Pre-Finals for Constitutional Law 1 cma

Memory Aid for Constitutional Law 1STATE POLICIES

Article II of the 1987 Constitution: “Declaration of Principles and State Policies”- Intended to lay down the rules underlying our system of

government and must therefore be adhered to in the conduct of public affairs and the resolution of public issues.

REPUBLICANISMSection 1, Article 2: “The Philippine is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in people and all government authority emanates from them”

Republican- This is a representative government which is run

by the people, for the people. - It is not a pure democracy where the people

directly govern themselves. Its essence is representation and renovation.

- Its purpose is the promotion of the common welfare according to the will of the people themselves.

While we enjoy liberty, our liberty, however is not unbridled since we are living in a society. We are a government of laws and not of men.In an election, the people who will emerge as the winner will not necessary have the majority votes, it is enough that he garnered the highest votes casts by the people.

PEACE AND ORDERSection 2, Article 2: “The Philippine renounces war as an instrument of national policy”

----Vis-a-vis---Section 23, Paragraph 1, Article 6: “Congress has the sole power to declare the existence of war”

The war referred to in Section 2, Article 2 is an offensive war, while in Section 23, Par. 1, Article 6 refers to a defensive war:- This means our nation renounces an offensive war

which means we cannot launch an attack to other nation however when we are going to or under attack by other nation, then we are justified to put up a defensive war.

INCORPORATION CLAUSESection 2, Article 2: “The Philippine renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation and amity with all nation”

Incorporation - The generally accepted principles of international

law are applied in our legal system and in our jurisdiction even if such international law is not formally adopted in our legal system.

Transformation - The formal adoption of the international laws or

treaties as part of our legal system.- In this case, the Congress will enact a law which is

basically a reiteration of an international law or treaty stipulation.

Kuruda vs. Jalandoni:The Supreme Court held that we are bound by the Hague Convention because it is embodied generally accepted principles of international law binding upon all States.

Pacta Sunt Servanda:- Treaty obligations must be complied with in Good

Faith- This also means that we are duty bound to fulfill

our treaty obligations.Which will govern if a treaty convention and a domestic law are in conflict?

Where there appears to be a conflict between international law and municipal law, efforts should be first exerted to harmonize them, so as to give effect to both.

However, if the conflict is irreconcilable and a choice must be made, then the domestic law must be upheld as against the international law or treaty.

Ichong vs. Hernandez:The Supreme Court saw no conflict, however, even assuming that there was, it was the Statute that should be upheld because it represented an exercise of the police power which, being inherent, could not be bargained away or surrendered through the medium of a treaty.Philip Morris vs. Fortune Tobacco:The Supreme Court held that under the incorporation clause set forth in Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution, treaties should be considered with equal footing with our own domestic rules. Treaties should not be considered superior to the domestic laws.

Section 3, Article 2: “Civilian authority is at all times supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory”

Laws which accentuates that Civilian Authority is Supreme over the Military: Section 18, Article 7

- The President of the Philippines is the commander in chief of the military notwithstanding that he has no military training and is a mere civilian.

Section 4, Article 2: “The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may call upon the people to defend the State and in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personal military or civil service” This is based upon the inherent right of every State to

existence and self-preservation. By virtue of this right, a State may take up all necessary action, including the use of armed force, to repel any threatNational Defense Act- The State has the power to compel the people to

render military service.People vs. Zosa and People vs. Lagman:The Supreme Court upheld their conviction, holding that the law in question was based on the afore-cited constitutional principle.

SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATESection 6, Article 2: “The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable” The idea is to make a clear demarcation line between

two institutions and thus avoid encroachments by one against the other because of misunderstanding.

1

However, this wall of separation should not be a wall of hostility since the very members of these religious organizations are the very members of the State.“Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s”

Other provisions that highlights the separation of Church and State:

The Non Establishment Clause: Section 5, Article 3“No law shall be made respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”- In this provision, the State is prohibited from

sponsoring religious institutions or discriminating any of it.

- The State should maintain neutrality in its relation with religious organization

Section 2, Paragraph 5, Article 9-C“Prohibiting religious organization from registering as political parties”- Religious institutions are not allowed to be

registered as major political partiesSection 5, Paragraph 2, Article 6“Prohibiting the appointment of any religious organization as a sectorial representative”- In this provision, the president is prohibited from

appointing a sectorial representative representing a religious organization.

Section 29, Paragraph 2, Article 6“No public money or property appropriated, applied, paid or employed directly or indirectly for the use or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution or other system of religion or of any other priest, minister, religious teacher or dignitaries; except, for such priest, preacher, minister or religious dignitary is assigned in the armed forces of the Philippines or to any other penal institution or any other government orphanage or leprosarium.”- In this provision, the State is prohibited from the

appropriation of public funds or properties for sectarian purposes, religious organization or religious person, except where the religious person is assigned in the Armed Forces or any penal institution or government orphanage or leprosarium.

Ebralina vs. The Division Superintendent of the Schools of Cebu 219 SCRA 256:The Supreme Court upheld the members of the Jehovah’s Witness for their refusal to salute the Philippine flag because for them the nation’s flag is a symbol, and since in their religion they are prohibited from worshipping any other symbol. The Supreme Court in this case, upheld their invocation of freedom of religion.

Provisions which grants favors to the Church:Section 29, Paragraph 2, Article 6“Except, for such priest, preacher, minister or religious dignitary is assigned in the armed forces of the Philippines or to any other penal institution or any other government orphanage or leprosarium.”- In this case, the religious person may be paid by

the State from public funds therein.Section 3, Paragraph 3, Article 14“Allows the teaching of religion in a public elementary school or public high school, as long as there is a written consent given by the parents or guardian of the students”- This allows the optional teaching of religion in

public schools (elementary or high school) provided that there is a written consent coming from the parents or the guardian of the children.

Section 4, Paragraph 2, Article 14“Allows private educational institutions to be owned by foreign religious groups or missions”Section 28, Paragraph 3, Article 6“Charitable institutions, parsonages, churches, convents and appurtenant thereto, public cemeteries and all lands and buildings, improvements, directly and exclusively used by the religious and charitable institution they are exempt from realty or property tax”- This exemption is only with respect to realty or

property tax such that when the Church own a land directly devoted for religious purposes then the Church is not required to pay realty and property tax from the land and the building.

- The property to be exempt from tax should be used exclusively and directly for religious purposes

Is the Church mandated to pay income tax? No, since under the National Internal Revenue Code

(NIRC) particularly section 30 thereof, the Church among others, is exempt from paying income tax. In the same manner, under section 101 of NIRC, the Church is also exempted from giving taxes or donor’s tax when the Church is the recipient of such donation.

If a priest is elected as a mayor can he receive his salary, or is that violative of Section 29, Par. 2, Article 6 of the 1987 Constitution?

Yes the priest can receive his salary because the payment of such salary is by reason of them being a public official and not by reason of them being an ecclesiastical officer.

NUCLEAR WEAPONSection 8, Article 2: “The Philippines consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory”

- This provision is dubious or vague since this provision can be interpreted to allow the use of nuclear weapon in the country if it is consistent with national interest, however, as for the meantime, nuclear weapon is not allowed in the Philippines since national interest does not deemed it to be.

SOCIAL JUSTICESection 10, Article 2: “The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development”

Social Justice (Calalang vs. Williams)- This is the humanization of laws and the

equalization of social and economic forces by the State.

- This is the promotion of the welfare of all the people, the adoption by the Government of measures calculated to insure economic stability of all the component element of society.

REARING OF THE YOUTHSection 12, Article 2: “The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents is in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the aid and support of the Government”Section 14, Article 2: “The State recognizes the roles of women in nation-building and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of men and women”Section 16, Article 2: “The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature”

2

Section 18, Article 2: “The State shall affirm labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare”Section 25, Article 2: “The State shall promote the autonomy of local governments”

Local Government Code of 1991:- This gives autonomy or powers to the local

government.

Section 26, Article 2: “The State shall guarantee the equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

- The framers of the 1987 Constitution left to the Congress the power to enact a law that would define political dynasty.

SEPARATION OF POWERSThe three branches of government are distinct and separate from each other and they are performing distinct and separate functions.These branches of government observes the principles of checks and balances.

Functions the Branches of the Government: Legislative Department: makes law Executive Department

- Enforce laws as enacted by the legislative department Judicial Department

- Interpret the laws enacted by the legislative department and to determine whether or not the acts of the other branches of government are in conformity with the provision of the 1987 Constitution.

Each branch is supposed to operate under its domain or scheme but under out present set-up, the other branches of government have their own ways of checking possible abuses committed by the other branches of government observing the principles of check and balances.

Executive vs. Legislative: The president is vested with powers to disapprove any

and all laws enacted by the Congress in the exercise of its veto power.

The legislative on the other hand, can also check the acts of the executive branch such that when the President exercises its power to veto power, the Congress has the power to override the veto power of the President by a vote of 2/3 of the members of both houses.

Executive vs. Judiciary vs. Legislative: Under the present Constitution, the President can exercise

its pardoning power such that the President can free the person from imprisonment even if the person is validly convicted by the courts of law.

The Judiciary may check the acts of the legislative by declaring laws enacted by Congress as unconstitutional.

The legislative department can also check the acts of the judiciary by passing a law depriving or limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as well as the jurisdiction of the lower courts. In fact, the Congress has the power to abolish any and all courts below the Supreme Court. In this case, by enacting a law limiting or depriving the powers of the Supreme Court and the lower courts, then, Congress in such a situation is therefore merely exercising its power pursuant to the principle of checks and balances.

While the branches are distinct and separate from each other, they likewise operate under the principle of inter-dependence.Principle of Interdepence:- These are situations where there are blending

powers by and among the three branches of government.

Example: The passage of a general appropriation law allocating the

funds for the operation of the government. Under the present Constitution, the “not clear” is prepared by the Office of the President and once prepared, the same will be submitted to the House of Representatives and submitted back to the President for his approval.

In an impeachment case, the Supreme Court Chief Justice would serve as a presiding officer along with the Senate President.

NON-DELEGATION OF POWERSSection 1, Article 2: “The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them”

- Through election we elect representatives delegating to them the power to enact laws.

- The rule is that this delegated authority may not be further delegated otherwise there will be betrayal of trust.

- The rule is also applicable to the executive and judicial branches of the government.

PROVISIONS WHICH WOULD ALLOW CONGRESS TO DELEGATE ITS LEGISLATIVE POWERS

1. TO THE PRESIDENT: TARIFF POWERS Section 28(2), Article 6:¤ Tariff rates¤ Import and export quotas¤ Tamage and wharfage dues¤ Other duties or imports within the framework of the

national development program of the government.

2. EMERGENCY POWERS : Section 23(2), Article 6:“In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may by law, authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy, unless sooner withdrawn by the resolution of the Congress, such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof”- Where there is such delegation, the President will

become a Constitutional Dictator because the President in that situation may be given the power to enact rules and regulations which have the force and effect of laws.

Safeguards:a. Such delegation may only be made in times of war or

other national emergencies such as typhoon, epidemic or any other calamities.

b. Must only be for a limited period.c. Exercise of which must be in accordance with

restrictions that may be prescribed by Congress.d. Exercise of which should be made to call out a

declared national policy as announced by Congress.

3

Suppose there is a war, does it necessarily follow that the President can already automatically exercise its emergency powers?- No, the exercise of emergency powers of the President in

times of war or other national emergency may only be done is such power is delegated to the President by Congress pursuant to Section 23(2), Article 6.

- Congress may opt to hold on to its legislative powers.- Congress cannot also be compelled to delegate emergency

powers to the President. It has the discretion whether or not to delegate emergency powers to the President in times of National Emergency.

Suppose in times of war, the Congress Delegates Emergency Powers but for a short duration like for 6 months but the war lasted for 12 months. Can the President validly continue the exercise of emergency powers?- No, the president cannot exercise emergency powers

beyond what is delegated to him. Suppose the President was granted emergency powers for a longer period but the emergency situation lasted only for a shorter period. Can the President continue to exercise his emergency powers?- No, in the event that emergency situation has already

ceased, it follows just as surely that the President’s emergency power would have to cease.

Suppose the authority is without a fixed duration, can the president continue to exercise his emergency powers?- No, since the framers of the 1987 Constitution made a

conscious effort to inject another provision under Section 23(2), Article 6, providing to the end that unless sooner withdrawn, the exercise of emergency powers by the President shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof.

David vs. ArroyoThe Supreme Court ruled that while it is true that the President has the power to declare a State of National Emergency that does not automatically follow that the President could thereupon direct the operations or taking over of the operations of property of public utilities. Any taking over of public utilities may only be done if there is an express delegation of such authority from the President to the Congress.

3. TO THE PEOPLE ¤ This happens when Congress decides a particular

issue via a system called referendum¤ If the Congress cannot decide on a particular issue,

the Congress can throw that question to the people.If the people has the power to directly propose amendments via the system of initiative, would that be a valid delegation of power to the people?- No, this power given to the people to propose amendments

to the Constitution is not a delegated authority. Rather, it is an express authority or power vested to the people pursuant to the 1987 Constitution.

4. TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Congress enacted the Local Government Code of

1991 delegating the power to source its funds or regulate business or activity.

The Local Government Units may not validly exercise the power of eminent domain and police powers by passing an ordinance regulating a particular activity or business.

Is the power to impose taxes a delegated power from Congress to the LGU?- No, this power is expressly conferred upon in the Local

Government Units by virtue of Section 5, Article 10 of the 1987 Constitution.

5. TO VARIOUS ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES: Congress is permitted to delegate to various

administrative bodies and with this grant of legislative

power, these administrative bodies may implement policies and implementing rules and regulations.

TEST OF DELEGATION

a. THE COMPLETENESS TEST (SUBSTANTIVE TEST)- The law must be complete in all its essential terms

and conditions when it leaves the legislature so that there will be nothing left for the delegate to do when it reaches him except to enforce it.US vs. Ang Tang HoThe Supreme Court ruled that the law did not pass the completeness test because the Governor-General was given a wide latitude to determine temporary rules and emergency measures

b. SUFFICIENT STANDARD TEST (SUBSTANTIVE TEST)- In this test, even if the law is not complete, the

delegation of authority by Congress may still be sustained as valid if the same is accompanied by sufficient standard.

- This test is intended to map out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority by defining the legislative policy and indicating the circumstances under which it is to be pursued and effected.Ynot vs. IACThe Supreme Court struck down as invalid E.O. 66-A because it gave unbridled authority to distribute the carabaos to the chairman of National Inspection Commission.

LEGISLATIVE POWER

Philippine Bill of 1902- Provided for a legislature consisting of a Philippine

Assembly and the Philippine Commission

Jones Law - House of Representatives and the Senate

Section 1, Article 6:

“The legislative Power is vested on the Congress of the Philippines which constitutes a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative referendum”

- This means that legislative power as not exclusively vested on Congress alone since a reservation is made regarding the people’s initiative referendum.

Non-legislative Powers of Congress:a. The canvass of the presidential electionsb. The declaration of the existence of a state of warc. Confirmation of amnestiesd. Presidential Appointments (Through Commission on

Appointments)e. The amendment or revision of the Constitutionf. Impeachment

COMPOSITION OF THE SENATE

Section 2, Article 6: The Senate“The Senate shall be composed of 24 Senators who shall be elected at large by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law”

¤ Senate:

4

- More circumspect and broad-minded since they have a national rather than a district constituency.

- They will have a broader outlook of the problems of the country instead of being restricted by parochial viewpoints and narrow interests

¤ Membership elected at large:- This rule intends to make the Senate a training

ground for national leaders and possibly a spring board to Presidency.

Section 3, Article 6: Qualifications for SenateExclusive:

a. Natural born Filipino - Citizens of the Philippines from birth without

having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine Citizenship.

b. On the day of the election is at least 35 years old - 35 years old at the time when the polls are

opened and the votes are cast and not on the day of the proclamation of the winners by the board of canvassers.

c. Able to read and write d. A registered voter e. Resident of the Philippines for not less than 2

years immediately preceding the election- The place where one habitually resides and to

which, when he is absent, he has the intention of returning.

An intention to abandon his old residence cannot be legally inferred from his act establishing a home elsewhere or otherwise conducting his activities therein, in the absence of a clear showing that he has decided to adopt a new residence.The qualifications prescribed in this section are continuing requirements and that they must be possessed for the entire duration of the member’s incumbency.Principle of “Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius”- It is not competent for Congress to provide by

mere legislation for additional qualifications no matter how relevant they may be.Social Justice Society vs. Dangerous Drugs Board

“The Supreme Court held that the provision on Article 6, Section 3 are exclsuive and that no other qualification may be added to those aspiring to be members of the Senate, other than those prescribe under the provision of the 1987 Constitution”

COMPOSITION OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

House of Representatives are composed of:1. District Representatives2. Party list Representatives3. Sectoral Representatives: already abolished

- In the passage of R.A. 7941, otherwise known as the Party List Law, the appointed sectoral representative has been abolished in the House of Representative.

DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES OR CONGRESSMAN/WOMAN

Section 6, Article 6: Qualification for District Representativea. Natural born Filipinob. On the day of the election he/she must be at least

25 years old

c. Able to read and writed. He must be registered voter in the district where he

wants to be electede. He must be resident therein for a period of not less

than 1 year, immediately prior to the election- Residency should be taken to mean as domicile which

connotes mere intention of returning, so that one may be physically absent for a given place but for purposes of election, no particular place may be regarded as residence, as long as he has the intention of coming returning to the particular place.

Section 5 (1), Article 6: Composition of District Representatives- District Representatives will have to be elected

from the various legislative district apportioned among the provinces, cities and Metropolitan Manila in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio.

Section 5 (3), Article 6: - Each legislative district must comprise as far as

practicable, of contiguous, compact and adjacent area.

- Each city with a population of at least 250,000, or each province shall have at least one (1) representative.

In a nutshell, for a city to have a district representation in the House of Representatives, it needs to have at least 250,000 inhabitants, but for the province, for as long as a province created then it necessarily follows that it is entitled to a representation in the House of Representatives, regardless of its population.

--------------------------***---------------------------Aldaba vs. COMELEC

“The Supreme Court held that the minimum population requirement for cities should be met before a particular city is entitled to have a district representation in the House of Representative”

Mariano vs. COMELEC“The Supreme Court ruled that if a particular city has already met the minimum population requirement, then it may be given additional places that need district representation in the House of Representatives and that particular city need not double act its population before it is entitled for an additional seat or place in the House of Representatives”

Aquino vs. COMELEC“The Supreme Court ruled that the 250,000 minimum requirement is only applicable for cities. It is not a requirement for a district representation in a province”

Sema vs. COMELEC“The Supreme Court in no equivocal terms, proved that only Congress can create a province and this legislative power to create a province cannot be validly delegated to another political unit much less to an autonomous region. The Supreme Court arrived in this conclusion by applying that the provisions under Section 5, Article 6 of the 1987 Constitution as well as Section 20, Article 10 of the same Constitution.”

Section 5(3), Article 6 States that once a province is made only one district representative is appointed:

- This denoted that once a province is created, a legislative district is also instituted.

Section 5(1), Article 6:Providing to the end that, there shall be not more than 250 members in the House of Representative, unless otherwise fixed by law:

5

- Denoting that it is only Congress which can increase the membership in the House of Representatives.

Section 5(4), Article 6:Provides that within 3 years following the return of every census, Congress re-apportion the legislative district:

- Denoting that it is only Congress who has the power to create or apportion legislative districts.

--------------------------***---------------------------Taking into account all this provisions, the Supreme Court ruled that it is only Congress which has the power to create a province. The Supreme Court further held that by meticulously inspecting the provision in Section 20, Article 10, it is not provided therein that an autonomous region may be given a power to create a province.

Tobias vs. Abalos; Mariano vs. COMELEC“The Supreme Court validly ruled that re-apportionment of legislative districts need not always be in a form of a general re-apportionment law, such that re-apportionment of legislative district may be done through the enactment of special laws which somehow would create a city or a province as the case may be..”

PARTY-LIST SYSTEMParty-list Representatives- These are entities, organizations or parties

registered under the party-list system.

Application Proceeding:1. Must file for a verified petition for accreditation no later

than 90 days before the Election Day, through its president or secretary. Attaching a copy of the following:a. Its constitutionb. By lawsc. Platformsd. List of officerse. Other relevant information as may be required by the COMELEC

2. The petition shall be published in at least 2 newspapers of general circulation.

3. After due notice and hearing, the petition must be resolved within 15 days and in no case later than 60 days before the election.

4. Religious sects, foreign organizations and those advocating violence or unlawful means are disqualified.

5. Sectors included: i. Labor ii. Peasantsiii. Fisher-folkiv. Urban poorv. Indigenous cultural communities

vi. Elderly handicappedvii. Womenviii. Youthix. Veteransx. Overseas workers

xi. ProfessionalsAre Major Political Parties prohibited from participating in the party-list system?- The Supreme Court held that while major political parties are

not disqualified merely on the ground that they are political parties, they must show however, that they represent the interests of the marginalized and under-represented. It further held that by reading the provisions of Section 5(1), Article 6, it likewise includes national and regional parties or organization.

- Another provision in Section 7, Article 9-C, providing to the end that votes cast in favor of political parties, organizations or coalitions are invalid except when those mentioned are registered in the Party-list system.

Bagong Bayani-OFW vs. COMELECAtong Paglaom vs. COMELEC

“The Supreme Court held that there are three kinds of groups which may participate in the party-list system:National Party-list or OrganizationsRegional Party-list or OrganizationsSectoral Party-list or Organizations

The Supreme Court ruled that as far as the national and regional party-list or organization, they need not be organized for sectoral purposes and they do need to represent the underprivileged and under-marginalized sectors, the Supreme Court further held that political parties may participate in the party-list system as long as they would not fail in the district representative election. However for those who failed in the district representative election, they may participate indirectly as by forming sectoral groups, which are to be considered as separate sectoral parties.

So clearly in this sense, the Supreme Court does not disqualify political parties from participating in the party-list system”

The Supreme Court further ruled that majority of the members of the this sectoral group must belong to their respective sectors and their nominees must also belong to the sectors they seek to represent or although the nominee did not belong to that sector but the nominee has a proven track record of advancing the interest of the particular group or organization.However for the nominees of the political parties participating in the party-list group, it is enough that they are members of such political party or organization participating in the party-list group. This means that nominees for political parties does not need to belong to the under-privileged or under-represented sectors.The Supreme Court moreover ruled that those national, regional or sectoral party-list or organization may not be disqualified by reason that some of their nominees has been disqualified, since it is enough that only one of their nominees have qualified.

Requirements for Major Political Parties to participate in the Party-list System:

a. This requirement must be strictly complied with by both the organization and its nominees to be representative.

b. They must not represent sectoral or religious sect or organization.

c. It must not be among those disqualified under Section 6 of R.A. 7941.

Section 6 of R.A. 7941 Provides for the disqualification for applicants of the Party-list System:

a) Religious Sectorsb) Any organization advancing violence and unlawful means

to seek goalc) Any foreign group or organizationd) Any group receiving support from any foreign

government, political party, foundation, organization whether directly or through any of its officers or members

e) Any groups who committed misrepresentationf) Any groups who violates of fails to comply with the laws,

rules and regulations relating to electionsg) Groups which has ceased to exist for at least 1 yearh) Groups which fails to participate in the last preceding

elections or fails to obtain at least 2% of the votes cast under the party-list system in the 2 preceding elections for the constituency in which it has registered.

May an organization be denied acquisition by COMELEC in the party-list system?- The Supreme Court held that while major political parties are

not disqualified merely on the ground that they are political parties, they must show however, that they represent the interests of the marginalized and under-represented. It further held that by reading the provisions of Section 5(1),

6

Underprivileged or Under-marginalized

Sectors which has no well-defined political constituency

Article 6, it likewise includes national and regional parties or organization.

Proceeding Upon Registration:1. The political group shall submit to the COMELEC not

later than 45 days before the election at least 5 names of whom will possibly represent it, in case they obtain the required number of votes. The names of the party-list nominees shall not be shown on the certified list of participants in the party-list system to be distributed by the COMELEC among all precincts.

2. The political group shall submit to the COMELEC not later than 45 days before the election at least 5 names of whom will possibly represent it, in case they obtain the required number of votes.

3. Only one person who have given their consent in writing be named as party-list candidates and in one list only.

Qualifications for Representative Nominees in the Party-list System under R.A. 7941:

1. Natural born Filipino2. Registered voter in the Philippines3. Residence in the Philippines for a period of at least

1 year prior to the election.4. A bona fide member of the organization who seeks

to represents for at least 90 days preceding the day of the election.

5. At least 25 years old on the day of the election. 6. Able to read and writeFor the nominees of the youth sectors, the nominee should not be beyond 30 years old. However, if the nominee was put in office when he is 29 years old and turns 30 during his term, he is not ipso facto disqualified from office and he can still continue serving his term.

Bantay Republic Act vs. COMELEC“The Supreme Court said that although it may true that under Section 7 of RA 7941, COMELEC need not include the names of the nominees of the party-list in the voter's certified list, but there is nothing in law which prevents COMELEC from disclosing the names of the nominees in another medium of communication. The Supreme Court based its ruling on Section 7, Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution dealing with the right of the people to public information”

Section 5 (2), Article 6: “The party-list members shall account to 20% of the total members in the House of Representatives, to include the party-list members”

Formula to get Allocated Seats for the Party-list groups:

Totalnumber of members∈HR.80

x .20

e.g.[(233/.80)*.20] = 58.25 ≠ 58 Seats are available for Party-list members

Computation for Additional Seats Garnered:(Veterans Bank vs. COMELEC)*May not be fully filled up

1st Rank: Actual VotesGarnered by the Highest Ranking Party−list

Total number of votes of all Party−list

e.g.70,000/1,000,000 = 7%

Rule 1: if the result is 6% up then it is entitled to 2 additional seats in Congress.Rule 2: if the result is at least 4% but less than 6%, then it is only entitled to only 1 seat in Congress.Rule 3: if the result is below 4%, then it cannot have additional seat in Congress.

Succeeding Ranks: Actual VotesGarnered

Totalnumber of votes of all PaTorty−listx the number of additional seats garnered by the 1 st Rank

e.g.(60,000/70,000) x 2= 1.71Rule: As long as the succeeding ranking party-list garnered an integer, then it can have 1 additional seat

Computation for Additional Seats Garnered:(BANAT vs. COMELEC)*Fully filled up

1st Rank: Votes of Each Party

Totalnumber of votes of all Party−listx remaining seat allocated for the party−list

Remaining seat = number of seats – seats already allocatede.g.70,000/1,000,000 = 7% * 52 = 3.6Rule 1: if the result is 6% up then it is entitled to 2 additional seats in Congress.Rule 2: if the result is at least 4% but less than 6%, then it is only entitled to only 1 seat in Congress.Rule 3: if the result is below 4%, then it cannot have additional seat in Congress.

Party-List

Votes Garnered

PercentageSeats

Garnered: 2% Rule

Veterans Bank vs.

COMELEC

Additional Seats

Total Seats

Garnered

BANAT vs.

COMELEC

Additional Seats

Total Seats

Garnered A 70,000 7% 1 7 2 3 3.60% 2 3B 60,000 6% 1 1.7 1 2 3.10% 2 2C 50,000 5% 1 1.4 1 2 2.60% 2 2D 40,000 4% 1 1.1 1 2 2.08% 2 2E 30,000 3% 1 0.85 0 1 1.56% 1 2F 20,000 2% 1 0.57 0 1 1.04% 1 2G 10,000 1% 0 0.28 0 0 0.52% 1 1H 5,000 0.50% 0 0.14 0 0 0.26% 1 1I 3,000 0.30% 0 0.0857 0 0 0.16% 1 1Total 1,000,000

Additional Seats Garnered

For example purposes, and not the real sum

TERM OF OFFICESection 2, Article 18:

The senators and Members of the House of Representatives served for 5 years:

This was done for the purpose of having a synchronize election in 1998.

The first 12 Senators elected in 1992 would serve for a full term of 6 years but the other 12 will only be elected for 3 years:

This is the reason why there is a staggering of election in the Members of the Senate.

Top 12 Senators -------------------------------------------------------------------------|1992 1993 1998Bottom 12 Senators -----------------------|

7

Section 7, Article 6: Congressmen/woman“No Member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three (3) consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected”

- The term of office for Congressmen are fixed at 3 years and not one of them can serve office for more than 3 consecutive years.

Section 4, Article 6: Senators“No Senator shall serve for more than two (2) consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected.”

Voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service for which the Congressman or Senator was elected.Term:- Refers to the time frame prescribed by law within

which a Congressman or Senator should serve office.

Tenure:- Refers to the actual period within which a particular

officer is discharging his function.Re-election:- This means running for the same position that the

official previously held in the election immediately succeeding the expiration of his term.

If Senator A was elected for Senate in the 1995 election and served for 6 years or until 2001. Subsequently, Senator A run again for the 2001 election, which he served until 2007. Can Senator A validly run again for Senate on the 2007 election?- No, because under the 1987 Constitution, particularly

Section 4, Article 6 thereof, the term limit for senators are fixed for 2 consecutive terms.

Can Senator A, validly run for another position, like Congress, Vice-President or President?- Yes, because it is not considered a re-election anymore.

Since re-election means running for the same position that the official previously held.

If Senator A, cannot anymore run for the 2007 election, must he wait for another 6 years or until 2013 so that he can validly run as Senator or he can already run for Senate on the 2010 election, 3 years after 2007?- As the Supreme Court held in Socrates vs. COMELEC, in

this case, Senator A need not wait for the 2013 election for he can validly run for Senate on the 2010 election, this is because re-election refers to the immediately succeeding election following the expiration of one’s term. And since the immediate succeeding election as far as Senator A is concerned, is the 2007 election, and while 2010 is a subsequent election, it is not the immediately succeeding election following the expiration of Senator A's term.

It is enough that there is a gap after the expiration of a Senator or a Congressman's term. An official can validly run as many times as he wants, as long as he does not go beyond the term prescribed in the law.If Senator A ran for Senate in 1995 and served his office until 2001. Then, on the 2001 Election he ran again for Senate, however, on 2004, Senator A voluntarily resigned from the Senate. Can he still valid run for senate on 2007?- No, because under the Constitution, voluntary renunciation

of office is not considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected. Thus, since Senator A voluntary resigned in 2004, then for all intent and purposes, his second term, should not be regarded as has been interrupted, it is still considered a full term up until 2007.

Suppose in 2007, Senator A did not tender a written resignation but what he did is that he filed a certificate of candidacy and ran for Congress on 2004. Can it be regarded as Senator A voluntarily resigned from Senate by filing a certificate of candidacy for another position?- Under the Fair's Election Act in 2001, an elective official shall

not be considered to have voluntary resigned from office upon his filing of candidacy. Whereas appointed official is ipso facto considered to have voluntary resigned from office from upon filing a certificate of candidacy.

- However, after an elective official wins the position an assumed the office then he will be considered already as having voluntarily resigned from office.

Senator A served 1 full term when he was elected on 1995. When Senator A was one again elected in 2001, there was a petition for disqualification filed against him. In 2004, a decision was rendered disqualifying him from office and he step down on 2004. Could he validly run for the 2007 election as Senator?- According to Lonzanida vs. COMELEC, G.R. 135150, The

Supreme Court held that disqualification is not considered as a voluntary renunciation of office and that this would not legitimately interrupt the continuity of service of one’s term of office.

Senator A was elected in 1995 and served for 6 years and got re-elected again in 2001, a petition for his disqualification was filed in 2004 and was currently pending. On 2007, he run again for the same position and was elected. Another disqualification case was filed against him. On 2008, the case filed against him on 2004 has reached a final judgment disqualifying him from office.

Senator A's contention is that, since he was already declared disqualified in the 2004 election complaint, it’s as if he was never elected at all in the 2001 elections, such that he should not be disqualified from running in the 2007 elections? Should we apply the same ruling in the Lonzanida vs. COMELEC case?

- Senator A's contention is unwarranted and the Lonzanida ruling would not apply in this case since Senator A has already served 1 full term before the disqualification was rendered against him. In this case, the disqualification decision is considered ineffective as regards to his service in his second term.

- Base on the pronouncement by the Supreme Court in the Lonzanida Case, the disqualification based on the term limit would only apply if:

1. The official got re-elected after the expiration of the allowable term limit

2. There was full service corresponding to the allowable term limit.

Suppose Senator A was elected in 1995 and once again re-elected in 2001. On 2004, Senator A was preventively suspended by Sandiganbayan from office for 1 year and resume his function in 2005. Could Senator A validly run for re-election in 2007, knowing that there has already been an interruption in his term?- No, because preventive suspension do not result in the loss

of one's title to the office. In fact as stated, he did not really lost his title from office. Furthermore, as held in the Lonzanida vs. COMELEC ruling, preventive suspension cannot be an effective interruption in the continuity of one's office.

Suppose Senator A was elected in 1995 and served for 6 years. He was re-elected in 2001 but he died in 2004, a special election was conducted and Senator B assumed the position for the remaining years. Senator B ran and won in the 2007 election and served until 2013. Can he run again for the 2013 elections?- No, since it is provided in Section 9, Article 6 in the 1987

Constitution that when there is vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives and a special election is called, the person who won in the special election will only assume the vacant position for the remaining term and

8

according to the deliberation of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, it shall be regarded as one whole term already.

- Such that Senator B should be disqualified from running in the 2013 election as senator.

Section 17, Article 18: President = ₱300,000 per annumVice President, Senate President, Speaker of the House of Representatives and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: ₱240,000 per annumSenators and Members of HR, Associate Justices of the Supreme Court and the Chairman of the Constitutional Commissions: ₱204,000/ annumMembers of the Constitutional Commissions: ₱108,000Nothing in the Constitution prohibits the giving of allowances for the Senators and members of House of Representatives as well as there is also nothing in the Constitution which prohibits the diminution of salaries of the members of Congress.

Section 10, Article 6: - Any increase of the salaries of the members of

Congress shall take effect only after the expiration of full term of the members of Congress who voted for such measures.

Section 11, Article 6: Parliamentary ImmunitiesSenators or Members of the House of Representatives: Privilege from Arrest :

- They privilege from arrest from all offenses not more than six years imprisonment while Congress is in session.

- This will only take effect if a person is an incumbent member of Congress, such that when he is no longer a member thereof, he can no longer invoke the privilege of arrest.

Session- We are referring to the day-to-day session of the Congress

which will take effect even if the Congressman concerned is attending the session or not.Section 11, Article 6 refers only to privilege from arrest and not from immunity from suit, such that if a member of Congress commits an offense, he is not therefore immune from suit. Rather he can be prosecuted in court, only that of if the penalty imposable for the offense does not exceed imprisonment for 6 years then he is entitled of this privilege from arrest.Section 11, Article 6 refers only to privilege from arrest and not from immunity from suit, such that if a member of Congress commits an offense, he is not therefore immune from suit. Rather he can be prosecuted in court, only that of if the penalty imposable for the offense does not exceed imprisonment for 6 years then he is entitled of this privilege from arrest.

Privilege of Speech and Debate :- They shall not be liable nor questioned in any other

place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.

- This extends even beyond the termination of office of a given member of Congress.

Requirement:a. The Congress or any committee thereof must be in

session.b. The speech or utterance made was in the

performance of his duties.

The privilege given in the 2nd sentence of Section 11, Article 6 is immunity from suit or immunity from prosecution, they cannot be held liable for any speech or debate in Congress as well as in any committee thereof either criminally or civilly. For the Privilege of Speech and Debate to apply it is necessary that Congress or any committee thereof must be in session and that any speech or utterance must be made in the performance of his duty. Otherwise, even if the Congress is in session, but a member thereof makes an utterance which is not in the performance of his function, like when he just engages in a private conversation with colleagues gossiping with another member, then that is actionable. Since although the Congress at that time is in session, the utterance made was in not in the exercise of his/her public duties or functions.Members of Congress will only be made liable or answerable within the Congress itself. Since Section 16 (3), Article 6 of the 1987 Constitution, gives each house of Congress the power to punish any of its members for disorderly behaviors. So, if a member of Congress gave a speech in Congress lambasting the President, the President himself cannot prosecute the member of Congress but nothing can prevent the other members of the house concerned to punish the particular member, because such power is given by the Constitution.

Osmeña vs. PendatunThe Supreme Court affirmed the disciplinary action imposed on then Senator Osmena for maligning the reputaiton of then President Carlos Garcia.

Alejandrino vs. Dizon“The Supreme Court disapproves the suspension imposed on Senator Alejandrino noting that he was not an elective member of Congress but rather an appointed member of the Governor General of the United States and under the Jones Law, which is in effect at that time, Congress can only impose disciplinary actions on any elected member thereof.”

LIMITATIONS ON MEMBERS OF CONGRESS:Section 12, Article 6: Conflict of Interest

Section 20, Article 6: Books of Accounts Section 17, Article 11: SALN

- All members of Congress are mandated by law to make a full disclosure of their financial and business interest. They shall also submit their respective "Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth’s" or SALN for examination.

- If a Member of Congress will sponsor a bill and he foresee that there is a conflict of interest for that particular bill, then he/she is under obligation and pursuant to the second sentence of Article 6, Section 12 of the 1897 Constitution, to inform the house concerned.Members of Congress are not mandated by the Constitution to relinquish their business interest in any Corporation, unlike the members of the cabinets, president and vice-president who are mandated by the Constitution to divest themselves in any financial interest. So for the members of the Congress, it is sufficient that they divulge the full disclosure of their financial and business interest and they are not required to relinquish any financial interests.

Section 13, Article 6: Incompatible & Forbidden Offices “No members of Congress may hold any other office or

employment in the Government, or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality, including GOCC w/out forfeiting his seat”- This provision is not absolute- If a member of Congress would hold another office of

the Government, then he may validly do so provided that he will relinquish his position in Congress.Adaza vs. Pacaña

9

The Supreme Court did not justify the complaint filed by Adaza questioning the office given to Pacaña, holding that he held the position already in Congress may be deemed to have forfeited his seat as Governor applying the provision on Article 6, Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution.

Situations wherein a Member of Congress can hold another office in Government without violating the Constitution:1. The other office is but an adjunct to the performance to

his legislative functions 2. A result of a designation 3. The other office is incidental to his being member of

Congress.

“No members of Congress shall be appointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected”- This provision is absoluteSenator A was elected in 2007 elections, served for office for 6 years until 2013. In 2010, Congress created an office or an office which has already been established but the emoluments of such office has been increased. Can Senator A be appointed to assume this particular office?- Under the second sentence of Article 6, Section 13, Senator

A cannot validly hold the office as an appointment designated to him.

Suppose that the office assumed by Senator A was not an appointment office but rather an elective office. Can Senator A validly run so he can assume the elective office?- Yes, because the prohibition on the second sentence of

Article 6, Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution only apply to appointments and never election. However, if Senator A won and was appointed in the office, by applying the provision in the first sentence of Article 6, section 13, then Senator A would have to relinquish his post as member of Congress.

Suppose, the term of Senator A expired and in the following election, he did not seek for re-election, can he be appointed in that particular office?- Yes, because his term already expired and the prohibition as

enshrined in section 13, article 6 would only apply to term where he was elected and Senator A in this case, did not anymore seek re-election for Congress.The provision in the 2nd sentence of section 13, article 6 is absolute in a sense that when a Senator is appointed for an office which was made during his term or the emoluments thereof is increased, he cannot assume the office even if he will relinquish his post as a member of Congress.

Section 14, Article 6: Inhibitions and Disqualifications “No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may

personally appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies.”- Such that any Member of Congress which is a lawyer

can still validly practice his profession but he is barred from appearing as counsel before any court of justice, electoral tribunal or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies.

“Prohibits any members of congress to aquire any financial interest in contracts, franchise, or any special privilege granted by the Government.”- While this provision exists in the Constitution, nothing

can prohibit a member of Congress from entering into a contract with the government provided that he will not reap any pecuniary advantage out of that contract.

What if Senator Duran enters into a contract with the government, giving her land to them, is this contract invalid?- No, since Senator Duran in this case is not reaping

pecuniary benefits out of the contract but instead the government inures benefit from it.

“He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office”- Any member of Congress cannot intervene in any

Governmental matters just so he could reap pecuniary benefits therefrom.

Section 15, Article 6: Session “Unless a different time is fixed by law, Congress shall convene

once a year on the 4th Monday of July and it shall continue for such number of days as Congress may determine, until 30 days prior to the opening of its next regular session” - Exclusive of Saturday, Sunday and Holidays

General Rule: Each house shall conduct separate sessions.Except:There are situations wherein the two houses are called to make joint sessions.

SITUATIONS WHERE BOTH HOUSES ARE MANDATED TO HOLD JOINT SESSIONS BUT ARE VOTING SEPARATELY:

1. When there is a tie in the canvassing of votes for the Presidential elections, such that has to break the tie. The votes required are majority votes of each house

2. Section 11, Article 7: - When there is a need for Congress to

determine the fitness of the President.3. Section 11, Article 7:

- When there is a need for Congress to determine the fitness of the President. The required votes is 2/3.

If majority of the cabinet members wrote a letter to Congress, expressing their belief that the President is unable to perform his functions, then in such case that the vice-president will be assume his office.

However, if the President will the dispute the allegations, then Congress should determine the fitness of the President. In this situation, the Congress is mandated to have a joint session to determine the President's fitness.

4. Section 9, Article 7: - The Congress will confirm or affirm the

nomination of the President, of who would become the Vice-President in the event that there will be vacancy in the position.

5. Section 23 (1), Article 6: - When Congress will declare the existence of

war. And the voting requirement is 2/3 of the members of each house.

6. Section 1, Article 17: - When Congress will propose amendments in

the Constitution or revision thereof.

SITUATIONS WHERE BOTH HOUSES ARE MANDATED TO HOLD JOINT SESSIONS BUT ARE VOTING JOINTLY:

1. Section 18, Article 7:- Congress will revoke the proclamation of

Martial Law or the revocation of the suspension of writ of habeas corpus.

- The voting requirement is only majority of both houses.

Section 16 (5), Article 6:10

“While Congress is in session neither house can adjourn for more than 3 days or meet in another place, other than the place where the two houses are sitting”

- This is requirement wherein each house should inform the other house if it has to convene or adjourn for more than 3 days or if it has to convene in another place. Only for the purpose of sufficiently informing the other house regarding the whereabouts of the other chamber.

- This is important specially in making bills.

Section 15, Article 6:“The President may call for special session at any time.”

- This usually happens in times of emergency. - In this Congress is mandated to convene even if

it is on recess.

SITUATIONS WHEREIN CONGRESS ARE MANDATED TO CONDUCT SPECIAL SESSIONS EVEN WITHOUT A SPECIAL CALL FROM THE PRESIDENT1. Section 4, Article 7:

- Congress would act as canvassers on the Presidential and Vice-Presidential elections.

2. Section 10, Article 7: - When there is vacancy in the office of the

President and the Vice-President. 3. Section 1, Article 11:

- Congress would decide to impeach the president.4. Section 18, Article 7:

- When the president calls for a martial law or a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.

Section 16(1), Article 6:The Senate will elect its officers:

Senate President Senate Pro Tempore Senate majority & minority floor leaders Chairmen of the various standing and special

committees Secretary and the sergeant-at-arms (non-

members)

The House of Representatives: Speaker of the House Speak Pro Tempore Majority & minority floor leaders Sergeant-at-arms who may not be members of the

House of Representatives.

Section 16(2), Article 6: Transactions of every house“A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and may compel the attendance of absent Members in such manner, and under such penalties, as such House may provide.”

Majority Each House to Constitute a Quorum:- This is arrived dividing the total membership of

the House concerned and adding 1 to constitute a quorum.Avelino vs. Cuenco

In this case, the Supreme Court determined the quorum on the basis the number of members who are at that time in the Philippines. In other words, the Supreme Court held that in order to get the quorum, it is sufficient to factor in only the members who are at that time in jurisdiction boundaries of the Philippines. Because if they are in the

Philippines, then they can be compelled to appear in the compulsory session of the Senate or House of Representative and if there are outside our jurisdiction, then we cannot validly compel them to appear in the session.

Section 16(3), Article 6: Discipline of Members“Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or expel a Member. A penalty of suspension, when imposed, shall not exceed sixty days”

Arroyo vs. De Venecia The Supreme Court ruled that in as much as each house has the power to determine its rules on proceedings, then it follows that each house has its power to relax the application of its own rules and procedures.

Each house has its powers to discipline any of its members for disorderly behaviors, in concurrence of 2/3 of all its members:

In our jurisdiction, the Supreme Court is powerless to determine what would constitute as disorderly behavior. It is up to the House of Senate or House of Representatives as to what would constitute as a disorderly behavior. However the Supreme Court may review if in the extortion or suspension of members has acquired the required number of votes has been complied with since for any punishment of disorderly behaviors, it shall be done in concurrence of 2/3 of its members.

Section 2, Article 11:Public officers who are not considered impeachable may be removed as provided by law.

- Denoting that if a law provides of Congress is suspended or removed, then such law may be enforced. Santiago vs. Sandiganbayan

The In this case, Sen. Santiago said that only senate can validly suspend her. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, it held that instances where members of Congress may be expelled or suspend are not mutually exclusive, such that applying Section 13, R.A. 3019, the Supreme Court held that Sen. Santiago could well be suspended.

Dimaporo vs. MitraThe Supreme Court held that provision in the old election law section 87 of B.P. 8781, is another mode of terminating the tenure of an elective public official.

Section 16(4), Article 6: Journals It is required in each house to maintain the journal of its

proceedings which shall be published from time to time exempting public matter that would somehow affect public security.

Each is also required to keep the record of each proceeding.

JOURNALS- The minutes of the proceedings.- This records the summary of the proceedings.RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS- This contains the blow by blow account, the recording

of each and every word spoken in the deliberation of particular measures would have to be recorded in their record of proceedings.

MATTERS THAT MUST BE STATED IN THE JOURNAL:Voting of the "YES" and the "NAYS", if it is requested by 1/5 of the house concerned.

Section 26(2), Article 6 :

11

The "YES" and "NO" votes on the third and final reading of the bill, must also be recorded in the journal.

Section 27(1), Article 6: If a bill was vetoed by the President, the veto message or the reason given by the President in disapproving the bill would have to be recorded in the journal.

Section 27(1), Article 6: If Congress decides to override the veto power of the President via a vote of 2/3 of each house thereof, then the voting pertaining to the re-passage of the bill as well as the names who voted for and against the overriding the power of the President.

ENROLLED BILL- Refers to a bill which is approved with finality of both

Houses of Congress and is signed by the Senate President, Speaker of the House as well as the respective Secretaries of both Houses and signed into law by the President.

JOURNAL vs. ENROLLED BILL ENROLLED BILL :

- If there is a conflict between enrolled bill and a journal and the subject matter of the inquiry is a provision of a law or a bill, then in this case the Enrolled bill will prevail.

Mabanag vs. Lopez Vito JOURNAL :

- If there is conflict between the entries of the journal and the ones in an enrolled bill and the subject matter of the inquiry pertains to those which under the Constitution are mandated to be recorded in the journal; then in such situation the journal shall prevail.US vs. Pons

The Supreme Court upheld the entry in the journal because in this case there was no actual conflict between a journal and an enrolled bill, because in this case the enrolled bill was never presented in evidence, since what was presented was only the journal.

Astorga vs. Villegas- The Supreme Court took into consideration and gave

credence on what appears in the journal since the Senate President and the Speaker of the House withdrew their signatures on the law, such that in actuality there was no longer an enrolled bill to speak of.

Section 17, Article 6: Electoral Tribunals Each House of Congress, the Senate or the House of Representatives, shall each have its own Electoral Tribunal:

¤ SET : Senate Electoral Tribunal¤ HRET House of Representatives Electoral TribunalELECTORAL TRIBUNAL- Shall be the sole of judge of all protest relating to

the election, qualification and returns of the members of the house concerned.

COMPOSITION:¤ 3 members from the Supreme Court¤ 6 members coming from the house concerned

- The members shall be chosen on the basis of the proportional representation of the various political parties and the organizations registered in the party-list system.

In an election, if there is a question regarding the qualification of nominee for Congress, the case shall be first lodge on COMELEC however after a winner has already been proclaimed and the same has already taken his oath and assumed office as a member of the

Congress, any such complaint shall already be decided by either the SET or HRET, as the case may be. The COMELEC shall already be divested of its jurisdiction to hear and decide.Lim Cai Chong vs. COMELEC

The Supreme Court held that once an election for the House of Representative is concerned and the winner is proclaimed and the winner as already taken his oath of office and assumed his duties as a member of Congress, then any questions pertaining to his/her election should be already be taken cognizance by the SET or HRET.

Codilla vs. COMELECThe Supreme Court sustained or upheld as valid the decision rendered by the COMELEC en banc, notwithstanding the fact that there has already been a winner proclaimed and that Congressman Locsin has already allowed to take his oath and that he already performed his function. The reason for which is that there was a patent anomaly committed by the division concerned of the COMELEC and that Congressman Codilla was not given a day in court to defend himself in the disqualification case filed against him which resulted to Locsin being declared as the winner.

The Supreme Court sustained the validity of the decision made by the COMELEC en banc noting that in the first place, there was a denial of due process committed against Codilla. This case is an exemption to the rule where if there is already a winner the election complaint will be in the jurisdiction of the SET or HRET.

Abas vs. SETAbas was a candidate for Senate who lost and protested the proclaimed winners. Abas also sought the disqualification of Members of the Senate Electoral Tribunal, holding that the members of the SET, were also the protestees of the action. Abas would have wanted that only those members of the Supreme Court will hear his election protest in SET

The Supreme Court disagreed noting that under Section 17, Article 6 of the 1987 Constitution, that the members of the Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of the 3 members of the Supreme Court and 6 members coming from the house concerned. The legislative component of SET or HRET cannot just be disregarded.

Bondoc vs. PinedaWhile the Supreme Court said that if a member of congress is chosen as a member of SET or HRET, that person is expected to vote independently of his partisan or political affiliations. He has to decide in a given particular case on the evidence obtained and the facts of the case.

Tañada vs. COMELECThe Supreme Court held in this case that the 6 membership in the SET or HRET need not be fully filled up, since what is important is in the selection of the members thereof must be done in accordance to the rational proportion of the political parties and organizations registered under the party-list.

Section 18, Article 6: Commission on Appointments Commission on Appointments

- The duty of this commission is to confirm the nominations made by the President.

- The commission on appointment shall only hold session when the Congress is also in session and it has to act on nominations submitted to the commission within 30 session days of Congress, which shall be reckoned from the date of submission.

e.g. When Congress is in recess the commission will also be in recess.Composed of 25 members:

1. Senate President ex officio chairman- He need not vote except when there is a tie.

2. 12 Senators3. 12 Members of the House of Representatives

They shall be chosen in accordance with the proportional ratio of the various political parties

12

and the various organizations registered under the party-list.

The Commission on Appointments need not be fully filled up if it cannot be in accordance with the ratio and proportion as provided in the Constitution.

The Electoral Tribunal and the Commission on appointment shall be organized within 30 days after the organization of Congress following the election of their respective officers.

Ad Interim Appointment:- This is an appointment made by the President

during the recess of the Commission on Appointment which will be subject to the commission’s approval once the Congress and the Commission on Appointment reconvenes.

General Rule:The primary function of the government is to enact laws except those which may be performed by themselves in using the people's initiative.

FUNCTIONS OF CONGRESS WHICH IS NON-LEGISLATIVE IN CHARACTER:

When Congress will canvass the votes in the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections.

When Congress will held a trial for an impeachment proceeding.

ENACTING LAWS Exclusive Bills or Laws from HR Section 24, Article 6

- This only means that the following bills should only be initiated in HR

¤ Appropriation Bills- These are bills which allows the disbursing of funds from

the national treasury ¤ Revenue and Tariff Bills

- These are bills which involves import and export ¤ Public bills increasing public debts¤ Bills of local application

- These are bills which creates provinces or cities¤ Bills of Private Application

- These are bills which would grant citizenship to a particular person

Tolentino vs. Secretary of FinanceThe Supreme Court held that it is enough that the measure was initiated in the House of Representatives. Moreover, the Supreme Court said that it is not violative of Section 24, Article 6 because the house of representative has already initiated the bill and therefore the Senate can already draft their own version of the bill however, the Senate must defer its own action of the bill until such time that the bill, coming from the House of Representatives has been forwarded to the Senate.

The senate is not duty bound to accept the version coming from the House of Representatives. The Senate can make an amendment to the bill or even substitute the same to its own version.

a. Any member of Congress may introduce or sponsor a bill to the Secretary of the House, who will calendar the same for the first reading.

b. In the first reading, the bill is read by its number and title only. Section 26(1), Article 6:

The bill shall only embrace one subject matter which shall be evident in its title.

Tobias vs. Abalos & Mariano vs. COMELECThe Supreme Court held that the title of the bill need not indexed or catalog anything or every contents thereof. It is enough that the contents of the bill are germane to the purpose on which that bill is particularly authored, sponsored or enacted.

c. After the first hearing, the bill is referred by the Speaker of the House to the appropriate committee for study. At this stage, the appropriate committee will conduct public hearings.- If there are other bills pertaining to the same subject

matter, those bills should be consolidated to become one bill.

- The committee concerned has the power to make any amendments or reject it.

d. After the public hearing, the committee shall decide whether or not to report the bill favorably or whether a substitute bill should be considered. - Should there be an unfavorable report of the

committee, then the proposed bill is dead.e. Upon favorable action, the bill is returned to the

National Assembly and shall be calendared for the second reading.

f. In the second reading, the bill is read in its entirety.g. Immediately after the second reading, the bill is set

for open debates where members of the assembly may propose amendments and insertions to the bill.

h. After the approval of the bill, in its second reading and at least 3 calendar days before its passage, the bill in its final form and copies thereof will distributed to each of the members.Is there an instance where the 3 readings on 3 separate days as well as the printing of final version of the bill and distribution of copies thereof may be dispensed with?- This can only happen when the President certifies the

urgency of enacting the particular bill only to meet a public calamity or emergency.

i. The bill is then calendared for the third and final reading. At this stage, no amendment shall be allowed. Only the title of the bill is read and the House concerned will then vote on the bill.

j. Under the 1987 Constitution, after the third and final reading at the house it originated, it will go to the other House where it will undergo the same process.What will happen if the Senate offered another version of the bill or would want to incorporate some amendments to the bill? What shall be done if there is a conflict proposed by the HR and the version adopted by the Senate?- If a conflict would arise, the bill shall be referred to the

Conference Committee, composed of members of coming from the HR and the senate. This committee is only in tasked to resolve the conflict in the bill sponsored by HR and the ones advanced by the senate.The Conference Committee has the power to introduce some amendments in the bill and once the C.C. has come up with a concrete resolution, it will submit its report to the House of Representatives and to the senate. Meaning to say it shall therefore come up with a revised bill.

Will the revised bill as submitted by the Conference Committee be subjected again to three separate committee?- No, the bill shall just be voted upon by the HR or the Senate

in plenary sessions, it does not have to pass through 3 separate readings again.

13

k. After the bill has been passed, it will be submitted to the President for approval.

l. If the President disapproves, he shall veto it and return the same with this objections to the house where it originated and if approved by 2/3 of all its members, it shall become a law.Pocket Veto:- This is the case, when the President is given a period

of time to sign the bill, however when the President does not approve the bill within a given period of time, and within the given period the Congress will adjourn, the bill will be deemed dead.

President Disapproves the Bill:- It shall be returned to the house where it originated

together with the vet message.- The veto message will be entered in the journal

and the house considered override the veto by 2/3 of all the members thereof.

- It will also be transmitted to the other house, where they will choose to override the same.

m. Under the present set-up, if the originating house will agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections to the other house by which it shall be likewise be considered and must be approved by 2/3 of the votes.

n. Every bill passed by Congress shall be acted upon by the President within 30 days thereof. Otherwise, it shall become a law.

Instances where a bill becomes a law without the signature of the President:

Override by the Congress When there is vacancy in the President and Vice-

President position, the special election law will be approved without the signature of the president.

PARTIAL VETO or LINE ITEM VETO of the PRESIDENT

General Rule:The President will approve the bill in its entirety or disapproves the same in its entirety.

Exemption: “ART”When the bill is regarded as an:

¤ Appropriation Bill¤ Revenue Bill¤ Tariff Bill

Conditional Veto:General Rule:The President cannot veto a particular condition which is attached to a provision in the bill without disapproving the provision which the condition pertains.

Exemption:The condition imposed in a particular provision in an appropriation, tariff or revenue bill, is considered an inappropriate condition, which can already be considered as a separate provision subject to the veto power of the President.

Suppose in the general appropriations bill, that item contains a condition. Can the President veto the condition alone without disapproving the entire provision in which it pertains?- No, the president as a rule cannot veto a condition without

disapproving the provision where it pertains or is attached. Except if the condition given is invalid. Bolinao vs. Valencia

The Supreme Court ruled that the veto was invalid since the rule is that even if the bill was an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill, the President cannot just veto a condition in a particular provision without necessarily disapproving the entire provision in which the condition is attached.

Is there an instance when the President can validly veto a condition without necessarily disapproving the provision where it pertains? In the general appropriations bill, that item contains a condition. Can the President veto the condition alone without disapproving the entire provision in which it pertains?- No, the president as a rule cannot veto a condition without

disapproving the provision where it pertains or is attached. Except if the condition given is invalid. PhilConsa vs. Enriquez:

The Supreme Court held the partial veto made by the President on the condition as a valid veto since the condition was inappropriate as it was legal and it can already be considered as a separate item which can be validly "vetoed" by the President.

POWER OF CONGRESS

RESTRICTION ON CONGRESS IN A PASSING A LAW1) Section 24, Article 6 :

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

2) Section 26, Article 6 :- Every bill by the Congress shall embrace only one subject which shall

be expressed in the title thereof.3) Section 27, Article 6 :

- Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that House, it shall become a law. In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the names of the Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal. The President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it.

4) Section 10, Article 3 :- No law impairing the obligations of contracts shall be passed.

5) Section 22, Article 3 :- No ex post fact law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

6) Section 31, Article 6 :- No law shall be passed granting title of royalty or nobility shall be

enacted by Congress. POWER OF APPROPRIATION

Section 29(1), Article 6 :- No money shall be paid out of the treasury except in

pursuant to an appropriation law made by Congress.Appropriation Law:a. General Appropriation Law

- Provides for funds for the organization of national government in a given fiscal period.

b. Special Appropriation Law - Funds for special purpose like for the rehabilitation

of a particular place or funds raised for the victims of a typhoon.

14

- This is enacted for a specific or special purpose.

LIMITATION IN THE APPROPRIAITON POWER OF CONGRESS: Inherent Limitations :

- Appropriation of funds should be for public purpose- Funds to be appropriated should be determined or

the specific amount should be stated Express Limitations :1. Section 24, Article 1:

- All appropriations, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing the increase of public debts, bills of local application and private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives but the Senate may propose or concur amendments.

2. Section 25(1), Article 6:- The Congress may not increase the appropriation

recommended by the President for the operation of Government as specified in the budget. The form, content and manner of preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law.Can Congress decrease the budget for the Executive Department?- Yes, because what is only prohibited is the increase of

the appropriation as recommended by the President.Can Congress decrease the budget for the Judiciary?- No, because we have the provision under Section 3,

Article 8 of the 1987 Constitution which States that the judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy appropriations and it cannot be reduced by the legislature below the amount appropriated for the previous year and after approval, shall be automatically and regularly released. Although, increases are allowed.

3. Section 25(2), Article 6:- No provision or enactment shall be embraced in

the general appropriations bill unless it relates specifically to some particular appropriations therein. Any such provision or enactment shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation to which it relates

4. Section 25(3), Article 6:- The procedure in approving appropriations for the

Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for approving appropriations for other departments and agencies.

5. Section 25(5), Article 6:- No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of

appropriations, however, the President, the Senate President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the heads of Constitutional Commission may by law be authorized to augment any time in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.

General Rule: There shall be no realignment of funds.Except:

- When there is a law enacted by Congress authorizing the persons enumerated under Section 25(5), Article 6 to make a re-alignment of funds provided that such re-alignment of funds must be for augmentation purposes and provided furthermore that the funds to be re-aligned to the departments should come from the savings from other departments for their appropriations.

PhilConsa vs. Enriquez:The Supreme Court ruled as invalid the provision under the questioned general appropriations act which authorize the Chief of Staff of AFP to make re-alignment of funds out of the savings of that particular department since only the President may be entitled by law to make re-alignment of funds in so far as the exclusive department is concerned.May there be a law authorizing the President to transfer funds from the savings in one of the item for DepEd to be transferred to DPWH?- Yes, because what is prohibited is the transfer of funds

from another branch to another branch of government.6. Section 25(6), Article 6:

- Discretionary funds appropriated for particular officials shall be disbursed only for the public purposes to be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be prescribed by law.

7. Section 25(7), Article 6:- If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall

have failed to pass the general appropriation bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed to be re-enacted and shall remain in force and effect until the general appropriations bill is passed by the Congress.

8. Section 29(2), Article 6:- Prohibiting disbursement of public funds for

sectarian purposes.

TAXING POWER OF CONGRESSConstitutional Limitations:1. Section 28(1), Article 6:

- The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.¤ Uniform Taxation:

All persons or things belonging to same shall be subject to the same tax.

¤ Equity: The assessment of tax should be based

on one’s capacity to pay.2. Section 28(3), Article 6:

- Tax exemption in favor of charitable institutions, churches and educational institutions.

3. Section 28(4), Article 6:- No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed

without the occurrence of a majority of all Members of the Congress.

4. Section 29(3), Article 6:- All money collected on any tax levied for a special

purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid out for such purpose only.

- If the purpose for which a special fund was enacted has been fulfilled or abandoned, the balance, if any shall be transferred to the general funds of the Government.

5. Section 4(3), Article 6:- Assets of non-stock, non-profit educational

institution shall be exempt from taxes and duties.

POWER TO MAKE AN INQUIRY: Section 21, Article 6:

- The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its representatives committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its

15

duty published rules of procedures. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected.

- Power of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation is inherent in its power to enact laws.Can Congress conduct inquiries in aid of legislation for matter which are already pending before the courts of law or sangidanbayan?- Yes, unless, if the purported inquiry is not actually an

inquiry in aid of legislation, the Congress cannot Can the person validly refuse to appear? Can a person invoke his right against self-incrimination?- No.Can the right against self-incrimination be invoke in investigations conducted by the Senate and any committee thereof?- Yes, but you can only invoke that when the

incriminating question is already being asked. You cannot invoke that right if only to disobey the subpoena issued by the Senate or HOR. In other words, you should appear but if the incriminating question is already being asked, that’s the time to invoke that right.

Is there an instance whereby a person is justified in not appearing before the senate or HOR in the event that there is an inquiry in aid of legislation?- Yes, when there is a proper invocation of the so-called

executive privilege.

Executive Privilege: Presidential communication privilege

- Refers to the decision making of the President¤ Military¤ Diplomatic¤ National Interest¤ Discussion during the close-door meetings

with the President ¤ Information¤ Confidential information given by/between the

President and his subordinates. Deliberate process privilege

- The decision-making of the other executive officers.

Those who can invoke Executive Privilege:1. The President2. Executive Secretary acting in behalf of the President

for the benefit of the subordinate or lower cabinet member.

3. Supreme Court Chief Justice and Associate Justices

Limitations in the Power of the Senate to Conduct Inquiries in Aid of Legislation:

Inquiry should be in aid of legislation. Automatically in accordance with the rules duly published

of Senate, HOR or any committee thereof. The invitation never against to a purported must already

obtain a proposed legislation. The rights of any person must be respected. The invitation must expressly divulge the person to be

invited and the subject matter of his investigation the questions to be profound

16