PS 152

The Philippines is a presidential form of government

-

With separation of powers between 3 co-equal branches.

o
Executive implements/executes laws
o
Legislative create/amend laws
o
Judiciary interprets the law.

There are cases where one has a quasi-function of the other

Article 8 of the Civil Code of the Philippines states that judicial decisions form part of the law of the
land.

The Supreme Court is tasked to scrutinize and test the law for its constitutionality The Philippine Constitutions
is the highest law of the land, the most fundamental law.

It is the expression of the will of the people.

1971 Constitution (preamble) The Filipino people
1987 Constitution (preamble) We, the sovereign
Filipino people

Article II Declaration of Principles and State Policy

Section 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State.

Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority
emanates from them.
Initially, the previous Constitutions provided only for a
republican government, this means that a
(democratic) government is composed of
representatives elected by people at large.
(representative democracy)
Democratic was added to emphasize that it embodies
characteristics of a pure democracy such as initiative
and referendum (Article 6, Section 1)
Elements of a State
1. People / Permanent population more or less numerous,
capable of maintaining a territory.
2. Defined Territory
3. Sovereignty
4. Government the concept of government has evolved
through time.
a. Both contains:
i. constituent functions basic functions
of the government (what is expected)
ii. ministrant functions optional
functions (may sometimes be
delegated to the private sector)
b. Before there was no rights that is automatic.
But the emergence of human rights proved to
be an exception and the government is
expected to protect it.
Section 2. The Philippines 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 nations.
Generally Accepted Principles right to life, basic health
o
However, culture may be a valid exception to the
GAP.
(e.g. Muslim community and culture vs
womens rights against discrimination; 1977
Code of Muslim Personal Laws vs CEDAW)
Section 3. 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.
To prevent the military from overpowering the
government
The militarys function is to protect the people.
Section 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and

Section 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest,

adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in
its territory.
excluding sources of energy
Section 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social
order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the
nation and free the people from poverty through policies that
provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a
rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.
Section 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of
national development.
Section 11. The State values the dignity of every human person
and guarantees full respect for human rights.
Section 12. 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 in the rearing of the youth for
civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall
receive the support of the Government.
Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in
nation-building and shall promote and protect their physical,
moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall
inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage
their involvement in public and civic affairs.
Section 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nationbuilding, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the
law of women and men.
Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to
health of the people and instill health consciousness among
them.
Section 16. 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.
Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science
and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and
nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total
human liberation and development.
Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic
force. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their
welfare.
Section 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and
independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos.
Section 20. The State recognizes the indispensable role of the
private sector, encourages private enterprise, and provides
incentives to needed investments.
Section 21. The State shall promote comprehensive rural

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.
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of
life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare
are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings
of democracy. (non self-executory)
Section 6. The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable
Section 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy.
In its relations with other states, the paramount consideration
shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national
interest, and the right to self-determination.
The case of Tanada vs Angara questions the
constitutionality of the Philippines accession to GATTWTO. The plaintiff argues that said accession is against
Art. 2 Sec 7 of the Philippine Constitution.
o
However, the court ruled that the provision did
not want the country to be isolationist amidst the
occurrence of globalization and
internationalization.

development and agrarian reform.

Section 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of
indigenous cultural communities within the framework of
national unity and development.
Section 23. The State shall encourage non-governmental,
community-based, or sectoral organizations that promote the
welfare of the nation.
Section 24. The State recognizes the vital role of communication
and information in nation-building.
Section 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local
governments.
Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to
opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as
may be defined by law. (non self-executory)
Section 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the
public service and take positive and effective measures against
graft and corruption.
Section 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law,
the State adopts and implements a policy of full public disclosure
of all its transactions involving public interest.

ARTICLE VI THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Section 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a House of
Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.
3 great powers of the State:
1.

Police power the duty of the state to regulate anything.

a. can be exercised in the name of public interest
b. done through the legislative -> executed by the executive.
c. According to Tablarin v Gutierrez, police power is the pervasive and non-waivable power and authority of the
sovereign to secure and promote all the important interests and needs. (in short, protection of public order within
the general community)
[Tablarin vs Gutierrez: The complainant argues that conducting NMAT violates the equal protection clause, does not
promote due process and does not ensure the promotion of the right of education. However, the court ruled that it is a
valid exercise of police power, to ensure the standard quality of the practice of medicine.]
d.

2.
3.

Limits to the said police power is threat of GADALEJ (Grave Abuse of Discretion Amounting to Lack or Excess of
Jurisdiction)
i. lack there was no jurisdiction to begin with
ii. excess there is jurisdiction but had exceeded.
Eminent domain taking ones property for the promotion of public interest with just compensation. (it presumes ownership)
taxation life-blood of the government
*goes hand-in-hand with police power.

Legislative power cannot be delegated to any other agency/department/branch.

-

Any law enacted by the legislative can never be altered by someone not from the legislative (under the grounds of GADALEJ)
o
The executive can only clarify, while judiciary can only interpret they cannot add any additional provisions. (As ruled
in People vs Maceren)
[People vs Maceren: It is the case where regarding an order of Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources against
electrofishing despite the silence of any sanction in the Fisheries Law. The court ruled that the executive, or any other
agency for that matter, cannot add provisions to the law. They can only clarify.]
o

o
o

For the executive to know what they are supposed to execute:

The law must be complete

Standards must be provided under sufficient grounds.

There is also the presumption that laws passed by the legislative is complete and are already constitutional (principle
of constitutionality).
However, there are exceptions (as provided in Belgica vs Executive Secretary):
i. Delegated legislative power to local governments since time immemorial applicable only on purely local
matters. (As ruled in Rubi vs Provincial Board, legislative power may be delegated to the provincial governor
because they are qualified and have an extensive knowledge of what happens within their legislative district.)
[Rubi vs Provincial Board: where the complainant questions Resolution No. 25 as ordered by the governor, where the
Mangyans will be resettled in Tigbao, Mindoro, against their will.]

ii.

constitutionally-grafted exceptions

e.g. Constitutionally mandated power of the president to enact laws in times of war and other national emergencies.
[Belgica v Executive secretary ruled that PDAF is not under the exceptions of the non-delegability of legislative power,
because it transfers legislative power that should be acted upon only by the Congress as a whole, to individual
legislators]
o

The law passed must have a standard or Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) either expressed or implied. There
can be a subordinate legislation where the legislative itself delegates some of its powers to some authorities within
certain limits. (according to Agustin v Edu)

[Agustin vs Edu: The complainant questioned the Letter of Instruction No. 229 issued by President Marcos, that was passed
to comply with the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. The letter of instruction recommends the
installation of road safety signs and devices. The court ruled that there is no undue delegation of legislative power and
that the Philippines must comply with the international law that it has signed (according to the Philippine Constitution)
Section 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at large by the qualified voters of the
Philippines, as may be provided by law.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least
thirty-five years of age, able to read and write, a registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not less than two years
immediately preceding the day of the election.
QUALIFICATIONS OF A SENATOR:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

natural born citizen of the Philippines

at least 35 years old at the day of the election
able to read and write
registered voter
Resident of the Philippines not less than two years immediately preceding the day of election.
a. Residence the place where one has true permanent home or the actual place of residence.

Senators are allowed to retain their office in the Senate even if they run for another office, so long as it is for Vice Presidency or the
Presidency.
Section 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the
thirtieth day of June next following their election. No Senator shall serve for more than two 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 of which he was elected.
-

There is no term limit for a senator, but a senator is prohibited to serve for more than two consecutive terms.
Voluntary renunciation such as the assignment of a senator to another office or an election to another post.

GRACE POES ISSUE:

-

lost her citizenship in 2012 -> ran for Senatorial elections in 2013, which means that her residence hasnt reached 2 years.
o
renounced her American citizenship in 2010
foundling -> questions her true citizenship because she was found with no (true) parents.
o
There are presumptions when a foundling has been found:

The law favors that a foundling has a nationality

It presumes that the parents of the foundling are citizens of the country.

Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise
fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area
in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as
provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations .
2 types of representatives within the HOR:
1.
2.

District representatives those who are elected within local districts, provinces, cities and Metro Manila, according to the
number of inhabitants.
Partylist representatives
a. National Parties/Organizations
b. Regional Parties/Organizations
c. Sectoral Parties/Organizations

According to Ang Bagong Bayani, the partylist system is a social justice tool to enable and empower participation of the
marginalized and underrepresented sectors, not the mainstream political parties. To enable them to become active participants in the
legislations of laws that will inevitably affect them, to give genuine power to the people within the bulwark of representative
democracy. The court ruled that:
1.
2.

political parties may join party-list elections

the purpose of party-list system is to give genuine power to the people, to promote proportional representation and enable
the election of:

a.

3.

those who belong to marginalized and underrepresented

i. Section 5 RA 7941 ..That the sectors shall include labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, veterans, overseas workers, and professionals.
ii. This list of sectors is not exclusive.
iii. it presumes that if a sector is underrepresented then it does not have the machinery to be elected.
b. those who lack well defined constituencies
c. those who could contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation.
Guidelines for Screening party-list participants:
a. must represent marginalized and underrepresented groups identified in Section 5 of RA 7941.
b. Major parties must have a sectoral wing to be able to participate in the party-list election.
c. religious sect is not allowed to participate
d. organizations or parties must be disqualified under section 6 of RA 7941:
i. religious sect
ii. those who advocate violence
iii. a foreign party or organization
iv. who receives support from foreign governments
v. violates/ fails to comply with laws.
vi. declares untruthful statements
vii. ceased to exist for at least 1 year
viii. fails to participate in last 2 preceding elections, or failed to obtain 2% of votes under the party-list system in 2
preceding elections/
e. must not be founded/organized by the government
f.
nominees must comply with the law under Section 9 of RA 7941
g. nominees/representatives must also represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors they represent
h. must be able to contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate legislation that shall benefit the nation as a
whole.

(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of representatives including those under the
party list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list
representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.
The case of BANAT v COMELEC ruled that:
1.
2.
3.
4.

the 20% allocation of all combined party-list congressman is enforced. party-list representatives must not exceed 20% of
the total membership of HOR. (as opposed to the Veterans ruling)
2% threshold shall be only applicable to the initial qualification of party-lists to obtain the first seat in the HOR.(unlike
the Veterans ruling, where it ruled that 2% threshold is also applicable to the granting of additional seats)
There is a three-seat limit regardless of number of votes actually obtained.
additional seats of a qualified party is computed in proportion to their total number of votes.
(5)It also ruled that the Veterans ruling will be continued, disallowing major political parties in participating party-list
elections.

20% party-list members in HOR

2% threshold

Veterans ruling
Not mandatory
constitutional

BANAT ruling
Mandatory
Unconstitutional for the purposes of
additional seats.

Meanwhile, Atong Paglaum vs COMELEC overturned some rulings in BANAT vs COMELEC. The party-list system, as intended
by the Constitution, does not mean to exclude non-sectoral parties. It ruled that:
1.

2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

Three different groups may participate in the partylist system: (1) national parties/ organizations, (2) regional
parties or organizations and (3) sectoral parties or organizations. (following Paragraph 1 of Art 6, Section 5 of
Constitution)
a. Party-list elections is both for sectoral and non-sectoral organizations.
b. Party-list elections is not synonymous to sectoral elections
National or regional organizations/parties do not need to organize along sectoral lines or present any marginalized
and underrepresented.
(major) political parties may join party-list elections so long as they are registered under the party-list system and
do not field candidates in legislative district elections.
The sectors may be marginalized or underrepresented or lack in well-defined political constituencies, so long as
they have a principal advocacy pertaining to special interests and concerns.
a. political party vs sectoral party
i. political party an organized group of citizens advocating an ideology or platform, principles
and policies for the general conduct of government which is the most immediate mean for
supporting politicians and securing seats in the public office
ii. sectoral party an organized group of citizens belonging to any sectors enumerated in Section
5 of RA 7941, whose principal advocacy pertains to the special interest and concerns of their
sector.
Majority members of sectoral parties that represent the marginalized and underrepresented must come from the
marginalized and underrepresented sector they represent.
National, regional and sectoral parties/org shall not be disqualified if their nominees are disqualified.

(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a
population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative.
Requirements for creation according to Section 461 of the Local Government Code 1991:
1.
2.

Average annual income of at least 20,000,000

either of one of the following:
a. a continuous territory of at least 2,000 square meter (sqm)
need not be contiguous if it comprises 2 or more islands or separated by a chartered city or cities that do not
contribute to the income of the province.
b. population of not less than 250,000
only income accruing to the general fund, exclusive of special funds, trust funds, transfers, etc.

*provided that the creation of a new district/province/city does not diminish any other areas land area and population significantly.
However in Navarro (Case of Dinagat Islands), the court ruled that the required territory, as provided in LGC, is not a requisite
indicator of viability of a province or any local government. It argued that some cities and municipalities are exempt from such
provisions if it is comprised of 2 or more islands however, the LGC 1991 was silent about this. The court ruled that following the
requisites of smaller local government units should be done, despite relative silence of the law [Section 461 of LGC 1991] regarding
this issue (which is entirely different from the other)
CENTRAL POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CREATION OF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
1.
2.
3.

economic viability -> primordial criterion.

efficient administration
capability to deliver basic services

(4) Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based
on the standards provided in this section.
Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines and, on
the day of the election, is at least twenty-five years of age, able to read and write, and, except the party-list representatives, a
registered voter in the district in which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for a period of not less than one year immediately
preceding the day of the election.
QUALIFICATIONS FOR A MEMBER OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

a natural born citizen of the Philippines

at least 25 years old at the day of the election
able to read and write
a registered voter in the district where he shall be elected (except for partylist representatives)
a resident of not less than one year immediately preceding the day of the election.
*these qualifications are exclusive you cannot add any more qualifications (SJS vs Dangerous Drugs Board)

RESIDENCE VS DOMICILE
Residence actual place where you live
Domicile the place where you intend to live (where there is intention to return and intention to stay)
As provided in the Constitution, there must be at least 1 year residency to become a qualified member of the HOR. However in
election laws, there is no recognized distinction between residence and domicile. (As ruled in Romualdez vs Comelec)
[

Romualdez vs COMELEC: the case questioning the disqualification of Imelda Marcos for her bid as a representative of the First
District of Leyte. The court held that she is a resident of Leyte for election purposes. They argued that:
1.
2.

3.
4.

The minor follows the domicile of their parents and is retained until a new one is gained (established when her father went
back to Leyte)
Domicile of origin is not easily lost, one must first demonstrate:
a. actual removal or change of domicile
b. bona fide intention of abandoning former place of residence and establishing a new one
c. acts which corresponds with the purpose
There is only a distinction between domicile and residence in the civil law, the wife only gains actual residence not a new
domicile.
The petitioner expressed the intent to go back to Tacloban as her domicile.

Therefore the court ruled that Mrs Imelda Marcos is qualified to be the representative of Leyte

Imposing additional qualifications provided by the Constitution is also unconstitutional. (as ruled in Social Justice System vs
Dangerous Drugs Board)
[

SJS vs Dangerous Drugs Board: the petitions assails the constitutionality of Section 36 of RA 9165 or the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs of Act 2002, where it requires mandatory drug testing for candidates of public office,
students of secondary and tertiary schools, officers and employees of public and private offices and persons charged before
the prosecutors offices for certain offenses.

The Court held that Section 36 (g) of RA 9165 is unconstitutional because it adds another layer of qualification to what the
Constitution had clearly stated as a qualifications as a member of the Senate. (mainly because unless otherwise provided by
law was provided in said provisions
]
Section 7. The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, unless
otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election.
No Member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three 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.
Difference between Term and Tenure:
Term of office prescribed by the Constitution (3 years for HOR representative and 6 years for Senators) cannot be extended or
shortened by the legislature.
Tenure period during which an officer actually holds the office, may be affected by circumstances within and beyond the power of
said officer. (may be shorter than the term)
Under Section 67, Article 9 of Batasang Pambansa Blg 881 and as contemplated in Section 7(2), Article 6 of the
Constitution, any elected official who files a certificate candidacy for another office is deemed to have voluntary cut his/her tenure
and is considered as a voluntary renunciation of his/her office (the terms remains but the tenure does not). As held in Dimaporo vs
Mitra, the mere act of filing certificate of candidacy is an overt act of an intention to relinquish the office currently held.
[DIMAPORO VS MITRA: The petitioner who was elected as a representative of Lanao del Sur during the 1987 Congressional elections
and ran for the governatorial race the following elections was excluded in the list of members of HOR. The petitioner argued that Sec
67 of BP Blg 881 is not operative. However, the court ruled that it is reflected in Section 7(2) of the Constitution as voluntary
renunciation and his filing of Certificate of Candidacy is an act of resigning in his post in the public office.
]
Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election of the Senators and the Members of the House of Representatives
shall be held on the second Monday of May.
Section 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a special election may be called to fill such vacancy in
the manner prescribed by law, but the Senator or Member of the House of Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the
unexpired term.
As provided in Section 2 of RA 6645 (AN ACT PRESCRIBING THE MANNER OF FILING A VACANCY IN THE CONGRESS OF THE
PHILIPPINES), special elections shall not be early than 45 days or later than 90 days from the date of resolution. However, if general
election is to be held then it shall be simultaneously held. As held in Tolentino vs Comelec, the court held that the special election
held in 2001 follows the constitution and RA 6645.
[Tolentino vs COMELEC: The petitioners questioned the validity of special elections held in 2001 provided that the COMELEC did not
fully distinguish to the voters that a special elections simultaneous with the general elections will be held to fill a vacant seat.
However, the court ruled that failing to notice a special elections did not negate the calling of such election and the voters were not
unknowledgeable of the special election since they have other ways to know such.]
Section 10. The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall be determined by law. No increase in said
compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the full term of all the Members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives approving such increase.
-

Unitary treatment is emphasized which means that it is intended to consider both houses as an indivisible components of
one Legislature or Congress.
o
This means all terms of office of the full Congress who had approved any increase of their compensation must end
before it may take effect. (as held in Philconsa vs Mathay)

[PHILCONSA VS MATHAY: The court held that all members of both Senate and House of Representatives must be treated unitarily and
therefore any increase of compensation approved by both houses shall take effect until both houses term expires.]
Section 11. A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years
imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any
other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof. (PRIVELEGED COMMUNICATION)
Parliamentary immunity enables and encourages a representative to discharge his public trust with firmness and success -> it
enables them to enjoy the fullest liberty of speech and be protected from resentment of everyone. It is needed to perform their
functions as the legislative branch of the government. It is not for private indulgence but for the public good. (as held in Pobre vs
Defensor-Santiago)
[Pobre vs Defensor Santiago: Senator Santiago expressed in her speech an irritation towards the Supreme Court ( calling them
Supreme court of idiots and such). The complainant urged the Supreme Court to disbar her and put immediate sanctions. However,
the court ruled that it is within the senators privileged communication. However, the court urged the Senate to sanction her for her
attitude towards the judicial branch.]

Said immunity is not extended to any speech and written publications done outside their duties as a legislator. He/she must commit
the act within the performance of his/her duty. (as held in Jimenez vs Cabangbang). Based on the nature of the statement uttered or
work publicized.
Privileged communication is not limited within the Congress session, a member of the Congress may still be covered by the said rule
so long as it is within the performance of his/her duty (confirmation of statements, etc.)
[ JIMENEZ vs CABANGBANG: The case where Jimenez published an open letter alleging plans of some AFP officers to stage a coup
against the president. The defendant argued that he is immune from suit and is covered by privileged communication. However, the
court ruled that such publications are not covered by privileged communication because he was not performing his official duty in
doing the said act. The congress was not in session during that time and he, himself, caused the publication of said letter]