filling in the details which the Congress may not have the opportunity or competence toprovide.

They can determine the effectivity of laws which depend on certain conditions. Such laws must

be complete when they leave the hands of the Legislature. They merely provide a contingency.

Delegation to local governments

Based on the recognition that local legislatures are more knowledgeable than Congress on

matters of purely local concern and are therefore in a better position to enact the necessaryand appropriate legislation

Subject to the interposition of the superior in cases of necessity

Tests of Delegation

1. The Completeness Test: The law must be complete in all its essential terms and conditions when it leaves the

legislature so that there will be nothing left for the delegate to do when it reaches himexcept enforce it.

2. The Sufficient Standard Test: Even if the law does not spell out in detail the limits of the delegates authority, it may

still be sustained if the delegation of legislative power is made subject to a sufficientstandard.

Vague standards such as for the public welfare or national security have been held

to be sufficient.

GRANT OF QUASI-LEGISLATIVE POWER;

IN GENERAL; LGUS AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES

RUBI V. PROVINCIAL BOARD OF MINDORO: The Provincial Governor was authorized to decidewhether to move non-Christians to a reservation and to choose the reservation site.The delegation or legislative powers to local authorities is sanctioned by immemorial practice.

ANTIPOLO REALTY CORP. V. NHA: The National Housing Authority was authorized to performquasi-judicial functions.The need for special competence and experience justifies delegation to administrative agencies.

Page 13


14/60

PITC V. ANGELES: The Philippine International Trading Corporation was authorized by law toregulate trade between the Philippines and China and make rules for that purpose.The delegation was valid. Delegation to administrative agencies is justified because of the growingcomplexity of modern society and the functions of government, the need for fast response to issues,and the fact that the rules which need to be made are too detailed for the legislature.

VALID DELEGATION

PEOPLE V. ROSENTHAL: The Blue Sky Law delegated to the Insular Treasurer the power to cancelcertificates for sale of securities.Public interest is a sufficient standard.

ARANETA V. GATMAITAN: The Fisheries Act prohibited the use of devices which could causedepletion of fish fry and authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate rules and regulations.The President issued Executive Orders prohibiting trawl fishing.The President may exercise power delegated to a cabinet secretary under his power of control andsupervision and because a cabinet member is his alter ego.

AGUSTIN V. EDU: An LOI (then valid as law) requiring vehicles to carry EWDs authorized the LTO topromulgate implementing rules.The standard to be followed may be implied form the policy and purpose of the act considered as a

whole. In this case, it was apparent from the LOI that public safety was the standard.

EASTERN SHIPPING LINES V. POEA: The law creating the POEA mandated it to ensure fair andequitable employment practices. It issued a memorandum circular prescribing a standard contract forseamen complete with benefits.The following were held to be sufficient standards: to ensure fair and equitable employment practices,public interest, just and equitable, simplicity, economy, efficiency.

CONFERENCE OF MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES V. POEA: Same facts as Eastern Shipping caseabove.Test for a valid exercise of delegated power to make rules: (1) the regulation should be germane tothe purposes of the law; and (2) it should not be in contradiction to but in conformity with thestandards prescribed by the law.

TABLARIN V. GUTIERREZ: The Medical Act created the Board of Medical Education and gave itpower to issue rules to carry out the following purposes: (1) the standardization of medical education;(2) the regulation of the medical profession; (3) to determine requirements for admission to medicalschools.The purpose of the law may provide the standard.

OSMEA V. ORBOS: P.D. 1956, created the Oil Price Stabilization Fund and authorized the EnergyRegulatory Board to augment the fund by imposing additional amounts on petroleum products.The amount to be imposed is determined by the standard: to augment the resources of the Fund.

GUINGONA V. CARAGUE: P.D. 1177 provided for automatic appropriation of funds for the paymentof foreign loans. (To whom was power delegated here? The Secretary of Budget?)The standard is that the amounts appropriated shall be enough to pay the principal, interest, taxesand other normal banking charges when they shall become due. No uncertainty arises in executive

implementation as the limit will be the exact amounts as shown by the books of the Treasury.

VIOLA V. ALUNAN: The Local Government Code provides for the officers and board in each chapterof the Liga ng Mga Barangay and allows the creation of additional positions by the board as it maydeem necessary for the management of the chapter.For the management of the chapter is a sufficient standard.

UNITES STATES V. BARRIAS: A law was passed giving the Collector of Customs the authority toregulate harbor and river craft and to make rules to carry the law into effect. The law madepunishable a violation of any rule made by the Collector pursuant to the law. The Collector made a

Page 14


15/60

rule barring certain underpowered vessels from plying the Pasig River.Administrative bodies have the authority to issue administrative regulations which are penal in naturewhere the law itself makes the violation of the administrative regulation punishable and provides forits penalty.

MARCOS V. COURT OF APPEALS: The Central Bank Act provides that a willful violation of the Act orany order, instruction, rule or regulation issued by the Monetary Board shall be punished by a fine and

imprisonment. Marcos was charged for a violation of a Central Bank circular issued by the MonetaryBoard which prohibited foreign exchange accounts abroad without CB authority.Administrative bodies have the authority to issue administrative regulations which are penal in naturewhere the law itself makes the violation of the administrative regulation punishable and provides forits penalty.

FERNANDEZ V. STO. TOMAS: A Civil Service Commission was issued to reorganize some structuralaspects of the Commission. The Revised Administrative Code authorized the Civil Service Commissionto effect changes in its organization as the need arises. It recognized the purpose of the CSC topromote efficiency and responsiveness in the civil service and required it to be decentralized.The SC said that by ruling that there was valid delegation, it was not saying that the power had to begranted to the CSC for the power to exist.

CHIONGBIAN V. ORBOS: R.A. 6734 created the ARMM and authorized the president to mergeremaining regions. The President issued an Administrative Order reorganizing the administrativeregions in the regions which did not vote in favor of joining the ARMM. There was no standard forreorganization in R.A. 6734.Another law, R.A. 5435, authorized the President to organize the Executive Department to promotesimplicity, efficiency, and economy in government.A legislative standard need not be found in the law challenged. It may be embodied in other statuteson the same subject as that of the challenged legislation.

RODRIGO V. SANDIGANBAYAN: R.A. 6758, the Compensation and Position Classification Act,directed the DBM to prepare the Index of Occupational Services to be guided by the BenchmarkPosition Schedule and several factor, e.g., education required by the job, nature of work, etc. TheDBM classified the position of Municipal Mayor as Salary Grade 27. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdictionover offenses committed by officers with Salary Grade 27 and higher but the law defining itsjurisdiction did not include municipal mayors.

The standard for classifying was equal work for equal pay. The DBM merely classifies positions; thatby such classification, an official comes under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is only anincidental consequence to the exercise of the DBMs functions.

UNDUE DELEGATION

PEOPLE V. MACEREN: The Fisheries Law prohibits the use of any obnoxious or poisonous substancein fishing. The Secretary of Agriculture issued an Administrative Order banning the use of electro-fishing and imposing a penalty for violation. The AO The law does not expressly prohibit/punishelectro-fishing.The power to declare what constitutes a criminal offense cannot be delegated. In a prosecution for aviolation of an administrative order, it must be clear that the order is within the scope of the law andthat the penalty is provided for in the law itself.

PEOPLE V. VERA: The Probation Law stated that it shall apply only in those provinces in which therespective provincial boards have provided for the salary of a probation officer.By making the application of the law in a particular province dependent of the provincial board, whatis granted is a roving commission which enables the provincial boards to exercise arbitrarydiscretion.

UNITED STATES V. PANLILIO: The law authorized the Director of Agriculture order a quarantine ofanimals but did not state that a violation of such orders would be punishable. The law merely statedthat a violation of any of the provisions of this Act shall incur criminal liability.

Page 15


16/60

Where the law granting the power to make rules does not state that a violation of the rules ispunishable, a person violating the rules cannot be proceeded against criminally.

PEOPLE V. DACUYCUY: R.A. 4670, the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers contained a penalprovision punishing any person who violates the rights of teachers under the act. The penalty was setat a fine of not less that one hundred pesos nor more than one thousand pesos, or by imprisonment,in the discretion of the court.

The penalty of imprisonment is unconstitutional for giving the courts an unduly wide latitude ofdiscretion to fix the term of imprisonment, without the benefit of a sufficient standard.

CEBU OXYGEN V. DRILON: R.A. 6640 raised the minimum wage. The Secretary of Labor issued animplementing rule which prohibited an employer from crediting anniversary wage increases negotiatedunder a collective bargaining agreement against wage increases mandated by R.A. 6640.Since the law did not prohibit the crediting of CBA anniversary increases, the implementing rulescannot provide such a prohibition. Implementing rules cannot add or detract from the provisions of thelaw it is designed to implement. The law itself cannot be expanded by regulations.

YNOT V. IAC: E.O. 626-A mandated the confiscation of illegally transported carabaos/carabeef andallowed certain government officers to dispose of the confiscated animals/beef as they may see fit.The phrase may see fit is extremely dangerous; it is laden with perilous opportunities for partialityand abuse, and even corruption. The discretion of the officers is boundless. There is here a roving

commission, a wide and sweeping authority that is not canalized within the banks that keep it fromoverflowing.

EXECUTIVE MISAPPLICATION

TATAD V. SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY: The Downstream Oil IndustryDeregulation Act authorized the DOE, upon approval of the President, to implement the fullderegulation of the oil industry not later than March 1997. The DOE was directed to time the fullderegulation when prices of crude oil and petroleum products in the world market are declining andwhen the exchange rate of the peso in relation to the US dollar is stable.The President issued E.O. 372 to fully implement deregulation. The E.O. stated that the conditions setby Congress have been met: depletion of the buffer fund; stable prices of crude oil; and stableexchange rate.While the law contained a valid delegation of power, the E.O. implementing it failed to faithfully follow

the standards set down by the law. The Executive misappreciated the extra factor of depletion of thebuffer fund. It is not harmless error, even if the standards required by Congress were present. It maybe that the presence of the two standards required by Congress wouldnt have been sufficient to theExecutive were it not for the presence of the improperly considered standard.

Section 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected atlarge by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-born citizen of thePhilippines, and, on the day of the election, is at least thirty-five years of age, able toread and write, a registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not less than twoyears immediately preceding the day of the election.

Section 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unlessotherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following theirelection.

No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of theoffice for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuityof his service for the full term for which he was elected.

Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House of Representatives unless he is anatural-born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least twenty-five years of age, able to read and write, and, except the party-list representatives, a

Page 16


17/60

registered voter in the district in which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for aperiod of not less than one year immediately preceding the day of the election.

Section 7. The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term ofthree years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtiethday of June next following their election.

No member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three consecutiveterms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be consideredas an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he waselected.

Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election of the Senators and theMembers of the House of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May.

QUALIFICATIONS

SENATORSNumber: 24

Qualifications: Natural born

25 years old Read and write

Registered voter

2 year residency

Term: 6 years2 term limit

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESNumber: Not more than 250 (may be

increased by law)

Qualifications: Natural born 25 years old

Read and write

Registered voter (IN

DISTRICT) 1 year residency (IN

DISTRICT)

Term: 3 years3 term limit

CITIZENSHIP

BENGSON V. HRET: Bengson was a natural-born Filipino who lost his citizenship by his naturalizationin the United States in connection with his service in the U.S. Marine Corps. He subsequentlyreacquired his Philippine citizenship through repatriation under a law which allowed those who served

in the U.S. Military to reacquire Philippine citizenship. He ran for and won a seat in the House. Naturalborn?A natural born Filipino is one who is a Philippine citizen from birth without having to perform any actto acquire or perfect his citizenship.Filipino citizens who have lost their citizenship may reacquire it by: naturalization, repatriation, or adirect act of Congress. Repatriation simply consists of taking an oath of allegiance and registering it inthe Local Civil Registry. It results in the recovery of the original nationality. A natural born Filipino whohas lost his citizenship, if repatriated, will recover his natural born status.Moreover, under the 1987 Constitution, there are only two classes of citizens: natural born andnaturalized. A citizen who did not have to go through the process of naturalization is, necessarily,

Page 17


18/60

natural born.

DOMICILE AND RESIDENCE

AQUINO V. COMELEC: Aquino, a candidate for congressman in Makati, was born in Tarlac and hadhis domicile of origin there. To show that he fulfilled the one-year residency requirement, hepresented a one-year residential lease in Makati.

The Constitution, when it says residence actually means domicile. It is clear that Aquinos domicileof origin is Tarlac. Thus to establish his domicile in Makati, he should be able to prove an (1) actualchange of domicile, a (2) bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of domicile andestablishing a new one and (3) acts which correspond with the purpose. In the absence of clear andpositive proof, the domicile of origin should be deemed to continue.The one-year lease was insufficient to prove change of domicile.

ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS V. COMELEC: Imelda was a candidate for congressman in her domicile oforigin, Leyte. Although she was born in Manila, she followed the domicile of her parents. She wasraised and educated in Leyte, after college, she went to Manila and married ex-President Marcos. Theylived in Malacaang and, after EDSA1, moved to Hawaii.Imelda never lost her domicile of origin. Domicile of origin is not easily lost. To successfully effect achange in domicile, one must demonstrate:1. An actual change of domicile;

2. A bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one; and3. Acts which correspond with the purpose.In the absence of clear and positive proof, domicile of origin should be deemed to continue. She didnot lose her domicile by marriage; the Civil Code allows the husband to fix the residence of the family.When the Civil Code uses the word residence, it actually means residence and not domicile.Dissent: the one year residence requirement is crucial regardless of whether or not the term residenceis to be synonymous with domicile the candidates intent and actual presence in one district must inall situations satisfy the length of time prescribed by the fundamental law. The candidate must befamiliar with the environment and problems of a district he intends to represent.

PROBLEM: Can a person who has been naturalized in a foreign country be deemed to haveabandoned his domicile in the Philippines? Assuming he does not live abroad? Probably not. The threerequisites for a change of domicile must first be shown before one can be said to have abandoned hisdomicile. The mere act of naturalizing is insufficient.

DOMINO V. COMELEC: Domino filed a certificate of candidacy for congressman in Sarangani. Hisdomicile of origin was Ilocos. He successfully changed domicile to QC, where he ran for congressman.To establish a change of domicile from QC to Sarangani, he presented a lease contract.Domino is still domiciled in QC. He has not shown the three requirements for change of domicile. Inthe consideration of these circumstances, three rules must be borne in mind: (1) a man must have adomicile somewhere; (2) once established, it continues until a new one is acquired; (3) there can onlybe one domicile at a time.The lease contract will show, at most, residence. Also, Dominos lack of intention to change domicile isshown by his registering as a voter in QC. This is true even if the MTC declared Domino to be aresident of Sarangani in an exclusion proceeding in QC. The only authority of the MTC is to determinewhether or not the voter is entitled to vote in that locality.

PEREZ V. COMELEC: Aguinaldos qualification to run for representative of Tuguegarao werechallenged. He was able to prove his qualifications by presenting: an affidavit from his lessor whichaffirmed residence; a marriage certificate; birth certificates of his children; letters addressed to him inTuguegarao.The fact that he registered as a voter in another district is not proof that his domicile is in that otherdistrict.

TERM

DIMAPORO V. MITRA: Rep. Dimaporo filed his certificate of candidacy for governor of ARMM. TheSpeaker and the Secretary of the House excluded his name from the Roll, considering him to have

Page 18


19/60

voluntarily renounce his office.The grounds for shortening of term enumerated in the Constitution are not exclusive. They are:forefeiture by holding another office in the government; expulsion; disqualification by the electoraltribunal; voluntary renunciation. There are other grounds: death, resignation; conviction withdisqualification.The mere act of filing a certificate of candidacy for another office is forfeiture of the elective positionheld. It is considered forfeiture under the Omnibus Election Code. [N.B. This provision has been

repealed by the Fair Elections Act. Now, only acceptance of an appointive office is consideredforfeiture.]Term v. Tenure: The term of an office must be distinguished from the tenure of the incumbent. Theterm means the time during which the officer may claim to hold the office as of right, and fixes theinterval after which the several incumbents shall succeed one another. The tenure represents the termduring which the incumbent actually holds the office. The tenure may be shorter than the term forreasons within or beyond the power of the incumbent.

Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than twohundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected fromlegislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the MetropolitanManila area in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on thebasis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall beelected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral partiesor organizations.

(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number ofrepresentatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms afterthe ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-listrepresentatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from thelabor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and suchother sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.

PARTY LIST

VETERANS FEDERATION PARTY V. COMELEC: In the 1998 elections, the COMELEC issued aresolution proclaiming parties which did not garner at least 2% of votes cast under the party listsystem in order to fill-up the 20% requirement. The SC cleared up the rules:

1. 20% of the total number of representatives is a ceiling; it is not mandatory. To compute:a. (# of district representatives/.80) X .20 = maximum number of party list representatives2. Allocation of seats:

a. All with at least 2% of the vote get one seatb. Determine number of seats top ranked party is entitled to; this is the basisc. Determine number of seats other parties are entitled to. To compute:

i. (# of votes of party/# of votes of 1st party) X # of additional seats of 1st party.The rationale is it would be unfair for parties with many votes to have the same number of seats asthose which are barely over 6%. The Niemeyer Formula used in the German Bundestag cannot beapplied here because there are fundamental differences between our party-list systems. In Germany,one-half of the Parliament is filled by party-list representatives; also, there is no three-seat limit.

ANG BAGONG BAYANI-OFW LABOR PARTY V. COMELEC: Petitions for party-list registration werefiled with the COMELEC. Some were granted; some werent. The SC set down guidelines for the

COMELEC to follow in evaluating applications for registration.1. must represent marginalized or underrepresented sectors enumerated in the law;2. political parties are allowed but they must comply with #1;3. the religious sector may not be represented;4. the party must not be disqualified under the law;5. it must not be related to government;6. nominees must be from the marginalized or underrepresented sectors;7. nominees must also comply with the law (same qualifications as congressmen except for residency

requirement plus must have been members of party-list for at least 90 days preceding election;for youth sector, must be 25-30 on election day;

Page 19


20/60

8. nominees must be able to contribute to the enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefitthe country as a whole.

Section 5. (3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous,compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fiftythousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative.

(4) Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make areappointment of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section.

DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES

TOBIAS V. ABALOS: Mandaluyong and San Juan used to belong to only one legislative district. A lawwas passed converting Mandaluyong into a Highly Urbanized City; it now formed a separate legislativedistrict.The law need not include a census to show that Mandaluyong already has 250k residents thus makingit into a highly urbanized city. It is presumed that Congress did its job.Its creation into a separate legislative district is valid even if the number of Congressmen goes over250. The number in the Constitution is subject to law.Though the Constitution directs Congress to make reapportionments three years after each census;there may still be reapportionment via special law.

MARIANO V. COMELEC: Makati was converted into a city.Reapportionment of legislative districts may be done through a special law.The law stated that the area of the Municipality of Makati would be the area of the City of Makati. It isnot necessary that there be a delimitation by metes and bounds.The law provided that Makati shall have two legislative districts. The Constitution merely requires acity with at least 250k population to have at least one representative. There is no requirement foradditional representatives.

SAMSON V. AGUIRRE: A law was passed creating Novaliches City from 15 QC barangays.The law was held valid despite allegations that there were certifications as to income, population, andland area. Every law is presumed valid. Petitioners failed to show overcome the presumption ofvalidity.The seat of government was not provided for in the law; this may be established after creation.

MONTEJO V. COMELEC: Biliran was made into a province and the COMELEC transferred somemunicipalities to other legislative districts purportedly to adhere to the equality of vote principleRedistricting and reapportionment are legislative prerogatives which the COMELEC may not exercise.The power of the COMELEC under the Ordinance attached to the Constitution is limited to minoradjustment or corrections. Reapportionment is substantial.

HERRERA V. COMELEC: A COMELEC resolution divided the province of Guimaras into two provincialdistricts.The COMELEC has the power to divide provinces with only one legislative district into two districts forthe purpose of electing members of the provincial board. The apportionment was done in accordancewith law. The districts are contiguous and/or adjacent, meaning adjoining, abutting, having acommon border, connected, and/or touching along boundaries often for considerable distances.Distinguish this from Montejo, where apportionment of legislative districts was done.

Section 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a specialelection may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by law, but theSenator or Member of the House of Representatives thus elected shall serve only for theunexpired term.

LUCERO V. COMELEC: There was a failure of elections in Samar. The special election could be heldclose to the next election date because the one-year rule in the special elections for vacancies inCongress did not apply to special elections held because of failure of elections.The requisites for a special election to fill a vacancy in Congress

Page 20


21/60

1. Permanent vacancy occurs in the Senate of House2. At least one year before expiration of term3. Election must be held: between 60 and 90 days after the vacancy if House; simultaneously with

next regular election, if Senate.

Section 10. The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall bedetermined by law. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after theexpiration of the full term of all the Members of the Senate and the House ofRepresentatives approving such increase.

Section 11. A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offensespunishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while theCongress is in session. No member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any otherplace for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.

SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES

Increase in salaries shall not take effect until after the expiration of the full term of all the

Senators and Representatives approving such increase Reduction of salaries is permitted

No prohibition on receipt of allowances but subject to audit by the COA

PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITIES:

1) Privilege from Arrest

Conditions: Only from arrests for criminal offenses punishable by not more that six years (prision correccional

max.) Only while Congress is in session, whether regular or special

Purpose is to protect legislator against harassment which would keep him away from legislative

sessions

2) Privilege of Speech and Debate

Condition: Remarks must be made in the discharge of official functions such as speeches delivered,

statements made and votes cast; utterance must constitute legislative action It must relate to an act generally done in Congress and in relation to the business before it

Only protection from other forums other that Congress itself; may be disciplined by Congress

Purpose is to leave the legislator unimpeded in the performance of his duties

Extends to agents as long as the agency consists of assisting legislator in his official functions

PEOPLE V. JALOSJOS: Jalosjos was convicted for rape and acts of lasciviousness; he was sent toprison. He filed a petition to be allowed to attend sessions, committee meetings, etc.The immunity is only for offenses punishable by not more than six years.Congress has the power to compel attendance unless absence is for a legitimate reason.

JIMENEZ V. CABANGBANG: Rep. Cabangbang wrote an open letter addressed to the Presidentwhich was allegedly libelous; he had it published.The communication is not privileged. It is not considered speech and debate in Congress so as to beprivileged. In causing publication of the communication, he was not performing an official duty.Moreover, the letter was dated on a date that Congress was not in session.

Section 12. All Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives shall, uponassumption of office, make a full disclosure of their financial and business interests.

Page 21


22/60

They shall notify the House concerned of a potential conflict of interest that may arisefrom the filing of a proposed legislation of which they are authors.

Failure to make the disclosure may be sanctioned under the Houses power to discipline its

members, e.g., 60 day maximum suspension or expulsion, both with 2/3 concurrence.

Section 13. No Senator or a Member of the House of Representatives may hold any other

office or employment in the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentalitythereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries,during his term without forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any officewhich may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term forwhich he was elected.

INCOMPATIBLE AND FORBIDDEN OFFICES

Incompatible: Representatives may not hold any other office or employment in the Government, orany subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlledcorporations or their subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting his seat

Forbidden: May not under any circumstances be appointed to offices which may have been created orthe emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected

Exception: if it can be shown that the second office is an extension of the legislative position or is inaid of legislative duties, the holding thereof will not result in the loss of the legislators seat inCongress, e.g., Chairman of Senate Blue Ribbon Committee or member of the JBC.

Section 14. No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personallyappear AS COUNSEL before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, orquasi-judicial and other administrative bodies.

Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or inany franchise or special privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision,agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlledcorporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office.

He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary

benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

Prohibitions:1. Appear as counsel2. Direct or indirect interest in any contract, etc. with the government and GOCCs (including

subsidiaries)3. Intervene in any matter before any government office for his direct/indirect pecuniary benefit or

where he may be called upon to act on account of his office

PUYAT V. DE GUZMAN: An assemblyman appeared as counsel for a corporation before the SEC.Because the other party objected, he acquired nominal shares in the corporation so that hisappearance would be in his own behalf.The appearance was an indirect appearance as counsel. The SC will not be fooled by the ruse. Whatcannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly.

If the appearance is genuinely in ones own behalf, then it is permissible.

Section 15. The Congress shall convene once every year on the fourth Monday of July forits regular session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and shall continue to be insession for such number of days as it may determine until thirty days before theopening of its next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays.The President may call a special session at any time.

SESSION1. Regular session: fourth Monday of July until 30 days before opening of next regular session

Page 22


23/60

2. Special session: may be called by President at any time

RECESS1. Compulsory recess: the 30 day period between regular sessions OR the period between the

beginning of a new term (noon of June 30) until the beginning of the regular session2. Voluntary recess: Each house may adjourn voluntarily; if for more than three days, must

obtain consent of other House.

Pimentel v. Joint Committee: Did the term of Congress expire when it adjourned sine die upon thetermination of its regular session, making any actions by the Joint Canvassing Committee beyond suchtermination void?No. Upon adjournment, what was terminated was the regular session. The current Congress continuedin existence until the proclamation of the replacements. The legislative functions cease uponadjournment; this does not affect non-legislative functions.In fact, the joint public session convened by directive of the Constitution to canvass the votes andproclaim the P/VP cannot adjourn sine die until it has accomplished its tasks. This is true even it thenewly proclaimed members of Congress have to take over the functions.

Section 16. (1) The Senate shall elect its President and the House of Representativesits Speaker, by a majority vote of all its respective Members.

Each House shall choose such other officers as it may deem necessary.(2) A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller

number may adjourn from day to day and may compel the attendance of absentMembers in such manner, and under such penalties, as such House may provide.

(3) Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its Members fordisorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspendor expel a Member. A penalty for suspension, when imposed, shall not exceed sixtydays.

(4) Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish thesame, excepting such parts as may, in its judgment, affect national security; and theyeas and nays on any question shall, at the request of one-fifth of the members present,be entered in the Journal.

Each House shall also keep a Record of its proceedings.(5) Neither House during the sessions of the Congress shall, without the consent of the

other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which thetwo Houses shall be sitting.

OFFICERS

Defensor-Santiago v. Guingona: During the election of officers in the Senate, (Majority LAMP, 10;Minority Lakas, 7), all but Miriam and Tatad voted for Fernan to be Senate President. Miriam andTatad claim that they are now the minority and manifested that Tatad be the minority leader. Lakaschoice was Guingona.All the Constitution requires is that the Senate President be elected by more than half of all of theSenators. It does not define who comprise the majority/minority.The rules of the Senate do not provide for election of majority/minority leaders.

QUORUM TO DO BUSINESS/COMPULSION TO ATTEND; MEANING

AVELINO V. CUENCO: To prevent Taada from giving a privilege speech, 10 Senators, includingSenate President Avelino, walked out. The remaining 12 declared the office of the Senate Presidentvacant and elected Cuenco.The election was valid. There was a quorum. One senator was in the US and a 12 is a majority of 23.When the Constitution declares that a majority of each House shall constitute a quorum, House doesnot mean all the members. There is a difference between a majority of all the members of the Houseand a majority of the House. The senator abroad was not considered to be part of the House because

Page 23


24/60

he was beyond the coercive power of the body.

PEOPLE V. JALOSJOS: The members of Congress cannot compel absent members to attend sessionsif the reason for the absence is a legitimate one. The confinement of a Congressman charged with acrime punishable by imprisonment of more than six months is not merely authorized by law, it hasconstitutional foundations.

INTERNAL RULES AND DISCIPLINE

ARROYO V. DE VENECIA: A motion was brought to ratify a bicameral conference committee report;Arroyo attempted to object but he was not recognized. He brought this petition to challenge thevalidity of the law which developed from the report on the ground that it was passed in violation of therules of the House.The SC has no jurisdiction.As a general rule, internal rules may be revoked at will by the Legislature. If a House violates its ownrules, it is considered a waiver and will not be questioned by the courts.The exception is where a violation of the rules affects private rights.

OSMEA V. PENDATUN: Disciplinary proceedings were initiated by the House against Osmea for aspeech he delivered on the floor. Osmea filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition alleging that hisspeech did not constitute disorderly behavior.

The House is the judge of what constitutes disorderly behavior not only because the Constitutionconferred jurisdiction upon it, but also because it depends on factual circumstances known best to theHouse. The courts cannot interfere as long as the disciplinary sanction is imposed with the requiredvote.

PAREDES V. SANDIGANBAYAN: Congressman was suspended by Sandiganbayan for actscommitted while still governor. SC upheld suspension but was powerless to implement it withoutcooperation from the House.

Lopez v. Senate: The Rules of the Joint Public Session of Congress creating a Joint Committee tocanvass the votes for P/VP cannot be reviewed unless there is a clear violation of the Constitution.There is none here because the decisions of the Committee are subject to the approval of the jointsession of both houses voting separately.

DUTY TO KEEP JOURNALS AND RECORDS

Journal: abbreviated account of daily proceedings Record: word for word transcript of the deliberations of Congress

U.S. V. PONS: To determine whether a law was passed while Congress was still in session, thejournal was referred to. It showed that the law was passed on the last day, when Congress adjournedsine die, but defendant claimed that the clock was merely stopped and in reality, the law was passedbeyond the last day.The could not inquire into the veracity of the journal under the principle of separation of powers.

CASCO PHILIPPINE CHEMICAL CO. V. GIMENEZ: The law exempted foreign exchangetransactions for the importation of urea formaldehyde from margin fees. Importer of urea andformaldehyde claims that Congress intended the exemption to apply to his situation.Though the deliberations and the bill may have supported the importers positions, they cannotovercome the final letter of the law, as approved and enacted. The courts cannot second guesscongressional intent when the law is clear.

MORALES V. SUBIDO: In a discrepancy between the bill as it appears in the journal and the enrolledbill, the enrolled bill will prevail because it has been attested to by the Speaker and the SenatePresident. With respect to matters not expressly required to be entered in the journal, the enrolled billprevails in the event of any discrepancy.

ASTORGA V. VILLEGAS: A law was passed but several approved amendments, as indicated in the

Page 24


25/60

journal, were omitted in the enrolled bill, which was passed into law. The Senate president and thePresident withdrew their signatures.In light of the special circumstances, by the withdrawal of the Senate Presidents signature, thedocument was stripped of its character and probative value as an enrolled bill and must yield to hejournal.

Section 17. The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an ElectoralTribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns,and qualifications of their respective Members.

Each Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom shall beJustices of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice, and the remainingsix shall be Members of the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be,who shall be chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the politicalparties and the parties or organizations registered under the party-list systemrepresented therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal shall be it Chairman.

JURISDICTION OF THE ELECTORAL TRIBUNALS

ANGARA V. ELECTORAL COMMISSION: The Electoral Commission took cognizance of a protest filedagainst Angara despite his having been confirmed by the National Assembly. The NA confirmed Angara

on December 3; the EC set the last day for filing protests on December 9.The grant of power to the Electoral Commission to judge all contests relating to the election, returnsand qualifications of members of the National Assembly, is intended to be as complete and unimpairedas if it had remained originally in the legislature. The express lodging of that power in the ElectoralCommission is an implied denial of the exercise of that power by the National Assembly. And this is aseffective a restriction upon the legislative power as an express prohibition in the Constitution.

VERA V. AVELINO: On reports of election irregularities, the Senate approved the Pendatunresolution, which suspended the swearing in of Vera et al as senators.This was within the Senates power to do. It was not an election contest over which the ElectoralCommission was the sole judge. An election contest relates only to statutory contests in which thecontestant seeks not only to oust the intruder, but to have himself inducted into office. In this case,nobody is asserting a better right to the offices of petitioners. The power of the Senate to suspend theswearing in is inherent in its right of self-preservation.

CHAVEZ V. COMELEC: Frank Chavez filed a petition with the COMELEC to suspend the proclamationof the Senators on the ground that there was a failure to remove from the official list of candidates adisqualified candidate with the surname Chavez.Pre-proclamation cases are not allowed in elections for President, Vice-President, Senators, andCongressmen; all the COMELEC may do is correct manifest errors in the certificates of canvass orelection returns.Chavez may file an election protest with the Senate Electoral Tribunal.

AQUINO V. COMELEC: The Electoral Tribunals have exclusive jurisdiction over election contestsinvolving their respective members. This means that for the ETs to have jurisdiction, the candidatemust have been proclaimed. In this case, there is no such proclamation. A disqualification case againsta candidate may continue after the election and the COMELEC may suspend his proclamation whereevidence of guilt is strong.

PEREZ V. COMELEC: Remedy before proclamation: COMELEC may suspend proclamation whereevidence of guilt in a disqualification case is strong. Remedy after proclamation: file election protest /quo warranto with the ET.

GARCIA V. HRET: Quo warranto was filed before the HRET questioning Ang Pings eligibility to holdthe office of representative. HRET dismissed for failure to make the P5,000 deposit.The SC has jurisdiction because there was an allegation of GADALEJ. But there was no GADALEJbecause the rule require payment of deposit.Difference between quo warranto and protest. Quo warranto: to disqualify on grounds of ineligibility;

Page 25


26/60

the protestant will not be seated. Election protest: based on fraud/irregularities and it may be shownthat protestant received more votes; protestant may be seated.

RASUL V. COMELEC: A petition for certiorari was filed to set aside the COMELEC proclamationallegedly issued with GADALEJ.The SC has no jurisdiction. SET is sole judge of elections, returns and qualifications.Elections: refers to conduct of polls, including the listing of voters, and the casting and counting of

votes.Returns: refers to the canvass of the returns and the proclamation of the winners.Qualifications: refers to matters that could be raised in a quo warranto proceedings such asineligibility.

GUERRERO V. COMELEC: Farias substituted his daughter in the certificate of candidacy as acandidate for a house seat. The problem is that his daughter filed as an independent candidate andthere can be no substitution of independents. Guerrero claims that the COMELEC has jurisdiction overthe case because what is involved is not a Constitutional qualification but merely a statutory one. TheSC ruled that the HRET has jurisdiction and that a distinction between statutory and Constitutionalqualifications should not be made.Father Bernas says that this is not a qualifications issue but rather an election issue, over which theHRET has jurisdiction.

VILLAROSA V. HRET: The HRET declared as stray ballots those which had the initials JTV on themand were being claimed by Girlie Villarosa. JTV are the initials of her incumbent husband.No GADALEJ. Nicknames are allowed but they must be names by which the candidate is popularlyknown before the candidate files his certificate of candidacy.

COMPOSITION

ABBAS V. SET: An election contest was filed against 22 senatorial candidates; a motion fordisqualification was filed against the Senator-members of the SET because they were all interestedparties to the case.The Electoral Tribunals were intended to have judicial and legislative components, which wouldcommonly share in the duty of deciding election contests. The proportion of Senators to Justices is 2to 1, an unmistakable indication that the "legislative component" cannot be totally excluded from

participation in the resolution of senatorial election contests, without doing violence to the spirit intentof the Constitution. The Senate Electoral Tribunal cannot legally function as such, absent its entiremembership of Senators and that no amendment of its Rules can confer on the three Justices-Members alone the power of valid adjudication of a senatorial election contest.

PIMENTEL V. HRET: A petition was filed with the SC to compel the HRET/CA to reconstitute itself onthe basis of proportional representation in order to represent the party-list organizations.Even if the party-list have agreed to field a common representative to the HRET/CA and are sufficientin number to deserve a seat, under the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction, their primary recourse is withthe HRET/CA. Only if the House fails to comply with the rule on proportional representation canrecourse to the SC be had.The HRET/CA cannot reconstitute itself. Their composition is determined by the House.

Independence

Bondoc v. Pineda: A political party revoked the nomination of Camasura, its representative to theHRET because the latter did not vote for his party-mate in an election contest before the tribunal. Hisnomination was revoked because he was expelled from the party for party disloyalty.The House may not remove Camasura. The Electoral Tribunals must be independent and non-partisan;they are non-political bodies in a sea of politicians. Disloyalty, short of joining another party, is not aground for removal from the HRET. His removal also violates his security of tenure.

ACTION/DECISION

Page 26


27/60


28/60

Section 19. The Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments shall beconstituted within thirty days after the Senate and the House of Representatives shallhave been organized with the election of the President and the Speaker. TheCommission on Appointments shall meet only while the Congress is in session, at thecall of its Chairman or a majority of all its Members, to discharge such powers andfunctions as are herein conferred upon it.

Section 20. The records and books of accounts of the Congress shall be preserved and beopen to the public in accordance with law, and such books shall be audited by theCommission on Audit which shall publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid toand expenses incurred for each Member.

Section 21. The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committeesmay conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules ofprocedure. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall berespected.

LEGISLATIVE INVESTIGATION

Conditions:1. Must be in aid of legislation2. Must be in accordance with duly published rules of procedure

3. Must respect rights of persons appearing or affected by such inquiries, including the right againstself-incrimination

Failure to attend or contumacy may be punished Imprisonment by Senate may be indefinite Imprisonment by House can last only as long session when offense was committed May be reviewed by SC for GADALEJ

NEGROS ORIENTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE V. SANGGUNIANG PANLUNGSOD OFDUMAGUETE:The Legislatures power to subpoena and punish for contempt is sui generis. It attachesnot because of its legislative functions but because it is an independent and coordinate branch ofgovernment. LGUs are mere creations of law and it cannot be inferred that they possess the awesomepower despite their exercise of legislative power.

BENGZON V. SENATE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE: Enrile gave a privilege speech where hedisclosed alleged anomalous transactions and called for the SBRC to investigate into the possibilitythat the Anti-Graft Act was violated. Petitioners filed a petition for prohibition to prevent their beingsubpoenaed a second time on due process grounds that the inquiry will prejudice a case pendingwith the Sandiganbayan.Not in aid of legislation. The purpose was to determine whether the AGCPA was violated. Thisencroaches into the realm of the judiciary. The power of inquiry must be exercised in furtherance of avalid function of Congress, whether to legislate, discipline a member, etc.Bernas: A valid ground to stop the investigation would have been the violation of the rights of thirdpersons. By ruling that it was not in aid of legislation, the SC second-guessed the intention of theSBRC.

ARANULT V. NAZARENO: The Senate was investigating a suspicious transaction entered into by thegovernment. Arnault, a witness, when asked who received the money paid by the government, kept

giving evasive or obviously false answers. He was punished for contempt and ordered imprisonedindefinitely, or until he decides to cooperate.An obviously false or evasive answer is equivalent to a refusal to testify, which is punishable bycontempt.The materiality of the question is determined by its direct relation to the subject of the inquiry and notits indirect relation to the potential legislation.

Section 22. The heads of departments may upon their own initiative, with the consent of thePresident, or upon the request of either House, as the rules of each House shall provide,

Page 28


29/60

appear before and be heard by such House on any matter pertaining to theirdepartments. Written questions shall be submitted to the President of the Senate or theSpeaker of the House of Representatives at least three days before their scheduledappearance. Interpellations shall not be limited to written questions, but may covermatters related thereto. When the security of the State or the public interest so requiresand the President so states in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in executivesession.

This is known as the question hour

Congress should keep in mind that there are better ways to obtain information than

compulsion Department heads should also be aware that material information required by Congress

should not be withheld

Section 23. (1) The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses in joint sessionassembled, voting separately, shall have the sole power to declare the existence of astate of war.

(2) In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize thePresident, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, toexercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless

sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress, such powers shall cease upon the nextadjournment thereof.

DECLARATION OF EXISTENCE OF STATE OF WAR

Actual power to wage war is lodged in Executive

Even if Congress doesnt declare existence of war, Executive may wage war under his broad

powers: commander in chief, residual powers, practical reasons

Requisites:1. 2/3 vote2. joint session3. voting separately

DELEGATION OF EMERGENCY POWERS

Requisites:1. War or national emergency2. Law is passed3. Limitations:

a. restrictions set by congressb. declared national policyc. limited period

i. may be withdrawn by resolution (majority vote)ii. powers cease upon adjournment of congress

Example of national emergency: brownouts during Ramos term

Section 24. All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of public debt,bills of local application, and private bills shall originate exclusively in the House ofRepresentatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments.

ORIGIN OF BILLS

1. Appropriation Bill: primary purpose of which is to authorize the release of funds from the publictreasury

2. Revenue Bill: levies taxes and raises funds for the government3. Tariff Bill: specifies the rates or duties to be imposed on imported articles

Page 29


30/60

4. Bill Increasing Public Debt: illustrated by one floating funds for public subscription redeemableafter a certain period

5. Bill of Local Application: one involving purely local matters, like the charter of a city6. Private Bills: illustrated by a bill granting honorary citizenship to a foreigner

The above bills must originate in the House because they are more numerous in membership andalso more representative of the people. Its members are presumed to be more familiar with the

needs of the country. The Senate has much leeway in amending the bills, what is important is that the bill originates in

the House.

GUINGONA V. CARAGUE: The law which provided for automatic appropriations was a PD issued byMarcos. It did not originate in the House.The Constitution must be given a reasonable construction and made to apply prospectively. Existingappropriation, revenue, etc. laws cannot be deemed to have been reduced to the status of bill andmade to pass the legislative mill anew.

TOLENTINO V. SOF/ALVAREZ V. GUINGONA:1. The bill, not the law, must originate in the lower house;2. The upper house, upon receipt of the bill, may overhaul it and even substitute it with its own3. The substitute bill may be filed in the Senate in anticipation of the receipt of the House bill as long

as no action is taken on it (hearings?)4. A third version of the bill may result from the conference committee. Though BCCs are not

expected to make substantial changes, their version will be accepted as long it is germane to thesubject of the Senate and House bills

APPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC REVENUE FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE

PASCUAL V. SEC. OF PUB. WORKS: Money was appropriated to build roads on property which wasdonated to the municipality. However, at the time of the appropriation, a condition for the effectivityof the donation had not yet occurred.The appropriation was not for a public purpose. What is important is the essential character of thedirect object of the appropriation, which must be public. Incidental advantage to the State does notmake an appropriation one for a public purpose.

Section 25. (1) The Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by thePresident for the operation of the Government as specified in the budget. The form,content, and manner of preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law.

(2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless itrelates specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such provision orenactment shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation to which it relates.

(3)The procedure in approving appropriations for the Congress shall strictly follow theprocedure for approving appropriations for other departments or agencies.

(4) A special appropriations bill shall specify the purpose for which it is intended, and shallbe supported by funds actually available as certified by the National Treasurer, or to beraised by a corresponding revenue proposed therein.

(5)No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, thePresident, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, theChief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Constitutional Commissions may, BY LAW,be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respectiveoffices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.

(6)Discretionary funds appropriated for particular officials shall be disbursed only forpublic purposes to be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelinesas may be prescribed by law.

Page 30


31/60

(7)If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the generalappropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law for thepreceding fiscal year shall be deemed reenacted and shall remain in force and effectuntil the general appropriations bill is passed by the Congress.

LIMITS ON POWER TO APPROPRIATE:

1. Must originate in lower house;2. Congress may not increase appropriations recommended by the President in the budget;3. Prohibition on riders;4. Appropriations for Congress must follow procedure for

Constitutional Law 1 Notes

Documents

Transcript of Constitutional Law 1 Notes