1
Constitutional Law Finals Reviewer President, or to the Judicial Branch, or if by law it attempts to invest itself or its
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
Separation of Powers
 The legislative makes the law, the executive implements the law and the judiciary
interprets the law.
e.g. GAA the Executive makes or formulates the GAA through the department of
Budget. After Approval it will be submitted to the Legislative (House of
Representatives)
 How can the Judiciary check the Executive and the Legislative Power?
Ans. Judicial Review
 How can the Executive check on the Judiciary and Legislative?
Ans. Impeachment and Veto Power; Appointment of Justices
Article VI
Section 1
 The Congress also discharges powers of a non-legislative nature among the canvass
of the Presidential Elections, the Declaration of the Existence of a state of war, the
confirmation of amnesties, and Presidential Appointments, the amendment or
revision of the constitution and impeachment.
I. Separation of Powers
 Allocation of great powers: Executive, Legislative and Judiciary
 Legislation belongs to the Congress; Execution belongs to the
Executive; Settlement of legal controversies belongs to the Judiciary
II. Systems of Checks and Balances
 No one department is able to act without the cooperation of at least one
of the other departments
e.g. 1. Legislation needs final approval of the President
2. President cannot act against laws passed by Congress and must
attain the concurrence of Congress to complete certain significant acts
3. Money can be released from the treasury only by authority of
Congress
4. The Supreme Court can declare acts of Congress or the President
unconstitutional
 The purpose of Separation of Powers and checks and balances is to
prevent concentration of powers in one department and thereby avoid
tyranny
III. Role of the Judiciary
 Judicial Power has been defined in jurisprudence as “the right to
determine actual controversies arising between adverse litigants, only
instituted in courts of proper jurisdiction”
 The authority to settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving
rights that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice or
the redress of wrongs for violation of such rights.
Non-delegability of Legislative Power
 In carrying our that constitutional division… it is a breach of the national
fundamental law is Congress gives up its Legislative Power and transfers it to the
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
members with either executive power or judicial power.
 Each in the field of its duties may not invoke the action of the two other branches in
so far as the action invoked shall not be an assumption of the constitutional field of
action of another branch.
Valid Tests for Delegation:
1. Completion Test – the law must be complete in all its terms and conditions when it
leaves the legislative such that when it reaches the delegate the only thing it will
have to do is enforce it.
2. Sufficient Standard Test – there must be adequate guidelines or stations in one law
to map out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority and prevent the delegation
from running riot.
 For administrative regulation to have the force of penal law it is necessary (1) that
such violation be made a crime by the delegating statute itself, (2) that the penalty
be provided by the statute itself, and (3) that the regulation be published
Oversight Function
 Oversight provisions- means for the legislative to check on executive
 IRR is the function of the legislative; they have the power to review and check
whether or not the law really was implemented
 Oversight Committee is not allowed because it would violate the principles of
separation of powers.
 Oversight Functions can be exercised:
1) Appropriations hearing
2) Section 21 Article 6 – investigation in aid of legislation
3) Section 22 Article 6 – Question Hour (limited only to Heads of
Department)
4) Scrutiny – submit documents
5) investigation – deeper digging of information in the implementation of
laws pursuant to the conducting of inquiries in aid of legislation.
Belgica
 Congress releases 9m
 Senate releases 200m
 Pork barrel system weakens the capacity of the Executive to check the
Legislative branch especially, veto power because the amount is not itemized by
the time it reaches the President
 The power to approve the budget belongs to the Congress as a whole, there is no
delegation of such power to an individual member of the Congress.
Judicial Power
 The power of judicial review is a judicial power.
 When there is no actual controversy brought to the Judiciary they cannot review.
1) Actual case of controversy
2) Standing (adversely affected)
 2

3) Earliest possible opportunity  resident of the Philippines for not less than 2 years immediately
4) lis mota (the issue of the constitutionality is the very heart or essence of preceding the day of the election
the case)  residence requirement is satisfied if one is domiciled in the
 Political question is a question of policy Philippines even if not physically present in the Philippines.
 Transfer of unitary to federal, the court can enter and review it if there is grave
abuse of discretion or if they did not follow the instruction of the Constitution it Section 4
becomes a justiciable question
I. Term of Office
Angara  6 years unless provided by law; 30th day of June after election
 2 deadlines: election commission and Congress II. Possibility of re-election
 a 6 year term with one immediate re-election
 Election Commission has the jurisdiction to set the said deadline as ruled
 one half retained; one half replaced or re-elected every three years
by the Judiciary
 Senator could run again after 3 years after the expiration of his second
term
 Expressed grant of the Constitution and the law is the basis of the exercise of power Section 5
however, there are powers that are also powers that are reasonably inferred and
implied; the doctrine of necessary implication. It is the grant of all other powers I. Composition
which are not expressly granted but are necessary for effective implementation of  3 kinds of members: district representatives, the partylist representatives
expressed power. and the sectoral representatives.
 membership of the house is 250
Article 7 Section 18 A. District representatives
Martial Law can be both a political and justiciable question.  shall be elected from legislative districes apportioned among provinces,
The scope of martial law is a political question. cities and the Metropolitan Manila area
Invasion or Rebellion.  the territory was divided into 13 regions, comprising 200 districts
apportioned among the provinces, cities, and Metropolitan Manila
 Each Legislative district shall comprise as far as practicable, contiguous,
Delegation of Powers compact, adjacent territory. This rule is to prohibit gerrymandering.
 Gerrymandering is the creation of representative districts out of separate
 The power to enact laws is delegated to Congress by the people.
portions of territories in order to favor a candidate
 What has been delegated cannot be redelegated is not absolute.  Each city with a population of at least 250,000 or each province shall
 The law that delegates is subject to the test of validity have at least one representative
 a province regardless of population size requires one representative
Ynot B. Party-list Representatives
 every delegation is imposed with conditions  shall constitute 20% of the total membership of the body, including such
 amend the Constitution through initiative representatives.
 3 different groups that may participate in the party-list system (1)
national parties, (2) regional parties or organizations and (3) sectoral
Section 2 parties or organizations
 Party-list system is intended to democratize political power by giving
I. The Senate (Composition)
political parties that cannot win in legislative district elections a chance
 The Senate shall be composed of 24 Senators who shall be elected at
to win seats in the House of Representatives.
large by the qualified voters of the Philippines.
 Who can be holders of the legislative power aside from the Congress?
Section 3  Ans. President in case of emergency; initiative and referendum- can
repeal a law passed by Congress, can amend the Constitution through
I. Qualification initiative and referendum. (12%; 3% per legislative district)
 natural-born citizen  3 level of initiative and referendum: local, national (passed by Congress)
 35 years of age and Constitution.
 able to read and write  If you repeal a national law it shall take effect 15 days following
 registered voter completion of the publication of the proposition that has the effect of
repealing a national law.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 3

 Major political parties can participate in party-list election (can’t fill 2) While Congress is in session (4th Monday of July – 30 days before the opening of
candidates for district election) the next regular session) state of the nation address “in -session” the one provided
 sectoral wing is a separate identity from political parties by law; no session on recess
 Sector can be represented by parties e.g. women can be represented by  if one factor is missing they cannot enjoy immunity
other parties.  Can congress be arrested on Sunday?
 5 nominees given by the party-list Ans. if the penalty is more than 6 years they can arrested on a Sunday.
 Immunity for speech cannot be invoked if outside one’s functions.
Section 6  When conducting privilege speech; speech and debate; committee hearings
House of Representatives  Vote required is 2/3 of all the members when imposing penalty under Congress

I. Qualifications Section 13
 natural-born citizen
Incompatible Office Forbidden Office
 at least 25 years of age of the day of the election
 able to read and write except for the party-list representatives Cannot hold two positions or Cannot hold two positions or
 registered voter in the district in which he shall be elected office while serving the Congress office while serving the Congress
 resident of the same district for a period of not less than one year unless you give up one office regardless of whether or not you
immediately preceding the day of the election have given up the other office
e.g. office created during your
Section 7 term and emoluments was
increased during your term (2nd
I. Term of Office term you can)
 2 terms; 3 years each
 voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time shall not be
considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service Section 12

2 (+1 immediate re- House of Representatives 3 years term  participation; share; potential conflict of interest
election) consecutive terms
2 consecutive terms Senate 6 years term Section 13
 tenure – actual occupancy
 term – the one set by law  refers to public office or office of the government
 counseling is allowed as long as the lawyer-legislator will not appear
e.g. Atty. Guillen elected 2016; appointed at DA on 2018 (renounced office); can he run in the  private office is okay – not an incompatible office
2019 elections? ANS. cannot run because term ends in 2222
Section 15
Section 8
 SONA is a joint session
 Unless otherwise provided regular election of the Senators and Members of the  voting separately – declaration of state of war
House of Representatives shall be held on the Second Monday of May  joint session, joint voting – Martial law and suspension of habeas corpus
 Can the House of Representatives adjourn even without the consent of the Senate?
Section 9 Ans. Yes, as long as the adjournment is not more than 3 days
 Special sessions may be held by the President.
 When can you compel COMELEC to hold special election? (House of
Representatives) Section 16
-next triennial election; more than 12 months to the next regular election; more than  Quorum – majority + 1
18 months to the next regular election (Senate)  2/3 – total membership x 2÷3
 those suspended and expelled are not included in the
Section 11 computation of total membership
1) Not more than 6 years  Shifting of Majority:
22 present – majority is 12; 16 present – majority is 9; 18 present – majority is 10

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 4

 to approve a bill there has to be majority (least quorum is 3 and majority is 7)  ad interim – made when Congress is not in session; can assume
 in determining the quorum members outside the Philippines shall not be included in immediately even without confirmation but ceased to function when
the computation ONLY IN QUORUM, because the Congress cannot compel the rejected or by passed.
attendance of those outside the Philippines.  regular appointment – made when Congress is in session; cannot assume
 2/3 vote is applicable when charge is filed by a co-worker before confirmation
 what constitute disorderly behavior is a political question III. Role of the Commission on Appointments
 Sandiganbayan can constitute suspension  Approve appointments
 expulsion – house can expel its members via 2/3 votes of all its members  Reject Appointments
 By pass Appointments (will not act on the appointment)
 exclusion – electoral tribunal can exclude you; once the electoral tribunal declare
that you lost the election there is exclusion
When Duterte appointed his cabinet members, is it ad interim or regular appointment?
 Journal – minutes
Answer: Ad interim, they can assume immediately.
 Record – verbatim record of the proceedings
What if by passed? Can President reappoint?
 Enrolled Bill – signing of the speaker and the senate president and the certification
Answer: The President can reappoint. No limitations of reappointment,
of the secretaries of both houses that such bill passed are conclusive of its due
enactment.

Section 17 Daza v Singson

 Realignment cannot validly change the composition of the Commission on
Electoral Tribunal Appointments because realignment is not permanent.

I. Composition
 9 members/ 3 Justices Coseteng
 6 Senators through proportional representation [24 members: no. of  If the proportional formula is not followed there will be an abuse of discretion is
senators in a political party x 12 ÷ total number of Senators elected a justiciable question
 Can be reviewed or subjected to judicial review when there is grave abuse of  indorsement is irrelevant
discretion
II. Scope
 election Guingona
 Returns  filing up of 12 seats is not mandatory
 Qualification  no round-off
 Certificate of Candidacy is under COMELEC  CA is a political body
III. HRET will take jurisdiction when:
 There is a proclamation and the proclamation must be valid
 Taking of Oath Section 19 & 20
 Assumed seat of office
 Commission on Appointments shall act upon the appointment submitted to it within
*regardless of how you are elected, when all three are present the HRET can have jurisdiction 30 days, should rule by majority vote.
IV. Grounds by which a member of the tribunal can be removed from or replaced Section 21
 Change of party
 Death Limitations:

Section 18&19  in aid legislation

 in accordance with duly published rules
Commission on Appointment  those being inquired upon shall have their rights represented
I. Members: *Bengzon v Drilon- not controlling
 Senate President
 12 from House of Representatives *Arnault v Nazareno
 12 from Senate
II. 2 kinds of appointments: *Sabio v Gordon et al

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 5

Duly Published rules, how often? 1) Limited period- withdrawn by a resolution or next adjournment
Answer: Once there is a change of composition (Senate) 2) subject to restrictions as provided by Congress
Every three years (House of Representatives
Section 24
Is the Senate a continuing body?
Answer: Yes, as an institution. However, any investigation ceases at the end of the session  Appropriations Bill is one whose purpose is to set aside a sum of money for public
but they can open it again. use
Can publication be done through internet?  Revenue or tariff bill are those strictly for raising revenues
Answer: No  Bill of local application are those which revenue is limited to a specific locality e.g
creation of a town
Under what instance can you refuse to answer?
 Private Bills are those which affect private persons e.eg. bill granting citizenship to
Answer: Executive privilege depends on the nature of information not the position of the
a specific foreigner
person being summoned in the legislative investigation in aid of legislation and one cannot
refuse on the ground that there is no consent of the President. *emphasis on the bill

Powers of Congress
Question Hour In aid of Legislation What are the substantive and express limitations on powers of Congress?
Limited to Cabinet Secretaries or Anyone Answer: Bill of Rights
department heads Cannot pass ex post facto law or bill of attainder
The entire body of Senate or the House of May assign committee Cannot pass irrepealable laws
Representatives can conduct the
investigation
Need consent from the President and Consent of the President is irrelevant; can Section 25
written questions ask anything under the sun
I. Limitations on the power to appropriate
 May not increase the appropriations recommended by the President for
the operation of the government as specified in the budget.
*E.O. 464 Section 2(4) – Neri PLEASE READ  May not slitter the general appropriation law with provisions not
specifically related to some particular item of appropriation, and every
 Executive privilege can be invoked in Sections 21 and 22 such provision shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation item
 In the declaration of Martial Law: joint session; joint voting which it relates.
 Amnesty needs to be concurred by Congress unlike pardon  May not adopt a procedure for approving appropriations for itself
 Concurrence to give effectivity on treaties or international agreements different from the procedure for other appropriations
 Special appropriation bills must specify the purpose for which they are
Section 22 intended
 Limited discretion to authorize transfer of funds
 question hour was retained  Discretionary funds shall be disbursed only for public purpose
 President was kept from legislative summons  Cannot cripple the operation of government by its failure or refusal to
 Under Section 21 Department Heads may be summoned; Chairman and Members if pass a general appropriations bill
the PCGG; anyone except Justices or President  Prohibits expenditure in religious purposes
 Must be based on budget prepared by the President
I. Oversight Function of Congress
 intended to enable Congress to determine whether the laws it passed are *the list of those authorized to transfer funds is exclusive
being implemented
 Department Heads may not appear without permission of the President  Presidential budget may be decreased but not increased
 Exemption applies only to Department Heads not everyone who has
Cabinet ranks Section 26

Section 23 Which of the three readings is most important?

Answer: Second Reading
I. Limitation of Emergency Powers Can all three readings be done in one day?

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 6

Answer: Yes, in a certification by the President of emergency or effect: public calamity or Executive Impoundment
emergency
What are the advantages of three readings in one day?  refusal of the President to spend or release funds on items already appropriated
Answer: No need for printing of the copy before final reading and can be done in one day.  those offices that enjoy fiscal autonomy can automatically release
Growing budget deficit is considered as a public calamity or emergency (Tolentino
v Sec. of Finance) Implied Limitations

 non-delegation of legislative power

 Rider – unrelated provisions to the appropriations bill *automatic appropriations for payment of debt is constitutional
 Inappropriate provisions
*Special Appropriations (Section 29)
Section 27
Limitations:
 Roll call vote is required in:
 Upon last and third reading 1) must be paid out of national treasury
 request of 1/5 of the members present 2) public purpose
 in re-passing a bill over the veto of the President
 President may act in: positive act or inaction Transfer of funds
 Conference Committee – reconciling conflicting provisions of a bill
 Item-veto is not allowed except in case of appropriations, revenue and tariff bills 1) Can’t transfer funds from one office to another just within the same office; savings
 distinct and severable part of the bill extra money from appropriated funds from the preceding fiscal year otherwise there
 Doctrine of inappropriate provisions – item-veto even if not appropriations or would be a violation of the principle of Separation of Powers.
revenue or tariff bill
*Technical malversation is a violation of Article VI Section 25 par. 5
 Impoundment- refusal of the President to spend funds already allocated
 A bill becomes a law even without the signature of the President Disbursement Acceleration Program
 Partial veto is allowed in revenue, tariff or appropriations bill Is the President allowed to transfer funds appropriated by Congress?
 Item can be vetoed not provisions when the provision is inappropriate it can be Answer: Yes. Conditions are on Article VI Section 25.
item-vetoed What is an Operative Fact Doctrine?
 Rider
Answer: Any program or law once proclaimed null and void by the Supreme Court has no
 Unconctitutional provision
effect, operative fact is an exception.
 Bill that amends existing laws
 Page 797 2nd paragraph
*Malampay funds can be used by the President
Summary
*Presidential Social Fund
General rule is no partial veto, exception:
Power to Tax
1) Appropriations bill
2) Revenue bill 1) Directly
3) Tariff bill 2) Actually
3) Exclusively
However, item can only be vetoed not a provision unless the provision is an inappropriate
provision. A provision is usually the conditions subjected therein. *extends to facilities which are incidental and reasonably necessary for accomplishment of said
purpose
Inappropriate provisions:
*income of educational institutions – income tax exception
1) Rider
2) Unconstitutional provision
3) Provision that amends an existing law
4) block administrative action in implementing a law

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018


CASES:
Tobias v Abalos
Facts: Petitioners assail the constitutionality if the Republic Act No. 7675, otherwise known
as “An Act Converting the Municipality of Mandaluyong into a Highly Urbanized City to
be known as the City of Mandaluyong”. Petitioners contend that it violates the one-subject
one-bill and that is resulted in the increase of the composition of the House of
Representatives.
Issue: WON the R.A. No. 7675 is unconstitutional.
Ruling: Article VI Section 5(3) each city with a population of at least 250k or each
province shall have at least one representative. The creation of a separate district for
Mandaluyong is not a subject distinct from the subject of its conversion into a highly-
urbanized city but a natural and logical consequence. The present limit of 250 members in
the HOR is not absolute with the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law”. Court
dismissed the petition due to lack of merit.
Veterans Federation Party v COMELEC
Facts: Petitioner assailed public respondent COMELEC resolutions ordering the
proclamation of 38 additional party-list representatives to complete the 52 seats in the HOR
as provided by Sec. 5 Article VI of the 1987 Constitution and R.A. 7941. Public respondent
avers that the filling up of the twenty percent membership of party-list representatives in
the HOR, as provided under the Constitution, was mandatory.
Issue: WON the 20% allocation for party-list lawmakers is mandatory
Ruling: No, it is merely a ceiling for the party-list seats in Congress; it is however deemed
it necessary to require parties, organizations and coalitions participating in the system to
obtain at least two percent of the total votes cast for the party-list system in order to be
entitled to a seat and no winning party can have more than three seats in the HOR.
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v COMELEC
Facts: petitioners challenged the COMELEC’s resolution which approved the participation
of 154 organizations and parties. Petitioners sought the disqualification of private
respondents, arguing mainly that party-list system was intended to benefit the marginalized
and underrepresented parties.
Issue: WON petitioner’s recourse to the Court was proper.
WON political parties may participate in the party list election.
WON the COMELEC committed grave abuse of discretion in promulgating the
resolution.
Ruling: Where the issue raised is one purely of law, where public interest is involved and in
case of urgency the court may take cognizance. Political parties even major ones may
participate in the party-list elections subject to the requirements laid down in the
Constitution and RA 7941. Section 5, article VI provides that members of the HOR may
be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or
organizations. COMELEC must determine proportional representation of the marginalized
and underrepresented for the criteria of participation.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
7
Banat v COMELEC
1. The 80-20 rule is observed in the following manner: for every 5 seats allotted for
legislative districts, there shall be one seat allotted for a party-list representative. In the May
2007 elections, there were 220 district representatives, hence applying the 80-20 rule or the
5:1 ratio, there should be 55 seats allotted for party-list representatives.
(Current Number of Legislative District Representatives ÷ 0.80) x (0.20) = No. of seats
available for party-list representatives. Hence, (220 ÷ 0.80) x (0.20) = 55.
2. The 20% allocation is merely a ceiling, meaning it shall not exceed 20% of the total
number of the members if the lower house, to fill the 20% is not mandatory.
3. There is no constitutional basis to allow that only party-lists which garnered 2% of the
votes cast are qualified for a seat and those which garnered less that 2% are disqualified.
4. Those who acquired less than 2% are allowed to get a seat:
a.) The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to lowest
based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections.
b.) The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least 2% of the total votes cast
shall be entitled to one guaranteed seat each.
c.) Additional seats. Those garnering sufficient number of votes according to the ranking
shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes:
e.g. 55 seats available 17 parties gained 2% each there are 38 seats remaining. First,
additional seats to 2 percenters. (Percentage of vote garnered) x (remaining seats) = number
of additional seats, hence, 7.33% x 38 = 2.79, NO ROUNDING OFF, meaning only 2
additional seats.
5. the 3 seats limit is valid, this is one way to make sure that no one party dominates the
party-list system.
Sen. Benigno Aquino v Commission on Elections
Facts: R.A. No. 9176 created an additional legislative district for the province of Camarines
Sur. To that effect, the first and second districts of Camarines Sur were reconfigured in
order to create an additional legislative district for the province. Petitioners claim that the
reapportionment introduced by R.A. No. 9716 violates the constitutional standards that
requires a minimum population of 250k for the creation of a legislative district.
Issue: WON a population of a 250k is an indispensable constitutional requirement for the
creation of a new legislative district in a province.
Ruling: No, Section 5(3) Article VI states that each city with a population of at least 250k
or each province shall have at least one representative.
Bai Sandra Sema v COMELEC
Facts: ARMM Regional Assembly enacted Muslim Mindanao Autonomy Act creating the
province of Shariff Kabungsuan in the first district of Maguindanao. The voters ratified the
creation in a plebiscite who is candidate for representative prayed for the exclusion from
the canvassing of votes cast in Cotabato for that office. Sema contended that Shariff
Kabunsuan is entitled to one representative.
Ruling: Congress can increase allowable membership of the HOR EXCLUSIVELY.
ARMM cannot create a province without a legislative district as mandated by the
Constitution, every province shall have a legislative district. ARMM can however, create
barangays or cities.

Romualdez-Marcos v COMELEC
Facts: Imelda Romualdez-Marcos was running for the position of representative of the First
District of Leyte for the 1995 Elections. Cirilo Roy Montejo, incumbent representative filed
a petition for cancellation and disqualification with COMELEC alleging that petitioner did
not meet the constitutional requirement of residency.
Issue: WON petitioner has satisfied the 1 year residency requirement to be eligible in
running as representative of the first district of Leyte.
Ruling: Yes. Residence is used synonymously with domicile for election purposes.
Tacloban has become Imelda’s domicile of origin when her father brought them to Leyte.
Domicile of origin is only lost when there is actual removal or change of domicile, a bona
fide intention of abandoning the former residence and establishing a new one.
Aquino v COMELEC
Facts: Agapito Aquino, the petioner, filed his COC for the position of Representative for
the new second legislative district of Makati. In his COC, Aquino stated that he was a
resident of the aforementioned district for 10 months. Move Makati and Mateo Bedon filed
a petition to disqualify Aquino on the ground that the latter lacked the residence
qualification as a candidate for congressman. Aquino amended the entry on his residency in
his COC to 1 year and 13 days.
Issue: WON residency in the COC actually connotes domicile to warrant the
disqualification of Aquino from the position in the electoral district. WON it is proven that
Aquino has established domicile of choice and not just residence in the district he was
running in.
Ruling: Yes, the term residence has always been understood as synonymous with domicile.
The purpose of the residency qualification is to exclude stranger or newcomers unfamiliar
with the conditions and needs if the community from taking advantage of favorable
circumstances existing in that community for electoral gain. No, Aquino has not established
domicile of choice in the district he was running in. The intention not to establish a
permanent home in Makati City is evident in his leasing a condominium unit instead of
buying one. Aquino was rightfully disqualified by the COMELEC due to his lack of one-
year residence.
Co v HRET
Facts: The issue in this case is whether Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural-born Filipino citizen in
contemplation of Section 6 Article VI.
Ruling: Yes, Article VI Section 2 defines natural-born citizen as “those who are citizens of
the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. The court based its resolution of
the issue by tracing Jose On, Jr. citizenship to his mother who was a natural-born Filipina.
In the opinion of the Court it is unnecessary for Ong, Jr. to formally or in writing elect
citizenship when he came of age as he was already a citizen since he was 9 by virtue of his
mother being a natural-born citizen and his father a naturalized Filipino
Election of citizenship can be both formal and informal and the exercise of right to suffrage
is a positive act of election of Philippine citizenship.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
8
Dimaporo v Mitra
Facts: Dimaporo was elected as a representative for the second legislative district of Lanao
del Sur during the 1987 congressional elections. Dimaporo filed a COC for the position of
governor of ARMM. Dimaporo lost the election wrote a letter intending to resume
performing his duties and functions as an elected member of the Congress. Unfortunately,
he was not able to regain his seat in the Congress. Dimaporo contended that he did not lose
his seat as a Congressman. Grounds may be termed to be shortened: 1.) Holding any officer
or employment in the government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof.
2.) Expulsion as a disciplinary action for a disorderly behavior. 3.) Disqualification as
determined by a resolution of the electoral tribunal in an election contest. 4.) Voluntary
renunciation of office.
Issue: WON Dimaporo can still be considered as a member of Congress even after he filed
for another governmental position.
Ruling: No. The filing of a COC shall be considered as an overt act or abandoning or
relinquishing his mandate to the people and he should therefore resign if he want to seek
another position which he feels he could be of better service.
Jimenez v Cabangbang
Facts: This is an ordinary civil action of several sums of money, by way of damages for the
publication of an allegedly libelous letter of a defendant Bartolome Cabangbang.
Issue: WON the publication is question is a privileged communication
Ruling: No, the publication in question is not a privileged communication. The
determination of the first issue depends on whether or not the aforementioned publication
falls within the purview of the phrase “speech and debate therein” that is to say, in
Congress – used in this provision. The publication involved in this case does not belong to
this category. The open letter to the President of the Philippines was published when the
Congress was presumably not in session. It is obvious that he was not performing his
official duty, either as a member of Congress or as an officer or any Committee thereof.
People v Jalosjos
Facts: Accused-appellant Jalosjos is a full-fledged member of Congress who is now
confined at the national penitentiary while his conviction for statutory rape on 2 counts and
acts of lasciviousness on 6 counts is pending appeal. He filed a motion asking that he be
allowed to fully discharge the duties of Congressman, including attendance at legislative
sessions and committee meetings despite his having been convicted in the first instance of a
non-bailable offense.
Issue: Does re-election to a public office give priority to any other right or interest,
including the police power of the State.
Ruling: The privileges and rights arising from having been elected may be enlarged or
restricted by law. All top officials of the government – executive, legislative and judicial
are subject to the majesty of law. Privilege has to be granted by law, not inferred from the
duties of a position. Jalosjos cannot claim parliamentary immunity from arrest, for offenses
punishable by more than 6 years imprisonment have no immunity from arrest. The
confinement of a Congressman charged with a crime punishable by imprisonment of more
than 6 years is not merely authorized by law, it has constitutional foundations.

Antero Pobre v Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago
Facts: Petitioner Antero-Pobre made aware to the court the contents of Senator Miriam’s
speech delivered on the senate floor. To Pobre , the statements reflected a total disrespect of
the part of the speaker towards then Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and the other
members of the Court and constituted direct contempt of court, hence Pbre asked for a
disbarment proceedings or other disciplinary actions be taken against the lady senator.
Senator Santiago argued that the statements she made were covered by the constitutional
provision on parliamentary immunity being part of a speech she delivered in the discharge
of her duty as member of congress or its committee. Article VI Section 11.
Issue: WON Senator Santiago can be charged for her comments on the judiciary
Ruling: The Court ruled in favor of Defensor-Santigao. Indeed, her privilege speech is not
actionable criminally or in a disciplinary proceeding under the Rules of Court. Despite this,
the court feels that the senator has gone beyond the limits of decency and good conduct for
the statements made which were intemperate and highly improper in substance. The
petition is dismissed.
Bengzon v Drilon
Facts: Petitioners are retired justices of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals who are
currently receiving pensions under RA 190 as amended by RA 1797. President Marcos
issued a decree repealing Section 3-A of RA 1797 which authorized the adjustment of the
pension of retired justices and officers and enlistment members of the AFP. It turns out that
PD 644 which repealed RA 1797 never became a valid law absent its publication, thus there
was no law. The veto of HB 16297 did not also produce any effect.
Issue: WON the President may veto certain provisions of the General Appropriations Act?
Ruling: The Executive must veto a bill in its entirety or not at all. He or she is, therefore,
compelled to approve into law the entire bill, including its undesirable parts. It is for this
reason that the Constitution has wisely provided the “item veto power” to avoid inexpedient
riders from being attached to an indispensable appropriation or revenue measure. What was
done by the President was the vetoing of a provision and not an item.
Doctrine: Pocket Veto Power
The President does not have the so-called pocket-veto power. The failure of the President
to communicate his veto of any bill represented to him within 30 days after the receipt
thereof automatically causes the bill to become a law. Exception is provided in Article 6
Section 27, which grants the President power to veto any particular item or items in an
appropriation, revenue or tariff bill. The veto in such cases shall not affect the item or items
to which he does not object.
3 ways how a bill becomes a law:
1.) When the President signs it, 2.) When the President vetoes it but the veto is overridden
by 2/3 vote of all the members of each House and 3.) When the President does not act upon
the measure within 30 days after it shall have been presented to him.
Puyat v De Guzman
Facts: Puyat and his group were elected as directors of the International Pipe Industries.
The election was subsequently questioned by Acero. Estanislao Fernandez filed an urgent
motion for intervention in this said SEC case for him to be intervene not as a counsel but as
a legal owner of IPI shares and as a person who has a legal interest in the matter in
litigation.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
9
Issue: WON assemblyman Fernandez, a stockholder of IPI, may intervene in the SEC case
without violating Sec 11 Article VIII of the Constitution.
Ruling: No, assemblyman Fernandez, as a stockholder of IPI, may intervene in the SEC
case without violating Section 11 Article VIII of the Constitution. He bought the stocks
before the litigation took place which is clearly a work around and is clearly an act after the
fact.
Sen. Defensor-Santiago and Tatad v Sen. Guingona and Fernan
Facts: Sen. Fernan was declared the duly elected President of the Senate by a vote of 20 to
2, over Sen. Tatad. Tatad manifested that he was assuming the position of minority leader,
reasoning that those who voted for Fernan comprised the majority while only those who
had voted for him belonged to the minority. However, the minority had chosen Guingona to
be the minority leader. Senators Santiago and Tatad filed a petition for quo warranto in the
SC alleging that Guingona had been usurping, unlawfully holding and exercising the
position of senate minority leader, a position that, according to them rightfully belonged to
Tatad.
Issue: Was there an actual violation of the constitution?
Ruling: None. The term majority has been judicially defined a number of times. When
referring to a certain number out of a total or aggregate, it simply means the number greater
than half or more than half of any total. Verily, no law or regulation states that the defeated
candidate shall automatically become the minority leader.
Some legal terms defined:
Usurpation generally refers to unauthorized arbitrary assumption and exercise of power by
one without color of title or who is not entitled by law thereto.
Quo Warranto proceeding is the proper legal remedy to determine the right or title to the
contested public office and to oust the holder from its enjoyment.
Grave abuse of discretion is meant such capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment as
is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.
Serio Osmena, jr. v Pendatun
Facts: Congressman Osmena took the floor in the one-hour privilege to deliver a speech,
entitled “a Message to Garcia” wherein said speech contained serious imputations of
bribery against the President. Osmena was then found to be guilty of serious disorderly
behavior by the HOR.
Issue: Whether the daid disciplinary action by the HOR is in violation of Section 15, Article
VI of the Constitution
Ruling: No, the said disciplinary action is not in violation of the Constitution. Article Vi
Section 15 states that “for any speech or debate in Congress, the Senators or members of
HOR shall not be questioned in any other place. Petition was dismissed.

Paredes v Sandiganbayan
Facts: Teofilo Gelacio filed a case against Ceferino Paredes, Jr., Atty Sansaet, and
Mansueto Honrado a clerk of court. The three allegedly conspired to falsify a copy of a
Notice of Arraignment and of the Transcript of Stenographic Notes. Paredes claimed that
Sansaet only changed his side because of political realignment. Subsequently, the Office of
the Ombudsman recommended that Paredes et al be charged with Falsification of Public
Documents. Paredes appealed but was eventually denied by the Sandiganbayan.
Issue: WON Paredes, now a member of Congress, may be suspended by order of the
Sandiganbayan.
Ruing: Yes. The SC affirmed the order of suspension of Congressman Paredes by the
Sandiganbayan, despite his protestations on the encroachment by the court on the
prerogatives of Congress.
US v Pons
Facts: Juan Pons and Gabino Beliso were trading partners. The stremer Lopez y Lopez
arrived in Manila from Spin and it contained 25 barrels of wine. The said barrels of wine
were delivered to Beliso. The customs authorities noticed that the said 25 barrels listed as
wine on record were not delivered to any listed merchant. Customs officers conducted an
investigation thereby discovering that the 25 barrels of wine actually contained tins of
opium. Pons and Beliso were charged for illegally and fraudulently importing and
introducing such contraband material to the Philippines. Pons said that his witnesses claim
that the said law was passed/approved on March 1, 1914 while the special session of the
Commission was adjourned at 12 MN on Feb. 28, 1914. Since this is the case, Act 2381
should be null and void.
Issue: WON the SC must go beyond the recitals of the Journals to determine if Act 2381
was indeed made a law on Feb. 28, 1914.
Ruling: Journals are conclusive on the Court and to inquire into the veracity of the journals
of the Phiippine Legislature, when they are, as the SC have said, clear and explicit, would
be to violate both the letter and the spirit of the organic laws by which the Ph Govt. was
brought into existence, to invade a coordinated and independent department of the
Government, and to interfere with the legitimate powers and functions of the Legislature.
The Court did not err in declining to go beyond these journals. The SC passed upon
conclusiveness of the enrolled bill in this particular case.
Casco Phil. Chemical Co. v Gimenez
Facts: Casco was engaged in the production of synthetic resin glues used primarily in the
production of plywood. Pursuant to Central Bank circular, Casco paid the required margin
fee for its imported urea and formaldehyde. The Central Bank agreed and it issued vouchers
for refund. The said couchers were submitted to Pedro Gimenez, the then Auditor General,
who denied the tax refund. Gimenez maintains that urea and formaldehyde, as separate and
distinct components are not tax exempt.
Issue: WON the term urea formaldehyde should be construed as urea and formaldehyde
Ruling: No, urea formaldehyde is not a chemical solution. It is a synthetic resin formed as a
condensation product. Urea formaldehyde is clearly a finished product, which is patently
distinct and different from urea and formaldehyde as separate articles used in the
manufacture of the synthetic resin known as urea and formaldehyde.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
10
Arroyo v De Venecia
Facts: A petition was filed challenging the validity of RA 8240. Petitioner charged that
there is no violation of the rule of the House which petitioners claim are constitutionally
mandated so that their violation is tantamount to a violation of the Constitution.
Issue: WON RA 8240 is null and void because it was passed in violation of the rules of the
House.
Ruling: No, Rules of each House of Congress are hardly permanent in character. They are
subject to revocation, modification or waiver at the pleasure of the body adopting them as
they are primarily procedural. Consequently, mere failure to conform to them does not have
the effect of nullifying the act taken if the requisite number of members has agreed to a
particular person other than members of the legislative body, the question presented is
necessarily judicial in character. Even its validity is open to question in a case where
private rights are involved. In this case, no rights of private individuals are involved.
Lazatin v HRET
Facts: Lazatin filed the instant petition assailing the jurisdiction of the COMELEC to annul
his proclamation after he had taken his oath of office, assumed office and discharged the
duties of Congressman of the first district of Pampanga. Lazatin claims that the HRET and
not the COMELEC, is the sole judge of all election contests. He alleges that the instant
petition should be given due course because the proclamation was valid.
Issue: WON the issue should be placed under the HRET’s jurisdiction
Ruling: Yes, the SC resolved to give due course to the petition. The petition is impressed
with merit because petitioner has been proclaimed winner of the Congressional elections in
the first district of Pampanga, has taken his oath of office as such, and assumed his duties
as Congressman. The alleged invalidity of the proclamation despite alleged irregularities in
connection therewith, and despite the pendency of the protests of the rival candidates, is a
matter that is also addressed, considering the premises, to the sound judgment of the ET.
Bondoc v Pineda
Facts: Marciano Pineda of the LDP and Bondoc of the NP were candidates for the position
of Representative for the Fourth District of Pampanga, Pineda was proclaimed winner.
Bondoc filed a protest in the HRET, which is composed of 9 members, 3 of whom are
Justices of the SC and the remaining 6 are members of the HOR. Thereafter, a decision had
been reached in which Bondoc won over Pineda. Congressman Camasura of the LDP voted
with the SC justices and Congressman Cerilles of the NP to proclaim Bondoc the winner of
the contest. On the day of the promulgation of the decision, the Chairman of HRET
received a letter informing the tribunal that on the basis of the letter from the LDP, the
HOR decided to withdraw the nomination and rescind the election of Congressman
Camasura to the HRET.
Issue: WON the HOR at the request of the dominant political party therein, may charge that
party’s representation in the HRET to thwart the promulgation of a decision freely reached
by the tribunal in an election contest pending therein.
Ruling: No, the purpose of the constitutional convention creating the Electoral Commission
was to provide an independent and impartial tribunal for the determination of contests to
legislative office. Members must be non-partisan. They must discharge their funtions with
complete detachment, impartiality and independence. HOR committed grave abuse of
discretion an injustice and a violation of the Constitution.

Chavez v COMELEC
Facts: Petitioner filed an urgent motion to disseminate through the fastest available means
and order said election officials to delete the name Melchor Chavez as printed in the
certified list of candidates tally sheets, election returns and count all votes in favor of
Franisco Chaves. But, petitioner assailed that COMELEC failed to perform its mandatory
function thus the name of Melchor Chavez remained undeleted.
Issue: WON SC has jurisdiction to entertain the instant petition.
Ruling: No, it is quite obvious that petitioner’s prayer does not call for the correction of
manifest errors in the certificated of canvass or election returns before the COMELEC but
for the ballots contained therein. Petitioners proper recourse is to file a regular election
protest which, under the constitution and the Omnibus Election Code, exclusively pertains
to the Senate Electoral Tribunal, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the instant
petition.
Pimentel v HRET
Facts: Proclaimed winners were 15 party-list representatives from 13 organizations
including petitioner from party-list groups. In practice, the procedure involves the
nomination by the political parties of House member who are to occupy the seats in the
HRET and CA. However, it does not appear that after the elections the party-list groups in
the House nominated any of their representatives to the HRET or the CA. Petitioners filed
with this Court their Petitions for Prohibition, Mandamus and Preliminary injunction
against the HRET. Petitioner charge that respondents committed grave abuse of discretion
in refusing to act positively on the letter of Senator Pimentel.
Issue: WON the present composition of the HRET violates the constitutional requirement
of proportional representation because there is no party-list representative in HRET
Ruling: No, under Section 17, Article VI, each chamber of Congress exercises the power to
choose, within constitutionally defined limits, who among their members would occupy the
allotted 6 seats of each chambers respective electrical tribunal. Assuming that the party-list
representatives comprise a sufficient number and have agreed to designate common
nominees to the HRET and the CA, their primary recourse clearly rests with the HOR not
with this court. Only if the House fails to comply with the directive of the Constitution on
proportional representation can the party-list seek recourse to this court.
Palparan v HRET
Facts: Petitioner Abayon is the first nominee of the Aangat tayo party-list organization that
won a seat in the HOR. Respondents filed a petition for quo warranto against Abayon. They
claimed that Aangat Tayo was not eligible for a party-list seat in the HOR, since it did not
represent the marginalized and underrepresented sectors since she did not belong to the
marginalized sectors, she being the wife of an incumbent congressional district
representative. Petitioner Palparan, Jr., is the first nominee of the Bantay party-list group,
Leseca and the others alleged that Palparan was ineligible to sit in the HOR as party-list
nominee because he did not belong to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors that
Bantay represented. Petitioner Palparan, countered that the HRET had no jurisdiction over
his person since it was actually the party-list Bantay that was elected to and assumed
membership in the HOR. Such question must be brought before the party-list group not
before the HRET.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
11
Issue: WON respondent HRET has jurisdiction over the question of qualifications of
Petitioners Abayon and Palparan as nominees of Aangat Tayo and Bantay party-list
organizations.
Ruling: Yes. Section 17, Article VI provides that the HRET shall be the sole judge of all
contests relating to the qualifications of the members of the HOR. Party-list nominees are
elected members of the HOR no less than the district representatives are, the HRET has
jurisdiction to hear and pass upon their qualifications. Once the party or organization of the
party-list nominee has been proclaimed and the nominee has taken his oath and assumed
office as member of the HOR, the COMELEC’s jurisdiction over election contests relating
to his qualifications ends and the HRET’s jurisdiction starts.
Bello v COMELEC
Facts: Petitioners Maza, Ocampo and Bayan Muna, represented by Casino filed with the
COMELEC a petition for disqualification against Arroyo. The certiorari petitioners argued
tht not only must the party-list organization factually and truly represent the marginalized
and the underrepresented, the nominee must as well be a Filipino citizen belonging to the
marginalized and underrepresented sector, organizations and parties, citing in this regard
the case of Ang Bagong Bayan-OFW v COMELEC. Petitioners concluded that Arroyo
cannot be considered a member of the marginalized and underrepresented sector.
Issues: Whether the HRET has jurisdiction over the question of Arroyo’s qualifications as
AGPP’s nominee after his proclamation and assumption to office as a member of the HOR
Ruling: Yes. HRET shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to, among others, the
qualifications of the members of the HOR.
Daza v Singson
Facts: Petitioner Daza was among those chosen and was listed as a representative of the
Liberal Party. The Laban Demokratikong Pilipino was reorganized, resulting in a political
realignment in the HOR. The HOR revised its representation in the Commission on
Appointments by withdrawing the seat occupied by the petitioner and giving this to the
newly-formed LDP. The chamber elected a new set of Representatives consisting of the
original members except the petitioner and including therein respondent Singson as the
additional member from the LDP. The petitioner challenges his removal from the
Commission on Appointments and the assumption of his seat by the respondent.
Issue: WON the realignment will validly change the composition of the Commission on
Appointments.
Ruling: No. The authority of the HOR to change its representation in the Commission on
Appointments to reflect at any time the changes that may transpire in the political
alignments if its membership. It is understood that such changes must be permanent and do
not include the temporary alliances or factional divisions not involving severance of
political loyalties or formal disaffiliation and permanent shifts of allegiance from one
political party or another. The court holds that the respondent has been validly elected as a
member of the Commission on Appointments and is entitled to assume his seat in that body
pursuant to Article Vi Section 18 of the Constitution.
 12

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 13

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT 4. At least 40 years of age on the day of the election

5. Resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years:
Section 1  intention to adandon old domicile
 animus manendi intention to remain there
I. Executive power is vested in the President  animus non revertendi
 Specific powers given to the President:
1. To appoint *bodily presence in locality is required (anywhere in the Philippines)
2. To ensure that the laws are faithfully executed
3. To be the commander-in-chief Section 3
4. To grant clemency
5. To contract foreign laws I. Vice President
 however, the above enumeration of presidential powers is not  President in reserve
only limited to such  same qualification as the President
 powers inherent that are not legislative and judiciary shall be
executive power Section 4
 has additional residual powers
II. Ceremonial functions I. Terms of the President and Vice-President
III. Immunity from Suit  6 year term
 no re-election for President
 performance of his official duties (immunity)
 Vice-president may not serve more than two successive terms
 outside of his power on authority (immunity)
 it serves less than 4 years he may run for President
 within and outside authority cannot be held personally liable for II. Congress as national board of canvassers
damages provided he used discretion and judgment  Congress has authority to make a “determination of the authenticity and
 It is the judiciary that shall determine whether it has the authority to act due exclusion”
or not  Such power is given by the Constitution to both houses in a joint session
 immunity can only be invoked by the person holding the not the COMELEC
office not anyone on behalf of President  Final termination terminates law making functions not non-law-making
 to exercise or waive such privilege is the President’s functions such as canvassing
prerogative (solely) III. Breaking-tie
 President is immune from suit for non-official acts or from  vote of a majority of all he members of both houses, voting separately
wrong-doing, after tenure even though term has not yet ended IV. Presidential and Vice-Presidential election controversies
IV. Executive Privilege  Supreme Court serves as the electoral tribunal for Presidential and Vice-
 Type of incorporation: presidential contests
1. Conversations and correspondence between the President and the public  On Presidential contest only 2 persons, 2nd and 3rd placers may contest
official covered by this executive order. the election.
2. Military, diplomatic and other national security matters which in the
interest of national security should not be divulged. Section 5-8
3. Information between inter-government agencies prior to the conclusion
of treaties and executive agreements. I. Filling a vacancy in the Presidency
4. Discussion in close-door cabinet meetings  When vacancy occurs at the start of the term (Section 7)
5. Matters affecting national security and public order  Vacancy occurs in midterm (Section 8)
V. The Cabinet  The Section 8 “death, permanent disability, removal from office or resignation.
1. an institution extra-constitutional created
2. consists of heads of departments Section 9
3. possesses the authority over the President
I. Vacancy in the Vice-Presidency
Section 2  President is authorized to nominate between the Senate President or
Speaker of the House to fill the vacancy
I. Qualifications of the President  Nomination must be confirmed by majority of all the members of both
1. National-born citizen of the Philippines houses, voting separately, to be valid
2. Registered voter
3. Able to read and write

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 14

Section 11

I. Incapacity of the President Security of tenure – ground and penalty must be provided by law and is not always outright
 if the President is able to make the decision and is willing to declare dismissal.
himself disabled, he has the power to declare so
1. valid cause of ground – provided by law
Section 12 2. due process

I. Serious illness of the President Presidential Appointees:

Section 13 Prosecutor I & Regional Director enjoys security of tenure.

I. Prohibition against holding another office or employment DURING THEIR  Secretary of Justice can be removed any time by loss of trust and confidence.
TENURE  Memorandum circular of Duterte, cannot force to remove career officials
1. President  The power to appoint carries with it the power to remove, but not absolute.
2. Vice President
3. Cabinet Chairman of the NLRC was found guilty of sexual harassment by the office of the
4. Deputies or Assistants President after an investigation that complied with the requirements of due process. He was
5. Spouse dismissed from the service. Is the dismissal valid?
6. Relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the 4th civil degree Answer: No, should be suspension. Determine the acts made and has to be assessed.
 Strictly imposed on the President and his official family
o refers to office of the government, government owned or controlled
corporations “unless otherwise provided” PB
o For President and official family prohibition is absolute government or Answer: Power of Control – executive department (substitution)
private Power of Supervision – local government (pointing out the mistake)
II. Other prohibitions Supervision – the President cannot dictate the local government but can point out violations
1. To avoid conflict of interest Control can dictate the members of the executive department
2. To force the officials to devote full time to their official duties There is power of control
Answer: No, because he’s a career official and there is no valid cause and dismissing the
Section 14 & 15 case is not a ground for dismissal from service because it’s his job as a prosecutor.
Answer: Yes, Secretary of DOJ is a non-career official.
I. Midnight appointments
 2 months before election no appointments include judiciary
 limitation to the powers of the executive
Career Service Executive Officer
 The Acting President can make appointments
Permanent Temporary
 2 months before the next Presidential election, no appointment until the end of his
If you meet all qualification provided by the If lacks qualification; does not enjoy
term
provision security of tenure
 Can revoke within 90 days from his assumption or re-assumption
 President can always revoke the appointment
 Any officer lower in ranks not mentioned to be appointed by the President does not
need confirmation. Can President re-organize offices under the executive department?
 Power to appoint, the power to remove Answer: Bad faith is established when the reorganization is for the purpose of removing
 Exceptions to the coverage: Career official as defined by the CSC laws and rules that certain or particular officer.
and regulation
 Career entered through merit or fitness
 Non-career not through merit or fitness e.g. Politicians, contractuals, or those who Doctrine of Qualified political agency
have highly specialized skills.
 the President as head of the cabinet, all cabinet members are alter-ego of the
Career Official Non-career official President
Entered through merit and fitness; cannot Politicians, co-terminous w/ the President,  cannot invoke immunity from suit just for the President
be removed from office without valid cause can be removed due to loss of trust and cnf.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018


Power of General Supervision (Ganzon v Santos) the President has power to suspend
even just supervision.
Section 16
LIST IS EXCLUSIVE
 President shall nominate and with the consent of the COA, appoint the:
1. Heads of the executive department
2. Ambassadors
3. Other public ministers and consuls
4. Officers of the armed forces from colonel to naval captain (naval
admiral)
5. Other officers’ appointments are rested in him in this Constitution
 during recess of the Congress
 Shall be effective only until disapproval by the COA or until next adjournment of
the Congress
I. Nature of appointing power
 power to appoint is neither legislative nor judicial, it must be exclusive
 appointing power is the exclusive prerogative of the President
II. Kinds of Presidential appointments:
1. Validity – qualified or has violated a law
2. Assumption – questions whether they can resume or not
a) appointments made by an Acting President (elected President
assumes or reassures office he is given 90 days within which to
revoke appointments made by Acting President)
b) Appointments made by a President (within 2 months before the
next Presidential elections and up to the end of his term)
c) Regular Presidential appointments (with or without confirmation
by the Commission on Appointments and with “recess” or “ad
interim” appointments.
III. Scope of the power of the Commission on Appointments
 To check the Presidents appointing authority
 First Sentence. Three step process: 1.) nomination, 2.) consent and 3.)
appointment
 Second Sentence. speaks only of appointment
 Not all Cabinet come under 3-step appointment rule only heads of the
executive department
 “Other appointments vested in him” refers to those specifically
mentioned in the Constitution. (needs confirmation)
1. Chairmen & Commissioners of CSC
2. COMELEC
3. COA (audit)
4. Regular members of the Judicial and Bar Council
 Justices, judges, ombudsman and his deputies’ appointments vested in
the President but does not require confirmation from the Commission on
Appointments also the Chairman and members of the CHR, Bureau of
Customs, Commissioner of the NLRC
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
15
IV. Appointments of officers “lower in rank”
 emphasizes the authority of Congress to decide whether the appointment
of “officers lower in rank” should be preserved to the “President alone”
or may be served with courts, heads of departments, agencies
commissions or boards
May Congress require other appointments to be confirmed by the Commission of
Appointments?
Answer: The appointing power is the exclusive prerogative of the President, upon which no
limitations may be improved by Congress, except those resulting from the need of the
securing concurrence of the Commission Appointments and from the exercise of the limited
power to prescribe the qualification to a given appointive office.
Section 18
Calling out powers: David v Arroyo
The President cannot promulgate laws that are meant for the Congress
 Power to declare State of emergency is different from the exercise of emergency
powers.
 Declaration of ML and suspension of the privilege of writ of habeas corpus is also
different from the two.
 State of National Emergency – the President has the power to declare ML and
suspend the privilege of writ of habeas corpus through faithful execution, limited
period of time because there is no such thing as endless emergency. The effect is
highest alert.
 Martial law when declared, the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus is NOT
automatic.
 Writ of habeas corpus is a privilege; to aske the court to order those who are
detaining another to produce the body or to justify why they are detaining him
When can an arrest be valid when there is no warrant of arrest?
1.) in case of hot pursuit (immediately after)
2.) flagrante delecto
3.) once he escaped confinement or detention warrant is not needed.
If there is a valid warrantless arrest they are required to file a case in court, what will
happen if they won’t?
Answer: For grave offense they can detain the person for 36 hours, if less grave 18 hours
and for light offense 12 hours, otherwise, the person walks. (Article 125 of the RPC applies
only to VALID warrantless arrest.
 Olaguer Doctrine – even under martial law civilians cannot be tried in military
tribunal when the civilian courts are still functional
 Operative Fact Doctrine – can apply if you are acquitted by the military tribunal and
you are a civilian.
 16

Right to bail 3. Suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus

Within 17 hours, one cannot do anything. Within 72 hours one can file a bail
(Suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not affect right to bail) *2 and 3 does not require confirmation by Congress, they can only be revoked or extended

 President can declare martial law for as long as 60 days and can be extended by
Emergency Powers Congress and may be longer than the original 60 days. Grounds for extension are
1.) Article VI Section 23 the same as the ground for the declaration and suspension.
2.) Scope of Emergency powers will be determined by the Congress  There is no need to hold session if the purpose to to confirm
3.) limited period of time; granted by law/Congress; pursuant to the declared national  SC reviews the sufficiency of factual basis at the time of the proclamation; if there’s
policy (Article 6 section 23) rebellion or invasion
4.) No, not at present.  It is valid if Congress does not want to hold session in order to review the
declaration
 Review of SC and Congress is independent from one another
Commander-in-Chiefship  If SC declared that there is no factual basis the Congress cannot argue because they
don’t have such power
 President is not a member of the armed forces  If SC declares that there is factual basis the Congress cannot argue because they do
 his functions are civil in nature not have such power
 he is not subject to court martial or other military discipline  Congress can only revoke and extend when already declared.
 does not require President to posses military training and talents
 he has power to direct military operations and to determine military strategy What are the safeguards in the Constitution to make sure that the President will not abuse
 has control and direction of the conduct of war his power?
 when he calls out the AFP for purposes of preventing or suppressing lawless 1. review of congress
violence invasion or rebellion it is subject to judicial review 2. review of the SC
 suspension of writ of habeas corpus 3. limited period of 60 days
4. make a report to Congress (personally or in writing)
 power to impose martial law
2 grounds: Invasion or rebellion
Martial law in the Constitution
Ways martial law can be terminated:
 can be operative only in case of invasion or rebellion, when public safety requires it
1. Congress revokes
 military government over domestic territory
2. SC declares there is no valid ground/sufficient factual basis
o can only come about when an insurrection has assumed the status of a
3. Lapse of 60 days
public war and a territorial war; can be imposed only on the belligerent
4. Termination of President before 60 days
territory
*calling-out power of the President cannot be review by the SC
Yes, martial law in the Philippines’ jurisdiction is imposed not by or through an
authorization from Congress but by the Executive as specifically authorized and within the
limits set by the Constitution.
To be exercised in time of invasion, insurrection within the limits of the (United States), or Section 19
during rebellion within the limits of the states, maintaining adhesion to the National
Government, when the public danger requires its exercise. I. Purpose of executive Clemency
 This section gives the President the power of executive clemency
 Executive clemency is a tacit admission that human institutions are
 When there is rebellion the Presidents may still not declare martial law it is not imperfect and that there are infirmities in the administration of justice.
automatic, in the case of PNOY he did not declare martial law but exercised calling  Clemency in not a function of the Judiciary it is an executive function
out powers.  The judge can recommend to the President the exercise of executive
clemency
Powers of the President under Section 18  The power of executive clemency is a non-delegable power and must be
exercised by the President personally
1. Calling out powers – cannot be revoked or extended to suppress lawless violence II. Constitutional limits on Executive Clemency
2. Martial Law 1. it cannot be exercised over cases of impeachment

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 17

2. reprieves, commutations and pardons, and remission of fines and forgiveness or waiver by the government of its right or collect what otherwise
forfeitures can be given ONLY AFTER CONVICTION by FINAL would be due to it.
JUDGMENT V. Other forms of executive clemency
3. A grant amnesty must be with the concurrence of a majority of all the  President may also grant reprieves, commutations and revision of fines
members of Congress and forfeitures
4. No pardon, amnesty, parole or suspension of sentence for violation of  Reprieve – postpones the execution of an offense to a certain day
election laws, rules and regulations shall be granted by the President  Commutation – remission of a part of the punishment; a substitution of a
without the favorable recommendation of the COMELEC less penalty from the one originally imposed; does not have any specific
form
*clemency for administrative penalties is considered.  Remission of fines and forfeitures – merely prevents the collection of
fines or the confiscation of forfeited property; cannot have the effect of
III. Pardon: Nature and Legal Effects returning property which has been vested in 3rd parties or money already
 Pardon exempts the individual from the punishment the law inflicts for a in the public treasury
crime he has committed
 Unlike amnesty or clemency, a legal power can compel the executive to Pardoning Power
give pardon 1.) Parole may be granted when or are able to serve the minimum penalty; commutation
 pardon is complete when there is acceptance reduced penalty; reprieve delay execution.
 Types of pardon: 3.) Mere commission of the crime is enough to revoke the pardon.
1. Absolute
2.
3. Conditional – has no force until accepted by the condemned, Mosanto v Factoran
the President will determine whether the condition has been 1.) No reinstatement despite the fact that is absolute pardon
violated 2.) There is conviction in the criminal case
IV. Amnesty
 amnesty may be given only with the concurrence of a majority of all the
members of the Congress  Administrative cases pardon can only be granted to in admin cases within executive
department.
Pardon Amnesty
 There must be conviction before pardon is granted
Granted by Chief Executive Proclaimed by the Chief Executive with the
concurrence of Congress Residual Powers
Private act which must be pleaded and Is a public act which the courts should take
proved by the person pardoned judicial notice -are implied powers and those necessary for the President to comply his/her duties
Granted after conviction Granted to classes of person or and it cannot be contrary to law or the Constitution. Not all powers of the President are not
communities who may be guilty of political listed.
offenses
Relieves the offender from the May be granted before or after the -the President can create a Philippine Truth Commission but the PTC is
consequences of an offense of which he has institution of the criminal prosecution and unconstitutional.
been convicted sometimes after conviction
Abolishes and forgives the punishment Abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense  to amend the Constitution is not the residual power of the President
itself. It overlooks and obliterates the  there can be no residual power if it violates the separation of powers or the law
offense with which he is charged that the
person released by amnesty stands before Immunity from suit
the law precisely as though he had
committed no offense 1. Official acts of the President while in office? There is immunity from suit.
2. While no longer sitting as President if acts are official and nothing is illegal, still
immune from suit.
 Tax amnesty – not an act of executive clemency but a legislative act; general 3. Unlawful acts of the President while sitting as President? Immune but can be
pardon or intentional overlooking of its authority to impose penalties on persons investigated. (If there is a probable cause, case will be forwarded to Congress as
otherwise guilty evasion or violation of revenue or tax law, partakes absolute ground for impeachment.)

Succession

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 18

 Congress will pass a law providing for the manner of selecting the acting President  an international instrument concluded between states in
(beginning of the term) [acting not permanent] written form and government instrument or in two or more
 Congress will pass a law selecting who will act as President (middle of the term) related instruments and whatever its particular designation.
[acting not permanent]  other terms used for a treaty or international agreement: act,
protocol, agreement, comprommis d’ arbitrage, charter and
Section 20 modus vivendi
III. Termination of treaty
I. Power to contract or guarantee foreign laws  International law recognizes the right if one party to terminate a treaty
 Foreign loans may only be incurred in accordance with law and the for breach by the other party or when the fundamental circumstances for
regulation of the monetary authority. which the treaty was enacted into have changed (principle of rebus sie
 Information on foreign loads obtained and guaranteed by the stantibus)
government shall be made available to the public IV. Other foreign affairs powers
 power to depart aliens is lodged in the President of the Republic of the
Section 21 Philippines
 Legislative may also limit the substantive grounds for deportation to
I. Senate concurrence in international agreements causes enumerated by law “as it would be undemocratic to hold that an
 Requires Senate concurrence in treaties and international agreements alien may be deported upon an unstated of undefined ground depending
 refer to treaties of any kinds merely in the unlimited distinction of the Chief Executive.
 Executive agreements may be validly outlawed into by the Chief  Congress may delegate to him the power to make rules and regulations
Executive without the concurrence of the Senate in matters touching foreign relations and even to legislative in matters
 Treaties embodies international agreement, involving political issues or touching trade relations with other countries.
changes of national policy and those involving international
arrangements of a permanent character JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
 Executive Agreements embody adjustments of detail carrying out well-
established national policies and traditions and those including Section 1
arrangements of a more or less temporary nature.
I. Judicial power
Needs no concurrence Needs concurrence  judicial power is defined as “the right to determine actual controversies
Executive agreements covering trademarks, Executive agreements and other arising between adverse litigants, duly instituted in courts of proper
postal regulations, tariffs and most favored international agreements which are in the jurisdiction”
treatment in customs. nature or original agreements of a  the authority to settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving
permanent nature or which establish rights that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice or
national policy (treaties). the redress of wrongs for violation of such rights
Executive agreements which are merely Less formal types of international  no exercise of judicial power unless real parties come to court
implantation of treaties or of statues or of agreements may be entered into by the  the power to control the execution of its decision is an essential aspect of
well established policy or are of a transitory Chief Executive (and become binding) jurisdiction
effectivity.  jurisdiction is the authority to act and exercise judicial power
Host Agreement  Jurisdiction is determined by law, it is the Congress that defines which
court has jurisdiction over which
II. Intrinsic limit on judicial power
Two phases of Treaty making:  cannot assume nor be compelled to perform non-judicial functions
III. Grave abuse of discretion
1. Negotiation – the power of the President excludes the legislative  duty is to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
2. Actual Making of the treaty – cannot be binding without the concurrence of the demandable and enforceable
Senate  another duty is to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse
 To enter or not to enter into a treaty is a prerogative solely of the President. Thus, of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of
unless the President submits a treaty to the Senate there is nothing for the Senate to any branch or instrumentality of the government
concur in.  Deliberative Process Privilege – documents cannot be disclosed to the public
II. Visiting Forces Agreement without the consent of the court. Before finality of judgment it is impossible for
 Treaty as defined by the Venna Convention them to disclose.
 There is abuse of discretion when:

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018


1. when an act is done contrary to the Constitution, the law or
jurisprudence
2. When tit is executed whimsically, capriciously or arbitrarily out of
malice, ill will or personal bias.
3. also, reckless disregard of its own bidding rules and procedures (Info
tech v COMELEC)
IV. Declaratory Relief
 declaratory relief is what is known as a advisory opinion
 it is an action by any person interested under a deed, will, contract or
other written instrument, or whose rights are affected by a statute,
ordinance executive order etc.
 A petition for declaratory relief must be predicated on the following requisites:
1. There must be justiciable controversy
2. The controversy must be between persons whose interests are adverse
3. The party seeking declaratory relief must have a legal interest in the
controversy
4. The issue involved must be ripe for judicial determination
Declaratory Relief Advisory Opinion
Involves real parties with real conflicting Response to a legal issue _____ in the
legal interests abstract in advance of any natural case in
There is an actual controversy however which it may be presented.
there is a vagueness in the case and they can Court cannot act upon it because there is an
file for a petition for declaratory relief absence of actual controversy
Section 2
I. Role of the Legislature
 proper exercise of judicial power requires prior legislative action
1. defining such enforceable and demandable rights and
prescribing remedies for violations of such rights
2. determining the court with jurisdiction to hear and decide
controversies or disputes arising from legal rights.
 its exercise presupposes the existence of an applicable law
 Congress creates courts and determines which court or courts shall have
jurisdiction over various types of controversies
 Powers of Congress:
1. Define the jurisdiction of various courts
2. Prescribe the jurisdiction of various courts
3. Apportion the jurisdiction of various courts
 Jurisdiction is the authority of a court to exercise judicial power in a
specific case and is a prerequisite of judicial power, which is the totality
of powers a court exercises when it assumes jurisdiction and hears and
decides a case
 Limitations of Congress:
1. May not reduce the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
2. May not create a court equal in authority or superior to the Supreme
Court
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
19
 the authority to create courts also includes the authority to abolish courts
 the power to abolish may not be exercised as a subterfuge for removing
unwanted judges
Section 3
I. Fiscal Autonomy
 fiscal autonomy is granted to assure its independence
Section 4
I. Composition and Sessions
 SC shall be composed of a Chief Justice and 14 Associate Justices
 The composition of SC may not be changed by ordinary legislation
 SC may sit en banc or (in its discretion) in divisions of three (3), five (5)
and seven (7).
 Cases that must be heard en banc:
1. All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or
executive agreement or law
2. Cases involving the constitutionality, application or operation of
Presidential decrees, proclamation order, instruction, ordinances and
other regulations
3. Cases hear by a division when the required majority in the division is not
obtained
4. Cases where the Supreme Court modifies or reverses a doctrine or
principle of law previously laid down either en banc or in division
5. Administrative cases where the vote is for the dismissal of a judge of a
lower court or otherwise to discipline such one and
6. election contests for President or Vice-President
 When SC sits en banc cases are decided by the concurrence of a
MAJORITY VOTE OF THE MEMBERS WHO ACTUALLY TOOK
PART ON THE DELIBERATIONS
 a law of PD can be declared unconstitutional by as few as 5 VOTES ,
because a quorum of the Court en banc is 8, a majority of which is only
5
 When sitting in division, cases can be decided by a minimum of 3 votes
when the required number is obtained the case shall be decided en banc
 When there is a tie there is no decision, resolved in the court en banc
 In a motion or reconsideration when there is a tie the motion is lost.
Section 5
I. Powers of the Supreme Court
 Powers may be classified into
1. irreducible jurisdiction of the SC and
2. the auxiliary administrative powers
 Paragraphs 1 and 2 represents the irreducible jurisdiction of the SC
 Paragraph 3 to 6 and Section provide for the auxiliary administrative power
o power to issue temporary assignments of judges

o to order change of venue
o to promulgate rules of procedure and enforcement of constitutional
rights
o integration of the bar, legal assistance and admission to the practice of
law
o to appoint its employees
o to have administrative supervision over all courts
II. Judicial review
 power to declare unconstitutionality
 power of the court to settle actual controversies between real and
conflicting parties through the application of a law
 if there is conflict between the constitution and the law, the court decides
if both are applicable which must be applied in the case
III. Requisites for the exercise of judicial review
1. actual case
 there must be an actual case for the exercise of judicial power
 no authority to _____ on advisory opinion
 no authority to resolve hypothetical or feigned constitutional
problems
 there has to be real adverse interests
2. Ripe for adjudication
 considered ripe when the governmental act being challenged
has had a direct adverse effect of the individual challenging it
IV. Standing
 Locus Standi – a person has standing to challenge the governmental act only if
he has a:
1. personal and substantive interest in the case such that he has sustained,
or will sustain, direct injury as a result of its enforcement
 Elements of Standing:
1. The petitioner must have suffered injury in fact which can be legal,
economic or environmental
2. The injury must be traceable to the governmental act challenged
3. The injury must be redressable by the remedy being sought for by
petitioner
V. Standing of legislators, taxpayers and citizens
 Congress has standing as an institution
 Court recognizes their standing to challenge a presidential veto or other acts of
the Executive which injures them in their person or the institution of Congress
to which they belong
 Taxpayer has standing to sue if it can be shown that:
1. that he has a sufficient interest or preventing the illegal expenditure
of money raised by taxation
2. that he will sustain a direct injury as a result of the enforcement of
the questioned state act
 Both aforementioned requisites come under locus standi
 In taxpayer’s suit the court has open discretion to take the case or not
 the action being challenged must be the exercise of the spending of taxing
power of Congress
VI.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018
20
 The question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity, so
that if not raised by pleadings, ordinarily it may not be raised at the trial and if
not raised in the trial court, it will not be considered on appeal
 The courts may determine the time when a question affecting constitutionality
of a state should be presented
 The court will not touch the issue of constitutionality unless it is really
unavoidable or is the very lis mota
VII. Political Questions
 Court generally refuses to touch cases that are political questions
 Political questions doctrine continues another limitation on the power of
judicial review
 Political questions are those which are to be decided by the people in their
sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been
delegated to the legislative or executive branch of the government
Kinds of Political questions
1. textual kind
 is found a textually demonstrative commitment of the issue to a political
department
 disciplinary power of the legislative owner its members
2. functional type
 a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving
it or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination
of a kind clearly for non-judicial discretion
3. prudential type
 the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without
expressing lack of respect due coordinate branches of government or an
unusual need for questioning adherence to political decisions already
made
VIII. Effect of declaration of unconstitutionality
 When the Court declares a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution,
to the former shall be void and the latter shall govern
 unconstitutional statute as an operative fact before it is declared
unconstitutional it was applied where the period before a moratorium
law was declared unconstitutional was not allowed to toll the
prescriptive period of the right to foreclose a mortgage
IX. Judicial Review by superior courts
 Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over judgments decrees of
lower courts in all cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any
treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree,
proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance or regulation is in question.
X. Modalities of constitutional interpretation
1) Historical
2) Textural
3) Structural
4) Doctrinal
5) Ethical
6) Prudential
XI. In case of death sentence review or appeal is automatic and mandatory
 21

 In reclusion perpetua review is not mandatory  Power of administrative supervision of the SC includes the power to
XII. Temporary assignment of judges discipline judges of lower court or order their dismissal by a vote of a
 temporary transfers could last no longer than 6 months without the majority of the members who actually took part in the deliberation on
consent of the judge concerned the issue in the case and voted thereon
 temporary transfer is to a branch within the same region  Authority from Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals down to the
 such transfer must be in the concurrence of the consent of the judge lowest municipal trial clerk
concerned
XIII. Change of venue Section 7
 individual and inherent power of counts is the transferring of trial cases
I. Qualification of Members of the Judiciary
from one court to another of equal rank in a neighboring site,
WHENEVER the imperative of securing a fair and impartial trial, or of
1. Natural-born citizens of the Philippines
preventing a miscarriage of justice, so DEMANDS
2. 40 years of age
 such power to transfer is exercised through writs of certiorari
3. Must have been fir 15 years or more a judge of a lower court or engaged
XIV. Rules concerning admission to the BAR
in the practice of law in the Philippines
 Supreme Court has the authority to promulgate rules concerning the 4. Competence
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights  may not be altered by Congress
 such power includes an inherent power to suspend its own rules in  qualifications of judges of single-member courts can either
particular cases in order to do justice be natural born or naturalized citizens
 a quo warranto proceeding may be concurred only by the
Traditional power of SC
Solicitor General or a public prosecutor or by any person
1. Promulgate rules concerning pleading claiming to be entitled to the public office a position usurped
2. Practice and Procedure or unlawfully held or exercised by another
3. Admission to the practice of law
Section 8
SC has the authority to :
1. Regular members of the council shall be appointed by the President for a term of 4
1. Integrate the Bar years with consent of the Commission of Appointments
2. To have administrative supervision over all courts 2. Representative of IBP – 4 years
3. TO discipline judges of lower courts 3. Professor of law – 3 years
4. Retired justice – 2 years
Limitations 5. Representative of Private sec – 1 year
I. Judicial and Bar Council
1. Shall provide a simplified and inexpressive procedure for the speedy disposition of  Function is to recommend to President judges to appoint without need
cases for confirmation by the Commission on Appointments
2. Shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade  Composition of the Council
3. Shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights 1. 3 ex-officio members (Chief Justice, Sec. of Justice, representative of
Congress)
XV. Congress and rules of court 2. 4 regular members (representative of the IBP, a professor of law, a
 Echegaray v the Secretary of Justice Congress no longer has the power retired member of the SC and a representative of the private sector)
to amend rules of court  regular members are appointed for 4 years with the consent of the Commission of
XVI. Integration of the Bar Appointments- allows political check on the President’s appointing authority
 IBP means the official unification of the entire lawyer population of the
Philippines Section 9
 Bar refers to the collectivity of all persons when names appear in the
Roll of Attorneys I. Appointment of Justice and Judges
 For every vacancy the judicial and bar council submits to the President a
Section 6 list of at least 3 names
 President may not appoint anybody who is not in the list, MUST BE
I. Administrative supervision of inferior courts NOMINATED BY JBC

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 22

Section 10  cases and matters filed must be resolved:

24 months -SC
I. Diminution of Salary 12 months -lower collegiate courts
 a tax on the salary was a prohibited diminution 3 months – other lower courts
 the true intent of the framers of the 1987 Constitution was to make the I. Period of making decisions
salaries of the members of the judiciary taxable  period begins from date of submission
 Sandiganbayan, being a trial court, has the same period for making decisions of 12
Section 11 months
 periods are mandatory, failure to comply will subject the SC justice to impeachment
I. Security of tenure in the judiciary and lower court judge to disciplinary action
 members of SC and judges of lower courts shall hold office until theu  3rd paragraph requires certification to determine whether the prescribed period has
reach the age of 70 years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties been complied with
of their office  paragraph 3 and 4 applies to cases filed before 1987
 can be removed only by impeachment (Sereno who?)
 SC needs to sit en banc only when penalty is dismissed, disbarment of a Section 16
lawyer, suspension of either for more than 1 year or a fine not exceeding
10k Report to the President and the Congress
 Power to determine the capacity of the SC over its members and over all
members of the judiciary; such power is exclusive  to inform government what it needs

Section 13 CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS

I. Process of decision making Common Provisions

 lack of certification will not invalidate the decision
 lack of certification would only serve an evidence of failure to observe Section 1
certification requirement and may be the basis for holding the official
responsible for the omission to account thereof 1. Civil Service Commission – personnel office of the government
 applied to intermediate appellate courts 2. Commission on Audit – auditing office
 requirement that each dissenting Justice must state the reason for his 3. Commission of Elections – administration of all important electoral process
dissent
 Constitution also requires justices who took no part or abstained from a Sections 2, 3 & 4
decision, to give an explanation for their inaction
I. Appointing Power
 These requirements are mandatory and applied to justices of the IAC
 Constitutional commissions shall appoint their officials and employees in
Section 14 accordance with law
 there are offices authorized by the Constitution to appoint their officials
I. Contents of decisions of courts
 First paragraph refers to decision, does not apply to resolution Section 5
 rule on contents is applicable to all courts
 Automatic release – DBM may not retain a portion of the amount nor may it
 failure of the lower court judge to follow it would subject him to
program release
disciplinary action and failure of a member of the SC would subject him
to impeachment  “no report, no release” policy may not be enforced to officer with fiscal autonomy
II. Petitions for review and motions for reconsideration
Section 6
 2nd paragraph
 does not require a statement of facts and an accompanying reasoning out I. Independence of the Commission
of the applicable law but merely a statement of the legal basis for Section 2 – practice of profession does not include teaching
denying the cause Section 3 – protects their salary from diminution
Section 4 – gives independent powers of appointment
Section 15
Section 5 – fiscal autonomy
Paragraph 1 Section 6 – gives authority to promulgate rules of procedure

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018

 23

 In case of conflict between rules of procedure by a Commission and

Rule of Court the former shall prevail
 SC cannot disapprove unless there is a violation of the constitution then
judicial power can be exercised

Section 7

 Shall decide by a majority vote of all its members

 60 days from date of its submission/mandatory
I. Decisions of the Commissions
No decision until the draft is signed and promulgates
II. Decisions Review
Decisions of the Commissions may be brought to the SC on certiorari

Civil Service Commission

Section 1

 the general objective of a civil service system is to establish and promote

professionalism and efficiency in public service
I. Organization
 administered by a civil service commission composed a Chairman and 2
commissioners appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments

Qualification of Chairman and Commissioners

1. natural-born citizen
2. at the time of their appointment at 35 years of age
3. with proven capacity for public administration
4. must not have been a candidate for any elective position in the elections
immediately preceding their appointment
 Term of commissioners is set at 7 years and may not be reappointed
 Chairman 7 years, another 5 years, and 3 years (rotational system)
 appointment to any vacancy shall only for the unexpured position of the
term of the predecessor

Section 2

I. Scope of the System

 Civil service now covers not all government-owned or controlled
corporation but only those “with original charters” those corporations
which have been created by special law and not through the general
corporation law.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - GUILLEN | November 2018