PRESUMPTIONS IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION Constitution is Self-Executing [Collector of Customs vs.

Villaluz, 71 SCRA 356] The Supreme Court held that judges derive directly from Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution the authority to conduct preliminary investigations to determine probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant or warrant of arrest, which power may not be withdrawn or restricted by the legislature.(Cruz) The Constitutions of 1935 and 1973 vest in the Judge the power to is sue a warrant of arrest or search warrant after conducting a preliminary investigation or examination. Congress could not divest the court of such authority as the Constitution does not permit it, for the constitutional guarantee on the arrest or search warrant is not qualified by some such phrase as unless otherwise provided by law. [Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS, G.R. No. 122156, February 3, 1997] A provision which lays down a general principle is usually not self-executing. But a provision which is complete in itself and becomes operative without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation, or that which supplies a sufficient rule by means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected, is self-executing. Thus, a constitutional provision is self -executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred and the liability imposed are fixed by the Constitution itself, so that they can be determined by an examination and construction of its terms, and there is no language indicating that the subject is referred to the legislature for action. Hence, unless it is expressly provided that a legislative act is necessary to enforce a constitutional mandate, the presumption now is that all provisions of the constitution are selfexecuting. In case of doubt, the Constitution should be considered self -executing rather than non-self executing. Constitution is Mandatory In the absence of clear contrary intention, constitution should be regarded as mandatory. Otherwise, the fundamental law would have no more force and prestige than a set of directions.(Cruz) Constitution is Prospective Constitution is prospective unless contrary is clearly intended. Otherwise, rights already acquired or vested may be unduly disturbed or withdrawn.(Cruz) AMENDMENTS AND REVISION METHODS OF CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION Congress acting as Constituent Assembly Congress, when acting as a Constituent Assembly pursuant to Article XV of the Constitution, has full and plenary authority to propose Constitutional amendments or to call a convention for the purpose, by a three-fourths vote of each House in joint session assembled but voting separately. (Imbong vs. Comelec, 35 SCRA 28)

People s Initiative (Amendment only) - No sufficient enabling or implementing law to amend the constitution [Defensor-Santiago vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 127325 ] (1) The constitutional provision on people s initiative to amend the Constitution can only be implemented by law to be passed by Congress. (2) The people s initiative is limited to amendments to the Constitution, not to revision thereof. Extending or lifting of term limits constitutes a revision and is, therefore, outside the power of the people s initiative. (3) Finally, Congress has not yet appropriated funds for people s initiative; neither the COMELEC nor any other government department, agency, or office has realigned funds for the purpos e. [Lambino vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 174153, October 25, 2006] The amendment is directly proposed ONLY if a. The people sign on a petition b. The petition contains the full text of the proposed amendment R.A. 6735 SECTION 2. Statement and Policy. -- The power of the people under a system of initiative and referendum to directly propose, enact, approve or reject, in whole or in part, the Constitution, laws, ordinances, or resolutions passed by any legislative body upon compliance with the requirements of t his Act is hereby affirmed, recognized and guaranteed. (Underscoring supplied). The inclusion of the word Constitution therein was a delayed afterthought. That word is neither germane nor relevant to said section, which exclusively relates to initiative and referendum on national laws and local laws, ordinances, and resolutions. That section is silent as to amendments on the Constitution. As pointed out earlier, initiative on the Constitution is confined only to proposals to AMEND. The people are not accorded the power to directly propose, enact, approve, or reject, in whole or in part, the Constitution through the system of initiative. They can only do so with respect to laws, ordinances, or resolutions. Constitutional Convention

Amendment vs. Revision [Lambino vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 174153, October 25, 2006 ] y y Amendment: change that adds, reduces or deletes without altering the basic principle involved Revision: change that alters the basic principles of the constitution and the substantial entirety of the constitution; requires harmonizing several provisions

Steps/Stages in Amendment/Revision Process Proposal (3 methods) [Secs. 1-3, Art. XVII]

1. Congress, by a vote of of all its members. Majority of authorities opine that this is to be understood as of the Senate and of the House of Representatives. 2. Constitutional Convention, which may be called into existence either by a 2/3 vote of all the members of Congress or (if such vote is not obtained) by a majority of all the members of Congress with the question of whether or not to call a Convention to be resolved by the people in a plebiscite. (Sec.3) 3. People, through the power of initiative. Requisite: A petition of at leas 12% of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein. (Sec. 2) Ratification [Sec. 4, Art. XVIII] The proposed amendment shall become part of the Constitution when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in plebiscite held not earlier than 60 nor later than 90 days after the approval of the proposal by the Congress or the Constitutional Convention, or after the certification by the Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition for initiative under Sec. 2, Art. XVII. y Doctrine of Fair and Proper Submission Because the Constitution itself prescribes the time frame within which the plebiscite is to be held, there can no longer be a question on whether the time given to the people to determine the merits and demerits of the proposed amendment is adequate. [Gonzales vs. Comelec, 21 SCRA 774; Almario vs. Alba, 127 SCRA 69; Occena vs. Comelec, 95 SCRA 755]

The plebiscite may be held on the same day as regular elections.

[Tolentino vs. Comelec, 41 SCRA 702]

The use of the word election in the singular meant that the entire Constitution must be submitted for ratification at one plebiscite only; furthermore, the people have to be given a proper frame of reference in arriving at their decision. Thus, submission for ratification of piece-meal amendments by the Constitutional Convention (which is tasked to revise the Constitution) was disallowed since the people had, at that time, no idea yet of what the rest of the revised Constitution would be.

Judicial Review of Amendments/Revisions [Gonzales vs. Comelec, 21 SCRA 774] Proposal of amendments is not a political but a justiciable question subject to judicial review. [Javellana vs. Executive Secretary, 50 SCRA 50; Sanidad vs. Comelec, 73 SCRA 333] The question is now regarded as subject to judicial review, because invariably, the issue will boil down to whether or not the constitutional provisions had been followed. [Tolentino vs. Comelec, 41 SCRA 702; Sanidad vs. Comelec, 73 SCRA 333] A taxpayer, or group of taxpayers, is a proper party to question the validity of a law appropriating public funds.