7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

1/40

POLITICAL LAW CASE DIGEST

1. Tubbataha Incident: UNCLOS Non-Mebe! US Go"#t Sti$$ %ound %& The

Cu'toa!& La(' o) Na"i*ation +A!i*o "' S(i)t, 1/0

AIGO 2S SWI3T

GR 206510 Sept 14, 2014

Facts:

In 2013, the USS Guardian of the US Na! ran a"round on an area near the

#u$$ataha Reefs, a %arine ha$itat of &hich entr! and certain hu%an actiities are

preented and a'orded protection $! a (hi)ippine )a&* #he "roundin" incident

pro%pted the petitioners to see+ for issuance of rit of -a)i+asan &ith #.(/ fro%

the S*

%on" those i%p)eaded are US ocia)s in their capacit! as co%%andin" ocers of

the US Na!* s petitioners ar"ued, the! &ere i%p)eaded $ecause there &as a

&aier of i%%unit! fro% suit $et&een US and ( pursuant to the F ter%s*

(etitioners c)ai%ed that the "roundin", sa)a"in" and postsa)a"in" operations of

the USS Guardian io)ated their constitutiona) ri"hts to a $a)anced and hea)thfu)

eco)o"! since these eents caused and continue to cause eniron%enta) da%a"e of

such %a"nitude as to a'ect other proinces surroundin" the #u$$ataha Reefs* side

fro% da%a"es, the! sou"ht a directie fro% the S for the institution of cii),

ad%inistratie and cri%ina) suits for acts co%%itted in io)ation of eniron%enta)

)a&s and re"u)ations in connection &ith the "roundin" incident* #he! a)so pra!ed for

the annu)%ent of so%e F proisions for $ein" unconstitutiona)*

I''ue 1: W4N the US Go"e!nent ha' *i"en it' con'ent to be 'ued th!ou*h

the 23A

No* #he "enera) ru)e on states i%%unit! fro% suit app)ies in this case*

First, an! &aier of State i%%unit! under the F pertains on)! to cri%ina)

7urisdiction and not to specia) cii) actions such as for the issuance of the &rit of

+a)i+asan* ence, contrar! to petitioners c)ai%, the US "oern%ent cou)d not $e

dee%ed to hae &aied its i%%unit! fro% suit*

Second, the US respondents &ere sued in their ocia) capacit! as co%%andin"

ocers of the US Na! &ho hae contro) and superision oer the USS Guardianand its cre&* Since the satisfaction of an! 7ud"%ent a"ainst these ocia)s &ou)d

re8uire re%edia) actions and the appropriation of funds $! the US "oern%ent, the

suit is dee%ed to $e one a"ainst the US itse)f* #hus, the princip)e of State I%%unit!

fro% suit $ars the e9ercise of 7urisdiction $! the court oer their persons*

I''ue : W4N the US *o"e!nent a& 'ti$$ be he$d $iab$e )o! daa*e'

cau'ed to the Tubbataha ee)'

es* #he US "oern%ent is )ia$)e for da%a"es in re)ation to the "roundin" incident

under the custo%ar! )a&s of nai"ation*

#he conduct of the US in this case, &hen its &arship entered a restricted area in

io)ation of R 1006; and caused da%a"e to the #RN( reef s!ste%, $rin"s the

%atter &ithin the a%$it of rtic)e 31 of the UN

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

2/40

)thou"h the US to date has not rati>ed the UNed in UNcation $! the US, it %ust $e noted that the US refusa) to 7oin the

UN)ed separate)!*

ence, a ru)in" on the app)ication or nonapp)ication of cri%ina) 7urisdiction

proisions of the F to a US personne) &ho %a! $e found responsi$)e for the

"roundin" of the USS Guardian, &ou)d $e pre%ature and $e!ond the proince of a

petition for a &rit of -a)i+asan*

Cha$$en*in* the Con'titutiona$it& o) a T!eat& 2ia a Petition )o! the I''uance

o) W!it o) 6a$i7a'an i' Not P!o5e!

#he F &as du)! concurred in $! the (hi)ippine Senate and has $een reco"nied asa treat! $! the US as attested and certi>ed $! the du)! authoried representatie of

the US "oern%ent* #he F $ein" a a)id and $indin" a"ree%ent, the parties are

re8uired as a %atter of internationa) )a& to a$ide $! its ter%s and proisions*

petition under the Ru)es on rit of -a)i+asan is not the proper re%ed! to assai) the

constitutiona)it! of its proisions*

e$e"ant La(' and 8u!i'5!udence

States I%%unit! fro% Suit .9tends to its /cia)s AGarcia s hief of Sta', 166C

.9ception to the Hoctrine of States I%%unit! fro% Suit AShauf s , 10C

rtic)e 30, UN

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

3/40

. PO9I%ITION AGAINST 9OLDING O3 DUAL O MULTIPLE O33ICES APPL

AS WELL TO TEMPOA DESIGNATIONS +3UNA 2S AGA, 1;0

3UNA 2S AGAGR 11644 Fe$ 1 2013

Facts:

"ra &as then the Goern%ent orporate ounse) &hen (res rro!o

desi"nated hi% as the ctin" So)icitor Genera) in p)ace of for%er So) Gen

Heanadera, &ho has $een appointed as the Secretar! of Dustice* "ain, "ra

&as desi"nated as the ctin" Secretar! in p)ace of Secretar! Heanadera

&hen the )atter resi"ned* "ra then re)in8uished his position as orporate

ounse) and continued to perfor% the duties of an ctin" So)icitor Genera)*

Funa, a concerned citien, 8uestioned his appoint%ent* "ra ar"ued that his

concurrent desi"nations &ere %ere)! in a te%porar! capacit!* .en assu%in"

that he &as ho)din" %u)tip)e oces at the sa%e ti%e, his desi"nation as an

ctin" So) Gen is %ere)! a+in to a ho)doer, so that he neer receiedsa)aries and e%o)u%ents for $ein" the ctin" So) Gen &hen he &as appointed

as the ctin" Secretar! of Dustice*

Issue 1: N "ras desi"nation as ctin" Secretar! of Dustice is a)id

No* #he desi"nation of "ra as ctin" Secretar! of Dustice concurrent)! &ith

his position of ctin" So)icitor Genera) io)ates the constitutiona) prohi$ition

under rtic)e II, Section 13 of the 1J; onstitution*

It is i%%ateria) that "ras desi"nation &as in an actin" or te%porar!

capacit!* Section 13 p)ain)! indicates that the intent of the Fra%ers of theonstitution is to i%pose a stricter prohi$ition on the (resident and the

a$inet Ke%$ers in so far as ho)din" other oces or e%p)o!%ents in the

Goern%ent or in G/s is concerned* #he prohi$ition a"ainst dua) or

%u)tip)e oces $ein" he)d $! one ocia) %ust $e construed as to app)! to a))

appoint%ents or desi"nations, &hether per%anent or te%porar!, $ecause the

o$7ectie of Section 13 is to preent the concentration of po&ers in the

.9ecutie Hepart%ent ocia)s, speci>ca))! the (resident, the ice(resident,

the a$inet Ke%$ers and their deputies and assistants*

Issue 2: N "ra %a! concurrent)! ho)d the positions $! irtue of the ?ho)d

oer princip)e@

No* "ras desi"nation as the ctin" Secretar! of Dustice &as not in an e9

ocio capacit!, $! &hich he &ou)d hae $een a)id)! authoried to

concurrent)! ho)d the t&o positions due to the ho)din" of one oce $ein" the

conse8uence of ho)din" the other*

Lein" inc)uded in the stricter prohi$ition e%$odied in Section 13, "ra cannot

)i$era))! app)! in his faor the $road e9ceptions proided in rtic)e IBL, Sec ;

A2C of the onstitution to 7ustif! his desi"nation as ctin" Secretar! of Dustice

concurrent)! &ith his desi"nation as ctin" So)icitor Genera), or ice ersa* It

is not sucient for "ra to sho& that his ho)din" of the other oce &as

?a))o&ed $! )a& or the pri%ar! functions of his position*@ #o c)ai% the

e9e%ption of his concurrent desi"nations fro% the coera"e of the stricter

prohi$ition under Section 13, he needed to esta$)ish that his concurrent

desi"nation &as e9press)! a))o&ed $! the onstitution*

3

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

4/40

Issue 3: N the oces of the So)icitor Genera) and Secretar! of Dustice is in

an e9 ocio capacit! in re)ation to the other

No* #he po&ers and functions of the So)icitor Genera) are neither re8uired $!

the pri%ar! functions nor inc)uded in the po&ers of the H/D, and ice ersa*

#he /SG, &hi)e attached to the H/D, is not a constituent of the )atter, as in

fact, the d%inistratie ode of 1J; decrees that the /SG is independent

and autono%ous* ith the enact%ent of R 41;, the So)icitor Genera) is no&

ested &ith a ca$inet ran+, and has the sa%e 8ua)i>cations for appoint%ent,

ran+, prero"aties, a))o&ances, $ene>ts and prii)e"es as those of (residin"

Dud"es of the ourt of ppea)s* E

Re)eant (roisions

rtic)e II, Sec 13 of the 1J; onstitutionrtic)e IBL, Sec ; A2C of the 1J; onstitution

Notes

Histinction $et&een rt II, Sec 13 s rt IBL, Sec ; A2.9ceptions fro% (rohi$ition a"ainst the o)din" of Ku)tip)e /ces

;. POMOTIONAL APPOINTMENT 3OM COMMISSIONE TO C9AIMAN

DOES NOT CONSTITUTE EAPPOINTMENT +3UNA 2S 2ILLA, 10

3UNA 2S 2ILLAG 1

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

5/40

further that the acanc! in the position of hair%an resu)ted fro% death,

resi"nation, disa$i)it! or re%oa) $! i%peach%ent*

Reappoint%ent found in Sec* 1A2C, rt* IBAHC %eans a %oe%ent to one and

the sa%e oce Ao%%issioner to o%%issioner or hair%an to hair%anC*

/n the other hand, an appoint%ent ino)in" a %oe%ent to a di'erent

position or oce Ao%%issioner to hair%anC &ou)d constitute a ne&

appoint%ent and, hence, not, in the strict )e"a) sense, a reappoint%ent

$arred under the onstitution*

I''ue : W4N the a55ointent o) 2i$$a! to the 5o'ition o) COA

Chai!an (hich i' ade "acant b& the e?5i!ation o) te! o) the

5!edece''o! i' "a$id

No* #he onstitution c)ear)! proides that if the acanc! resu)ts fro% the

e9piration of the ter% of the predecessor, the appoint%ent of a / %e%$er

sha)) $e for a >9ed ;!ear ter%*

ere, the acanc! in the position of / chair%an )eft $! ara"ue in

Fe$ruar! 2, 200J resu)ted fro% the e9piration of his ;!ear ter%* Under that

circu%stance, there can $e no une9pired portion of the ter% of the

predecessor to spea+ of* ence, in )i"ht of the ;!ear a""re"ate ru)e, i))ars

appoint%ent to a fu)) ter% is not a)id as he &i)) $e a))o&ed to sere %ore

than seen ; !ears under the constitutiona) $an*

i))ar had a)read! sered 4 !ears of his ;!ear ter% as / o%%issioner*

shorter ter%, ho&eer, to co%p)! &ith the ;!ear a""re"ate ru)e &ou)d a)so

$e ina)id as the correspondin" appoint%ent &ou)d e'ectie)! $reach the

c)ear purpose of the onstitution of "iin" to eer! appointee so appointedsu$se8uent to the >rst set of co%%issioners, a >9ed ter% of oce of ; !ears*

NOTES:

A. One o) the doct!ina$ *uide$ine' out$ined in Matiba* "' %eni5a&o

ha' been e@ecti"e$& abandoned b& the Cou!t#' 5!onounceent in

thi' ca'e.

In Matiba* "' %eni5a&o,the ourt out)ined the fo))o&in" for%u)ations in

&hich the constitutiona) $an on reappoint%ent %a! app)!:

#he >rst situation is &here an ad interi% appointee after con>r%ation $! the

o%%ission on ppoint%ents seres his fu)) ;!ear ter%* Such person cannot

$e reappointed &hether as a %e%$er or as chair%an $ecause he &i)) then $e

actua))! serin" %ore than ; !ears*

#he second situation is &here the appointee, after con>r%ation, seres part

of his ter% and then resi"ns $efore his ;!ear ter% of oce ends* Such

person cannot $e reappointed &hether as a %e%$er or as chair to a acanc!

arisin" fro% retire%ent $ecause a reappoint%ent &i)) resu)t in the appointee

serin" %ore than ; !ears*

#he third situation is &here the appointee is con>r%ed to sere the une9pired

portion of so%eone &ho died or resi"ned, and the appointee co%p)etes the

une9pired ter%* Such person cannot $e reappointed &hether as a %e%$er or

as chair to a acanc! arisin" fro% retire%ent $ecause a reappoint%ent &i))

resu)t in the appointee a)so serin" %ore than ; !ears*

5

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

6/40

#he fourth situation is &here the appointee has preious)! sered a ter% of

)ess than ; !ears, and a acanc! arises fro% death or resi"nation* .en if it

&i)) not resu)t in his serin" %ore than seen !ears, a reappoint%ent of such

person to sere an une9pired ter% is a)so prohi$ited $ecause his situation &i))

$e si%i)ar to those appointed under the second sentence of Sec* 1A20C, rt*

IB of the onstitution Mreferrin" to the >rst set of appointees Athe 5 and 3

!ear ter%ersC &hose ter% of oce are )ess than ; !ears $ut are $arred fro%$ein" reappointed under an! situation*

#he fourth for%u)ation is $asica))! predicated on the postu)ate that

reappoint%ent of an! +ind is prohi$ited under an! and a)) circu%stances*

Since the princip)es )aid do&n in this case is contrar! to that, the

constitutiona) $an on reappoint%ent under the fourth situation depicted in

the Kati$a" s Lenipa!o case is no& therefore e'ectie)! a$andoned* s he)d

$! the ourt, a pro%otiona) appoint%ent fro% the position of o%%issioner

to that of hair%an is constitutiona))! per%issi$)e and not $arred $! Sec*

1A2C, rt* IB AHC of the onstitution*

%. A!tic$e I> +D0, Sec 1 +0 of the Con'titution i' !e-out$ined a'

)o$$o(':1* #he appoint%ent of %e%$ers of an! of the three constitutiona)

co%%issions, after the e9piration of the uneen ter%s of oce of the >rst set

of co%%issioners, sha)) a)&a!s $e for a >9ed ter% of seen A;C !earsO an

appoint%ent for a )esser period is oid and unconstitutiona)*

#he appointin" authorit! cannot a)id)! shorten the fu)) ter% of seen A;C

!ears in case of the e9piration of the ter% as this &i)) resu)t in the distortion

of the rotationa) s!ste% prescri$ed $! the onstitution*

2* ppoint%ents to acancies resu)tin" fro% certain causes Adeath,

resi"nation, disa$i)it! or i%peach%entC sha)) on)! $e for the une9pired portion

of the ter% of the predecessor, $ut such appoint%ents cannot $e )ess than

the une9pired portion as this &i)) )i+e&ise disrupt the sta""erin" of ter%s )aid

do&n under Sec* 1A2C, rt* IBAHC*

3* Ke%$ers of the o%%ission, e*"* /, /K.rst appointees in the o%%ission under the onstitution are a)so coered $!

the prohi$ition a"ainst reappoint%ent*

4* co%%issioner &ho resi"ns after serin" in the o%%ission for )ess than

seen !ears is e)i"i$)e for an appoint%ent to the position of hair%an for the

une9pired portion of the ter% of the departin" chair%an* Such appoint%ent is

not coered $! the $an on reappoint%ent, proided that the a""re"ate

period of the )en"th of serice as co%%issioner and the une9pired period of

the ter% of the predecessor &i)) not e9ceed seen A;C !ears and proided

further that the acanc! in the position of hair%an resu)ted fro% death,

resi"nation, disa$i)it! or re%oa) $! i%peach%ent* #he ourt c)ari>es that

reappoint%ent found in Sec* 1A2C, rt* IBAHC %eans a %oe%ent to one and

the sa%e oce Ao%%issioner to o%%issioner or hair%an to hair%anC*

/n the other hand, an appoint%ent ino)in" a %oe%ent to a di'erent

position or oce Ao%%issioner to hair%anC &ou)d constitute a ne&

appoint%ent and, hence, not, in the strict )e"a) sense, a reappoint%ent

$arred under the onstitution*

6

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

7/40

5* n! %e%$er of the o%%ission cannot $e appointed or desi"nated in a

te%porar! or actin" capacit!*

/.COCO LE2 3UND %ELONGS NOT TO T9E COCO 3AMES IN T9EI PI2ATE

CAPACITIES %UT TO T9E GO2ENMENT +COCO3ED 2S EP, 10

Coco)ed "' e5ub$icG 1==B=-B 8an / 1Facts:

In 1;1, R 6260 created the oconut Inest%ent o%pan! AIC to

ad%inister the oconut Inest%ent Fund, a fund to $e sourced fro% )e! on

the sa)e of copra* #he copra se))er &as, or ou"ht to $e, issued //FUNH

receipts* #he fund &as p)aced at the disposition of //F.H, the nationa)

association of coconut producers hain" the )ar"est %e%$ership*

hen %artia) )a& started in 1;2, seera) presidentia) decrees &ere issued to

i%proe the coconut industr! throu"h the co))ection and use of the coconut)e! fund:

(H 2;6 esta$)ished the oconut onsu%ers Sta$i)iation Fund ASFC and

dec)ared the proceeds of the SF )e! as trust fund, to $e uti)ied to

su$sidie the sa)e of coconut$ased products, thus sta$i)iin" the price of

edi$)e oi)*

(H 5J2 created the oconut Industr! Hee)op%ent Fund AIHFC to >nance the

operation of a h!$rid coconut seed far%*

In 1;3, (H 232 created the (hi)ippine oconut uthorit! A(C to acce)eratethe "ro&th and dee)op%ent of the coconut and pa)% oi) industr!*

#hen ca%e (*H* No* ;55 in Du)! 1;5, proidin" under its Section 1 the po)ic!

to proide readi)! aai)a$)e credit faci)ities to the coconut far%ers at

preferentia) rates* #o&ards achiein" this, Section 2 of (H ;55 authoried (

to uti)ie the SF and the IHF co))ections to ac8uire a co%%ercia) $an+ and

deposit the SF )e! co))ections in said $an+, interest free, the deposit

&ithdra&a$)e on)! &hen the $an+ has attained a certain )ee) of sucienc! in

its e8uit! capita)* It a)so decreed that a)) )eies ( is authoried to co))ect

sha)) not $e considered as specia) andor >duciar! funds or for% part of the

"enera) funds of the "oern%ent*

Loth (*H* Nos* 61 and 146J a)so proide that the SF sha)) not $e

construed $! an! )a& as a specia) andor trust fund, the stated intention

$ein" that actua) o&nership of the said fund sha)) pertain to coconut far%ers

in their priate capacities*

Short)! $efore the issuance of (H ;55 ho&eer, ( had a)read! $ou"ht fro%

(epin" o7uan"co ;2*2P of the outstandin" capita) stoc+ of FUL U(L* In

that contract, it &as a)so stipu)ated that Handin" o7uanco sha)) receie

e8uit! in FUL a%ountin" to 10P, or ;*22 P of the ;2*2P, as consideration for

(s $u!out of &hat Handin" on7uanco c)ai% as his e9c)usie and persona)option to $u! the FUL shares*

#he ( appropriated, out of its o&n fund, an a%ount for the purchase of the

said ;2*2P e8uit!* It )ater rei%$ursed itse)f fro% the coconut )e! fund*

hi)e the 64*JP A;2*2 P Q ;*22PC portion of the option shares ostensi$)!

pertained to the far%ers, the correspondin" stoc+ certi>cates supposed)!

;

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

8/40

representin" the far%ers e8uit! &ere in the na%e of and de)iered to (*

#here &ere, ho&eer, shares for%in" part of the 64*JP portion, &hich

ended up in the hands of nonfar%ers* #he re%ainin" 2;*JP of the FUL

capita) stoc+ &ere not coered $! an! of the a"ree%ents*

#hrou"h the !ears, a part of the coconut )e! funds &ent direct)! or indirect)!

to arious pro7ects andor &as conerted into di'erent assets or inest%ents*

/f particu)ar re)eance to this &as their use to ac8uire the FUL U(L, and

the ac8uisition $! U(L, throu"h the IIF and ho)din" co%panies, of a )ar"e

$)oc+ of San Ki"ue) orporation ASKC shares*

I''ue 1: W4N the andate 5!o"ided unde! PD =BB, ))ed or a$andoned, the $a)ance, if an!, sha)) $e

transferred to the "enera) funds of the Goern%ent* ere, the SF &ere

sourced fro% forced e9actions &ith the end"oa) of dee)opin" the entire

coconut industr!* #herefore, the su$se8uent rec)assi>cation of the SF as a

priate fund to $e o&ned $! priate indiidua)s in their priate capacities

under (*H* Nos* ;55, 61 and 146J is unconstitutiona)*

Not on)! is it unconstitutiona), $ut the %andate is contrar! to the purpose orpo)ic! for &hich the coco )e! fund &as created*

I''ue :W4N the coco $e"& )und a& be o(ned b& the coconut

)a!e!' in thei! 5!i"ate ca5acitie'

No* #he coconut )e! funds are in the nature of ta9es and can on)! $e used

for pu$)ic purpose* #he! cannot $e used to purchase shares of stoc+s to $e

"ien for free to priate indiidua)s* .en if the %one! is a))ocated for a

specia) purpose and raised $! specia) %eans, it is sti)) pu$)ic in character*

ccordin")!, the presidentia) issuances &hich authoried the ( to

distri$ute, for free, the shares of stoc+ of the $an+ it ac8uired to the coconut

far%ers under such ru)es and re"u)ations the ( %a! pro%u)"ate is

unconstitutiona)*

It is unconstitutiona) $ecause >rst, it hae undu)! de)e"ated )e"is)atie po&er

to the (, and second, it a))o&ed the use of the SF to $ene>t direct)!

priate interest $! the outri"ht and unconditiona) "rant of a$so)ute o&nership

of the FULU(L shares paid for $! ( entire)! &ith the SF to the

unde>ned ?coconut far%ers@, &hich ne"ated or circu%ented the nationa)

po)ic! or pu$)ic purpose dec)ared $! (*H* No* ;55*

ence, the soca))ed Far%ers shares do not $e)on" to the coconut far%ers in

their priate capacities, $ut to the Goern%ent* #he coconut )e! funds are

specia) pu$)ic funds and an! propert! purchased $! %eans of the coconut

)e! funds shou)d )i+e&ise $e treated as pu$)ic funds or pu$)ic propert!,

su$7ect to $urdens and restrictions attached $! )a& to such propert!*

J

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

9/40

B. E>ECUTION PENDING APPEAL NOT APPLICA%LE IN E>POPIATION

POCEEDINGS+CUATA 2S PPA, 1/0Cu!ata "' Phi$i55ine Po!t' Autho!it&G 1B/11-1 8une ned as indicatin" a nu%$er of persons or thin"s

considered as constitutin" one "roup or a""re"ate, &hi)e co))ectie)! is

de>ned as in a co))ectie sense or %annerO in a %ass or $od!* L! usin" the

&ord co))ectie)!, the onstitution a))o&s for indirect o&nership of )and and

not 7ust outri"ht a"ricu)tura) )and transfer* #his is in reco"nition of the fact

that )and refor% %a! $eco%e successfu) een if it is done throu"h the%ediu% of 7uridica) entities co%posed of far%ers*

#he stoc+ distri$ution option deised under Sec* 31 of R 665; he&s &ith the

a"rarian refor% po)ic!, as instru%ent of socia) 7ustice under Sec* 4 of rtic)e

BIII of the onstitution* )$eit )and o&nership for the )and)ess appears to $e

the do%inant the%e of that po)ic!, the ourt e%phasied that Sec* 4, rtic)e

BIII of the onstitution, as couched, does not constrict on"ress to passin" an

a"rarian refor% )a& p)anted on direct )and transfer to and o&nership $!

far%ers and no other, or e)se the enact%ent su'ers fro% the ice of

unconstitutiona)it!* If the intention &ere other&ise, the fra%ers of the

onstitution &ou)d hae &orded said section in a %anner %andator! incharacter*

#he S, throu"h a reso)ution dated No 21 2011 of the %otion for reconsideration

>)ed $! EC SECETA, 10Sa*ui'a* "' E?ecuti"e Sec!eta!&Ca'e Di*e't: G 1/ 8an 1, 1

Facts:

(etitioners, as citiens, ta9pa!ers and for%er )e"is)ators, 8uestioned $efore

the S the constitutiona)it! of .H A.nhanced Hefense ooperation

12

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

13/40

"ree%entC, an a"ree%ent entered into $! the e9ecutie depart%ent &ith

the US and rati>ed on Dune 6, 2014* Under the .H, the ( sha)) proide

the US forces the access and use of portions of ( territor!, &hich are ca))ed

"reed ca))! sho& that the!

hae sucient interest in preentin" the i))e"a) e9penditure of pu$)ic %one!,

and that the! &i)) sustain a direct in7ur! as a resu)t of the enforce%ent of theassai)ed act* pp)!in" that princip)e to this case, the! %ust esta$)ish that

.H ino)es the e9ercise $! on"ress of its ta9in" or spendin" po&ers*

readin" of the .H, ho&eer, &ou)d sho& that there has $een neither an

appropriation nor an authoriation of dis$urse%ent*

I''ue ;: W4N the 5etition' Hua$i)& a' $e*i'$ato!#' 'uit

No* #he po&er to concur in a treat! or an internationa) a"ree%ent is an

institutiona) prero"atie "ranted $! the onstitution to the Senate* In a

)e"is)ators suit, the in7ured part! &ou)d $e the Senate as an institution or an!

of its incu%$ent %e%$ers, as it is the Senates constitutiona) function that isa))e"ed)! $ein" io)ated* ere, none of the petitioners, &ho are for%er

senators, hae the )e"a) standin" to %aintain the suit*

I''ue /: W4N the SC a& e?e!ci'e it' Po(e! o) 8udicia$ e"ie( o"e!

the ca'e

13

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

14/40

es* )thou"h petitioners )ac+ )e"a) standin", the! raise %atters of

transcendenta) i%portance &hich 7ustif! settin" aside the ru)e on procedura)

technica)ities* #he cha))en"e raised here is rooted in the er! onstitution

itse)f, particu)ar)! rt BIII, Sec 25 thereof, &hich proides for a stricter

%echanis% re8uired $efore an! forei"n %i)itar! $ases, troops or faci)ities

%a! $e a))o&ed in the countr!* Such is of para%ount pu$)ic interest that the

ourt is $ehooed to deter%ine &hether there &as "rae a$use of discretionon the part of the .9ecutie Hepart%ent*

Lrion Hissent

es, $ut on a di'erent )ine of reasonin"* #he petitioners satis>ed the

re8uire%ent of )e"a) standin" in assertin" that a pu$)ic ri"ht has $een

io)ated throu"h the co%%ission of an act &ith "rae a$use of discretion* #he

court %a! e9ercise its po&er of 7udicia) reie& oer the act of the .9ecutie

Hepart%ent in not su$%ittin" the .H a"ree%ent for Senate concurrence

not $ecause of the transcendenta) i%portance of the issue, $ut $ecause the

petitioners satisf! the re8uire%ents in ino+in" the courts e9panded7urisdiction* Read %ore

Issue 5: N the nonsu$%ission of the .H a"ree%ent for concurrence $!

the Senate io)ates the onstitution

No* #he .H need not $e su$%itted to the Senate for concurrence $ecause

it is in the for% of a %ere e9ecutie a"ree%ent, not a treat!* Under the

onstitution, the (resident is e%po&ered to enter into e9ecutie a"ree%ents

on forei"n %i)itar! $ases, troops or faci)ities if A1C such a"ree%ent is not the

instru%ent that a))o&s the entr! of such and A2C if it %ere)! ai%s to

i%p)e%ent an e9istin" )a& or treat!*

.H is in the for% of an e9ecutie a"ree%ent since it %ere)! ino)es

?ad7ust%ents in detai)@ in the i%p)e%entation of the K#H and the F* #hese

are e9istin" treaties $et&een the (hi)ippines and the U*S* that hae a)read!

$een concurred in $! the (hi)ippine Senate and hae there$! %et the

re8uire%ents of the onstitution under rt BIII, Sec 25* Lecause of the

status of these prior a"ree%ents, .H need not $e trans%itted to the

Senate*

He astro Hissent

No* #he .H is entire)! a ne& treat!, separate and distinct fro% the F and

the KH#* hether the sta! of the forei"n troops in the countr! is per%anent

or te%porar! is i%%ateria) $ecause the onstitution does not distin"uish*

#he .H c)ear)! ino)es the entr! of forei"n %i)itar! $ases, troops or

faci)ities in the countr!* ence, the a$sence of Senate concurrence to the

a"ree%ent %a+es it an ina)id treat!*

. ENDANGEED SPECIES MA %E IMPLEADED AS T9E EAL PATIES-IN-

INTEEST IN A CITIEN#S SUIT +ESIDENT 2S DOE, 1B0

Resident Karine Ka%%a)s s Secretar! of Hepart%ent of .ner"!ase Hi"est GR 1J0;;1 pri) 21 2015

Facts:

In 2002, the Hepart%ent of .ner"! entered into a Geoph!sica) Sure! and

.9p)oration ontract &ith D(.B, a 100P Dapanese corporation, &hich &as )ater

conerted to a serice contract, +no&n as S46, for the e9p)oration, dee)op%ent

14

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

15/40

and uti)iation of petro)eu% resources in an area that $asica))! a'ects the #anon

Strait* #he (resident at that ti%e &as not a si"nator! to the S46 and such

contract &as not su$%itted to the on"ress for reie&*

#anon Strait is a narro& passa"e of &ater in e$u &hich har$ors a $iodiersit! of

%arine )ife and is dec)ared $! )a&s as a protected seascape* hen D(.B started

its seis%ic sure!s and dri))in" actiities oer the area, petitions &ere >)ed

assai)in" the constitutiona)it! of S46* /ne petition protestin" the actiities for

its eco)o"ica) i%pact &as in the na%e of ?Resident Karine Ka%%a)s@ Q &hich are

)itera))! toothed &ha)es, turt)es and such, 7oined in $! hu%an petitioners referred

to as ?Ste&ards@, in their representatie as &e)) as persona) capacit!* (res* rro!o

&as a)so i%p)eaded as an un&i))in" copetitioner, purported)! $ecause of her

e9press dec)aration and underta+in" under the S.N harter to protect ha$itats

and other eniron%enta) concerns*

FIH., an or"aniation co%%itted to the &e)fare of %ar"ina) >sherfo)+ in the area,

a)so 8uestioned the S46 on the "round that serice contracts are no )on"er

a))o&ed under the 1J; onstitution, and that if it &ere, S46 is sti)) nu)) and oid$ecause it did not co%p)! &ith the onstitution, %ost especia))! the safe"uards

that the ourt )aid do&n in )in" of a citiens suit*

citiens suit under this ru)e a))o&s an! Fi)ipino citien to >)e an action for the

enforce%ent of eniron%enta) )a& on $eha)f of %inors or "enerations !et un$orn*It is essentia))! a representatie suit that a))o&s persons &ho are not rea) parties in

interest to institute actions on $eha)f of the rea) part! in interest*

Leonen Di''ent:

No* #he ani%a)s cannot $e rea) part!ininterests $ecause Ru)e 3, Sec 1 of R/

re8uires parties to an action to $e either natura) or 7uridica) persons*

.9tendin" the app)ication of ?rea) part! in interest@ to the% throu"h a 7udicia)

pronounce%ent &i)) potentia))! resu)t in a))o&in" petitions $ased on %ere concern

rather than an actua) enforce%ent of a ri"ht* It is i%possi$)e for ani%a)s to te))

hu%ans &hat their concerns are* t $est, hu%ans can on)! sur%ise the e9tent of

in7ur! in=icted, if there $e an!* (etitions ino+in" a ri"ht and see+in" )e"a) redress

$efore this court cannot 7ust $e a product of %ere "uess&or+*

#o a))o& citiens suits to enforce eniron%enta) ri"hts of others, inc)udin" future

"enerations, is dan"erous for three reasons: First, the! run the ris+ of forec)osin"

ar"u%ents of others &ho are una$)e to ta+e part in the suit, puttin" into 8uestion

its representatieness* Second, ar!in" interests %a! potentia))! resu)t in

ar"u%ents that are $orderin" on po)itica) issues, the reso)utions of &hich do not

fa)) upon this court* #hird, auto%atica))! a))o&in" a c)ass or citiens suit on $eha)f

of %inors and "enerations !et un$orn %a! resu)t in the oersi%p)i>cation of &hat%a! $e a co%p)e9 issue, especia))! in )i"ht of the i%possi$i)it! of deter%inin"

future "enerations true interests on the %atter*

I''ue : W4N the nae o) )o!e! P!e'ident A!!o&o i5$eaded in the

5etition a' an un(i$$in* co-5$ainti@ i' 5!o5e!

15

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

16/40

No* #he na%e of (res rro!o as an un&i))in" p)ainti' i%p)eaded in the petition

shou)d $e stric+en fro% the tit)e of the case*

First, under Ru)e 3, Sec 10 of the R/, &hen the consent of a part! &ho shou)d $e

7oined as p)ainti' cannot $e o$tained, he or she %a! $e %ade a part! defendant*

#his &i)) put the un&i))in" part! under the 7urisdiction of the court, &hich %a!

proper)! i%p)ead hi% or her throu"h its processes* #he un&i))in" part!s na%e

cannot $e si%p)! inc)uded in the petition &ithout her +no&)ed"e or consent, as

this &ou)d $e a denia) of due process*

Second, i%p)eadin" the for%er (resident for an act she %ade in perfor%ance of

the functions of her oce is contrar! to the pu$)ic po)ic! a"ainst e%$roi)in"

(residents in suits*

Po$itica$ La(

I''ue ;: W4N 'e!"ice cont!act' a!e no $on*e! a$$o(ed b& the 1sheries, forests or ti%$er, &i)d)ife,

=ora and fauna, and other natura) resources are o&ned $! the State* ith the

e9ception of a"ricu)tura) )ands, a)) other natura) resources sha)) not $e a)ienated*

#he e9p)oration, dee)op%ent, and uti)iation of natura) resources sha)) $e under

the fu)) contro) and superision of the State* #he State %a! direct)! underta+e such

actiities, or it %a! enter into coproduction, 7oint enture, or productionsharin"

a"ree%ents &ith Fi)ipino citiens, or corporations or associations at )east si9t! per

centu% of &hose capita) is o&ned $! such citiens* Such a"ree%ents %a! $e for a

period not e9ceedin" t&ent!>e !ears, rene&a$)e for not %ore than t&ent!>e

!ears, and under such ter%s and conditions as %a! $e proided $! )a&* In cases of&ater ri"hts for irri"ation, &ater supp)!, >sheries, or industria) uses other than the

dee)op%ent of &ater po&er, $ene>cia) use %a! $e the %easure and )i%it of the

"rant*

#he State sha)) protect the nations %arine &ea)th in its archipe)a"ic &aters,

territoria) sea, and e9c)usie econo%ic one, and resere its use and en7o!%ent

e9c)usie)! to Fi)ipino citiens*

16

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

17/40

#he on"ress %a!, $! )a&, a))o& s%a))sca)e uti)iation of natura) resources $!

Fi)ipino citiens, as &e)) as cooperatie >sh far%in", &ith priorit! to su$sistence

>sher%en and >sh&or+ers in riers, )a+es, $a!s, and )a"oons*

#he (resident %a! enter into a"ree%ents &ith forei"no&ned corporations

ino)in" either technica) or >nancia) assistance for )ar"esca)e e9p)oration,

dee)op%ent, and uti)iation of %inera)s, petro)eu%, and other %inera) oi)s

accordin" to the "enera) ter%s and conditions proided $! )a&, $ased on rea)

contri$utions to the econo%ic "ro&th and "enera) &e)fare of the countr!* In such

a"ree%ents, the State sha)) pro%ote the dee)op%ent and use of )oca) scienti>c and

technica) resources* #he (resident sha)) notif! the on"ress of eer! contract

entered into in accordance &ith this proision, &ithin 30 da!s fro% its e9ecution*

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

18/40

%otorc!c)e )icense p)ate* /ut of the (450*00, the cost of the %otor ehic)e p)ate

&ou)d on)! $e (3J0*00* In e'ect, the "oern%ent &ou)d een earn (;0*00 fro%

eer! pair of p)ate*

I''ue: W4N 8acoi$$o ha' $e*a$ 'tandin* to aintain the 'uit

e)d:

es* Daco%i))o as a ta9pa!in" citen is a proper part! $ecause the K(S( ino)es

the e9penditure of pu$)ic funds* hi)e the %otor ehic)e re"istrants &i)) pa! for the

)icense p)ates, the $id docu%ents and contract for K(S( indicate that the

"oern%ent sha)) $ear the $urden of pa!in" for the pro7ect*

s a ru)e, a person suin" as a ta9pa!er %ust sho& that the act co%p)ained of

direct)! ino)es the i))e"a) dis$urse%ent of pu$)ic funds deried fro% ta9ation*

Daco%i))o satis>es this re8uire%ent &hen he a))e"es that pu$)ic funds in the a%ount

of (3 *J51 $i))ion sha)) $e used in a pro7ect that has under"one an i%proper

procure%ent process* EE

Note:

Lecause of irre"u)arities in the procure%ent, the K(S( &as rendered nu)) and oid,

$ut &as a)so %ade %oot and acade%ic $! the appropriation for the fu)) a%ount of

the pro7ect fund in G 2014* Said appropriation cured &hateer defect the process

had*

1. PO9I%ITION ON MA6ING MIDNIG9T APPOINTMENTS NOT APPLICA%LE

TO LOCAL E>ECUTI2ES +PO2INCE 2S MACO, 1B0

P!o"ince o) Au!o!a "' Ma!co G ;;1 A5! 1B

3act':

Karco &as per%anent)! appointed as orporate Hee)op%ent Specia)ist II $! Go*

/n" 5 da!s $efore the end of her ter% in Dune 30, 2004* is appoint%ent, a)on"

&ith 25 other appoint%ents, &as acco%panied $! a certi>cation statin" that funds

&ere aai)a$)e for the position* hen the ne& Go too+ oer, the appoint%ents

%ade $! Go /n" &ere reo+ed $ased on the reca)) %ade $! Lud"et /cerre"ardin" the aai)a$i)it! of funds for the position* Karcos sou"ht reconsideration

fro% the S Re"iona) /ce $ut &as denied* /n appea), the S throu"h a

reso)ution dated pr 14 he)d the a)idit! of the appoint%ent on the "round that it

co%p)ied &ith the S ru)es and that the reca)) of the certi>cation did not a'ect its

a)idit! $ecause eidence &as not presented*

Instead of >)in" an KR, the (roince >)ed a petition for re)ief* It &as denied $! the

S $ecause it &as not a))o&ed $! the ru)es* Kean&hi)e, Karco >)ed a %otion to

i%p)e%ent the pr 14 Reso)ution, &hich &as "ranted* #he (roince >)ed an KR ofthe pr 14 Reso)ution $ut &as a"ain denied $ecause it &as not >)ed &ithin the 15

da! re")e%entar! period* Fina))!, the (roince >)ed $efore the a petition for

certiorari ia Ru)e 43 a"ainst the Ss second order i%p)e%entin" the pr 14

reso)ution, ino+in" the constitutiona) prohi$ition a"ainst %idni"ht appoint%ents*

#he denied the petition and uphe)d the S decision*

Po$itica$ La(

1J

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

19/40

I''ue: W4N the 5!ohibition on idni*ht a55ointent' a55$& to

a55ointent' ade b& $oca$ e?ecuti"e'

No* #he prohi$ition under rtic)e II, Sec 15 app)ies on)! to presidentia)

appoint%ents, and not to those %ade $! )oca) e9ecuties* In this case, the

appoint%ent is a)id $ecause there is no )a& that prohi$its )oca) e)ectie ocia)s

fro% %a+in" appoint%ents durin" the )ast da!s of hisher tenure*

eedia$ La(

I''ue: W4N the CA i' co!!ect in ta7in* co*niFance o"e! the ca'e

No* #he court shou)d hae dis%issed the petition outri"ht $ecause no appea) %a!

$e ta+en oer an order of e9ecution*

Under Ru)e 50, Sec 1 of the Ru)es of ourt, the is a))o&ed to dis%iss an appea)

&here the order appea)ed fro% is not appea)a$)e* #his ru)e is $ased on the doctrine

of i%%uta$i)it! of 7ud"%ent, &hich states that a >na) and e9ecutor! re%oes fro%

the court &hich renders it the po&er and 7urisdiction to further a)ter or a%end it,%uch )ess reo+ed it* #hus, een if a 7ud"%ent is )ater on discoered to $e

erroneous, it re%ains i%%uta$)e

ELE2ANT LAWS:

A!tic$e 2II, Sec 1B o) the Con'titution

S.#I/N 15* #&o %onths i%%ediate)! $efore the ne9t presidentia) e)ections and up

to the end of his ter%, a (resident or ctin" (resident sha)) not %a+e appoint%ents,

e9cept te%porar! appoint%ents to e9ecutie positions &hen continued acancies

therein &i)) pre7udice pu$)ic serice or endan"er pu$)ic safet!*

u$e B, Sec 1 o) the u$e' o) Cou!t

RU9ed $! these Ru)esO

A$C Fai)ure to >)e the notice of appea) or the record on appea) &ithin the period

prescri$ed $! these Ru)esO

AcC Fai)ure of the appe))ant to pa! the doc+et and other )a&fu) fees as proided in

section 5, Ru)e 40 and section 4 of Ru)e 41O ALar Katter No* J03, 1; Fe$ruar! 1JC

AdC Unauthoried a)terations, o%issions or additions in the approed record on

appea) as proided in section 4 of Ru)e 44O

AeC Fai)ure of the appe))ant to sere and >)e the re8uired nu%$er of copies of his

$rief or %e%orandu% &ithin the ti%e proided $! these Ru)esO

AfC $sence of speci>c assi"n%ent of errors in the appe))ants $rief, or of pa"e

references to the record as re8uired in section 13, para"raphs AaC, AcC, AdC and AfC of

Ru)e 44O

A"C Fai)ure of the appe))ant to ta+e the necessar! steps for the correction or

co%p)etion of the record &ithin the ti%e )i%ited $! the court in its orderO1

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

20/40

AhC Fai)ure of the appe))ant to appear at the pre)i%inar! conference under Ru)e

4J or to co%p)! &ith orders, circu)ars, or directies of the court &ithout 7usti>a$)e

causeO and

AiC #he fact that the order or 7ud"%ent appea)ed fro% is not appea)a$)e* A1aC

11.DESPITE LAC6 O3 POCEEDINGS, COMPENSATION-DETEMINED-AT-T9E-

TIME-O3-TA6ING ULE EMAINS +DPW9 2S 9EACLEO, 1B0

Sec!eta!& o) DPW9 "' 9e!ac$eo G 1=ed, erac)eo >)ed a co%p)aint for recoer! of possession &ith da%a"es*

Faora$)e decisions &ere rendered $! the R# and the , &ith a)uation of ( 1,500

per s8% and 6P interest per annu% fro% the ti%e of >)in" of the unti) fu)) pa!%ent*

#he S Hiision reersed the ru)in" and he)d that co%putation shou)d $e $ased

at the ti%e the propert! &as ta+en in 140, &hich is 0*;0 per s8%* Lut $ecause of

the contrastin" opinions of the %e%$ers of the Hiision and transcendenta)

i%portance of the issue, the case &as referred to the .n Lanc for reso)ution*

I''ue 1: W4N the ta7in* o) 5!i"ate 5!o5e!t& (ithout due 5!oce'' 'hou$d benu$$iJed

No* #he "oern%ents fai)ure to initiate the necessar! e9propriation proceedin"s

prior to actua) ta+in" cannot si%p)! ina)idate the States e9ercise of its e%inent

do%ain po&er, "ien that the propert! su$7ect of e9propriation is indu$ita$)!

deoted for pu$)ic use, and pu$)ic po)ic! i%poses upon the pu$)ic uti)it! the

o$)i"ation to continue its serices to the pu$)ic* #o hasti)! nu))if! said e9propriation

in the "uise of )ac+ of due process &ou)d certain)! di%inish or &ea+en one of the

States inherent po&ers, the u)ti%ate o$7ectie of &hich is to sere the "reater

"ood*

#hus, the non>)in" of the case for e9propriation &i)) not necessari)! )ead to the

return of the propert! to the )ando&ner* hat is )eft to the )ando&ner is the ri"ht of

co%pensation*

I''ue : W4N co5en'ation i' ba'ed on the a!7et "a$ue o) the 5!o5e!t&

at the tie o) ta7in*

es* hi)e it %a! appear ine8uita$)e to the priate o&ners to receie an outdated

a)uation, the )on"esta$)ished ru)e is that the fair e8uia)ent of a propert! shou)d

$e co%puted not at the ti%e of pa!%ent, $ut at the ti%e of ta+in"* #his is $ecause

the purpose of 7ust co%pensation is not to re&ard the o&ner for the propert! ta+en$ut to co%pensate hi% for the )oss thereof* #he o&ner shou)d $e co%pensated on)!

for &hat he actua))! )oses, and &hat he )oses is the actua) a)ue of the propert! at

the ti%e it is ta+en*

I''ue ;: W4N the 5!inci5$e o) eHuit& 'hou$d be a55$ied in thi' ca'e

No* #he ourt %ust adhere to the doctrine that its >rst and funda%enta) dut! is the

app)ication of the )a& accordin" to its e9press ter%s, interpretation $ein" ca))ed for

20

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

21/40

on)! &hen such )itera) app)ication is i%possi$)e* #o entertain other for%u)a for

co%putin" 7ust co%pensation, contrar! to those esta$)ished $! )a& and

7urisprudence, &ou)d open ar!in" interpretation of econo%ic po)icies Q a %atter

&hich this ourt has no co%petence to ta+e co"niance of* .8uit! and e8uita$)e

princip)es on)! co%e into fu)) p)a! &hen a "ap e9ists in the )a& and 7urisprudence*

2e$a'co Di''ent:

#he States po&er of e%inent do%ain is not a$so)uteO the onstitution is c)ear that

no person sha)) $e depried of )ife, )i$ert! and propert! &ithout due process of )a&*

s such, fai)ure of the "oern%ent to institute the necessar! proceedin"s shou)d

)ead to fai)ure of ta+in" an indiidua)s propert!* In this case, since the propert! &as

a)read! ta+en, the co%p)ainants %ust $e e8uita$)! co%pensated for the )oss

thereof*

For purposes of ?7ust@ co%pensation, the a)ue of the )and shou)d $e deter%ined

fro% the ti%e the propert! o&ners >)ed the initiator! co%p)aint, earnin" interest

therefro%* #o ho)d other&ise &ou)d a)idate the States act as one of e9propriation

in spite of procedura) in>r%ities &hich, in turn, &ou)d a%ount to un7ust enrich%ent

on its part* #o continue condonin" such acts &ou)d $e )icensin" the "oern%ent to

continue dispensin" &ith constitutiona) re8uire%ents in ta+in" priate propert!*

1. COMELEC CANNOT EGULATE ACTS O3 OWNES9IP E>ECISED %

PU2S AND TANSPOT TEMINAL OWNES +1 UTA6 2S COMELEC, 1B0

1 Uta7 "' CoMELEC G A5!i$ 1/ 1B

3act':

In 2013, the /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

22/40

#he e9pression of ideas or opinion of an o&ner of a (U, throu"h the postin" of

e)ection ca%pai"n %ateria)s on the ehic)e, does not a'ect considerations pertinent

to the operation of the (U* Sure)!, postin" a deca) e9pressin" support for a certain

candidate in an e)ection &i)) not in an! %anner a'ect the operation of the (U as

such* Re"u)atin" the e9pression of ideas or opinion in a (U, throu"h the postin" of

an e)ection ca%pai"n %ateria) thereon, is not a re"u)ation of the franchise or per%it

to operate, $ut a re"u)ation on the er! o&nership of the ehic)e*

I''ue : W4N the !e*u$ation i' u'tiJed b& the ca5ti"e audience doct!ine

No* "oern%ent re"u)ation $ased on the captieaudience doctrine %a! not $e

7usti>ed if the supposed ?captie audience@ %a! aoid e9posure to the other&ise

intrusie speech* ere, the co%%uters are not forced or co%pe))ed to read the

e)ection ca%pai"n %ateria)s posted on (Us and transport ter%ina)s* Nor are the!

incapa$)e of dec)inin" to receie the %essa"es contained in the posted e)ection

ca%pai"n %ateria)s since the! %a! si%p)! aert their e!es if the! >nd the sa%e

un$eara$)! intrusie* ence, the doctrine is not app)ica$)e*

re"u)ation $ased on the captieaudience doctrine is in the "uise of censorship,

&hich underta+es se)ectie)! to shie)d the pu$)ic fro% so%e +inds of speech on the

"round that the! are %ore o'ensie than others* Such se)ectie restrictions hae

$een uphe)d on)! &hen the spea+er intrudes on the priac! of the ho%e or the

de"ree of captiit! %a+es it either i%possi$)e or i%practica) for the un&i))in" ie&er

or auditor to aoid e9posure*

I''ue ;: W4N the !e*u$ation con'titute' 5!io! !e't!aint' on )!ee '5eech

es* It undu)! infrin"es on the funda%enta) ri"ht of the peop)e to freedo% of

speech* entra) to the prohi$ition is the freedo% of indiidua)s such as the o&ners

of (Us and priate transport ter%ina)s to e9press their preference, throu"h the

postin" of e)ection ca%pai"n %ateria) in their propert!, and conince others to

a"ree &ith the%*

I''ue /: W4N the !e*u$ation i' a "a$id content-neut!a$ !e*u$ation

No* #he prohi$ition under the certain proisions of R 615 are contentneutra)

re"u)ations since the! %ere)! contro) the p)ace &here e)ection ca%pai"n %ateria)s

%a! $e posted, $ut the prohi$ition is repu"nant to the free speech c)ause as it fai)s

to satisf! a)) of the re8uisites for a a)id contentneutra) re"u)ation*

#he restriction on free speech of o&ners of (Us and transport ter%ina)s is notnecessar! to a stated "oern%enta) interest* First, &hi)e Reso)ution 615 &as

pro%u)"ated $! the /K.ned standards, is constitutiona))! per%issi$)e, een if it restricts the

ri"ht to free speech, proided that the fo))o&in" re8uisites concur: >rst, the

"oern%ent re"u)ation is &ithin the constitutiona) po&er of the Goern%entO

second, it furthers an i%portant or su$stantia) "oern%enta) interestO third, the

"oern%enta) interest is unre)ated to the suppression of free e9pressionO and fourth,

22

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

23/40

the incidenta) restriction on freedo% of e9pression is no "reater than is essentia) to

the furtherance of that interest*

A!t I>-C, Section / o) the Con'titution:

#he o%%ission %a!, durin" the e)ection period, superise or re"u)ate the

en7o!%ent or uti)iation of a)) franchises or per%its for the operation of

transportation and other pu$)ic uti)ities, %edia of co%%unication or infor%ation, a))"rants, specia) prii)e"es, or concessions "ranted $! the Goern%ent or an!

su$diision, a"enc!, or instru%enta)it! thereof, inc)udin" an! G/ or its su$sidiar!*

Such superision or re"u)ation sha)) ai% to ensure e8ua) opportunit!, ti%e, and

space, and the ri"ht to rep)!, inc)udin" reasona$)e, e8ua) rates therefor, for pu$)ic

infor%ation ca%pai"ns and foru%s a%on" candidates in connection &ith the

o$7ectie of ho)din" free, order)!, honest, peacefu), and credi$)e e)ections*

Sec < o) A

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

24/40

Hurin" the Dune 30, 2014 %eetin" of the DL, Dustice arpio appeared and disc)osed

a con>dentia) infor%ation &hich, to D Sereno, characteried Darde)eas inte"rit! as

du$ious* Darde)ea de%anded that D Sereno e9ecute a s&orn state%ent specif!in"

her o$7ections and that he $e a'orded the ri"ht to crosse9a%ine her in a pu$)ic

hearin"* e a)so re8uested defer%ent of the DL proceedin"s, as the S en $anc has

!et to decide in his )etterpetition*

o&eer, the DL continued its de)i$erations and proceeded to ote for the

no%inees to $e inc)uded in the short)ist* #hereafter, the DL re)eased the short)ist of

4 no%inees* It &as reea)ed )ater that there &ere actua))! 5 no%inees &ho %ade it

to the DL short)ist, $ut 1 no%inee cou)d not $e inc)uded $ecause of the inocation

of the ?unani%it! ru)e@**

Darde)ea >)ed for certiorari and %anda%us ia Ru)e 65 &ith pra!er for #R/ to

co%pe) the DL to inc)ude hi% in the )ist of no%inees on the "rounds that the DL

and D Sereno acted &ith "rae a$use of discretion in e9c)udin" hi%, despite hain"

"arnered a sucient nu%$er of otes to 8ua)if! for the position*

Po$itica$ La(

I''ue: W4N the !i*ht to due 5!oce'' i' deandab$e a' a atte! o) !i*ht in

8%C 5!oceedin*'

es* hi)e it is true that the DL proceedin"s are sui "eneris, it does not %ean that

an app)icants access to the ri"hts a'orded under the due process c)ause is

discretionar! on the part of DL*

#he ourt does not $rush aside the uni8ue and specia) nature of DL proceedin"s*

Not&ithstandin" $ein" ?a c)ass of its o&n,@ the ri"ht to $e heard and to e9p)ain

ones se)f is aai)in"* In cases &here an o$7ection to an app)icants 8ua)i>cations israised, the o$serance of due process neither contradicts the fu)>))%ent of the DLs

dut! to reco%%end* #his ho)din" is not an encroach%ent on its discretion in the

no%ination process* ctua))!, its adherence to the precepts of due process supports

and enriches the e9ercise of its discretion* hen an app)icant, &ho ehe%ent)!

denies the truth of the o$7ections, is a'orded the chance to protest, the DL is

presented &ith a c)earer understandin" of the situation it faces, there$! "uardin"

the $od! fro% %a+in" an unsound and capricious assess%ent of infor%ation

$rou"ht $efore it* #he DL is not e9pected to strict)! app)! the ru)es of eidence in

its assess%ent of an o$7ection a"ainst an app)icant* Dust the sa%e, to hear the side

of the person cha))en"ed co%p)ies &ith the dictates of fairness $ecause the on)!test that an e9ercise of discretion %ust sur%ount is that of soundness*

onse8uent)!, the ourt is co%pe))ed to ru)e that Darde)ea shou)d hae $een

inc)uded in the short)ist su$%itted to the (resident for the acated position of

ssociate Dustice $ad* #his conse8uence arose not fro% the unconstitutiona)it! of

Section 2, Ru)e 10 of DL00 per se, $ut fro% the io)ation $! the DL of its o&n

ru)es of procedure and the $asic tenets of due process* L! no %eans does the ourt

intend to stri+e do&n the ?unani%it! ru)e@ as it re=ects the DLs po)ic! and,

therefore, &isdo% in its se)ection of no%inees* .en so, the ourt refuses to turn a

$)ind e!e on the pa)pa$)e defects in its i%p)e%entation and the ensuin" treat%ent

that Darde)ea receied $efore the ounci)* #rue, Darde)ea has no ested ri"ht to ano%ination, $ut this does not prescind fro% the fact that the DL fai)ed to o$sere

the %ini%u% re8uire%ents of due process* EE

eedia$ La(

I''ue 1: W4N the Su5!ee Cou!t ha' u!i'diction o"e! the ca'e

24

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

25/40

es* Darde)eas a))e"ations in his petitions %erits the e9ercise of the ourts

superisor! authorit! oer the DL* Under Sec J, rt III of the onstitution, the DL

sha)) function under the superision of the S* It fo))o&s that such superisor!

authorit! coers the oerseein" of &hether the DL co%p)ies &ith its o&n ru)es or

not*

I''ue : W4N a (!it o) andau' i' a"ai$ab$e a*ain't the 8%C

No* #he DLs dut! to no%inate is discretionar! and it %a! not $e co%pe))ed to do

so%ethin"*

Kanda%us )ies to co%pe) the perfor%ance, &hen refused, of a %inisteria) dut!, $ut

not to co%pe) the perfor%ance of a discretionar! dut!* Kanda%us &i)) not issue to

contro) or reie& the e9ercise of discretion of a pu$)ic ocer &here the )a& i%poses

upon said pu$)ic ocer the ri"ht and dut! to e9ercise his 7ud"%ent in reference to

an! %atter in &hich he is re8uired to act* It is his 7ud"%ent that is to $e e9ercised

and not that of the court*

I''ue ;: W4N a (!it o) ce!tio!a!i unde! Sec 1, u$e B o) the u$e' o) Cou!ti' a"ai$ab$e a*ain't the 8%C +(hich i' not e?e!ci'in* Hua'i-udicia$

)unction'0

es* Under the e9panded 7urisdiction or e9panded po&er of 7udicia) reie& ested to

the S $! the 1J; onstitution, a petition for certiorari is a proper re%ed! to

8uestion the act of an! $ranch or instru%enta)it! of the "oern%ent on the "round

of "rae a$use of discretion a%ountin" to )ac+ or e9cess of 7urisdiction $! an!

$ranch or instru%enta)it! of the "oern%ent, een if the )atter does not e9ercise

7udicia), 8uasi7udicia) or %inisteria) functions

1/. Di'tinction %et(een the Su5!ee Cou!t#' E?5anded 8u!i'diction and

Po(e! o) Gene!a$ Su5e!"i'ion O"e! the 8%C +2i$$anue"a "' 8%C, 1B0

2i$$anue"a "' 8%C

G 11;; A5!i$ =, 1B

Facts:

fter a$out a !ear fro% $ein" appointed as a K# 7ud"e, Dud"e i))anuea app)ied

for the acant position of presidin" 7ud"e in so%e R# $ranches* #he DL ho&eerinfor%ed hi% that he &as not inc)uded in the )ist of candidates for such position

$ecause the DLs )on"standin" po)ic! re8uires 5 !ears of serice as 7ud"e of >rst

)ee) courts $efore one can app)! as 7ud"e for second)ee) courts* Lefore the S,

he assai)ed ia Ru)e 65 and Ru)e 63 &ith pra!er for #R/ and pre)i%inar! in7unction

the po)ic! of DL on the "round that it is unconstitutiona) and &as issued &ith "rae

a$use of discretion* ))e"ed)!, the po)ic! a)so io)ates procedura) due process for

)ac+ of pu$)ication and nonsu$%ission to the U(

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

26/40

es* s an o'sprin" of the 1J; onstitution, the DL is %andated to reco%%end

appointees to the 7udiciar! and on)! those no%inated $! the DL in a )ist ocia))!

trans%itted to the (resident %a! $e appointed $! the )atter as 7ustice or 7ud"e in

the 7udiciar!* #hus, the DL is $urdened &ith a "reat responsi$i)it! that is i%$ued

&ith pu$)ic interest as it deter%ines the %en and &o%en &ho &i)) sit on the 7udicia)

$ench* hi)e the 1J; onstitution has proided the 8ua)i>cations of %e%$ers of

the 7udiciar!, this does not prec)ude the DL fro% hain" its o&n set of ru)es andprocedures and proidin" po)icies to e'ectie)! ensure its %andate*

I''ue : W4N 8%C coitted *!a"e abu'e o) di'c!etion in $a&in* do(n 'uch

5o$ic&

No* #he functions of searchin", screenin", and se)ectin" are necessar! and

incidenta) to the DLs principa) function of choosin" and reco%%endin" no%inees

for acancies in the 7udiciar! for appoint%ent $! the (resident* o&eer, the

onstitution did not )a! do&n in precise ter%s the process that the DL sha)) fo))o&

in deter%inin" app)icants 8ua)i>cations* In carr!in" out its %ain function, the DL

has the authorit! to set the standardscriteria in choosin" its no%inees for eer!acanc! in the 7udiciar!, su$7ect on)! to the %ini%u% 8ua)i>cations re8uired $! the

onstitution and )a& for eer! position* #he search for these )on" he)d 8ua)ities

necessari)! re8uires a de"ree of =e9i$i)it! in order to deter%ine &ho is %ost >t

a%on" the app)icants* #hus, the DL has sucient $ut not un$rid)ed )icense to act in

perfor%in" its duties*

I''ue ;: W4N the "io$ate' the eHua$ 5!otection c$au'e o) the Con'titution

No* #he e8ua) protection c)ause is not io)ated $ecause the c)assi>cation created $!

the cha))en"ed po)ic! satis>es the rationa) $asis test*

Su$stantia) distinctions do e9ist $et&een )o&er court 7ud"es &ith >e !ear

e9perience and those &ith )ess than >e !ears of e9perience, )i+e the petitioner, and

the c)assi>cation enshrined in the assai)ed po)ic! is reasona$)e and re)eant to its

)e"iti%ate purpose* #he assai)ed criterion or consideration for pro%otion to a

second)ee) court, &hich is >e !ears e9perience as 7ud"e of a >rst)ee) court, is a

direct adherence to the 8ua)ities prescri$ed $! the onstitution* ()acin" a pre%iu%

on %an! !ears of 7udicia) e9perience, the DL is %ere)! app)!in" one of the strin"ent

constitutiona) standards re8uirin" that a %e%$er of the 7udiciar! $e of ?proen

co%petence*@ In deter%inin" co%petence, the DL considers, a%on" other

8ua)i>cations, e9perience and perfor%ance*

CI2IL LAW

I''ue 1: W4N the 5o$ic& o) 8%C 'hou$d ha"e been 5ub$i'hed in the ONA

No* #he DL po)ic! need not $e >)ed in the /NR $ecause the pu$)ication

re8uire%ent in the /NR is con>ned to issuances of ad%inistratie a"encies under

the .9ecutie $ranch of the "oern%ent* Since the DL is a $od! under the

superision of the Supre%e ourt, it is not coered $! the pu$)ication re8uire%ents

of the d%inistratie ode*

I''ue : W4N the 5o$ic& o) 8%C 'hou$d ha"e been 5ub$i'hed

es* s a "enera) ru)e, pu$)ication is indispensa$)e in order that a)) statutes,

inc)udin" ad%inistratie ru)es that are intended to enforce or i%p)e%ent e9istin"

)a&s, attain $indin" force and e'ect* .9e%pted fro% re8uire%ent of pu$)ication are

interpretatie re"u)ations and those %ere)! interna) in nature, &hich re"u)ate on)!

the personne) of the ad%inistratie a"enc! and not the pu$)ic, and the soca))ed

)etters of instructions issued $! ad%inistratie superiors concernin" the ru)es or

"uide)ines to $e fo))o&ed $! their su$ordinates in the perfor%ance of their duties*

26

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

27/40

ere, the assai)ed DL po)ic! does not fa)) &ithin the ad%inistratie ru)es and

re"u)ations e9e%pted fro% the pu$)ication re8uire%ent* It ino)es a 8ua)i>cation

standard $! &hich the DL sha)) deter%ine proen co%petence of an app)icant* It is

not an interna) re"u)ation, $ecause if it &ere, it &ou)d re"u)ate and a'ect on)! the

%e%$ers of the DL and their sta'* Nota$)!, the se)ection process ino)es a ca)) to

)a&!ers &ho %eet the 8ua)i>cations in the onstitution and are &i))in" to sere in

the Dudiciar! to app)! to these acant positions* #hus, natura))! it fo))o&s thatpotentia) app)icants $e infor%ed of the re8uire%ents to the 7udicia) positions, so

that the! &ou)d $e a$)e to prepare for and co%p)! &ith the%*

Durisprudence has he)d that ru)es i%p)e%entin" a statute shou)d $e pu$)ished* #hus,

$! ana)o"!, pu$)ication is a)so re8uired for the >e!ear re8uire%ent $ecause it

see+s to i%p)e%ent a constitutiona) proision re8uirin" proen co%petence fro%

%e%$ers of the 7udiciar!*

EMEDIAL LAW

I''ue 1: W4N the 5etition' )o! ce!tio!a!i and 5!ohibition a!e a55$icab$e to

8%C +eedia$0

es* #he re%edies of certiorari and prohi$ition are necessari)! $roader in scope and

reach* Under Ru)e 65, Sec 1Apar 1C, the &rit of certiorari or prohi$ition %a! $e

issued to correct errors of 7urisdiction co%%itted not on)! $! a tri$una), corporation,

$oard or ocer e9ercisin" 7udicia), 8uasi7udicia) or %inisteria) functions $ut a)so to

set ri"ht, undo and restrain an! act of "rae a$use of discretion a%ountin" to )ac+

or e9cess of 7urisdiction $! an! $ranch or instru%enta)it! of the Goern%ent, een if

the )atter does not e9ercise 7udicia), 8uasi7udicia) or %inisteria) functions*

onse8uent)!, petitions for certiorari and prohi$ition are appropriate re%edies to

raise constitutiona) issues and to reie& andor prohi$it or nu))if! the acts of)e"is)atie and e9ecutie ocia)s*

ere, the DL indeed does not fa)) &ithin the scope of a tri$una), $oard, or ocer

e9ercisin" 7udicia) or 8uasi7udicia) functions* In the process of se)ectin" and

screenin" app)icants, the DL neither acted in an! 7udicia) or 8uasi7udicia) capacit!

nor assu%ed unto itse)f an! perfor%ance of 7udicia) or 8uasi7udicia) prero"atie*

o&eer, since the for%u)ation of "uide)ines and criteria is necessar! and incidenta)

to the e9ercise of the DLs constitutiona) %andate, a deter%ination %ust $e %ade

on &hether the DL has acted &ith "rae a$use of discretion a%ountin" to )ac+ or

e9cess of 7urisdiction in issuin" and enforcin" the said po)ic!*

I''ue : W4N the !eed& o) andau' i' 5!o5e! in a''ai$in* the 5o$ic& o)

the 8%C

No* First, to $e inc)uded as an app)icant to second)ee) 7ud"e is not proper)!

co%pe))a$)e $! %anda%us inas%uch as it ino)es the e9ercise of sound discretion

$! the DL* Second, petitioner has no c)ear )e"a) ri"ht since there is no )a& that

"rants hi% the ri"ht of pro%otion to second)ee) courts*

I''ue ;: W4N the !eed& o) dec$a!ato!& !e$ie) i' 5!o5e!

No* First, the petition for dec)arator! re)ief did not ino)e an unsound po)ic!*

Rather, the petition speci>ca))! sou"ht a 7udicia) dec)aration that the petitioner has

the ri"ht to $e inc)uded in the )ist of app)icants a)thou"h he fai)ed to %eet DLs >e

!ear re8uire%ent po)ic!* "ain, no person possesses a )e"a) ri"ht under the

onstitution to $e inc)uded in the )ist of no%inees for acant 7udicia) positions* #he

opportunit! of appoint%ent to 7udicia) oce is a %ere prii)e"e, and not a 7udicia))!

enforcea$)e ri"ht that %a! $e proper)! c)ai%ed $! an! person* #he inc)usion in the

)ist of candidates, &hich is one of the incidents of such appoint%ent, is not a ri"ht

2;

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

28/40

either* #hus, the petitioner cannot c)ai% an! ri"ht that cou)d hae $een a'ected $!

the assai)ed po)ic!*

Second, the S does not hae ori"ina) 7urisdiction oer a petition for dec)arator!

re)ief een if on)! 8uestions of )a& are ino)ed* #he specia) cii) action of

dec)arator! re)ief fa))s under the e9c)usie 7urisdiction of the appropriate R#

pursuant to L( 12, Sec 1, as a%ended $! R** No* ;61*

#he S assu%es 7urisdiction oer the petition on)! $ecause of the ourts

superisor! dut! oer the DL and in the e9ercise of its e9panded 7udicia) po&er*

Lut in an! eent, een if the ourt &i)) set aside procedura) in>r%ities, the instant

petition shou)d sti)) $e dis%issed* EE

Issue 4: N the ourt %a! e9ercise its superisor! 7urisdiction oer the DL

separate fro% the e9ercise of its e9panded 7urisdiction oer acts of "rae a$use of

discretion of "oern%ent a"encies

1B. 3ound$in*' a!e Natu!a$-%o!n 3i$i5ino CitiFen' +G!ace Poe "' COMELEC,

10

G!ace Poe "' COMELEC : G 1ed as

a candidate for (residenc!* #hree 7ustices, ho&eer, a$stained to ote on the

natura)$orn citienship issue*

I''ue 1: W4N the COMELEC ha' u!i'diction to !u$e on the i''ue o)

Hua$iJcation' o) candidate' +ead Di''ent0

e)d:

No* rtic)e IB, Sec 2 of the onstitution proides for the po&ers and functions of

the /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

29/40

In contrast, the onstitution proides that on)! the S.# and R.# tri$una)s hae

so)e 7urisdiction oer the e)ection contests, returns, and 8ua)i>cations of their

respectie %e%$ers, &hereas oer the (resident and ice (resident, on)! the S en

$anc has so)e 7urisdiction* s for the 8ua)i>cations of candidates for such positions,

the onstitution is si)ent* #here is si%p)! no authoried proceedin" in deter%inin"

the ine)i"i$i)it! of candidates $efore e)ections* Such )ac+ of proision cannot $e

supp)ied $! a %ere ru)e, and for the /K.cation issue of Grace as a candidate in the sa%e case for cance))ation of her

/*

I''ue : W4N G!ace Poe-L$aanFa!e' i' a natu!a$-bo!n 3i$i5ino citiFen

ARead HissentC

e)d:

es, Grace (oe %i"ht $e and is considera$)! a natura)$orn Fi)ipino* For that, she

satis>es one of the constitutiona) re8uire%ents that on)! natura)$orn Fi)ipinos %a!

run for presidenc!*

First, there is a hi"h pro$a$i)it! that Grace (oes parents are Fi)ipinos* er ph!sica)

features are t!pica) of Fi)ipinos* #he fact that she &as a$andoned as an infant in a

%unicipa)it! &here the popu)ation of the (hi)ippines is oer&he)%in")! Fi)ipinos such

that there &ou)d $e %ore than P chance that a chi)d $orn in such proince is a

Fi)ipino is a)so a circu%stantia) eidence of her parents nationa)it!* #hat pro$a$i)it!

and the eidence on &hich it is $ased are ad%issi$)e under Ru)e 12J, Section 4 of

the Reised Ru)es on .idence* #o assu%e other&ise is to accept the a$surd, if not

the irtua))! i%possi$)e, as the nor%*

Second, $! otes of ;5, the S pronounced that found)in"s are as a c)ass, natura)

$orn citiens* #his is $ased on the >ndin" that the de)i$erations of the 134

onstitutiona) onention sho& that the fra%ers intended found)in"s to $e coered

$! the enu%eration* hi)e the 135 onstitutions enu%eration is si)ent as to

found)in"s, there is no restrictie )an"ua"e &hich &ou)d de>nite)! e9c)ude

found)in"s either* Lecause of si)ence and a%$i"uit! in the enu%eration &ith

respect to found)in"s, the S fe)t the need to e9a%ine the intent of the fra%ers*

#hird, that found)in"s are auto%atica))! conferred &ith natura)$orn citienship is

supported $! treaties and the "enera) princip)es of internationa) )a&* )thou"h the

(hi)ippines is not a si"nator! to so%e of these treaties, it adheres to the custo%ar!

ru)e to presu%e found)in"s as hain" $orn of the countr! in &hich the found)in" is

found*

I''ue ;: W4N G!ace Poe 'ati'Je' the 1-&ea! !e'idenc& !eHui!eent

e)d:

es* Grace (oe satis>ed the re8uire%ents of ani%us %anendi coup)ed &ith ani%us

reertendi in ac8uirin" a ne& do%ici)e*

Grace (oes do%ici)e had $een ti%e)! chan"ed as of Ka! 24, 2005, and not on Du)!

1J, 2006 &hen her app)ication under R 225 &as approed $! the LI* /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

30/40

and intent to a$andon per%anent)! her do%ici)e in the US* oup)ed &ith her

eentua) app)ication to reac8uire (hi)ippine citienship and her fa%i)!s actua)

continuous sta! in the (hi)ippines oer the !ears, it is c)ear that &hen Grace (oe

returned on Ka! 24, 2005, it &as for "ood*

I''ue /: W4N the G!ace Poe#' candidac& 'hou$d be denied o! cance$$ed )o!

coittin* ate!ia$ i'!e5!e'entation' in he! COC

e)d:

No* #he /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

31/40

a'ectin" e)ections@ necessari)! inc)udes the po&er to decide &hether a candidate

possesses the 8ua)i>cations re8uired $! )a& for e)ection to pu$)ic oce* #his $road

constitutiona) po&er and function ested in the o%e)ec is desi"ned precise)! to

aoid an! situation &here a dispute a'ectin" e)ections is )eft &ithout an! )e"a)

re%ed!*

Q If one &ho is o$ious)! not a natura)$orn (hi)ippine citien, )i+e rno)d

Sch&arenne"er, runs for (resident, the o%e)ec is certain)! not po&er)ess to

cance) the certi>cate of candidac! of such candidate* #here is no need to &ait unti)

after the e)ections $efore such candidate %a! $e dis8ua)i>ed*

In fact, the /K.)es a

certi>cate of candidac! for (resident puts the e)ection process in %oc+er! and is

therefore a nuisance candidate* Such persons certi>cate of candidac! can %otuproprio $e cance))ed $! the /K.)o Lus)on su""ested that the

su$7ect %atter $e )eft in the hands of the )e"is)ature, &hich %eant that on"ress

&ou)d decide &hether to cate"orie as Fi)ipinos A 1C natura) or i))e"iti%ate chi)dren

of Fi)ipino %others and a)ien fathers &ho do not reco"nie the%O and A2C chi)dren of

un+no&n parenta"e found)in"s*

31

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

32/40

Q If that &ere the case, found)in"s &ere not and cou)d not a)id)! $e considered as

natura)$orn Fi)ipino citiens as de>ned in the onstitution since on"ress &ou)d

then proide the ena$)in" )a& for the% to $e re"arded as Fi)ipino citiens*

Q Found)in"s &ou)d $e natura)ied citiens since the! ac8uire Fi)ipino citienship ?in

accordance &ith )a&@ under para"raph A5C, Section 1 of rtic)e I of the 13 5

onstitution*

Q Si"ni>cant)!, petitioner and the So)icitor Genera), conenient)! )eft out He)e"ate

Lus)ons opinion*

2* None of the fra%ers of the 135 onstitution %entioned the ter% ?natura)$orn@

in re)ation to the citienship of found)in"s* "ain, under the 135 onstitution, on)!

those &hose fathers &ere Fi)ipino citiens &ere considered natura)$orn Fi)ipino

citiens* #hose &ho &ere $orn of Fi)ipino %others and a)ien fathers &ere sti))

re8uired to e)ect (hi)ippine citienship, preentin" the% fro% $ein" natura)$orn

Fi)ipino citiens*

Q If the fra%ers intended that found)in"s $e considered natura)$orn Fi)ipinocitiens, this &ou)d hae created an a$surd situation &here a chi)d &ith un+no&n

parenta"e &ou)d $e p)aced in a $etter position than a chi)d &hose %other is

actua))! +no&n to $e a Fi)ipino citien* #he fra%ers of the 135 onstitution cou)d

not hae intended to create such an a$surdit!*

3* He)e"ate Rafo)ss a%end%ent, &hen put to a ote, &as c)ear)! re7ected $! the

%a7orit! of the de)e"ates to the 134 onstitutiona) onention*

Q #he re7ection of the Rafo)s a%end%ent not on)! %eant the noninc)usion in thete9t of the onstitution of a proision that chi)dren &ith un+no&n parenta"e are

Fi)ipino citiens, $ut a)so si"ni>ed the re7ection $! the de)e"ates of the idea or

proposition that found)in"s are Fi)ipino citiens at $irth 7ust )i+e natura)$orn citiens*

hi)e the fra%ers discussed the %atter of found)in"s $ecause of He)e"ate Rafo)ss

a%end%ent, the! not on)! re7ected the Rafo)s proposa) $ut a)so c)ear)! %anifested

that found)in"s cou)d not $e citiens of the (hi)ippines at $irth )i+e chi)dren of

Fi)ipino fathers*

4* /n)! the 130 a"ue onention on ertain Vuestions Re)atin" to the on=ict of

Nationa)it!

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

33/40

#here is a di'erence $et&een citienship at $irth $ecause of 7us so)i, and citienship

at $irth $ecause of 7us san"uinis* #he for%er %a! $e "ranted to found)in"s under

(hi)ippine statutor! )a& pursuant to rt I, Sec 1 A5C of the 135 onstitution $ut

the (hi)ippine citienship thus "ranted is not that of a natura)$orn citien $ut that

of a natura)ied citien* /n)! those citiens at $irth $ecause of 7us san"uinis, &hich

re8uires $)ood re)ation to a parent, are natura)$orn Fi)ipino citiens under the 135,

1;3 and 1J; onstitutions*

n! treat!, custo%ar! internationa) )a&, or "enera))! accepted internationa) )a&

princip)e has the status of %unicipa) statutor! )a&* s such, it %ust confor% to our

onstitution in order to $e a)id in the (hi)ippines*

3ound$in*' a!e Deeed Natu!a$iFed 3i$i5ino CitiFen'

If a chi)ds parents are neither Fi)ipino citiens, the on)! &a! that the chi)d %a! $e

considered a Fi)ipino citien is throu"h the process of natura)iation in accordance

&ith statutor! )a& under rt I, Sec 1 A5C of the 13 5 onstitution*

Q If a chi)ds parents are un+no&n, as in the case of a found)in", there is no $asis toconsider the chi)d as a natura)$orn Fi)ipino citien since there is no proof that either

the chi)ds father or %other is a Fi)ipino citien* #hus, the on)! &a! that a found)in"

can $e considered a Fi)ipino citien under the 135 onstitution, as &e)) as under

the 1;3 and 1J; onstitutions, is for the found)in" to $e natura)ied in

accordance &ith )a&*

On the u$in* that G!ace Poe Mi*ht be a 3i$i5ino CitiFen

#here is no )a& or 7urisprudence &hich supports the contention that natura)$orn

citienship can $e conferred on a found)in" $ased a)one on statistica) pro$a$i)it!*

On Ado5tion La('

(hi)ippine )a&s and 7urisprudence on adoption is si%p)! not deter%inatie of

natura)$orn citienship*

On %u!den o) P!oo)

Since the onstitution re8uires that the (resident of the (hi)ippines sha)) $e a

natura)$orn citien of the (hi)ippines, it is i%peratie that petitioner proe that she

is a natura)$orn Fi)ipino citien, despite the fact that she is a found)in"* #he $urden

of eidence shifted to her &hen she ad%itted her status as a found)in" &ith no

+no&n $io)o"ica) parents* t that %o%ent, it $eca%e her dut! to proe that she is a

natura)$orn Fi)ipino citien*

G!ace Poe i' NOT a Natu!a$-bo!n 3i$i5ino CitiFen

1* #here is no (hi)ippine )a& auto%atica))! conferrin" (hi)ippine citienship to a

found)in" at $irth* .en if there &ere, such a )a& &ou)d on)! resu)t in the found)in"

$ein" a natura)ied Fi)ipino citien, not a natura)$orn Fi)ipino citien*

2* Second, there is no )e"a) presu%ption in faor of (hi)ippine citienship, &hether

natura)$orn or natura)ied* itienship %ust $e esta$)ished as a %atter of fact and

an! dou$t is reso)ed a"ainst the person c)ai%in" (hi)ippine citienship*

3* #hird, the )etter and intent of the 135 onstitution c)ear)! e9c)uded found)in"s

fro% $ein" considered natura)$orn Fi)ipino citiens* #he onstitution adopts the 7us

san"uinis princip)e, and identi>es natura)$orn Fi)ipino citiens as on)! those &hose

fathers or %others are Fi)ipino citiens* (etitioner fai)ed to proe that either her

father or %other is a Fi)ipino citien*

33

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

34/40

4* Fourth, there is no treat!, custo%ar! internationa) )a& or a "enera) princip)e of

internationa) )a& "rantin" auto%atica))! (hi)ippine citienship to a found)in" at $irth*

(etitioner fai)ed to proe that there is such a custo%ar! internationa) )a&* t $est,

there e9ists a presu%ption that a found)in" is do%ici)ed, and $orn, in the countr!

&here the found)in" is found*

5* Fifth, een assu%in" that there is a custo%ar! internationa) )a& presu%in" that

a found)in" is a citien of the countr! &here the found)in" is found, or is $orn to

parents possessin" the nationa)it! of that countr!, such presu%ption cannot preai)

oer our onstitution since custo%ar! internationa) )a& has the status %ere)! of

%unicipa) statutor! )a&* #his %eans that custo%ar! internationa) )a& is inferior to

the onstitution, and %ust !ie)d to the onstitution in case of con=ict* Since the

onstitution adopts the 7us san"uinis princip)e, and identi>es natura)$orn Fi)ipino

citiens as on)! those &hose fathers or %others are Fi)ipino citiens, then petitioner

%ust proe that either her father or %other is a Fi)ipino citien for her to $e

considered a natura)$orn Fi)ipino citien* n! internationa) )a& &hich contraenes

the 7us san"uinis princip)e in the onstitution %ust of course $e re7ected*

6* Si9th, petitioner fai)ed to dischar"e her $urden to proe that she is a natura)

$orn Fi)ipino citien* Lein" a found)in", she ad%itted that she does not +no& her

$io)o"ica) parents, and therefore she cannot trace $)ood re)ation to a Fi)ipino father

or %other* ithout credi$)e and conincin" eidence that petitioners $io)o"ica)

father or %other is a Fi)ipino citien, petitioner cannot $e considered a natura)$orn

Fi)ipino citien*

;* Seenth, a found)in" has to perfor% an act, that is, proe his or her status as a

found)in", to ac8uire (hi)ippine citienship* #his $ein" so, a found)in" can on)! $e

dee%ed a natura)ied Fi)ipino citien $ecause the found)in" has to perfor% an act to

ac8uire (hi)ippine citienship* Since there is no (hi)ippine )a& speci>ca))! "oernin"the citienship of found)in"s, their citienship is addressed $! custo%ar!

internationa) )a&, na%e)!: the ri"ht of eer! hu%an $ein" to a nationa)it!, and the

States o$)i"ations to aoid state)essness and to faci)itate the natura)iation of

found)in"s*

GACE POE 2S COMELEC

%ION DISSENT: G 1

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

35/40

W In On*'ia7o-e&e' ". COMELEC, the ourt ar%ed the /K.ed to $e e)ected to

oce, and he is dis8ua)i>ed if he )ac+s an! of the 8ua)i>cations for e)ectie oce*

4* If &e &ere to fo))o& the ponencias )i%itation on the /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

36/40

W #he e'ect &ou)d $e that an! pronounce%ents outside the /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

37/40

5* #he )ist of Fi)ipino citiens under the onstitution %ust $e read as e9c)usie and

e9haustie*

W In Paa ". Chan, this ourt cate"orica))! ru)ed that it is incu%$ent upon the

person &ho c)ai%s (hi)ippine citienship, to proe to the satisfaction of the court

that he is rea))! a Fi)ipino* #his shou)d $e true particu)ar)! after proof that the

c)ai%ant has not proen Aand een ad%its the )ac+ of proenC Fi)ipino parenta"e*

6* No presu%ption can $e indu)"ed in faor of the c)ai%ant of (hi)ippine citienship,

and an! dou$t re"ardin" citienship %ust $e reso)ed in faor of the State*

;* #he e9ercise $! a person of the ri"hts andor prii)e"es that are "ranted to

(hi)ippine citiens is not conc)usie proof that he or she is a (hi)ippine citien*

J* Lased on these considerations, the ourt %a7orit!s ru)in" on $urden of proof at

the /K.)ed $efore the (L/ a petition to correct %anifest %ista+es concernin"

the cance))ed candidac! of )in Dohn and a %otion to conso)idate )in Dohns otes

&ith the otes he "arnered* #he (L/ denied the %otion to conso)idate the otes

$ecause )in Dohn &as not a nuisance candidate* (L/ then proc)ai%ed n"e)ica

as the &inner*

/n Ka! 21, 2013, i"$erto >)ed a supp)e%enta) petition $efore the /K.)ed a certiorari assai)in" the pri) 25,

2013 /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

38/40

protest and directed i"$erto to >)e the protest $efore the proper tri$una) &hich is

the R.#* #he certiorari &as a)so dis%issed for $ein" >)ed $e!ond the 5da!

re")e%entar! period*

Lefore the R.#, the e)ection protest &as dis%issed for $ein" insucient in for%

and su$stance and for )ac+ of 7urisdiction oer Dohn )in &ho &as not a %e%$er of

the ouse of Representaties*

I''ue 1: W4N the "ote' )o! A$"in 8ohn 'hou$d be c!edited in )a"o! o)

Wi*be!to a' a !e'u$t o) the cance$$ation o) A$"in 8ohn#' candidac&

e)d:

No, the otes cast for )in Dohn &hose / &as cance))ed are stra! otes on)!*

/ cance))ed on "round of fa)se representations under Sec ;J of the /%ni$us

.)ection ode, un)i+e in $ein" a nuisance candidate in Sec 6, does not hae the

e'ect of creditin" the otes in faor of another candidate*

I''ue : W4N the J$in* o) a otion )o! !econ'ide!ation o) the COMELEC enbanc#' !u$in* i' 5!o5e!

e)d:

No, the %otion for reconsideration is a prohi$ited p)eadin"* Ru)e 13 Sec 1AdC of the

/K.ca))! prohi$its the >)in" of a %otion for

reconsideration of an en $anc ru)in", reso)ution, order or decision e9cept in e)ection

o'ense cases* onse8uent)!, &hen a /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

39/40

I''ue B: W4N the 9ET ha' u!i'diction o"e! the e$ection 5!ote't J$ed b&

Wi*be!to !e*a!din* the cance$$ed candidac& o) 8ohn A$"in

e)d:

No* rtic)e I, Sec 1; of the 1J; onstitution and Ru)e 15 of the 2011 R.# Ru)es

dec)are that R.#s po&er to 7ud"e e)ection contests is )i%ited to Ke%$ers of the

ouse of Representaties* )in Dohn is not a Ke%$er of the ouse ofRepresentaties

Wi*be!to Tanada "' 9ET

Pe!eF Concu!!in*: G 1=1 Ma!ch 1, 1

Summary o Justice Perez Concurring Opinion

1* R.# )ac+s the authorit! to ru)e &hether a candidate is indeed a nuisance

candidate*

2* Under the R.# Ru)es, the e)ectora) tri$una) on)! has 7urisdiction oer t&o t!pes

of e)ection contests: e)ection protests and 8uo &arranto cases*

3* n e)ection protest is the proper re%ed! a"ainst acts or o%issions constitutin"

e)ectora) frauds or ano%a)ies in contested po))in" precincts, and for the reision of

$a))ots*

4* /n the other hand, the e)i"i$i)it! of a %e%$er representatie is i%pu"ned in a

8uo &arranto case* Lut the R.# Ru)es do not prescri$e procedura) "uide)ines on

ho& the / of a po)itica) aspirant can $e cance))ed on the "round that he or she is

a nuisance candidate* Rather, this re%edia) ehic)e is instituted in the /K.

7/25/2019 Political Law 2014-2015

40/40

36, to ensure the sanctit! of the $a))ot* #he (# functiona)it! is in the for% of a

printed receipt and a touch screen re=ectin" the otes in the otecountin"

%achine* For the 2016 e)ections, the /K.cation at %ini%u% shou)d $e paper $ased* Under the

onstitution, the /K.