ARTICLE II CONSTI 1

Article II Sec 1:

CASE

DIGESTS

the land and therefore the DOH may implement them through the RIRR.

Villavicencio vs Lukban Prostitues can win over the mayor Mayor of Manila Lukban deported 170 prostitues to Davao under the good intention to get rid the city of social evils and also to have them work under the hacienda of the Gov. Of Davao, Gov. Sales. Several parties of the deportees filed for habeas corpus and questioned constitutionality of the order. Issue: WON the act of the mayor is constitutional. Held: NO. There is no law allowing the mayor to do so. Law defines power. In the absence of law defining such power, it then becomes illegal and thus should not be countenanced. Article II Sec 2 pharma vs helth sec Breastmilk is best but international law has to be made into local law regulating breastmilk substitute ads. cory aquino signed Executive Order No. 51 (Milk Code), which was adopted from foreign laws. it says that breastfeeding should be supported, promoted and protected, hence, it should be ensured that nutrition and health claims are not permitted for breastmilk substitutes. Hence, DOH issued RIRR which regulates breastmilf substitutes. Several milk sub producers questioned the constitutionality of this order. DOH said that international instruments are deemed part of the law of

issue: Whether Administrative Order No. 20060012 or the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (RIRR) issued by the Department of Health (DOH) is constitutional Held: No. Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law either by transformation or incorporation. The transformation method requires that an international law be transformed into a domestic law through a constitutional mechanism such as local legislation. The incorporation method applies when, by mere constitutional declaration, international law is deemed to have the force of domestic law. Treaties become part of the law of the land through transformation pursuant to Article VII, Section 21 of the Constitution which provides that "[n]o treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the members of the Senate." Thus, treaties or conventional international law must go through a process prescribed by the Constitution for it to be transformed into municipal law that can be applied to domestic conflicts RIRR are not treaties. It appears to have incorporated thru the legislation of the Milk Code. Art 2 of Consti embodies incorporation method. Has it been validly incorporated? There are two requirements for them to be validly incorporated: they should have the character of jus rationale and validity thru all kinds of human societies

As previously discussed, for an international rule to be considered as customary law, it must be established that such rule is being followed by states because they consider it obligatory to comply with such rules (opinio juris). Respondents have not presented any evidence to prove that the WHA Resolutions, although signed by most of the member states, were in fact enforced or practiced by at least a majority of the member states; neither have respondents proven that any compliance by member states with said WHA Resolutions was obligatory in nature. Respondents failed to establish that the provisions of pertinent WHA Resolutions are customary international law that may be deemed part of the law of the land. Consequently, legislation is necessary to transform the provisions of the WHA Resolutions into domestic law. The provisions of the WHA Resolutions cannot be considered as part of the law of the land that can be implemented by executive agencies without the need of a law enacted by the legislature. Kuroda vs Jalandoni International law on war is generally accepted in the local Kuroda is charged before a military commission for committing brutal atrocities to civilians during WWII. The petitioner is now before the court to challenge constitutionality of trying him as ordered by the issuance of EO 68 of the president of RP. since RP has not signed the Hague Convention what wold have allowed him to be tried. Is EO 68 violative of our Constitution? NO. The atrocities created by the japanese are against humanity and thus can be tried. the principles in the Hague convention although not signed by RP are

in conformity with the generally accepted and policies of international law which are part of the our Constitution. Moreover, when the atrocities happened, RP was under US and both US and Japan signed the convention. Agustin vs Edu an example of a ratified international law A letter of instruction by pres. marcos ordering land motor vehicles to have warning devices when disabled on the road was promulgated pursuant to international laws, specifically the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals which was ratified under PD 207 in the country. This required motor vehicles to own EWD upon registration, serially stickered. Petitioner, owning a beetle with already and properly equipped blinking lights ahead and back questioned the order as it was only for the purpose of enriching the manufacturers of the EWD's and also can be source of abuse of police power. Petitioner also questioned the constitutionality of the said convention and its applicability in the phil. Issue: WON the order is constitutional. Held: IT is consitutional because RP has ratified the Vienna Convention. Gonzales vs Hechanova Municipal law is supreme over intl law. No executive order can be made against already established statutes. Action for injunction prohibition with preliminary

On sept. 22, 1963, exec sec issued order to allow importation of rice for the armed forces. Petitioner mr gonzales, who is president of iloilo palay and corn planters association, challenged this as RA 3452, which allegedly repeals RA 220, explicitly

prohibits the importation of rice and corn by the goverment and it can only be done thru private individuals or businessess. Respondent defended this by saying that under such law, by reason of national security they should be allowed to import rice. Besides, the contracts with vietnam and burma to import rice from those countries have already been set. they now invoke the doctrine that , if a treaty and a statute are inconsistent with each other, the conflict must be resolved under the American jurisprudence in favor of the one which is latest in point of time.

Issue: WON the treaty should be followed over the municapl law in regards to the importation of rice. Held: No. The executive agreement made is unlawful since they are inconsistent with RA 2207 and 3452. Although the president may enter executive agreements without prevoous legislative authority, he may not enter into a transaction which is prohibited by already established statutes. The Executive's main role is execution of the law not creating agreements. He may not defeat legislative enactments that have acquired the status of law, by indirectly repealing the same through an executive agreement providing for the performance of the very act prohibited by said laws. Thus, with that reasong and also by using Sec 2 of Art VIII which allows the courts to nullify treaties, such treaty was invalidated by the court. Article II Sec 3 Gudani vs Senga There are proper steps to disobey the president Annulment of a directive

Around sept 22, 2005, sentaor biazon invited some senior officers in pma to appear before a public hearing re the alleged 2004 electoral fraud. Gen. Gudani and Senga were mong those who received the letter of invitation. The latter said he could not attend due to prev commitment in brunei but nonetheless directed the others to attend the hearing. A letter was sent out to attend the hearing. Gen senga wrote letter to biazon requesting postponement since some could not attend the hearing. Gen. gudani though was already on his way to manila for the hearing. On that evening though, an order came from gma that no military personnel is to attend the hearing without approval from gma.still, gudani attended the hearing. Now they are subjected to court martial. These soldiers now invoke that they did not disobey the law and should not be tried for violating the president's orders based on what is valid under civilian law. Issue: WON the military personel's violation of gma's order is unconsitutional Held: 1. first we must know that the order of the president is not part of her executive privilege but as the priviledge of chief executive. 2. we must understand that military life is by choice and this choice involves the choice to follow rules and waive some rights. 3. chain of command is very important in the military although it may have barbaric and ancient history pre democracy. 4. question now involves whether the president erred in ordering the generals not to testify 5. it is also established that the generals recognize chain of command including mobility in that they even asked permission to travel

6. senate hearing invitations for the purpose 'aid of legislation' should inluce what the statues in question are and other details because these hearins are not free from possible abuse of authority 7. next, if there is a deadlock between the enate and the refusing party, which is the president, it should be resolved by the court. 8. YES. The general's disobedience are unconstitutional. They should have followed the proper procedure in questioning the presidents orders which was to inform the senate and then senate would rquest the president to have them testify afterwhcich if there was a deadlock, the court would decide on it. Article II, Sec 4 People vs Lagman Military service is required with benefits Lagman and de sosa refuse to join the military since the former has an ailing father to support, no military learnings and does not wish to kill or be killed while the latter refuses since he is fatherless and has a mother and an 8 yr old brother to support. Issue: WON they can refuse the order of the goverment to join the military Held: NO. They cannot because the defense of the state is in the constitution. Also, it is reciprocal in nature. In the event of war, the right of the government is the consequence of its duties to defend the state and is reciprocal with its duty to defend life, liberty and property of the citizen. Also, the reason re family support is not valid because in fact as soon as they

appear at the acceptance board, they can ask for allowance. Article II Sec 8 Aglipay vs Ruiz Stamps for sale to advertise Manila, not the event In commemoration of the 33d international eucharistic congress held in manila, the director of posts issued an order to have a commerative postage stamp re the anniversary. Msgr. Aglipay, the head of the Aglipayan church contested this since there should be separation between church and state. Issue: WON the act by the director is violative of Art 2 sec 6 of the constitution and Sec 23, sub sec 3 of article VI of the constitution. HELD: NO. 1. The making of the stamps are mere profound reverence and recognition of religion. Religious freedom as a constitutional mandate is not inhibition of profound reverence for religion and is not denial of its influence in human affairs. Religion is interspersed in the constitution starting with the preamble to the taxation (sec. 14, subsec. 3, Art. V) and employment of religous sect in the military (sec. 13, subsec. 3, Art. VI,). 2. Also, this has already been approved by the president. 3. The postage made actually stresses that the event happend in Manila. 4. Act No. 4052 grants the Director of Posts, with the approval of the Secretary of Public Works and Communications, discretion to misuse postage stamps with new designs "as often as may be deemed advantageous to the Government"

5. Act No. 4052 contemplates no religious purpose in view. What it gives the Director of Posts is the discretionary power to determine when the issuance of special postage stamps would be "advantageous to the Government." In fact, it was stated in the request that the only purpose in issuing and selling the stamps was "to advertise the Philippines and attract more tourists to this country." Article 2, Section 10 Social Justice What is Social Justice? Social justice is justice exercised within a society, particularly as it is exercised by and among the various social classes of that society. A socially just society is based on the principles of equality and solidarity, understands and values human rights, and recognizes the dignity of every human being.[1][2][3] Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system. The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that "universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice."[4] Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education.[5] Maglakas vs NHA

There is no social injustice in slum for the slum For review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure Pursuant to PD 1315 enacted on March 26, 1978 ordering the expropriation of lots in bagong barrio, caloocan city to make way for a bliss propject by the NHA, lot of petitioner was to be subjected to become an 'area center' (30% open space as required in all types of residential developments). This was tagged 77-0063. Petitioner, having known that the lot was tagged under him believed that he is the owner of the lot and he has vested rights on it having been there for 40 yeras. He filed a case why their lot was to be made as the open space but this was denied because it was already censused and thus identified for relocation. petitioner then filed for damages and preliminary injunction but this was also denied and he was order to transfer. petitioner is now filing this in the supreme court. Issue: WON the demolition and relocation violates the petitioner's rights to acquired property under the social justice clause of the constitution. Held: NO. The tagging of the lot was not a vested right but a conditional right. . The "tagging of structures" in the Bagong Barrio area was conducted merely to determine the qualified beneficiaries and bona fide residents within the area. It did not signify assurance that the tagged structure would be awarded to its occupant as there were locational and physical considerations that must be taken into account, as in fact, the area where petitioners property was located had been classified as Area Center (open space).

Social justice can only be used to correct an injustice. All things being equal, it can only favour the poor when pited against the rich but not the poor against the poor. In fact the relocation and proper demolition is evidence of the fundamental objective of promoting social justice. The refusal of petitioner to vacate has hampered the development of the area. Indeed, petitioner cannot invoke the social justice clause at the expense of the common welfare. Oxales vs United Lab social justice is equal and is for the deserving, it is for the employer as much as it is for the retired employee For certiorari Mr Oxales was an employee of united lab. United lab has a very good retirement package which he would be entitled upon retirement. Mr oxales retired at the mandatory age of 60 and joined a rival company but he got less benefits than he expected due to 13th month and bonuses. the hr dept said that based on policies, those which he claimed are not included in the computation. thus he filed this with the labor dept. the arbiter decided not in favor of the petitioner. Among other reasons was that the Labor Arbiter opined that the URP precludes the application of the provisions of R.A. No. 7641. He then filed this further now with moral damages saying "having suffered sleepless nights, serious anxiety, and mental anguish are not enough. No premium should be placed on the right to litigate." An also to ge the medical benefits for retired employees. Issue: WON he is entitled to moral damages Held: No. He was not able to prove bad faith on the part of the employer to cause him any

sleepless nights. In fact, it seems that the petitioner is the one in bad faith. We reiterate the time-honored principle that the law, in protecting the rights of the laborer, authorizes neither oppression nor self-destruction of the employer. While the Constitution is committed to the policy of social justice and the protection of the working class, management also has its own rights, which are entitled to respect and enforcement in the interest of fair play. Out of its concern for those with less privilege in life, this Court has inclined more often than not toward the employee and upheld his cause with his conflicts with the employer. Such favorable treatment, however, has not blinded the Court to rule that justice is in every case for the deserving. Justice should be dispensed in the light of the established facts and applicable law and doctrine.63 Ondoy vs Ignacio Protection for the worker, even if he plans on cutting work hours to drink. Mr Jose Ondoy was working as a fisherman on board a vessel. he was invited for a drking spree while he was at work and so he left the vessel and but then he drowned. mother of deceased is now filing to claim for benefits. however labor court denied. Issue: Is social justice applicable here and is the mother entitled for compensation? Held: 1. Yes. Labor erred in denying social justice. It is worthy to take note that there have been several similar cases already that have been granted in favor of the victim. In fact, there is a situation that only declared 'missing' but was awarded compensation. in this case it as established that he drowned and it happend during working hours and while he was at worked,

regardless of whether he was on his way to a drinking spree. Having said that, the burden should be cast not on the appelant but on the person resisting the claim, in this case the employer. : 'As between a laborer, usually poor and unlettered, and the employer, who has resources to secure able legal advice, the law has reason to demand from the latter stricter compliance. Social justice in these cases is not equality but protection. Article 2 Sec 12

dependent must be "legitimate"; and (d) proper legal document to be presented. mr hortillano filed this but it was in favor of the employer. the reasoning mainly used by the employer is that the fetus does not live up to the requirements for benefits. the person has no juridical personality, is not a dependant and cold never hav acquired death . Issue: WON mr hortillaino is entitled to the death benefits. Held: YES, he is entitled to it. the employer could not keep on insisting the definitions of the terms to grant benefits as this would shy away from the intention of the cba and the compensation, which is to assuage the bereaved party, herein the parents. It is obivous that the parents lost the unborn child and this obvious fact should merit them the benefit. " The rights to bereavement leave and other death benefits in the instant case pertain directly to the parents of the unborn child upon the latters death. In this light, bereavement leave and death benefits are meant to assuage the employee and the latters immediate family, extend to them solace and support, rather than an act conferring legal status or personality upon the unborn child. " In fact, employers usage of article 40,41 and 42 misses the point. they do not define death. they also do not define life. the child is already dependent because based on the cba, a dependent is one who requires the parent for support. Also, the child is legitimate. legitimacy only involves the child's status in relation to his/her parents, it is only a question whether the parents are married or not and has nothing to do with the peson being born out of the mothers womb or not.

Continental Steel vs Hortillano Bereavement benefits are intended for the worker not intended for the unborn dependent legitimate child. Mr hortillano lost a fetus of 38-39 weeks upon delivery of her wife. he is now filing for bereavement leave benefits as stated in the cba with his employer continental steel, the herein petitioner. Continental Steel immediately granted Hortillanos claim for paternity leave but denied his claims for bereavement leave and other death benefits, consisting of the death and accident insurance. the employers reasoning is that based on the cba, This Office declares that for the entitlement of the benefit of bereavement leave with pay by the covered employees as provided under Article X, Section 2 of the parties CBA, three (3) indispensable elements must be present: (1) there is "death"; (2) such death must be of employees "dependent"; and (3) such dependent must be "legitimate". On the otherhand, for the entitlement to benefit for death and accident insurance as provided under Article XVIII, Section 4, paragraph (4.3) of the parties CBA, four (4) indispensable elements must be present: (a) there is "death"; (b) such death must be of employees "dependent"; (c) such

Lastly, We emphasize that bereavement leave and other death benefits are granted to an employee to give aid to, and if possible, lessen the grief of, the said employee and his family who suffered the loss of a loved one. It cannot be said that the parents grief and sense of loss arising from the death of their unborn child, who, in this case, had a gestational life of 38-39 weeks but died during delivery, is any less than that of parents whose child was born alive but died subsequently. Being for the benefit of the employee, CBA provisions on bereavement leave and other death benefits should be interpreted liberally to give life to the intentions thereof. Time and again, the Labor Code is specific in enunciating that in case of doubt in the interpretation of any law or provision affecting labor, such should be interpreted in favor of labor.29 In the same way, the CBA and CBA provisions should be interpreted in favor of labor When conflicting interests of labor and capital are to be weighed on the scales of social justice, the heavier influence of the latter should be counter-balanced by sympathy and compassion the law must accord the underprivileged worker. Article 2 Section 16

to be born. Factoran was advised on this and was already working on illegal loggers but agreed to be sued if only to bring it to the attention of the courts and the nation. Oposa sued DENR to stop its concenssions in that 3.8 million hectares have now bee denuded while 800,0000 hectares now remain. He pursued this although he was aware of the fact that TLAs could not just be removed unless the 25 year contract lapses and unless the concessionares violated the terms. Intially hwe was denied for lack of clear violations presented and for lack of representation of plaintiff. Issue: WON the TLAs could file in behalf of other generations and whether the TLA is against the right to a balanced and healthful ecology. Held: Yes, he could file for future generation. Intergenerational equity is new and was recognized here and the right to a healthful and balanced ecology as stated in the constitution cannot be invoked without recognizing that the provision is for our generation and the years to come. However he failed to have the concessions stopped and was ordered to file separate cases to each logging contractor. Article 2, Section 25

Oposa vs Factoran Basco vs Pagcor Intergenerational Equity In this case, oposa challenges the factoran to stop all the timber license agreements because it would derive the generation and the generations to come of a healthful and balanced ecology. He was fresh from winning a victory against illegal loggers and wanted to bring to the nations attention the importance of saving the environment for the generation and intergenerational equity. He was suing not just for the people born but those that are Pagcor cannot governments be taxed by local

"The new PAGCOR responding through responsible gaming." PAgocr started as an experimental floating casino. Due to its success, the government saw its potential as an income generating machine for the goverment. it was then broadened to control gaming accross the

country and a charter created its personality. in its repealing clause isits capaity to override all statues covering or contrary to its articles. Petitioners think otherwise and thus filed this case for the ff issues: Issues: A. It constitutes a waiver of a right prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law. It waived the Manila City government's right to impose taxes and license fees, which is recognized by law; B. For the same reason stated in the immediately preceding paragraph, the law has intruded into the local government's right to impose local taxes and license fees. This, in contravention of the constitutionally enshrined principle of local autonomy; C. It violates the equal protection clause of the constitution in that it legalizes PAGCOR conducted gambling, while most other forms of gambling are outlawed, together with prostitution, drug trafficking and other vices; D. It violates the avowed trend of the Cory government away from monopolistic and crony economy, and toward free enterprise and privatization. (p. 2, Amended Petition; p. 7, Rollo) Held: A. No. 1. In the first place, local goverments are merely created by congress and it has limitations on the taxes it can impose. in this case it is not stated in the charter of manila. 2.. the license to impose gambling fees has long been revoked under PD 771, it is now vested in the national government.

besides, local governments has no power to tax instrumentalities of the national government and pagcor is such, under its original charter pd 1869. Pagcor has the dual power to operae and regulate gambling casinos. The latter role being governmental, it should not be taxed. B. No. it has not. It is a doctrine that national government is supreme othewrise these mere little created creatures called 'local governments' could destroy the policies of the national government and who knows, the entire state in the future. Also it is a principle that local autonomy only means decentralization. it does not make governments sovereign within the state or imperium in imperii. in a unitary system of government, local governments are just decentralized. what constituites decentralization is a matter of political question and thus it is up to the state to decide what the local governments can do or not, in this case WON they can tax pagcor. right now, it cannot. C. NO it does not violate equal protection. The "equal protection clause" does not prohibit the Legislature from establishing classes of individuals or objects upon which different rules shall operate. D. It is not the judiciaries matter to question the executive order. it is for the congress to repeal it. E. in regards to monopoly, as stated in sec.19 of art. 12, monopolies are not necessarily or outright disallowed. it is decided by the state and is for the legislature to decide. Article 2 Section 28 Bantay Republic Act vs COMELEC Show me the party list nominees!

in the light of the introduction o fht party list system, herein petitioners are seeking for the names of those enlisted to join the party list to know whether the respresentatives are valid or not. Comelec went to the headlines for not allowing disclosure as ordered by comelec chair ben abalos since he believes that the party list system is not about personality. and it is stated in sec 7 of ra 7941 "This provision, while commanding the publication and the posting in polling places of a certified list of party-list system participating groups, nonetheless tells the Comelec not to show or include the names of the party-list nominees in said certified list." Issues: 1. Whether respondent Comelec, by refusing to reveal the names of the nominees of the various party-list groups, has violated the right to information and free access to documents as guaranteed by the Constitution 2. Whether respondent Comelec is mandated by the Constitution to disclose to the public the names of said nominees Held: It is stated in the constitution under art 2, sec 28 and in the bill of rights, art 3, sec 7 that in matters of public concern, any citizen has the right to it. however, this is not absolute like in the case of military, trade, banking or diplomatic secrets, or those affecting national security. it is therefore for the court to decide which is which. In this case, there is no national security at risk, hence the comelec has committed grave abuse of discretion in refusing legitimate demands for the nominees list. in RA 7941, it only prohibits disclosure on the certified list, or that is the list in the ballots or in the precint but there is no indication that it should be undisclosed in any other measure or from any person requesting it.

10