Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
ART. VIII Sec. 1 Par. 1- The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme
Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law
*QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES - strictly speaking, they are not courts- do not
form part of the judicial system.
- They are administrative bodies performing quasi-judicial functions. In
Remedial Law, referred to loosely as special courts- Doctrine of Primary
Jurisdiction.
- Part of the executive.
Ex. CSC, SEC, COA, COMELEC
*Since quasi-judicial bodies are not strictly courts, their jurisdiction is strictly
construed against them.
*According to the petition, most of the people who went to EDSA are not
really serious in overthrowing the Marcos government. (Most were vendors)
-In turn, this principle is the result of our Presidential System of Government.
*No matter, We will no longer inquire into the motives of the people in going
to EDSA. The facts were: because of the magnitude of the people who were
in EDSA, Marcos fled to Hawaii, so that the Cory government was able to
take effective control of the machinery of the State without resistance from
the people. Furthermore, the international community has recognized the
Cory Government. Hence, there can be no more question as to the de jure
status of the said government.
1.
EDSA 2
-Extra-constitutional
and
the
2
-Intra-constitutional
and
the
resignation of the sitting President
that it caused and the succession of
the Vice President as president are
subject to judicial review.
*Unlike in the past, the power to declare martial law and to suspend the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus were expressly made subject of judicial
review.
*Article VII, Sec. 18, Par 3- The Supreme Court may review in an
appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual
basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of
the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision within
thirty days from its filing.
SC: It is the unclouded intent of the Court to grant to the President full
discretionary authority. The hands of the President should not be tied;
otherwise, this could be a veritable proscription for disaster. Unless grave
abuse of discretion is shown, the Presidents exercise of the power should
not be questioned. Mere abuse of discretion will not suffice. To doubt is to
sustain.
Q. What is the effect of the EXPANDED CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL POWER
on the political question doctrine?
A. It has lessened the political question doctrine. Thus, even if it is a political
question, if there appears to be abuse of discretion, the Court may review it.
*The burden is upon petitioners- the ones assailing the act.
*It must be grave abuse of discretion to warrant judicial intervention.
*Mere abuse of discretion is not enough.
*To doubt is to sustain the act of the person.
Q. Why the difference in treatment?
A. Calling out power is the lesser and more benign power while the power to
declare martial law and to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
are the greater powers which involve direct curtailment of civil liberties
thereby necessitating safeguards of Congress and judicial review of the
Court. (IBP VS. ZAMORA)
DAVID VS. GMA
*PGMA exercised the calling out power when she issued GO 5 and PP
1017, not the martial law power. The acts taken purportedly to carry out the
issuances were ultra vires, hence, unconstitutional. The exercise of the
calling out power does not involve the direct curtailment and suppression of
civil liberties and individual freedoms. However GO 5 and PP1017 are
constitutional. Petitioners failed to counteract the factual bases therefore as
alleged by the Solgen.
Q. Why not the martial law powers?
A. There was no case of invasion or rebellion. President will be required to
submit report to (kulang page ko, sorry...)
2.
3.
MOOT AND ACADEMIC CASES - A moot and academic case is one that
ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events,
so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or value.
Generally, courts decline jurisdiction over such case or dismiss it on ground
of mootness. (David vs. GMA)
*The moot and academic principle is not a magical formula that can
automatically dissuade the courts in resolving a case. Courts will decide
cases, otherwise moot and academic, if:
-It means an existing case or controversy which is both ripe for resolution
and susceptible of judicial determination and that which is not conjectural or
clarificatory, or that which seeks to resolve hypothetical or feigned
constitutional problems. (IBP VS. ZAMORA)
1.
2.
4.
3.
1.
2.
TAXPAYERS SUIT
To constitute a taxpayers suit, two requisites must be met, namely:
That public funds are disbursed by a political subdivision or
instrumentality and in doing so, a law is violated or some irregularity
is committed; and
That the petitioner is directly affected by the alleged ultra vires act.
SC: No. It is not the date of the filing that determines whether the
constitutional question was raised at the earliest possible opportunity. The
earliest opportunity to raise a constitutional issue is to raise it in the
pleadings before a competent court that can resolve it, such that if not raised
in the pleadings, it cannot be raised on appeal. Here, Matibag questioned
the legality of said appointments when she filed her petition before the
Supreme Court, which is the earliest opportunity for pleading the
constitutional issue before a competent body.
D. THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION MUST BE THE VERY LIS MOTA
OF THE ENTIRE CONTROVERSY
*The constitutional question must be the main issue of the controversy.
*There is no way that the Court may resolve the entire case, unless it first
resolves the constitutional question raised.
AMENDMENTS OR REVISIONS (ARTICLE XVII)
3 ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A GOOD WRITTEN CONSTITUTION:
1.
2.
3.
REVISION
1.
2.
Article XVII Sec. 3- The Congress may, by a vote of 2/3 of all its
Members, call a constitutional convention, or by a majority vote of all its
Members, submit to the electorate the calling of such convention
a.
b.
Proposal
Ratification
2 ways:
3.
No. Note the second sentence says- The Congress shall provide
for the implementation of the exercise of this right. Thus Congress
should enact a law implementing this provision.
1.
2.
Constitutional convention
-a separate body the members of which are elected
3 SYSTEMS OF INITIATIVE:
1. Initiative on the Constitution
2. Initiative on Statutes
3. Initiative on Local Legislation
SANTIAGO VS. COMELEC (re: Initiative on the Constitution)
Article XVI, Sec. 3- The State may not be sued without its consent.
*If Congress intended to fully provide for the implementation of the initiative
on amendments to the Constitution, it could have provided for a subtitle
therefore, considering that in the order of things, the primacy of interest, or
hierarchy of values, the right of the people to directly propose amendments
to the Constitution is far more important than the initiative on national and
local laws.
*SC declared RA 6735 inadequate to cover the system of initiative on
amendments to the Constitution and have failed to provide a sufficient
standard for subordinate legislation (there is undue delegation of power to
Comelec). To this extent, RA 6735 is unconstitutional.
*Article XVII, Sec. 2 remains non self executing.
*Peoples Initiative on the Constitution is limited only to proposing
amendments not revisions.
Q. Ethical basis?
A. There can be no legal right against the authority which makes the law on
which the right depends. (Justice Holmes)
Q. Does the Doctrine of State Immunity form Suit apply also to foreign
agreements?
A. Yes. We are bound by the DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN EQUALITY. All
states are sovereign equals. An equal may not assume jurisdiction over
another equal. Otherwise it will unduly vex the peace of nations. This is
another generally accepted principle of international law as expressed in the
Latin maxim par in parem non habet imperium.
Q. Can you sue the State?
RATIFICATION
A. A State may not be sued without its consent. Hence, you can actually sue
the State, for as long as the State gives its consent.
Any amendment under Sec. 2 hereof (Con Com) shall be valid when ratified
by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier
than 60 days nor later than 90 days after the certification by the Comelec of
the sufficiency of the petition.
CHA-CHA NOT ALLOWED
*Article XVII, Sec. 2 remains to be non self executing. The implementing law
was declared unconstitutional. (Santiago vs. Comelec)
*Peoples initiative is limited only to amendments.
presented to COA and only when COA refuses payment that a party can
sue.
Q. Where?
IMPLIEDLY-2 ways:
1.
Q. A contract was entered into with DPWH for the construction of roads.
When the roads were finished, the contractor was not paid. Contractor sued
the government before the RTC. Will the suit prosper?
A. No. It will be dismissed for lack of cause of action. He failed to exhaust all
administrative remedies provided for by law under CA 327 as amended by
PD 1445.
2. SPECIAL LAWS
Ex. Article 2180, NCC- The State is responsible xxx when it acts though a
special agent xxx.
Ex. Article 2189, NCC- Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for
damages for the death of, or injuries suffered by any person by reason of the
defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and other
public works under their control or supervision.
TEOTICO VS. CITY OF MANILA
*City of Manila contends that it cannot be held liable under its charter.
*SC held that the provision in the charter is a general provision in a special
law. On the other hand, Article 2189 is a special provision found in a general
law. A special provision found in a general law prevails over the general
provision found in the charter of the City of Manila. City of Manila is liable.
KILATKO VS. CITY OF DAGUPAN
*City of Dagupan contended that the manhole is found in the national road.
*SC held that the ownership of the road is immaterial. Even if it is a national
road, the LGU is liable. Article 2189 merely requires supervision over the
maintenance of the national road. City of Dagupan has supervision. Hence,
liable.
Ex. Sec. 24, Local Government Code- Liability for Damages- Local
government units and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or
injury to persons or damage to property.
Ex. Charters of GOCC- GSIS, DBP, LBP
2.
John Hay for this reason. All persons availing themselves of this facility pay
for the privilege like all other customers in ordinary restaurants. Although the
prices are concededly reasonable and relatively low, such services are
undoubtedly operated for profit as a commercial and not a governmental
activity.
*The case was remanded to the Labor arbiter. There is waiver of immunity.
Q. When do you consider a suit against public officials as a suit against the
state itself?
EXECUTION OF JUDGEMENT
A. The suit must be regarded as one against the State where the satisfaction
of judgement against the public official concerned will require the State itself
to perform a positive act such as appropriation of the amount necessary to
pay the damages awarded to the plaintiff. (LANSANG VS. GARCIA)
Q. Assume that you are allowed by the State to sue. After trial, judgement
was rendered in your favor, holding the State liable. Judgement thereafter
attained finality. Can you garnish or levy government funds to execute the
judgement?
A. No. It will paralyze the operations of the government. Waiver extends only
up to the rendition of judgement. Execution requires another waiver. The
disbursement of public funds requires an appropriate appropriation law.
Q. Remedy?
A. To make representation with the proper legislative authority for the
enactment of an appropriation law necessary to satisfy the judgement.
Q. What if the legislative authority refuses to enact the law?
A. Go to the courts and ask for MANDAMUS to compel the legislative
authority to enact the required law. True, the duty to appropriate is
discretionary. The exception however, as in this case, is when there is
already a money judgement against the government, the discretionary duty
becomes ministerial. The state must be the first to respect and obey the
decisions of the Courts. (Municipality of Makati vs. IAC)
SUITS AGAINST GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND INSTRUMENTALITIES
Distinguish:
1.
The test of suability will depend whether or not its charter allows it
to sue and be sued.
*The official was charged in his official capacity in the performance of official
duties. In this case, the official was acting only as an agent of the State.
10
*This results in complications when the country where you are born applies
the principle of jus soli.
- Note that this is the reason why the provision applies only to those
born of Filipino mothers.
*Complications arise with respect to the matter of dual allegiance. (See Sec.
5)
* Note that the provision says OR- not and. This means that as long as 1
of your parents is a Filipino, you are a Filipino.
11
- In this case, the person has to perform an act to perfect his Philippine
citizenship.
-Thus, this constitutes an exception to the 1st kind of Natural-Born Citizens.
12
1. As to Nature
Repatriation
-A mode of re-acquisition
of Philippine citizenship.
Naturalization
2. As to process
and
-Simpler process
2. Naturalization
13
1. As to how it results
2. As to voluntariness
Dual Allegiance
Dual Citizenship
-A situation where a
person simultaneously
owes, by some positive
act, loyalty to 2 or more
states.
-Voluntary.
Involuntary.
14
STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT
Ex:
always
be
an
EXPRESS
delegation!
(by
15
Article VI, Sec 1: The legislative power shall be vested in the congress of
the Philippines, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of
Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the
provisions on initiative and referendum.
Sufficiency of Standards Test - The law must provide for standards that
are determinate or at least determinate, which will define the limits of a
delegates authority.
16
The houses are co-equal bodies; hence the terms upper house and lower
house are inaccurate!
Bicameral Conference Committee
See Phil. Judges Association vs. Hon. Prado, and
Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance.
to the extent reserved to the People by initiative and referendum
Article VI, Sec. 32 The Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a
system of initiative and referendum, and the exceptions there from.
Art VI. Sec 15 The president may call a special session at any time
When the president certifies as the urgency of the bill to meet a public
calamity or emergency.
Art VI, sec 26 (2) No bill passed by either house shall become a law unless
it has passed three (3) readings on separate days x x x except when the
president certifies as to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a
public calamity or emergency.
17
Art VI, Sec 21 The senate or the house of representatives or any of its
respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation or in
accordance with its duly published rules of procedure
(2) Power to declare the existence of a state of War
Art VI, Sec 23 The congress by a vote of 2/3 of both houses in joint
session assembled, voting separately, shall have the sole power to declare
the existence of a state of war. [*then based on such declaration, delegate
emergency powers to the President]
(3) Power to confirm a presidential appointments [through commission
on Appointments]
Art VII, Sec 16 The president shall nominate and with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments, appoint the heads of the executive
departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls or officers of
the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other officers
whose appointments are vested in him in this constitution.
(4) Power to punish for contempt
- Incidental to the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislations.
(5) Power to impeach and to try cases of impeachment
As a prosecutorial body: Art XI, Sec 3(1) The House of Representatives
shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.
As an impeachment Court: Art XI, Sec 3(6) The senate shall have the
sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment x x x
(6) Power to judge election contests involving their members through
the Electoral tribunal
Art VI, Sec 17 The senate and House of Representatives shall each have
electoral tribunals which is the sole judge of all contests relating to the
election returns and qualifications of their respective members x x x
Representative
(1) Citizenship
Natural born
Art VIII, Sec 19(2) He shall have the power to grant amnesty with the
concurrence of a majority of all the members of the Congress
(2) LIteracy
(3) Voter
Registered voter
(4) Age
35 years of age
on the day of
election
(5) Residence
2 years residence
1 year in the
representing.
(6) Term
6
years,
2
consecutive termlimit
district
he
is
18
give more in life to the great masses of our people who have less in life, but
also to enable them to become veritable (genuine/real) law makers
themselves. It
Art VI, Sec 5(1) The HOR shall be composed of not more than 250
members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from
legislative districts x x x and those who, as provided by law, shall be elected
through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral
parties or organizations.
(1) District representatives
(2) Party-list representatives
this absorbed the sectoral representatives
Art VI, Sec 5(2) x x x for 3 consecutive terms after the ratifications of this
constitution, of the seats allocated to the party-list representatives shall be
filled as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant,
urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other
sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.
[other sectors: fisher folks, elderly, handicapped (Sec 5, RA7941)].
PUF LICE HWY O
Xpn: Religious sector
Party list system
Implemented by RA7941 (Party-list law)
Adopted the German model of the party list system
1998 elections: first time we had party list election
Borrowed concept from parliamentary system
See: Ang bagong-bayani-OFW labor party vs. COMELEC (June 26, 01
En Banc)
Q: What is the nature of the party-list system?
The party list system is one such tool intended to benefit those who
hae less in life. It gives the great masses of our people the genuine hope
and genuine power. It is a message to the destitute and the prejudiced, and
even to those in the underground (e.g. rebels), that change is possible. It is
an invitation for them to come our of their limbo and seize the opportunity.
Q: Is it open to all?
A: No. It is not open to all but only to the marginalized and the
underrepresented.
Allowing all individuals and groups, including those which now
dominate district elections, to have the same opportunity to participate in the
party-list elections would desecrate this lofty. Objective and mongrelize the
social justice mechanism into an atrocious veneer for traditional politics
(nose bleed!)
To make it open to all, without qualifications would not only weaken
the electoral chances of the marginalized and the underrepresented it also
prejudices them. To allow the non-marginalized and the overrepresented to
vie under the party list system would not only dilute, but also prejudice the
chance of the marginalized and underrepresented contrary to the laws
intention to enhance it. It would gut the substance of the party-list system.
Instead of generating hope, it would create a mirage. Instead of enabling the
marginalized, it would further weaken them and aggravate their
marginalization.
Uphold Social Justice principle to give those who have less life, more in
law
Underground group Rebels (p.27 3A notes)
Guidelines for screening party list participants (8)
The political party, sector, organization, or coalition must represent the
marginalized and underrepresented sectors identified in Sec 5, RA7941.
Sec 5, RA7941 x x x the sectors shall include labor, peasant, fisherfolk,
urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women,
youth, veterans, overseas workers, and professionals.
19
Sec 5(1), Art VI, 1987 Const. The HOR shall be composed of x x x and
those who x x x shall be elected through a party list system of registered
national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.
Art IX-C Sec 2(5) The COMELEC shall exercise the following powers and
functions x x x (5) Register x x x political parties, organizations x x x religious
denomination shall not be registered.
Art VI, Sec 5(2) x x x from the labor, peasant urban poor x x x and such
other sectors as may be provided by law, except religious sector
20
(3) Resident of the Philippines for a perioud of not less than 1 year
immediately preceding the day of the electon.
(4) Able to read and write
Q: To determine the total votes cast for the party-list system, should the
votes tallied to the disqualified candidates be deducted/excluded in
computing the 2% threshold?
(6) Not only the candidate party or organization must represent marginalized
and underrepresented sectors; so also must its nominees.
(Ang Bagong Bayani OFW vs. COMELEC [June 25, 2003 En Banc])
In the case of Labo vs. COMELEC, reaffirmed in the case of Grego vs.
COMELEC, the court declred that the votes case for an ineligible or
disqualified candidate cannot be considered stray, because this would
disenfranchise the voters/majority; valid votes.
However, votes cast for a notoriously disqualified candidate may be
considered stray and excluded from the canvass.
Because of the express rule in Sec 10, RA 7941 x x x that a vote cast for
a party, sectoral organization or coalition not entitled to be voted for shall not
be counted x x x
Art VI, Sec 5(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute 20% of the
total number of representatives including those under the party-list.
Bar Question!
NOTE: The base is the total votes cast for the party-list and not the total
number of registered voters.
See RA 7941.
c. The three (3) seat limit - Each qualified part, regardless of the number of
votes actually obtained, is entitled to a maximum of 3 seats 1 qualifying
and 2 additional seats.
Rationale: To avoid domination/monopoly will go against the purpose of
the party-list system.
21
legislative power itself and (2) integral to the checks and balances (3)
inherent in a democratic system of government.
Q: what are the categories of congressional oversight functions? [SIS]
A: Three categories:
Scrutiny primary purpose is to determine economy and efficiency of the
operation of government activities.
Based primarily on the power of appropriation of congress as under the
constitution, the power of the purse belongs to the congress
Ex: Budget hearings usual means of renewing policy and auditing the use
of previous appropriation to ascertain whether they have been disbursed for
purposes authorized in an appropriation act.
Power of confirmation [through COA,] provides congress an opportunity to
find out whether the nominee possesses the necessary qualifications,
integrity and probity required for all public servants.
Not absolute!
In session
Art VI, Sec 15 the Congress shall convene once every year on the Fourth
Monday of July for its regular session, unless a different date is fixed by Law,
and shall continue to be in session for such number of days as it may
determine until thirty days before the opening of its next regular session,
exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays x x x
A: YES. Congress has the discretion under Art VI, Sec 15. It is allowed to
remain in session provided only that 30 days before the opening of the next
session, it shall adjourn (compulsory adjournment).
The opening of the session is also the time the President delivers his STATE
OF THE NATION ADDRESS (SONA) part of the informing power of the
President (Art VII, Sec 23)
22
Art VII, Sec 23 The president shall address the Congress at the opening
of its regular session x x x
This is a deviation from the 1935 constitution, under which the opening of
the regular session is every 4 th Monday of January and the duration of the
session is for a fixed period of 100 days. It was patterned after the American
Constitution.
Freedom of Speech and Debate
Requisites:
(1) The speech or debate must be made in Congress or in any
committee thereof.
(2) The congress must be in session.
Q: In a TV interview, a congressman maligns someone. Can he invoke his
freedom of speech?
A. NO. It was not made in congress or any of its committee.
Q: In his privileged speech, a congressman made remarks against A. Can A
sue him for defamation?
A: NO. It is covered by the immunity.
Q: What is As remedy?
A: Ask the house to punish the congressman.
In any other place means - tThis includes the courts!
Statement made in Congress is a form of privileged communication.
SC: The Senates act is valid. Congress can punish their members [Art VI,
Secc 16(3)]. The freedom of speech and debate cannot be invoked in
Congress itself. The constitution says, in any other place.
People vs. Jalosjos: To allow Jalosjos to attend congressional session will
virtually make him a free man; this would be a mockery of the correctional
system.
Immunity of Members of the Congress
arises from a constitutional provision
granted in a restrictive sense
cannot be extended by
Intendment
Implication
Equitable considerations
Q: During pendency of his appeal from conviction of RTC, should he be
allowed to post bail?
A. NO. Evidence of guild is strong; should wait for decision on appeal inside
the penitentiary.
1987 Constitution says
Art III, Sec 13 All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable
by reclusion perpetua, when the evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before
conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance
as may be provided by law. x x x
Rules of Court says
Rule 114 Sec 4 Bail, a matter of right; exception:
Absolutely privileged
23
In aid of legislation
Art VI, Sec 22 The heads of departments may upon their own initiative,
with the consent of the President, or upon the request of either house, as
the rules of each house shall provide, appear before and be heard by such
house on any matter pertaining to their departments x x x
The right against self incrimination (Art III sec 17) may be invoked.
24
Section 22
- attendance
compulsory*
- attendance
discretionary
is
meant
to
be
is
meant
to
be
Organization
Q:
A: 25
12 Senators
A: Only when the congress is in Session. (Art VI, Sec 19. 2 nd sentence)
The commission on Appointments shall meet only while the Congress is in
session at the call of its chairman and a majority of all its members, to
discharge such powers and functions as are herein conferred upon it
- Thus, ad interim appointments are allowed (see Section 16, 2nd par. Art VII)
How
many
Senate President ex officio chairman
members?
Electoral Tribunals
Section 17, Art VI The Senate and the House of Representatives shall
each have an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests
relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective
members. Each Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of nine members.
Three of whom shall be Justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by
the Chief Justice, and the remaining six shall be members of the Senate or
the House of Representatives, as the case may be, who shall be chosen on
the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and the
parties or organizations registered under the party-list system represented
therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal shall be its chairman.
Example:
Senate composition:
K4 = 10
KNP = 8
LOP = 4
LAKAS = 2
Formula to determine seats per party in the Commission on
Appointments:
# of senators of party
x 12
Total # of senators
12 is the # of CoA seats
Simply put, it is the # of senators of a Party DIVIDED by 2
Follow the same formula for HOR component just use the # of
congressmen.
Therefore:
K4 = 5
KNP = 4
LOP = 2
LAKAS = 1
Q: What if there are decimal places?
A: Disregard (drop) the fraction. Otherwise, rounding off would violate the
rule on proportional representation! Although some seats would not be filled,
it is not mandatory that all seats be filled up. What is necessary is that there
be a quorum (Guingona vs. Gonzales)
Q: What is main function of the Commission on Appointments?
A: To act on Presidential Appointments (checks-and-balances)
the house/senate leadership should not interfere with the tribunal. Although
they are attached to congress, yet they are independent of Congress.
Q: Can they meet when Congress is not in session?
A: YES. Unlike the Commission on Appointments, they shall meet in
accordance with their rules, regardless of whether congress is in session!
Q: From the decision of SET or HRET, is there an appeal?
A: NO. Sec 17 of Article VI provides that the SET/HRET is the sole judge of
all contests x x x. Hence, from its decision, there is no appeal. Appeal is not
a constitutional but merely a statutory right.
Q: Is there any remedy from its decision?
A: YES. A special civil action (an original action not a mode of appeal) for
certiorari under Rule 65 may be filed. This is based on grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. This will be filed before
the SC.
[The other form of Certiorari is Rule 45, which is a mode of appeal
on pure questions of law. This is a mode of appeal unlike the Special Civil
action for Certiorari under Rule 65]
SET/HRETs jurisdiction is limited to contests relating to the election x x x
of their respective members
Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC
FACTS: In the 1995 elections, Imelda ran for HOR. A disqualification case
was filed against her on account of her residence. The case was not
resolved before the election. Imelda won the election. However, she was not
proclaimed. Imelda now questions the COMELECs jurisdiction over the
case.
HELD: The COMELEC still has jurisdiction. HRETs jurisdiction as the sole
judge of all contests relating to the elections, etc..of members of congress
begins only after a candidate has become a member of the HOR. Since
Imelda has not yet been proclaimed, she is not yet a member of the HOR.
Thus, COMELEC retains jurisdiction. (see RA6646, Sec 6, Electoral Reform
Law of 1987)
Guerrero vs. COMELEC
FACTS: Rudy Farias of Ilocos Norte ran for Congressman. A
disqualification case was filed against him, which was not resolved before
the elections. He won and was proclaimed. COMELEC dismissed the
pending disqualification case against Farias. This was questioned by
Guerrero on the ground that HRET has jurisdiction only if there is a valid
Process
Filing of the Bill
General Rule: A bill may be introduced and may originate either from the
Senate or the HOR.
Exceptions: Bills that must originate exclusively with the HOR [APRIL]
Appropriations bill
Private bills
27
FACTS: There were 2 versions of the EVAT the HOR and the Senate
version. The HOR bill was first filed and the Senate suspended its own
deliberations until the HOR version was sent to the Senate. Then, the senate
passed its own version. Both versions were sent to the Bicameral
Conference Committee. What eventually became the EVAL law was the
senates version.
HELD: It is not the law, but the revenue bill that is required to originate
exclusively in the HOR. What the constitution simply means is that the
INITIATIVE for filing revenue, tariff bills, etcmust come from the HOR on
the theory that since the HOR members are elected from the districts, they
can be expected to be more sensitive to the local needs and problems. A bill
originating in the HOR may undergo such extensive changes in the Senate.
The result may be a rewriting of the whole. To insist that the revenue statute
must be substantially the same as the house bill would deny the senates
power to concur and propose amendments. This would violate the coequality of the legislative power between the HOR and the Senate. Thus, the
power of the senate to propose amendments includes the power to propose
its own version. Amendments may be amendments by substitution.
2 rules:
1) One-subject-one-title rule
Sec 26(1), Art VI Every bill passed by the Congress shall embrace only 1
subject, which shall be expressed in the title thereof.
Objectives (De Guzman Jr. vs. COMELEC)
To prevent hodge-podge or log-rolling legislation;
To prevent surprise or fraud upon the legislature by means of provisions in
bills of which the title gives no information and which might thus be
overlooked and carelessly and unintentionally adopted; and
To fairly appraise the people, through such publication of legislative
proceedings as usually made, of the subjects of legislation that are being
considered, in order that they may have the opportunity of being heard
thereon by petition or otherwise, if they shall so desire.
In general, the rule seeks to prevent riders provision which is totally
unrelated to the subject matter of the legislation being considered and may
be the subject of a separate legislation.
This rule is interpreted liberally!
Philippine Judges Association vs. Prado
FACTS: RA7354 is entitled, law creating the Philippine Postal Corporation.
In section 35 (Repealing clause), the Judiciarys franking privilege was
Political Law Review Notes (Atty. Edwin Sandoval)
Prepared by: Atty Joan P. Gamboa
28
After 3 readings, the bill will be sent to the other house where it will
undergo the same cumbersome process.
If both houses have different versions of the Bill, said versions will be sent
to the Bicameral Conference Committee for reconciliation.
29
Art VI Sec 27(1) In such cases, the votes of each house shall be
determined by yeas or nays, and the names of the members voting for or
against shall be entered in its journal.
The presidents objection to a bill he had vetoed.
Art VI Sec 27(1) every bill passed by Congress shall, before it becomes a
law, be presented to the President x x x otherwise, he shall veto it and return
the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall
enter the objections at large in its journal x x x
Astorga vs. Villegas
FACTS: A bill of local application was filed in the and was there passed on
3rd reading without amendments. Forthwith, the bill was sent to the Senate
for its concurrence. It was approved with minor amendments suggested by
Senator Roxas, that instead of the City Engineer, it be the President
Protempore of the Municipal Board who should succeed the Vice Mayor in
case of the latters incapacity to act as Mayor. However, on second reading,
substantial amendments to this were introduced by Senator Tolentino. These
were approved in toto by Senate. The amendment recommended by
Senator Roxas does not appear in the Journal of the Senate proceedings as
having been acted upon. When the Secretary of the Senate sent a letter to
the that the House Bill No. 9266 had been passed by the Senate with
amendments, he attached a certification of the amendment, which were the
ones actually approved by the senate. The thereafter signified its
approval of the bill and caused copies thereof to be printed. The printed
copies were then certified and attested by the secretaries of the and the
senate and the speaker of the and the Senate president. When the
printed copies were sent to the President, he affixed his signature thereto by
was of approval. The bill became R.A. 4065. However, Senator Tolentino
issued a press statement that the bill signed into law by the President was
the wrong version. Consequently, the Senate President withdrew his
signature.
The yeas and nays on any question at the request of 1/5 of the members
present
HELD: The court went beyond the enrolled bill and looked into the Journal to
determine whether theres legal insertion or not.
Art VI, Sec 16(4) Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings x x x
and the yeas and nays on any question shall, at the request of 1/5 of the
members present, be entered in the journal.
The yeas and nays upon re-passing a bill over the Presidents veto.
many
options
does
the
president
have?
30
Appropriation bills
Revenue Bills
Tariff Bills
Sec 27 (1), Art VI Every bill passed by Congress shall, before it becomes
a law, be presented to the President. If he approves the same, he shall sign
it xxx
Second option: President vetoes the bill
Ultra-vires/
prejudicial to public welfare
Sec 55 of LGC par. B: on Item/line veto:
Requirements:
[PAL]
Appropriation Ordinance
Sec 27 (1), Art VI Every bill passed by Congress shall, before it becomes
a law, be presented to the President x x x otherwise, he shall veto it and
return the same with his objections to the House where it originated.
[UP]
KINDS OF VETO
Item or Line Veto Art VI, Sec 27, par 2 The President shall have the
power to veto any particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue, or
tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or items to which he does not
object.
General Rule: President may not veto a provision without vetoing the entire
bill.
Lupong Tagapamayapa
Chief Executive
Sangguniang Baranggay, presiding officer
31
Punong Baranggay
Sangguniang Baranggay members
authority
Persons-in-
Lupong taga-pamayapa
HELD: The Court sustained the validity of the exercise by the President of
her veto power, invoking the doctrine of inappropriate provision.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
EXECUTIVE POWER
ARTICLE VII, Sec. 1: The executive power shall be vested in the President
of the Philippines.
Q: What power belongs to the President?
A: Power of the Sword. (Power of the Purse belongs to the Congress.)
FAITHFUL EXECUTION CLAUSE
ARTICLE VII, Sec. 17, 2nd sentence: xxx he shall ensure that the laws be
faithfully executed.
QUALIFICATIONS OF PRESIDENT ARTICLE VII, Sec. 2
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
natural-born citizen
registered voter
able to read and write
at least 40 years of age on the day of the election
32
- Grounds:
(a) culpable violation of the Consitution
(b) treason
(c) bribery
(d) graft and corruption
(e) high crimes
(f) betrayal of public trust
Q: Was Estrada impeached?
A: Yes!
Q: But was he removed through impeachment?
A: No! (remember, a vice president can only be removed by impeachment)
(4) Resignation
Estrada vs. Desierto
ARTICLE VII, Sec. 3, 2nd par. The vice President may be appointed as a
Member of the Cabinet. Such appointment requires no confirmation.
PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION
- Elements of Resignation
4 INSTANCES:
(1) Death
(2) Permanent disability
(3) Removal
- The President can only be removed by means of impeachment.
- ARTICLE XI, Sec. 2 : the list of impeachable officer is exclusive!
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
President
Vice President
Members of the Supreme Court
Members of the Constitutional Commission
Ombudsman
33
(b) commutations
(c) pardons
(d) remit fines and forfeitures
(in these 4, conviction by final judgment is a requirement)
(e) amnesty
- require concurrence of the majority of Congress
- conviction by final judgment is not a requirement
- if case is still pending, may extend amnesty
(5) Borrowing Power - ARTICLE VII, Sec. 20 The President may
contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Republic of the
Philippines with the prior concurrence of the Monetary Board, and subject to
limitations as may be provided by law xxx.
(6) Treaty-Making Power ARTICLE VII, Sec. 21 No treaty or
international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at
least 2/3 of all the Members of the Senate.
(7) Budgetary Power- ARTICLE VII, Sec. 22 The President shall submit
to the Congress within 30 days from the opening of every regular session, as
the basis of the general appropriations bill, a budget of expenditures and
sources of financing, including receipts from existing and proposed revenue
measures.
(8) Informing Power- SONA
- ARTICLE VII, Sec. 23 The President shall address the Congress at the
opening of its regular session. He may also appear before it at any other
time.
II. SPECIFIC POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT FOUND SOMEWHERE
ELSE IN THE CONSTITUTION
(1) Power of general supervision over local governments
- ARTICLE X, Sec. 4 The President of the Philippines
shall exercise general supervision over local governments xxx.
(2) Veto Power
- ARTICLE VI, Sec. 27
(3) Power to call Congress to special session
- ARTICLE VI, Sec. 15 The President may call a
special session at any time.
III. OTHER POWERS
(a) reprieves
34
- those connected with the diplomatic and consular services of the country.
(3) Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval
captain
35
The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of other officers lower in
rank in the president alone, in the courts, or in the heads of departments,
agencies, commissions or boards.
36
REGULAR
(2) There are four situations where ARTICLE IX-C, Sec. 1, Par. 2 will apply:
a) where an ad interim appointee to the Comelec, after confirmation by the
Commission on appointment, serves his full seven-year term;
b) where the appointee, after confirmation, swerves a part of his term and
then resigns before his seven-year term of office ends;
c) where the appointee is confirmed to serve the unexpired term of
someone who died or resigned and the appointee completes the unexpired
term;
d) where the appointee has previously served a term of less than seven
years, and a vacancy arises from death or resignation.
- 2nd issue is of first impression! (not yet asked in the bar)
- In any of these four situations, it presupposes that the appointment had
already been confirmed by the Commission on Appointments. It will not
apply in this case where the appointments were by-passsed.
Q: What if the appointments were actually disapproved and not simply bypassed, can they still be validly reappointed?
A: No. The disapproval is actually a judgment on the merits of their
qualification. The principle of checks and balances will come into play.
37
Q: To what positions?
A: (1) Constitutional Commissions COA, Comelec, CSC
(2) Office of the Ombudsman
(3) Secretaries
(4) Undersecretaries
(5) Chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including GOCCs and their
subsidiaries
(2) ARTICLE VII, Sec. 15 Two months immediately before the next
presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or acting
President shall not make appointments except temporary appointment to
executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public
service or endanger public safety.
- This applies only to a presidential election: every 6 years.
Q: To what kind of appointment is this directed against?
A: This is directed against 2 types of appointments: (In Re: Valenzuela and
Vallaria)
(1) those made for buying votes (to influence the outcome of Presidential
elections)
permanent in nature
merely temporary
(2)
those made for partisan considerations (the so-called midnight
appointments)
Ad Interim
requires
confirmation
by
Commission on Appointments
Acting Appointments
the
38
A: (1) President
SC: The records reveal that when De Rama brought the matter of recalling
the appointments of the 14 respondents before the CSC, the only reason he
cited to justify his action was that these were midnight appointments that
are forbidden under ARTICLE VII, Sec. 15 of the Constitution. However, the
CSC ruled and correctly so, that the said prohibition applies only to
presidential appointments. In truth and in fact, there is no law that prohibits
local elective officials from making appointments during the last days of his
or her tenure.
(3) ARTICLE VII, Sec. 13, Par. 1 The President, Vice President, the
Members of the Cabinet and their deputies or assistants shall not, unless
otherwise provided in this Constitution, hold any other office or employment
during their tenure. They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly,
practice any other profession, participate in any business, or be financially
interested in any contract with, or in any franchise, or special privilege,
granted by the Government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
39
FORBIDDEN OFFICE
more of an inhibition
more of a prohibition
SC: The prohibition in Section 13, ARTICLE VII of the 1987 Constitution
does not apply to Elma since neither the PCGG Chairman nor the CPLC is a
cabinet secretary, undersecretary, or assistant secretary even if the former
may have the same rank as the latter positions. Even if Section 13,
ARTICLE VII is not applicable, Elma still could not be appointed concurrently
to the offices of the PCGG Chairman and CPLC because neither office was
occupied by him in an ex-officio capacity and the primary functions of one
office do not require an appointment to the other post. Moreover, even if the
appointments in question are not covered by Section 13, ARTICLE VII of the
1987 Constitution, said appointments are still prohibited under Section 7,
ARTICLE IX-B, which covers all appointive and elective officials, due to the
incompatibility between the primary functions of the offices of the PCGG
Chairman and the CPLC.
A: Yes.
40
A: No!
- In this case, the function of CPLC is to review decisions of officers under
the Office of the President and among them is the PCGG.
- Control is said to be the very heart of the power of the President. (Joson
vs. Torres)
Q: What is an EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, BUREAU, OR OFFICE?
CONTROL POWER
ARTICLE VII, Sec. 17 The President shall have control of all the executive
departments, bureaus, and offices. He shall ensure that the laws be
faithfully executed.
CONTROL
exercised
over
all
executive
departments bureaus, and offices
GENERAL SUPERVISION
exercised over local governments
ARTICLE X, Section 4 The
President of the Philippines shall
exercise general supervision over
local governments xxx
ARTICLE II, Section 25 The State
shall ensure the autonomy of local
governments.
Q: What is CONTROL?
A: (1) to direct the performance of a duty;
(2) to restrain the commission of acts;
(3) to review, reverse, revise, alter, or modify the decisions of his
subordinates; or
(4) to substitute his own decision over that of his subordinates.
Q: Does the President have CONTROL over local government units?
A: No. His power is limited to GENERAL SUPERVISION. The power of
supervision means overseeing or the authority of an officer to see that the
subordinate officers perform their duties. If the subordinate officers fail or
neglect to fulfill their duties, the official may take such action or step as
prescribed by law to make them perform their duties. The Presidents power
of general supervision means no more than the power of ensuring that laws
are faithfully executed or that subordinate officers act within the law.
(JOSON VS. TORRES)
- Hence, the Presidents power of general supervision means to oversee; to
see to it that the local governments and their officials perform their functions
in accordance with law. No more than that.
41
(2) Expressly been made subject to judicial review under ARTICLE VII, Sec.
18, Par. 3 The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding
filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of
Martial Law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or
the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty
days from its filing. (LANSANG VS. GARCIA)
(3) Within 48 hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report
in person or in writing to the Congress.
(4) The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its
members in regular or special session,, may revoke such proclamation or
suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President.
(5) Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress, may in the same
manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be
determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and
public safety requires it.
(6) The Congress, if not in session, shall, within 24 hours following such
proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without
need of a call.
(7) A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution,
nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, NOR
authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over
civilians, where civil courts are able to function, (OLAGUER DOCTRINE)
Nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.
OLAGUER DOCTRINE
- Superseded AQUINO VS. COMMISSIONER
- during martial law, military courts may assume jurisdiction over civilians
- Ninoy Aquino questioned the assumption of jurisdiction of the military
tribunals
(1) invasion }
- sentence was not carried out but he died just the same
} when public safety requires it
(2) rebellion }
Other Limitations
(1) For a period not exceeding 60 days
42
conviction
required
is
not
by
final
judgment
but
He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a
majority of all the Members of the Congress.
- On the other hand, pardon, being a private act of the President, requires
proof and the convict who was granted such pardon has the burden of proof.
(1) does not apply in cases of impeachment (ARTICLE VII, Sec. 19)
(2) there must first be conviction by final judgment (ARTICLE VII, Sec. 19)
(3) not applicable to legislative contempt
(4) not applicable to election offenses without favorable recommendation of
Comelec (ARTICLE IX-C, Sec. 5)
AMNESTY
- segregated from the 4 others
A: Yes. Pardon is available not only to those guilty of criminal offense but
also to those guilty of administrative offense. Section 19, ARTICLE VII
makes no distinction between criminal offense and administrative offense
except with respect to impeachment. If persons convicted of heinous crimes
PARDON
AMNESTY
43
SC: Pardon granted after conviction frees the individual from all the
penalties and legal disabilities and restores him to all his civil rights. But
unless expressly grounded on the persons innocence (which is rare), it
cannot bring back lost reputation for honesty, integrity, and fair dealing. This
must be constantly kept in mind, lest we lose track of the true character and
purpose of the privilege. Pardon does not ipso facto restore a convicted
felon to public office necessarily relinquished or forfeited by reason of the
conviction although such pardon undoubtedly restores his eligibility for
appointment to that office.
SC: Garcia should not be considered to have left his office for all legal
purposes, so that he is entitled to all the rights and privileges that accrued to
him by virtue of the office held, including backwages. If the pardon is based
on the innocence of the individual, it affirms this innocence and makes him a
new man and as innocent as if he had not been found guilty of the offense
charged. When a person is given pardon because he did not truly commit
the offense, the pardon relieves the party from all punitive consequences of
his criminal act, thereby restoring him his clean name, good reputation and
unstained character prior to the finding of guilt.
- He is entitled to full backwages for 8 years. Verily, law, equity, and justice
dictate that Garcia be afforded compassion for the embarrassment,
humiliation, and above all injustice caused to him and his family by his
unfounded dismissal. This is a little measure. SC even commended him for
protecting government property.
ESTRADA VS. DESIERTO
Leo Echegaray was convicted of qualified rape. At that time, the death
penalty is still in effect. On the date he is to be executed by lethal injection,
the SC issued a TRO. This was criticized on the ground, among others, that
it encroached on the power of the President to grant reprieve under Sec. 19,
ARTICLE VII of the 1987 Constitution.
44
SC: Sec. 19, ARTICLE VII of the 1987 Constitution is simply the source of
power of the President to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons and
remit fines and forfeiture after conviction by final judgment. This provision,
however, cannot be interpreted as denying the power of the courts to control
the enforcement of their decisions after the finality. In truth, an accused who
has been convicted by final judgment still possesses collateral rights and
these rights can be claimed in the appropriate courts. The suspension of
such a death sentence is indisputably an exercise of judicial power. It is not
usurpation of the presidential power of reprieve though its effect is the same
the temporary suspension of the execution of the death convict. The
powers of the Executive, Legislative, and the Judiciary to save the life of a
death convict do not exclude each other for the simple reason that there is
no higher right than the right to life.
equally
binding
as
an
EXECUTIVE
- involves implementation of that policy
more or less temporary longer
and of short duration
45
A: No! The President, in ratifying the VFA and in submitting the same to
Senate for concurrence, acted within the confines and limits of the powers
vested in him by the Constitution. It is of no moment that the President, in
the exercise of his wide latitude of discretion and in the honest belief that
VFA falls within the ambit of Section 21, ARTICLE VII of the Constitution
referred to the Senate for concurrence. Certainly, no abuse of discretion
much less a grave, patent and whimsical abuse of judgment, may be
imputed to the President in his act of ratifying the VFA and referring the
same to the Senate for the purpose of complying with the concurrence
requirement embodied in the fundamental law. In doing so, the President
merely performed a constitutional task and exercised a prerogative that
chiefly pertains to the functions of his office.
BUDGETARY POWER
ARTICLE VII, Sec. 22 The President shall submit to the Congress within
30 days from the opening of every regular session, as the basis of the
general appropriations bill, a budget of expenditures and sources of
financing, including receipts from existing and proposed revenue measures.
INFORMING POWER
The President entered into a VFA with the US under which American troops
will be allowed to enter the Philippines to conduct joint military exercises with
members of the Philippine armed forces. He subsequently transmitted said
VFA to the Senate for concurrence invoking his treaty-making power under
Section 21, ARTICLE VII of the 1987 Constitution. Petitioners, who are
opposed to the VFA, challenged the constitutionality of said VFA contending
that it was grave abuse of discretion on the part of the President to transmit
the same to the Senate invoking Section 21, ARTICLE VII of the Constitution
as the controlling provision should have been Section 25, ARTICLE XVIII.
Q: The nature of the petition filed was for certiorari and prohibition. Did it
constitute grave abuse of discretion on the part of the President when he
submitted the VFA to the Senate invoking Section 21 instead of Section 25?
ARTICLE VII, Sec. 23 The President shall address the Congress at the
opening of the regular session. He may also appear before it at any other
time.
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
46
OF
SUPREME
(3)
possesses the qualifications
prescribed by Congress
QUORUM = 8
MAJORITY = 5
VOTING
- Only the members present and who participated in the deliberations on the
issues in the case shall vote.
- All cases xxx which shall be heard en banc xxx shall be decided with the
concurrence of a majority of members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon.
- Cases or matters heard by division shall be decided or resolved with the
concurrence of a majority of Members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon and in no case,
without the concurrence of a t least 3 such members.
- When the required number is not obtained, the case shall be decided en
banc.
- No doctrine or principle of law laid down by the court in a decision
rendered en banc or in a division may be modified or reversed except by the
court sitting en banc.
Q: What cases are to be heard by the Supreme Court en banc?
A: (1) Cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty,
international or executive agreement, law, executive order, or presidential
The regular members of the Council shall be appointed by the President for
a term of 4 years with the consent of the Commission on Appointments.
(2) ARTICLE VIII, Sec. 3 The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.
Appropriations for the Judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below
the amount appropriated for the previous year and after approval, shall be
automatically and regularly released.
General Considerations:
Taada v. Angara By its very nature, Art. II are policies and principles that
may guide the Legislature in the enactment of laws and the courts in its
interpretation
war!
II.
A:
NO! This clause should not be lifted out of context. Look
at the 1st sentence of the provision that the civilian authority is supreme
over the military. Thus, the AFPs role must be understood within the context
of civilian supremacy.
Sec. 16, Art. II The State shall protect and advance the
right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in
accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
Q:
This refers to a right of the people. Why is this
found in Art. II and not in Art. III (Bill of Rights)?
A:
This right belongs to a different category of rights!
Oposa v. Factoran (224 SCRA 792, 1993)
HELD: While this right is found under the
Declaration of Principles and State Polivies, it does not
follow that it is less important than any of the c ivil and
49
MANILA PRINCE HOTEL v. GSIS (GR. 118295, 02 May 1997, 267 SCRA
402)
FACTS:
The Manila Hotel, which was previously owned by a US
Corporation, was then owned by GSIS.
Pursuant to the policy of
Privatization, the GSIS held it up for bidding. The Filipino Corporation lost.
However, it offered to match the bid of the winning foreign corporation.
(2) The word patrimony means heritage. Heritage includes not only natural
resources but also our national and cultural heritage. While the Manila Hotel
was not originally Filipino, it has become truly Filipino, with its own history. It
is a mute witness to our history.
2.
Provisions on Education
Academic Freedom Art. XIV, Sec. 5 (2) Academic freedom
shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.
Note that the provision says institutions of higher
learning
This refers to the tertiary level only!
Q:
A:
50
2.
3.
4.
2.
IX.
51
2.
4.
5.
52
presumed to have been held in the same way from before the
Spanish conquest, and never to have been public land.
Significant Laws
BP 881 Omnibus Election Code
RA 6646 Electoral Reform Law of 1987
RA 7166
ELECTION LAW
Q:
A:
NO!
PRE-ELECTION STAGE
Registration of Voters
Q:
A:
VOTERS QUALIFICATIONS
Art. V, Sec. 1 Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines
not otherwise disqualified by law, who are at least eighteen years of age and
who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year and in the
place wherein they propose to vote for at least six months preceding the
election. No literacy, property or other substantive requirement shall be
imposed on the exercise of suffrage.
53
executed by these Filipinos abroad that they will return and resume
residence in the Philippines within 3 years.
-Registration
Art. V. Sec 1
-Filing of Certificate of
Candidacy
Sec. 79(A) OEC
Sec. 73 OEC
-Political Parties
Section 8, BP 881
-Substitution
Candidates
Mitmug v.
of
Sec. 12 RA 9006
PNOC-EDC v.
COMELEC
-
Pre-Proclamation
Miranda v. Abaya
Election Protest
Counter protest
Kho v. COMELEC
Sec. 241,242,243
OEC
NLRC
Sec. 26 OEC
Sec. 4 RA 7166
Sec. 77 OEC
Sec. 66 OEC
Failure of Elections
Sec. 6 OEC
-Campaign Period
Monsale v. Nico
Quo Warranto
Effect of Death
COMELEC
Sec. 68 OEC
Resolution
Effects
Disqualification
of
De Castro v. COMELEC
Santiago v. FVR
Sec. 6, RA 7166
days)
Guerrero v.
COMELEC
Q:
A:
MACALINTAL v. COMELEC
HELD: Under the ABSENTEE VOTERS ACT OF 2003, overseas absentee
voters are allowed to vote for President, Vice-President, Senators and PartyList representatives. This is a clear intent to enfranchise Filipinos abroad, to
allow them to have a voice in the selection of our leaders. This refers to
IMMIGRANTS and those who acquire the right to reside therein. It does not
pertain to NATURALIZED CITIZENS. However, there must be an affidavit
Loong v.
COMELEC
Salcedo v.
COMELEC
Tecson v.
COMELEC
54
Provides for:
(1) A system for securing the security and sanctity of ballots
(2) A system for absentee voting
EXIT POLLS
The reason for securing the sanctity/secrecy of ballots is to avoid vote
buying through voter identification. What is forbidden is the association of
voters with their respective votes for the purpose of assuring that votes have
been cast in accordance with the instruction of a third party.
Exit polls conducted by ABS-CBN does not violate the sanctity of ballots.
The contents of the ballots are not exposed. The revelation is not
compulsory but voluntary. Also, voters are not required to reveal their
names. (ABS-CBN v. COMELEC)
MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM
Q:
ELECTION PERIOD
Q:
A:
A:
A:
COMELEC in accordance with Article IX-C, Sec. 2(5). It is the
registration with COMELEC that vests personality to an organization as a
political party.
Art. IX-C, Sec. 2(5) ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAY NOT BE REGISTERED
AS POLITICAL PARTIES
(1) religious denominations and sects
55
A:
No. It is the ministerial duty on the part of the election official to
receive and acknowledge receipt of the certificate of candidacy. The
question of whether or not a person is disqualified belongs to another
tribunal in an appropriate disqualification case.
PERIOD
Sec. 73, 1st sentence, OEC No person shall be eligible for any elective
public office unless he files a sworn certificate of candidacy within the period
fixed herein xxx
The certificate of candidacy must be filed within the period prescribed by law.
Late filing not allowed
Sec. 73, 3rd sentence, OEC No person shall be eligible for more than one
office to be filled in the same election, and if he files his certificate of
candidacy for more than one office, he shall not be eligible for any of them
xxx
The certificate of candidacy must be filed for only one office in an election
If a candidate files his certificate of candidacy for more than one office, he
shall not be eligible for any of them.
WITHDRAWAL
Q:
A:
Yes. A person who has filed a certificate of candidacy may, prior to
the election, withdraw the same by submitting to the office concerned a
written declaration under oath. (Sec. 73, 2nd sentence, OEC)
MONSALE v. NICO
On the last day of filing of certificate of candidacy. March 31, Jose Monsale
withdrew his certificate of candidacy. April 1, campaign started. On April 2,
he wanted to run again so he filed a written declaration withdrawing his
withdrawal.
HELD: The withdrawal of the withdrawal of the certificate of candidacy
made after the last day of filing is considered as filing of a new certificate of
candidacy. Hence, it was not allowed since it was filed out of time.
Q:
Ka Roger went to Laguna to file COC. The election officer refused
because he seeks to achieve goals through violence. Valid?
EFFECT OF FILING OF A CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY
56
Appointive Officials
Sec. 66. OEC Candidates holding appointive office or position Any
person holding a public appointive office or position, including active
members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and officers and
employees in the government-owned or controlled corporations, shall be
considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate
of candidacy.
Q:
Vice-governor filed a certificate of candidacy for governor. What is
the effect?
A:
He is NOT ipso facto considered resigned. Sec. 67 OEC has been
repealed by the FAIR ELECTION ACT (RA 9006). Any elective official,
national or local shall not be considered as resigned from their elective
office.
Q:
X, a municipal treasurer filed a certificate of candidacy for governor.
What is the effect?
SUBSTITUTION OF CANDIDATES
A:
Q:
Q:
A:
A:
NO! The appointive official is ipso facto resigned. Ipso facto means
no need to resign.
Q:
A:
Sec. 67, OEC Candidates holding elective office xxx has already been
repealed by the Repealing Clause of the Fair Election Act under Sec. 14, RA
9006 Repealing Clause. Sec 67 and 85 0f the EOC xxx are hereby
repealed.
Q:
Q:
A:
Substitution can only take place on the first day of campaign period
until NOT later than mid-day of election day.
Q:
A:
Q:
PNOC-EDC v. NLRC
HELD: The OEC does not distinguish between employees of GOCCs which
have original charters and those that do not have one.
Elective Officials
A:
Secton 38, COMELEC Resolution 7767 (30 Nov 2006),
Implementing Rules of the Fair Election Act Effect of Filing Certificate of
Candidacy of Elective Officials Any elective official, whether national or
local, who has filed a certificate of candidacy for the same or other office
shall not be considered resigned from his office.
57
A:
The purpose of the law in requiring the filing of the COC and in fixing the
time limit therefore are:
(a) To enable the voters to know at least 60 days before the regular
election, the candidates among whom they are to make the choice
and
Yes! As a general rule, under RA 9006, Sec. 12, the same will be
considered as stray votes but will not invalidate the whole ballot.
Exception is when the substitute carries the same family name, the said
provision will not apply.
A:
No. The certificate of candidacy was filed long after the last day of
filing (Sec. 73, OEC)
Q:
Since there was no valid substitution, should the candidate who
obtained the second highest vote be proclaimed?
A:
No. Under the doctrine on the rejection of second placer, the
second placer is just like that second placer. He was not the choice of the
electorate. The wreath (crown) of victory cannot be transferred to the
repudiated loser. (Cayat v. COMELEC citing Butch Aquino v. COMELEC
and Sunga v. COMELEC)
Q:
A:
LABO DOCTRINE
The thrust is what to do with the votes cast for a disqualified candidate.
Should they be considered as stray votes?
SC:
No! That would disenfranchise the majority. The votes cast for the
disqualified are not stray votes they are valid votes only that the candidate
was later on found to be disqualified.
It would have been different if his disqualification was so apparent,
so notorious, so much so that the people, notwithstanding that they knew
him to be disqualified, they still voted for him in which case the votes cast for
him shall be considered as protest votes. Protest votes are considered as
58
stray votes. But not in this case, where the people of Baguio voted for Labo
only to find out that he is disqualified.
(1)
CAYAT v. COMELEC
FACTS: Rev. Fr. Nardo Cayat ran for Mayor. Palileng, his opponent, found
out that Cayat, before the elections, was previously convicted of acts of
lasciviousness although he was granted probation. His candidacy was then
questioned in a disqualification case invoking Section 40 pf the LGC.
(Disqualification The following persons are disqualified from running for
any elective local position: (a) those sentenced by final judgment for an
offense involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one (1)
year or more of imprisonment, within (2) years after serving sentence ; xxx) .
COMELEC disqualified Cayat on the ground of conviction of an offense
involving moral turpitude. However, Cayat alleged that he did not receive a
copy of the judgment. That decision disqualifying Cayat became final even 2
weeks before the election. Still, Cayat won in the election. Palileng claimed
that since Cayat is disqualified, he should be the one proclaimed.
HELD: The Court agreed and did not apply the doctrine of the rejection of
the second placer. The one who obtained the second highest number of
votes was the one actually proclaimed. This is very peculiar because here,
there is only one candidate. Since Cayat was disqualified, it is as if he is not
a candidate. Hence, there is no second placer here.
The doctrine of the rejection of second placer is not applicable because of
Sec.6 of RA 6646
Also, under Section 6, RA 6646 (Electoral Reform Law of 1987 Effect of
disqualification) which contemplates of 2 situations, it is the 1 st sentence
which applies to Cayat. He was declared by final judgment, to be
disqualified because the decision attained finality even 2 weeks before the
election. He shall therefore not be voted for and the votes cast for him shall
not be counted.
The second sentence contemplates that there was a disqualification case
filed before the COMELEC but for whatever reason, COMELEC was not
able to render a decision before the election and such candidate won in the
election, in which case, the court or Commission shall continue with the trial
and hearing of the election, inquiry or protest.
A:
A nuisance candidate is a candidate who has no bona fide intention
to run, his purpose is merely to put the election process in mockery or
disrepute or to cause confusion among the voters by the similarity of the
names of the registered candidates or by other circumstances or acts
intended to prevent a faithful determination of the true will of the electorate.
(Bautista v. COMELEC)
59
Within five (5) days from the last day of filing of the certificate of candidacy
assuming that COMELEC did not act motu proprio.
(3)
Section 78, OEC Petition to deny due course to or cancel a
certificate of candidacy. - A verified petition seeking to deny due course or to
cancel a certificate of candidacy may be filed by the person exclusively on
the ground that any material representation contained therein as required
under Section 74 hereof is false. Xxx
Period to file a petition
Within twenty-five (25) days from the time the candidate filed his certificate
of candidacy/ from the date the candidate alleged to have made
misrepresentation in the COC filed.
ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS v. COMELEC
LOONG v. COMELEC
GUERRERO v. COMELEC
Farias was elected, proclaimed and took his oath. The COMELEC ousted
itself of jurisdiction. SC upheld COMELEC. It was recognition of the power
of the HRET and the constitutional boundaries.
HELD: No. The petition was filed out of time. The disqualification case
under Sec. 78 should be filed within 25 days from the date the candidate
who made the misrepresentation filed his certificate of candidacy, not on the
date of discovery. The 25-day period is mandatory.
There was yet no proclamation, hence not yet a member of the HOR.
COMELEC still has jurisdictom
Q:
(1)COMELEC
A:
(2)Treasurer
(3)Municipal Judge
SALCEDO v. COMLELEC
HELD: Material misrepresentation refers to the QUALIFICATIONS of the
elective official for the elective office and NOT to any innocuous mistake.
There must be a deliberate intent to deceive the people to ones qualification
for public office.
The idea is that in case of lost return, they can refer to the other copies.
Number of votes written in words and number
TECSON v. COMELEC
FACTS: A disqualification case was filed against FPJ in accordance with
Sec. 78 on the ground of material representation as to the citizenship.
HELD: There was no material misrepresentation. The misrepresentation
must not only be material. There must also be a deliberate intent to mislead
or deceive as to ones qualification to public office.
POST ELECTION
PRE-PROCLAMATION CASE
Q:
A:
Pre-proclamation case.
election
Q:
60
A:
DOCTRINE OF
DONCTRINE
STATISTICAL
IMPROBABILITY
LAGUMBAY
Any objection on the election returns before the city or municipal board of
canvassers, or on the municipal certificates of canvass before the provincial
board of canvassers or district boards of canvassers in Metro Manila Area,
shall be specifically noticed in the minutes of their respective proceedings.
61
(1) President
(2) Vice-President
(3) Senators
(4) House of Representatives
There can be no pre-proclamation case on matters relating to
transmission, custody of election returns; the only issue that can be
raised illegality of the composition or proceeding of the Board of
Canvassers
(1) No election
The election in any polling place has not been held on the date
fixed on account of FVTFA
(2) Election is suspended
The election in any polling place has been suspended before the
hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting on account of FVTFA
(3) There is a failure to elect
After the voting and during the preparation and transmission of the
election returns or to the custody or canvass thereof, such election
results in a failure to elect on account of FVTFA; nobody emerged
as winner
Q:
What are the two (2) conditions that must concur before the
COMELEC can act on a verified petition seeking to declare a failure of
election?
A:
FAILURE OF ELECTION
Section 6, OEC Failure of election. - If, on account of force majeure,
violence, terrorism, fraud, or other analogous causes the election in any
polling place has not been held on the date fixed, or had been suspended
before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting, or after the voting
and during the preparation and the transmission of the election returns or in
the custody or canvass thereof, such election results in a failure to elect, and
in any of such cases the failure or suspension of election would affect the
result of the election, the Commission shall, on the basis of a verified petition
by any interested party and after due notice and hearing, call for the holding
or continuation of the election not held, suspended or which resulted in a
failure to elect on a date reasonably close to the date of the election not
held, suspended or which resulted in a failure to elect but not later than thirty
days after the cessation of the cause of such postponement or suspension
of the election or failure to elect.
GROUNDS FOR FAILURE OF ELECTION
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Force majeure
Violence
Terrorism
Fraud
Analogous Causes
SITUATIONS
Political Law Review Notes (Atty. Edwin Sandoval)
Prepared by: Atty Joan P. Gamboa
Q:
A:
COMELEC EN BANC. The majority of the Commission may grant
the petition and schedule special election in areas affected.
(Section 4, RA 7166 Postponement, Failure of election and
special Elections The postponement, declaration of failure of election and
the calling of special elections as provided in Sec. 5, 6, and 7 of the OEC
shall be decided by the Commission sitting en banc by a majority vote of its
Members. The causes for the declaration of a failure of election may occur
before or after the casting of votes or n the day of the election xxx)
BANAGA v. COMELEC
Failure of election is the same with petition to annul election returns
General Rule: xxx All such election cases shall be heard and decided in
division, provided that motions for reconsideration of decisions shall be
decided by the Commision en banc. (Art IX-C, Section 3)
Exception: A petition to declare a failure of election shall be heard by the
COMELEC en banc.]
PRE-PROCLAMATION v. FAILURE OF ELECTION
62
MITMUG v. COMELEC
There were 3 candidates for mayor. The total registered voters is 10, 000.
Only 3,000 voted. There was a low turn out of voters. A petition was filed to
declare a failure of election
HELD: The petition cannot be granted. There was an election that took
place. The law does not require the majority of voters to cast their votes.
There can onlybe a failure of election if the will of the people is defiled and
cannot be determined.
PROCLAMATION
DUMAYAS v. COMELEC
Q:
A:
-eg.
Citizenship,
residence,
disloyalty to Republic of the
Philippines
JURISDICTION
(1) President/ VP
- SC en banc , acting
as Presidential
Electoral Tribunal
It is the ministerial duty of the BOC to proclaim the winning candidate. It has
no discretion whether to proclaim or not. After the last official act, which is
the proclamation, the BOC becomes functus officio and may not validly
reconvene motu proprio. However, when the COMELEC ordered the
reconveyance of the BOC, it may.
QUO WARRANTO
QW 10 days from
proclamation
sole judge
(2) Members
Congress
- EP
30 days from
proclamation
of
the
-EP or QW
-Senators
-Senate
Tribunal
Electoral
-Congressmen
- 15 days after
proclamation
- 10 days after
proclamation
No appeal
63
Or Rule 65 (Special
Civil Action
on
Certiorari)
(3) Governor/
Governor
Vice-
-COMELEC (Original)
(Art. IX-C, Sec. 2[2])
-10
days
proclamation
from
-SC (Appellate)
(4)
Regional/
Provincial/City
-COMELEC (Original)
-SC (Appellate)
-RTC (Original)
-COMELEC
(Appellate)
(Art. IX-C, Sec. 2[2])
-MTC (Original)
(trial courts of limited
jurisdiction)
-COMELEC
(Appellate)
A:
The death of the protestant neither constitutes a ground for the
dismissal of the contest not ousts the trial court of its jurisdiction to decide
the election contest. An election protest involves both the private interests of
the rival candidates and the public interest in the final determination of the
real choice of the electorate, and for this reason, an election contest
necessarily survives the death of the protestant or the protestee. But while
the right to public office is personal and exclusive to the public officer, an
election protest ins not purely personal and exclusive to the protestant or to
the protestee such that after the death of either would oust the court of all
authority to continue the protest proceedings. An election contest, after all,
involves not merely conflicting private aspirations but is imbued with
paramount public interests. (DE CASTRO v. COMELEC)
COUNTER-PROTEST available to a winning candidate if his election is
protested.
A remedy available to a duly proclaimed winner in order to protect ones
lead. Allege also the precinct where your opponent cheated.
KHO v. COMELEC
64
Counter protest must be filed within 5 days from receipt of the copy of the
protest. The period is not only mandatory but also jurisdictional. It partakes
the nature of a counterclaim. So that the court is ousted of jurisdiction to
entertain a counter protest belatedly filed.
If a counter protest was belatedly filed, but was erroneously admitted, the
remedy is to file a motion to expunge the counter protest from the records. If
not expunged from the record, file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
ELECTION OFFENSE
Q:
A:
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Q:
A:
COMELEC not the fiscal unless the latter is deputized by the
COMELEC
The Code is a general law and incorporates into a unified document the
major structural, functional and procedural principles of governance and
embodies changes in administrative structures and procedures designed to
serve the people (Ople v. Torres).
Q:
A:
INCLUSION/EXCLUSION PROCEEDINGS
- within the jurisdiction of MTC appealable to RTC
-RTC decision is not appealable
WHEN ELECTION PROTEST BECOMES MOOT
(1) GENERAL RULE After the elections, the liberal interpretation rule
shall be applied. IN CASE OF DOUBT, the rule in favor of the vote
65
2. Professor Goodnow
it is that part of public law which fixes the organization of the government
and determines the competence of the authorities who execute the law and
indicates to the individual remedies for the violation of his rights.
2 COMPONENTS:
In both definitions, the focus is on the executive department acting in quasilegislative and quasi-judicial functions.
(2) Various arms through which political authority is made effective in the
Philippines.
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
It implements or enforces
But the law may vest the agency quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative
powers.
66
public good and welfare affecting the public in general - the function is
governmental.
ARTICLE X, Section 4
POWER
OF
GENEREAL
SUPERVISION means to generally
oversee, see to it that the local
governments and their officials perform
their functions in accordance with law
(no more than that)
*LGU's are not under the control power of the President. It falls under the
general supervision of the President.
DEPARTMENT
-
BUREAU
OTHER AGENCIES
OFFICE
67
INSTRUMENTALITY
-
REGULATORY AGENCY
-
They do not fall within the control power of the president over the
departments.
CHARTERED INSTITUTIONS
-
Ex: BSP
ILLUSTRATION
Delegation of Powers
Conferment of Jurisdiction
QUASI- LEGISLATIVE
QUASI JUDICIAL
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY
Administrative Regulations
Legislative
Supplemental
Interpretative
Contingent
Due Process
Contempt Power
Appeals
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
68
69
When Article 2 of the New Civil Code refers to laws, these do not
only refer to those enacted by Congress but includes administrative
regulations promulgated by administrative bodies in their quasilegislative functions except those which are merely internal or
interpretative in nature. (Tanada v. Tuvera)
Q. What are
REGULATION?
the
REQUISITES
OF
A VALID
ADMINISTRATIVE
FIRST REQUISITE: its promulgation must be authorized by the legislature meaning, there is a valid delegation of power.
SECOND REQUISITE: it must be within the scope of authority given by the
legislature.
-
70
it must not
confiscatory
be
unreasonable,
oppressive,
-the powers to create and abolish public office are vested in the
legislative
4. It is not a property.
It is therefore not protected or guaranteed by the due process
clause.
Ex: A is holding public office, Congress decided to abolish it. A cannot
complain that there was a violation of the due process clause if he was not
given an opportunity to be heard, provided that the abolition is done in good
faith.
ABOLITION VS REMOVAL
In abolition, what is abolished is the office itself, while in removal, it
is the occupant that is removed, but the office remains.
71
Ex: A is holding a public office, he was removed. In this case, A may validly
invoke his security of tenure. He can only be removed for a just and valid
cause and there must be an observance of due process.
PUBLIC OFFICER
Nature of designation
72
can the Deputy Accountant claim that there was a violation of the next in
rank rule?
A: No. The next in rank rule applies only in case of promotion. What is
involved here is a mere transfer, a lateral movement involving same rank
and position.
In case of a promotion, vertical movement from lower to a higher position.
Q: What if the one that was appointed was the Administering Officer, can
Deputy Accountant complain?
A: Yes, because it was filled by a promotion.
Q: Can the Deputy Officer claim that he should be the one to be appointed?
2. Doctrine of Separation of Powers
Congress encroached on the power of the President to
appoint. The President was not given an option at all. The Appointment was
limited to the Mayor of Olongapo. The heart or core of appointment is the
power to choose. Also, the nature of appointment is discretionary, not a
ministerial act.
Hence, when the Congress clothes the President with the power to appoint
an officer, it cannot at the same time limit the choice of the President to only
one candidate. Once the power of appointment is conferred on the
President, such conferment necessarily carries the discretion on whom to
appoint.
NEXT IN RANK RULE
Where can you find the said rule?
Civil Service Law
ABILA VS CSC
Q: If the next to the Head Chief Accountant is the Deputy accountant and the
third is the Administering Officer IV, then the office of Chief Accountant
became vacant and the then Deputy accountant and Administering Officer IV
applied, assume that another Chief Accountant applied and was appointed,
73
1. As an act
2. As an endowment
QUALIFICATION AS AN ACT
-consists in taking of an oath
-in case of an accountable officer (Ex: Treasurer), consist in the posting of a
bond.
1. Art. 7, sec. 5 before they enter on the execution of their office, the
President, the Vice President or the Acting President shall take the following
oath or affirmation XXX.
PRINCIPLE OF VACANCY
Q: Jose, an employee working for ten years already, was surprised to learn
that Pedro replaced him. Jose was removed. But the CSC ordered the
reinstatement of Jose which became final. Can Pedro validly complain that
there was a violation of security of tenure?
A: No. This is because there was no vacancy, hence security of tenure did
not attach.
2 PRINCIPLIES:
1. A person no matter how qualified cannot be appointed to an office which
is not vacant.
2. One who is illegally dismissed from office is, by fiction of law, deemed not
to have vacated his office. His security of tenure did not attach.
2. Art IX-B, Sec. 4 All public officers and employees shall take an oath or
affirmation to uphold and defend the Constitution.
3. Art. XV, Sec. 5, par. 1 All members of the armed forces shall take an
oath or affirmation to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Q: A public officer was appointed/elected. Then he assumed the office but
failed to take an oath. He nonetheless preformed his duties. Are his acts
valid?
A: Yes, insofar only as third persons are concerned and the general public
relied on the said acts. He is a de facto officer.
De Facto Officer One who is in actual possession but only has a colorable
title. His title is imperfect.
His acts are valid insofar only as third persons are concerned and the
general public relied on the said acts.
His title may only be questioned directly in a quo warranto proceedings
Intruder/Usurper No Title but in actual possession
His acts are entirely void
74
In Civil Law, residence and domicile are different. In the said law, a person
may only have several residences but may only have one domicile. In
Ploitical Law, particularly in election law, residence and domicile are the
same.
3 CLASSES OF DOMICILE
1. Domicile of Birth
EXCEPTIONS:
2. Domicile of Choice
MACALINTAL VS COMELEC
FLORES VS DRILON
Domicile of Origin
1 year from the disposition from office. After 1 year, the de facto
officer will ripen into a de jure one.
it is the domicile of the childs parents and not necessarily the place
of birth.
Domicile of Choice
-
a. citizenship
b. residence
SC: With the death of her husband, her adoption of the San Juan residency
is lost.
75
c). age
SC: Argument No.1) he was voted by the people, hence the defect was
cured:
d). education
--a qualification under Civil Service Law
--true only to appointive officials, in case of elective official, minimum
requirements are that he must be able to read and write
Religious Affiliations
--No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights
Political Affiliation
G.R. Not a valid qualification
Xpn: Can be a valid qualification under:
1. Party-list system
DISQUALIFICATIONS:
Sec. 40, LGC. Disqualifications. The following persons are disqualified
from running for any elective local position:
1. Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral
turpitude or for an offense punishable by one year or more of imprisonment
within two years after serving the offense;
2. Those removed from office as a result of an administrative offense;
76
SC: No. Fugitive from justice applies not only to those convicted by final
judgment and who absconds to evade punishment BUT also to one, where a
valid criminal information is already filed and he absconded to evade
jurisdiction.
RODRIGUEZ VS COMELEC
Although there was indeed fraud insurance case before
California court, HE IS NOT A FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE because
cases were filed 5 months after he has returned to the Philippines,
controlling factor was the intent to evade jurisdiction. He could not have
intent to evade because there is no information yet.
the
the
the
the
1. Moral turpitude
was passed. On the said special election, Hagedorn filed his certificate of
candidacy. His qualification was questioned.
SC: He is qualified. The three term limit is found in Art. X, Sec. 8 and
reiterated in Sec. 43, par. B of LGC. WHAT IS PROHIBITED IS IMMEDIATE
RE-ELECTION to the SAME OFFICE for a FOURTH CONSECUTIVE
TERM. In this case there is an intervening date.
Q: What if in 2004 and 2007 he wins again, then in 2010, he wants to run
again, is he qualified to run?
A: SC in the same case said that: The service of a recall term shall
constitute one full term. Reason: Elected official in a recall election should
know that the service of recall term shall constitute one full term. (OBITER
DICTUM)
MENDOZA VS COMELEC
Service of recall term will not constitute one full term in applying the
disqualification.
78
SCOPE
SC: Philippine National Red Cross is a GOCC with an original charter under
R.A> 95, as amended. The test to determine whether a corporation is
government owned or controlled or private in nature is simple. Is it created
by its own charter for the exercise of a public function or by incorporation
under the general incorporation law? Those with special charters are
government corporations subject to its own provisions and its employees are
under the jurisdiction of CSC and are compulsory members of the GSIS.
The PNRC was not impliedly converted to a private corporation simply
because its charter was amended.
Art. IX-B, sec. 2(1) The Civil Service embraces all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies of the government, including the GOCC with
original charters.
KINDS OF APPOINTMENTS
1. Permanent extended to one who possesses all the qualifications
including civil service eligibility.
2. Temporary - extended to one who possesses all the qualifications but
without the civil service eligibility.
The law requires publication of all vacant positions in the government. This
is mandatory so that all eligible can apply.
Positions that need not be published include PRIMARILY CONFIDENTIAL
POSITIONS, which are co-terminus with the appointing authority.
Duration of Temporary Appointment
-
one year
A: Career
BAR Question:
A: NO! They may possess technical skills or training but not in the supreme
or superior degree, hence non-career.
1. Career
b. Tenure is:
1. Limited to a period specified by law;
2. Coterminous with that of the appointing authority or
subject to his pleasure; or
3. Limited to the duration of a particular project for which
the purpose for employment was made.
Q:
How do you classify position of members of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan?
A: Non-career. It is an elective office.
All elective officials occupy non-career positions since no examination is
required to be taken and the tenure is limited to a period specified by law.
GRINO VS CSC
The position of a provincial attorney is both highly technical and
primarily confidential position. But its predominant feature is primarily
confidential. Hence, he can be removed based on loss of trust or
confidence. However his staff is highly technical. He holds the position coterminous with the pleasure of the appointing authority. There is no removal
but only expiration of term.
When pleasure becomes displeasure, the term becomes fixed and
automatically expires. One who is holding a primarily confidential position,
who was removed from in the ground of loss of trust and confidence cannot
complain on the ground that there was a violation of his security of tenure.
PROXIMITY RULE
- This is the test to determine whether or not the position is primarily
confidential or not. The distance between the positions of the appointing
authority and the employee is considered.
CSC VS SALAS
Salas was an employee of PAGCOR, a GOCC with an original
charter. He was a supervisor of the dealers in the casino. He was
suspected in engaging in proxy betting. There was a discreet investigation
conducted of his act. He was later removed on the ground of loss of trust
and confidence. His defense was that he cannot be removed from office on
the ground that under the Constitution, no employee of the Civil Service shall
80
Secretary/head of bureau-CSC-CA
CSCCA
81
CSC VS DACOYCOY
Dacoycoy was the head of a government vocational school in
Samar. Two of his sons were extended permanent appointment under his
administrative supervision although he was not the one who neither
appointed nor recommended them. A case was filed against him for
violation of the law on nepotism. CSC found him guilty. The penalty was
dismissal.
As the party adversely affected, he appealed to CA. CA
exonerated him. If we will follow the Paredes ruling, there is no more appeal
and the complainant cannot appeal because is merely a complaining
witness.
SC: CSC can appeal because it was their decision that was reversed by the
CA. To this extent only, CSC became the party adversely affected. By this
ruling, the Paredes Doctrine, up to this extent, is abandoned. The phrase
party adversely affected refers to the government employee against whom
the administrative case is filed for the purpose of a disciplinary action which
may take the form of suspension, demotion in rank or salary, etc. and not
included are the cases where the penalty imposed is suspension for not
more than 30 days or fine in an amount not exceeding 30 days salary.
(PAREDES VS CSC)
82
BEJA, SR VS CA
Preventive suspension is not a penalty by itself; it is imposed only
during the pendency of an administrative investigation. It is merely a
measure of precaution so that the employee who is charged may be
separated for obvious reasons, from the scene of his alleged misfeasance,
ehilr the same is being investigated. Thus, preventive suspension is distinct
from the administrative penalty of removal from office such as the one
mentioned in Sec 8 (d) of PD 807. While preventive suspension may be
imposed on a respondent during the investigation of the charges against
him, the removal from office is a penalty which may only be meted out upon
him at the termination of the investigation or the final disposition of the case.
GLORIA VS CA
Preventive suspension pending investigation is not a penalty. It is
simply a means of preventing the latter from interfering or intimidating the
witnesses against him.
YABOT VS OMBUDSMAN VASQUEZ
An administrative case was filed against Vice-Mayor Yabot by an
American doctor. He was placed under preventive suspension for 60 days.
Yabot contends that he was already suspended and hence, can no longer be
suspended again.
SC: The first suspension that was imposed was not the penalty. It is merely
a preventive suspension. The second suspension was the penalty. The two
suspensions are of different nature. The service of preventive suspension
cannot be credited with the service of suspension as penalty.
LAYNO VS SANDIGANBAYAN
If the preventive suspension, however, becomes indefinite,
so much that the term of the elective official is about to expire and his
suspension is not yet lifted, in effect he was being penalized and considering
that after the investigation is not yet terminated, to that extent, there was a
denial of due process, hence must be nullified.
Also, the right to due
process of the people who voted for him is likewise violated.
3. Ombudsman Act
Period 6 months
Case Hagad vs Gonzales
B. CRIMINAL CASE
1. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
Period 90 days applying by analogy
PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE CASE
I. CIVIL SERVICE LAW
If one is charged administratively, while pending investigation, he
can be preventively suspended for a period of 90 days.
If after the lapse of the 90 day period and the investigation has not
been terminated, there will be an automatic reinstatement.
However if one contributed to the delay of the proceedings or has
filed a petition for certiorari, the period of the delay or certiorari will not
be included in the computation of the 90 day period of preventive
suspension.
Q: Who shall impose the preventive suspension?
A: The CHIEF of the office, agency or bureau shall be the disciplinary
authority.
83
GLORIA VS CA
During the teachers strike, the public school teachers in this case
did not report for work. Accordingly, they were administratively charged
and placed under preventive suspension. The investigation concluded
before their 90 day suspension and they were found guilty. On appeal,
Merit Systems and Protection Board, later affirmed by the CSC,
dismissed their claim. Before the CA, they asked that they be paid for
their salaries during their suspension beyond 90 days. This was
granted. Hence, Sec. Gloria questioned this.
SC: The public school teachers are entitled to their salaries computed
from the time of their dismissal or suspension until their actual
reinstatement, for a period of not exceeding 5 years.
There are two kinds of preventive suspension of civil service
employees who are charged with offenses punishable by removal or
suspension:
1. Preventive Suspension pending investigation
2. Preventive suspension pending appeal, if the penalty imposed is
suspension or dismissal and after review the respondent is exonerated
on appeal.
Preventive suspension pending investigation is not a penalty. It is a
measure intended to enable the disciplining authority to investigate
charges against the respondent by preventing the latter from
intimidating or in any way influencing witnesses against him. If the
investigation is not finished and the decision is not rendered within the
period, the suspension will be lifted and the respondent will
automatically be reinstated. If after the investigation, the respondent is
found innocent of the charges and is exonerated, he should be
reinstated. However, no compensation was due for the preventive
suspension pending investigation.
In case of a suspension pending appeal, he is entitled to
compensation for the period of their suspension pending appeal if
eventually he is found innocent. Why? It is actually punitive in
character although it is in effect subsequently considered illegal if
respondent is exonerated and the administrative decision finding him
guilty is reversed. Hence, he should be reinstated with full pay for the
period of the suspension.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE:
Pending Investigation not entitled. Why? Not a penalty but is entitled t
reinstatement.
84
SC:
the contention is not correct. The amendatory provisions clearly
states that any incumbent public officer against whom any criminal
prosecution under a valid information under RA 3019 or for any offense
involving fraud upon the government or public funds or property whether as
a simple or as a complex offense and in whatever stage or execution and
mode of participation, is pending in court shall be suspended from office.
Thus by the use of the word office the same applies to any office which the
officer charged may be holding and not only the particular office which he
was charged.
*Section 13 RA 3019 does not state that the officer concerned must be
suspended only for the office he was charged.
86
Exception: Elective official can hold other positions/ office in an exofficio capacity. The prohibition extends only to public and not to
private positions. (FLORES vs. DRILON)
2.
SC:
this cannot be allowed. The work of the cabinet members
demands full time
work. Their position is sui generis. Article VII,
section 13 is a new provision. The reason is to avoid what happened in the
Marcos era. It is a special provision which applies to Cabinet
members.
Article IX-B sec. 7 (2) on the other hand is a general provision. Hence, the
EO is unconstitutional.
*see also PUBLIC INTEREST CENTER vs. ELMA June 30, 2006
4.
87
5.
5.
6.
Law on Nepotism
Violation results to dismissal with forfeiture of benefits
Found in the Civil Service Law
Under Section 59, Civil Service Law All appointments in the
national, provincial, city, and municipal governments or in any
branch or instrumentality thereof, including government owned
or controlled corporations, made in favor of a relative of the
appointing or recommending authority, or of the chief of the
bureau or office or of the persons exercising immediate
supervision over him, are hereby prohibited.
Under Article VII, Section 13 The President may not appoint his
spouse or relatives within the 4 th civil degree of consanguinity or
affinity to
a. Member of Constitutional Commission
b. Office of the Ombudsman
c. Secretaries and Undersecretaries
d. Chairman, heads of bureau or offices
Prohibited relationships
Under the Civil Service Law = 3rd Civil Degree
Under the LGC = 4th civil degree SEC. 79. Limitation on
Appointments. - No person shall be appointed in the career
service of the local government if he is related within the fourth
civil degree of consanguinity or affinity to the appointing or
recommending authority.
DEBULGADO vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
It was contended that the law on nepotism applies only to
original appointments but not to promotional appointments.
SC:
The law on nepotism applies to all kinds of appointment
because the law does not distinguish.
A textual examination of Section 69 at once reveals that
the prohibition was cast in comprehensive and unqualified terms.
Firstly, it explicitly covers all appointments without seeking to
make ay distinction between differing kinds or types of
appointments. Secondly, Section 59 covers all appointments to the
national, provincial, city, and municipal governments, as well as any
branch or instrumentality thereof and all government owned or
controlled corporations. Thirdly, there is a list of exceptions set out
in Section 59 itself, but it is a short list.
Both an original appointment and a promotion are
particular species of personnel action. The original appointment of
a civil service employee and all subsequent personnel actions
undertaken by or in respect of that employee such as promotion,
transfer, reinstatement, reemployment, etc. must comply with the
Implementing Rules including of course the prohibition against
nepotism in Rule XVIII.
88
Pedro
2.
Mario
3.
Jose
District II (8,000)
5,000
4,500
5,000
Q: Let us assume that 8 sanggunian members, the last ranking died. What
happens?
A: Apply sec. 45 LGC, not the rule on automatic succession.
Section 45, LGC Permanent vacancies in the Sanggunian (a)
Permanent vacancies in the sanggunian where automatic successions
provided above do not apply shall be filled by appointment in the following
manner:
(1)
The President, through the executive secretary, in
the case of the sangguniang panlalawigan and the
sangguniang panlungsod of highly urbanized cities
and independent component cities;
(2) The governor, in the case of the sangguniang
panlungsod of component cities and sanggunian
bayan;
(3) The city or municipal mayor, in the case of
sangguniang barangay, upon recommendation of the
sangguniang barangay concerned.
(b) Except for the sangguniang barangay, only the nominee of the
political party under which the sanggunian member concerned had been
elected and whose elevation to the position next higher in rank created the
last vacancy in the sanggunian shall be appointed in the manner herein after
provided. The appointee shall come from the same political party as that of
the sanggunian member who caused the vacancy and shall serve the
unexpired term of the vacant office. In the appointment therein mentioned, a
nomination and certificate of membership of the appointee from the highest
official of the political party concerned are conditions sine qua non, and any
appointment without such nomination and certification shall be null and void
ab initio and shall be ground for administrative action against the official
responsible therefor.
(c) In case the permanent vacancy is caused by a sanggunian
member who does not belong to any political party, the local chief executive
shall, upon recommendation of the sanggunian concerned, appoint a
qualified person to fill the vacancy.
Governor
Sangguniang PAnglungsod in component cities
(2) Sangguniang Panglungsod of Highly Urbanized Cities
Sangguniang Panglungsod of Independent Component Cities
President
Sangguniang Panlalawigan
*If one who will be replaced belongs to a political party, the successor must
come from the same political party.
If he does not belong to a political party then apply Sec. 45(c)
Q: Who shall appoint?
A: Local chief executive upon the recommendation of the sanggunian
concerned.
FARIAS vs. BARBA
The last ranking sanggunian bayan member who did not
belong to any political party resigned. To fill the vacancy, both the mayor and
the governor appointed their own choice.
SC:
Neither of the two appointees should assume position.
Sec 45 (c) LGC must be read together with Sec 45 (a). Since this is a
municipality, the governor should appoint but with the recommendation of
the sanggunian concerned which is the sanggunian bayan where the
vacancy took place.
NAVARRO vs. CA
Composition of the municipal government:
Mayor Lakas
NUCD
Vice Mayor. Lakas
NUCD
1st to 5th sanggunian member.. Reporma
6th Sanggunian Member.. Lakas NUCD
7th Sanggunian Member.. Reporma
8th Sanggunian Member.. Lakas NUCD
91
92
UNITS/
AUTONOMOUS
REGIONS/
Decentralization of Power
Abdication of political
power in favor of LGU;
free to chart its own
destiny.
OR SUBSTANTIAL
94
TWO REQUIREMENTS
1. It must be according to the criteria established in the LGC.
2.
2.
3.
Resolution
-is a law
- temporary
95
character
- a third reading on its enactment is
required
* Two views:
a.) Traditional view only states are subject of international law.
- only states have rights which may be directly enforced or
have obligation
for which it may be held directly accountable
under international law.
b.) Modern view not only states are proper subjects of
international law.
proper subjects
proper subject of
96
the UN.
- only states may be parties to
disputes in international court of
justice.
common characteristics of the four they are the most serious crimes
of international concern.
ethnic or
to eliminate
ICC
- it is a separate body.
97
of court)
Principle of Complementarity
a) individual
permanent
resources.
human rights in
Human Rights
- those liberties, immunities, and benefits which all human
beings should
be able to claim as of right of the
society in which they live by accepted
contemporary values.
- those fundamental and inalienable rights which are
essential for life as a
human being.
98
99
HRL
conduct
of
100
a) spies
b) mercenaries soldiers for a fee/ soldiers of fortune
A soldier, not wearing uniform during hostilities, runs
the risk of being
treated as a spy; thus, not to be treated
as a prisoner of war.
BAR 1993:
Reden, Jolan and Andy, Filipino tourists, were in
Bosnia-Herzegovina when hostilities erupted between the Serbs and the
Moslems.
Penniless and caught in the crossfire, Reden, Jolan and
Andy, being retired
generals, offered their services to the Moslems
for a handsome salary, which offer was accepted. When the Serbian
National Guard approached Sarajero, the
Moslem civilian population
spontaneously took up arms to resist the invading
troops. Not finding
time to organize, the Moslems wore armbands to identify
themselves,
vowing to observe the laws and customs of war. The three Filipinos
fought side by side with the Moslems. The Serbs prevailed resulting
in the capture
of Reden, Jolan and Andy, and part of the civilian fighting
force.
1) Are Reden, Jolan and Andy considered combatants thus
entitled to treatment as prisoners of war?
NO. Reden, Jolan and Andy are not combatants because
they are mercenaries. They offered their services to the Moslems for a
handsome salary.
They are soldiers of fortune. They are not
members of the armed forces but took part in the hostilities. They are nonprivileged combatants and are not entitled to treatment as prisoners of war.
2) Are the captured civilians likewise prisoners of war?
YES. The captured civilians are prisoners of war. They fall
under the
category of levee en masse. When the Serbian National
Guard approached Sarjero, the Moslem civilian population spontaneously
took up arms and resist the
invading troops without having time to
organize. The Moslems wore armbands to identify themselves, vowing to
observe the laws and customs of war.
Civilian objects may not be attacked.
-using civilians to shield military targets is prohibited
- it is prohibited for combatants to pose as civilians
- starvation of civilians as a method of combat is prohibited
the
simply
101
2) Ministrant
IHL will not apply to international conflict but also to non-international
conflict.
(5.) The Law on Treaties
Jus Cogens Norm
f) piracy
A treaty entered into by two states agreeing to invade another state
would have to be invalidated as it runs in conflict with a jus cogens
norm
the prohibition against the use of force under the UN charter.
102
All states have a legal interest for its compliance, and thus all states are
entitled to invoke responsibility for breach of such an obligation.
a) requesting state the state where the offenses was alleged to have
been committed
- the role of the senate, however, is only limited to giving or withholding its
consent, or concurrence to the ratification.
4) unless otherwise stipulated in the treaty, the offense must have been
committed in the territory of the requesting state.
- this is the formal act by which a state confirms and accepts the
provisions of a treaty concluded by its representatives.
4) Exchange of the Instrument- signifies the effectivity of the treaty unless
a different date has been agreed upon by the parties
- it is not even required that the designation of the offense be the same in
both jurisdictions.
103
- it is not a criminal proceeding which will call into operation all the
rights of an accused as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
- presumption of innocence does not apply
- as an extradition proceeding is not criminal in character and the
evaluation stage in an extradition proceeding is not akin to a preliminary
investigation, the due process safeguards in the latter may not necessarily
apply during the initial evaluation stage in an extradition proceeding.
- this we hold for the procedural due process required by a given
set of circumstances must begin with a determination of the precise nature
of the government function involved as well as the private interest that has
been affected by governmental action.
- the concept of due process is flexible for not all situations calling
for procedural safeguards call for the same kind of procedure.
SC:
(decided January 18, 2000 by a 9-6 vote) Indeed there
was denial of due process. How can you expect him to prepare for his
defense if he will not be furnished copies of the documents he was
requesting. An extradition proceeding is similar to a criminal proceeding.
Likewise, the initial evaluation stage in an extradition proceeding is also
similar to a preliminary investigation in a criminal
proceeding.
* Strong dissenting opinion
- this is no longer a case of due process; it is now a case of overdue process
Extradition
SC:
(decided October 17, 2000 by a 9-6 vote) reconsidered;
controlling
doctrine!!!
- an extradition proceeding is sui generis
the
issue
* Distinctions between extradition proceedings and criminal
proceedings
time
104
105
- under section 6 of PD 1069, once a petition for extradition is filed with the
RTC, the judge will immediately issue a warrant of arrest.
- the word used was immediately
- this word would be rendered nugatory if the issuance of warrant of arrest is
set for hearing.
- arrest subsequent to a hearing is no longer immediate.
- the law could not have contemplated the word immediately as a mere
superfluity but as a means of inferring a sense of urgency.
b) second, constitutional basis
- two equally desirable interest of society are colliding but these interests are
equally desirable to the society.
- under section 2 of the Bill of Rights, prior notice and hearing was never a
requirement for the issuance of a warrant of arrest
- on the contrary, the provision says after examination under oath of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, not of the
extraditee.
a) that once granted bail, the extraditee will not be a flight risk or a
danger to the community; and
b) that there exists a special humanitarian and compelling
circumstances that will justify the grant of bail
- the burden of proving these two requirements lies on the part of
the applicant by clear and convincing evidence.
Govt. of HK special administrative region (represented by Phil. DOJ)
vs. Judge Olalia (En Banc)
- the ruling in Purganan should be re-examined
- these remedies should include the right to bail
- in light of the various international treaties giving recognition and
protection to human rights particularly the right to life and liberty, a reexamination of the courts ruling in Purganan is in order
- especially the trend in international law where an individual is not
merely considered as an object but rather a subject of international law and
also in view of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenant
of Civil and Political Rights where the Philippines is a signatory and because
of our commitment to human rights under the Constitution.
- yet, for an extraditee to be allowed to post bail, he ought still the
two requirements:
a) that once granted bail, he will not be a flight risk or a
danger to the community; and
b) that there exist a special humanitarian and compelling
circumstance that will justify the grant of bail to him.
- the burden of proving these requirements still lies on the part of
the applicant by clear and convincing evidence.
Clear and Convincing Evidence
- a new standard of evidence adopted by the court lower than proof beyond
reasonable doubt required in a criminal case but higher than preponderance
of evidence required in civil case.
- this is applied only in application for bail in extradition proceeding
- in extradition proceedings, mere prima facie evidence is required.
FUNDAMENTALS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Relations between International Law and Municipal Law from the view
of practice
Political Law Review Notes (Atty. Edwin Sandoval)
Prepared by: Atty Joan P. Gamboa
* Two Doctrines
1) Doctrine of Incorporation
- the generally accepted principles of international law
automatically become part of their laws and will no longer require an
enabling act from the legislative body.
- the Philippines subscribe to this doctrine under section 2,
article II of the Constitution, which provides that, the Philippines adopts the
generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the law
of the land.
2) Doctrine of Transformation
- the generally accepted principles of international law
does not automatically become part of their laws and will still require an
enabling act from the legislative body.
* Examples of generally accepted principles of international law
Pacta Sunt Servanda (treaties must be observed in good faith)
- under the pacta sunt servanda rule, a state may not advance the
provisions of its own Constitution, as well as that of its laws in order not to
comply with its obligations under a treaty.
- a state must make the necessary modifications to its laws in order
to comply with its obligations in a treaty.
Doctrine of State Immunity from Suit - a state may not be sued
without its consent
Doctrine of Sovereign Equality of all States
- par in parem non habet imperium
- all states are sovereign equals; an equal may not
assume jurisdiction over
another equal.
Rebus Sic Stantibus (things remaining as they are)
- opposite of pacta sunt servanda
Special Thanks To:
ATTY. JOAN LOU P. GAMBOA
For sharing her handwritten lecture notes
in Political Law Review
under Atty. Edwin Sandoval
and for her generous support
throughout the years
107
108