Constitutional Law I

5/22/2018 Constitutional Law I

1/62

APRIL LYNN L. URSAL Pag

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IGENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

A. POLITICAL LAW

- A branch of public law which deals with the organization and operations of the governmental organs of the State and defines the

relations of the State with the inhabitants of its territory.

B. BRANCHES OF POLITICAL LAW

1. Constitutional Law - constitution + jurisprudence

2. Administrative Law

3. Law on Public Administration

4. Law on Public Corporations5. Law on Elections

C. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

- Constitutional law is a term used to designate the law embodied in the constitution and the legal principles growing out of the

interpretation and application made by courts of the constitution in specific cases.

TYPES OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

1. English type- Characterized by the absence of a written constitution.

2. European continental typeA written constitution w/c gives the court no power to declare ineffective statutes repugnant to it.

3. American type- Legal provisions of the written constitution are given effect through the power of the courts to declare ineffecti

or void ordinary statutes repugnant to it.

D. CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY

- A form of government in which the sovereign power of the people is spelled out in a governing constitution.- A system of government based on popular sovereignty in which the structures, powers, and limits of government are set forth in

constitution.

CONSTITUTIONALISM

- Constitutionalism refers to the position or practice that government be limited by a constitution.

- The doctrine or system of government in which the governing power is limited by enforceable rules of law and concentration of

power is limited by various checks and balances so that the basic rights of individuals and groups are protected.

E. CONSTITUTION

- That body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the power of sovereignty are habitually exercised.

- Puts limitations to the powers of government rather than being the source of powers.

Subordinates:

- Acts of Congress- Acts of the President

- Decisions of the Congress

THE SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

- We obey laws because we have a covenant or agreement between the people.

- It is with consent.

*Theory - is trying to explain something; is trying to answer a question or query

1. Thomas Hobbes

- true state of nature is warlike, nasty etc.

- surrender our rights to people higher than us for them to establish governance

- totalitarian

- authoritarian

2. John Locke

- true state of nature is not warlike, nasty etc.

- man is supposed to be governed by natural laws

- concerned about property rights

- political authority is conditional

- we can use our inherent rights to replace our government

- government should be limited


2/62


3. Jean-Jacques Rousseau

- The contract liberates people from the rude state of nature.

- Socialistic view of the relationship between the individual and society.

- The contract does not change people or their rights, but rather it offers guarantees.

- It guarantees individualism by prohibiting excessive individualism or self-interest.

- People empower the state by their contract with the ruler.

- The citizens give the state (and society) complete control over themselves and their (individual) possessions.

MEANING, PURPOSE AND ROLE OF A CONSTITUTION

- To prescribe the permanent framework of a system of government, to assign to the several departments their respective powers

and duties, and to establish certain first principles on which government is founded.

THE DOCTRINE SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION

- It is a supreme law to which all other laws must conform and in accordance with which all private rights must be determined and

public authority administered.

- If a law violates any norm of the constitution, that law is null and void; it has no effect. (This is an overstatement, for a law held

unconstitutional is not always wholly a nullity)

- It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the Constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it.

- Constitutional supremacy produced judicial review.

CLASSIFICATIONS OF CONSTITUTIONS

A. (1) Rigid- is one that can be amended only by a formal and usually difficult process; cumbersome; subject to ratification

(2) Flexible- is one that can be changed by ordinary legislation; easier

B. (1) Written- is one whose precepts are embodied in one document or set of documents; codified(2) Unwritten- consists of rules which have not been integrated into a single, concrete form but are scattered in various

sources, such as statutes of a fundamental character, judicial decisions, commentaries of publicists, customs and traditions,

certain common law principles; uncodified

C. (1) Evolved- or cumulative is the result of political evolution, not inaugurated at any specific time but changing by accretion

rather than by systematic method

(2) Enacted- or conventional constitution is enacted, formally struck off at a definitive time and place following a conscious

deliberate effort taken by a constituent body or ruler

D. (1) Normative- adjusts to norms

(2) Nominal- not yet fully operational

(3) Semantic- perpetuation of power

*The Constitution of the Philippines is written, conventional and rigid.

ESSENTIAL QUALITIES OF A GOOD WRITTEN CONSTITUTION

1. Broad - it provides for the organization of the entire government and covers all persons and things within the territory of the Sta

and also because it must be comprehensive enough to provide for every contingency

2. Brief - must confine itself to basic principles to be implemented w/ legislative details more adjustable to change and easier to am

3. Definite- to prevent ambiguity in its provisions which could result in confusion and divisiveness among the people

ESSENTIAL PARTS OF A GOOD WRITTEN CONSTITUTION

1. Constitution of Government- The series of provisions outlining the organization of the government, enumerating its powers, laying

down certain rules relative to its administration and defining the electorate.

2. Constitution of Liberty- The series of proscriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and political rights of the citizens and imposi

limitations on the powers of government as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights.

3. Constitution of Sovereignty- The provisions pointing out the mode or procedure in accordance with which formal changes in the

fundamental law may be brought about. It has to be changed through the instrumentality of the people.

METHODS OF CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION

Well-settled principles of constitutional construction, namely:

1. Verba Legis- plain meaning rule

- whenever possible the words used in the Constitution must be given their ordinary meaning except when technical terms a

employed (Francisco, Jr. vs. House of Rep.)

- textualist approach or intent


3/62


2. Ratio legis et anima- interpretation according to spirit

- words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of the framers (Francisco, Jr. vs. House of R

- originalism (intent of the framers; original understanding of the people)

3. Ut magis valeat quam pereat- the constitution has to be interpreted as a whole

PRESUMPTIONS IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION

1. Constitution is Self-Executing - a constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred and the

liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself, so that they can be determined by an examination and construction of its ter

and there is no language indicating that the subject is referred to the legislature for action. (Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS)

2. Constitution is Mandatoryobligatory; compulsory; fixed; binding3. Constitution is Prospectivenot retroactive; looks forward

AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS

METHODS OF CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION

1. Constituent Assembly- amendments and revisions

- 3/4 of all its members voting separately

- there were instances in which the Senate and HP will convene and vote as a whole (during the Martial Law)

- since nothing is said about a joint session, it is submitted that each House may separately formulate amendments by a vote

of all its members, and then pass it on to the other House for a similar process, and disagreement can be settled through

conference committee

2. Constitutional Convention - amendments and revisions- calls for a constituent assembly first before Constitutional Convention

- 2/3 of all its members

3. People's Initiative- amendments only

- proposal by the people themselves

- The constitutional provision on people's initiative to amend the Constitution can only be implemented by law to be passed

Congress. No such law has been passed. (Santiago vs. COMELEC)

- The people's initiative is limited to amendments to the Constitution, not to revision thereof. Extending or lifting of term lim

constitutes a revision and is, therefore, outside the power of the people's initiative. (Santiago vs. COMELEC)

(a) The proper parties who may file the petit ion,

(b) the appropriate agency before whom the petition is to be filed,

(c) the contents of the petition,

(d) the publication of the same,(e) the ways and means of gathering the signatures of the voters nationwide and 3% per legislative district,

(f) the proper parties who may oppose or question the veracity of the signatures,

(g) the role of the COMELEC in the verification of the signatures and the sufficiency of the petition,

(h) the appeal from any decision of the COMELEC,

(i) the holding of a plebiscite, and

(g) the appropriation of funds for such people's initiative.

*Since the Constitution is about what method to be used, under the political questions doctrine, the Congress shall decide on

what method is to be used.

AMENDMENT VS. REVISION

Amendment- an alteration of one or a few specific provisions of the Constitution. Its main purpose is to improve specific provisions o

the Constitution. The changes being brought about by amendments will not affect the other provisions of the Constitution.

Revision- an examination of the entire Constitution to determine how and to what extent it should be altered. A revision implies

substantive change, affecting the Constitution as a whole.

* Revision broadly implies a change that alters a basic principle in the constitution, like altering the principle of separation o

powers or the system of checks-and-balances. There is also revision if the change alters the substantial entirety of the constitution, as

when the change affects substantial provisions of the constitution. On the other hand, amendment broadly refers to a change that ad

reduces, or deletes without altering the basic principle involved. Revision generally affects several provisions of the constitution, while

amendment generally affects only the specific provision being amended. (Lambino vs. COMELEC)


4/62


STEPS/STAGES IN AMENDMENT/REVISION PROCESS

1. Proposal (3 methods)- there is a process of proposing a change in the Constitution

2. Ratification- held in a plebiscite conducted under the election law

- supervised by the COMELEC

- where only registered voters take part

- all proposed amendments/revision made by the constituent assemblies must be submitted for ratification in a single plebi

- there cannot be a piece-meal ratification of amendments/revisions

Doctrine of Fair and Proper Submission

- sufficiently inform the people of the amendments to be voted upon, to conscientiously deliberate thereon and to express their will igenuine manner

JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS/REVISIONS

- the power of judicial review is limited to actual cases and controversies to be exercised after full opportunity of argument by the par

and limited further to the constitutional question raised or the very lis mota(the cause of the suit or action, commencement of the

controversy, beginning of the suit presented) (Tolentino vs Comelec)

THEORIES ON THE POSITION OF CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IN RELATION TO THE REGULAR DEPARTMENTS OF THE GOVERNM

1. Theory of Conventional Sovereignty

- where the Constitutional Convention is supreme over the other departments of the government because the powers it exercises are

the nature of sovereign powers

2. Inferiority of Constitutional Convention

- Constitutional Convention is considered inferior to the other departments of the government and with very limited power purely

delegated by the people or by a regularly constituted legislature3. Independence and Co-equality

- so long as the Constitutional Convention exists and confines itself within the sphere of its jurisdiction, it must be considered an

independent and a coordinate department of an existing government

F. THE CONSTITUTION AND THE JUDICIARY

JUDICIAL POWER

- includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceabl

and to determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction on the part o

any branch or instrumentality of the Government. Under the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, it is vested in one Supreme Court an

in such lower courts as may be established by law.

a. Judicial Power Proper- power to review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal on certiorari ... final judgments and orders of

courts in cases ... constitutionality of a treaty ... lawb. Judicial Review- only power of the Supreme Court that enables it to check the prerogative and acts of the powers of executive and

legislative department

i. Ordinary Judicial Review (Constitutional Review)

- the role and function of the Supreme Court under the Constitution has been characterized as that of being the arbiter in

allocating the boundaries of powers under the Constitution

- discretion, but about validity based on Constitution

- if it is a question of wisdom, policy etc, courts will hands off

- Political Question Doctrine is strictly followed

- act is valid if it contravenes the Constitution

ii. Expanded Judicial Review (Extraordinary Certiorari Review)

- the Supreme Court, together with the ordinary courts, the power and duty to determine, in actual justiciable cases, wheth

or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or

instrumentality of the Government

- involves discretion

Judicial Review

- Constitution

- Statute

- Doctrine/Principle of Law

- voting requirements

- schedule of plebiscite

- procedure


5/62


Political Question -It is a question which, under the Constitution, is to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity,

in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch of the government.

concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not legality of a particular measure. To a great degree, the 1987

Constitution has narrowed the reach of the political question doctrine when it expanded the power of judicial review not on

to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable but also to determine whether

not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or

instrumentality of government.

- discretion

- wisdom

- policy

- efficiency- practicability

- substance (exc: "Jus Cogens" - preemptory norms in the international law which cannot be derogated, should bind all state

THE DOCTRINE OF SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION

-The Constitution is the basic and paramount law to which all other laws must conform and to which all persons, including the highes

officials of the land, must defer. No act shall be valid, however nobly intentioned, if it conflicts with the Constitution. The Constitution m

ever remain supreme. All must bow to the mandate of this law. Expediency must not be allowed to sap its strength nor greed for powe

debase its rectitude. Right or wrong, the Constitution must be upheld as long as it has not been changed by the sovereign people lest it

disregard result in the usurpation of the majesty of the law by the pretenders to illegitimate power.

- The Constitution is the basis of the validity of all laws and governmental acts. It is the basis of the legitimacy of the very existence of

government. It is the basis of the legitimacy of the exercise by government of powers that interfere with personal autonomy and liber

It is the anchorage of all legitimacy.

- The Constitution does not become legitimate just because it is a constitution and while it cannot be unconstitutional, it can however

illegitimate. Constitutionality therefore is one thing and legitimacy is another. Constitutionality is an attribute of governmental acts an

laws that do not contravene the Constitution; legitimacy is an attribute of governmental acts and laws, including the Constitution, tha

makes them at the least, juridically right, acceptable, and necessary.

- As the anchorage of all legitimacy, the Constitution must itself be legitimate. Its legitimacy cannot rest on mere conjectures or shaky

theories. It cannot simply be assumed. It must rest on solid ground if it is to the basis of the legitimacy of all governmental acts and la

that depend on it for their own legitimacy.

Doctrine of Separation of Powers

- It operates to maintain the legislative powers to the legislative department, executive powers to the executive department, and thos

which are judicial in character to the judiciary. Through this allocation of powers, the person entrusted shall not be permitted to encro

upon the power confided to the others, but that each shall, by the law of its creation, be limited to the exercise of the powers

appropriate to its own department and no other. There must be independence and equity of the several departments.

The separation of powers however should not be interpreted as complete separation and absolute exclusion. The doctrine carries tha

although the three branches are not subject to the control by either of the others and each is supreme within its own sphere, they are

still equal and coordinate. Equal because they al l derive their powers from the same common sovereign through the constitution. And

coordinate because they cannot simply ignore the acts done by other departments as nugatory and not binding.

HOW JUDICIAL REVIEW IS EXERCISED

- All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the Suprem

Court en banc, and all other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en banc, including those involving the

constitutionality, application, or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulati

shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the ca

and voted thereon. (Sec. 4(2), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)

- manner: (1) Supreme Court en banc; (2) majority of the members who participated in the deliberation and voted thereon

WHO MAY EXERCISE JUDICIAL REVIEW

-judicial power shall be vested in 1 Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law (Sec. 1, Art. VIII, 1987 Const

- All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree,

proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question. (Sec. 5(2)(A), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)

FUNCTIONS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW

1. Checking- it allows justice to be served by striking down erroneous decisions by lower courts

- the reading of the constitutional map, as it were, and the allocation of constitutional authority among the major structures

government


6/62


2. Legitimating- appellate courts monitor the performance of lower courts; lower courts have an incentive to apply the law correctly

the possibility exists that their decisions may be overturned

- the determination of whether the particular agency or department concerned has stayed within its own sphere of authorit

observing the constitutional limitations projected for actions within such sphere, or whether it has trespassed into the zone

immunity or privacy guaranteed to individuals by the Constitution

3. Symbolic- important controversies regarding the law are examined and resolved for the future guidance of courts and individuals

- it is this function that the Supreme Court discharges when it acts, as it should, as the "pronouncer and the guardian" of the

more fundamental values that the community seeks

- "sui generis"(of its own kind/genus or unique in its characteristics); whether the Supreme Court be invalidating or validatin

legislative or executive measure, the demand of the community is that the resulting decision shall embody and implement it

basic values

REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW

1. Actual Case or Controversy; Ripeness of Controversy

- a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial determination

- no commitment to adversorial system; the court has no authority to pass upon issues of constitutionality through advisory

opinions; there should be an actual case or controversy

- ripeness for adjudication - governmental act challenged should have direct adverse effect on individual challenging the act

* premature case: hypothetical, give advisory opinion, pool a problem in abstract

* actual case: ripeness for adjudication

* moot and academic

Doctrine of Operative Fact (David vs. Arroyo)The courts will decide if the cases otherwise become moot and academic if:

there is a grave violation of the Constitution the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is involved when constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the pub the case is capable of repetition yet evading review

2. Legal Standing (Locus Standi)

- standing in law

- complainant/challenger should have personal or substantial interest in the case

* real-party-in-interestparty who stands to be benefited/injured by judgment in the suit; the party entitled to the avails of the sui

civil / private law cases

rigid; strict

* legal standingpublic / constitutional law cases

personal and substantial interest; if the person is the party who suffers or will suffer the injury pursuant to the applicatio

governmental act

broader concept

apply the direct injury test

i. Suits

Requisites for Taxpayers Suit- there must be a claim of illegal disbursement of public funds or that the tax measure isunconstitutional

Requisites for Lawmakers Suit- there must be a claim that the official action complained of infringes upon their prerogativelegislators

Requisites for Voters Suit- there must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of the election law in question Requisites for Concerned Citizens Suit- there must be a showing that the issues raised are of transcendental importance w

must be settled early

ii. The Paramount Importance Doctrine

We find the instant petition to be of transcendental importance to the public. The issues it raised are of paramount public i nterest an

a category even higher than those involved in many of the aforecited cases. The ramifications of such issues immeasurably affect the

social, economic, and moral well-being of the people even in the remotest barangays of the country and the counter-productive and

retrogressive effects of the envisioned on-line lottery system are as staggering as the billions in pesos it is expected to raise. The legal

standing then of the petitioners deserves recognition and, in the exercise of its sound discretion, this Court hereby brushes aside the

procedural barrier which the respondents tried to take advantage of. (Kilosbayan vs. Guingona, Jr.)


7/62


iii. A facialchallenge is allowed to be made to vague statute and to one which is overbroad because of possible chilling effect upon

protected speech. The possible harm to society in permitting some unprotected speech to go unpunished is outweighed by the

possibility that the protected speech of other may be deterred and perceived grievances left to fester because of possible inhibitory

effects of overly broad statutes. But in criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the area of free speech. (Estrada vs.

Sandiganbayan)

Doctrine of Strict Scrutiny- The statute is absolutely unconstitutional under no circumstance. But the only time a facialchallenge to a statute is allowed is when it operates in the area of freedom of expression. Invalidation of the statute on its

face, rather than as applied is permitted in the interest of preventing a chilling effect on freedom of expression.

Doctrine of Over Breadth- permits a party to challenge the validity of a statute even though as applied to him, it is notunconstitutional, but it might be if applied to others not before the Courts whose activities are constitutionally protected.

(applicable to any statute) Doctrine of Void-for-Vagueness- subject to the same principles governing over breadth doctrine also an analytical tool fo

testing on their faces statutes in free speech cases

- applies to criminal laws, not merely those that regulate speech or other fundamental constitutional right

(The 3 doctrines are applicable only on freedom of expression, not on penal statutes.)

3. The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity; Exceptions

General Rule:

The question must be raised in the pleadings.

Exceptions:

In criminal cases, the question can be raised at any time at the discretion of the court; In civil cases, the question can be raised at any stage of the proceedings if necessary for the determination of the case itself; In every case, except where there is estoppel, it can be raised at any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court.

2 kinds of estoppel:

o A person is barred from questioning a particular act after where he has benefited from the same act.o Where a person is prevented from exercising a right, after a certain period he has slept that right.

4. The decision on the constitutional question must be determinative of the case itself (constl question must be the very lis mota)

- lis mota- essence of the subject matter of the case; existing or anticipated litigation

- determination of the constitutionality of the act is inevitable, cannot be avoided

- the court should respect the act of the other 2 branches

EFFECTS OF DECLARATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY

1. The Orthodox View- The law is void if on its face it does not enjoy any presumption of validity because it is patently offensive to th

Constitution. It produces no effect, creates no effect, and produces no duty.

- if the law is inconsistent with the Constitution, then the latter shall govern

- if the law has been declared unconstitutional, it is presumed that no law existed at all

- traditional view

- An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in leg

contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. (NORTON vs. SHELBY COUNT 118 U.S. 425, 442 [1886], ARTICLE 7 N

2. The Modern View - The law is voidable if on its face it enjoys the presumption of unconstitutionality. The law becomes inoperative

only upon the judicial declaration of its invalidity. The declaration produces no retroactive effect.

- Under this view, the court in passing upon the question of constitutionality does not annul or repeal the statute if it finds it in conflic

with the Constitution. It simply refuses to recognize it and determines the rights of the parties just as if such statute had no existence

(CRUZ, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1991, 32-33, citing NORTON vs. SHELBY, 118 U.S. 425 and SHEPARD vs. BARREN, 194 U.S. 553) But certlegal effects of the statute prior to its declaration of unconstitutionality may be recognized. (PELAEZ vs. AUDITOR GENERAL 15 SCRA 56

* Doctrine of Operative Factif the law has been declared unconstitutional

PARTIAL UNCONSTITUTIONALITY; CONDITIONS

Requisites for partial unconstitutionality:

(1) The Legislature must be willing to retain the valid portion(s), usually shown by the presence of a separability clause in the law; and

(2) The valid portion can stand independently as law. (IN RE: CUNANAN 94 Phil. 534, SALAZAR vs. ACHACOSO 183 SCRA 145)


8/62


G. THE 1987 CONSTITUTION

- took effect on February 2, 1987 (date of ratification)

- above-mentioned date is the date of plebiscite

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ITHE PHILIPPINES AS A STATE

A. STATE, defined

* State - is a community of persons, more or less numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of territory,

independent of external control, and possessing a government to which a great body of the inhabitants render habitual obedience- a politically organized sovereign community independent of outside control bound by ties of nationhood,

legally supreme within its territory, acting through a government functioning under a regime of law.

(CIR v. Campos Ruedas, 42 SCRA 23)

* 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States

- was a treaty signed at Montevideo, Uruguay, on December 26, 1933, during the Seventh International Conference of American States

- the Convention codified the declarative theory of statehood as accepted as part of customary international law

Primary Sources of International Laws:

treaties and conventions customary international laws general principle

Secondary Sources International Laws:

opinions of highly qualified publicists or decisions of courtsElements of a State:

People Territory Government Sovereign/Capacity to enter into relations with other states

* Doctrine of Self Auto-Limitation

- A principle under which any state may by its consent, express or implied, submit to a restriction of its sovereign rights. There may thus be a

curtailment of what otherwise is a plenary power.

- There is no limitation on the sovereignty but there is a limitation on the exercise of sovereignty.

B. STATE, distinguished from NATION, from GOVERNMENT

* Stateis a political and geopolitical entity; while, Nationis a cultural and/or ethnic entity.

State

-is a legal or juristic concept

Nation

-is an ethnic or racial concept

State

-possesses a government to which a great body of

inhabitants render habitual obedience

Government

-merely an instrumentality of the State through which the will of

the State is implemented and realized

C. TERRITORY

Article I, 1987 Constitution

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over whthe Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the

subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarines areas. The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless

their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

* It is important to know the territory in order to know over which the State can exercise its jurisdiction.

Two (2) Parts of the National Territory:

1. The Philippine archipelago with all the islands and waters embraced therein; and

2. All other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction.


9/62


Modes of acquiring territories:

1.Discovery and Occupationwhich are terra nullius (land belonging to no one)

*Doctrine of Effective Occupationdiscovery alone is not enough. Mere discovery gives only an inchoate right to the discoverer. For t

to finally vest, discovery must be followed by effective occupation in a reasonable time and attestation of the same.

2.Cession by Treaty.

Examples are Treaty of Paris, treaty between France and US ceding Louisiana to the latter and treaty between Russia and US ceding Alaska to th

latter;

3.Prescriptionwhich is a concept under the Civil Code. Territory may also be acquired through continuous and uninterrupted possession overlong period of time. However, in international law, there is no rule of thumb as to the length of time for acquisition of territory through

prescription. In this connection, consider the Grotius Doctrine of immemorial prescription, which speaks of uninterrupted possession going beyo

memory.

4.Conquest or Subjugation(conquistadores)this is no longer recognized, inasmuch as the UN Charter prohibits resort to threat or use of forc

against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state; and

5.Accretionanother concept in the Civil Code. It is the increase in the land area of the State, either through natural means, or artificially, throu

human labor.

xxx The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form par

the internal waters of the Philippines.

* This second sentence of Article I is not the Archipelago Doctrine. This is only our restatement/reaffirmation of our adherence to the ArchipelaDoctrine simply because we are an archipelago consisting of 7,107 islands. It is essential for our national survival that we adhere to the archipel

principle.

* Archipelago Doctrinemerely emphasizes the unity of lands and waters. It is a body of waters interconnected with other natural features. Un

the United Nation Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS), it consists of drawing imaginary baseline connecting the outermost islands of the

archipelago in which all waters, islands is considered as one integrated whole.

Anarchipelagois defined as group of islands, interconnecting waters and other natural features which are so closely interrelated that such islan

waters and natural features form an intrinsic geographical, economical and political entity, or which historically been regarded as such.

Correlate this doctrine to right of innocent of passage, right of arrival under stress and UNCLOS requiring the designation of archipelagic seaway

that foreign vessels may pass through an archipelago.

2 Kinds of Archipelago:

1.Coastal Archipelagosituated close to a mainland and may be considered a part thereof.2.Mid-Ocean Archipelagosituated in the ocean at such distance from the coasts of firm land. The Philippines is classified as mid-ocean

archipelago just like Indonesia. The Philippines is not in any way connected physically with the Asia mainland.

Components of National Territory:

I. Terrestrialland mass on which the inhabitants live;

II. Fluvialmaritime;

a. Internal or national watersbodies of water within the land mass, among them are:

i. Rivers

* Thalweg Doctrinefor boundary rivers, in the absence of an agreement between the riparian states, the bounda

line is laid on the middle of the main navigable channel.

* Middle of the Bridge Doctrinewhere there is a bridge over a boundary river, the boundary line is the middle or

center of the bridge.

ii. Bays and gulfs

iii. Straits

iv. Canals

b. Archipelagic watersare the waters enclosed by the archipelagic baselines, regardless of their depth or distance from the coast.

c. Territorial Seathe belt of the sea located between the coast and the internal waters of the coastal state on the other hand, and th

high seas on the other, extending up to 12 nautical miles from the low-water mark, or in the case of archipelagic states, from the

baselines.

d. Contiguous Zoneextends up to 12 nautical miles from the territorial sea; this shall not exceed 24 nautical miles from the archipel

baselines.

e. Exclusive Economic Zoneshall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the archipelagic baselines.


10/62

APRIL LYNN L. URSAL Page

* Baselineis a line from which the breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone and the exclusive economic zone is measured i

order to determine the maritime boundary of the coastal state.

* Types of baseline:Normal Baseline Method; Straight Baseline method

f. Continentalshelfit is the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas extending beyond the Philippine territorial sea throughout th

natural prolongation of the land territory. It extends up to:

i. The outer edge of the continental margin; or

ii. A distance of 200 nautical miles from the archipelagic baselines, whichever is the farthest.

* The continental shelf does not form part of the Philippine territory. The Philippines has the sovereign rights over the continental she

for the purpose of exploring it and exploiting its natural resources.

g. High Seastreated as res communes, thus, not territory of any particular State. These are the waters which do not constitute the

internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zones of a state. They are beyond the jurisdiction andsovereign rights of States.

* Philippinesterritorial sea 12 nautical miles from the baseline

- contiguous zone12 nautical miles from the territorial sea

- exclusive economic zone 200 nautical miles from the baseline

- high seas after the E.E.Z., no state can exercise jurisdiction

D. PEOPLE

1. Different Concepts of People

Peoplethe inhabitants of the State; the number of which is capable for self sufficiency and self-defense; of both sexes for perpetuity.

a. Inhabitants;

b. Citizens;c. Electors.

* Citizen - a person member or democratic political community; they exercise political rights

* National - a person relating to ethnic or racial concept

* Subject - a member of a non-democratic political community

2. Citizenship

Citizenship - is membership in a political community which is personal and more or less permanent in character.

Nationality - is membership in any class or form of political community. Thus, nationals may be citizens [if member of a democratic community]

subjects [if members of a monarchial community]. It does not necessarily include the right or privilege of exercising political and civil rights.

* Citizenshipis political in character; nationalityrefers to a racial or ethnic relationship.

Section 1, Article III, 1935 Constitution:

The following are citizens of the Philippines -

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this Constitution

(2) Those born in the Philippines Islands of foreign parents who, before the adoption of this Constitution, had been elected to public office in the

Philippine Islands.

(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines.

(4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and upon reaching the age of majority, elect Philippine citizenship.

(5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

Section 1, Article III, 1973 Constitution:

The following are citizens of the Philippines-

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution.

(2) Those whose fathers ormothers are citizens of the Philippines.

(3) Those who elect Philippine citizenship pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution of 1935.


Section 1, Article IV, 1987 Constitution now provides:

The following are citizens of the Philippines-

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution.

(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines.

(3) Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and



11/62


Citizenship Laws and Important Dates:

Before 11 April 1899(Treaty of Paris), no Citizens of the Philippines (only Spanish subjects); * December 11, 1898 date of signing of Treaty of Paris.

From 11 April 1899 to 01 July 1902(Phil. Bill of 1902), some judges applied Jus Soli (as it was and still is the one followed ithe United States);

On 01 July 1902, the Phil. Bill of 1902 defines Citizens of the Philippines as those who were o (1) Spanish subjects (native or otherwise) on 11 April 1899 (including their children born thereafter),o (2) who remain inhabitants of the Philippines, ando (3) did not becomes citizens of another state. [excluding those who declared to remain under Spain];

On August 29, 1916, Jones Law of 1916 reiterated Phil. Bill of 1902; On March 22, 1920, Act No. 2927 (old Naturalization Law) was enacted; On May 14, 1935,the 1935 Constitution took effect which provided for jus sanguinis. But only those born of Filipino Fathe

can be Filipinos by birth. Those born of Filipino Mother and alien father had to elect citizenship upon reaching the age of

majority (meaning, the child was alien during minority), but decision of courts still applying jus soli in certain cases would ha

to be respected because of res judicata;

OnJune 17, 1939, C.A. No. 473 (new Naturalization Law) took effect; On June 7, 1941,C.A. No. 625 was enacted provided for the manner of electing Phil. Citizenship as required by the 1935

Constitution (sworn statement to be filed with the Civil Registry accompanied by oath allegiance to the Constitution and

Government);

1973 Constitution took effect on January 17, 1973which makes jus sanguinis fully applicable (to either father or mother). also recognized as natural-born those who elected Phil. Cit izenship under the 1935 Constitution;

1987 Constitution took effect on February 2, 1987, adopting the same provisions in the 1973 Constitution; Republic Act No. 9139 was enacted on June 8, 2001which provides for Administrative Naturalization in certain cases;

Republic Act No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003) was enacted on August 29, 2003.

April 11, 1899 Phil. Bill of 1902 / Jones

Law of 1916

May 14, 1935 January 17, 1973 February 2, 1987

* Spanish subjects

* Treaty of Paris

3 conditions for mass

naturalization:

* a subject of Spain on

April 11, 1899

* residing in the Phils on

said date

* since that date, not a

citizen of foreign country

* mentioned in Section1,

Article III, 1935

Constitution

* a native-born inhabitant

of the Phils.

* naturalized under Act.

No. 2927

* mentioned in Section1,

Article III, 1973

Constitution

* must be a Filipino since

1935 Constitution

* mentioned in Section

Article IV, 1987

Constitution

* must be a Filipino sin

1973 Constitution

*Res Judicataa matter already judged

- no amount of act can grant your citizenship; not applicable in citizenship

* Obiter dictumif not material to the solution of the case

- an expression or opinion by the court or judge on a collateral questions not directly involved or not necessary for the decis

2.1 Importance

- Citizenship is personal and more or less permanent membership in a political community. It denotes possession within that particula

community of full civil and political rights subject to special disqualifications such as minority.

- Citizenship is a mans basic right for it is nothing less than the right to have rights. Remove this priceless possession andthere remain

stateless person, disgraced and degraded in the eyes of his countrymen.

The sale of the land in question was consummated sometime in March 1936, during the effectivity of the 1935 Constitution which prohibits alie

acquire private agricultural lands, save in cases of hereditary succession. Thus, Lee Liong, a Chinese citizen, was disqualified to acquire the land question.

The fact that the Court did not annul the sale of the land to an alien did not validate the transaction, for it was still contrary to the constitutiona

proscription against aliens acquiring lands of the public or private domain. However, the proper party to assail the illegality of the transaction w

not the parties to the transaction. In sales of real estate to aliens incapable of holding title thereto by virtue of the provisions of the Constitutio

both the vendor and the vendee are deemed to have committed the constitutional violation and being thus in pari delicto(equally in the wrong

the courts will not afford protection to either party. The proper party to assail the sale is the Solicitor General. This was what was done in this

case when the Solicitor General initiated an action for annulment of judgment of reconstitution of title. While it took the Republic more than s

years to assert itself, it is not barred from initiating such action. Prescription never lies against the State.

In this case, subsequent circumstances militate against escheat proceedings because the land is now in the hands of Filipinos. The original vend


12/62


Lee Liong, has since died and the land has been inherited by his heirs and subsequently their heirs, petitioners herein. Petitioners are Filipino

citizens, a fact the Solicitor General does not dispute.

The objective of the constitutional provision to keep our lands in Filipino hands has been achieved.

(Lee vs. Director of Lands, G.R. No.128195, October 3, 2001).

2.2 Modes of Acquisition; Citizens of the Philippines

Modes of Acquisition:

By birthJus Soliacquisition of citizenship on the basis of place of birthJus Sanguinisacquisition of citizenship on the basis of blood relationship

By naturalizationthe legal act of adopting an alien and clothing him with the privilege of native-born citizenBy acts of Congressexpensive

Judicialresidency requirement; time consuming; go to court to file a petition

Administrativego to a special committee on naturalization

(not included anymore) By marriagebut still acquiring the conditions in naturalization

General Rule: The Filipino retains Philippine citizenship.

Exception: If, by their act or omission they are deemed under the law to have renounce it.

The following are citizens of the Philippines:

[1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;

[2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;

[3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and (a

reasonable period of 3 years after reaching the age of majority)

[4] Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

The Court took note of the fact that Lorenzo Poe (grandfather of FPJ), who died in 1954 at the age of 84 years of age, would have been born

sometime in 1870, when the Philippines was under the Spanish rule, and that San Carlos, Pangasinan, his place of residence upon his death in 1

in the absence of any other evidence, could have well been his place of residence before death, such that Lorenzo Poe would have benefited fro

the en masse Filipinization that the Philippine Bill of 1902 effected. That Filipino citizenship of Lorenzo Poe, if acquired, would thereby extend

his son, Allan F. Poe (father of FPJ).The 1935 Constitution, during which regime FPJ had seen first light, confers citizenship to all persons whose

fathers are Filipino citizens regardless of whether such children are legitimate or illegitimate. (Tecson vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 3,2

The Philippine law on citizenship adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis. Thereunder, a child follows the nationality or citizenship of the parenregardless of the place of his/her birth, as opposed to the doctrine of jus soli which determines nationality or citizenship on the basis of place of

birth. Private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez was born on May 16, 1934 in Napier Terrace, Broome, Western Australia, to the spouses, Teles

Ybasco, a Filipino citizen and native of Daet, Camarines Norte, and Theresa Marquez, an Australian. Historically, this was a year before the 1935

Constitution took into effect and at that time, what served as the Constitution of the Philippines were the principal organic acts by which the

United States governed the country. These were the Philippine Bill of July 1, 1902 and the Philippine Autonomy Act of August 29, 1916, also kno

as the Jones Law. Under both organic acts, all inhabitants of the Philippines who were Spanish subjects on April 11, 1899 and resided therein

including their children were deemed to be Philippine citizens. By virtue of the same laws, Telesforo's daughter, herein private respondent Rosa

Ybasco Lopez, is likewise a citizen of the Philippines

Thus, herein private respondent, Rosalind Ybasco Lopez, is a Filipino citizen, having been born to a Filipino father. The fac t of her being born in

Australia is not tantamount to her losing her Philippine citizenship. If Australia follows the principle ofjus soli, then at most, private respondent

also claim Australian citizenship resulting to her possession of dual citizenship. Mere registration of alien in BID and mere possession of foreign

passport do not constitute effective renunciation.

(Valles vs. COMELEC, 337 SCRA 543, GR 137000, August 9, 2000)

Vicente Ching, a legitimate child, having been born on April 11, 1964 of Filipino mother and an alien father, was already 35 years old when he

complied with the requirements of CA 625 on June 15, 1999, or over 14 years after he had reached the age of majority. By any reasonable

yardstick, Chings election was clearly beyond the al lowable period within which to exercise the privi lege. All his acts (passing the CPA and Bar

Exams) cannot vest in him citizenship as the law gives him the requirement for election of Filipino citizenship which he did not comply with. (He

was not allowed to take the Lawyers Oath)

The proper period for electing Philippine citizenship was, in turn, based on the pronouncements of the Department of State of the US governme


13/62


to the effect that the election should be made within a reasonable time after attaining the age of majority. The phrase reasonable time has

been interpreted to mean that the election should be made within three (3) years from reaching the age of majority except when there is

justifiable reason to delay. The span of 14 years that lapsed from the time he reached 21 until he finally expressed his intention to elect Philippi

citizenship is clearly way beyond the contemplation of the requirement of electing upon reaching the age of majority.

(Re: Application for Admission to the Philippine Bar, Vicente D. Ching, Bar Matter No. 914, October 1, 1999)

The present Constitution, however, now considers those born of Filipino mothers before the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution and who electe

Philippine citizenship upon reaching the majority age as natural-born. It is apparent from the enumeration of who are citizens under the presen

Constitution that there are only 2 classes of citizens: (1) those who are natural-born and (2) those who are naturalized in accordance with law. A

citizen who is not a naturalized Filipino, i.e., did not have to undergo the process of naturalization to obtain Philippine citizenship, necessarily isnatural-born Filipino. Noteworthy is the absence in said enumeration of a separate category for persons who, after losing Philippine citizenship,

subsequently reacquire it. The reason therefore is clear: as to such persons, they would either be natural born or naturalized depending on the

reasons for the loss of their citizenship and the mode prescribed by the applicable law for the reacquisition thereof. Repatriation would result in

the recovery of the original nationality. He will be restored to his former status as a natural-born citizen. Cruz recovered his original status as a

natural-born citizen because of his repatriation.

(Bengson III vs. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001)

Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 17: the HRET and SET shall be the sole judges of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of t

respective members. The authority conferred upon the Electoral Tribunal is full, clear and complete. The use of the word sole emphasizes

exclusivity of the jurisdiction of these Tribunals. In the opinion of the Court it is not necessary for Ong, Jr. to formally or in writing elect citizen

when he came of age as he was already a citizen since he was nine by virtue of his mother being a natural-born citizen and his father a natural

Filipino. The private respondent did more than merely exercise his right of suffrage. He has established his life here in the Philippines.

(Co vs. HRET, 199 SCRA 692)

Deportation proceedings are administrative in character, summary in nature, and need not be conducted strictly in accordance with the rules o

ordinary court proceedings. The essence of due process is simply an opportunity to be heard, or as applied to administrative proceedings, an

opportunity to explain ones side or an opportunity to seek reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of. As long as the parties are give

the opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered, the demands of due process are sufficiently met.

(Go, Sr. vs. Ramos, G.R. No. 167569, September 4, 2009)

Having taken their oath of allegiance as Philippine citizens, petitioners, however, failed to have the necessary documents registered in the civil

registry as required under Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. 625 (An Act Providing the Manner in which the Option to Elect Philippine Citizens

shall be Declared by a Person whose Mother is a Filipino Citizen). It was only on 27 July 2005 or more than thirty (30) years after they elected

Philippine citizenship that Balgamelo and Felix, Jr. did so. On the other hand, there is no showing that Valeriano complied with the registrationrequirement.

Having a Filipino mother is permanent. It is the basis of the right of the petitioners to elect Philippine citizenship. Petitioners elected Philippine

citizenship in form and substance. The failure to register the election in the civil registry should not defeat the election and resultingly negate th

permanent fact that they have a Filipino mother. The lacking requirements may still be complied with subject to the imposition of appropriate

administrative penalties, if any. The documents they submitted supporting their allegations that they have already registered with the civil regis

although belatedly, should be examined for validation purposes by the appropriate agency, in this case, the Bureau of Immigration. Other

requirements embodied in the administrative orders and other issuances of the Bureau of Immigration and the Department of Justice shall be

complied with within a reasonable time.

Petitioners are given ninety (90) days from notice within which to COMPLY with the requirements of the Bureau of Immigration embodied in its

Judgment of 2 February 2005. The Bureau of Immigration shall ENSURE that all requirements, including the payment of their f inancial obligation

the state, if any, have been complied with subject to the imposition of appropriate administrative fines; REVIEW the documents submitted by t

petitioners; and ACT thereon in accordance with the decision of this Court.

(Ma, et al. v. Fernandez, Jr., et al., G.R. No. 183133, July 26, 2010)

2.3 Naturalization: Judicial, Administrative, and Congressional

JudicialCommonwealth Act 473: Revised Naturalization Law; for aliens; courts will handle AdministrativeRepublic Act 9139: The Administrative Naturalization Law of 2000 grants

Philippine citizenship to aliens born and residing in the Philippines; aliens born in the Philippines; handled by the Solicitor

General

Congressional- Special Act of Legislaturethis is discretionary on Congress; usually conferred on an alien who has made aoutstanding contribution to the country


14/62


Effects of naturalization:

1. On the wife: - The wife would also become a Filipino citizen provided that she does not have any disqualification that

would bar her from being naturalized.

- Vests citizenship on the wife who might herself be lawfully naturalized. She need not prove her qualifications bu

only that she is not disqualified. (Moya Lim Yao v. Comm. Of Immigration, 41 SCRA 292)

2. On the minor children:

i) if born in the Philippines automatically becomes a citizen;

ii) If born abroad before the naturalization of the father

a) residing in RP at the time of naturalization automatically becomes citizens.

b) if not residing in RP at the time of naturalizationconsidered citizen only during minority, unless begins to residpermanently in the Phils.

iii) If born outside the Philippines after parents naturalization considered Filipino, provided registered as such before a

Phil. Consulate within 1 year after attaining majority age and takes oath of allegiance.

Under Sec. 15 of Commonwealth Act No. 473, an alien woman marrying a Filipino, native born or naturalized, become ipso facto a Filipina provi

she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines under Sec. 4 of the same law. Likewise, an alien woman married to an alien who is

subsequently naturalized here follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his

oath as Filipino citizen, provided that she does not suffer from any disqualifications under said Sec. 4. Ipso Facto as here use does

not mean that all alien wives and all minor children of Philippine citizens, from the mere fact of relationship, necessary become such citizens also

Those who do not meet the statutory requirements do not ipso facto become citizens; they must apply for naturalization in order to acquire suc

status. Under the second paragraph of Sec. 15, a minor child of a Filipino naturalized under

the law, who was born in the Philippines, becomes ipso facto a citizen of the Philippines from the time the fact of relationship concurs with the f

of a citizenship of his parent, and the time when child become a cit izen does not depend upon the time that he is able to prove that he was bor

the Philippines.

(Moya Lim Yao vs. Commissioner, 41 SCRA 292)

He should comply w/ all requirements of the Revised Naturalization Law. He cant choose requirements to follow. Its immaterial that he was a

former Filipino citizen. Irregularities: heard case ahead of scheduled hearing w/o publication of such order, heard w/in 6 mos from last publicati

of petition, allowed to take oath of allegiance before finality of judgment (which comes 30 days after Sol Gen receives his copy of the decision &

w/o opposition) and took oath w/o observing the 2-year waiting period.

Waiting period seeks to observe if applicant has left country, dedicated himself continuously to any lawful calling/profession, not convicted of a

offense/violation of government promulgated rules and committed acts prejudicial to the interest of country or against government policies.

Hence, Frivaldo has not acquired his citizenship.

(Republic vs. dela Rosa, G.R. No. 104654, June 6, 1994)

Solicitor General filed a motion to cancel the certificate of naturalization of Yao on the ground that it was fraudulently and illegally obtained. Lo

court cancelled his certificate of naturalization on the basis that he evaded payment of taxes due to the government by under declaration of his

income. Yao filed a motion for reconsideration but it was denied.

Based on section 18(a) of Com. Act no. 473 known as the Revised Naturalization Act, which provides that a naturalization certificate may be

cancelled if it is shown that said naturalization certificate was obtained fraudulently or illegally. Even if Li Yao paid his tax liability via the tax

amnesty program its legal effect would merely remove any civil, criminal or administrative liability on the part of the taxpayer, only insofar as h

tax case is concerned. Tax amnesty does not have the effect of obliterating his lack of good moral character and irreproachable conduct which a

grounds for denaturalization.

Naturalization laws should be rigidly enforced in favour of the government and against the applicant. When the applicant failed to meet the

qualifications required for naturalization, the latter is not entitled to Filipino citizenship.

(Republic vs. Liyao, 214 SCRA 748)

Limkaichong is allegedly not a natural born citizen of the Philippines because when she was born her father was still a Chinese and that her mom

though Filipino lost her citizenship by virtue of her marriage to Limkaichongs dad.

Resolution No. 8062 adopting the policy-guidelines of not suspending the proclamation of winning candidates with pending disqualification case

which shall be without prejudice to the continuation of the hearing and resolution of the involved cases.

(Limkaichong vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 178831-32, April 1, 2009)


15/62


2.4 Loss of Citizenship Commonwealth Act No. 63, Section 1

a. By naturalization in a foreign country

- However, this was modified by RA 9225An Act Making the Citizenship of Philippine Citizens Who Acquire Foreign Citizenship

PermanentSeptember 15, 2003 which declares the policy of the State that all Philippine citizens who become citizens of another

country shall be deemed to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of this Act.

They may reacquire Philippine citizenship by taking the oath of allegiance

Those Filipino citizens who, after the effectivity of RA 9225, become citizens of a foreign country, may reacquire Philippine citizens

upon taking the oath of allegiance

Unmarried child, whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted, below 18 years of age, of those who reacquire their Philippine

citizenship upon the effectivity of RA 9225 shall be deemed citizens of the Philippines.Those who reacquire or retain Philippine citizenship under this Act shall enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all

attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Phils. and the ff. conditions:

Meet the requirements of RA 9189, The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003, and other existing laws

For those seeking elective public office and appointive office, meet the qualifications, make personal and sworn renunciat

subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to the RP

For those intending to practice their profession, apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such

practice

b. By express renunciation of citizenship

Conscious, voluntary and intelligent renunciation

Express renunciation means a renunciation made known distinctly and explicitly, and not left to inference or implication or

presumption.

Mere registration of alien in BID and mere possession of foreign passport do not constitute effective renunciation.

c. By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution or laws of a foreign country upon attaining the age of 21; provid

however, that a Filipino may not divest himself of Philippine citizenship in this manner while RP is at war with any country. an

application of the principle of Indelible Allegiance.by virtue of RA 9225

d. By rendering service to or accepting commission in the armed forces of a foreign country EXCEPT:

If RP has a defensive and/or offensive pact of alliance with the said foreign country; and

The said foreign country maintains armed forces in Philippine territory with the consent of RP

e.By cancellation of the certificate of naturalization.

f.By having been declared by competent authority a deserter of the pardon or amnesty has been granted.

g. In the case of a woman, upon marriage to a foreignerif, by virtue of the laws in force in her husbands country, she acquires hisnationality. (Under 1973 and 1987, she remains a Filipino)

Cruz enlisted in the US Marine Corps without the consent of the Republic of the Philippines. He took an oath of allegiance to the US and as a

consequence he lost his Filipino Citizenship because under the Commonwealth Act no. 63 a Filipino may lose his citizenship by rendering service

or accepting commission in the armed forces of a foreign country. Any doubts as to his citizenship was settled by his naturalization as a US citize

on June 5, 1990.

1987 Constitution does not provide a separate category for persons who after losing Philippine citizenship, subsequently reacquires it because t

are either natural born or naturalized depending on the reason for the loss of their citizenship and the mode prescribed by the applicable law

for reacquisition.

( Bengson vs. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001)

The term residence is to be understood not in its common acceptation as referring to dwelling or habitation, but rather to domicile or lresidence, that is, the place where a party actually or constructively has his permanent home, where he, no matter where he may be found at

given time, eventually intends to return and remain (animus manendi).

A domicile of origin is acquired by every person at birth. It is usually the place where the childs parents reside and continues until the same is

abandoned by acquisition of new domicile (domicile of choice).

In the case at bar, petitioner lost his domicile of origin in Oras by becoming a U.S. citizen after enlisting in the U.S. Navy in 1965.

From then on and until November 10, 2000, when he reacquired Philippine citizenship, petitioner was an alien without any right to reside in the


16/62


Philippines save as our immigration laws may have allowed him to stay as a visitor or as a resident alien. The status of being an alien and a non-

resident can be waived either separately, when one acquires the status of a resident alien before acquiring

Philippine citizenship, or at the same time when one acquires Philippine citizenship.

As an alien, an individual may obtain an immigrant visa under Sec 13 of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1948 and an Immigrant Certificate of

Residence (ICR) and thus waive his status as a non-resident. On the other hand, he may acquire Philippine citizenship by naturalization under C.A

No. 473, as amended, or, if he is a former Philippine national, he may reacquire Philippine citizenship by repatriation or by an act of Congress, in

which case he waives not only his status as an alien but also his status as a non-resident alien.

( Coquilla vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 151914, July 31, 2001)

2.5 Reacquisition

a. By naturalization

- judicial

- administrative

- congressional

b. By direct Act of Congress

c. By repatriation

-mode for reacquisition for those who lost their citizenship

-governed by various statutes

-consists of taking of an oath of allegiance to the RP and registering said oath in the LCR of the place where the person

concerned resides or last resided

Effect of repatriation:

- It allows the person to recover or return to, his original status before he lost his Philippine citizenship. Thus, the

respondent, a former natural-born Filipino citizen who lost his Philippine citizenship when he enlisted in the US

Marine Corps, was deemed to have recovered his natural-born status when he reacquired Filipino citizenship

through repatriation.

The only persons entitled to repatriation under RA 8171 are the following:

a) Filipino women who lost their Philippine citizenship by marriage to aliens; and

b) Natural-born Filipinos including their minor children who lost their Philippine citizenship on account of political (ex: Marcos Regime

economic (ex: OFWs) necessity.

Repatriation Laws:

Sec. 4, C.A. No. 63 Repatriation shall be effected by merely taking the necessary oath of allegiance to the Commonwealththe Philippines and registration in the proper civil registry.

deserter of the Armed Forces of the Philippines

Certificate of Registration

Sec. 1, R.A. 965 (1953) Any person who, being a citizen of the Philippines on December eight, nineteen hundred forty-onhad lost said citizenship by rendering service to, or accepting commission in, the armed forces of an allied foreign country, a

taking an oath of allegiance incident thereto, may reacquire Philippine citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the

Republic of the Philippines and registering the same with the Local Civil Registry in the place where he resides or last resided

the Philippines within one year from the date of the approval of this Act. The said oath of allegiance shall contain, in addition

renunciation of any other citizenship.

service in the Allied Forces during World War II


Sec. 1, R.A. 2630 (1960) Any person who had lost his Philippine cit izenship by rendering service to, or accepting commissin, the Armed Forces of the United States, or after separation from the Armed Forces of the United States, acquired United

States citizenship, may reacquire Philippine citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and

registering the same with the Local Civil Registry in the place where he resides or last resided in the Philippines. The said oat

allegiance shall contain a renunciation of any other citizenship.

service in the Armed Forces of the U.S. at any given time


Sec. 1, R.A. 8171 (1995) Filipino women who have lost their Philippine citizenship by marriage to aliens and natural-bornFilipinos who have lost their Philippine citizenship, including their minor children, on account of political or economic necess

may reacquire Philippine citizenship through repatriation in the manner provided in Section 4 of Commonwealth Act No. 63

amended.

marriage of a Filipina


17/62


political or economic necessity

Certificate of Registration + Bureau of Immigration

Article XI, Section 9, of the Constitution that all public officials and employees owe the State and the Constitution "allegiance at all times". Secti

42 of the Local Government Code that a candidate for local elective office must be inter alia a citizen of the Philippines and a qualified voter of t

constituency where he is running. Section 117 of the Omnibus Election Code provides that a qualified voter must be, among other qualifications

citizen of the Philippines, this being an indispensable requirement for suffrage under Article V, Section 1, of the Constitution.

Frivaldo described himself as a "natural-born" citizen of the Philippines, omitting mention of any subsequent loss of such status. He was naturali

as a citizen of the United States in 1983. The Court sees no reason not to believe that the petitioner was one of the enemies of the Marcos

dictatorship. Even so, it cannot agree that as a consequence thereof he was coerced into embracing American citizenship. His feeblesuggestion that his naturalization was not the result of his own free and voluntary choice is totally unacceptable and must be rejected outright. T

Court will not permit the anomaly of a person sitting as provincial governor in this country while owing exclusive allegiance to another country.

If a person seeks to serve in the Republic of the Philippines, he must owe his total loyalty to this country only, abjuring and renouncing all fealty

fidelity to any other state. It is true as the petitioner points out that the status of the natural-born citizen is favored by the Constitution and our

laws, which is all the more reason why it should be treasured like a pearl of great price. But once it is surrendered and renounced, the gift is gon

and cannot be lightly restored. This country of ours, for all its difficulties and limitations, is like a jealous and possessive mother. Once rejected,

not quick to welcome back with eager arms its prodigal if repentant children. The returning renegade must show, by an express and unequivoca

act, the renewal of his loyalty and love. Petition Dismissed. Petitioner JUAN G. FRIVALDO is hereby declared not a citizen of the

Philippines and therefore disqualified from serving as Governor of the Province of Sorsogon. Accordingly, he is ordered to vacate his office

and surrender the same to the duly elected Vice-Governor of the said province once this decision becomes final and executory.

( Frivaldo vs. COMELEC, 257 SCRA 731)

Petitioner was a natural born citizen who lost his citizenship by naturalization in the US. On March 11, 1996, he filed a petition with the RTC to

regain his status as a citizen of the Philippines. The court thereafter repatriated Petitioner.

A petition for repatriation should be fi led with the Special Committee on Naturalization and not with the RTC which has no jurisdiction thereove

The courts order was thereby null and void. The Special Committee on Naturalization was reactivated on June 8, 1995, hence, when Petitioner

his petition on March 11, 1996, the Committee constituted pursuant to LOI No. 270 under PD No. 725 (a Decree providing for repatriation of

Filipino women who had lost their Philippine citizenship by marriage to aliens and of natural born Filipinos) was in place.

(Angat vs. Republic, G.R. No. 132244, September 14, 1999)

"Repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and registration in the proper civil

registry and in the Bureau of Immigration. The Bureau of Immigration shall thereupon cancel the pertinent alien certificate of registration and is

the certificate of identification as Filipino citizen to the repatriated citizen."

Altajeros took his Oath of Allegiance on 17 December 1997, but his Certificate of Repatriation was registered with the Civil Registry of Makati Ci

only after 6 years or on 18 February 2004, and with the Bureau of Immigration on 1 March 2004. Altajeros, therefore, completed all the

requirements of repatriation only after he filed his certificate of candidacy for a mayoralty position, but before the elections. The Courts ruling

Frivaldo v. Commission on Elections that repatriation retroacts to the date of filing of ones application for repatriation subsists. Accordingly,

Altajeross repatriation retroacted to the date he fi led his application in 1997. He was, therefore, qualified to run for a mayoralty position in the

government in the 10 May 2004 elections.

However, considering that Altajeros failed to prove before the COMELEC that he had complied with the requirements of repatriation, as he

submitted the necessary documents proving compliance with the requirements of repatriation only during his motion for reconsideration, whe

the COMELEC en banc could no longer consider said evidence.

Wherefore, the petition seeking the nullification of the Resolution of the COMELEC en bancof May 7, 2004 (denying petitioners motion for

reconsideration), affirming the Resolution of its First Division dated March 22, 2004, is hereby DENIED.

( Altarejos vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 163256, November 10, 2004)

2.6 Dual Citizenship and Dual Allegiance

Dual Citizenship

arises as a result of the concurrent application of the different laws of 2 or more states, a person is simultaneously considered as a

national of said states; involuntary

Dual Allegiance

refers to a situation in which a person simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty to 2 or more states; voluntary/positive act

Doctrine of INDELIBLE ALLEGIANCE: an individual may be compelled to retain his original nationality even if he has already renounced

forfeited it under the laws of the second State whose nationality he has acquired.


18/62


Instances when a citizen of the Philippines may possess dual citizenship:

1. Those born of Filipino fathers and/or mothers in foreign countries which follow the principle of jus soli;

2. Those born in the Philippines of Filipino mothers and alien fathers if by the laws of their fathers count ry such

children are citizens of that country;

3. Those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latters country the former are considered citizens, unless by their act or omission they

deemed to have renounced Philippine citizenship.

The filing of a COC suffices to renounce foreign citizenship, effectively removing any disqualification as dual citizen. This is so because in the CO

one declares that he is a Filipino citizen and that he will support and defend the Constitution and will maintain true fa ith and allegiance to the

same. Such declaration under oath operates as an effective renunciation of foreign citizenship. In this case, the Court adopted the l iberal

interpretation of the rule. Manzano is not really prohibited to run due to dual citizenship. Dual allegiance is the one prohibited. Dual citizenshipreferred to under Section 40 (d) of the Local Government Code refers to dual allegiance under Section 5 of Article IV of the 1987 Constitution.

Those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latterscountry the former are considered citizens, unless by their act or omission they are deemed

have renounced Philippine citizenship.

(Mercado vs. Manzano, 307 SCRA 630)

What RA 9225 (Citizen Retention and Reacquisition Act) does is allow dual citizenship to natural-born citizens who have lost their Philippine

citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country. On its face, it does not recognize dual allegiance. By swearing to the

supreme authority of the Republic, the person implicitly renounces its foreign citizenship. Plainly, from Section 3, RA 9225 stayed clear out of th

problem of dual allegiance and shifted the burden of confronting the issue of whether or not there is dual allegiance to the concerned foreign

country. What happens to the other citizenship was not made a concern of RA 9225.

(Calilung vs. Datumanong, G.R. No. 160869, May 11, 2007)

E. SOVEREIGNTY

- is the power of the State to regulate matters within its own territory.

Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. This power resides in the people understood as those w

have a direct hand in the formulation, adoption, and amendment or alteration of the Constitution.

Sovereign authority, moreover, is not always directly exercised by the people. It is normally delegated by the people to the government and to t

concrete persons in whose hands the powers of government temporarily reside. Such authority continues with the consent of the people.

Finally, is recognition by other states a constitutive element of a state such that even it has all four elements of the Montevideo Convention it is n

a state if it has not been recognized?In International law, there are two views on this. One view, the constitutive theory, is that recognition

constitutes a state. The other view, the declaratory theory, is that recognition is merely declaratory of the existence of the state. In practi

however, whether recognize or not is largely a political decision.

* Westphalian Sovereignty Concept is the concept ofnation-statesovereignty based on two things: territoriality and the absence of a role fo

external agents in domestic structures; there is a monopoly of power; all states are equal; this is outmoded

Kinds of Sovereignty:

legal sovereigntythe supreme power to make lawsthe power to issuance final commands or orders in the form of laws

political sovereigntythe sum total of all the influences in a state, legal and non-legal, which determine thecourse of law

the power behind legal sovereign

internal sovereigntythe supreme power or authority of the state or the governmentability to command obedience, ability to pass, implement and carry out laws

inherent element of government

external sovereignty

authority of the state to conduct its affairs domestically and internationally withoutthe interference of external forces

should not be bound by other states; freedom from external control

Dual Capacities:

Imperiumthe authority to govern; governmental Dominiumcapacity of the state to own properties; proprietary

* Regalian Doctrineif there is a doubt as to the ownership of the land, all the properties belong to the government
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-state


19/62


Jurisdiction:

Territorialauthority of the state over its territory such as all act, events or persons within its territory are subject to its jurisdiction bsubject to limitations

Personalauthority of the state over it constituents and citizens wherever they are found Extraterritorialauthority of the state outside its territory

Republican State- It is one wherein all government authority emanates from the people and is exercised by representatives chosen by the peo

Democratic StateThis merely emphasizes that the Philippines has some aspect of direct democracy such as initiative and referendum.

Characteristics:

a. Permanenceb. Exclusiveness

c. Comprehensiveness

d. Absoluteness

e. Indivisibility

f. Inalienability

g. Imprescriptibility

The jurisdiction of a nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation imposed by itself. Any

restriction upon it, deriving validity from an external source, would imply a diminution of its sovereignty.

(Reagan vs. CIR, 30 SCRA 968)

On the rationale that the Philippines has adopted the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, a portion

sovereignty may be waived without violating the Constitution. Such waiver does not amount to an unconstitutional diminution or deprivation o

jurisdiction of Philippine courts.

(Bayan Muna vs. Romulo, G.R. No. 159618)

F. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY

1. Basis

* Section 3.The State may not be sued without its consent.

* Gen. Rule:The State may not be sued without its consent.

Basis:Sec. 3, Art. XVI of the Constitution.

Reason:There can be no legal right against the authority which makes the law on which the right depends.

* The State immunity from suit is not based on constitutional provisions but based on jus cogensin international law.

Basis of State immunity from suit:

Positivist theoryno legal right as against which makes the law or where the right is based Sociological theoryif you are deprived of the right to suit then the inconvenience of not able to sue should be subordinated by the

higher interest of the public

Consent theorythe state cannot be sued when we approved the 1987 Constitution Equality among statesa state is banned from suing another state

Consent to be sued does not include consent to the execution of judgment against it. Such execution will require another waiver, because the

power of the court ends when the judgment is rendered, since government funds and properties may not be seized under writs of execution or

garnishment, unless such disbursement is covered by the corresponding appropriation as required by law.

(Republic vs. Villasor, 54 SCRA 83)

2. Suit against State

Framework of Analysis:

1.) Is it a suit against the State?

If NoWe dont apply the rules on state immunity. If Yes Question: 2.) Is the act jure gestiones (proprietary) or jure imperii (governmental)?

o If jure gestiones the state is suable


20/62


o If jure imperiiQuestion: 3.) Is there consent to be sued? (consider: incorporated vs. uninc. agency) If there is none suit will not prosper Is there is consent suit will prosper (to determine liability), Question: 4.) Has the State consented to be liable?

- if the State acts through its special agent

- then go to COA for claims of payment

* Consider:

Incorporated agencyhas separate and distinct personality- has a governmental function, but if it is exercising a governmental task, then it still may be sued

Unincorporated agencyhas no separate personality; subsumes to be a part of the state, therefore can be sued as a state Ex contractorit has stepped down to a level of individual and therefore An officeraccused of bad faith (personal capacity of the person, not of the state) State initiates the suitthat is already consent because the state here impliedly submits to the jurisdiction of the court Has the

Constitutional Law I

Documents

Transcript of Constitutional Law I