NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
CONSTITIONAL LAW II
History of Civil and Political Rights
The Covenant of Civil and Political Rights which
was adopted by UN General Assembly.
-came from International Bill of Human Rights
as comprised by first portion by Universal
Declaration of Human Rights with (Socio-
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights)
-freedom of speech; the right for a fair trial; the
right to keep and bear arms; right to religion;
right against discrimination; right to vote; Right
to self-determination; right to prevent from
torture;
Government – the agency or instrumentality
through which the will of the state is
formulated, express and realized, with or
without a rightful title and has the power and
control to exercise on its own.
Executive Department – power vested in the
President of the Philippines. This department
has a duty to execute and implement the laws.
And ensure that the laws are faithfully
executed in every part of the government and
instrumentalities thereof.
Enrolled Bill Doctrine – states that the bill
which is passed and approved shall be deemed
importing an absolute verity and binding upon
the court. Copy of a bill is conclusive not only
of its provisions but also of its due enactment.
Legislative Department – has the power to
make, alter or repeal the laws. Power to enact
laws. Has the duty to create laws for the general
welfare.
Judicial Department – has the power to
interpret and apply the laws. Judicial power
shall vested in one Supreme Court and such
other lower court as maybe established by law.
By expanded jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court, it says that:
It is the duty of the court of justice to settle
justiciable and 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 in
any part of the government or instrumentalities
thereof.
Constitutional Law – is the study of
maintenance of a proper balance between
authority as represented by three inherent
1
powers of state and liberty as guaranteed by
the Bill of Rights.
Constitution - is the basic framework of the
state, a fundamental law of state and a
supreme law of the land.
Judicial Power – is the duty of the court of
justice to settle justiciable and actual
controversy 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 and excess of
jurisdiction and any part of the government,
instrumentalities thereof.
The Constitution requires as a condition
precedent for the exercise of judicial power the
existence of an actual controversy between
litigants.
An actual case or controversy involves a conflict
of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal
claims susceptible to judicial resolution. The
controversy must be justiciable, definite and
concrete.
The one-subject requirement under the
Constitution is satisfied if all the parts of the
statute are related, are germane to the subject
matter expressed in the title, or as long as they
are not inconsistent with or foreign to the
general subject and title.
“No person shall be deprived of life,
liberty and property without due process of law.
Nor shall any person be denied the equal
protection of laws.”
Valid Classification of the law in order to be
valid and without conflict with the
Constitution; to wit:
1) It must be germane to the purpose of the
law
2) It must not be limited to the existing
conditions only
3) It must be based on substantial
distinction
4) It must be apply to all members of the
class
ESSENCE AND MEANING OF DEMOCRACY
Under the Labor Code Art. 4 states that: “In
case of doubt in the implementation and
interpretation of the provisions of the Labor
Code including its implementing rules and
regulations shall be resolved in favor of labor.
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
Weight as a requirement for a Philippine airline
flight steward. The respondent filed an action
for illegal dismissal before the labor arbiter. The
standards violated here were not mere orders of
the employer but it is prescribed under the
labor code that a cabin crew must maintain in
order to qualify for and keep his or her position
in the company. OBESITY is a ground for
dismissal.
CA held that the weight standards of PAL are
reasonable. Thus, petitioner was illegally
dismissed because he repeatedly failed to meet
the prescribed weight standards. It is obvious
that the issue of discrimination was only
invoked by petitioner for purposes of escaping
the result of his dismissal for being overweight.
Decision of CA affirmed and modified.
(Yrasuegui v. Philippine Airlines)
Allado, alumni of UP College of Law. On the
basis of extra-judicial confession of a security
guard, they are accused of heinous crime of
kidnapping with murder by PACC and ordered
arrested without bail.
The judge issued warrant of arrest based on
reasonable belief only which is inconsistent
with the constitution. Under the Constitution,
in issuing warrant of arrest it must be done
personally by the judge under oath and
affirmation of the complainant and witnesses
he may produce particularly describing the
place to be searched and the persons or things
to be seized.
Petition for certiorari is granted.
(Allado v. Diokno)
Expropriation proceedings. The government
has the power to acquire private property upon
payment of just compensation.
Democracy as essence as way of life enshrined
in the Constitution, embraces its necessary
components of freedom of conscience, freedom of
expression, and freedom in the pursuit of
happiness.
The constitution did not propose to
destroy or undermine the property right
or to advocate equal distribution of
wealth or to authorized of what is in
excess of one’s personal needs and the
giving of it to another.
Property is bound up with every aspects
of social life in a democracy as democracy is
2
conceived in the Constitution. The Constitution
owned in reasonable quantities and used
legitimately, plays in the simulation to
economic effort and the formation and growth
of a social middle class that is said to be the
bulwark of democracy and the backbone of
every progressive and happy country.
(Guido v. Rural Progress Administration)
Hierarchy of Rights
Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC
There is no political question. The
determination of o whether an issue involves a
truly political and non-justifiable question lies
in the answer to the question of whether there
are constitutionality imposed limits on powers
or functions conferred upon political bodies. If
there are, then our courts are duty-bound to
examine whether the branch or instrumentality
of the Government properly acted within the
limits. A political question will not be
considered justiciable if there are no
constitutionality imposed limits on powers or
may be abridged demands judicial scrutiny. It
does not fail squarely into any doubt that a
political question brings.
In this case, the Bill of Rights gives the utmost
deference to the right to free speech. Any
instance that this right may be abridged
demands judicial scrutiny. It does not fall
squarely into any doubt that a political
question brings.
The content of a tarpaulin is a political speech
Political Speech refers to speech “both intended
and received as a contribution to public
deliberation about some issue” “fostering
informed and civic minded deliberation. On the
other hand, commercial speech has been
defined as speech that does’ no more than
propose a commercial transaction. The
expression resulting from the content of the
tarpaulin is, however, definitely political
speech.
Moreover, there is no compelling or substantial
state interest endangered by the posting of the
tarpaulin as to justify curtailment of the right
of freedom of expression. There is no reason for
the state to minimize the right of non-candidate
petitioners to post the tarpaulin in their private
property. The size of the tarpaulin does not
affect anyone else’s constitutional rights.
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
DOCTRINE OF BENEVOLENT NEUTRALITY
It allows accommodation of religion
under certain circumstances. Accommodations
are government policies that take religion
specifically into account not to promote the
government’s favored form of religion, but to
allow individuals and groups to exercise their
religion without hindrance. Their purpose or
effect therefore is to remove a burden on, or
facilitate the exercise of, a person’s or
institution’s religion.
The government may take religion into
account, to exempt, when possible, from
generally applicable governmental regulation
individuals whose religious beliefs and
practices would otherwise thereby be infringed,
or create without state involvement an
atmosphere in which voluntary religious
exercise may flourish.
SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION
It is basic that if the law or administrative rule
violates any norm of the Constitution, that
issuance is null and void and has no effect. The
Constitution is the basic law or framework of
the state to which all laws must conform
including the highest official of the land must
defer. A supreme law of the land.
No act shall valid, however, noble in its
intention if it conflicts with the Constitution.
Freedom of Speech and of Expressions; Prior
Restraint; Freedom from prior restraint is
largely freedom from government censorship of
publications, whatever the form of censorship,
and regardless of whether it is wielded by the
executive, legislative or judicial branch of
government.
It is now deeply embodied in our jurisprudence
that freedom of speech and of the press enjoys
a preferred status in our hierarchy of rights.
Rationale: The preservation of other
rights depends on how well we protect our
freedom of speech and of the press. It has been
our constant holding that this preferred
freedom calls all the more for utmost respect
when what may be curtailed is the
dissemination of information to make more
meaningful the equally vital right of suffrage.
CONTENT-NUETRAL REGULATION
-which merely concerned with the
incidents of speech, or one that merely controls
the time, place or manner, and under well-
3
defined standards, is constitutionality
permissible , even if it restricts the right to free
speech, provided that the following requisites
concur:
1) Government regulation is within the
constitutional power of the Government
2) It furthers an important or
substantial governmental interest
3) Governmental interest is unrelated
to the suppression of free expression
4) The incidental restriction on
freedom of expression is no greater than is
essential to the furtherance of that interest.
The Constitutional grant of supervisory and
regulatory powers of the COMELEC over
franchises and permits to operate, though
seemingly unrestrained, has its limits.
The COMELEC’s constitutionally delegated
powers of supervision and regulation do not
extend to the ownership per se of public utility
vehicles (PUV’s) and transport terminals, but
only to the franchise or permit to operate the
same.
Regulating the expression if ideas or opinion in
a public utility vehicle, through the posting of
an election campaign material thereon, is not a
regulation of the franchise or permit to operate,
but a regulation on the very ownership of the
vehicle.
The COMELEC does not have the
constitutional power to regulate public
transport terminal owed by private persons. A
regulation of public transport terminals owned
based on extraneous circumstances, such as
prohibiting the posting of election campaign
materials thereon, amounts to regulating the
ownership of the transport terminal and not
merely the permit to operate the same.
CAPTIVE-AUDIENCE DOCTRINE
-states that when a listener cannot, as a
practical matter, escape from intrusive speech,
the speech can be restricted.
-recognizes that a right not to be
exposed to an unwanted message in
circumstances in which the communication
cannot be avoided. The commuters are not
forced or compelled to read the election
campaign materials posted on PUVs and
transport terminals. Nor they are incapable of
declining to receive the messages contained in
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
the posted election campaign materials since
they may simply avert their eyes if they find the
same unbearably intrusive.
The Constitution does not require that things,
which are different in fact, be treated in law as
though they were the same. The equal
protection clause does not forbid
discrimination as to the things that are
different.
In order that there can be valid classification so
that a discriminatory governmental act may
pass the constitutional norm of equal
protection, it is necessary that four requisites
of valid classification be complied with:
1) It must be germane to the purpose of the
law
2) It must not be limited to the existing
conditions only
3) It must be based on substantial
distinction
4) It must be apply to all members of the
class
It bears stressing that the freedom to
advertise one’s political candidacy is clearly
a significant part of our freedom of
expression.
(1-UTAK v. COMELEC)
ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
- This law was enacted to deter public
officials and employees from committing
acts of dishonesty and improve the tone
of morality in public service. It was
declared to be the state policy “in line
with the principle that a public office is
a public trust, to repress certain acts of
public officers and private persons alike
which constitute graft or corrupt
practices or which may lead thereto.
There is a presumption of validity with
respect to the law and it is always prevails
in the absence of evidence to rebut the
contrary. To declare a law unconstitutional,
the infringement of constitutional rights
must be clear, categorical, and undeniable.
In other words, to declare a law
unconstitutional, such constitutional
violation must be clear and categorical.
The disclosure of information does not
infringe the right of a person to privacy.
There is no violation of the guarantee
against unreasonable search and seizure in
4
the requirement of periodical submission of
one’s financial condition.
e.g. Declaration of Statement of Assets
Liabilities and Networth.
(Morfe v. Mutuc)
DUAL CITIZENSHIP
Dual allegiance is inimical to the public interest
and shall be dealt with by law. (1987
Constitution)
Everytime the citizenship of a person is
material or indispensable in a judicial or
administrative case, whatever the
corresponding court or administrative
authority decides therein as to such citizenship
is generally not considered as res judicata,
hence, it has to be threshed out again and
again as the occasion may demand.
While citizenship is a continuing requirement
that must be possessed not only at the time of
election or assumption of office, but also during
the entire tenure of the official, it is not a
continuing disqualification to run and hold
public office.
In case of Maquiling, we reiterated that natural-
born citizens of the Philippines who have lost
their citizenship by reason of their
naturalization as citizens of a foreign country
may qualify to run for public office upon taking
an oath of allegiance and making a sworn
renunciation of their foreign citizenship.
Arnado subjected his citizenship to attack
when he continued to use his United States
(US) passport to travel in and out of the country
despite previously renouncing his US
citizenship.
The court ruled that his use of his US passport
nullified the effect of his previous renunciation of
US citizenship. Under the Local Government
Code, those with dual citizenship are
disqualified from running for any elective local
position. The continued use of his US passport is
the indicative factor in order for him to disqualify
to run for public office.
That up to the filing of Arnado’s
Certificate of Candidacy for elections, he
failed to remedy the fatal blow that such
repeated use of his passport dealt on his
electoral qualifications.
Petition is hereby dismissed.
(Arnado v. COMELEC)
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
Domicle is distinct from citizenship. They are
separate matters. Domicile is not a mere
incident or consequence of citizenship and is
not dictated by it. The case of petitioner Rogelio
Batin Caballero who, as it is not disputed, has
Uyugan, Batanes as his domicile of origin must
be resolved with this fundamental premise in
mind.
However, for purposes of election law,
residence is synonymous with “domicile”.
Domicile denotes a fixed permanent residence
to which, when absent for business, pleasure,
or like reasons, one intends to return.
Jurisprudence has established three
fundamental principles governing domicile; to
wit:
1) One must have a residence or domicile
somewhere
2) Once established it remains until a new
one is acquired;
3) One can have but one domicile at a time
For purposes of election the term
“residence” contemplates “domicile”
Local Government Code provides that in
order to be eligible for local elective public
office, a candidate must possess the
following qualifications:
a) A citizen of the Philippines
b) A registered voter in the barangay,
municipality, province, or in the case a
member of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod
or Sanguniang Bayan, the district where
he or she intends to be elected
c) A resident of therein for at least one (1)
year immediately preceding the day of
the election
d) Able to read and write Filipino or any
other local language or dialect
Residence – imports not only intention to
reside in a fixed place but also personal
presence in that place, coupled with
conduct indicative of such intention. In
order to acquire a domicile by choice, there
must concur:
1) Residence or bodily presence in the new
locality
2) An intention to remain there
3) An intention to abandon the old domicile
In other words, there must be an animus
non revertendi and an animus manendi.
The purpose to remain in or at the
domicile of choice must be for an
indefinite period of time. The acts of the
person must conform to his purpose.
The change of residence must be
voluntary; the residence at the place
chosen for the domicile must be actual;
and to the fact of residence there must
be added the animus manendi.
(Caballero v. Comelec)
CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITIONS
SEARCHES & SEIZURES – Art. III of the Bill of
Rights, Sec. 3 states that: The right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses
papers and effects against unreasonable
searches and seizures of whatever nature or for
any purpose shall be inviolable. To issue search
warrant or warrant of arrest it must be
determine personally by the judge under oath
or affirmation of the complainant and
witnesses he may produce particularly
describing the place to be searched and the
person or things to be seized.
The constitutional protection against
unreasonable searches and seizures refers to
the immunity of one’s person from interference
by government; it cannot be extended to acts
committed by private individuals sos as to
bring it within the ambit of alleged unlawful
intrusion by the government.
In the absence of governmental
interference, the liberties guaranteed by the
Constitution cannot be invoked against the
State.
Where the contrabands articles are identified
without a trespass on the part of the arresting
officer, there is not a search that is prohibited
by the Constitution. “The mere presence of the
NBI agents did not convert the reasonable
search affected by Reyes into a warrantless
search and seizure proscribed by the
Constitution. Merely to observe and look at that
which is in plain sight is not a search. Having
observed that which is open, where no trespass
has been committed in aid thereof, is not
search.
Where the contraband articles are
identified without a trespass on the part of the
arresting officer, there is not the search
prohibited by the Constitution.

5
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
Moreover, the Bill of Rights embodied in the
Constitution in not meant to be invoked against
act of private individuals, it is directed only
against the government and its agencies tasked
with the enforcement of the law.
The mantle of the Constitution covers only the
period “from the time a person is taken into
custody for investigation of his possible
participation in the commission of a crime
although not yet in custody. To fall within the
ambit of sec. 12, there must an arrest or a
deprivation of freedom, with “questions
propounded on him by the police authorities for
the purpose of eliciting admissions,
confessions, or any information.
The constitutional provisions “does not apply to
spontaneous statements made in a voluntary
manner” whereby an individual orally admits to
authorship of a crime. What the constitution
proscribes is the compulsory or coercive
disclosure of incriminating facts.
The right against self-incrimination
under Sec. 17 of Art. III of the Constitution,
which is ordinarily available only in criminal
incrimination, which is ordinarily available
only in criminal prosecutions, extends to all
other government proceedings – including civil
actions, legislative investigations, and
administrative proceedings that possesses a
criminal or penal aspect – BUT NOT TO
PRIVATE INVESTIGATIONS DONE BY
PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS.
NOTE: Even in such government proceedings,
this right may be waived, provided the waiver
is:
- certain, unequivocal, intelligently,
understanding and willingly made
Furthermore, the Bill of Rights does not
concern itself with the relation between a
private individual and another individual. It is
a charter of liberties for the individual and a
limitation upon the power of the State. It
governs the relationship between the individual
and the State.
(BPI v. Casa Montessori Internationale)
Art. 4 of the Labor Code states that:
In case of doubt in the implementation and
interpretations of the provisions of the labor
code including its implementing rules and
regulations shall be resolved in favor of labor.
The right of the people including those
employed in the private and public sector, to
6
form unions, associations, or societies for
purposes not contrary to law shall not be
abridged.
In the said case, there is a violation of due
process with respect to twin-notice rule under
the labor code which is the Notice and Hearing.
Every employee has the right to right to self-
organization, just and humane conditions of
work, statutory and monetary benefits provided
by law, right to collective bargaining, right to
strike and lockout, right to security of tenure.
An employer cannot terminate his/her
own employees without just and authorized
cause. If it is done, without just cause, the
termination is illegal or constitutes illegal
dismissal.
FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
Taxation v. Police Power.
Policer Power is the power of the state to enact
legislation that may interfere with personal
liberty or property in order to promote the
general welfare, while the power of taxation is
the power to levy taxes to be used for public
purpose.
Police power and power of taxation are
inherent powers of the state. These powers are
distinct and have different tests for validity. The
main purpose of police power is the regulation
of a behavior or conduct, while taxation is
revenue regulation.
The “lawful subject” and “lawful means” tests
are used to determine the validity of a law
enacted under the police power. The power of
taxation, on the other hand, is circumscribed
by inherent and constitutional limitations.
While it is true that the power of taxation ca be
used as an implement of police power, the
primary purpose of the levy is revenue
generation.
If the purpose of the power of taxation is not for
revenue regulation then it is deemed an
exercise of police power because it is a pure
regulation or regulatory in nature.
The power to tax exist for the general welfare,
hence implicit in its power is the limitation that
it should be used only for a public purpose-it
would be robbery for the State to tax its citizens
and use the funds generated for a private
purpose.
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
“To lay with one hand, the power of the
government on the property of the citizen, and
with the other bestow it upon favored
individuals to aid private enterprises and build
up private fortunes, is nonetheless a robbery
because it is done under the forms of law and
is called taxation.
Public purpose s the heart of a tax law;
Public purpose is an elastic concept that
can be hammered to fit modern
standards – it does not only pertain to
those purposes which are traditionally
viewed as essentially government
functions, such as building roads and
delivery of basic services, but also
includes those purposes designed to
promote social justice; While the
categories of what may constitute a
public purpose are continually
expanding in light of the expansion of
government functions, the inherent
requirement that taxes can only be
exacted for a public purpose still stands.
Thus, public money may now be used for
the relocation of illegal settlers, low-cost
housing and urban or agrarian reform.
“Letter of Instructions as applied to the
case at bar is invalid because it did not
promote public interest.”
Test as follows:
1) the interest of the public generally,
as distinguished from those of
particular class, requires its exercise
2) the means employed are reasonably
necessary for the accomplishment of
the purpose and not unduly
oppressive upon individuals
Operative Fact Doctrine
When the courts declare a law to be
inconsistent with the Constitution, the former
shall be void and the latter shall govern.
G.R. – It produces no right, imposes no
duties and affords no protection, it has no legal
effect, and it is, in legal contemplation,
inoperative as if it has not been passed.
The Doctrine of Operative Fact as an exception
to the G.R. It nullifies the effects of an
unconstitutional law by recognizing that the
existence of a statute prior to a determination
of unconstitutionality is an operative fact and
7
may have consequence which cannot always be
ignored.
(Planters v. Fertiphil)
Police Power is the power of the state to
promote public welfare by restraining and
regulating the use of liberty and property – it is
most pervasive, the least limitable, and the
most demanding of the three fundamental
powers of the State and the justification is
found in the Latin maxims “salus populi es
suprema lex” welfare of the people is the
supreme law.
The theory behind the exercise of the
power to tax emanates from necessity. Without
taxes the government cannot exist nor endure.
They cannot fulfill its mandate of promoting the
general welfare and well-being of the people.
That power to regulate means the power to
protect, foster, promote, preserve and control,
with due regard for the interests, first and
foremost, of the public, then of the utility and
of its patrons.
Take Note: That if the generation of revenue is
the primary purpose and regulation is merely
incidental, the imposition is a tax; but if
regulation is the primary purpose, the fact that
revenue is incidentally raised does not make
the imposition a tax.
Delegata Potestas non Potest Delagari ( what
has been delegated cannot be delegated or
further delegated)
(Grecohi v. Dept. of Energy)
POLICE POWER
Police Power (No right is absolute) and the
proper regulation of a profession, calling,
business or trade has always been upheld as a
legitimate subject of a valid exercise of the
police power of the state particularly when their
conduct affects the execution of legitimate
governmental functions, the preservation of the
state, public health and welfare of and public
morals.
Moreover, Real Estate developers are
prohibited from performing acts or
transactions constituting real estate service
practice without first complying with
registration and licensing requirements for
their business, brokers or agents, appraisers,
consultants and salespersons.
If the classification is germane to the
purpose of the law, concerns all members of the
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
class, and applies equally to present and future price their products and services relative to a
conditions, the classification does not violate special class of individuals, senior citizens, for
the equal protection guarantee. which the Constitution affords preferential
concern.
Since every law is presumed valid, the
presumption of constitutionality can be Manila Memorial Park v. Sec. of DSWD
overcome only by the clearest showing that
BP 22 or Bouncing Checks Law
there was indeed an infraction of the
Constitution, and only when such a conclusion The gravamen of BP 22 is the issuance of a
is reached by the required majority may the worthless checks, not the payment of an
Court pronounce, in the discharge of the duty obligation.
it cannot escape, that the challenge act must
be struck down. One who attacks a statute, The legislature may not validly punish
alleging constitutionality must prove its nonpayment of a debt ex contractu, and an act
invalidity beyond reasonable doubt. may not be considered and punished as malum
in se, but such act may be penalized under
(Remman Enterprises v. Professional police power as malum prohibitum because of
Regulatory Board of Real Estate Service/PRC) harm it causes to the public. An act may not be
considered by society as inherently wrong,
Under existing laws, the office of the mayor is
hence, not malum in se, but because of the
given powers not only relative to its function as
harm that inflicts on the community, it can be
the executive official of the town; it has also
outlawed and criminally punished as malum
been endowed with authority to hear issued
prohibitum. The state can do this in the
involving property rights of individuals and to
exercise of its police power.
come out with an effective order or resolution
thereon. Police power – the most essential, insistent
illimitable of powers which enables it to
Illegal Constructions (Under the law, insofar as
prohibit all things hurtful to the comfort, safety
illegal constructions are concerned, the mayor
and welfare of society. It is a power not
can, after satisfying the requirement of due
emanating from or conferred by the
notice and hearing, order their closure and
constitution, but inherent in the state, plenary,
demolition. No person, firm or corporation,
suitably vague and far from precisely defined,
including any agency or instrumentality of the
rooted in the conception that man in organizing
government shall erect, construct, alter, repair,
the state and imposing upon the government
move, convert or demolish any building or
limitations to safeguard constitutional rights
structure or cause the same to be done without
did not intend thereby to enable individual
first obtaining a building permit therefor from
citizens or group of citizens to obstruct
the building official assigned in the place where
unreasonably the enactment of such salutary
the subject building is located or the building
measures to ensure communal peace, safety,
work is to be done.
good order and welfare.
Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan
The enactment of BP 22 is a valid exercise of
20% Senior Citizen discount is an exercise of the police power and is not repugnant the
police power. constitutional inhibition against imprisonment
for debt.
The discount above-stated is intended to
improve the welfare of senior citizens who, at Furthermore, BP 22 does not conflict with
their age, are less likely to be gainfully constitutional probation against imprisonment
employed, more prone to illnesses and other for non-payment of debt Police power may
disabilities, and thus, in need of subsidy in override a constitutional guarantee.
purchasing basic commodities. It may not be
Checks are not mere contracts, but substitutes
amiss to mention also that the discount serves
for money. Non-impairment of contract clause
to honor senior citizens who presumably spent
applies only to lawful contracts.
the productive years of their lives on
contributing to the development and progress (Lozano v. Martinez)
of the nation.
Moreover, the 20% discount is a regulation
affecting the ability of private establishments to

8
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
The power of subordinate legislation does not
mean the absolute transmission of legislative
powers to administrative agencies such as the
DepED. In order for a valid delegation to exist,
two basic tests must be complied with:
1) Completeness test
2) Sufficient standard test
In completeness test, the law must be
complete in all its terms and conditions
when it leaves the legislature, such that,
when it reaches the delegate, the only
thing he would have to do is enforce it.
On the other hand, under the sufficient
standard test, there must be adequate
guidelines or stations in the law to map
out the boundaries of the delegate’s
authority and prevent a total
transference of legislative authority to
the delegate, who is not allowed to step
into the shoes of the legislature and the
exercise of their power of subordinate
legislation, create rules and regulations
that are:
- Germaned to the objects and purposes
of the law they implement
- Are not in contradiction, but in full
conformity with the standards
prescribed by this law.
View that is a settled rule that administrative
agencies, in the exercise of their power of
subordinate legislation, should not enlarge,
alter, or restrict the provisions of the law it
administers and enforces, and should not
engraft additional noncontradictory
requirements that the Congress did not
contemplate.
(QC PTCA Federation v. DepED)
Police power is vested primarily with the
national legislature, which may delegate the
same to local governments through their
legislature bodies (the sangunians). The so-
called the general welfare clause provided
under LGC provides for such delegation of
police power.
Salus populi est Superema Lex “Welfare of the
people is the Supereme Law”
(Cruz v. Pandacan Hiker’s Club, Inc)
Police power with state authority to enact
legislation that may interfere with personal
liberty or property in order to promote the
general welfare. Persons and property could
thus be subjected to all kinds of restraints and
9
burdens in order to secure the general comfort,
health, and prosperity of the state.
(Agustin v. Edu)
POWER OF TAXATION
The period to assess and collect deficiency
taxes may be extended only upon a written
agreement between the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue and the taxpayer prior to the
expiration of the Three (3) year prescribed
period in accordance with Sec. 22 (b) of the
NIRC.
A waiver of the stature of limitations, whether
on assessment or collection, should not be
construed as a waiver of the right to invoke the
defense of prescription but, rather, an
agreement between the taxpayer and the
Bureau of Internal Revenue to extend the
period to a date certain, within which the latter
could still assess or collect taxes due.
The statute of limitations imposed by the tax
code precisely intends to protect the taxpayer
from prolonged and unreasonable assessment
and investigation by the BIR.
(CIR v. Stanley Works)
Uniformity of Taxation merely requires that all
subjects or objects of taxation, similarly
situated, are to be treated alike both in
privileges and liabilities. The determination in
the nature, object, extent, coverage, situs or
place of taxation and the SC cannot freely delve
into those matters.
Tax Refund are construed strictly against a
taxpayer and liberally in favor of the State such
that he plain to be mistaken and too categorical
to be misinterpreted.
The test whether an enterprise is charitable or
not is whether it exists to carry out a purpose
recognized in law as charitable or whether it is
maintained for gain, profit or private
advantage. Charity is fully defined as a gift to
be applied consistently with existing laws for
the benefit of an indefinite number of persons.
It is applied to almost anything that tend to
promote the well-doing and well-being of social
man. Charitable institution is exempt from
payment of taxes the same for religious
purposes.
Lung Center of the Phils. V. QC)
It is the legislature, unless limited by a
provision of the Constitution, which has full
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
power to exempt any person or corporation or
class of property from taxation, its power to
exempt being as broad as its power to tax.
(John Hay Peoples v. Lim)
Public funds may be used only for public
purpose. The right of the legislature to
appropriate public funds I correlative with its
right to tax, and under constitutional
provisions against taxation except for public
purposes and prohibiting the collection of tax
for one purpose and the devotion thereof to
another purpose, no appropriation of state
funds can be made for other than a public
purpose.
Legislative Department determines what
entities should be empowered to impose
occupation tax.
(Punsalan v. Municipal Board of Manila)
Double Taxation –where one tax is imposed by
the state and the other is imposed by the city,
it being widely recognized that there is nothing
inherently obnoxious in the requirement that
license fees or taxes be enacted with respect to
the same occupation, calling or activity by both
the state and the political subdivisions thereof.
It is not for the courts to judge what particular
cities or municipalities should be empowered to
impose occupation taxes in addition to those
imposed by the National Government. The
matter is peculiarly within the domain of the
political departments and the courts would do
well not to encroach upon it.
Legislative Department determines what
entities should be empowered to impose
occupation tax.
(Punsalan v. Municipal Board of Manila)
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
The putting up of the access fence on the
petitioner’s property was in the valid exercise of
police power, assailable only upon proof that
such putting up of unduly violated
constitutional limitations like due process and
equal protection of the law.
The limited access imposed on the petitioner’s
property did not partake of a compensable
taking due to the exercise of the power of
eminent domain.
(Hermano Oil v. Toll Regulatory Board)
10
The right of eminent domain is the “ultimate
right of the sovereign power to appropriate, not
only the public but the private property of all
citizens within the territorial sovereignty, to
public purpose. The concept has expanded to
include utility, advantage or productivity for
the benefit of the public.
(Republic v. Heirs of Saturnino)
It is essential that element of public use of the
property be maintained throughout the
proceedings for expropriation.
Republic of the Phils may require telephone
company to permit interconnection of the
government telephone system and that of of the
PLDT; Right of Way; State may require a public
utility to render services in the general interest;
subject to the payment of a just compensation
to be determined by the court.
In the interest of national welfare, transfer
utilities to public ownership upon payment of
just compensation, there I no reason why the
State may not require a public utility to render
services in the general interest, provided that
just compensation is paid therefor.
(Republic v. PLDT)
Parking Fee collection cannot even be found at
all in the entire National Building Code and its
IRR. The State also cannot impose the same
prohibition by generally invoking police power,
since said prohibition amounts to a taking of
respondents’ property without payment of just
compensation.
The state is not only requiring that respondents
devote a portion of the latter’s properties for use
as parking spaces, but also mandating that
they give the public access to said parking
spaces for free.
Police power does not involve that taking or
confiscation of property, with the exception of a
few cases where there is a necessary to
confiscate private property in order to destroy
for the purpose of protecting peace and order
and of promoting the general welfare; for
instance, the confiscation of an illegally
possessed article, such an opium and firearms.
(OSG v. Ayala Land)
DUE PROCESS CLAUSE
Right to Life
The court resolves to refer the present case to
the Commission on Human Rights as the
NOTES: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
MIDTERM EXAM REVIEWER
//:EMM
court’s directly commissioned agency tasked when human life begins. “Fertilized Ovum”
with the continuation of the investigation of the simple phrase from the moment of conception
Burgos abduction and the gathering of
(Imbong v. COMELEC)
evidence, with the obligation to report its
factual findings and recommendations to this Right to Liberty
court.
Doctrine of Necessity –who else was in better
The court concludes that PNP & AFP have so position to determine whether or not to execute
far failed to conduct an exhaustive and the law but the provincial governor. It is
meaningful investigation into the optional for the provincial governor to execute
disappearance of Jonas Burgos and to exercise the law as circumstances may arise. It is
extra-ordinary diligence (in the performance of necessary to give discretion to the provincial
their duties) that the Rule on the Writ of governor. The Legislature may make decisions
Amparo requires. of executive departments of subordinate of
subordinate official thereof, to whom it has
(Burgos v. Macapagal-Arroyo)
committed the execution of certain acts, final
The writ of Amparo is an extra-ordinary and on questions of fact.
independent remedy that provides rapid
Police power here cannot exercised in the
judicial relief, as it partakes of a summary
contravention of the inhibitions of the organic
proceeding that requires only substantial
law of the state.
evidence to make the appropriate interim and
permanent reliefs available to the petitioner. (People v. Pomar)
It is not an action to determine guilt requiring
proof beyond reasonable doubt, or liability for
damages requiring preponderance of evidence
or administrative responsibility requiring
substantial evidence that will require full and
exhaustive proceedings. Rather, it serves both
preventive and curative roles in addressing the
problem of extra-judicial killings and enforced
disappearances.
In writ of amparo, the court applies the doctrine
of command responsibility to ascertain
responsibility and accountability in extra-
judicial killings and enforced disappearances.
Writ of Habeas Data on the other hand,
provides a judicial remedy to protect a person’s
right to control information regarding oneself,
particularly in instances where suxh
information is being collected through unlawful
means in order to achieve unlawful ends. To
protect the right to privacy especially right to
informational privacy. This proceedings does
not entail any finding of criminal, civil or
administrative culpability.
Writ of Amparo explicitly states that the
violation of or threat to the right to life, liberty
and security may be caused by either an act or
an omission of a public official
(Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo)
Constitution used the phrase “from the
moment of conception” and not “from the
moment of fertilization” because of doubt of

11