COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT Page 1 of 9

***CONCEPTS OF THE FOLLOWING: JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

A. Composition
1) JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
The Supreme Court and all lower courts make up the judicial
2) SEPARATION OF POWERS department of our government.405

3) EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT B. Common Provisions

4) LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT 1. Independence of Judiciary (See Section 3)

5) JUDICIAL POWER (Section 1, Article 8) 2. Congressional Oversight (Section 2)

6) JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE 3. Separation of Powers (Section 12)

4. General Rules (Section 14)

7) FISCAL AUTONOMY
5. Period to Decide Case (Section 15)

8) JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY

C. Independence of Judiciary (2000 Bar Question)

To maintain the independence of the judiciary, the following

safeguards have been embodied in the Constitution:406

1. The Supreme Court is a constitutional body. It cannot

be abolished nor may its membership or the manner of
its meeting be changed by mere legislation. (art 8 §2)

2. The members of the Supreme Court may not be

removed except by impeachment. (art. 9 §2)

3. The SC may not be deprived of its minimum original

and appellate jurisdiction as prescribed in Article X,
Section 5. (art. 8 §2)
COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT
4. The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may
not be increased by law without its advice or
concurrence. (art. 6 §30)
5. Appointees to the judiciary are now nominated by the
Judicial and Bar Council and no longer subject to
confirmation by Commission on Appointments. (art. 8
§9)  Division and Assignment. Its starting point is the assumption of
6. The Supreme Court now has administrative supervision over
all lower courts and their personnel. (art. 8 §6)
7. The Supreme Court has exclusive power to discipline judges
of lower courts. (art 8 §11)

8. The members of the Supreme Court and all lower courts
have security of tenure, which cannot be undermined by a law
reorganizing the judiciary. (art. 8 §11)
9. They shall not be designated to any agency performing
quasi-judicial or administrative functions. (art. 8 §12)
10. The salaries of judges may not be reduced during their
continuance in office. (art. 8 §10)
11. The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy (art 8§3)
12. Only the Supreme Court may order the temporary detail of
judges (art 8 §5(3))
13. The Supreme Court can appoint all officials and employees
of the judiciary. (art. 8 §5(6)) 
Page 2 of 9
SEPARATION OF POWERS
Essence. In essence, separation of powers means that
legislation belongs to Congress, execution to the executive,
settlement of legal controversies to the judiciary. Each is
prevented from invading the domain of others. (Bernas,
Commentary 656, 2003 ed.)
the division of the functions of the government into three
distinct classes—the executive, the legislative and the judicial.
Its essence consists in the assignment of each class of
functions to one of the three organs of government.33
Theory. The theory is that “a power definitely assigned by the
Constitution to one department can neither be surrendered
nor delegated by that department, nor vested by statute in
another department or agency.”34
Reason. The underlying reason of this principle is the
assumption that arbitrary rule and abuse of authority would
inevitably result from the concentration of the three powers of
government in the same person, body of persons or organ.35
More specifically, according to Justice Laurel, the doctrine of
separation of powers is intended to:
1. Secure action
2. To forestall overaction
3. To prevent despotism
4. To obtain efficiency36

COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT
History. Separation of powers became the pith and core of the
American system of government largely through the influence
of the French political writer Montesquieu. By the
establishment of the American sovereignty in the Philippines,
the principle was introduced as an inseparable feature of the
governmental system organized by the United States in this
country.37
Limitations on the Principle
1. System of Checks and Balances
2. Existence of overlapping powers
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
A. Executive Power (Definition)
The executive power is the power to enforce and administer
the laws.250 (NEA v. CA, 2002)
B. Executive Power, Scope
1. The scope of power is set forth in the Constitution
specifically in Article VII.
2. However, Executive power is more than the sum of specific
powers enumerated in the Constitution. It includes residual
powers251 not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
(Marcos v. Manglapus (1989)
Page 3 of 9
The prosecution of crimes appertains to the Executive
Department, whose responsibility is to see the laws are
faithfully executed. (Webb v. De Leon)252
3. BUT the President cannot dispose of State property unless
authorized by law.253
4. Enforcement and administration of election laws is the
authority of the COMELEC.254
C. Executive Power, Where Vested
The Executive power shall be vested in the President of the
Philippines.
D. Ceremonial Functions (Head of State)
In a presidential system, the presidency includes many other
functions than just being executive. The president is the
[symbolic and] ceremonial head of the government of the
[Philippines].255
E. Executive Immunity from suit
Rules on Immunity during tenure
1. The President is immune from suit during his tenure.
2. He may be filed impeachment complaint during his
tenure. (Article XI)
3. The President may not be prevented from instituting
suit (Soliven v. Makasiar)

COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT Page 4 of 9

4. There is nothing in our laws that would prevent the the office-holder’s time, also demands undivided attention
President from waiving the privilege. The President (Soliven v. Makasiar)
may shed the protection afforded by the privilege.
(Soliven v. Makasiar)  

5. Heads of departments cannot invoke the presidents’ LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

immunity (Gloria v. CA)


A. Definition of Legislative Power

Rules on Immunity after tenure
6. Once out of office, even before the end of the six year term,
immunity for non-official acts is lost. Such was the case of
Joseph Estrada. (See Bernas Commentary, p 804 (2003 ed.) It
could not be used to shield a non-sitting President from
prosecution for alleged criminal acts done while sitting in office.
(Estrada v. Disierto; See Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan)
Note: In David v. Arroyo, the Court held that it is improper to
implead President Arroyo as respondent. However, it is well to
note that in Rubrico v. Arroyo, Min. Res., GR No, 180054,
October 31, 2007, the Supreme Court ordered the
respondents, including President Arroyo, to make a return of
the writ: “You, respondents President Macapagal Arroyo....are
hereby required to make a return of the writ before the Court of
Appeals...”
Legislative power is the authority to make laws and to alter or
repeal them.
B. Where Vested
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
Legislative power is vested in Congress except to the extent
reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and
referendum.
C. Classification of legislative power

(1) Original legislative power- possessed by the sovereign
people.
(2) Derivative legislative power- that which has been

Reasons for the Privilege:
 delegated by the sovereign people to the legislative bodies.
1. Separation of powers. The separation of powers principle is (Kind of power vested in Congress)
viewed as demanding the executive’s independence from the
(3) Constituent- The power to amend or revise the constitution
judiciary, so that the President should not be subject to the
judiciary’s whim.257

(4) Ordinary- Power to pass ordinary laws.
2. Public convenience. By reason of public convenience, the
grant is to assure the exercise of presidential duties and Legislative power exercised by the people. The people,
functions free from any hindrance or distraction, considering through the amendatory process, exercise constituent power,
that the Chief Executive is a job that, aside from requiring all of
COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT Page 5 of 9

and through initiative and referendum, ordinary legislative JUDICIAL POWER (Section 1, Article 8)
power. A. Judicial Power Where Vested (1989 Bar Question)

D. Scope of Legislative power. Judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in
such lower courts as may be established by law. (Section 1
Congress may legislate on any subject matter. (Vera v. Avelino) par. 1)
In other words, the legislative power of Congress is plenary.
B. Definition of Judicial Power (1994 Bar Question)
E. Limitations on legislative power:
Traditional Concept: Judicial power includes the duty of the
1. Substantive limitations135 courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable. (Section 1, 2nd
sentence)
2. Procedural limitations136

1. Substantive limitations:
 Broadened Concept: Duty to determine whether [or not] there
a. ExpressLimitations has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction on the party of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government. (Section 1, 2nd sentence)
i. Bill of Rights137
C. Scope of Judicial Power (1989 Bar Question)
ii. On Appropriations138
Judicial power is the measure of the allowable scope of judicial
action.409 The use of the word “includes” in Section 1
3. iii. On Taxation139
 connotes that the provision is not intended to be an exhaustive
 
 list of what judicial power is.410

An accused who has been convicted by final judgment still

possesses collateral rights and these rights can be claimed in
 
 the appropriate courts [e.g. death convict who becomes insane
after his final conviction cannot be executed while in a state of
insanity] The suspension of death sentence is an exercise of
judicial power. It is not usurpation of the presidential power of
reprieve though the effect is the same- the temporary
suspension of the execution of the death convict.” (Echegaray
v. Sec. of Justice, 1999)
COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT Page 6 of 9

D. Limit on Judicial Power a. Only one subject


b. Three readings on separate days

(1)  Courts may not assume to perform non-judicial functions. c. Printed copies in its final form 3 days before passage of the
bill. (art 6 § 26)
(2)  It is not the function of the judiciary to give advisory opinion
F. Non-delegability of Legislative power
(3)  Judicial power must sometimes yield to separation of
powers, political questions and enrolled bill rule.
 Doctrine of Non-delegation of legislative powers: The rule is
delegata potestas non potest delagari-what has been
delegated cannot be delegated. The doctrine rests on the
1. By the principle of separation of powers, courts may neither ethical principle that a delegated power constitutes not only a
attempt to assume nor be compelled to perform non-judicial right but duty to be performed by the delegate by the
functions.411 Thus, a court may not be required to act as a instrumentality of his own judgment and not through the
board of arbitrators (Manila Electric Co. v. Pasay intervening mind of another.
Transportation (1932). Nor may it be charged with
administrative functions except when reasonably incidental to  
the fulfillment of official duties. (Noblejas v. Tehankee) Neither
is it’s the function of the judiciary to give advisory opinions.

 On Constitutional jurisdiction of SC

Appellate

v. No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted

(art. 6 §31)

b. Implied limitations

1. Congress cannot legislate irrepealable laws

2. Congress cannot delegate legislative powers

3. Non-encroachment on powers of other departments

2. Procedural limitations:
COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT Page 7 of 9

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
o maintain the independence of the judiciary, the following
safeguards have been embodied in the Constitution:406
1. The Supreme Court is a constitutional body. It cannot
be abolished nor may its membership or the manner of
its meeting be changed by mere legislation. (art 8 §2)
10. The salaries of judges may not be reduced during their
continuance in office. (art. 8 §10)
11. The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy (art 8§3)
12. Only the Supreme Court may order the temporary detail of
judges (art 8 §5(3))

2. The members of the Supreme Court may not be 13. The Supreme Court can appoint all officials and employees
removed except by impeachment. (art. 9 §2) of the judiciary. (art. 8 §5(6))

3. The SC may not be deprived of its minimum original  

and appellate jurisdiction as prescribed in Article X,
Section 5. (art. 8 §2)

4. The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may

not be increased by law without its advice or
concurrence. (art. 6 §30)

5. Appointees to the judiciary are now nominated by the

Judicial and Bar Council and no longer subject to
confirmation by Commission on Appointments. (art. 8
§9)

6. The Supreme Court now has administrative supervision over

all lower courts and their personnel. (art. 8 §6)

7. The Supreme Court has exclusive power to discipline judges

of lower courts. (art 8 §11)

8. The members of the Supreme Court and all

lower courts have security of tenure, which cannot be

undermined by a law reorganizing the judiciary. (art. 8 §11)

9. They shall not be designated to any agency performing

quasi-judicial or administrative functions. (art. 8 §12)
COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT
FISCAL AUTONOMY
(1999 Bar Question)

Fiscal autonomy means freedom from outside control.As
envisioned in the Constitution, fiscal autonomy enjoyed by the
Judiciary...contemplates a guarantee of full flexibility to allocate
and utilize their resources with the wisdom and dispatch that
their needs, require.
Fiscal autonomy recognizes the power and authority to (a)
levy, assess and collect fees, (b) fix rates of compensation not
exceeding the highest rates authorized by law for
compensation, and (c) pay plans of the government and
allocate or disburse such sums as may be provided by law or
prescribed by them in the course of the discharge of their
functions.
The imposition of restrictions and constraints on the manner
the [Supreme Court] allocate and utilize the funds appropriated
for their operations is anathema to fiscal autonomy and
violative of the express mandate of the Constitution and of the
independence and separation of powers. (Bengzon v. Drilon)
Reason. Fiscal autonomy is granted to the Supreme Court to
strengthen its autonomy.407 The provision is intended to
remove courts from the mercy and caprice, not to say
vindictiveness, of the legislature when it considers the general
appropriations bill.
Page 8 of 9
JUDICIAL IMPARTIALITY
PROMOTE CONFIDENCE, IMPARTIALITY
There is undue interference where the judge's participation in
the conduct of the trial tends to build or to bolster a case of one
of the parties such as when he orders the presentation of
specific documentary evidence without motion from any party
or without participation of the parties as in the case of Ty v.
Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank (2004). [However,]
it is within the sound discretion of the trial judge to ask
questions from witnesses, if only to clarify what may appear to
be vague points in the narration. Questions designed to avoid
obscurity in the testimony and to elicit additional relevant
evidence are not improper [Paco et al. v. Quilala (2003)].
A judge may not be legally prohibited from sitting in a litigation.
But when suggestion is made of record that he might be
induced to act in favor of one party or with bias or prejudice
against a litigant arising out of circumstance reasonably
capable of inciting such a state of mind, he should conduct a
careful self-examination. He should exercise his discretion in a
way that the people's faith in the courts of justice is not
impaired [Pimentel v. Salanga (1967)].
A judge should behave at all times in a way that promotes
public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the
COURT ADMINISTRATION JANUARY 26 ASSIGNMENT
judiciary. The appearance of bias or prejudice can be as
damaging to public confidence and the administration of justice
as actual bias or prejudice [Montemayor v. Bemejo (2004)].
 
Bare allegations of partiality and prejudgment will not suffice
[Dimo Realty & Dev. Inc. v. Dimaculangan (2004)]. A judge's
conduct must be clearly indicative of arbitrariness and
prejudice before it can be stigmatized as biased and partial
[Cruz v. Iturralde (2003)].
EXTRAJUDICIAL SOURCE RULE
Bias and prejudice must be shown to have resulted in an
opinion on the merits on the basis of an extrajudicial source,
Page 9 of 9
not on what the judge learned from participating in the case. As
long as opinions formed in the course of judicial proceedings
are based on the evidence presented and the conduct
observed by the magistrate, such opinion – even if later found
to be erroneous – will not prove personal bias or prejudice on
the part of the judge. While palpable error may be inferred from
the decision or the order itself, extrinsic evidence is required to
establish bias, bad faith, malice or corrupt purpose [Gochan v.
Gochan (2003)].
Truth about Judge Austria’s alleged partiality cannot be
determined by simply relying on the verified complaint. Bias
and prejudice cannot be presumed, in light especially of a
judge’s sacred obligation under his oath of office to administer
justice without respect to the person, and to give equal right to
the poor and rich. There should be clear and convincing
evidence to prove the charge; mere suspicion of partiality is not
enough. In this case, aside from being speculative and judicial
in character, the circumstances cited by the complainant were
grounded on mere opinion and surmises. The complainant also
failed to adduce proof indicating the judge’s predisposition to
decide the case in favor of one party. [Antonio M. Lorenzana v.
Judge Ma. Cecilia I. Austria, RTC, Br. 2, Batangas City, A.M.
No. RTJ-09-2200 (2014)]