Sei sulla pagina 1di 18

ART. VIII.

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Bar Questions:

1989/10. Where is judicial power vested? What are included in judicial power?
SEC. 1 MEMORIZE

1994, 2: What is the difference if any between the scope of judicial power under
the 1987 Constitution, on the one hand; and the 1935 and 1973 Constitution, on
the other? DETERMINATION OF GAD ON THE ACTS OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT..
HENCE EVEN POLITICAL QUESTION MAY BE JUDICIALLY DETERMINE IF GAD
EXISTS

1995: Judicial power ad defined in Sec. 1, VIII, includes…/ This definition is said to
have expanded the power of the judiciary to include political questions formerly
beyond its jurisdiction. Do you agree with this interpretation… POLITICAL
QUESTION MAY BE JUDICIALLY DETERMINED IF GAD EXISTS…. DECISIONS OF
OTHER DEPARTMENTS CAN BE REVERSED BY THE SC IF GAD IS ESTABLISHED

1997/5: To what extent has the 1987 Constitution affected the political question
doctrine? SAME ANSWER

2004/1: substance is the same

Two types of jurisdiction:

1. Ordinary jurisdiction (first part – to settle actual controversies involving


rights…)

2. Extraordinary jurisdiction (2nd part – to determine whether there is grave


abuse of discretion…]

Two types of questions:

1. Justiciable questions: can be resolved by applying the statutes or the


Constitution-IT INVOLVES LEGALITY OR IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL/ DOES IT VIOLATE
A LAW

2. Political question – does not call for the application of any law – to determine
the “wisdom” of an act. Policy determination, not legality-WHETHER IT IS GOOD OR
BAD

GR-COURT HAS NO BUSINESS IN POLICY DETERMINATION

Political Question:

1. Those to be decided, under the Constitution, by the people in their sovereign


capacity [amendment/recall?] CHANGING OF FORM OF GOVERNMENT-COURT
CANNOT TAKE COGNIZANCE.. EX. RECALL OF AN ELECTIVE OFFICIAL

Those where full discretionary authority has been delegated to the political
department [executive or legislative] EX. PARDON OF ESTRADA BY GMA…. IT
CANNOT BE QUESTIONED AS IT IS A POLITICAL QUESTION WHICH IS WITHIN THE
FULL DISCRETION OF THE PRESIDENT

1|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


EXCEPTION…. DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW OF THE PHILIPPINES… ANYBODY
CAN QUESTION THE FACTUAL BASIS OF THE DECLARATION AS PROVIDED IN THE
CONSTITUTION..HENCE SC CAN DETERMINE THE FACTUAL BASIS

Which ones is a justiciable question:

[A] Whether the imposition of the Value Added Tax (VAT) is necessary for the
recovery of the national economy? POLITICAL QUESTION

[B] Whether taxpayers can afford a new round of tax increases under the
VAT law? POLITICAL QUESTION

[C] Whether the VAT law is consistent with the concept of uniform,
progressive and equitable system of taxation? JUSTICIABLE QUESTION

[D] Whether it is proper for Congress to impose VAT at a time when the
economy is taking a downward slide? POLITICAL QUESTION

Political Questions: ” Wisdom”

Association v. Secretary-(Congress passed Land Reform Law… in said law… the


order was made 1. private lands 2. public lands. As an order to the subject of Carp-
Held: you cannot question the order as it is within the authority of the congress to
determine as to what should be placed in the order.. POLITICAL QUESTION. LEAVE
IT TO CONGRESS!

Garcia v. Executive –”too early”… SOMEBODY QUESTIONED THE OIL


DEREGULATION LAW ON THE GROUND THAT IT IS TOO EARLY TO DEREGULATE
THE SAME: HELD: IT IS A POLITICAL QUESTION.. DETERMINATION OF WHEHTER
OR NOT IT IS TOO EARLY CANNOT BE DETERMINED BY SC BY LAW OR IN THE
CONSTITIUTION.

DENR v. DENR – timeliness: REFERS TO THE TRANSFER OF POLITICAL


OFFICES/REGIONAL OFFICES.. IT WAS IMPUGNED ON THE GROUND OF
TIMELINESSS BECAUSE IT WAS MADE DURING RAMADAN HELD.. IT IS A POLITCAL
QUESTION! SC CANNOT DECIDE WHETHER IT IS TIMELY OR NOT

Also practicality, economy, “beneficial”

How to remove from scope of political question

Estrada v. Desierto –’whether succession was lawful”

Tatad – Whether it violates monopoly in restraint of trade’

Which question, as framed, is a political question?

a. Whether the President committed grave abuse of discretion in ratifying the


WTO?

b. Whether the signing of the WTO which allows unrestricted flow of foreign goods
would violate the Filipino First Policy?

c. Whether the WTO which compels Congress to enact laws implementing its terms
constitutes an intrusion into the plenary power of Congress?

2|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


d. Whether the removal of the tariff barriers as a consequence of ratifying
WTO would eventually benefit the Philippine economy? “WISDOM-
BENEFICIAL”

Summary: THIS IS HOW YOU REMOVE THE SAME FROM POLITICAL QUESTION!

1. Must alleged specific constitutional provision violated; or


2. Must allege grave abuse of discretion

But: Perez v. Lacson, David v. Macapagal

Test of whether there is GAD: Is the President correct?

Did she act arbitrarily? “Test of Arbitrariness” [Did she abuse gravely?]

Burden?

National Artist Award? THE NATIONAL ARTIST AWARD TO CARLO J CAPARAS BY


GMA…. THEY QUESTIONED THE CONFERRMENT TO CARLO J CAPARAS AND
ALVAREZ WHO HAPPENED ALSO TO BE A MEMBER OF CULTURAL BOARD OF THE
Philippines (not allowed by law to be conferred. HELD: SC HELD alvarez
conferrment is void as it is violative to law but upheld the conferment to caparas as
there is no basis to determine as to WHO IS AN ARTIST.. IT IS WITHIN THE
PRESIDENT TO DETERMINE THE SAME

ALSO: THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION OF CORONA BY THE IMPEACHMENT


COURT… CANNOT BE REVIEW ED BY THE COURT…. UNLESS THERE IS GRAVE
ABUSE OF DISCRETION

Sec. 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and
apportion the jurisdiction of various courts, but may not deprive the
Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Sec. 5 hereof.

No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines


the security of tenure of its Members. (hence reorganization is allowed)

Bar Q: 1992, 7: Mantrust Case-APT

Congress is considering new measures to encourage foreign corporations to


bring investments to the Philippines. Congress has found that foreign investors are
deterred by the uncertain investment climate in

Investment climate partly brought about by judicial intervention. Thus, it passed a


law saying: “No court or administrative agency shall issue any restraining order or
injunction against the Central Bank. Is the law constitutional?

YES IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL….. INJUNCTION AND RESTRAINING ORDERS ARE NOT


AMONG OF THOSE LISTED IN SEC. 5..

Sec. 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and
apportion the jurisdiction of various courts, but may not deprive the
Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Sec. 5 hereof.

Sec. 5. Powers of the Supreme Court:

Judicial Power (Jurisdiction of SC)

3|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


A. Original jurisdiction

1. Cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers and consuls

2. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto and habeas


corpus-INJUNCTION IS NOT INCLUDED

J. Abad’s Sample: The jurisdiction of courts are determined by:

a. Congress

Sec. 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and
apportion the jurisdiction of various courts, but may not deprive the
Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Sec. 5 hereof.

b. the Supreme Court

c. the Judicial and Bar Council

d. The Court Administrator

2011 Bar Exam

84. A judge of the Regional Trial Court derives his powers and duties from

A. statute.

Sec. 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and apportion
the jurisdiction of various courts, but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its
jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Sec. 5 hereof.

B. the President, the appointing power.

C. Supreme Court issuances.

D. the rules of court.

Sec. 3. The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations for the
Judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount
appropriated for the previous year and after approval, shall be
automatically and regularly released.

THE 3 CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS HAVE SAME FISCAL AUTONOMY

FISCAL AUTONOMY OF CHR IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT THOSE 3 COMMISIONS AND


JUDICIARY

Bar Question, 2001, No. 1: name at least three Constitutional safeguards to


maintain judicial independence.

1. SECURITY OF TENURE OF JUDGES


2. FISCAL AUTONOMY

Section 4. (1) The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and
fourteen Associate Justices. It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in
division of three, five, or seven Members. Any vacancy shall be filled within
ninety days from the occurrence thereof.

4|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


Sec. 4 (1) – 90 days from vacancy (OCCURRENCE)

Sec. 5- Lower courts – 90 days from submission of the list by the JBC. PLS TAKE
NOTE THE DIFFERENCE

Villanueva and Villarama – general v. specific

Castro v. JBC – Intent is to exclude the Supreme Court –

1. It does not say it is covered

2. Arrangement of Articles

3. Regalado view

4. “any vacancy shall be filled”

What happened to Villanueva case?

(2) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive


agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all
other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en banc,
including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation of
presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other
regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members
who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted
thereon.

(3) Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the
concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no case without
the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number is
not obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the court in a decision rendered en banc or in division
may be modified or reversed except by the court sitting en banc.

1999, No. 11: What are the cases that must be decided by the Supreme Court en
banc? ANSWER PREVIOUS SLIDE

1996, No. VII. Can five members of the Supreme Court declare a municipal
ordinance unconstitutional? YES!

15 JUSTICES, 8 CONSTITUTE MAJORITY= SO 5 CAN DECLARE MUNICIPAL


ORDINANCE UNCONSTITUTIONAL

1999, 11 (b): What does it mean when a Supreme Court justice concurs in a
decision pro hac vice?

What is the minimum number of justices that can declare a law unconstitutional?

a. 15
b. 10
c. 8
d. 5

In which instance does the Constitution directly provide that the Supreme
Court must decide the case en banc? [3%]

5|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


a. cases involving ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls

b. cases challenging the constitutionality of an appointment made by the President


(ELMA CASE)

c. cases involving the constitutionality of an implementing rules and


regulations issued by the Secretary

d. criminal cases involving the imposition of the death penalty-

Note: “all other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be
heard en banc “: disbarment, admin cases, dismissal of judges- based on
RULES OF COURT

Over which does the Supreme Court exercise exclusive original


jurisdiction?

a. a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus-RTC AND CA


b. a case involving an ambassador, other public minister or consul-RTC AND CA
c. a suit to challenge the factual basis for the declaration of martial law
d. an action to declare a treaty or law unconstitutional- ONLY APPELLATE

JURISDICATION OF THE COURT

Questions:

Can the RTC declare a law unconstitutional? [Planters v. Fertiphil – 2008]


YES.. THIS THE USUAL PROCEDURE….

Can the Court of Tax Appeals? [British Tobacco – 2008 NO… CTA CANNOT
DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL

3. Can the Ombudsman? [Estarija vs. OMB– 2006)

NO! IT HAS NO POWER TO DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL

4. Can the COA declare a law unconstitutional? Parreno v. COA -2007) NO!
THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT HAS NO POWER

EMPHASIS: ONLY REGULAR COURTS CAN DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

SANDIGAN BAYAN –NOT YET CLEAR

2004, 10: In case there is an irreconciliable conflict between a provision of the


treaty and a provision of the Constitution, in a jurisdiction and legal system like
ours, which should prevail: the provision of the treaty or of the Constitution. Why?
Explain with reasons.

IT IS THE CONSTITUTION! THE SUPREME COURT CAN DECLARE A TREATY OR


EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT UNCONSTITUTIONAL

REVIEW THIS WITH DEANS DISCUSSION

1. Can a treaty amend the Rules of Court? YES

6|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


Tanada v. Angara “WHEN WE ENTERED TREATIES, WE LIMIT OUR
SOVERIEGNTY…” SC COURT ALLOWED THE SAME THOUGH ENTERING WTO WOULD
RESULTS TO AMENDING RULES OF COURT AS THE SAME IS SMALL MATTERS”

Bar 1987,9: The Philippines entered into a Treaty of Friendship with Indonesia
providing that the nationals of each contracting State admitted to the practice of
law in said State, to practice law without taking the bar examinations in the other
contracting State. HELD:SC SAID THE PRACTICE OF LAW MAY PROVIDED BY LAW…
AND A TREATY IS A LAW

2. In re:Garcia:Can an Executive Agreement amend the Rules of Court? PRES.


MACAPAGAL ENTERED A EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT(AT THAT TIME, EXECUTIVE
AGREEMENT REQUIRES NO SENATE CONCURRENCE) WITH SPAIN.. SUCH
AGREEMENT FILIPINO CITIZENS CAN PRACTICE LAW IN SPAIN PROVIDED HE
PASSES THE BAR IN PH AND VICE VERSA WITH SPANIARDS.. IS THE AGREEMENT
VALID? HELD- NO! THE PRESIDENT CANNOT DO THAT BECAUSE BY MEANS OF
EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT, HE IS INTRUDING THE POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT
TO PROMULGATE RULES OF COURT. NOTEWORTHY IS THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE
LATTER IN RULE DOES NOT APPLY TO EXECUTIVE AGREEEMENTS WITHOUT
SENATE CONCURRENCE… SAID PRINCIPLE APPLIES ONLY IN TREATIES AND
EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS RATIFIED BY THE SENATE.. HENCE, RULES OF COURT
PREVAIL THE EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO….

3. Can Congress amend the Rules of Court- NO!

Webb v. De Leon-

Echegaray v. Secretary

In re petition of GSIS (2010)- DOCKET FEEE

2009, No 1: True or False:

A law fixing the passing grade in the Bar examinations at 70% with no grade
lower than 40% in any subject, is constitutional.

NO! CONGRESS CANNOT AMEND THE RULES OF COURT… IT BELONGS TO THE


JUDICIARY

2008, No. 13:

Congress enacted a laW establishing the right to a trial by jury of an accused


charged with a felony or offense punishable with reclusion perpetual or life
imprisonment. The law provides for the qualifications of prospective jury members,
the guidelines to be observed by the judge and the lawyers in jury selection
including the grounds for challenging the selection of jury members, and the
methodology for jury deliberations. Is the law constitutional?

a. Yes, because Congress has plenary powers and it can pass any law including
one mandating jury trial
b. Yes, because the law constitutes a mere amendment to the rules of court on
the conduct of trials
c. Yes, because the adoption of the jury system necessarily entails
appropriation of funds which only Congress is authorized to perform

7|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


d. No, because the subject of the law pertains to pleading, practice and
procedure in all courts which is the exclusive domain of the Supreme
Court

1. Case or Controversy: No advisory opinion, moot and academic controversy. SO


THERE MUST BE A GENUINE DISPUTE BETWEEN PARTIES BEFORE A COURT CAN
COME IN!

Nitafan: Central Bank Circular

Tan – bark, grass, shrub

Liban v. Gordon, Jan. 18, 2011

In its original decision in Liban v. Gordon, 593 SCRA 68 (2009), the Court
declared void the PNRC Charter “insofar as it creates the PNRC as a private
corporation” and consequently ruled that “the PNRC should incorporate under the
Corporation Code and register with the Securities and Exchange Commission if it
wants to be a private corporation,” even as it ruled that Liban was without standing
to file the petition. The issue brought before the Court, however, was whether
Senator Gordon may hold the position of Chairman of the Board of PNRC without
forfeiting his seat in the Senate in accordance with Sec. 13, Art. VI, of the
Constitution. Was the decision correct?

Romualdez v. COMELEC: Sec. 45, RA 9189: The following shall be considered


election offenses under this Act.

Violations of any of the provisions of this act.

Constitutional: “void for vagueness” ‘facial invalidation’

Actual Case or Controversy Requirement

REFER TO DEAN!

Southern Hemisphere v. Anti-Terrorism Council, 632 SCRA 5 (2010)

How is a “facial” challenge different from an “as-applied” challenge? May a


criminal statute be subject to a “facial” challenge?

Answers: Distinguished from an as-applied challenge which considers only extant


facts affecting real litigants, a facial invalidation is an examination of the entire law,
pinpointing its flaws and defects, not only on the basis of its actual operation to the
parties, but also on the assumption or prediction that its very existence may cause
others not before the court to refrain from constitutionally protected speech or
activities. A litigant cannot mount a facial challenge against a criminal statute on
either vagueness or overbreadth grounds. The allowance of a facial challenge in
free speech cases is justified by the aim to avert the “chilling effect” on protected
speech, the exercise of which should not at all times be abridged. This rationale is
inapplicable to plain penal statutes that generally bear an “in terrorem effect” in
deterring socially harmful conduct.

-WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT STATUTE MAY BE CHALLENGED FOR BEING VAGUE


(FACIAL), THAT APPLIES ONLY IF THE STATUTE INVOLVES FREEDOM OF SPEECH..
BUT PENAL STATUTE CAN BE SUBJECT TO FACIAL INVALIDATION!

8|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


More on Actual case or controversy: Moot and Academic

a. Qualifications of Guingona and Davide [Paguia v. Office,621 SCRA 600


(2010)

DAVIDE- he was appointed as ambassador to China. His appointment was


challenged for violation of law prohibiting persons over 70 years old who recently
retired from being appointed in any government position… before the case was
decided, Davide resigned and Joined Liberal Party…. Held.. Moot and Academic

b. Eligibility of Estrada –Pormento v Estrada, 629 SCRA 530 (2010)

Can he run for another term? Held Moot and academic because estrada lose already
in the election

2011, Bar Exam

34. Courts may dismiss a case on ground of mootness when

A. the case is premature.

B. petitioner lacks legal standing.

C. the questioned law has been repealed.

D. the issue of validity of law was not timely raised.

Instances when the court decides the case even if it is already moot and academic

Moot and Academic, exceptions: David/GRP cases

1. there is a grave violation of the Constitution

2. the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest
involved

3. the issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the


bench, the bar and the public

4. the case is capable of repetition yet evading review.

Moa ad about to be signed in singapore only later the government withdrew.. Held..
While it is already moot and academic, court decided the validity of moa ad.

2011 Bar Exam

25. Courts may still decide cases that have otherwise become academic when they
involve

A. the basic interest of people.


B. petitions for habeas corpus.
C. acts of the Chief Executive.
D. Presidential election protests.

White Light Corp. v. City of Manila, GR No. 122846, Jan. 20, 2009

What is “third-party” standing? SCH

9|Page JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


Litigants have a right to bring actions on behalf of third parties, provided three
important criteria are satisfied:

1. the litigant must have suffered an ‘injury-in-fact,’ thus giving him or her a
"sufficiently concrete interest" in the outcome of the issue in dispute;
2. the litigant must have a close relation to the third party; and
3. there must exist some hindrance to the third party's ability to protect his or
her own interests

A CASE INVOLVING THE ORDINANCE ON WASH HOUR RATES IN MANILA.. MOTEL


OWNERS QUESTIONED THE SAME ALSO IN REPRESENTATION/IN BEHALF OF THE
PATRONS OF THEIR HOTELS HELD: YES IT IS ALLOWED

Due to the incident involving the massacre of Hong Kong tourists by dismissed
police officer Mendoza, it became apparent that Jesse Robredo would have difficulty
getting the approval of the Commission on Appointments. To avoid a rebuff from
the body, the President, while Congress was in session, designated him as Acting
Secretary of the DILG. In that capacity, there was no need for him to be confirmed
by the Commission on Appointments. Who has standing to challenge the
constitutionality of the appointment?

(a) any member of Congress


(b) any Filipino citizen
© any registered voter
(d) any member of the Commission on Appointments

How about as Tax-Payer? (APPOINTMENT OF DAVIDE-)

Paguia v. Office of the President, 621 SCRA 600 (2010)

Taxpayers' contributions to the state's coffers entitle them to question


appropriations for expenditures which are claimed to be unconstitutional or illegal.
However, the salaries and benefits respondent Davide received commensurate to
his diplomatic rank are fixed by law and other executive issuances, the funding for
which was included in the appropriations for the DFA's total expenditures contained
in the annual budgets Congress passed since Davide's nomination. Having assumed
office under color of authority (appointment), Davide is at least a de facto officer
entitled to draw salary, negating petitioner's claim of "illegal expenditure of scarce
public funds.“

3. Earliest Opportunity –
Sta. Rosa – DAR – CA – SC?

CASE STARTED AT DAR-CA-SC….. PLAINTIFF CHALLENGE THE


CONSTITUITONALLITY OF THE LAW AT THE SC. HELD- NOT ALLOWED..THAT IS
NOT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RAISED BEFORE THE
DAR… (NOTE: DAR CANNOT DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL)

Estarija – OMB – CA – SC

PERSON WAS CHARGED IN OMB. HE RAISED THE CONSTITUIONALITY WITH CA..


IS THAT EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY? HELD: YES! BECAUSE OMB HAS NO POWER TO
DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONALITY

10 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
SUMMARY-You raise it in the pleadings before the tribunal with jurisdiction to
rule on constitutional issue. VIP.. Mtc has no power of the same.. RTC ok..

4. Necessity – there must be a need or necessity in passing the validity of a law-


the reason Is separation of powers.. Example is the liban vs. gordon case

(Judicial Restraint) exercise judicial restraint if you can resolve in some other
way

Bar Q: 1992/6 – The Phil. Environmentalists’ Organization for Nature, a duly


recognized non-governmental organization, intends to file suit to enjoin the Phil.
Government from allocating funds to operate a power plant at Mt. Tuba in a
southern island. They claim that there was no consultation with the indigenous
cultural community who will be displaced from ancestral lands essential to their
livelihood and indispensable to their religious practices.

1. The organizations is based in Makati. All its officers live and work in Makati. Not
one of its officers or members belongs to the affected tribe. Do they have
standing?

a. Yes, if the suit is based on the fact that petitioner is an NGO, which is
recognized by the Declaration of Principles

b. Yes, if the suit is predicted on violation of the rights of indigenous cultural


communities

c. Yes, if the suit is premised on their being taxpayers questioning the


disbursement of public funds

d. No, because there is no way that their rights would be injuriously affected
by the project

2. Would your answer be different if the Philippine Power Corporation, a private


company, were to operate the plant? [Would they have standing?]
a. Yes, if the suit is based on the fact that petitioner is an NGO, which is
recognized by the Declaration of Principles-does not mean that NGO has standing in
court
b. Yes, if the suit is predicted on violation of the rights of indigenous cultural
communities
c. Yes, if the suit is premised on their being taxpayers questioning the
disbursement of public funds- note: no public funds is being disburesed as it is a
private co.
d. No, because there is no way that their rights would be injuriously
affected by the project

2007, VIII. The Provincial Governor of Bataan requested the Department of


Budget and Management (DBM) to release it Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA) of
P100 million for the current budget year. However, the General Appropriations Act
provided that the IRA may be released only if the province meets certain conditions
as determined by an oversight council created by the President.

[Is this requirement valid?]

The Provincial Governor is a party-mate of the President. May the Bataan


Representative instead file a petition to compel the DBM to release the funds?

11 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
No!, the congressman has no locus standi.. Has no interest….. It should be the
governor.. Remember that a district is a representative unit..not a political unit

Y was administratively charged before the Ombudsman with Grave Abuse of


Authority. The only defense that he presented was denial, that is, that he did not
perform the act complained of. He was found guilty and ordered dismissed from
the service. He promptly filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals, this
time directly attacking the constitutionality of the Ombudsman Act. As a justice of
the Court of Appeals, you will: [4%]

a. give due course to the petition because Y raised the issue of


constitutionality on the first opportunity

b. dismiss the petition because Y has no standing

c. dismiss the petition because Y did not raise the issue of constitutionality at
the first opportunity

d. dismiss the petition because there is no necessity for ruling on the issue of
constitutionality

Some Cases:

Macalintal v. PET, 635 SCRA 738 (2010)

Petitioner, a prominent election lawyer, questioned the legality of the creation


of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal. However, in the election protest filed by
Fernado Poe, Jr., he appeared before the tribunal representing respondent Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo.

Held: Petitioner’s standing is imperiled by his appearance as counsel for former


President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in the election protest filed by 2004 presidential
candidate Fernando Poe, Jr. before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, because
judicial inquiry requires that the constitutional question be raised at the earliest
possible opportunity.

Paguia v. Office of the President, 621 SCRA 600 (2010)

Filed a case for disbarment of davide as citizen and taxpayer:

An incapacity to bring legal actions peculiar to petitioner also obtains.


Petitioner’s suspension from the practice of law bars him from performing "any
activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure,
knowledge, training and experience.“ Certainly, preparing a petition raising
carefully crafted arguments on equal protection grounds and employing highly
legalistic rules of statutory construction to parse Section 23 of RA 7157 falls within
the proscribed conduct.

What is the effect if a law is declared unconstitutional?

1. Orthodox view- an unconstitutional act is not law. It is as if the law did not
exist.- the declaration of unconstitutionality is given retroactive effect…

12 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
2. Modern view- It has no retroactive effect, it affects only the parties before it.
[“operative fact doctrine” Flores v. Drilon- all previous acts prior to the declaration
of unconstitutionality remain valid..

Gordon Case.. SBMA… his appointment as SBMA chairman was declared


unconstitutional…Held: all acts of Gordon prior to it is valid.. All contracts he
entered are valid prior thereto.. Salaries are due to him….

Planters v. Fertiphil, 548 SCRA 485 (2008): What do we follow?

The doctrine of operative fact, as an exception to the general rule, only


applies as a matter of equity and fair play. 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 may have
consequences which cannot always be ignored. The doctrine is applicable when a
declaration of unconstitutionality will impose an undue burden on those who have
relied on the invalid law.

What is the doctrine of Relative Constitutionality: A statute declared constitutional


at one time, may be declared unconstitutional at another time because of altered
circumstances. [Central Bank Case]

Ex. Exemption of salaries of central bank executives from salaries standardization


law.

2011 Bar Exam

56. When the Supreme Court nullified the decisions of the military tribunal for lack
of jurisdiction, it excluded from their coverage the decisions of acquittal where the
defendants were deemed to have acquired a vested right. In so doing, the Supreme
Court applied

A. the operative fact doctrine.

B. the rule against double jeopardy.

C. the doctrine of supervening event.

D. the orthodox doctrine.

Bar Q: 2004/3: An NLRC Commissioner is facing a complaint before the OMB for
violation of the Anti-Graft Law. He contends that under the law creating the NLRC,
he has the rank of a justice of the Court of Appeals. Hence the OMB has no
jurisdiction over him. Is he correct? No! nlrc is a quasi judicial body outside the
judiciary

Re: Undated letter (2009) – Can the Supreme Court investigate Justices during
their tenure? After? For what?

GR: SC justices cannot be investigated as they are impeachable officers.. Cannot be


charged with offenses that would result to removal from office… exception torres
case where SC proceeded the investigation in view of his resignation as SC justice

Del Castillo? Plagiarism case… SC may not investigate the same.. It may investigate
as long as the resulting penalty is not removal

13 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Section 7. (1) No person shall be appointed Member of the Supreme Court
or any lower collegiate court unless he is a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines. A Member of the Supreme Court must be at least forty years of
age, and must have been for fifteen years or more, a judge of a lower court
or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

(2) The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower


courts, but no person may be appointed judge thereof unless he is a citizen
of the Philippines and a member of the Philippine Bar.

(3) A Member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence,


integrity, probity, and independence.

Section 8. (1) A Judicial and Bar Council is hereby created under the
supervision of the Supreme Court composed of the Chief Justice as ex
officio Chairman, the Secretary of Justice, and a representative of the
Congress as ex officio Members, a representative of the Integrated Bar, a
professor of law, a retired Member of the Supreme Court, and a
representative of the private sector.

(2) The regular members of the Council shall be appointed by the President
for a term of four years with the consent of the Commission on
Appointments. Of the Members first appointed, the representative of the
Integrated Bar shall serve for four years, the professor of law for three
years, the retired Justice for two years, and the representative of the
private sector for one year.

Note: no prohibition of reappointment of the jbc members

(3) The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the Secretary ex officio of the
Council and shall keep a record of its proceedings.
(4) The regular Members of the Council shall receive such emoluments as
may be determined by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court shall
provide in its annual budget the appropriations for the Council.

(5) The Council shall have the principal function of recommending


appointees to the Judiciary. It may exercise such other functions and
duties as the Supreme Court may assign to it.

Section 9. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of the lower
courts shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least three
nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. Such
appointments need no confirmation. (Note: no need of confirmation if you
passed through the JBC)

For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments within
ninety days from the submission of the list. note: SC justice… within 90 days
from occurrence of vacancy

14 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Bar Q: 1988, No. 11: a novel feature of the present Constitution is the Judicial
and Bar Council Please state: 1) its principal function (Council shall have the
principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary )2) its composition
(7), and 3)who supervises it and takes care of its appropriations (SC)? CODAL
MEMO

Note the distinction: at least 3 nominees by the council in judiciary.. While


nominees for OMB must be 3

1999, XI: What is the composition of the JBC and the term of office of the regular
members.

1. Chief Justice
2. Secretary of Justice
3. Representative of Congress
4. Rep. of Integrated Bar
5. Professor of law
6. Retired SC member
7. Private sector representative

No. 1, 2 and 3 are ex officio

The 4,5,6 are regular members which must be confirmed by the CA

24. The President wants to appoint A to the vacant post of Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court because of his qualifications, competence, honesty, and efficiency.
But A’s name is not on the list of nominees that the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)
submitted to the President. What should the President do?

A. Request the JBC to consider adding A to the list.

B. Decline to appoint from the list.

C. Appoint from the list.

D. Return the list to JBC.

Sec. 10. The Salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate Justices of the
SC, and of the judges of lower courts shall be fixed by law. During their
continuance in office, their salary shall not be decreased.

Sec. 11. The members of the SC and judges of lower courts shall hold
office during good behavior until they reach the age of 70 or become
incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office. The Supreme Court en
banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower courts, or order
their dismissal by a vote of majority of the members who took no part, or
dissented, or abstained from a decision or resolution

Gacott: Must all disciplinary cases against judges be heard by the Supreme Court
en banc? No. Only if penalty is dismissal (VIEW POINT OF THE CONSTITUTION). If
less, division will do.

15 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Note: PREVAILING Circular says if the penalty of fine is more than 10,000.00 pesos,
it must be heard by ENBANC

1996, No. 9: A, an associate justice of the Supreme Court reached the age of
seventy on Jul1 1, 1996. There was a case for deliberation on that day where the
vote of A was crucial. Can A hold over the position and participate in the
deliberation? No! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS HOLD OVER POSITION IN ALL
CONSTITUIONAL POSITIONS. ----------- NO DECISIONS MUST BE MADE ON THE
DAY OF YOUR BIRTHDAY

1993, No. 11: How may judges of lower courts be removed from office? – ONLY
BY SUPREME COURT EN BANC

Sec. 12. The members of the Supreme Court and of other courts
established by law shall not be designated to any agency performing
administrative or quasi-judicial function. [In Re Judge Manzano] - JUDGE WAS
APPOINTED TO THE PEACE AND ORDER COUNCIL- THAT IS A BODY PERFORMING
ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION.. HENCE, NOT ALLOWED

MACALINTAL CASE: HE QUESTIONED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF PET ON THE


GROUND THAT IT IS VIOLATIVE TO SEC. 12 BY DECIDING WHO WON THE
CONTEST-ALLEGEDLY A QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION- HELD: IT IS
CONSTITUTIONAL … DECIDING WHO WON THE ELECTION OF PRESIDENCY IS
ACTUALLY A JUDICIAL FUNCTION AS IT INVOLVES SETTLEMENT OF CONTROVERSY
AND IT IS REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION

Section 13. The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case submitted to
it for decision en banc or in division shall be reached in consultation before
the case is assigned to a Member for the writing of the opinion of the
Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be
issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case and served
upon the parties. Any Members who took no part, or dissented, or
abstained from a decision or resolution, must state the reason therefor.
The same requirements shall be observed by all lower collegiate courts. CA
and Sandigan Bayan

Procedure for Decision-Making

First, must deliberate before assigning to the writer

Second, a member who dissents must state the reason

Third, a member who does not participate must state the reason.

Purpose of certification/provision- to ensure that decision is reached by the


supreme court as collegiate body

Considering the requirement of certification/Peragoza-absence

- The presiding justice failed to make certification that its decision was reached
upon consultation.. What happen if there is failure to make such certification? Held:

16 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
it will not affect the decision.. It is only a formal defect. The omitting justice may be
held administratively liable or for impeachment

Sec. 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing


clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. VIP

No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the


court shall be refused due course or denied without stating the legal basis
therefor.

2011 Bar Exam

71. The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) found Atlantic
Homes, Inc. liable in damages arising from its delayed release of the title to the
house and lot that it sold to Josephine. Atlantic appealed to the Office of the
President which rendered a one page decision, affirming the attached HLURB
judgment. Atlantic challenges the validity of the decision of the Office of the
President for not stating the facts and the law on which it is based. Is the challenge
correct?
A. No, the Office of the President is governed by its own rules
respecting review of cases appealed to it. – THE REQUIRMENT OF
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND LAW PERTAINS ONLY TO THE
JUDICIARY- IT IS ALSO A MEMORANDUM DECISION

B. Yes, the decision of the Office of the President must contain its own
crafted factual findings and legal conclusions.

C. Yes, administrative due process demands that the Office of the President
make findings and conclusions independent of its subordinate.

D. Yes, the trial judge may reasonably rely on the prosecution's


manifestation that he had no objection to the grant of bail.

Sec. 15 (1) All cases or matters filed after the efectivity of this Constitution
must be decided or resolved within 24 MONTHS from the date of
submission for the SC, and unless reduced by the Supreme Court, 12
months for all lower collegiate courts, and 3 months for all other lower
courts.

Period for making Decisions


1. Supreme Court – 24 months
2. Court of Appeals – 12 months
3. RTC/MTC – 3 months
4. Sandiganbayan and CTA? BEING COLLEGIATE COURTS, 3 MONTHS

(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without
prejudice to such responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence thereof,
shall decide or resolve the case or matter submitted thereto for determination,
without further delay ….. MEMO!!!!!!!!!!

1989: No. Despite the lapse of 4 months from end of trial, the judge failed to
decide. The defense counsel moved to dismiss the case on the ground that the
court had lost jurisdiction. Should the motion be granted. NO! THE DELAY DOES
NOT RESULT TO LOSS OF JURISDICTION OF THE COURT- Despite the expiration of
the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such responsibility

17 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
as may have been incurred in consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve the case
or matter submitted thereto for determination, without further delay

[But take note of Licaros]

Sandiganbayan was tried for 10 years… AFTER THAT, Justice delayed to make
decision.. Held… SC Dismissed the case in favor of the Accused as there was a
violation of the right of the accused to speedy disposition of the case!!!!!!!!!

PRINCIPLE- THE DELAY OF THE JUDGE DOES NOT RESULT TO DISMISSAL UNLESS
IT VIOLATES THE RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED TO SPEEDY DISPOSITION

THIS DOES NOT APPLY ALSO TO CIVIL CASES

Section 16. The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the opening
of each regular session of the Congress, submit to the President and the
Congress an annual report on the operations and activities of the Judiciary.

18 | P a g e JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT