Midterm in Social Legislation

3
1. Yes. The law guarantees the equality of men and women by providing therein a provision in the constitution recognizing the role of women in nation-building and ensuring the fundamental equality before the law of women and men, Article 2, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution. Nicolasa applied as a collector and in the interview she insisted on her desire to work in the field as she preferred it over working inside the office. Indeed, she expresses her overwhelming willingness to work as a collector. When the company hired her as a teller instead and gave the collector position to Procopio, the same violated the constitutional right of Nicolasa of equality. Hence, the company must be liable to such violation. 2. The case should be dismissed for being unmeritorious. The Blue Sunday Law is already non-existent. The existing law today does not contain any provision thereto as reference to the said law. Hence, it is unmeritorious to sue my client, Masipag Enterprise, in lieu of their violation to the Blue Sunday Law, when in fact the said law is obsolete. 3. The act of Mayor Matalino, should he pursue on it, would constitute violation of law. It would amount to gross ignorance of the law and would entail him administrative cases against him. The law safeguards public employees’ security of tenure. This is ensured by acquiring civil service eligibility and obtaining appointment to their office. A public office is characterized by permanency; it is not co-terminus. Should Mayor Matalino continue with his plan of removing employees that are not his allies; the same would be in violation of the rights of those government employees. Not only would he face legal

description

a

Transcript of Midterm in Social Legislation

1. Yes. The law guarantees the equality of men and women by providing therein a provision in the constitution recognizing the role of women in nation-building and ensuring the fundamental equality before the law of women and men, Article 2, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution.Nicolasa applied as a collector and in the interview she insisted on her desire to work in the field as she preferred it over working inside the office. Indeed, she expresses her overwhelming willingness to work as a collector. When the company hired her as a teller instead and gave the collector position to Procopio, the same violated the constitutional right of Nicolasa of equality. Hence, the company must be liable to such violation.

2. The case should be dismissed for being unmeritorious.The Blue Sunday Law is already non-existent. The existing law today does not contain any provision thereto as reference to the said law.Hence, it is unmeritorious to sue my client, Masipag Enterprise, in lieu of their violation to the Blue Sunday Law, when in fact the said law is obsolete.

3. The act of Mayor Matalino, should he pursue on it, would constitute violation of law. It would amount to gross ignorance of the law and would entail him administrative cases against him.The law safeguards public employees security of tenure. This is ensured by acquiring civil service eligibility and obtaining appointment to their office. A public office is characterized by permanency; it is not co-terminus. Should Mayor Matalino continue with his plan of removing employees that are not his allies; the same would be in violation of the rights of those government employees. Not only would he face legal difficulties but also his image will be seriously taintedsurely this is not what Mayor Matalino would want. The only remedy is to let the situation pushed those employees that are not his allies to resign in their post as a delicadeza on their part.

4. Yes. Under Ra 6657 Sec 27, awarded lands can be acquired by beneficiaries under this Act may not be sold, transferred or conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to the government, or to the LBP, or to other qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years; Provided, however, That the children or the spouse of the transferor shall have a right to repurchase the land from the government or LBP within the period of two (2) years. Due notice of the availability of the land shall be given by the LBP to the Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) of the barangay where the land is situated. The Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM), as herein provided, shall, in turn, be given due notice thereof by the BARC.Clearly, Mang Ambo can sell the land awarded to him by the State provided however that he binds his sale to the limitations stated in the above mentioned provisions. Otherwise, the sale will be null and void.5. I vehemently oppose the RH Bill. I am not afraid to say that I belong to the conservatives of the society. For me it is of utmost importance that we cling unto our morals and values despite the seemingly modern world today.The unborn must be protected, the dignity of life must be upheld, the duties of parents to their children shall not be detached and most importantly, the family as a basic social institution must never be disregarded. These are the most important ideas that Filipinos should never forget and always bear in mind. Thus, I believe RH Bill should never be made into a law. It legalizes abortion, it decriminalizes immorality and adultery, and it accepts the dissipation and debauchery that many a number of Filipinos will commit once the said bill would be implemented.The State should focus the funds and budgets to more important matters like solving the problem of poverty and corruption. Legislators should not waste their times on time-consuming debates on the floor; rather, consume their times on legislating bills that would eradicate poverty and corruption at its root. People are not the problem. The problem lies on the administration and the supervision and management of those who have the powers. We already have enough laws relative to birth control, population regulation and the likes. We need not any addition to the list; implement first those enacted bills and then think of efficient ways to oversee those laws.