PHILOSOPHY OF LAW

Questioning the fundamentals we normally take for granted

In politics: freedom, equality, social justic
Rembrandt's THE TWO PHILOSOPHERS (1628): it takes two to philosophize and philosophy is a shared search for truth
A philosopher seeks the following:

Deeper understanding of concept

How it actually functions in our thoughts and lives

Other ways it might be used

Possible dangers of its use

How it does or could relate to other key concepts

Philosophy is a quest for rational understanding of the most fundamental things.
Philosophy raises important questions:

How are we to go about finding answers to all these questions of ours?

Can we ever know really know?

And even if we know, how will we be able to be sure that we know?

Philosophy begins in wonder (Plato)
Various Titles

Jurisprudence

From the Latin prudencia (prudence, practical knowledge or skill) and juris (law)

Originally meant knowledge of or skill in law

Also meant case law or body of law built up by the decisions of particular courts

NCC, Article 8:

Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws and the Constitution shall form part of the legal
system of the Philippines
Judicial decisions are commonly considered as Philippine Jurisprudence.

The study of jurisprudence is not knowing, understanding or analyzing the law of particularcountry but
investigates what is common to systems of law, the shared features of actual legal systems.

Course in jurisprudence would need to examine from an external perspective and from different external
disciplines (historical, anthropological, sociological, psychological, economic, ethical)

Jurisprudence v Legislation

Jurisprudence concerns the knowledge of law as a science combined with the art or skill of applying
it

Legislation is the science of what ought to be done towards making good laws, combined with the art
of doing it.

Legal Theory

An aspect of jurisprudence which deals with the question what is the nature of law?

Deals with law as it is (sole concern of legal theory) as opposed to law as it ought to be (legislation)

On ideal law as well as on procedural and substantive justice, legal theory should not just be concerned with
law as it is but with law as it ought to be.

Philosophy of Law

Focuses on questions jurisprudence may regard as peripheral such as inquiry of other legal phenomena
(justice, liberty, punishment)

Inquires not only on nature of law and other legal phenomena but also the rational consideration of normative
issues related to law (like obligation to obey the law, enforcement of morality, the problems of ideal justice,
liberty, punishment)
The common observation is: the term philosophy of law is often used in courses handled by philosophy faculty while
jurisprudence or legal theory by those in law faculty.
The subject is not part of Bar Exams.
Students are obsessed in passing law school and bar exams.
Studying law is knowing what the law says, memorizing and applying.
What is absent is the reflection, creativity and call to genius: a man who sess how all the the law provides leads (or does not
lead) to a more human and humanly ordered society.
Why important?

In order to determine which problems have already been clarified significantly so that we can build upon a foundation
provided by previous thought.

To sketch upon which philosophical ground each particular constribution rests (from which general philosophy it has
emerged)

THE GREEKS (also Pre-Socratic Philosophers)

Philosophy begins when human beings start trying to understand the world, not through religion but through REASON
Began among early Greeks (6th, 5th, and 4th centuries BC)
Earliest questions:

What is the world made of?

What holds the world up?

THALES world made of single element water

Thales thought that the earth is floating on water, emerged out of water and is constituted of water

Now, he was right of a single element (all materials ae reducible to energy) but mistakenly supposed this to be water
ANAXIMANDER pupil of Thales

The earth is not supported by anything at all; it is a solid object hanging in space and is kept in position by its
equidistance from everything else

He did not think of earth as globe as it was evident to him that we live on a flat surface

The earth remains stationary

ANAXIMENES pupil of Anaximander

The earth was flat and must be held up by something

HERACLITUS pupil of Anaximander

Two ideas

Unity of Opposites

the path up the mountainside and the path down the mountainside are not two different paths
running in opposite directions, they are one and the same paths

Strife and contradiction are not to be avoided, they are what come together to make up the world

Everything is Flux

Reality is inherently unstable, everything is in flux all the time (everything is changing)

This idea is true as nothing in this world is permanent, everything is changing all the time

Heraclitus is telling us that we cannot find something stable, change is the law of life, we can never
escape it
PYTHAGORAS one of his gifts being for mathematics

We have to learn Pythagors' Theorem at school

He introduced the idea of square and the cube of a number, applying geometrical concepts to arithmetic

Thought to have invented the word philosophy and who first applied the word cosmos to the universe

Some great philosophers are mathematicians (Descartes analytic geometry and Leibniz calculus)
XENOPHANES human views of things are human creations including what we take to be our knowledge

By learning more and more, and changing our ideas in the light of what we learn, we may get nearer to the truth but our
ideas remain always ours and there is always an element of guesswork.
PARMENIDES there can never have been nothing and therefore it cannot be true to say that everything came out of nothing.
Everything must always have existed. For a similar reason it is not possible for anything to pass into nothing. Therefore not only
must everything be beginningless and uncreated, it must also be eternal and imperishable.
EMPEDOCLES everything was made up of four different elements that are perennial: earth, water, air and fire

He tried to reassert the reality of the ever-changing world of sensory experience and also the plurality of the world

He said Each man believes only his experience

ATOMISTS (Leucippus and Democritus) everything is made up of atoms that are too small to be seen; all that exists are atoms
and space

Atoms themselves are uncreated and indestructible

All change in the universe consists of atoms

atom comes from Greek word meaning cannot be cut

Pre-Socratic philosophers were concerned of the nature of the world, not human nature
The most famous of all Greek Philosophers:
SOCRATES What matters most is how we ought to live (father of moral philosophy).

Socrates' basic question: What is justice? What is good? What is right? What is just? If we knew the answers, it would
have a profound effect on the way we lived.

He established the method of trying to get at truth by persistent questioning.

He did not think he knew the answers but he saw no-one else knew them either

He established a method known dialectic (method of seeking truth by a process of question and answer)

This is used particularly in teaching method

He asserted that he knew nothing (different from Sophists who presumed to know everything)

Socrates wrote nothing but he was known through Plato, his pupil
PLATO two worlds (ever-changing world presented through senses and another world an abstract realm independent of time
and space, accessible only to the intellect)

His ideal concept of the State (man on a large scale perfect organism, a body formed of several organs which together
make its life possible)

Parallel between the State and individual

Individual (3 parts or faculties: reason which dominates, courage which acts, sense which obeys)

State (3 classes: wise destined to dominate, warriors who must defend the social organism, and artisans and farmers
who must feed it)
As the individual is dominated by reason, so is the State by the class which represents precisely wisdom the
philosophers
The State dominates human activity in all its manifestations; upon it rests the duty to promote good in its every form
The power of the State is limitless, all comes under the competence and the intervention of the State
This is opposed to Kant's Legal State (there are well-defined limits on the action of the State)

ARISTOTLE -unlike Plato, there is only one world (world we live and experience)

He mapped out basic fields of inquiry (now known as logic, physics, political science, economics, psychology,
metaphysics, meteorology, ethics)

He also invented technical terms (energy, dynamic, induction, demonstration, substance, attribute, essence, property,
accident, category, topic, proposition, and universal)

His four causes: material cause, efficient cause, formal cause and final cause

Man is by nature a political animal - the true purpose of government is to enable its citizens to live a full and happy life
He hints the distinction between the powers of the State (legislative, executive and judicial)
The supreme good is happiness
The State is a necessity, a necessary union directed toward the purpose of perfection of life; the individual cannot be
properly thought of without the State

The State regulates the life of the citizens by means of laws (content of laws is Justice, principle of justice is equality
applied in various ways (distributive justice, corrective justice)
What follows are Cynics, Sceptics, Epicureans and Stoics

They are concerned with how a civilized man is to live in an insecure, unstable and dangerous world

CYNICS (Antisthenes and Diogenes) proclaimed that they wanted no government, no private property, no marriage and no
established religion;

SCEPTICS (Pyrrho arguing both ways)

For almost everything believed by the people in one place, there semm to be people somewhere else who believe the
opposite; normally the arguments are equally good on both sides

All we can do is go by things as they appear but appearances are notoriously deceptive so we should never assume the
truth of one explanation rather than the other. The best thing was to stop worrying and just go with the flow, swim along
with whatever customs and practices prevail

The most famous Sceptic philosopher is DAVID HUME

To live at all, we have to perpetually to make choices, decisions and this forces us to make judgements about the things
are, whether we like it or not
Since certainty is not available, we have to make the best assessments we can of the realties we face

EPICUREANS (Epicurus)

Its aim was to liberate the people from fear, not only fear of death but fear of life

Living like a dog (the word cynic comes from Greek kynikos which means like a dog)
The difference between true values and false values was the only distinction that mattered (all social conventions
distinctions between yours and mine, public and private, naked and clothed, raw and cooked are nonsense)
Virtue is the only good consisting of modesty (wise man has no wants and despises that which ordinary man desire); a
forerunner of Christianity

Death is nothing to us - anyone who genuinely grasps that truth is liberated from fear of death
Since non-existence is our own inescapable destiny, we should make the best of the only life we have; pleasire is the
only good
For Epicurus, man was engaged in a continuous struggle with other men, this struggle is abolished with formation of
State; Law is only a pact for the sake of utility and the State is the result of an agreement which men could break when
they failed to find the utility

STOICS (Zeno)

There can be no authority higher than reason

We are one with nature and there is no higher realm so there can be no questions of our going anywhere else when we
die

They conceived the ideal of a wise man (must be kept in view by every man because this is imposed on him by right
reason); man is by nature a participant in a Law which is universally valid
ROMAN JURISTS (Cicero)

Law is not the product of choice but is given by nature

Cicero observes that not everything which is put down as Law is just for in such case even the laws of tyrants would be
Law

MIDDLE AGES

PATRISTIC PERIOD (early Christian writers: Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Lactantius, Ambrose, St. Augustine)

From beginnings of Christianity to Charlemagne

St. Augustine extols the Church and communion of souls in God as supreme end of man (compared to Greeks which is
State)

Earthly State has praiseworthy purpose and itself comes from divine will but it is always subordinate to the heavenly city
(Church)
SCHOLASTICISM

Rediscovering and restoration of Greek Philosophy but studied with dogmatic approach

While conserving the dogmatic character, Scholastic Philosophy tried to develop religious dogmas with a rational
analysis
St. Thomas Aquinas

division of laws (3 orders of laws: 1. lex aeterna divine reason itself which governs the world; 2. lex naturals directly
knowable by men through reason being precisely a participation of the eternal law in the rational creature accroding to
his own nscapacity; 3. lex humana an of man through whichn inventio moving from principles of natural law one
proceeds to particular applications
State is subordinate to the Church which it must always obey; a State which is in opposition to the Church is not
legitimate
State is a natural product (derives from the social nature of man) necessary for the satisfaction of human needs
Man even though free is considered as a rule subordinate to public power (ecclesiastical or civil). He is no longer the
center, author of laws but simply be subject to them.

MODERN SCIENCE

COPERNICUS TO NEWTON
Nicolaus Copernicus (founder of modern astronomy) proposed the idea the sun, not the earth, is the center of our solar system
Galileo asserted that the earth rotates on its axis and that it revolves round the sun; all bodies fall at the same velocity regardless
of their weight provided they are not interfered with by some other pressure
Newton worked out the law of gravitation and demonstrated that it is the force of gravity that keeps the planets moving in orbitts
around the sun; the consequences of his work for philosophy made philosopher to take full account of the new science in that
every description of reality had to incorporate in a plausible way the reality revealed by science. Also any account of the nature of
knowledge and on the way it was arrived at (its foundations) had to apply to science if it was to command credibility
MACHIAVELLI he discusses the arguments for and against the different forms of government

He pointed out that the means is the most efficacious and valid for attaining the desired result; Machiavellism in politics
has a bad meaning in the famous formula the end justifies the means
BODIN in every State there must be a supreme power which is one and indivisible; there is no State without sovereign power

Essential characteristics of sovereignty are absoluteness and perpetuity (there is no right to rebel against a tyrant and
there is no right on the part of citizen against the State; freedom is sacrificed to the authority of the State); sovereignty
includes the right to make laws; he who makes the laws cannot be subjected to them but remains superior to them

FRANCIS BACON the first to see that scientific knowledge could give men power over nature; the advance of science could be
used to promote human plans and prosperity

How to advance knowledge of the natural world? Follow a controlled and systematic procedure

Introduces the concepts of induction (particular to general) and deduction (general to particular) in discovering
scientific law
THOMAS HOBBES

Man is naturally an egotist who seeks only his own good and is insensible to that of others. In this state of nature (there
is a permanent state of war between every individual because each one seeks his own advantage), the individual right is
unlimited. Man has to leave this state of nature, give up his original right and turn it over to the a sovereign who
imposes laws and establishes what is just and unjust, what is licit and illicit. The State has unlimited power and no
citizen can claim rights over it.
In Hobbes' Philosophy, demand for order is attained but freedom is sacrificed. Conservation is present in man but he
also has compassion for others.
The first modern materialst (physical matter is all there is: the universe is corporeal, that is body, every part of body is
likewise body, every part of the universe is body, that which is not body is nothing and consequently nowhere)

RATIONALISM

RENE DESCARTES (invented the branch of geometry called analytical geometry)

That I exist is indubitable; I know with absolute certitude that I am a being which has conscious experiences (Cogito
ergo sum - I think, therefore I am)
Whatever is presented clearly and distinctly to me as being true not by my senses (sensory input is inherently
unreliable) which I already know to deceive but my mind (gave birth to rationalism)

BENEDICT SPINOZA (one of great rationalists together with Leibniz: rationalism is a development is philosophy that knowledge
of the world can be gained by use of reason alone)

There exists one substance he called Deus sive natura

All that happens in the world is an expression thereof and is absolutely perfect
He argued that freedom of speech was necessary in order to secure public order; the real disturbers of the peace are
those who, in a free state, seek to curtail the liberty of judgment which they are unable to tyrannize over
WILHELM LEIBNITZ/LEIBNIZ

All truths are two kinds: truth of reasoning(the truth of the statement can be determined by examining the statement
without to look outside of it, now called analytic statement) and truth of fact(the truth of the statement can be
determined by examining the facts, now called synthetic statement)
SAMUEL PUFENDORF

In his theory of the state, all men were free and equal but having no guarantee of their rights were liable to be
overpowered so they had to submit themeselves to a sovereign, to constitute the State

He distinguishes innate rights(proper to isolated man before he associates with other men) and acquired
rights(acquired by man insofar as he belongs to a society, family and to the State)
RICHARD HOOKER

He asserts that by Natural Law, in conformity with Divine Law, political power is based upon the consent of the entire
society because no man has by nature the power to command a multitude of men. If common consent is lacking the
power is illegitimate.
JOHN MILTON

He sustains liberty of conscience and freedom of press and justifies the killing of a tyrant

EMPIRICISM

Rationalists said that the only reliable knowledge comes from use of reason.
Empiricists insisted that information about the world external to ourselves can come to us only through our senses; the mind
workds in appraising and organizing this information and drawing inferences from it and connecting it with other things but the
original source of data can only be sensory experience
JOHN LOCKE (knowledge exists only by means of sensation and is based on sensation)

Man is naturally social; there does not exist a state of nature without society

In the state of nature, man has already certain rights (right to personal liberty, right to work, right to property) and what is
lacking is the authority which can guarantee these rights. To assure themselves of such guarantee, individuals must
renounce a portion of their natural rights, must consent to certain limitations and this is done by contract
He who is invested with public authority cannot use it arbitrarily because the authority itself has been confided to him for
the protection of the rights of the individuals. If he abuses it he violates the contract and the people regain ipso facto
their original sovereignty.
The State is not a negation but a reaffirmation, with certain limits of natural liberty which finds therein its guarantee.

The governed retains their individual rights even after the government has been set up; sovereignty ultimately remains
with the people

He believed that all human beings have the potential for development and that the preservation of their rights and their
freedoms is the only purpose of government.
GEORGE BERKELEY

What exists are subjects and their experiences, there is nothing else.

He believed that we perceive not things but qualities such as colour and that these qualities are relative to the percipient.
DAVID HUME

Certainty, in matters of fact, is not available to us; we deal in hopeful probabilites, not in certainties

Apart from mathematics, we know nothing for certain but we still have to live and to live is to act; all actions have to
based in assumptions about reality

Justice is not derived from an original sentiment but from the reflection and calculation of what is useful. Society has a
natural foundation in the human spirit.
EDMUND BURKE

Ina developed society, tradition embodies the accumulated wisdom and experience of many generations, it is likely to be
a more reliable guid to action that any one person's opinion

Each generation needs to regard itself not as owning the assets of society but as taking care of them and which it is its
duty to pass on to future generations.

Governments have to deal with people as they are, unequal in talent, mixture of good and bad; it is not intellectual
brilliance that is called for in government but sound understanding of people and the ways of the world.
JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU

Judgments should be based on requirements of felling, not reasons

3 rev ideas: 1. civilization, a bad thing (human beings are corrupted by experiences in society; answer? Changes in
education (practice and example)

Law-making and law-changing: all people coming together, deliberating and voting

Legislators - charismatic leaders who instinctively understood the general will and drafted legislation themselves then
persuaded people to accept it (ill-informed, undisciplined and short-sighted legislative body)

IMMANUEL KANT (gain knowledge through both experience and understanding: PHENOMENAL v NOUMENAL)

Bodily apparatus (5 senses, brain and central nervous system) perception, feeling, memory, thought or whatever are
apprehended through this but it has limitations (i.e., photograph and sausages)

Knowledge anything else (i.e., thoughts or ideas in brain) may exist but not capable of apprehension or cannot be
registered by experience or he called transcendental
ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER

He argued that the empirical world exists for the experiencing subject only as representation. The search for the thingin-itself behind the representation is futile if we turn our thoughts to the natural world. But we too are the thing-in-itself
and it is dual nature that gives us the key to the nature of all reality.
CONFUCIANISM (K'ung Fu-tzu)

Philosophical and ethical influence in Chinese society

Foundations: filial piety, respect for tradition and rule what you do not want done to you, do not do to others
BUDDHISM

Historically began at North India, man called Siddhartha Gautama attained enlightenment, the ultimate truth by which
people are freed from the cycle of rebirth

4 Noble Truths: 1. life is inherently unsatisfactory and a burden, experience of inevitable suffering; 2. suffering is caused
by endlessly grabbing at things, grasping, wanting, carving; 3. cessation of suffering can be found through ceasing to
crave or want; 4. cessation can be achieved by Noble Eightfold Path

MAO ZEDONG (principal revolutionary thinker in Chinese Community Party)

Sought to adopt Communism to Chinese traditions using rural-based revolution

Set about creating Communist Philosophy based on re-education and rectification

JOHANN GOTTLIEB FICHTE

He taught that the empirical world is the creation of the knowing mind

We act and in doing so we make choices and decisions, and in doing these things we have direct experience of our own
existence not as objects in the empirical world but was moral agents (responsible for out actions)

What sort of Philosophy one chooses depends on what sort of person he is

FRIEDRICH SCHELLING

Famous for Philosophy of Nature: all life was a creation og Nature which had at one time been a world of lifeless matter.

Man is part of Nature, in him, nature has arrived at self-awareness; the whole vast on-going phenomenon of nature has
been a development towards self-awareness, therefore the very reason of reality is achieved in creative art (only in art
can the mind be fully aware of itself)
GEORG WILHELM FRIEDRICH HEGEL

Conceptualized Geist - midway between spirit and mind, the ultimate existenceof being.

The historical process that constitutes reality is the development of the Geist towards self-awareness and selfknowledge, when this state is reached all that exists will be harmoniously at one with itself. He called this sel-aware oneness of everything the Absolute, so his philosophy was known as Absolute Idealism' (compared development with
Christ and redemption)
KARL MARX

Reality is not a state of affairs but an on-going historical process.

The key to understanding reality is to understand the nature of historical change.

Human beings have to do if they are to live at all is to get the means of substinence, they must have the wherewithal to
feed, clothe and house themselves and to meet other basic wants.

Production of the means of life becomes a social activity and not an individual one.
FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE

God is dead
There is no God and we do not have immortal souls.
Life of ours is a largely meaningless business of suffering and striving, driven along by an irrational force called will.

UTILITARIANS

JEREMY BENTHAM

Judging each action by its utility (usefulness in bringing about consequences); the greatest good of the greatest
number as guiding principle.
JOHN STUART MILL

Individual should be free to do whatever he likes so long as he does not bring any significant harm to anyone else

Advocated equality for women

AMERICAN PRAGMATISTS

C.S. PEIRCE

Pragmatism is a method for ascertaining the meaning of terms (theory of meaning)

We acquire knowledge by participating, not spectating (i.e., learn to drive, we gain knowledge from our action as a
participant)

This contradicted the view of scientists that knowledge is impersonal and is read from observations.

EXISTENTIALISM

SOREN KIERKEGAARD and MARTIN HEIDEGGER

The individual finds his own identity a problem and hopes to uncover the meaning in life through investigating the
mystery of his own existence

Through making choices we create our own lives

ETYMOLOGY

Comes from Greek words:

philo (to love)

sophia (wisdom)
Originally meant love of wisdom
Broad sense, wisdom is still the goal of philosophy
Philosophy emphasizes our living desire to understand the world that surrounds us and the world within us
Things considered in definition

Science

Called a science because the investigation is systematic just like other science

Natural Light of Reason

Philosophy investigates things using human reason alone (not laboratory instrument or tools or supernatural
revelation)

Study of all thinfs

Philosophy studies human beings, society, religion, language, God, plants and many more

Questions almost anything

Ancient and Contemporary Approaches

Philosophy is the knowledge (scientia) of things by their ultimate cause or reasons (per ultimas causes vel rationes)

Scholastic formation that goes back to Aristotle

We have said in Ethics what the differece is between art and science and other kindred faculties; but the point of our
present discussion is this, that all men suppose what is called Wisdom to deal with the first cause and the principle of
things (Metaphysics I, 1)
Further, the final cause is an end, and that sort of end which is not for the sake of something else, but for whose sake
everything else is; so if there is to be a last term of this sort, the process will not be infinite. (Metaphysics II, 2)
The task of philosophy of law is to unveil the goal of the law and its underlying motives (not motives of legislators
primarily but of society that creates laws and sustains them)
There are standards by which to determine whether a law should have been passed (natural law theory for Medieval
philosophers, some natural justice)
Article 10 Civil Code

In case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended
right and justice to prevail.
SALVACION v CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES 343 PHIL 539

Court treated the petition for declaratory relief as one for mandamus considering the grave injustice that would
result in the interpretation of a banking law.

Crime of rape committed by a foreign tourist against a Filipino minor and the execution of the final judgment in
the civil case for damages on the tourist's dollar deposit with a local bank, the Court declared Section 113 of
Central Bank Circular No. 960, exempting foreing currency deposits from attachment, garnishment or any
other order of process of any court, inapplicable due to the peculiar circumstances of the case.

The court held that injustice would result especially to a citizen aggrieved by a foreign guest like accused . . .
that would negate Article 10 of the Civil Code which provides that in case of doubt in the interpretation or
application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body inteded right and justice to prevail.

The Court therefore required respondents Central Bank of the Philippines, the local bank, and the accused to
comply with the writ of execution issued in the civil case for damages and to release the dollar deposit of the
accused to satisfy the judgment.
AMATAN v JUDGE AUJERO A.M. NO. RTJ-93-956, SEPTEMBER 27 1995

At issue is the sentence of respondent judge finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the lesser
offense of Attempted Homicide and not Homicide as charged.

Judge asserted that he relied on Sec. 2, Rule 116 of the 1985 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as
amended, which allows an accused individual with the consent of the offended party to plead guilty to a
lesser offense, regardless of whether or not sich offsense is necessarily included in the crime charged, or is
cognizable by a court of lesser jurisdiction.

Supreme Court decided:

Section 2, Rule 116 of the 1985 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended, allows the
accused in a criminal case to plead guilty :to a lesser offense regardless of whether or not it is
necessarily included in the crime charged. The fact of death of the victim for which the accused

Rodrigo Umpad was criminall liable, cannot by simple logic and plain common sense be
reconciled with the plea of guilty to the lower offense of attempted homicide. The crime of
homicide as defined in Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code necessarily produces death; attempted
homicide does not. Concededly, hiatus in the law exists in the case before us, which could either
lead to a misapprehension of Section 2 of Rule 116 or to outright confusion.

However, the law is not entirely bereft of solutions in such cases. In instances where a literal
application of a provision of law would lead to injustice or to a result so directly in opposition
with the dictates of logic and everyday common sense as to be unconscionable, the Civil
Code admonishes judges to take principles of right and justice at heart. Incase of doubt the intent is
to promote right and justice. Fiat justicia ruat coelum. Stated differently, when a provision of law is
silent or ambiguous, judges ought to invoke a solution responsive to the vehement urge of
conscience.
These are fundamental tenets of law. In the case at bench, the fact of the victim's death, a clear
negation of frustrated or attempted homicide, ought to have alerted the judge not only to a possibly
inconsistent result but to an injustice. The failure to recignize such principles so cardinal to our body
of laws amounts to ignorance of the law and reflects respondent judge's lack of prudence, if not
competence, in the performance of his duties.
While it is true, as respondent judge contends, that he merely applied the rule to the letter, the
palpably incongruous result ought to have been a red flag alerting him of the possibility of
injustice. The death of an indentified individual, the gravamen of the charge against the defendant
in the criminal case, cannot and should not be ignored in favor of a more expedient plea of either
attempted or frustrated homicide. We have held before that if the law is so elementary, not to know it
or to act as if one does not know it, constitutes gross ignorance of the law.

Natural Law Theory v Legal Positivism

Natural law: some laws depend for their authority on the logical relationship in which they stand to moral
standards (prevailing dominant theory in Phil predominantly Roman Catholic country: cosmic justice or
karma)

Cicero: whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason
of this very fact he will suffer the worst penalties, even if he escapes what is commonly called
punishment

Criticisms:

Concept of cosmic justice or karma is contrary to evidence; due to free choices and
actions of man.

David Hume: moral judgments are not true and they cannot be derived from factual
premises alone.

In order to attain justice and order in the world, there is a need for a divine plan or measure (St.
Thomas Aquinas calls it lex aeterna; impersonal forces of nature in Stoic philosophy like Nature
itself)

Moral law as justice (Aristotle called in universal justice); justice also called righteousness.

Legal Positivism: there is no instrinsic connection between law and morality (separable concepts); law is a
valid law despite its lack of morality.

Emanates from the insight that law is a product of human endeavor or human will (compared to
natural law that law is product of reason not necessarily human reason but may be by God or by
nature)
Task of philosophy is provide a person with map that gives coherence to his activities and that makes of human life a
meaningful whole

While science is effective and efficient, it can be inhuman

There still remains the search for the humanum, the vision of being fully human, fully alive
Philosophy is the endeavor of uncovering the meaning of phenomena

In Crim Law, the convict only sees the harshness of law; complainant will see the law as vindication: Is there anything
else more than these?

Statute, rule or order must conform to the Constitution: what is this phenomenon called constitution?

Development of Constitutionalism (M. Curtis, THE GREAT POLITICAL THEORIES. Vol. 1)

While thinkers were concerned of order, they were eager to put limits on state authority

The idea of restriction by law by constitutionalism was developed by Coke, Harrington, Hooker and Locke

Coke

Neither the King nor the Parliament was superior to the law

No man shall imprisoned except by die process of the common law, the native, English law

(No person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of
law, CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE III, SECTION 1)

Harrington

Government is the empire of laws and not of men

The Government of the Philippine Islands is essentially a Government of laws and

not of men. (In Re: Mulloch Dick, G.R. No. 13862, 16 April 1918, 38 Phil. 41)

Hooker

Locke

The ruler must act in the public interest and observe law
Laws might be changed but only by the authors themselves, not by individual or group opposition

Consent is the basis of political power

The function of the state was limited to stated purposes
Power was held in trust and government ought to be dissolved if it was not serving the purpose for
which it has been established

Rebellion was justified but only after a long train of abuses, not over every little mismanagement

The supreme power cannot take from any man part of his property without his consent

The legislative cannot transfer the power of making laws to any other hands for it being but a
delegated power from the people, they who have it cannot pass it over to others

They are to govern by promulgated laws, not to be varied in particular cases but to have one rule for
rich or poor

Laws ought to be designed for no other end ultimately but the good of the people

They must not raised taxes on the property of the people without the consent of the people
Hermeneutics apply (science of interpreting texts); calls for dialoguing (the law as well as its readers and interpreters
must speak alike)
Calls for deconstruction of pseudo-knowledge so that the richness of symbol and metaphor may truly emerge
Example: Concept of Non-Suability of State
ATO v Sps. RAMOS, G.R. NO. 159402, FEBRUARY 23, 2011

Respondents discovered that a portion of their land in Baguio City was being used as part of the runway and
running shoulder of the Loakan Airport being operated by ATO.

Respondents agreed after negotiations to convey the affected portion by deed of sale to the ATO in
consideration of the amount of P778,150.00. However, the ATO failed to pay despite repeated verbal and
written demands. Hence an action for collection was filed and the defense is non-suability of state.

Is the defense tenable? No, because it is an agency of the State engaged in an enterprise that is far from
being the State's exclusive prerogative.

Practical considerations dictate the establishment of an immunity from suit in favor of the State. Otherwise,
and the State is suable at the instance of every other individual, government service may be severely
obstructed and public safety endangered because of the number of suits that the State has to defend
against. Several justifications have been offered to support the adoption of the doctrine in the Philippines, but
that offered in Providence Washington Insurance Co. v Republic of the Philippines is the most acceptable
explanation, according to Father Bernas, a recognized commentator on Constitutional Law, to wit:

The kind of law fixing the balance in lands is called 'Agrarian

[A] continued adherence to the doctrine of non-suability is not to be deplored for as against the
inconvenience that may be caused private parties, the loss of governmental efficiency and the
obstacle to the performance of its multifarious functions are far greater if such a fundamental
principle were abandoned and the availability of judicial remedy were not thus restricted. With the
well known propensity on the part of our people to go to court, at the least provocation, the loss of
time and energy required to defend agaist law suits, in the absence of such a basic principle that
constitutes such an effective obstacle, could very well be imagined.

Analytic tradition

to describe that which is observed through a logical account; task of rendering a logical account of terms in law are to
be used
On sovereignty (used in CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 11, SECTION 1):

xxx Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.

How to do a logical account? American political law, the belief in the sovereignty of the people is a
cornerstone of the body politic. Chishold v Georgia:

In SANIDAD v COMELEC, 73 SCRA 333, SC said - This is the concept of popular sovereignty. It
means that the constitutional legislator, namely, the people, is sovereign.

To the Constitution of the United States the term sovereign is totally unknown. There is but one
place where it could have been used with propriety. But, even in that place it would not, perhaps,
have comported with the delicacy of those who ordained and established that Constitution. They
might have announced themselves sove-reign people of the United States: But, serenely conscious
of the fact, they avoided the ostentatious declaration.

On mens rea

When the law requires that the offenders intend to kill, the judge should be prepared to render her
measurement theory, the verifiable indicia that will allow her to arrive at a conclusion about the presence or
absence of intent

BERADIO V CA, ET AL., G.R. NO. L-49483-86, MARCH 30, 1981

Petitioner (lady-lawyer), formerly an election registrar of COMELEC whose job was field work, was
charged after her retirement from the service, with falsification of public documents for allegedly
having made it appear in her daily time records that she was not absent from office when in fact she
was at the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan attending to her cases.

Petitioner admitted in all candor her appeareances in said court, claiming among other things that
she is not under strict obligation to submit a time record and that she did not reflect her appearances
in court in said record as they were for few minute duration only apart from the fact that she has a
standing authority given by the COMELEC to act as de oficio counsel.
CFI rendered a decision finding her guilty as charged which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Supreme Court decision:

for a conviction of the offense of falsification of public or official documents, defined and
penalized under Article 171, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, the requisite
elements thereof must be clearly established, namely: 1) the offender makes in a
document false statements in a narration of facts; 2) he has legal obligation to disclose
the truth of the facts narrated by him; 3) the facts narrated by him are absolutely false, and
4) the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of
injuring a third person
attendant facts and circumstances in the instat case no criminal intent to commit the
crime with which she is charged can be imputed against the petitioner
If petitioner filled up her daily time record for the six days in question making it appear that
she attended her office from 8:00 am to 12:00 noon and from 1:00 pm to 5:00 pm, there is
more than color of truth in the entry made. It is not shown that she did not report first to
her office as Election Registar of Rosales, Pangasinan, before going to the courtroom just
two meters away.
Petitioner thus likened her appearance to going out for the usual coffee breaks. The
comparison is not even apt, for during the while she appeared in court, she was rendering
service more, if not wholly, for the public good, than just for her own well-being as when
she goes out for snack during the coffee-break period. The court being only two meters
away from her office, she did not even have to go so far as when one goes out for snack.
What is more, everytime she appeared in court, she surely must have made this fact
officialy of record in the court proceedings, something which is not done with leaving the
office room for coffee breaks.
In fine, the entries in petitioner's daily time records were not absolutely false. The
alleged false entry may be said to have a color of truth, not a downright and willful
falsehood which alone would constitute falsification as a crime.
The evident purpose of requiring government employees to keep a time record is to show
their attendance in office to work and to be paid accordingly. Cloesely, adhering to the
policy of no work-no pay, a daily time record is primarily, if not solely, intended to prevent
damage or loss to the government as would result in instances where it pays an employee
for no work done.

It is not criminally falsified if it does not pervert its avowed purpose as when it does not
cause damage to the government
VILLAREAL V PEOPLE, G.R. NO. 151258, FEBRUARY 1, 2012

The public outrage over the death of Leonardo Lenny Villa the victim in this case on 10
February 1991 led to a very strong clamor to put an end to hazing.
This widespread condemnation prompted Congress to enact a special law, which became effective
in 1995, that would criminalize hazing. The intent of the law was to discourage members from
making hazing a requirement for joining their sorority, fraternity, organization or association.
Moreover, thelaw was meant to counteract the exculpatory implications of consent and initial
innocent act in the conduct of initiation rites by making the mere act of hazing punishable or mala
prohibita.
Supreme Court decision:

Revised Penal Code belongs to the classical school of thought. The classical theory
posits that a human person is essentially a moral creature with an absolute free will to
choose between good and evil. It asserts that one should only be adjudged or held
accountable for wrongful acts so long as free will appears unimpaired. The basic postulate
of the classical penal system is that humans are rational and calculating beings who guide
their actions with reference to the principles of pleasure and pain. They refrain from
criminal acts if threatened with punishment sufficient to cancel the hope of possible gain or
advantage in committing the crime. Here, criminal liability is thus based on the free will
and moral blame of the actor. The identity of mens rea defined as a guilty mind, a
guilty or wrongful purpose or criminal intent is the predominant consideration. Thus, it
is not enough to do what the law prohibits. In order for an intentional felony to exist, it is
necessary that the act be committed by means of dolo or malice
The presence of an initial malicious intent to commit a felony is thus a vital ingredient in
establishing the commission of the intentional felony of homicide. Being mala in se, the
felony of homicide requires the existence of malice or dolo immediately before or
simultaneously with the infliction of injuries. Intent to kill or animus interficendi cannot
and should not be infereed, unless there is proff beyond reasonable doubt of such intent.
Fraternity initiation rites does not automatically amount to the absence of malicious intent

or dolus malus. If it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that the perpetrators were
equipped with a guilty mind whether or not there is a contextual background or factual
premise they are still criminally liable for intentional felony.

As regards Villareal and Dizon, the CA modified the Decision of the trial court and found
that the two accused had the anumus interficendi or intent to kill Lenny Villa, not merely to
inflict physical injuries on him. It justified its finding of homicide against Dizon by holding
that he had apparently been motivated by ill will while beating up Villa. Dizon kept
repeating that his father's parking space had been stolen by the victim;s father. As to
Villareal, the court said that the accused suspected the family of Bienvenido Marquez, one
of the neophytes, to have had a hand in the death of Villareal's brother. The CA then ruled
as follows:

The two had their own axes to grind against Villa and Marquez. It was very clear
that they acted with evil and criminal intent. The evidence on this matter is
unrebutted and so for the death of Villa, appellants Dizon and Villareal must and
should face the consequence of their acts. . .

full appreciation of the context in which the supposed utterances were made
The foregoing testimony of witness Marquez reveals a glaring mistake of substantial
proportion on the part of the CA it mistook the utterances of Dizon for those of
Villareal. Such inaccuracy cannot be tolerated, especially because it was the CA's primary
basis for finding that Villareal had the intent to kill Lenny Villa, thereby making Villareal
guilty of the intentional felony of homicide. To repeat, according to Bienvenido Marquez's
testimony, as reproduced above. It was Dizon who uttered both accusations against Villa
and Marquez, Villareal had no participation whatsover in the specific threats referred to by
the CA. It was Boyet Dizon [who] stepped on [Marquez's] thigh; and who told witness
Marquez, (I)to, yung pamilya nito ay pinapatay yung kapatid ko. It was also Dizon who
jumped on Villa's thights while saying, (T)his guy, his father stole the parking space of my
father. With the testimony clarified, we find that the CA had no basis for concluding the
existence of intent to kill based solely thereon.
SC agreed with the Solicitor General that the ill motives attributed by the CA to Dizon and
Villareal were baseless. since the statements of the accused were just part of the
psychological initiation calculated to instill fear on the part of the neophytes; that [t]here is
no element of truth in it as testified by Bienvenido Marquez; and that the harsh words
uttered by Petitioner and Villareal are part of 'tradition' concurred and accepted by all the
fraternity members during their initiation rites.
As to the existence of anumus interficendi on the part of Dizon, we refer to the entire
factual milieu and contextual premise of the incident to fully appreciate and understand
the testimony of witness Marquez
Dizon's way of inflicting psychological pressure was through hurling make-believe
accusations at the initiates. He concocted the fictitious stories, so that he could justify
giving the neophytes harder blows, all in the context of fraternity initiation and role playing.
Even one of the neophytes admitted that the accusations were untrue and made-up.
We cannot sustain the CA in finding the accused Dizon guilty of homicide under Article 249
of the Revised Penal Code on the basis of the existence of intent to kill. Animus
interficendi cannot and should not be inferred unless there is proof beyond
reasonable doubt of such intent. Instead, we adopt and reinstate the finding of the trial
court in part, insofar as it ruled that none of the fraternity members had the specific intent
to kill Lenny Villa.

WHAT IS LAW?

Essentialist

One that captures the true nature or essence of that which is being defined

Aristotle defined man as rational being for in rationality lies the true nature of manhood which distinguishes man from
all other beings in universe

One is not defining but explaining what a group or class of things is in terms of its essence
Stipulative

Purpose is the linguistic one of enabling the reader to know when to use the word correctly and the criterion for logical
correctness is confined to the linguistic world.

However, there is no logical criterion for correctness (a stipulation is nothing but a proposal or recommendation to use a
word in a certain way; no rightness or wrongness about the definition because the definer creates the standard by which
correctness is to be judged)
Lexical definition

Called a reportive or dictionary definition

The kind of definition found in the dictionary and all it does is merely to report the actual usage of the word

A definition is good or correct lexical definition if it truly reflects how people in general actually use the word defined
What a philosopher is looking for

A philosopher, when conducting logical inquiry, is not looking for essentialist, stipulative or lexical definition of law
He is in search of a definition which partakes of characteristics from all three but is in some sense more than just a
definition
Conceptual analysis of law

A logical analysis of the concept law

It seeks to find out what does or does not follow from, what is or is not logically presupposed by and what is or
what is not compatible with the concept (LOGICAL CLARIFICATION OF THE CONCEPT)
EXPLICATION way to achieve logical clarification when some sort of definition is achieved

How is explication done?

Examine the concept by looking at ordinary usage, how people actually use the term law while
communicating with other people (conceptual analysis using lexical definitions)
Purification and refinement since ordinary usage may be vague, ambigous or inconsistent or
even misleading, philosopher needs to go beyond the evidence of ordinary usage and makes
proposal as to how to regard the concept(affinity with stipulative definitions)
Philosophical puzzlement it is not actually a definition that conceptual philosophy is after but
description of a special kind, of how we use words to provide a deeper understanding of the world (in
a way like an essentialist definition trying to capture the essence of reality)

KINDS OF LAW

Descriptive laws

merely describe uniformities or regularities in the world or nature

merely a statement of how events regularly do happen

such laws cannot be violated; law may be amended to take account the anomaly and arrive at more accurate description
of phenomena being described

Ex. Scientific laws (mere expressions of uniformities of science); Eternal Law of St. Thomas Aquinas (mandates order
and harmony in entire universe)
Prescriptive laws

do not describe but prescribe a type of behavior which is supposed to be obeyed

require the doing or abstaining from certain actions

may be violated; if violated, this does not mean that the law has been incorrectly formulated thus requiring amendment;
violator is subject to some for of sanction
Kind of prescriptive law which is concern of philosophy of law is positive law(known as municipal law) law of the state.
Regulates transactions between ctizens, civil liability and criminal liability, prescribes remedies for wrongs and proper
procedure for complaining and setting up defenses, required to be studied in law schools
Positive Law

Kinds and senses of positive law:

Law in particular sense

One specific law (law on rape)

Law in generic sense (collection of laws or law embodying all criminal laws)

Law in crimes against chastity (law on rape, adultery, concubinage, acts of lasciviousness,
seduction, corruption of minors, white slave trade, abduction)

Law as system of norms (embodies all laws, criminal, civil, commercial, procedural and of state

Law in comprehensive sense

Focus is not what law is but what law does or how it functions as agency of social control
instituted to meet the demands of society

As such, law includes a great number of phenomena besides rules or norms such as
principles, standards, doctrines, processes and institutions

Law is a working process and vital institution which has many links to and varied
fundamental roles of differing significance to play in society

DIFFERENT FEATURES OF LAW

Cicero the law be based on right reason in accordance with nature

St. Thomas Aquinas law is an ordinance of reason for the common good promulgated by him who has authority
Locke law is a product of a social contract preserving natural rights
Austin law is the general command of the sovereign
Savigny law is the product of the common consciousness or spirit of the people
Ehrlic law is the inner order of human associations

KINDS OF LEGAL THEORIES

Natural Law Theories

Originates to classical Greeks; Socrates, Plato, Aristotle subscribed to it who were influenced by Pythagoras, Heraclitus
or Paremenides

There is an instrinsic, essential or conceptual connection or link between law and morality; morality provides the key to
the proper understanding of law

For classical Greeks, the connection was in terms of validity: positive law must conform to an objective univesal morality
to be valid; dictum - an unjust law is not law (St. Augustine)

Common Law Theory

A variation of the Classical Natural law Theory as it was postulated that the Common Law was the embodiment
of Justice or Natural law

Philippines was classified as common law country:

A survey of recent cases in the Philippine Reports, and praticularly those of the last few years,
shows an increasing reliance upon English and American authorities in the formation of what may be
termed a Philippine Common Law, as supplemental to the statute law of this jurisdiction (In Re
Shoop, 41 Phil. 213)
Classical Natural Rights Theory

Its champion is John Locke and U.S. Constitution(natural rights theory is said to be the justification for
American Revolution and guiding spirit with which the US Constitution was drafted, particularly the First Ten
Amendments)

Under this theory, any purported law violative of natural right is invalid or void regardless of whether the right
has been constitutionally recognized or not
Procedural or Methodological Natural Theory

adopted by Lon Fuller

Law must satisfy eight procedural requirements in order to be valid which would then require law to have an
internal morality

General

Promulgated (published)

Prospective (non-retroactive)

Intelligible

Logically consistent

Such as to require only the possible

Relatively constant over time

Applied as state
Constructive or Jurisprudential Natural Law

Adopted by Ronald Dworkin

The legal enterprise is constructive in the sense that law is being constantly interpreted and applied to satisfy
two requirements, that of fit and of soundness

The soundness criterion (which mandates that we must interpret the law in its best moral light) provides law its
moral quality

Neo-Thomists

John Finnis, Michael Moorem and Robert george

Modified the views of St. Thomas Aquinas and made them up-to-date

Adopted some views of the doctrines of positivism (i.e., law is authoritative and exclusionary) and rendered
Classical Natural Law Theory more plausible and acceptable
Legal Positivism

Provides the simplest explanation of what law is law is a command, a hierarchy of norms, union of primary or
secondary rules, a social fact

A product of human endeavor or human will

Encapsulated in the Roman maxim: whatever pleases the prince has the force of law

To be valid, a law must simply follow the prescribed proper procedures for the enactment of law

Law need not fulfill any kind of moral content to be valid

Social Science Theories

Law as product of human endeavor which has no essential connection to morality

In contrast to positivism, it studies law as social phenomenon

In describing law, it adapts an external or third person perspective

Law is seen merely as set of predictions and not as normative judgments which are to be obeyed or complied with(this
perspective fails to capture law's binding character)
Radical or Critical Theories

Radical theories include Marxist Legal Theory of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Lenin and Pashukanis

Law is perceived as nothing but representing the interests of the moneyed or propertied class in society
Violence an external act characterized by the use of physical force (Nagabo v Obad, CV-63916, Feb 8, 1988, cited in
MORENO'S LAW DICTIONARY by F.B. MORENO, 2000 ED.)

RA 9262, SEC. 3:

xxx As used in this Act, (a) Violence against women and their children refers to any act or a series of acts

commited by any person against a woman who is his wife xxx

Arrest the taking of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense (Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 113, Sec. 1[Definition of Arrest]; Sanchez v Demetriou, 46 SCAD 152, 227 SCRA 637,
cited in MORENO'S LAW DICTIONARY)

RA 9344, SEC 4 (k):

Initial Contact With the Child refers to the apprehension or taking into custody of a child in conflict with the
law by law enforcement officers or private citizens. It includes the time when the child alleged to be in conflict
with the law receives a subpoena under Section 3(b) of Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
xxx

THE NEED FOR PHILOSOPHY

Law is not a self-contained discipline (answers to problems cannot be found internally, so resort to philosphy)
Lawyer must be knowledgeable not just in law but also in logic (logical consistency and reasoning)
More insightful understanding of legal problems (truth, meaning, validity, right, duty, sanction, coercion, responsibility, intent,
motive, crime, punishment, tort, property, ownership, possession)

PHILOSOPHY CITED IN LAWS

EO 209, ART. 183

Article 183. A person of age and in possession of full civil capacity and legal rights may adopt, provided he is in a
position to support and care for his children, legitimate or illegitimate, in keeping with the means of the family.
Only minors may be adopted, except in the cases when the adoption of a person of majority age is allowed in this Title.
In addition, the adopter must be at least sixteen years older than the person to be adopted, unless the adopter is the parent
by nature of the adopted, or is the spouse of the legitimate parent of the person to be adopted. (27a, EO 91 and PD 603)

The interests and welfare of the child are of primary and paramount consideration in determining whether or not to set
aside a decree of adoption.

The philosophy behind adoption statutes is to promote the welfare of the child. Accordingly, the modern trend is to
encourage adoption and every reasonable intendment should be sustained to promate that objective. (Paulina Santos
vs Gregoria Aranzanso, G.R. No. L-23828, February 28, 1966)
BP 22, SEC. 1

Section 1. Checks without Sufficient Funds Any person who makes or draws and issues any check to apply on account
or for value, knowing at the time of issue that he does not have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the
payment of such check in full upon its presentment, which check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for
insufficiency of funds or credit or would have been dishonored for the same reason had not the drawer, without any valid
reason, ordered the bank to stop payment, shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than thirty days but not
more than one (1) year or by a fine of not less than but not more than double the amount of the check which fine
shall in no case exceed two hundred thousand pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of
the court.
VACA v CA, 359 PHIL 187

Petitioners were convicted of BP 22 which provides for alternative penalties of fine or imprisonment or both fine
and imprisonment

SC deleted the prison sentence imposed upon petitioners and instead ordered them only to pay a fine
equivalent to double the amount of the check

SC held:

Petitioners are first-time offenders. They are Filipino entrepreneurs who presumably contribute to
the national economy. Apparently, they brought this appeal, believing in all good faith, although
mistakenly, that they had not committed a violation of BP Blg 22. Otherwise, they could simply have
accepted the judgment of the trial court and applied for probation to evad prison term. It would best
serve the ends of criminal justice if in fixing the penalty within the range of discretion allowed by par.
1, the same philosophy underlying the Indeterminate Sentece Law is observed namely that of
redeeming valuable human material and preventing unnecessary deprivation of personal
liberty and economic usefulness with due regard to the protection of the social order.

A fine double the amount of the check involved would best serve the ends of criminal justice.
CIVIL CODE OF THE PHIL., ART 979

ARTICLE 979. Legitimate children and their descendants succeed the parents and other ascendants, withoud distinction
as to sex or age, and even if they should come from different marriages.

The philosophy underlying this article is that a person's love descends first to his children and grandchildren before
it ascends to his parents and thereafter spreads among his collateral relatives. It is also supposed that one of his
purposes in acquiring properties is to leave them eventually to his children as a token of his love for them and as a
provision for their continued care even after he is gone from this earth (Mauricio Sayson vs Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos.
89224-25, January 23, 1992)
RA 8424, Sec. 23:

Principle of estoppel does not operate against the government for neglect or omission of its officials tasked to collect
taxes.

Taxes are the lifeblood of the Government and their prompt and certain availability are imperious need. Upon taxation
depends the Government's ability to serve the people for whose benefit taxes are collected. To safeguard such interest,
neglect or omission of government officials entrusted with the collection of taxes should not be allowed to bring harm or
detriment to the people, in the same manner as private persons may be made to suffer individually on account of hins
negligence, the presumption being that they take good care of their personal affair. This should not hold true to
government officials with respect to matters not of their own personal concern. This is the philosophy behind the
government's exception as a general rule, from the operation of the principle of estoppel. (Vera, et al. vs.
Fernandez, et al., G.R. No. L-313164, March 30, 1979; Atlas Consolidated Mining & Dev't Corp vs Commissioner of
Internal Revenue, G.R. No. L-36011, Jan 27, 1981)

RA 8424, Sec. 218:

Section 218 Injunction not Available to Restrain Collection of Tax No court shall have the authority to grant an
injunction to restrain the collection of any national internal revenue tax, fee or charge imposed by this Code.
1997 Rules of Procedure, Rule 70, Sec. 1

Section 1 Who may institute proceedings, and when Subject to the provisions of the next succeeding section, a
person deprived of the possession of any land or building by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth or a lessor,
vendor, vendee or other person against whom the possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld after the
expiration or termination of the right to hold possession, by virtue of any contract, express or implied, or the legal
representatives or assigns of any such lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person, may, at any time within one year after
such unlawful deprivation or withholding of possession, bring an action in the proper Municipal Trial Court against the
person or persons unlawfully withholding or depriving of poessession, or any person or persons claiming under them, for
the restitution of such possession, together with damages and costs.
Supreme Court:

Petitioner should not trifle with the summary nature of an ejectment suit by the simple expedient of asserting
someone else's ownership over the leased property. The proceedings are only intended to provide an
expeditious means of protecting actual possession or right to possession of property. Title is not involved

The distinction between a sumarry action of ejectment and a plenary action for recovery of possession and/or
ownership of the land is settled in our jurisprudence. The underlying philosophy behind the former is to
prevent breach of peace and criminal disorder and to compel parties out of possession to respect and
resort to the law alone in order to obtain what they claim are theirs. Petitioner is necessarily in prior lawful
possession of the property, but his possession eventually becomes unlawful upon termination or expiration of
his right to possess. His prior physical possession of the leased property does not automatically entitle him to
continue in its possession and does not give him a better right to the property
RA 9346 proscribing the imposition of death penalty in relation to RPC, Art. 71

Art 71 Graduated scales In the cases in which the law prescribes a penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees
than another given penalty, the rules prescribed in article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty.

The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the following graduated scales:

SCALE NO. 1

Death

Reclusion perpetua

Reclusion temporal

Prision mayor

Prision correcional

Arresto mayor

Destierro

Arresto menor

Public (sic)

Fine

People v Bon, G.R. No. 166401, Oct 30, 2006:

The maximum term of reclusion temporal in the sentence imposed on appellant by the Court of Appeals for the
two counts of attempted rape. The sentence was prescribed by the appellate court prior to the enactment of
Republic Act No. 9346 which ended the imposition of the death penalty in the Philippines. The proximate
concern as to appellant is whether his penalty for attempted qualified rape, which under the penal law should
be two degrees lower than that of consummated qualified rape, should be computed from death or reclusion
perpetua, the critical question is whether Rep Act No. 9346 intended to delete the word death as expressly
provided for in the graduated scale of penaltties under Article 71.

Supreme Court:

It is also a well-known rule of legal hermeneutics that penal or criminal laws are strictly construed
against the state and liberally in favor of the accused. If the language of the law were ambigous,
the court will lean more strongly in favor of the defendant than it would if the statute were
remedial as a means of effecting substantial justice. The law is tender in favor of the rights of an
individual. It is this philosophy of caution before the State may deprive a person of life or liberty
that animates one of the must fundamental principles in our Bill of Rights, that every person is
presume innocent until proven guilty.

PD 1508 (now RA 7160)

Katarungang Pambarangay Law

Also known as barangay justice (mediation, concilation and arbitration)

Aquino v Aure, G.R. No. 153567, Feb 18, 2008:

Supreme Court:

The barangay justice system was established primarily as a means of easing up the congestion of
cases in the judicial courts. This could be accomplished through a proceeding before the barangay
courts which, according to the conceptor of the system, the late Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro, is
essentially arbitration in character, and to make it truly effective, it should also be compulsory. With
this primary objective of the barangay justice system in mind, it would be wholly in keeping with the
underlying philosophy of Presidential Decree No. 1508, otherwise known as the Katarungang
Pambarangay Law, and the policy behind it would be better served if an out-of-court settlement of
the case is reached voluntarily by the parties.
Concepcion v Court of Appeals, 381 Phil 90 (2000)

Supreme Court:

The philosophy behind Article 26 underscores the necessity for its inclusion in our civil law. The
Code Commission stressed in no uncertain terms that the human personality must be exalted.
The sacredness of human personality is a concomitant consideration of every plan for human
amelioration. The touchstone of every system of law of the culture and civilization of every country, is
how far it dignifies man. If the statutes, insufficicently protect a person from being unjustly humiliated,
in sohrt, if human personality is not exalted then the laws are indeed defective. Thus, under this
article, the rights of persons are amply protected, and damages are provided for violations of
person's dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind.
Res Judicata 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 2, Sec. 3

Section 3 One Suit for a Single Cause of Action A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of
action.

Dapar v Biascan, et al., G.R. No. 141880, September 27, 2004:

Supreme Court:

Xxx the difference in ofrm and nature of the two actions is immateral and is not a reason for
exemption from the effects of res judicata. The philosophy behind this rule prohibits the parties
from litigating the same issue more than once. When a right or fact has been judicially tried and
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or an opportunity for such trial has been given, the
judgment of the court, as long as it remains unreversed, should be conclusive upon the parties and
those in privity with them. Whatever has once been irrevocably established as the controlling legal
principle is an earlier final judgment continues to be the law of the case between the same parties in
another suit as long as the facts on which such decision was predicated continue to be the facts of
the dispute before the court.

APPROACHES TO PHILOSOPHY

Analytic approach

Conceptual analysis is the method used (logical analysis of the concept, i.e., what is law?)

Concept need to be clarified first before addressing normative issues

Ex. Normative issue: moral obligation to obey the law

before adequate resolution of the problem, the meanings of moral, obligation, obedience and law need to be
defined and adequately understood

Why?

How the word or concept was in the beginning used by ordinary person in its everyday sense (this way, the
philosopher would be able to (a) analyze and determine if the philosophical conclusion generated from the
premises logically follow, (b) how these problems arose, and (c) ensure that the precise issue or problem is
addressed

Successful communication is better ensure and the foundation for a constructive debate is laid

Avoiding philosophical error and confusion

Avoiding unwarranted normative or substantive conclusions through persuasive definitions (some words have
the effect of producing either favorable or unfavorable reactions on the part of hearer or reader called as
emotive meaning by Stevenson)

Ex. freedom, democracy and culture evoke favorable reaction while violence, fascism, and
tyranny evoke unfavorable ones

Ex. democracy has favorable emotive meaning

A Marxist may make use of this and define true democracy as kind of government which is
governed by the masses in the form of dictatorship of the proletariat (this overlooks
country and no procedures are instituted to determine what the people or the masses want
which are supposed to be features of a democracy.

Ex. violence has unfavorable emotive meaning

Categorical and Historical Approach

Newton Garver: 'violence' as some sort of violation of a person's rights to autonomy and
to dignity (overt v covert violence)
Dictionary: unlawful exercise of physical force
Effects: 1. definition provokes unfavorable reactions, would automatically result in
condemnation of certain acts, this prevents a more through examination of the nature of
the act to determine whether it is indeed condemnable; 2. blurs the distinction

4 Caregories (natural law theories, legal positivism, social science and radical theories); proper understanding of the
many issues in philosophy of law cannot be fully understood unless situated within its jurisprudential category

Once categorizedm historical background and setting come in

Naturalist-Positivist Debate

They represent two main schools of jurisprudential thought

These two are grounded on most basic insights into the nature of law: law as product of reason (from which arises the
rationalist tradition in philosophy of law as exemplified by natural law theory) and law as product of human will
(voluntarist tradition championed by legal positivism)
Detached Internal Point of View

Philosopher must understand from the point of view of the participant (lawyer's shoes)

Internal perspective provides an insight into the nature of the phenomena

Martian visitng the earth example

RELEVANCE

For lawyers/aspiring lawyers

Better lawyer

Enhance skills and deepen understanding of law (analysis)

Better human being

Better rational understanding of certain normative issues and making rational choice involving these issues

LEGAL PHILOSOPHY AND THE COURTS

Justifiability

Whether a matter is for the courts to pass upon or not is something that the courts must first pass upon.

Francisco v House of Rep (G.R. No. 160261, November 10, 2003) and consolidated cases
Separate Opinion (Azcuna, J.):

As to the jurisdication of this Court, and whether the issue presents a political question that may not be delved
into by the Court, it is necessary to look into the structure and essence of our system of government
under the Constitution.
The starting principle is that the Philippines is a democratic and republican State and that sovereignty resides
in the people and all governed authority emanates from them (Article II, Section 1)
As a republican State, the sovereign powers of the people are for the most part exercised through
representatives and not directly, except in the cases of suffrage, referenda and initiatives.
It is my view that when the Constitution not only gives or allocates the power to one Department, or branch of
government, be it solely or exclusively, but also, at the same time, or together with the grant or allocation,
specifically provides certain limits to its exercise, then this Court, belonging to the Department called upon
under the Constitution to interpret its provisions, has the jurisdiction to do so.
And, in fact, this jurisdiction of the Court is not so much of power as a duty, as clearly set forth in Article VIII,
Section 1 of the Constitution:

Section 1. The judicial poer shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may
be established by law.
Judicial power includes THE DUTY of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which
are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
Government.
This function of the Court is a necessary element not only of the system of checks and balances, but also of a
workable and living Constitution. For absent an agency or organ that can rule with finality, as to what the
terms of the Constitution mean, there will be uncertainty if not chaos in governance, i.e., no governance at
all. This is what the noted writer on legal systems, Prof. H.L.A. Hart, calls the need for a Rule of Recognition in
any legal system, without which that sytem cannot survive and dies (HART, THE CONCEPT OF LAW, 92, 118).
From as far back as Angara v Electoral Commission, 63 Phil 139 (1936), it has been recognized that this is not
the supremacy of the Court. It is the supremacy of the Constitution and of the sovereign Filipino people
who ordained and promulgated it.

Justiciability

Justiciability limits the reach of judicial power (what is not justiciable is beyond the province of the courts)

Is SC at liberty to decide which questions it would like to rule on?

Depends on constitutionally imposed limits on powers conferred upon political bodies (where there are no
constitutional standards (i.e., purely policy matters, there is nothing to take judicial cognizance of) but it is for
the courts to determine whether the issues fall on the side of justiciability or of non-justiciability.

Francisco v House of Rep case (Separate Opinion of Azcuna, J):

Proceeding, then, to do our duty of construing the Constitution in a matter of profound necessity, we are called
upon to rule whether the second complaint of impeachment is in accord with Article XI, Sec. 3(5) of the
Constitution, which states:

No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period
of one year.
I say it is not.
The purpose of this provision is two-fold: to prevent undue or too frequent harassment; and (2) to allow the
legislature to do its principal task, legislation.
I earlier adverted to the placement of the power of impeachment, not in the Articles on government powers, but
in the Article on accountability. This indicates that such power is not essentially legislative in character, and
is not primarily intended as a check by the Legislative Department on the other branches. Its main purpose, at
least under our Constitution, is to achieve accountability, but this is to be done without detriment to the
government power of legislation under Article VI.

A second complaint is not forever barred, but only temporarily so, or until June of 2004, to forestall disruption
of the principal task of legislative work. As it is, without casting aspersions on co-equal Departments but
stressing only the fact that all the Departments have so much to do and so little time to do it, the national
budget is yet to be approved. The rationale of the Constitution provision is, thus, evident.
Power of Judicial Review

The power of judicial review is a sword that must be unsheathed with restraint. To ensure this, certain
justiciability doctrines' mus be complied with as a prerequisite for the Court's exercise of its awesome power to
declare the act of a co-equal branch invalid for being unconstitutional. These doctrines are important as they
are intertwined with the principle of separation of powers. They help define the judicial role; they determine
when it is appropriate for courts to review (a legal issue) and when it is necessary to defer to the other
branches of government (Galicto v H.E. Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III, et al., G.R. No. 193978, February
28, 2012, CORONA, CJ., separate opinion)

standing and mottness are among the justiciability doctrines

Paul Ricoeur - The Act of Judging JUSTICIABILITY

amenability to the act of judging by the institution of the courts

Justificability is confining because an issue is resolved by reference to specific set of norms called laws
4 conditions: (1) existence of written law; (2) presence of institutional framework; (3) intervention of qualified,
competent and independent persons who are charged with judging; (4) course of action constituted by the trial
or judicial process where the pronounsement of judgment constitutes the endpoint
What does justiciability do?

Salutary reminder to judges and community that it is the force of law that brings the debate between
contending parties to an end

Preferred alternative to the brute force that law was crafted to curb

Institutionalization of distributive justice

Distributive justice is sanctioned by the Constitution, Article XII, Section 6:

The use of property bears a social fuction, and all economic agents shall contribute to the
common good. Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and
similar collective organizations, shall have the right to own, establish and operate
economic enterprises, subject to the duty of the State to promote distributive justice and
to intervene when the common good so demands.
PLDT V NTC, 190 SCRA 717

PLDT challenged the grant of interconnection order by NTC in favor of another company,
saying that the NTC is not empowered to compel such a private raid on PLDT's legitimate
income arising out of its gigantic investment; that it is not public interest, but purely a
private and selfish interest which will be served by an interconnection under ETCI's terms;
and that to compel PLDT to interconnect merely to give viability to a prospective
competitor, which cannot stand on its own feet, cannot be justified in the name of a nonexistent public need

Supreme Court:

The interconnection which has been required of PLDT is a form of

intervention with property rights dictated by the objective of government to
promote the rapid expansion of telecommunications services in all areas of the
Philippines, . . . to maximize the use of telecommunications facilities available, . .
. in recognition of the vital role of communications in nation building . . . and to
ensure that all users of the public telecommunications service have access to all
other users of the service wherever they may be within the Philippines at an
acceptable standard of service and at reasonable cost (DOTC Circular No. 90248). Undoubtedly, the encompassing objective is the common good.
Precarious about option of adjudication when there is unreliability or incompetence violent confrontation is
difficult to resist
Justiciability addresses injustice (heavy burden on court and judge) for its finality is recognition
When court decides, winning and losing parties alike recognize the rule by which the outcome is reached
Usefulness of concept of justiciability is closely linked with INTEGRITY OF JUDGE, RATIONALITY OF LEGAL
SYSTEM, and COMPETENCE and CREDIBILITY OF JUDICIAL INSTITUTIONS
Act of judging makes possible the maintenance of balance: too close an encounter (disorderly and violent
conflict) and too distant a dealing (ignorance, hate and scorn)

BELIEF

Philippine law voids contracts that run contrary to morals

Art. 1352 Contracts without cause, or with unlawful cause, produce no effect whatever. The cause is unlawful if it is
contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy.
Art. 1409 the following contracts are inexistent and void from the beginning:

Those whose cause, object or purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public
policy;

Art. 2035 (no compromise on civil status, validity of marriage or legal separation, any ground for legal separation, future
support, jurisdiction of courts and future legitime)
Placewell International Services Corp. v Camote, G.R. No. 169973, 26 June 2006

SC held that the subsequently executed side agreement of an overseas contract worker with the foreign employer is
void, simply because it is against our existing laws, morals and public policy

The subsequent agreement cannot supersede the terms of the standard employment contract approved by the POEA as
RA No. 8092, commonly known as the Migrant Workers Act of 1995, expressly prohibits the substitution or alteratio, to
the prejudice of the worker, of employment contracts already approved and verified by DOLE from the time of the actual
signing thereof by the parties up to and including the period of the expiration of the same, without the approval of DOLE.
Calimlim-Canullas v Hon. Fortun, etc., et al. 214 Phil. 593 (1984)

SC held that the contract of sale was null and void for being contrary to morals and public policy. The sale was made by
a husband in favor of a concubine after he had abandoned his family and left the conjugal home where his wife and
children lived and from whence they derived their support. The sale was subversive of the stability of the family, a basic
social institution which public policy cherishes and protects.
Actions contrary to morals are grounds for award of damages.
Article 21: any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs, or public
policy shall compensate the latter for the damage
Sandejas v Sps. Ignacio, G.R. No. 155033, December 19, 2007

SC held that the act of Alice and Rosita in fraudulently encashing the subject checj to the prejudice of respondents is
certainly a violation of law as well as of the public policy that no one should put the law into his own hands.
Civil servants liable for conduct offensive to morality

Ecube-Badel v Badel, 339 Phil. 510, 518 (1997), SC suspended a court employee for one year for having illicit relations
with another woman not his wife by whom he begot a child, citing Rule XIV, Section 23 (o) of the Civil Service Rules and
applicable rulings, that immorality is considered a grave offense and is punished by suspension for six months and one
day to one year for the first offense and, for the second offense, by dismissal.

Zaguirre v Castillo, 446 Phil. 861, 867 (2003), SC reiterated the defintion of immoral conduct as such conduct which
is so willful, flagrant, or shameless as to show indifference to the opinion of good and respectable members of the
community.
Estrada v Escritor

Judicial philosophizing judgment demonstrated in penumbral cases (cases not considered by creators of law
legislature)

Respondent (court employee) was estranged from her husband and living with a married man, likewise estranged from
his wife.

She asked her church (religious sect known as the Jehovah's Witness and the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society) to
pass upon their union and the church gave its consent and approval.

Insofat as the congregation is concerned, there is nothing immoral about the conjugal arrangement between Escritor and
Quilapio and they remain members in good standing in the congregation.

For Jehovah's Witnesses, the 'Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness allows members of the congregation who have been
abandoned by their spouses to enter into marital relations. The Declration thus makes the resulting union moral and
binding within the congregation all over the world except in countries where divorce is allowed.

Supreme Court:

Under the benevolent-neutrality theory, the principle underlying the First Amendment is that freedom to carry
out one's duties to a Supreme Being is an inalienable right, not one dependent on the grace of legislature.
Religious freedom is seen as a substantive right and not merely a privilege against discriminatory legislation.
With religion looked upon with benevolence and not hostility, benevolent neutrality allows accommodation of
religion under certain circumstances.

Admin Code and Civil Service Laws (immoral conduct is actionable) v Religious norms and freedom of religion(her conjugal
arrangement does not constitute disgraceful and immoral conduct)

What is this morality?

The morality referred to in the law is public and necessarily secular, not religious as the dissent of Mr. Justice
Carpio holds. Religious teachings as expressed in public debate may influence the civil public order but
public moral disputes may be resolved only on grounds articulable in secular terms.
Otherwise, if government relies upon religious beliefs in formulating public policies and morals, the resulting
policies and morals would require conformity to what some might regard as religious programs or agenda. The
non-believers would therefore be compelled to conform to a standard of conduct buttressed by a religious
belief, i.e., to a compelled religion, anathema to religious freedom.

Likewise, if government based its actions upon religious beliefs, it would tacitly approve or endorse that
belief and thereby also tacitly disapprove contrary religious or non-religious views that would not support
the policy. As a result, government will not provide full religious freedom for all its citizens, or even make it
appear that those whose beliefs are disapproved are second-class citizens.
In other words, government action, including its proscription of immorality as expressed in criminal law like
concubinage, must have a secular purpose. That is, the government proscribes this conduct because it is
detrimental (or dangerous) to those conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of
human society and not because the conduct is proscribed by the beliefs of one religion or the other.
Although admittedly, moral judgments based on religion might have a compelling influence on those
engaged in public deliberations over what actions would be considered a moral disapprobation punishable by
law.

Underying the compelling state interest test is the notion that free exercise is a fundemental right and that
laws burdening it should be subject to strict scrutiny.

Applying the strict scrutiny-compelling state interest test which is most in line with the benevolent neutralityaccommodation approach, SC dismissed the administrative case.
Re-reading the law and deconstruction

Re-reading the law is deconstructing it to explore the unread, the unfamiliar.

Oposa v Factoran on locus standi: accepted reading of the rules would have denied the children any standing outright
but CJ Davidce ventured into the unfamiliar, the moving force of all deconstruction
What is the accepted rule?

Funa v Villar, G.R. No. 192791, April 24, 2012

As a general rule, a petitioner must have the necessary personality or standing (locus standi) before
a court will recognize the issues presented.

Citing IBP v Zamora, locus standi was defined as:

a personal and substantial interest in the case such that the party has sustained or will
sustain a direct injury as a result of the government act that is being challeged. The term
interest means a material interest, an interest in issue affected by the decree, as
distinguished from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere incidental interest.

Oposa v Factoran the unfamiliar

This case, however, has a special and novel element. Petitioners minors assert that they represent
their generation as well as generations yet unborn. We find no difficulty in ruling that they can, for
themselves, for others of their generation and for the succeeding generations, file a class suit. Their
personality to sue in behalf of the succeeding generations can only be based on the concept of
intergenerational responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is
concerned. Such a right, as hereinafter expounded, considers the rhythm and harmony of nature.
Nature means the created world in its entirety.
Oposa v Factoran on legal right involved or a legal wrong committed
Supreme Court:

The complaint focuses on one specific fundamental legal right the right to a balanced
and healthful ecology which, for the first time in our nation's constitutional history, is
solemnly incorporated in the fundamental law (citing Section 16, Article II of the 1987
Constitution)

If they are now explicitly mentioned in the fundamental charter, it is because of the wellfounded fear of its framers that unless the rights to a balanced and healthful ecology and
to health are mandated as state policies by the Constitution itself, thereby highlighting their
continuing importance and imposing upon the state a solemn obligation to preserve the
first and protect and advance and second, the day would not be too far whel all else
would be lost not only for the present generation, but also for those to come
generations which stand to inherit nothing but parched earth incapable of sustaining life.
Oposa v Factoran on non-impairment of contracts clasue.
Supreme Court: Citing Nebia v New York in Philippine American Life Insurance Co. v Auditor
General:

Under our form of government the use of property and the making of contracts are
normally matters of private and not of publoc concern. The general rule is that both shall
be free of governmental interference. But neither property rights not contract rights are
absolute; for government cannot exist if the citizen may at will use his property to the
detriment of his fellows, or exercise his freedom of contract to work them harm.
Equally fundamental with the private right is that of the public to regulate it in the common
interest.
Justice: The Indeconstructible that summons deconstruction

Salvacion v Central Bank of the Philippines:

In our predisposition to discover the original intent of a statute, courts become the unfeeling pillars
of the status quo. Little do we realize that statutes or even constitutions are bundles of compromises
thrown our way by their framers. Unless we exercise vigilance, the statute may already be out of
tune and irrelevant to our day. (Torres, J., ponente)

If Karen's sad fate had happened to anybody's own kind, it would be difficult for him to fathom how
the incentive for foreign currency deposit could be more important that his child's rights to
said award of damages; in this case, the victim's claim for damages from this alien who had the
gall to wrong a child of tender years of a country where he is a mere visitor. This further illustrates
the flaw in the questioned provisions.

It is worth mentioning that RA No. 6426 was enacted in 1983 or at a time when the country's
economy was in a shambles; when foreign investments were minimal and presumably, this was the
reason why said statute was enacted. But the realities of the present times show that the country has
recovered economically; and even if not, the questioned law still denies those entitled to due process
of law for being unreasonable and oppressive. The intention of the questioned law may be good
when enacted. The law failed to anticipate the iniquitous effects producing outright injustice
and inequality such as the case before us.
Ambiguity resolved through the application of the Civil Code

In fine, the application of the law depends on the extent of its justice. Eventually, if we rule that
the questioned Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 which exempts from attachment,
garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any
administrative body whatsoever, is applicable to a foreign transient, injustice would result specially
to a citizen aggrieved by a foreign guest like accused Greg Bartelli. This would negate Article 10 of
the New Civil Code which provides that in case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it
is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail. Xxx Simply stated, when
the statute is silent or ambiguous, this is one of those fundamental solutions that would respond to
the vehement urge of conscience. (Padilla vs Padilla, 74 Phil 377)
Justice is not found in the written text.
It will be the achievement of a judge in each instance who must, precisely because he endeavors to do justice,
UN-WRITE, RE-WRITE, DEFER and DIFFER the written text of the law.
Law is deconstructed so that justice is done (refers not only to law reform or jurisprudential reversal but how a
judge must look each litigant who stands before him in every single case and do him justice)

ROLES OF AREAS OF LAW

Fornier v COMELEC

Respondent Ronald Allan Kelly Poe, also known as Fernando Poe, Jr. (hereinafter 'FPJ), filed his certificate of candidacy
for the position of Predident of RP, indicating therein that, among other things, he is a natural-bron Filipino citizen, born
on August 20, 1939 in the City of Manila.

Petitioner Fornier initiated a petition before COMELEC to disqualify FPJ and to deny due course or to cancel his
certificate of candidacy on the ground that he made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by
claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen when in truth, according to Fornier, his parents were foreigners.

COMELEC dismissed the petition. MR was also denied.

The SC dismissed the petition in G.R. No. 161824.

In ruling that FPJ is a natural-born Filipino citizen, the SC referred to the 1935 Constitution, which was the fundamental
law prevailing on the day, month and year of birth of FPJ, which confers citizenship to all persons whose fathers are
Filipino citizens regardless of whether such children are legitimate or illegitimate.

Supreme Court: Review of concept of citizenship

Perharps, the earliest understanding of citizenship was that given by Aristotle, who, sometime in 384 to 322
B.C., described the citizen to refer to a man who shared in the administration of justice and in the
holding of an office. Aristotle saw its significance if only to determine the constituency of the State, which he
described as being composed of such persons who would be adequate in number to achieve a self-sufficient
existence. The concept grew to include one who would both govern and be governed, for which
qualifications like autonomy, judgment and loyalty could be expected. Citizenship was seen to deal with rights
and entitlements, on the one hand, and with concomitant obligations, on the other. In its ideal setting, a citizen
was active in public life and fundamentally willing to submit his private interests to the general interest of
society.
The concept of citizenship had undergone changes over the centuries. In the 18 th century, the concept was
limited, by the large, to civil citizenship, which established the rights necessary to individual freedom, such as
rights to property, personal liberty and justice. Its meaning expanded during the 19 th century to include political
citizenship, which encomapssed the right to participate in the exercise of political power. The 20 th century saw
the next stage of the development of social citizenship, which laid emphasis on the right of the citizen to
economic well-being and social security. The idea of citizenship has gained expression in the modern welfare
state as it so developed in Western Europe. An ongoing and final stage of development, in keeping with the
rapudly shrinking global village, might well be the internationalization of citizenship.

Local setting: Spanish to present

There was no such term as Philippine citizens during the Spanish regime but subjects of Spain or Spanish
subjects. In church records, the natives were called 'indios', denoting a low regard for the inhabitants of the
archipelago. Spanish laws on citizenship became highly codified during the 19 th century but their sheer number
made it difficult to point to one comprehensive law. Not all of these citizenship laws of Spain, however,

were made to apply to the Philippine Islands except for those explicitly extended by Royal Decrees.
The year 1898 was another turning point in Philippine history. Already in the state of decline as a superpower,
Spain was foced to so cede her sole colony in the East to an upcoming world pwer, the United States. An
accepted principle of international law dictated that a change in sovereignty, while resulting in an aborgation of
all political laws then in force would have no effect on civil laws, which would remain virtually intact.
The Treaty of Paris was entered into an 10 December 1898 between Spain and the US. Under Article IX of the
treaty, the civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants of the territories ceded to the United States
would be determined by its Congress.
Upon the ratification of the treaty, and pending legislation by the United States Congress on the subject, the
native inhabitants of the Philippines ceased to be Spanish subjects. Although they did not become American
citizens, they, however, also ceased to be aliens under American laws and were thus issued passports
describing them to be citizens of the Philippines entitled to the protection of the united States.
The term citizens of the Philippine Islands appeared for the first time in the Philippine Bill of 1902, also
commonly referred to as the Philippine Organic Act of 1902, the first comprehensive legislation of the
Congress of the United States on the Philippines.
Under the organic act, a citizen of the Philippines was one who was an inhabitant of the Philippines, and a
Spanish subject on the 11th day of April 1899. The term inhabitant was taken to include 1) a native-born
inhabitant, 2) an inhabitant who was a native of Peninsular Spain, and 3) an inhabitant who obtained Spanish
papers on or before 11 April 1899.
Controversy arose on the status of children born in the Philippines from 11 April 1899 to 01 July 1902, during
which period no citizenship law was extant in the Philippines. Weight was given to the view, articulated in
jurisprudential writing at the time, that the common law principle of jus soli, otherwise also known as the
principle of territoriality, operative in the US and England, governed those born in the Philippine Archipelago
within that period.
With the adoption of the Philippine Bill of 1902, the concept of Philippine citizens had for the first time
crystallized. The word Filipino was used by William H. Taft, the first Civil Governor General in the Philippines
when he initially made mention of it in his slogan, The Philippines for the Filipinos. In 1916, the Philippine
Autonomy Act, also known as the Jones Law restated virtually the provisions of the Philippine Bill of 1902, as
so amended by the Act of Congress in 1912.
Under the Jones Law, a native-born inhabitant of the Philippines was deemed to be a citizen of the
Philippines as of 11 April 1899 if he was 1) a subject of Spain on 11 April 1899, 2) residing in the Philippines on
said date, and 3) since that date, not a citizen of some other country.
While there was, at one brief time, divergent views on whether or not jus soli was a mode of acquiring
citizenship, the 1935 Constitution brought to an end to any such link with common law, by adopting, once and
for all, jus sanguinis or blood relationship as being the basis of Filipino citizenship.
1935 Constitution

Section 1, Article III, 1935 Constitution. The following are citizens of the Philippines
Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this
Constitution

Those born in the Philippines Islands of foreign parents who, before the adoption of this
Constitution, had been elected to public office in the Philippine Islands.

Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines

Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and upon reaching the age of
majority, elect Philippine citizenship.

Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

The 1987 Constitution generally adopted the provision of the 1973 Constitution, except for subsection (3)
thereof that aimed to correct the irregular situation generated by the questionable proviso in the 1935
Constitution

The following are citizens of the Philippines:

Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution

Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines

Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship
upon reaching the age of majority; and

Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

FPJ Case

Section 2, Article VII, of the 1987 Constitution expresses:

No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter,
able to read and write, at least forty years of age on the day of the election, and a resident of the Philippines
for at least ten years immediately preceding such election.
The term natural-born citizens, is defined to include those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having
to perform any act to acquire or pefect their Philippine citizenship.
The date, month and year of birth of FPJ appeared to be 20 August 1939 during the regime of the 1935 Constitution.
Through its history, four modes of acquiring citizenship naturalization, just soli, res judicata and jus sanguinis had
been in vogue. Only two, i.e., just soli and jus sanguinis could qualify a person to being a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines. Jus soli, per Roa vs Collector of Customs (1912), did not last long. With the adoption of the 1935
Constitution and the reversal of Roa in Tan Chong vs Secretary of Labor (1947), jus sanguinis or blood relationship

would now become the primary basis of citizenship by birth.

Proof of Paternity and Filiation Under Civil Law

Petitioner submits, in any casem that in establishing filiation (relationship or civil status of the father to the child) of an
illegitimate child, FPJ evidently being an illegitimate son according to petitioner, the mandatory rules under civil law must
be used.

Under the Civil Code of Spain, which was in force in the Philippines from 08 December 1889 up until the day prior to 30
August 1950 when the Civil Code of the Philippines took effect, acknowledgmenet was required to establish filiation or
paternity. Acknowledgment was either judicial (compulsory) or voluntary. Judicial or compulsory acknowledgment was
possible only if done during the lifetime of the putative parent; voluntary acknowledgment could only be had in a record
of birth, a will, or a public document.

In order that the birth certificate could then be utilzied to prove voluntary acknowledgment of filiation or paternity, the
certificate was required to be signed or sworn to by the father.

In the birth certificate of respondent FPJ, presented by both parties, nowhere in the document was the signature of Allan
F. Poe found. There being no will apparently executed, or at least shown to have been executed, by decedent Allan F.
Poe, the only other proof of voluntary recognition remained to be some other public document

It should be apparent that the growing trend to liberalize the acknowledgement of recognition of illegitimate children is an
attempt to break away from the traditional idea of keeping well apart legitimate and non-legitimate relationships within
the family in favor of the greater interest and welfare of the child. The provisions are intended to merely govern the
private and personal affairs of the family. There is little, if any, to indicate that the legitimate or illegitimate civil status
of the individual would affect his political rights or, in general, his relationship to the State. While, indeed, provisions on
citizenship could be found in the Civil Code, such provisions must be taken in the context or private relations, the
domain of civil law; particularly
Civil Law is that branch of law which has for its double purpose the organization of the family and the
regulation of property. It has thus [been] defined as the mass of precepts which determine and regulate the
relations of assistance, authority and obedience among member of a family, and those which exist among
members of a society for the protection of private interests.
The relevance of citizenship or nationality to Civil Law is best exemplified in Article 15 of the Civil Code, stating that
Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding
upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad -

that explains the need to incorporate in the code a reiteration of the Constitutional provisions on citizenship.
Similarly, citizenship is significant in civil relationships found in different parts of the Civil Code, such as on
successional rights and family relations. In adoption, for instance, an adopted child would be considered
the child of his adoptive parents and accorded the same rights as their legitimate child but such legal fiction
extended only to define his rights under civil law and not his political status.
Civil law provisions point to an abvious bias against illegitimacy. This discriminatory attitude may be traced to the
Spanish family and property laws, which, while defining proprietary and successional rights of members of the family,
provided distinctions in the rights of legitimate and illegitimate children. In the monarchial set-up of old Spain, the
distribution and inheritance of titles and wealth were strictly according to bloodlines and the concern to keep these
bloodlines uncontaminated by foreign blood was paramount.
These distinctions between legitimacy and illegitimacy were codified in the Spanish Civil Code, and the invidious
discrimination survived when the Spanish Civil Code became the primary source of our own Civil Code. Such distinction,
however, remains and should remain only in the sphere of civil law and not unduly imped or impinge on the
domain of political law.
The proof of filiation or paternity for purposes of determining his citizenship status should thus be deemed independent
from and not inextricably tied up with that prescribed for civil law purposes. The Civil Code or Family Code provisions on
proof of filiation or paternity, although good law, do not have preclusive effects on matters alien to personal and family
relations. The ordinary rules on evidence could well and should govern.
Thus, the duly notarized declaration made by Ruby Kelley Mangahas, sister of Bessie Kelley Poe submitted as Exhibit
20 before the COMELEC, might be accepted to prove the facts of Allan F. Poe, recognizing his own paternal relationship
with FPJ, i.e., living together with Bessie Kelly and his children (including respondent FPJ) in one house, and as one
family (citing Section 39, Rule 130, of the Rules of Court on act or declaration about pedigree; 'pedigree' includes
relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when and the places where these facts occurred, and
the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family history intimately connected with pedigree)

WRITINGS OF SENIOR ASSOCIATE JUSTICE RENATO S. PUNO THE CONSTITUTIONAL PHILOSOPHY OF PHILIPPINE
JURISPRUDENCE BY JOSE MIDA P. MARQUEZ 2005

Judicial Restraint, Judicial Activism and the Coordinacy Theory of Constitutional Interpretation

Francisco v House or Rep (2003):

Judicial restraint assumes a setting of a government that is democratic and republican in character. Within this
democratic and republic framework, both the apostles of judicial restraint and the disciples of judicial activism
agree that government cannot act beyond the outer limits demarcated by constitutional boundaries without
becoming subhect to judicial intervention. The issue that splits them is the location of those limits.

The antagonism between judicial restraint and judicial activism is avoided by the coordinacy theory of
constitutional interpretation. This coordinacy theory gives room for judicial restraint without allowing the
judiciary to abdicate its constitutionally mandated duty to interpret the constitution. Coordinacy theory
rests on the premise that within the constitutional system, each branch of government has an independent

obligation to interpret the Constitution. This obligation is rooted on the system of separation of powers.
(Separate Opinion, Puno, J.)
Urging the Courts to be Pro-Active

IBP v Zamora (2000):

It is now history that the improper reliance by the Court on the political question doctrine eroded the people's
faith in its capacity to check abuses committed by the then Executive in the exercise of his commander-in-chief
powers, particularly violations against human rights. The refusal of courts to be pro-active in the exercise of
its checking power drove the people to the streets to resort to extralegal remedies. They gave birth to EDSA.
(Separate Opinion, Puno, J.)
Liberalizing Discovery and Deposition Procedure to Espouse a Pro-Active Court

People v Webb (1999):

The liberalization of the rules of discovery in criminal procedure in the US while slow was unabated.

In the case of the Philippines, the move towards a more liberal discovery and deposition procedure in criminal
cases is even slower but its march, likewise, appears inexorable. There can be no stepping back for the 1987
Constitution has gone to the extent of constitutionalizing basic rights of the accused whuch has not been done
in the United States. With this new orientation of the Constitution, this Court itself has taken steps to liberalize
our rules of criminal procedure. Thus, Section 1, Rule 118 of our 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure for the first
time ordered the holding of pre-trial when the accused and the cousel agree. The fruitful expreience of courts
holding pre-trial in criminal cases has impelled requests that our rules be further amended to make it
mandatory. Thus, too, this Court has given an expansive interpretation of the right of an accused to discovery
procedure.

Upon assumption of office, our present Chief Justice vowed to have a court that is pro-active, a stance that
will surely promote rights more than authority. I am sure such a stance will quicken moves to liberalize further
our rules on criminal procedure on the matter of discovery and deposition taking as to strenghthen the
constiuttional right to due process of an accused (Concurring Opinion, Puno, J.)
Pro-active but always neutral

Tecson v COMELEC

While there is a need for the Court to be at times pro-active, it must always remain neutral

Justice Puno argued that the delay in the resolution of the issue of whether respondent Poe is qualified to run
for the presidency should be avoided as this will prejudice his candidacy and favor his political opponents.

In light of these erudite opinions of our amici curiae, it is daylight clear that Fornier is not only wrong with his
facts but also wrong with his law. Considering that petitioner is wrong both with his facts and the law, the Court
has no option but to dismiss the petition at bar which espouses nothing but errors. This Court will be
compounding the wrongs committed by petitioner Fornier with another wrong if it remands the petition at
bar to the COMELEC. A remand means a new round of litigation in the COMELEC when its proceedings have
long been closed and terminated. (Separate Opinion, Puno, J.)
This court is also a court of equity

Republic v NLRC (1995)

As this Court is not only a court of law but also of equity, we hold that fairness requires that private respondent
be allowed possession of not more than P60 million of the levied properties.

In the meanwhile, no evasion, much less defiance, is allowable. It is bad enough if the parties would be
minded to do so. It is infinitely worse if the offender, as was the case here, was a judge of the Court of First
Instance. It would make a mockery of the legal order if one like respondent judge, precisely called upon
to assure respect for legal processes, would act otherwise. To say that he has been recreant to his trust
is to put it mildly. For the contumacious conduct manifested by him has a much more corrosive effect in the
public mind. (citing Reliance Procoma, Inc. v Phil-Asia Tobacco Corporation)
The supreme court is also a court of first instance

Agan v Phil. International Air Termianls, Inc. (2003)

SC can always assume jurisdiction over a case in the first instance if necessitated by the circumstances.

The rule on hierarch of courts will not also prevent this Court from assuming jurisdiction over the cases at bar.
The said rule may be relaxed when the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts or where
exceptional and compelling circumstances justify availment of a remedy within and calling for the exercise of
this Court's primary jurisdiction.

Remand means petitioner will be gifted with another chance to prove facts which he has failed to prove
before. Remand means the petitioner will be given the extra-ordinary privilege of correcting his erroneous
understanding of the law on who are natural-born Filipino citizens. These are favors which cannot be extended
to a litigant without shattering the Court's stance of political neutrality. The Court must be above politics for in
the temples of justice, we do not follow any political god. (Separate Opinion, Puno, J.)

It is easy to discern that exceptional circumstances exist in the cases at bar that call for the relaxation of the
rule. Both petitioners and respondents agree that these cases are of transcendental importance as they
involve the construction and operation of the country's premier international airport. Morever, the crucial issues
submitted for resolution are of first impression and they entail the proper legal interpretation of key
provisions of the Constitution, the BOT Law and its Implementing Rules and Regulations. Thus,
considering the nature of the contoversy before the Court, procedural bars may be lowered to give way for the
speedy disposition of the instant cases.
It is also the business of the court to shield the innocent right from the start

Roberts, Jr. v CA (1996)

It must be stressed, however, that in these exceptional cases, the Court took the extraordinary step of
annulling findings of probable cause either to prevent the misuse of the strong arm of the law or to protect the
orderly administration of justice. The constitutional duty of this Court in criminal litigations is not only to
acquit the innocent after trial but to insulate, from the start, the innocent from unfounded charges. For
the Court is aware of the strains of a criminal accusation and the stresses of litigation which should not be
suffered by the clearly innocent. (Dissenting Opinion, Puno, J.)

The filing of an unfounded criminal information in court exposes the innocent to severe distress especially
when the crime is not bailable. Even an acquittal of the innocent will not fully bleach the dark and deep stains
left by a baseless accussation for reputation once tarnished remains transihed for a long length of time. The
expense to establish innocence may also be prohibitive and can be more punishing especially to the poor and
the powerless. Innocence ought to be enough and the business of this Court is to shield the innocent from
senseless suits right from the start.
Respecting the hierarchy of courts

Villaflor v Judge Amatong (2000)

Respondent judge ought to know his place in the judicial ladder. Inferior courts must be modest enough to
consciously realize the position that they occupy in the interrelation and operation of the integrated judicial
system of the nation. Occupying as he does a court much lower in rank than the Court of Appeals, respondent
judge owes respect to the latter and should, of necessity, defer to the orders of the higher court. The
appellate jurisdiction of a higher court would be rendered meaningless if a lower court may, with impunity,
disregard and disobey it.
. . .(T)he settled rule is that an order from the bench issue by a court acting within its jurisdiction is entitled to
respect. It may come from a municipal or city court, or one of the next higher rank as that occupied by
respondent judge or the Court of Appeals, as did happen here. This Court does not have to be the source.
What cannot be ignored is that it would be productive of confusion if the parties could just disregard
what has been so ordained. The appropriate procedure always is for the matter as thus decreed by any
tribunal to be taken up an appeal. Where as did happen here, the Court of Appeals had spoken, the judge of
the court of first instance was bound by what it said. If there is room for disagreement, a reconsideration can
be sought, or the matter can be taken up, whenever appropriate to this Court. (citing Reliiance Procoma, Inc.
v Phil-Asia Tobacco Corporation)
To paraphrase Justice Brandeis, a government of laws demands that public officials observe scrupulously
orders emanating from tribunals vested with competence. For the public looks up to them. For good or for
ill, what they do sets the example. Disrespect for the law is contagious. If the judge does not observe
judicial norms, he is to all intents and purposes just as much a law-beaker. His conduct breeds contempt for
the rule of law. It may ultimately lead to anarchy. This may be to conjure too extreme an evil. It may be so, but
where the observance of judicial decorum is concerned, more specifically the requirement of strict conformity
to an order of an appellate tribunal, even the slightest infraction is not to be tolerated. Obsta principiis should
be the rule. (citing Reliance Procoma, Inc. v Phil-Asia Tobacco Corporation)