Political Law Review Q & A 1987-2004

ANSWERS TO BAR
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
IN
POLITICAL LAW
ARRANGED BY TOPIC
(1987 2004)
E!"# $% A&&$%'# ()*
+$%#""# L$'',!-I.$/ $%
A0#1 A%&#2 P3 I.$/
(S!00!4$% U%!5#&6!") C/00#'# /7 L$2)
8&/4 "9# ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION
QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW () "9#
UP LAW COMPLEX
+,0) 2:; 200<
1
This work is not intended for sale or commerce. This work is freeware. It
may be freely copied and distributed. It is primarily intended for all those who
desire to have a deeper understanding of the issues touched by the Philippine
Bar Examinations and its trend. It is specially intended for law students from
the provinces who very often are recipients of deliberately distorted notes from
other unscrupulous law schools and students. !hare to others this work and you
will be richly rewarded by "od in heaven. It is also very good karma.
#e would like to seek the indulgence of the reader for some Bar
$uestions which are improperly classified under a topic and for some topics
which are improperly or ignorantly phrased for the authors are %ust Bar
&eviewees who have prepared this work while reviewing for the Bar Exams
under time constraints and within their limited knowledge of the law. #e would
like to seek the reader's indulgence for a lot of typographical errors in this work.
The (uthors
)uly *+ *,,-
*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(&&(."E/ B0 T1PI2............................................................................................................
Janette Laggui-Icao and ............................................................................................................
Alex Andrew P. Icao....................................................................................................................
T(B3E 14 21.TE.T!............................................................................................................
/ET(I3E/ T(B3E 14 21.TE.T!......................................................................................1*
Constitutional Law....................................................................................................................
General Principles....................................................................................................................
Expropriation............................................................................................................................
Expropriation; Just Compensation...........................................................................................
Expropriation; Just Compensation, Public s Pri!ate Purpose..............................................
Expropriation; Public "se........................................................................................................
Expropriation; Public "se # Just Compensation....................................................................
Expropriation; $rit o% Possession............................................................................................
People Power............................................................................................................................
People Power............................................................................................................................
People Power............................................................................................................................
Police Power.............................................................................................................................
Police Power s &on-Impairment o% Contracts.......................................................................
Police Power; 'ig(t to )ue Process and Compensation.........................................................
*eparation o% Powers................................................................................................................
*tate Immunit+ # Liabilit+ ,rom *uit.......................................................................................
*tate Immunit+ # Liabilit+ %rom *uit; Collection o% Just Compensation %rom
-unicipalities...........................................................................................................................
*tate Immunit+ # Liabilit+ %rom *uit; Collection o% Just Compensation %rom Cities...............
*tate Immunit+ # Liabilit+ ,rom *uit; *o!ereigns...................................................................
*tate Immunit+ ,rom *uit.........................................................................................................
*tate Immunit+ ,rom *uit; E%%ect o% Its $ai!er .......................................................................
*tate Immunit+ ,rom *uit; Expropriation................................................................................
.axation; !s special assessment................................................................................................
.axation; G/CC Liabilit+ ,or 'eal Estate .ax........................................................................
&ational .erritor+.....................................................................................................................
&ational .erritor+.....................................................................................................................
&ational .erritor+; Arc(ipelagic )octrine...............................................................................
.erritor+; Exclusi!e Economic 0one........................................................................................
*tate Principles And Policies....................................................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; Armed ,orces; P&P....................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; )octrine o% Incorporation...........................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; 1alo-1alo...................................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; -unicipal Law s .reat+ Pro!isions..........................................
5
*tate Principles # Policies; &uclear $eapons........................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; Pacta *unt *er!anda...................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; .ransparenc+ in -atters o% Public Interest.................................
2ill o% 'ig(ts.............................................................................................................................
In General.................................................................................................................................
&ew ,eatures "nder 3456 Consti............................................................................................
$rit o% Amparo..........................................................................................................................
*ection 3....................................................................................................................................
)ue Process; 2ot(....................................................................................................................
)ue Process; -agna Carta ,or .eac(ers................................................................................
)ue Process; Pre!enti!e *uspension; 'ig(t to &otice and 1earing........................................
)ue Process; Procedural; 2asic 1uman 'ig(ts 7E.G. 'ig(t to -arr+ and to Procreate8,
alidit+ o% $ai!er .(ereo%.........................................................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural..........................................................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; Administrati!e................................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; ,or%eiture Proceedings..................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; Prior &otice and 1earing..............................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; 'ig(t to be 1eard...........................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; 'ig(t to &otice and 1earing..........................................................
)ue Process; *ubstanti!e.........................................................................................................
E9ual Protection.......................................................................................................................
E9ual Protection.......................................................................................................................
E9ual Protection.......................................................................................................................
E9ual Protection and )ue Process Clause; Alien Emplo+ment...............................................
E9ual Protection; Constitutionalit+ o% *ubsidiar+ Imprisonment............................................
E9ual Protection; 'ig(t to C(oose Pro%ession.........................................................................
*ection :....................................................................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures...............................................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; Aliens ..................................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; Applicabilit+........................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; $arrantless Arrests.............................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; $arrants o% Arrest...............................................................................
*ection <....................................................................................................................................
Pri!ac+ o% Communication ......................................................................................................
Pri!ac+ o% Communication and Correspondence.....................................................................
*ection =....................................................................................................................................
,reedom o% Expression.............................................................................................................
,reedom o% *peec(....................................................................................................................
,reedom o% t(e Press................................................................................................................
,reedom o% t(e Press; Actual -alice.......................................................................................
'ig(t to Assembl+ # /rgani;e; Go!ernment Emplo+ees.........................................................
'ig(t to Assembl+; Permits.......................................................................................................
'ig(t to Assembl+; .eac(ers.....................................................................................................
6
*ection >....................................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion.................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion ................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion.................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion; ,lag *alute............................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion; &on-Establis(ment Clause....................................................................
*ection ?....................................................................................................................................
Libert+ o% Abode........................................................................................................................
Libert+ o% Abode........................................................................................................................
'ig(t to .ra!el; 'ig(t to 2ail....................................................................................................
*ection 3:..................................................................................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; Extra@udicial Con%ession to Pri!ate Indi!iduals...............................
Custodial In!estigation; Extra@udicial Con%ession...................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; Police Line-"p..................................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(t to Counsel................................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(t to Counsel, Independent..........................................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(t to Counsel; 'eceipt o% Propert+ *ei;ed...................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(ts................................................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(ts ...............................................................................................
*ection 3<..................................................................................................................................
'ig(ts o% t(e Accused; 'ig(t to 2ail.........................................................................................
*ection 3=..................................................................................................................................
'ig(ts o% t(e Accused; 'ig(t to *peed+ .rial............................................................................
'ig(ts o% t(e Accused; 'ig(t to be Presumed Innocent............................................................
*ection 36..................................................................................................................................
*el%-Incrimination.....................................................................................................................
*ection 35..................................................................................................................................
In!oluntar+ *er!itude................................................................................................................
*ection :A..................................................................................................................................
&on-Imprisonment ,or &on-Pa+ment o% )ebt.........................................................................
*ection :3..................................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+ ......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
*ection ::..................................................................................................................................
2ill o% Attainder........................................................................................................................
2ill o% Attainder........................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
-
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; Action ,or Cancellation; Prescription # E%%ect o% )eat(...................................
Citi;ens(ip; )ual Citi;ens(ip...................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; E%%ect o% 'epatriation...........................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; E%%ects o% -arriages.............................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; &atural-2orn........................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; &aturali;ation; Cancellation o% Citi;ens(ip.........................................................
Citi;ens(ip; 'eac9uisition, wa+s o%..........................................................................................
Legislati!e )epartment...........................................................................................................
Legislature; Appropriation Law; &ature................................................................................
Legislature; Appropriation Law; 'ider Pro!ision..................................................................
Legislature; Appropriation Law; Automatic 'enewal # Pwr o% Augmentation ....................
Legislature; Appropriation o% Public ,unds; /nl+ %or Public Purposes................................
Legislature; Appropriation o% Public ,unds; )ebt *er!icing................................................
Legislature; Appropriation o% Public ,unds; must be b+ law................................................
Legislature; Commission /n Appointments...........................................................................
Legislature; Conduct o% ,oreign A%%airs.................................................................................
Legislature; Conduct o% ,oreign A%%airs; 'ole o% *enate.......................................................
Legislature; Conduct o% ,oreign A%%airs; .reaties..................................................................
Legislature; Congressmen; )iscipline; *uspension o% A -ember.........................................
Legislature; Congressmen; )iscipline; -odes o% 'emo!al...................................................
Legislature; Congressmen; Loans Extended to -embers o% Congress..................................
Legislature; Congressmen; Pro(ibitions and In(ibitions o% Public /%ice..............................
Legislature; Congressmen; Buali%ications; age.....................................................................
Legislature; Congressmen; Buali%ications.............................................................................
Legislature; Congressmen; .(ree-.erm Limit........................................................................
Legislature; Electoral .ribunal..............................................................................................
Legislature; Electoral .ribunal, *enate; Jurisdiction............................................................
Legislature; -ulti-Part+ *+stem.............................................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; Passage o% A Law.......................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; Process # Publication..............................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; /!erriding t(e Presidential eto...............
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing......................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; )elegation o% Legislati!e ,unctions.................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; In!estigations in Aid o% Legislation; 'ig(ts to *el%-
Incrimination o% $itness..........................................................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e.............................................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; alidit+ o% Item eto...................................
Legislature; Powers; &on-Legislati!e; Emergenc+ Powers; 'e9uisites................................
Legislature; Powers; &on-Legislati!e....................................................................................
Executi!e )epartment.............................................................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power..................................................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Appointments 'e9uiring Con%irmation..................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Appointments 'e9uiring Con%irmation # ad interim
appointments...........................................................................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Acting s Permanent Appointment........................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Ad Interim Appointments.......................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Appointments.........................................................................
+
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Limitations /n Presidential Appointments............................
Executi!e; Exec Clemenc+; ....................................................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Clemenc+; ; Amnest+....................................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Clemenc+; ; Pardon, Conditional................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Clemenc+; ; Pardon.....................................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; 3?; -artial Law # *uspension o% $rit o% 1abeas Corpus............
Executi!e; Exec Powers; 3?; -artial Law.............................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; 3?; *uspension o% $rit o% 1abeas Corpus.....................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power o% t(e President to Enter Into Loan Agreements................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power to Contract /r Guarantee ,oreign Loans..........................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power to Enter Into Executi!e Agreements...................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power to Impose .ari%% 'ates, Import and Export Buotas, Etc.
................................................................................................................................................
Executi!e; Presidential Immunit+ ,rom *uit..........................................................................
Executi!e; Pro(ibition Against -ultiple Positions b+ Go!Dt /%%icials...................................
Executi!e; Pro(ibition Against -ultiple Positions # Additional Compensation; Cabinet
-embers.................................................................................................................................
Executi!e; Pro(ibitions and In(ibitions o% Public /%ice........................................................
Judicial )epartment...............................................................................................................
*ection 3..................................................................................................................................
,inalit+ o% oid Judgments.....................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power # Political Buestion, related........................................................................
Judicial Power # Political Buestions....................................................................................
Judicial Power # Political Buestion )octrine......................................................................
Judicial Power to 'e!iew Executi!e Acts...............................................................................
Judicial Power; Contempt Powers ........................................................................................
Judicial Power; *cope "nder t(e Present Constitution.........................................................
Judicial 'e!iew; Proper Part+ ..............................................................................................
Judicial 'e!iew; Proper Part+...............................................................................................
Judicial 'e!iew; 'e9uisites....................................................................................................
Jurisdiction o% Courts; In@unction /rders..............................................................................
Jurisdiction o% 1L"'2...........................................................................................................
Justiciable Buestion................................................................................................................
Pro 1ac ice Cases................................................................................................................
*upreme Court As A Continuing Constitutional Con!ention..................................................
*ection <..................................................................................................................................
,iscal Autonom+.....................................................................................................................
Judicial Independence; *a%eguard..........................................................................................
*ection =..................................................................................................................................
Cases to be 1eard En 2anc....................................................................................................
*ection 5..................................................................................................................................
Judicial and 2ar Council........................................................................................................
Judicial and 2ar Council .......................................................................................................
*ection 33................................................................................................................................
-odes o% 'emo!al o% Lower Court Judges.............................................................................
.erm o% /%%ice o% Justices........................................................................................................
*ection 3>................................................................................................................................
-andator+ Period ,or )eciding Cases ................................................................................
Constitutional Commissions...................................................................................................
In General...............................................................................................................................
7
'otational *c(eme..................................................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice............................................................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; 'ecei!ing o% Indirect Compensation ...............................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; ,unction o% C*C...............................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; Career *er!ice; C(aracteristics.......................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; G/CCs; co!erage............................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; G/CCs $it(out /riginal C(arter s Goccs $it( /riginal C(arter; ............
Ci!il *er!ice; G/CCs, Jurisdiction o!er................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; -odes o% 'emo!al............................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; *ecurit+ o% .enure............................................................................................
C/-ELEC..............................................................................................................................
Comelec; E9ual *pace and .ime in -edia.............................................................................
Comelec; Grant o% Pardon in Election /%%enses....................................................................
Comelec; 'emo!al o% Commissioners....................................................................................
Commission on Audit..............................................................................................................
Commission /n Audit; Jurisdiction........................................................................................
Commission /n Audit; -one+ Claims....................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers............................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers ...........................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; Impeac(ment....................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; /mbudsman; Jurisdiction................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; /mbudsman; Power to Impose Pre!enti!e *uspension
................................................................................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; /mbudsman; Power to In!estigate..................................
&ational Econom+ and Patrimon+..........................................................................................
*ection :..................................................................................................................................
Article EII; Exploration and )e!elopment o% -inerals.........................................................
*ection <..................................................................................................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition and Lease o% Public Lands...............................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands............................................................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands ...........................................................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands b+ 1ereditar+ *uccession..................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands; Citi;ens(ip issue...............................................................
Article EII; Lease o% Pri!ate Agricultural Lands...................................................................
Article EII; *ale o% Public Lands; Limitations.......................................................................
*ection 3A................................................................................................................................
Article EII; &ational Patrimon+; de%inition...........................................................................
/t(er Pro!isions.....................................................................................................................
Article EII; Citi;ens(ip 'e9uirement in -anagement o% Ad!ertising Industr+......................
Article EII; Engagement in 2usiness......................................................................................
Article EII; Exercise o% Pro%ession.........................................................................................
Article EII; Expropriation o% Public "tilities.........................................................................
Article EII; &ationali;ed Acti!ities.........................................................................................
Article EII; /wners(ip 'e9uirement o% -ass -edia.............................................................
*ocial Justice # 1uman 'ig(ts..............................................................................................
In General...............................................................................................................................
*ocial Justice "nder t(e Present Constitution.......................................................................
Agrarian..................................................................................................................................
Agrarian .................................................................................................................................
1uman 'ig(ts.........................................................................................................................
Commission /n 1uman 'ig(ts; Jurisdiction.........................................................................
8
Labor.......................................................................................................................................
Labor; 'ig(t to *el%-/rgani;ation..........................................................................................
Labor; 'ig(t to *triCe.............................................................................................................
$omen.....................................................................................................................................
$omen.....................................................................................................................................
Education................................................................................................................................
Education; Academic ,reedom...............................................................................................
Education; Academic ,reedom; Extent..................................................................................
Education; Alien Enrollees # )onors....................................................................................
Education; )uties o% *tate in 'e Education...........................................................................
Education; ,lag *alute...........................................................................................................
Education; 'ig(t to C(oose Pro%ession..................................................................................
Education; 'ig(t to Bualit+ Education..................................................................................
Education; .eac(ing o% 'eligion............................................................................................
Education; alidit+ o% Academic 'e9uirements......................................................................
General Pro!isions.................................................................................................................
General Pro!isions; Local )ialect.........................................................................................
Amendments and 'e!isions.....................................................................................................
Amendments and 'e!isions; -odes........................................................................................
.ransitor+ Pro!isions..............................................................................................................
.ransitor+ Pro!isions; ,oreign -ilitar+ 2ases......................................................................
Administrati!e Law.................................................................................................................
Admin Law; Ex(austion o% Administrati!e 'emedies.............................................................
Admin Law; Ex(austion o% Administrati!e 'emedies !s )octrine o% Primar+ Jurisdiction
................................................................................................................................................
Admin Law; Ex(austion o% Administrati!e 'emedies; Exceptions.........................................
Admin Law; Judicial 'e!iew o% Administrati!e Action..........................................................
Admin Law; Judicial 'e!iew o% Administrati!e )ecisions.....................................................
Admin Law; -eaning o% FGo!ernment o% t(e P(ilippinesG...................................................
Admin Law; Power o% t(e President to 'eorgani;e Administrati!e *tructure........................
Admin Law; 'ules and 'egulations; )ue Process.................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers............................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Abandonment o% /%%ice.....................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )e ,acto /%%icer..............................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )e ,acto /%%icer; e%%ects..................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Clemenc+; )octrine o% Condonation.............................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Clemenc+; E%%ect o% Pardon Granted in ,a!or o%
Public /%%icers........................................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; )ismissal o% Emplo+ees in 2ad ,ait(; Pa+ment o%
2acCwages..............................................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Pre!enti!e *uspension...................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Pre!enti!e *uspension # Appeal; entitlement to
salar+ pendente.......................................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Gra%t and Corruption; Prescription o% Crime # 'ig(t to 'eco!er
Illegall+ Ac9uired $ealt(........................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Liabilit+ ,or )amages in Per%ormance o% /%%icial ,unctions ........
Law o% Public /%%icers; Local Electi!e /%%icials; Limitations /n Additional )uties............
9
Law o% Public /%%icers; &ext-in-'anC 'ule............................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Power to Issue *ubpoena; !alidit+ o% delegation.............................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Pro(ibition /n Electi!e /%%icer to 1old Public /%%ice....................
Law o% Public /%%icers; 'etirement 2ene%its..........................................................................
Election Laws..........................................................................................................................
Election Laws; :nd Placer 'ule.............................................................................................
Election Laws; :nd Placer 'ule ............................................................................................
Election Laws; :nd Placer 'ule; in Buo $arranto Cases.....................................................
Election Laws; Appreciation o% 2allots..................................................................................
Election Laws; Comelec; Judicial 'e!iew o% )ecisions.........................................................
Election Laws; Comelec; Jurisdiction....................................................................................
Election Laws; )is9uali%ication; Grounds.............................................................................
Election Laws; E%%ect o% ,iling o% Certi%icate o% Candidac+; Appointi!e /%%icer s
Electi!e /%%icer.......................................................................................................................
Election Laws; E%%ect o% ,iling o% Certi%icate o% Candidac+; ,air Election Act....................
Election Laws; Election /%%enses; Conspirac+ to 2ribe oters.............................................
Election Laws; Election Protest.............................................................................................
Election Laws; Election Protest s Buo $arranto ...............................................................
Election Laws; Election Protest; Jurisdiction........................................................................
Election Laws; Expiration o% term bars ser!ice t(ereo%.........................................................
Election Laws; Petition to )eclare ,ailure o% Elections; 'e9uisites # E%%ects.....................
Election Laws; Pre-Proclamation Contest.............................................................................
Election Laws; Pre-Proclamation Contest s Election Contests...........................................
Election Laws; Pre-Proclamation Contest; Proper Issues.....................................................
Election Laws; Process; Illiterate oters...............................................................................
Election Laws; Process; Principle o% Idem *onans................................................................
Election Laws; Process; *tra+ 2allot.....................................................................................
Local Go!ernment..................................................................................................................
Public Corp; Appointment o% 2udget /%%icer; control !s super!ision....................................
Public Corp; 2oundar+ )ispute *ettlement...........................................................................
Public Corp; Closure /r Lease o% Properties ,or Public "se ..............................................
Public Corp; Creation o% &ew Local Go!ernment "nits; Plebiscite 'e9uirement................
Public Corp; )e ,acto Public Corporations; E%%ect o% /%%icial Acts o% t(e -unicipal
Corporation and Its /%%icers..................................................................................................
Public Corp; )e!olution.........................................................................................................
Public Corp; Entitlement o% LG"s to E9uitable *(are in "tili;ation and )e!elopment o%
&ational $ealt(......................................................................................................................
Public Corp; ,ranc(ise; prior appro!al o% LG" necessar+..................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; E%%ect o% ice--a+or Acting As -a+or.....................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; Buali%ications...........................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ecall........................................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ule o% *uccession....................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ule o% *uccession # :nd Placer 'ule.....................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ule o% *uccession in Local /%%ice...........................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; .(ree-.erm Limit......................................................
Public Corp; Local Executi!es; alidit+ o% Contracts Entered Into; 'e9uisites....................
Public Corp; /rdinances; alidit+.........................................................................................
Public Corp; /rdinances; alidit+; general wel%are clause...................................................
Public Corp; /rdinances; alidit+ o% Gambling Pro(ibition.................................................
Public Corp; /rdinances; eto Power...................................................................................
Public Corp; Police Power; LL)A.........................................................................................
Public Corp; Powers o% 2aranga+ Assembl+; .......................................................................
Public Corp; Powers /% Liga &g -ga 2aranga+..................................................................
Public Corp; 'e9uisites ,or Contracts In!ol!ing Public ,unds............................................
Public Corp; *anggunian; Power to Issue *ubpoena # Cite ,or Contempt.........................
1,
Public Corp; *ources o% 'e!enue...........................................................................................
Public Corp; "se and Lease o% Properties ,or Public "se ..................................................
Public Corp; $it(drawal o% Public Propert+ ,rom Public "se.............................................
Public International Law........................................................................................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+......................................................................................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+; Ambassadors..............................................................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+; )iplomatic En!o+ and Consular /%%icers..................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+; )iplomatic En!o+ and Consular /%%icers .................................
PIL; Exclusi!e Economic 0one...............................................................................................
PIL; Executi!e Agreements; 2inding E%%ect...........................................................................
PIL; Extradition; )octrine o% *pecialt+.................................................................................
PIL; Extradition; E%%ecti!it+ o% treat+.....................................................................................
PIL; Extradition; Grounds......................................................................................................
PIL; Extradition; s )eportation...........................................................................................
PIL; Genocide.........................................................................................................................
PIL; (alo-(alo........................................................................................................................
PIL; (alo-(alo........................................................................................................................
PIL; 1uman 'ig(ts.................................................................................................................
PIL; 1uman 'ig(ts; Ci!il and Political 'ig(ts......................................................................
PIL; ICJ; Jurisdiction /!er *tates.........................................................................................
PIL; ICJ; Limitations /n Jurisdiction....................................................................................
PIL; ICJ; 'epresentation o% Parties; Language in Pleadings and /ral Argument................
PIL; -andates and .rust .erritories......................................................................................
PIL; -unicipal Law s International Law.............................................................................
PIL; &eutralit+ o% *tates.........................................................................................................
PIL; /uter *pace; Jurisdiction ..............................................................................................
PIL; 'eparations Agreement; alidit+....................................................................................
PIL; 'ig(t to Innocent Passage..............................................................................................
PIL; 'ig(t to .ransit and Innocent Passage...........................................................................
PIL; *ources o% International Law.........................................................................................
PIL; *o!ereign Immunit+ o% *tates.........................................................................................
PIL; *o!ereignt+ o% *tates.......................................................................................................
PIL; *tateless Persons............................................................................................................
PIL; e%%ecti!e occupation........................................................................................................
PIL; 'ecognition o% *tates......................................................................................................
PIL; *tate Liabilities ..............................................................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce...................................................................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; 'ig(ts and /bligation "nder t(e "& C(arter.......................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; *el%-)e%ense; Anticipator+ *el%-)e%ense.................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; *el%-)e%ense; $ar....................................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; .errorism; *el%-)e%ense...........................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; "& C(arter; .(reat /r "se o% ,orce......................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; $ar; CombatantsHPrisoners o% $ar........................................................
11
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS
(&&(."E/ B0 T1PI2............................................................................................................
Janette Laggui-Icao and ............................................................................................................
Alex Andrew P. Icao....................................................................................................................
T(B3E 14 21.TE.T!............................................................................................................
/ET(I3E/ T(B3E 14 21.TE.T!......................................................................................1*
Constitutional Law....................................................................................................................
General Principles....................................................................................................................
Expropriation............................................................................................................................
Expropriation; Just Compensation, Public s Pri!ate Purpose..............................................
Expropriation; Public "se # Just Compensation....................................................................
Expropriation; $rit o% Possession............................................................................................
People Power............................................................................................................................
People Power............................................................................................................................
People Power............................................................................................................................
Police Power.............................................................................................................................
Police Power; 'ig(t to )ue Process and Compensation.........................................................
*tate Immunit+ # Liabilit+ %rom *uit; Collection o% Just Compensation %rom
-unicipalities...........................................................................................................................
*tate Immunit+ # Liabilit+ %rom *uit; Collection o% Just Compensation %rom Cities...............
*tate Immunit+ ,rom *uit; E%%ect o% Its $ai!er .......................................................................
*tate Immunit+ ,rom *uit; Expropriation................................................................................
.axation; !s special assessment................................................................................................
.axation; G/CC Liabilit+ ,or 'eal Estate .ax........................................................................
&ational .erritor+.....................................................................................................................
&ational .erritor+.....................................................................................................................
&ational .erritor+; Arc(ipelagic )octrine...............................................................................
.erritor+; Exclusi!e Economic 0one........................................................................................
*tate Principles And Policies....................................................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; Armed ,orces; P&P....................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; )octrine o% Incorporation...........................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; 1alo-1alo...................................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; -unicipal Law s .reat+ Pro!isions..........................................
*tate Principles # Policies; &uclear $eapons........................................................................
*tate Principles # Policies; Pacta *unt *er!anda...................................................................
2ill o% 'ig(ts.............................................................................................................................
In General.................................................................................................................................
&ew ,eatures "nder 3456 Consti............................................................................................
$rit o% Amparo..........................................................................................................................
*ection 3....................................................................................................................................
)ue Process; 2ot(....................................................................................................................
)ue Process; -agna Carta ,or .eac(ers................................................................................
)ue Process; Pre!enti!e *uspension; 'ig(t to &otice and 1earing........................................
)ue Process; Procedural; 2asic 1uman 'ig(ts 7E.G. 'ig(t to -arr+ and to Procreate8,
alidit+ o% $ai!er .(ereo%.........................................................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; Administrati!e................................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; ,or%eiture Proceedings..................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; Prior &otice and 1earing..............................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; 'ig(t to be 1eard...........................................................................
)ue Process; Procedural; 'ig(t to &otice and 1earing..........................................................
)ue Process; *ubstanti!e.........................................................................................................
E9ual Protection.......................................................................................................................
E9ual Protection.......................................................................................................................
E9ual Protection.......................................................................................................................
E9ual Protection and )ue Process Clause; Alien Emplo+ment...............................................
E9ual Protection; Constitutionalit+ o% *ubsidiar+ Imprisonment............................................
E9ual Protection; 'ig(t to C(oose Pro%ession.........................................................................
*ection :....................................................................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; Aliens ..................................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; Applicabilit+........................................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; $arrantless Arrests.............................................................................
*earc(es and *ei;ures; $arrants o% Arrest...............................................................................
*ection <....................................................................................................................................
Pri!ac+ o% Communication ......................................................................................................
*ection =....................................................................................................................................
,reedom o% *peec(....................................................................................................................
,reedom o% t(e Press................................................................................................................
,reedom o% t(e Press; Actual -alice.......................................................................................
'ig(t to Assembl+ # /rgani;e; Go!ernment Emplo+ees.........................................................
'ig(t to Assembl+; Permits.......................................................................................................
'ig(t to Assembl+; .eac(ers.....................................................................................................
*ection >....................................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion.................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion ................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion.................................................................................................................
,reedom o% 'eligion; ,lag *alute............................................................................................
*ection ?....................................................................................................................................
Libert+ o% Abode........................................................................................................................
Libert+ o% Abode........................................................................................................................
'ig(t to .ra!el; 'ig(t to 2ail....................................................................................................
*ection 3:..................................................................................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; Extra@udicial Con%ession to Pri!ate Indi!iduals...............................
Custodial In!estigation; Extra@udicial Con%ession...................................................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(t to Counsel, Independent..........................................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(t to Counsel; 'eceipt o% Propert+ *ei;ed...................................
Custodial In!estigation; 'ig(ts ...............................................................................................
*ection 3<..................................................................................................................................
*ection 3=..................................................................................................................................
'ig(ts o% t(e Accused; 'ig(t to *peed+ .rial............................................................................
'ig(ts o% t(e Accused; 'ig(t to be Presumed Innocent............................................................
*ection 36..................................................................................................................................
*ection 35..................................................................................................................................
In!oluntar+ *er!itude................................................................................................................
*ection :A..................................................................................................................................
&on-Imprisonment ,or &on-Pa+ment o% )ebt.........................................................................
*ection :3..................................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+ ......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
)ouble Jeopard+.......................................................................................................................
*ection ::..................................................................................................................................
2ill o% Attainder........................................................................................................................
2ill o% Attainder........................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip................................................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; Action ,or Cancellation; Prescription # E%%ect o% )eat(...................................
Citi;ens(ip; )ual Citi;ens(ip...................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; E%%ects o% -arriages.............................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; &atural-2orn........................................................................................................
Citi;ens(ip; &aturali;ation; Cancellation o% Citi;ens(ip.........................................................
Citi;ens(ip; 'eac9uisition, wa+s o%..........................................................................................
Legislati!e )epartment...........................................................................................................
Legislature; Appropriation Law; &ature................................................................................
Legislature; Appropriation Law; 'ider Pro!ision..................................................................
Legislature; Appropriation Law; Automatic 'enewal # Pwr o% Augmentation ....................
Legislature; Appropriation o% Public ,unds; /nl+ %or Public Purposes................................
Legislature; Appropriation o% Public ,unds; )ebt *er!icing................................................
Legislature; Appropriation o% Public ,unds; must be b+ law................................................
Legislature; Commission /n Appointments...........................................................................
Legislature; Conduct o% ,oreign A%%airs.................................................................................
Legislature; Conduct o% ,oreign A%%airs; 'ole o% *enate.......................................................
Legislature; Conduct o% ,oreign A%%airs; .reaties..................................................................
Legislature; Congressmen; )iscipline; *uspension o% A -ember.........................................
Legislature; Congressmen; )iscipline; -odes o% 'emo!al...................................................
Legislature; Congressmen; Loans Extended to -embers o% Congress..................................
Legislature; Congressmen; Pro(ibitions and In(ibitions o% Public /%ice..............................
Legislature; Congressmen; Buali%ications; age.....................................................................
Legislature; Electoral .ribunal..............................................................................................
Legislature; Electoral .ribunal, *enate; Jurisdiction............................................................
Legislature; -ulti-Part+ *+stem.............................................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; Passage o% A Law.......................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; Process # Publication..............................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; /!erriding t(e Presidential eto...............
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing......................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; )elegation o% Legislati!e ,unctions.................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; In!estigations in Aid o% Legislation; 'ig(ts to *el%-
Incrimination o% $itness..........................................................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e.............................................................................................
Legislature; Powers; Legislati!e; Law -aCing; alidit+ o% Item eto...................................
Legislature; Powers; &on-Legislati!e; Emergenc+ Powers; 'e9uisites................................
Legislature; Powers; &on-Legislati!e....................................................................................
Executi!e )epartment.............................................................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power..................................................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Appointments 'e9uiring Con%irmation..................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Appointments 'e9uiring Con%irmation # ad interim
appointments...........................................................................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Acting s Permanent Appointment........................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Ad Interim Appointments.......................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Appointments.........................................................................
Executi!e; Appointing Power; Limitations /n Presidential Appointments............................
Executi!e; Exec Clemenc+; ; Pardon, Conditional................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; 3?; -artial Law # *uspension o% $rit o% 1abeas Corpus............
Executi!e; Exec Powers; 3?; -artial Law.............................................................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; 3?; *uspension o% $rit o% 1abeas Corpus.....................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power o% t(e President to Enter Into Loan Agreements................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power to Contract /r Guarantee ,oreign Loans..........................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power to Enter Into Executi!e Agreements...................................
Executi!e; Exec Powers; Power to Impose .ari%% 'ates, Import and Export Buotas, Etc.
................................................................................................................................................
Executi!e; Presidential Immunit+ ,rom *uit..........................................................................
Executi!e; Pro(ibition Against -ultiple Positions b+ Go!Dt /%%icials...................................
Executi!e; Pro(ibition Against -ultiple Positions # Additional Compensation; Cabinet
-embers.................................................................................................................................
Executi!e; Pro(ibitions and In(ibitions o% Public /%ice........................................................
Judicial )epartment...............................................................................................................
*ection 3..................................................................................................................................
,inalit+ o% oid Judgments.....................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power........................................................................................................................
Judicial Power # Political Buestion, related........................................................................
Judicial Power # Political Buestions....................................................................................
Judicial Power # Political Buestion )octrine......................................................................
Judicial Power to 'e!iew Executi!e Acts...............................................................................
Judicial Power; Contempt Powers ........................................................................................
Judicial Power; *cope "nder t(e Present Constitution.........................................................
Judicial 'e!iew; Proper Part+ ..............................................................................................
Judicial 'e!iew; Proper Part+...............................................................................................
Judicial 'e!iew; 'e9uisites....................................................................................................
Jurisdiction o% Courts; In@unction /rders..............................................................................
Jurisdiction o% 1L"'2...........................................................................................................
Justiciable Buestion................................................................................................................
Pro 1ac ice Cases................................................................................................................
*upreme Court As A Continuing Constitutional Con!ention..................................................
*ection <..................................................................................................................................
,iscal Autonom+.....................................................................................................................
Judicial Independence; *a%eguard..........................................................................................
*ection =..................................................................................................................................
Cases to be 1eard En 2anc....................................................................................................
*ection 5..................................................................................................................................
Judicial and 2ar Council........................................................................................................
Judicial and 2ar Council .......................................................................................................
*ection 33................................................................................................................................
-odes o% 'emo!al o% Lower Court Judges.............................................................................
.erm o% /%%ice o% Justices........................................................................................................
*ection 3>................................................................................................................................
-andator+ Period ,or )eciding Cases ................................................................................
Constitutional Commissions...................................................................................................
In General...............................................................................................................................
'otational *c(eme..................................................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice............................................................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; 'ecei!ing o% Indirect Compensation ...............................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; ,unction o% C*C...............................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; Career *er!ice; C(aracteristics.......................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; G/CCs; co!erage............................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; G/CCs $it(out /riginal C(arter s Goccs $it( /riginal C(arter; ............
Ci!il *er!ice; G/CCs, Jurisdiction o!er................................................................................
Ci!il *er!ice; -odes o% 'emo!al............................................................................................
C/-ELEC..............................................................................................................................
Comelec; E9ual *pace and .ime in -edia.............................................................................
Comelec; Grant o% Pardon in Election /%%enses....................................................................
Comelec; 'emo!al o% Commissioners....................................................................................
Commission on Audit..............................................................................................................
Commission /n Audit; Jurisdiction........................................................................................
Commission /n Audit; -one+ Claims....................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers ...........................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; /mbudsman; Jurisdiction................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; /mbudsman; Power to Impose Pre!enti!e *uspension
................................................................................................................................................
Accountabilit+ o% Public /%%icers; /mbudsman; Power to In!estigate..................................
&ational Econom+ and Patrimon+..........................................................................................
*ection :..................................................................................................................................
Article EII; Exploration and )e!elopment o% -inerals.........................................................
*ection <..................................................................................................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition and Lease o% Public Lands...............................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands............................................................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands ...........................................................................................
Article EII; Ac9uisition o% Lands b+ 1ereditar+ *uccession..................................................
Article EII; Lease o% Pri!ate Agricultural Lands...................................................................
Article EII; *ale o% Public Lands; Limitations.......................................................................
*ection 3A................................................................................................................................
Article EII; &ational Patrimon+; de%inition...........................................................................
/t(er Pro!isions.....................................................................................................................
Article EII; Citi;ens(ip 'e9uirement in -anagement o% Ad!ertising Industr+......................
Article EII; Engagement in 2usiness......................................................................................
Article EII; Exercise o% Pro%ession.........................................................................................
Article EII; Expropriation o% Public "tilities.........................................................................
Article EII; &ationali;ed Acti!ities.........................................................................................
Article EII; /wners(ip 'e9uirement o% -ass -edia.............................................................
*ocial Justice # 1uman 'ig(ts..............................................................................................
In General...............................................................................................................................
*ocial Justice "nder t(e Present Constitution.......................................................................
Agrarian..................................................................................................................................
Agrarian .................................................................................................................................
1uman 'ig(ts.........................................................................................................................
Labor.......................................................................................................................................
Labor; 'ig(t to *el%-/rgani;ation..........................................................................................
$omen.....................................................................................................................................
$omen.....................................................................................................................................
Education................................................................................................................................
Education; Academic ,reedom; Extent..................................................................................
Education; Alien Enrollees # )onors....................................................................................
Education; )uties o% *tate in 'e Education...........................................................................
Education; ,lag *alute...........................................................................................................
Education; 'ig(t to C(oose Pro%ession..................................................................................
Education; 'ig(t to Bualit+ Education..................................................................................
Education; .eac(ing o% 'eligion............................................................................................
Education; alidit+ o% Academic 'e9uirements......................................................................
General Pro!isions.................................................................................................................
General Pro!isions; Local )ialect.........................................................................................
Amendments and 'e!isions; -odes........................................................................................
.ransitor+ Pro!isions..............................................................................................................
Administrati!e Law.................................................................................................................
Admin Law; Ex(austion o% Administrati!e 'emedies !s )octrine o% Primar+ Jurisdiction
................................................................................................................................................
Admin Law; Ex(austion o% Administrati!e 'emedies; Exceptions.........................................
Admin Law; Judicial 'e!iew o% Administrati!e Action..........................................................
Admin Law; Judicial 'e!iew o% Administrati!e )ecisions.....................................................
Admin Law; -eaning o% FGo!ernment o% t(e P(ilippinesG...................................................
Admin Law; Power o% t(e President to 'eorgani;e Administrati!e *tructure........................
Admin Law; 'ules and 'egulations; )ue Process.................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers............................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Abandonment o% /%%ice.....................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )e ,acto /%%icer..............................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )e ,acto /%%icer; e%%ects..................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Clemenc+; )octrine o% Condonation.............................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Clemenc+; E%%ect o% Pardon Granted in ,a!or o%
Public /%%icers........................................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; )ismissal o% Emplo+ees in 2ad ,ait(; Pa+ment o%
2acCwages..............................................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; )iscipline; Pre!enti!e *uspension # Appeal; entitlement to
salar+ pendente.......................................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Gra%t and Corruption; Prescription o% Crime # 'ig(t to 'eco!er
Illegall+ Ac9uired $ealt(........................................................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Liabilit+ ,or )amages in Per%ormance o% /%%icial ,unctions ........
Law o% Public /%%icers; Local Electi!e /%%icials; Limitations /n Additional )uties............
Law o% Public /%%icers; &ext-in-'anC 'ule............................................................................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Power to Issue *ubpoena; !alidit+ o% delegation.............................
Law o% Public /%%icers; Pro(ibition /n Electi!e /%%icer to 1old Public /%%ice....................
Law o% Public /%%icers; 'etirement 2ene%its..........................................................................
Election Laws..........................................................................................................................
Election Laws; :nd Placer 'ule.............................................................................................
Election Laws; :nd Placer 'ule ............................................................................................
Election Laws; :nd Placer 'ule; in Buo $arranto Cases.....................................................
Election Laws; Appreciation o% 2allots..................................................................................
Election Laws; Comelec; Judicial 'e!iew o% )ecisions.........................................................
Election Laws; Comelec; Jurisdiction....................................................................................
Election Laws; )is9uali%ication; Grounds.............................................................................
Election Laws; E%%ect o% ,iling o% Certi%icate o% Candidac+; Appointi!e /%%icer s
Electi!e /%%icer.......................................................................................................................
Election Laws; E%%ect o% ,iling o% Certi%icate o% Candidac+; ,air Election Act....................
Election Laws; Election /%%enses; Conspirac+ to 2ribe oters.............................................
Election Laws; Election Protest.............................................................................................
Election Laws; Election Protest s Buo $arranto ...............................................................
Election Laws; Election Protest; Jurisdiction........................................................................
Election Laws; Expiration o% term bars ser!ice t(ereo%.........................................................
Election Laws; Petition to )eclare ,ailure o% Elections; 'e9uisites # E%%ects.....................
Election Laws; Pre-Proclamation Contest s Election Contests...........................................
Election Laws; Pre-Proclamation Contest; Proper Issues.....................................................
Election Laws; Process; Illiterate oters...............................................................................
Election Laws; Process; Principle o% Idem *onans................................................................
Election Laws; Process; *tra+ 2allot.....................................................................................
Local Go!ernment..................................................................................................................
Public Corp; Appointment o% 2udget /%%icer; control !s super!ision....................................
Public Corp; 2oundar+ )ispute *ettlement...........................................................................
Public Corp; Closure /r Lease o% Properties ,or Public "se ..............................................
Public Corp; Creation o% &ew Local Go!ernment "nits; Plebiscite 'e9uirement................
Public Corp; )e ,acto Public Corporations; E%%ect o% /%%icial Acts o% t(e -unicipal
Corporation and Its /%%icers..................................................................................................
Public Corp; )e!olution.........................................................................................................
Public Corp; Entitlement o% LG"s to E9uitable *(are in "tili;ation and )e!elopment o%
&ational $ealt(......................................................................................................................
Public Corp; ,ranc(ise; prior appro!al o% LG" necessar+..................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; E%%ect o% ice--a+or Acting As -a+or.....................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; Buali%ications...........................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ecall........................................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ule o% *uccession....................................................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ule o% *uccession # :nd Placer 'ule.....................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; 'ule o% *uccession in Local /%%ice...........................
Public Corp; Local Electi!e /%%icials; .(ree-.erm Limit......................................................
Public Corp; Local Executi!es; alidit+ o% Contracts Entered Into; 'e9uisites....................
Public Corp; /rdinances; alidit+; general wel%are clause...................................................
Public Corp; /rdinances; alidit+ o% Gambling Pro(ibition.................................................
Public Corp; /rdinances; eto Power...................................................................................
Public Corp; Police Power; LL)A.........................................................................................
Public Corp; Powers o% 2aranga+ Assembl+; .......................................................................
Public Corp; Powers /% Liga &g -ga 2aranga+..................................................................
Public Corp; 'e9uisites ,or Contracts In!ol!ing Public ,unds............................................
Public Corp; *anggunian; Power to Issue *ubpoena # Cite ,or Contempt.........................
Public Corp; *ources o% 'e!enue...........................................................................................
Public Corp; "se and Lease o% Properties ,or Public "se ..................................................
Public Corp; $it(drawal o% Public Propert+ ,rom Public "se.............................................
Public International Law........................................................................................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+; Ambassadors..............................................................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+; )iplomatic En!o+ and Consular /%%icers..................................
PIL; )iplomatic Immunit+; )iplomatic En!o+ and Consular /%%icers .................................
PIL; Exclusi!e Economic 0one...............................................................................................
PIL; Executi!e Agreements; 2inding E%%ect...........................................................................
PIL; Extradition; )octrine o% *pecialt+.................................................................................
PIL; Extradition; E%%ecti!it+ o% treat+.....................................................................................
PIL; Extradition; Grounds......................................................................................................
PIL; Extradition; s )eportation...........................................................................................
PIL; Genocide.........................................................................................................................
PIL; (alo-(alo........................................................................................................................
PIL; (alo-(alo........................................................................................................................
PIL; 1uman 'ig(ts.................................................................................................................
PIL; ICJ; Limitations /n Jurisdiction....................................................................................
PIL; ICJ; 'epresentation o% Parties; Language in Pleadings and /ral Argument................
PIL; -andates and .rust .erritories......................................................................................
PIL; -unicipal Law s International Law.............................................................................
PIL; &eutralit+ o% *tates.........................................................................................................
PIL; /uter *pace; Jurisdiction ..............................................................................................
PIL; 'eparations Agreement; alidit+....................................................................................
PIL; 'ig(t to Innocent Passage..............................................................................................
PIL; 'ig(t to .ransit and Innocent Passage...........................................................................
PIL; *ources o% International Law.........................................................................................
PIL; *o!ereign Immunit+ o% *tates.........................................................................................
PIL; *o!ereignt+ o% *tates.......................................................................................................
PIL; *tateless Persons............................................................................................................
PIL; e%%ecti!e occupation........................................................................................................
PIL; 'ecognition o% *tates......................................................................................................
PIL; *tate Liabilities ..............................................................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce...................................................................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; 'ig(ts and /bligation "nder t(e "& C(arter.......................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; *el%-)e%ense; Anticipator+ *el%-)e%ense.................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; *el%-)e%ense; $ar....................................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; .errorism; *el%-)e%ense...........................................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; "& C(arter; .(reat /r "se o% ,orce......................................................
PIL; "se o% ,orce; $ar; CombatantsHPrisoners o% $ar........................................................
C/%6"!","!/%$0 L$2
G#%#&$0 P&!%.!=0#6
E1=&/=&!$"!/%
2001 N/ III
The Republic of the Philippines, through the Department of Public
Works and Highways (DPWH, constructed a new highway linking !etro
!anila and "ue#on pro$ince, and which ma%or thoroughfare tra$ersed the
land owned by !ang Pandoy& The go$ernment neither filed any
e'propriation proceedings nor paid any compensation to !ang Pandoy for
the land thus taken and used as a public road&
!ang Pandoy filed a suit against the go$ernment to compel payment
for the $alue of his land& The DPWH filed a motion to dismiss the case
on the ground that the (tate is immune from suit& !ang Pandoy filed an
opposition&
Resol$e the motion& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The motion to dismiss should be denied& .s held in .migable $&
1uenca, 23 (1R. 344 (5678, when the ,o$ernment e'propriates pri$ate
property without paying compensation, it is deemed to ha$e wai$ed its
immunity from suit& 9therwise, the constitutional guarantee that pri$ate
property shall not be taken for public use without payment of %ust
compensation will be rendered nugatory&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%
1989 N/, :0
. law pro$ides that in the e$ent of e'propriation, the amount to
be paid to a landowner as compensation shall be either the sworn
$aluation made by the owner or the official assessment thereof,
whiche$er is lower& 1an the landowner successfully challenge the law in
court; Discuss briefly your answer&
.nswer0
<es, the landowner can successfully challenge the law in court&
.ccording to the decision in -'port Processing =one .uthority $s& Dulay,
526 (1R. 34), such a law is unconstitutional& >irst of all, it $iolates
due process, because it denies to the landowner the opportunity to pro$e
that the $aluation in the ta' declaration is wrong& (econdly, the
determination of %ust compensation in e'propriation cases is a %udicial
function& (ince under (ection 6, .rticle III of the 56?7 1onstitution
pri$ate property shall not be taken for public use without %ust
compensation, no law can mandate that its determination as to the %ust
compensation shall pre$ail o$er the findings of the court&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%
1988 N/& ?0
!r& Roland Ri$era is the owner of four lots sought to be
e'propriated by the -'port Processing =one .uthority for the e'pansion
of the e'port processing #one at @aguio 1ity& The same parcels of land
had been $alued by the .ssessor at P584&44 per sAuare meter, while !r&
Ri$era had pre$iously fi'ed the market $alue of the same at P544 per
sAuare meter& The Regional Trial 1ourt decided for e'propriation and
ordered the payment to !r& Ri$era at the rate of P544 a sAuare meter
pursuant to Pesidential Decree /o& 5)33, pro$iding that in determining
%ust compensation for pri$ate property acAuired through eminent domain
proceedings, the compensation to be paid shall not e'ceed the $alue
declared by the owner or determined by the .ssessor, pursuant to the
Real Property Ta' 1ode, whiche$er $alue is lower, prior to the
recommendation or decision of the appropriate go$ernment office to
acAuire the property&
!r& Ri$era appealed, insisting that %ust compensation for his
property should be determined by 1ommissioners who could e$aluate all
e$idence on the real $alue of the property, at the time of its taking by
the go$ernment& He maintains that the lower court erred in relying on
Presidential Decree /o, 5)33, which he claims is unconstitutional&
How would you decide the appeal; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
The decision of the lower court should be re$ersed& In -P=. $,
Dulay, 526 (1R. 34) (56?7 the (upreme 1ourt declared PD /o& 5)33 to be
an unconstitutional encroachment on the prerogati$es of the %udiciary&
It was e'plained that although a court would technically ha$e the power
to determine the %ust compensation for property under the Decree, the
courtBs task would be relegated to simply stating the lower $alue of the
property as declared either by the owner or by the assessor& Cust
compensation means the $alue of the property at the time of the taking&
It means a fair and full eAui$alent for the loss sustained& To determine
it reAuires consideration of the condition of the property and its
surrounding, its impro$ements and capabilities&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%
199? N/, )0
In e'propriation proceedings0
5 What legal interest should be used in the computation of
interest on %ust compensation;
.nswer0
5 .s held in /ational Power 1orporation $s& .ngas& 84? (1R. )28,
in accordance with .rticle 8846 of the 1i$il 1ode, the legal interest
should be si' per cent (:* a year& 1entral @ank 1ircular /o& 25:, which
increased the legal interest to twel$e percent (58* a year is not
applicable to the e'propriation of property and is limited to loans,
since its issuance is based on Presidential Decree /o, 55:, which
amended the +sury Daw&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%; P,(0!. @6 P&!5$"# P,&=/6#
1990 N/& 80
The 1ity of 1ebu passed an ordinance proclaiming the e'propriation
of a ten (54 hectare property of 1 1ompany, which property is already a
de$eloped commercial center& The 1ity proposed to operate the commercial
center in order to finance a housing pro%ect for city employees in the
$acant portion of the said property& The ordinance fi'ed the price of
the land and the $alue of the impro$ements to be paid 1 1ompany on the
basis of the pre$ailing land $alue and cost of construction&
(5 .s counsel for 1 1ompany, gi$e two constitutional ob%ections
to the $alidity of the ordinance&
(8 .s the %udge, rule on the said ob%ections&
.nswer0
(5 .s counsel for 1 1ompany, I will argue that the taking of the
property is not for a public use and that the ordinance cannot fi' the
compensation to be paid 1 1ompany, because this is a %udicial Auestion
that is for the courts to decide&
(8 .s %udge, I will sustain the contention that the taking of
the property of 1 1ompany to operate the commercial center established
within it to finance a housing pro%ect for city employees is not for a
public use but for a pri$ate purpose& .s the 1ourt indicated in a dictum
in !anotok& $& /ational Housing .uthority, 5)4 (1R. ?6, that the
e'propriation of a commercial center so that the profits deri$ed from
its operation can be used for housing pro%ects is a taking for a pri$ate
purpose&
I will also sustain the contention that the ordinance, e$en though
it fi'es the compensation for the land on the basis of the pre$ailing
land $alue cannot really displace %udicial determination of the price
for the simple reason that many factors, some of them super$ening,
cannot possibly be considered by the legislature at the time of enacting
the ordinance& There is greater reason for nullifying the use of the
cost of construction in the ordinance as basis for compensation for the
impro$ements& The fair market $alue of the impro$ements may not be eAual
to the cost of construction& The original cost of construction may be
lower than the fair market $alue, since the cost of construction at the
time of e'propriation may ha$e increased&
.lternati$e .nswer0
The taking of the commercial center is %ustified by the concept of
indirect public benefit since its operation is intended for the
de$elopment of the $acant portion for sociali#ed housing, which is
clearly a public purpose&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> P,(0!. U6#
199: N/& 2
8 The 1ity of Pasig initiated e'propriation proceedings on a
oneEhectare lot which is part of a tenEhectare parcel of land de$oted to
the growing of $egetables& The purpose of the e'propriation is to use
the land as a relocation site for 844 families sAuatting along the Pasig
ri$er&
a 1an the owner of the property oppose the e'propriation on
the ground that only 844 out of the more than 54,444 sAuatter families
in Pasig 1ity will benefit from the e'propriation; -'plain&
b 1an the Department of .grarian Reform reAuire the 1ity of
Pasig to first secure authority from said Department& before con$erting
the use of the land from agricultural to housing; -'plain&
.nswer0
8& a /o, the owner of the property cannot oppose the
e'propriation on the ground that only 844 out of more than 54,444
sAuatter families in Pasig 1ity will benefit from the e'propriation& .s
held in Philippine 1olumbian .ssociation $s& Pants, 88? (1R. ::?& the
acAuisition of pri$ate property for sociali#ed housing is for public use
and the fact that only a few and not e$eryone will benefit from the
e'propriation does not detract from the nature of the public use&
b /o, the Department of .grarian Reform cannot reAuire Pasig
1ity to first secure authority from it before con$erting the use of the
land from agricultural to residential& .ccording to Pro$ince of
1amarines (ur $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 888 (1R. 573, there is no pro$ision
in the 1omprehensi$e .grarian Reform Daw which sub%ects the
e'propriation of agricultural lands by local go$ernment units to the
control of the Department of .grarian Reform and to reAuire appro$al
from the Department of .grarian Reform will mean that it is not the
local go$ernment unit but the Department of .grarian Reform who will
determine whether or not the e'propriation is for a public use&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> P,(0!. U6#
2000 N/ FIII&
!adlangbayan is the owner of a )44 sAuare meter lot which was the
birthplace of the founder of a religious sect who admittedly played an
important role in Philippine history and culture& The /ational
Historical 1ommission (/H1 passed a resolution declaring it a national
landmark and on its recommendation the lot was sub%ected to
e'propriation proceedings& This was opposed by !adlangbayan on the
following grounds0 a that the lot is not a $ast tractG b that those to
be benefited by the e'propriation would only be the members of the
religious sect of its founder, and c that the /H1 has not Initiated the
e'propriation of birthplaces of other more deser$ing historical
personalities& Resol$e the opposition raised by !adlangbayan& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
The arguments of !adlangbayan are not meritorious& .ccording to
!anosca $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8)8 (1R. 258 (566:, the power of eminent
domain is not confined to e'propriation of $ast tracts of the land& The
e'propriation of the lot to preser$e it as the birthplace of the founder
of the religious sect because of his role in Philippine history and
culture is for a public purpose, because public use is no longer
restricted to the traditional concept& The fact that the e'propriation
will benefit the members of the religious sect is merely incidental& The
fact that other birthplaces ha$e not been e'propriated is likewise not a
$alid basis for opposing the e'propriation& .s held in C&!& Tuason and
1ompany, Inc& $& Dand Tenure .dministration, 35 (1R. 253 (5674, the
e'propriating authority is not reAuired to adhere to the policy of Hall
or noneH&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> P,(0!. U6# A +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%
1987 N/& IFI0
In Canuary 56?2, Pasay 1ity filed e'propriation proceedings
against se$eral landowners for the construction of an aAueduct for flood
control in a barangay& 1learly, only the residents of that barangay
would be benefited by the pro%ect&
.s compensation, the city offered to pay only the amount declared
by the owners in their ta' declarations, which amount was lower than the
assessed $alue as determined by the assessor&
The landowners oppose the e'propriation on the grounds that0
(a the same is not for public useG and
(b assuming it is for public use, the compensation must be based
on the e$idence presented in court and not, as pro$ided in presidential
decrees prescribing payment of the $alue stated in the ownerBs ta'
declarations or the $alue determined by the assessor, whiche$er is
lower&
If you were %udge, how would you rule on the issue; Why;
.nswer0
(a The contention that the taking of pri$ate property for the
purpose of constructing an aAueduct for flood control is not for public
useH is untenableE The idea that Hpublic useH means e'clusi$ely use by
the public has been discarded& .s long as the purpose of the taking is
public, the e'ercise of power of eminent domain is %ustifiable& Whate$er
may be beneficially employed for the general welfare satisfies the
reAuirement of public use& (Heirs of Cuancho .rdona $& Reyes, 583 (1R .
884 (56?3
(b @ut the contention that the Presidential Decrees pro$iding
that in determining %ust compensation the $alue stated by the owner in
his ta' declaration or that determined by the assessor, whiche$er is
lower, in unconstitutional is correct& In -P=. $& Dulay& ,&R& /o& )6:43,
.pril 86, 56?7, it was held that this method prescribed for ascertaining
%ust compensation constitutes an impermissible encroachment on the
prerogati$es of courts& It tends to render courts inutile in a matter
which, under the 1onstitution, is reser$ed to them for final
determination& >or although under the decrees the courts still ha$e the
power to determine %ust compensation, their task is reduced to simply
determining the lower $alue of the property as declared either by the
owner or by the assessor& HCust compensationH means the $alue of the
property at the time of the taking& Its determination reAuires that all
facts as to the condition of the property and its surroundings and its
impro$ements and capabilities must be considered, and this can only be
done in a %udicial proceeding&
E1=&/=&!$"!/%> W&!" /7 P/66#66!/%
199? N/, )0
In e'propriation proceedings0
8 1an the %udge $alidly withhold issuance of the writ of
possession until full payment of the final $alue of the e'propriated
property;
.nswer0
8 /o, the %udge cannot $alidly withhold the issuance of the writ
of possession until full payment of the final $alue of the e'propriated
property& .s held in /ational Power 1orporation $s& Cocson, 84: (1R.
)84& it is the rninisterial duty of the Cudge to issue the writ of
possession upon deposit of the pro$isional $alue of the e'propriated
property with the /ational or Pro$incial Treasurer&
P#/=0# P/2#&
1987 N/& IFIII0
The framers of the 56?7 1onstitution and the people who ratified
it made sure that pro$isions institutionali#ing people power were
incorporated in the fundamental law, @riefly discuss at least two such
pro$isions&
.nswer0
.rt& FI, (ec& 5, while $esting in 1ongress the legislati$e power,
nonetheless states that such conferment of power shall be sub%ect to the
reser$ation made in fa$or of the people by pro$isions on initiati$es and
referendum& >or this purpose, 1ongress is reAuired, as early as
possible, to pro$ide for a system of initiati$e of referendum whereby
the people can directly propose and enact laws or appro$e or re%ect an
act or law or part thereof passed by the 1ongress or the legislati$e
bodies after the registration of a petition therefor, signed by at least
54* of the total number of registered $oters, of which e$ery legislati$e
district must be represented by at least 3* of the registered $oters&
(Id&, sec& 38 The 1onstitution also pro$ides that through initiati$e,
upon a petition of at least 58* of the total numbers of registered
$oters, of which e$ery legislati$e district must be represented by at
least 3* of the registered $oters therein, amendments to the
1onstitution may be directly proposed by the people&
.rt, IIII, sec& 5) states that the state shall respect the role
of independent peopleBs organi#ation to enable them to pursue and
protect, within the democratic framework, their legitimate and
collecti$e interests and aspirations through peaceful lawful means& >or
this purpose, the 1onstitution guarantees to such organi#ations the
right to participate at all le$els of social, political and economic
decisionEmaking and the state is reAuired to $alidate the establishment
of adeAuate mechanism for this purpose& (Id&, sec, 5:
P#/=0# P/2#&
2000 N/ II&
a Is the concept of People Power recogni#ed in the
1onstitution; Discuss briefly& (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a BIhe concept of People Power is recogni#ed in the
1onstitution&
+nder (ection 38& .rticle FI of the 1onstitution, through
initiati$e and referendum, the people can directly propose and enact
laws or appro$e or re%ect any act or law or part thereof passed by the
1ongress or local legislati$e body after the registration of a petition
therefor signed by at least ten per centum of the total number of
registered $oters, of which e$ery legislati$e district must be
represented by at least three per centum of the registered $oters
thereof&
+nder (ection 5:, .rticle IIII of the 1onstitution, the right of
the people and their organi#ations to effecti$e and reasonable
participation at all le$els of social, political and economic decisionE
making shall not be abridged& The (tate shall, by law& facilitate the
establishment of adeAuate consultation mechanisms&
+nder (ection 8& .rticle IFII of the 1onstitution, the people may
directly propose amendments to the 1onstitution through initiati$e upon
a petition of at least twel$e per centum of the total number of
registered $oters, of which e$ery legislati$e district must be
represented by at least three per centum of the registered $oters
therein&
P#/=0# P/2#&
200? N/ I
(b Is Hpeople powerH recogni#ed by the 56?7 1onstitution;
-'plain fully&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(b HPeople powerH is recogni#ed in the 1onstitution& .rticle III,
(ection 2 of the 56?7 1onstitution guarantees the right of the people
peaceable to assemble and petition the go$ernment for redress of
grie$ances& .rticle FI, (ection 38 of the 56?7 1onstitution reAuires
1ongress to pass a law allowing the people to directly propose and enact
laws through initiati$e and to appro$e or re%ect any act or law or part
of it passed by 1ongress or a local legislati$e body& .rticle IIII,
(ection 5: of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides that the right of the
people and their organi#ations to participate at all le$els of social,
political, and economic decisionEmaking shall not be abridged and that
the (tate shall, by law, facilitate the establishment of adeAuate
consultation mechanisms& .rticle IFII, (ection 8 of the 56?7
1onstitution pro$ides that sub%ect to the enactment of an implementing
law, the people may directly propose amendments to the 1onstitution
through initiati$e&
P/0!.# P/2#&
1992 N/& 50
1ongress passes a law prohibiting tele$ision stations from airing
any commercial ad$ertisement which promotes tobacco or in any way
glamori#es the consumption of tobacco products&
This legislation was passed in response to findings by the
Department of Health about the alarming rise in lung diseases in the
country& The World Health 9rgani#ation has also reported that +&(&
tobacco companies ha$eEshifted marketing efforts to the Third World due
to dwindling sales in the healthEconscious .merican market,
1owboy De$yBs, a Ceans company, recently released an ad$ertisement
featuring model Richard @urgos wearing De$yBs %ackets and %eans and
holding a pack of !arlboro cigarettes&
The .sian @roadcasting /etwork (.@/, a pri$ately owned tele$ision
station, refuses to air the ad$ertisement in compliance with the law&
c Decide the constitutionality of the law in Auestion&
.nswerG
c The law is constitutional& It is a $alid e'ercise of police
power, because smoking is harmful to health& In Posadas de Puerto Rico
.ssociates $s& Tourism 1ompany of Puerto Rico, 27? +&(& 38?, it was
ruled that a law prohibiting certain types of ad$ertisements is $alid if
it was adopted in the interest of the health, safety, and welfare of
the people& In 1apital @roadcasting 1ompany us& !itchell 333 > (upp
)?8, a law making it unlawful to ad$ertise cigarettes on any medium of
electronic communication was upheld& The +nited (tates (upreme
1ourt summarily sustained this ruling in 1apitaJ @roadcasting 1ompany
us, .cting .ttorney ,eneral 24) +&(& 5444& The law in Auestion was
enacted on the basis of the legislati$e finding that there is a need to
protect public health, because smoking causes lung diseases& 1owboy
De$yBs has not o$erthrown this finding&
P/0!.# P/2#& @6 N/%-I4=$!&4#%" /7 C/%"&$."6
1989 N/& 580
Pedro bought a parcel of land from (mart 1orporation, a realty
firm engaged in de$eloping and selling lots to the public& 9ne of the
restrictions in the deed of sale which was annotated in the title is
that the lot shall be used by the buyer e'clusi$ely for residential
purposes& . main highway ha$ing been constructed across the subdi$ision,
the area became commercial in nature& The municipality later passed a
#oning ordinance declaring the area as a commercial bank building on his
lot& (mart 1orporation went to court to stop the construction as
$iolati$e of the building restrictions imposed by it& The corporation
contends that the #oning ordinance cannot nullify the contractual
obligation assumed by the buyer& Decide the case&
.nswer0
The case must be dismissed& .s held in 9rtigas and 1ompany,
Dimited Partnership $s& >eati @ank and Trust 1ompany, 62 (1R. )33, such
a restriction in the contract cannot pre$ail o$er the #oning ordinance,
because the enactment of the ordinance is a $alid e'ercise of police
power& It is ha#ardous to health and comfort to use the lot for
residential purposes, since a highway crosses the subdi$ision and the
area has become commercial&
P/0!.# P/2#& @6 N/%-I4=$!&4#%" /7 C/%"&$."6
2001 N/ IFIII
In the deeds of sale to, and in the land titles of homeowners of a
residential subdi$ision in Pasig 1ity, there are restrictions annotated
therein to the effect that only residential houses or structures may be
built or constructed on the lots& Howe$er, the 1ity 1ouncil of Pasig
enacted an ordinance amending the e'isting #oning ordinance by changing
the #one classification in that place from purely residential to
commercial&
H.H, a lot owner, sold his lot to a banking firm and the latter
started constructing a commercial building on the lot to house a bank
inside the subdi$ision& The subdi$ision owner and the homeownersB
association filed a case in court to stop the construction of the
building for banking business purposes and to respect the restrictions
embodied in the deed of sale by the subdi$ision de$eloper to the lot
owners, as well as the annotation in the titles&
If you were the Cudge, how would you resol$e the case; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
If I were the %udge, I would dismiss the case& .s held in 9rtigas
and 1ompany Dimited Partnership $s& >eati @ank and Trust 1ompany& 62
(1R. :33 (5676, the #oning ordinance is a $alid e'ercise of police
power and pre$ails o$er the contractual stipulation restricting the use
of the lot to residential purposes&
P/0!.# P/2#&> R!'9" "/ D,# P&/.#66 $% C/4=#%6$"!/%
2004 IX-@& The 1ity of (an Rafael passed an ordinance authori#ing
the 1ity !ayor, assisted by the police, to remo$e all ad$ertising signs
displayed or e'posed to public $iew in the main city street, for being
offensi$e to sight or otherwise a nuisance& .!, whose ad$ertising
agency owns and rents out many of the billboards ordered remo$ed by the
1ity !ayor, claims that the 1ity should pay for the destroyed billboards
at their current market $alue since the 1ity has appropriated them for
the public purpose of city beautification& The !ayor refuses to pay, so
.! is suing the 1ity and the !ayor for damages arising form the taking
his property without due process nor %ust compensation&
Will .!Ks suit prosper; Reason briefly& ()*
S#=$&$"!/% /7 P/2#&6
1988 N/& 8)0
1an any other department or agency of the ,o$ernment re$iew a
decision of the (upreme 1ourt; Why or why not;
.nswer0
/o& The (upreme 1ourt is the highest arbiter of legal Auestions&
(Ca$ier $& 1omelec, 522 (1R. 562 (56?: To allow re$iew of its decision
by the other departments of go$ernment would upset the classic pattern
of separation of powers and destroy the balance between the %udiciary
and the other departments of go$ernment& .s the Custices said in their
answer to the complaint for impeachment in the 1ommittee on Custice of
the House of Representati$es, HCust as it is completely unacceptable to
file charges against the indi$idual members of 1ongress for the laws
enacted by them upon the argument that these laws are $iolati$e of the
1onstitution, or are a betrayal of public trust, or are un%ust& so too,
should it be eAually impermissible to make the indi$idual members of the
(upreme 1ourt accountable for the courtBs decisions or rulings,H
S#=$&$"!/% /7 P/2#&6
200? N/ II
. group of losing litigants in a case decided by the (upreme 1ourt
filed a complaint before the 9mbudsman charging the Custices with
knowingly and deliberately rendering an un%ust decision in utter
$iolation of the penal laws of the land& 1an the 9mbudsman $alidly take
cogni#ance of the case; -'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
/o, the 9mbudsman cannot entertain the complaint& .s stated in the
case of In re0 Daureta& 52? (1R. 3?8 L56?7M, pursuant to the principle
of separation of powers, the correctness of the decisions of the (upreme
1ourt as final arbiter of all %usticiable disputes is conclusi$e upon
all other departments of the go$ernmentG the 9mbudsman has no power to
re$iew the decisions of the (upreme 1ourt by entertaining a complaint
against the Custices of the (upreme 1ourt for knowingly rendering an
un%ust decision&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
.rticle II, (ection 5 of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides that
public officers must at all times be accountable to the people& (ection
88 of the 9mbudsman .ct pro$ides that the 9ffice of the 9mbudsman has
the power to in$estigate any serious misconduct allegedly committed by
officials remo$able by impeachment for the purpose of filing a $erified
complaint for impeachment if warranted& The 9mbudsman can entertain the
complaint for this purpose&
S"$"# I44,%!") A L!$(!0!") 8&/4 S,!"
1989 N/& 530
. property owner filed an action directly in court against the
Republic of the Philippines seeking payment for a parcel of land which
the national go$ernment utili#ed for a road widening prefect&
(5 1an the go$ernment in$oke the doctrine of nonEsuitability of
the state;
(8 In connection with the preceding Auestion, can the property
owner garnish public funds to satisfy his claim for payment;
-'plain your answers&
.nswer0
(5 /o, the go$ernment cannot in$oke the doctrine of state of
immunity from suit& .s held in !inisterio $s& 1ourt of >irst Instance of
1ebu, 24 (1R. 2:2, when the go$ernment e'propriates property for public
use without paying %ust compensation, it cannot in$oke its immunity from
the suit& 9therwise, the right guaranteed in (ection 6, .rticle III of
the 56?7 1onstitution that pri$ate property shall not be taken for
public use without %ust compensation will be rendered nugatory&
(8 /o, the owner cannot garnish public funds to satisfy his
claim for payment, (ection 7 of .ct /o& 34?3 prohibits e'ecution upon
any %udgment against the go$ernment& .s held in Republic $s& Palacio, 83
(1R. ?66, e$en if the go$ernment may be sued, it does not follow that
its properties may be sei#ed under e'ecution&
.lternati$e .nswer0
(8 /o, funds of the go$ernment on deposit in the bank cannot be
garnished for two reasons0 (i +nder .rt& II, (ec& 86(5 public funds
cannot be spent e'cept in pursuance of an appropriation made by law, and
(ii essential public ser$ices will be impaired if funds of the
go$ernment wrere sub%ect to e'ecution, (1ommissioner of Public Highways
$s& (an Diego, 35 (1R. :5: (5674& The remedy of the pre$ailing party
is to ha$e the %udgment credit in his fa$or included in the general
appropriations law for the ne't year&
S"$"# I44,%!") A L!$(!0!") 8&/4 S,!"
1994 N/& :G
Cohnny was employed as a dri$er by the !unicipality of 1alumpit,
@ulacan& While dri$ing recklessly a municipal dump truck with its load
of sand for the repair of municipal streets, Cohnny hit a %eepney& Two
passengers of the %eepney were killed&
The (angguniang @ayan passed an ordinance appropriating P344,444
as compensation for the heirs of the $ictims&
5 Is the municipality liable for the negligence of Cohnny;
8 Is the municipal ordinance $alid;
.nswer0
5 <es, the !unicipality of 1alumpit is liable for the negligence
of its dri$er Cohnny& +nder (ection 82 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode,
local go$ernment units are not e'empt from liability for death or in%ury
to persons or damage to property&
.lternati$e .nswer0
/o, the municipality is not liable for the negligence of Cohnny,
The pre$ailing rule in the law of municipal corporations is that a
municipality is not liable for the torts committed by its regular
employees in the discharge of go$ernmental functions& The municipality
is answerable only when it is acting in a proprietary capacity&
In the case at bar, Cohnny was a regular employee of the
!unicipality of 1alumpit as dri$er of its dump truckG he committed a
tortious act while discharging a go$ernmental function for the
municipality, ie&, dri$ing recklessly the said truck loaded with sand
for the repair of municipal streets& +ndoubtedly then, Cohnny as dri$er
of the dump truck was performing a duty or task pertaining to his
office& The construction or maintenance of public streets are admittedly
go$ernmental acti$ities& .t the time of the accident, Cohnny was engaged
in the discharge of go$ernmental functions&
Hence, the death of the two passengers of the %eepney Etragic and
deplorable though it may be E imposed on the municipality no duty to pay
monetary compensation, as held in !unicipality of (an& >ernando $&
>irme, 56) (1R. :68&
8 The ordinance appropriating P344,444&44 for the heirs of the
$ictims of Cohnny is $oid& This amounts to appropriating public funds
for a pri$ate purpose& +nder (ection 33) of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode,
no public money shall be appropriated for pri$ate purposes&
.lternati$e .nswerG
+pon the foregoing considerations, the municipal ordinance is
null and $oid for being ultra $ires& The municipality not being liable
to pay compensation to the heirs of the $ictims, the ordinance is
utterly de$oid of legal basis& It would in fact constitute an illegal
use or e'penditure of public funds which is a criminal offense& What is
more, the ordinance does not meet one of the reAuisites for $alidity of
municipal ordinances, ie&, that it must be in consonance with certain
wellEestablished and basic principles of a substanti$e nature, to wit0
it does not contra$ene the 1onstitution or the law, it is not unfair or
oppressi$e& It is not partial or discriminatory& It is consistent with
public policy, and it is not unreasonable&
S"$"# I44,%!") A L!$(!0!") 7&/4 S,!"> C/00#."!/% /7 +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%
7&/4 M,%!.!=$0!"!#6
1994 N/& 520
The !unicipality of .ntipolo, Ri#al, e'propriated the property of
Cuan Reyes for use as a public market& The !unicipal 1ouncil
appropriated Pl,444,444&44 for the purchase of the lot but the Regional
Trial 1ourt, on the basis of the e$idence, fi'ed the $alue at
P8,444,444&44&
5 What legal action can Cuan Reyes take to collect the balance;
8 1an Cuan Reyes ask the Regional Trial 1ourt to garnish the
!unicipalityBs account with the Dand @ank;
.nswerG
5 To collect the balance of Cudgment, as stated in Tan Toco $s&
!unicipal 1ounsel of Iloilo, 26 Phil& )8, Cuan Reyes may le$y on
patrimonial properties of the !unicipality of .ntipolo& If it has no
patrimonial properties, in accordance with the !unicipality of !akati
$s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 564 (1R. 84:, the remedy of Cuan Reyes is to file
a petition for mandamus to compel the !unicipality of .ntipolo to
appropriate the necessary funds to satisfy the %udgment,
8 Pursuant to the ruling in Pasay 1ity ,o$ernment $s& 1ourt of
>irst Instance of !anila, 538 (1R. 5):, since the !unicipality of
.ntipolo has appropriated P5,444,444 to pay for the lot, its bank
account may be garnished but up to this amount only&
S"$"# I44,%!") A L!$(!0!") 7&/4 S,!"> C/00#."!/% /7 +,6" C/4=#%6$"!/%
7&/4 C!"!#6
1998 N/ FI&
The 1ity of 1ebu e'propriated the property of 1arlos Topico for
use as a municipal parking lot& The (angguniang Panlungsod appropriated
P54 million for this purpose but the Regional Trial 1ourt fi'ed the
compensation for the taking of the land at P5) million&
5& What legal remedy, if any, does 1arlos Topftco ha$e to
reco$er the balance of P) million for the taking of his land; L3*M
8, If the 1ity of 1ebu has money in bank, can it be garnished;
L8*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& The remedy of 1arlos Toplco is to le$y on the patrimonial
properties of the 1ity of 1ebu& In !unicipality of Paoay $s !anaois, ?:
Phil :86& :38, the (upreme 1ourt held0
HProperty, howe$er, which is patrimonial and which is held by a
municipality in its proprietary capacity as treated by the great weight
of authority as the pri$ate asset of the town and may be le$ied upon and
sold under an ordinary e'ecution&H
If the 1ity of 1ebu does not ha$e patrimonial properties, the
remedy of 1arlos Topico is to file a petition for mandamus to compel it
to appropriate money to satisfy the Cudgment& In !unicipality !akati $s&
1ourt of .ppeals, 564 (1R. 84:, 853& the (upreme 1ourt said0
HWhere a municipality falls or refuses, without %ustifiable
reason, to effect payment of a final money %udgment rendered against it,
the claimant may a$ail of the remedy of mandamus in order to compel the
enactment and appro$al of the necessary appropriation ordinance, and the
corresponding disbursement of municipal funds therefor&H
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
5& He can file the money claim with the 1ommission on .udit&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
8& /o, the money of the 1ity of 1ebu in the bank cannot be
garnished if it came from public funds& .s held
in !unicipality of !akati $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 564 (1R. 84:, 858,
public funds are e'empted from garnishment&
S"$"# I44,%!") A L!$(!0!") 8&/4 S,!"> S/5#&#!'%6
1991 N/& 53G
In >ebruary 5664, the !inistry of the .rmy& Republic of Indonesia,
in$ited bids for the supply of )44,444 pairs of combat boots for the use
of the Indonesian .rmy& The !arikina (hoe 1orporation, a Philippine
corporation, which has no branch office and no assets in Indonesia,
submitted a bid to supply )44,444 pairs of combat boots at +&(& N34 per
pair deli$ered in Cakarta on or before 34 9ctober 5664& The contract was
awarded by the !inistry of the .rmy to !arikina (hoe 1orporation and was
signed by the parties in Cakarta& !arikina (hoe 1orporation was able to
deli$er only 844,444 pairs of combat boots in Cakarta by 34 9ctober 5664
and it recei$ed payment for 544,444 pairs or a total of +&(&
N3,444,444&44& The !inistry of the .rmy promised to pay for the other
544,444 pairs already deli$ered as soon as the remaining 344,444 pairs
of combat boots are deli$ered, at which time the said 344,444 pairs will
also be paid for&
!arikina (hoe 1orporation failed to deli$er any more combat boots,
9n 5 Cune 5665, the Republic of Indonesia filed an action before
the Regional Trial 1ourt of Pasig& Ri#al, to compel !arikina (hoe
1orporation to perform the balance of its obligations under the contract
and lor damages& In its .nswer, !arikina (hoe 1orporation sets up a
counterclaim for +&(& N3,444,444&44 representing the payment for the
544,444 pairs of combat boots already deli$ered but unpaid& Indonesia
mo$ed to dismiss the counterclaim, asserting that it is entitled to
so$ereign Immunity from suit& The trial court denied the motion to
dismiss and issued two writs of garnishment upon Indonesian ,o$ernment
funds deposited in the Philippine /ational @ank and >ar -ast @ank&
Indonesia went to the 1ourt of .ppeals on a petition for certiorari
under Rule :) of the Rules of 1ourt&
How would the 1ourt of .ppeals decide the case;
.nswer0
The 1ourt of .ppeals should dismiss the petition insofar as it
seeks to annul the order denying the motion of the ,o$ernment of
Indonesia to dismiss the counterclaim& The counterclaim in this case is
a compulsory counterclaim since it arises from the same contract
in$ol$ed in the complaint& .s such it must be set up otherwise it will
be barred& .bo$e all, as held in >roilan us& Pan 9riental (hipping 1o&,
6) Phil& 64), by filing a complaint, the state of Indonesia wai$ed its
immunity from suit& It is not right that it can sue in the courts but it
cannot be sued& The defendant therefore acAuires the right to set up a
compulsory counterclaim against it&
Howe$er, the 1ourt of .ppeals should grant the petition of the
Indonesian go$ernment insofar as it sought to annul the garnishment of
the funds of Indonesia which were deposited in the Philippine /ational
@ank and >ar -ast @ank& 1onsent to the e'ercise of %urisdiction of a
foreign court does not include wai$er of the separate immunity from
e'ecution& (@rownlie, Principles of Public International Daw, 2th ed&,
p& 322& Thus, in De'ter $s& 1arpenter $s& Ounglig Carn$agsstyrelsen, 23
>8d 74), it was held the consent to be sued does not gi$e consent to the
attachment of the property of a so$ereign go$ernment&
S"$"# I44,%!") A L!$(!0!") 8&/4 S,!"> S/5#&#!'%6
199: N/& :G
8 The Republic of the @alau (formerly Palau Islands opened
and operated in !anila an office engaged in trading @alau products with
Philippine products& In one transaction, the local buyer complained
that the @alau goods deli$ered to him were substandard and he sued the
Republic of @alau, before the Regional Trial 1ourt of Pasig, for
damages&
a How can the Republic of @alau in$oke its so$ereign
immunity; -'plain&
b Will such defense of so$ereign immunity prosper; -'plain&
.nswer0
8& a The Republic of @alau can in$oke its so$ereign Immunity by
filing a motion to dismiss in accordance with (ection l(a, Rule 5: of
the Rules of 1ourt on the ground that the court has no %urisdiction o$er
its person&
.ccording to the Holy (ee $s& Rosario, 83? (1R. )82, in Public
International Daw, when a (tate wishes to plead so$ereign immunity in a
foreign court, it reAuests the >oreign 9ffice of the (tate where it is
being sued to con$ey to the court that it is entitled to immunity& In
the Philippines, the practice is for the foreign go$ernment to first
secure an e'ecuti$e endorsement of its claim of so$ereign immunity& In
some cases, the defense of so$ereign immunity is submitted directly to
the local court by the foreign go$ernment through counsel by filing a
motion to dismiss on the ground that the court has no Curisdiction o$er
its person&
b /o, the defense of so$ereign Immunity will not prosper& The
sale of @alau products is a contract in$ol$ing a commercial acti$ity& In
+nited (tates $s& Rui#, 53:(1R.2?7 and +nited (tates $s& ,uinto, 5?8
(1R. :22, it was stated that a foreign (tate cannot in$oke Immunity from
suit if it enters into a commercial contract& The Philippines adheres to
restricti$e so$ereign Immunity&
199: N/& 70
5 1an the CudgeE.d$ocate ,eneral of the .rmed >orces of the
Philippines be appointed a Trustee of the ,o$ernment (er$ice Insurance
(ystem; -'plain&
8 1an the (ecretary of >inance be elected 1hairman of the @oard
of Directors of the (an !iguel 1orporation; -'plain&
3 1an the President take acti$e part in the legislati$e
process; -'plain&
2 1an fi$e members of the (upreme 1ourt declare a municipal
ordinance unconstitutional; -'plain&
) 1an the House of Representati$es take acti$e part in the
conduct of foreign relations, particularly in entering Into treaties and
international agreements; -'plain&
.nswerG
C/%6"!","!/%$0 0$2> #1#.,"!5# #=$&"4#%"> A8P> 0!4!"$"!/% /%
$..#="!%' $!"!/%$0 ,"!#6
199: N/& 70
5 1an the CudgeE.d$ocate ,eneral of the .rmed >orces of the
Philippines be appointed a Trustee of the ,o$ernment (er$ice Insurance
(ystem; -'plain&
.nswerG
5 /o, the Cudge .d$ocate ,eneral of the .rmed >orces of the
Philippines cannot be appointed as trustee of the ,o$ernment (er$ice
Insurance (ystem& +nder (ection )(2& .rticle IFI of the 1onstitution,
no member of the .rmed >orces of the Philippines in the acti$e ser$ice
shall at any time be appointed or designated in any capacity to a
ci$ilian position in the ,o$ernment, including go$ernmentEowned or
controlled corporations&
C/%6"!","!/%$0 0$2> #1#.,"!5# #=$&"4#%"> .$(!%#" 4#4(#&6>
0!4!"$"!/% /% $..#="!%' $!"!/%$0 ,"!#6
199: N/& 70
8 1an the (ecretary of >inance be elected 1hairman of the @oard
of Directors of the (an !iguel 1orporation; -'plain&
.nswerG
8 /o, the (ecretary of >inance cannot be elected 1hairman of
the @oard of Directors of the (an !iguel 1orporation& +nder (ection
53, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, members of the 1abinet cannot hold
any other office or employment during their tenure unless it is
otherwise pro$ided in the 1onstitution& They shall not also during said
tenure participate in any business or be financially interested in any
contract with, or in any franchise, or special pri$ilege granted by the
,o$ernment or any subdi$ision, agency or instrumentality thereof,
including go$ernmentEowned or controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries& They shall strictly a$oid conflict of interest in the
conduct of their office&
C/%6"!","!/%$0 0$2> #1#.,"!5# #=$&"4#%"> =$&"!.!=$"!/% /7
=&#6!#%" !% 0#'!60$"!5# =&/.#66
199: N/& 70
3 1an the President take acti$e part in the legislati$e
process; -'plain&
.nswerG
3 The President can take acti$e part in the legislati$e
process to the e'tent allowed by the 1onstitution& He can address
1ongress at any time to propose the enactment of certain laws& He
recommends the general appropriations bill& He can call a special
session of 1ongress at any time& He can certify to the necessity of the
immediate enactment of a bill to meet a public calamity or emergency& He
can $eto a bill&
C/%6"!","!/%$0 0$2> B,!.!$0 #=$&"4#%"> 5/"#6 &#C,!&# 7/&
#.0$&!%' $ 0$2 ,%./%6"!","!/%$0
199: N/& 70
2 1an fi$e members of the (upreme 1ourt declare a municipal
ordinance unconstitutional; -'plain&
.nswerG
2 <es& fi$e !embers of the (upreme 1ourt sitting enEbanc can
declare a municipal ordinance unconstitutional& +nder (ection 2(8&
.rticle FIII of the 1onstitution, a municipal ordinance can be declared
unconstitutional with the concurrence of a ma%ority of the !embers of
the (upreme 1ourt who actually took part in the deliberation on the
issues in the case and $oted thereon& If only eight !embers of the
(upreme 1ourt actually took part in deciding the case, there will still
be a Auorum& >i$e !embers will constitute a ma%ority of those who
actually took part in deciding the case&
S"$"# I44,%!") 8&/4 S,!"
1987 N/& IF0
(a HIH filed a case against the Republic of the Philippines for
damages caused his yacht, which was rammed by a na$y $essel&
(b HIH also sued in another case the (ecretary of Public Works
and the Republic of the Philippines for payment of the compensation of
the $alue of his land, which was used as part of the tarmac of the 1ebu
International .irport, without prior e'propriation proceedings&
The (olicitor ,eneral mo$ed to dismiss the two cases in$oking
state immunity from suit Decide&
.nswer0
(a The go$ernment cannot be sued for damages considering that
the agency which caused the damages was the Philippine na$y& +nder .rt&
85?4 of the 1i$il 1ode, the state consents to be sued for a Auasi delict
only when the damage is caused by its special agents& Hence, the
(olicitor ,eneralBs motion should be granted and the suit brought by HIH
be dismissed&
(b @ut the go$ernment cannot in$oke the stateBs immunity from
suit& .s held in !inisterio $& 1ourt of >irst Instance& 24 (1R. 2:2
(5675, which also in$ol$ed the taking of pri$ate property without the
benefit of e'propriation proceeding, HThe doctrine of go$ernmental
immunity from suit cannot ser$e as an instrument for perpetrating an
in%ustice on a citi#en& & & & When the go$ernment takes any property for
public use, which is conditional upon the payment of %ust compensation,
to be %udicially ascertained, it makes manifest that it submits to the
%urisdiction of the court&H The (olicitor ,eneralBs motion to dismiss
should, therefore, be denied&
S"$"# I44,%!") 8&/4 S,!"
1992 N/& 60
The /orthern Du#on Irrigation .uthority (/DI. was established by
a legislati$e charter to strengthen the irrigation systems that supply
water to farms and commercial growers in the area& While the /DI. is
able to generate re$enues through its operations, it recei$es an annual
appropriation from 1ongress& The /DI. is authori#ed to He'ercise all the
powers of a corporation under the 1orporation 1ode&H
Due to a miscalculation by some of its employees, there was a
massi$e irrigation o$erflow causing a flash flood in @arrio =an%era& .
child drowned in the incident and his parents now file suit against The
/DI. for damages&
!ay the /DI. $alidly in$oke the immunity of the (tate from suit;
Discuss thoroughly&
.nswer0
/o, the /orthern Du#on Irrigation .uthority may not in$oke the
immunity of the (tate from suit, because, as held in >ontanilla $s&
!aliaman, 576 (1R. :?) and 562 (1R. 2?:, irrigation is a proprietary
function& @esides, the /orthern Du#on Irrigation .uthority has a
%uridical personality separate and distinct from the go$ernment, a suit
against It is not a suit against the (tate& (ince the wai$er of the
immunity from suit is without Aualification, as held in Rayo $s& 1ourt
of >irst Instance of @ulacan, 554 (1R. 2):, the wai$er includes an
action based on a AuasiEdelict&
S"$"# I44,%!") 8&/4 S,!"
1999 N/ FI
.& 5& What do you understand by state immunity from suit;
-'plain& (8*
8& How may consent of the state to be sued be gi$en; -'plain&
(8*
@& The employees of the Philippine Tobacco .dministration (PT.
sued to reco$er o$ertime pay& In resisting such claim, the PT. theori#ed
that it is performing go$ernmental functions& Decide and e'plain&
(8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& 5& (tate immunity from suit means that the (tate cannot
be sued without its consent& . corollary of such principle is that
properties used by the (tate in the performance of its go$ernmental
functions cannot be sub%ect to %udicial e'ecution&
8& 1onsent of the (tate to be sued may be made e'pressly as in
the case of a specific, e'press pro$ision of law as wai$er of (tate
immunity from suit is not inferred lightly (e&g& 1&.& 387 as amended by
PD 522)P or impliedly as when the (tate engages in proprietary functions
(+&(& $& Rui#, +&(& $& ,uinto or when it files a suit in which case the
ad$erse party may file a counterclaim (>roilan $& Pan 9riental (hipping
or when the doctrine would in effect be used to perpetuate an in%ustice
(.migable $& 1uenca, 23 (1R. 3:4&
@& .s held in Philippine Firginia Tobacco .dministration $&
1ourt of Industrial Relations, :) (1R. 25:, the Philippine Tobacco
.dministration is not liable for o$ertime pay, since it is performing
go$ernmental functions& .mong its purposes are to promote the effecti$e
merchandising of tobacco so that those engaged in the tobacco industry
will ha$e economic security, to stabili#e the price of tobacco, and to
impro$e the li$ing and economic conditions of those engaged in the
tobacco industry&
S"$"# I44,%!") 8&/4 S,!"> E77#." /7 I"6 W$!5#&
1997 N/, :0
It is said that Hwai$er of immunity by the (tate does not mean a
concession of its liabilityH& What are the implications of this phrase;
.nswerG
The phrase that wai$er of immunity by the (tate does not mean a
concession of liability means that by consenting to be sued, the (tate
does not necessarily admit it is liable& .s stated in Philippine Rock
Industries, Inc& $s& @oard of DiAuidators, 5?4 (1R. 575, in such a case
the (tate is merely gi$ing the plaintiff a chance to pro$e that the
(tate is liable but the (tate retains the right to raise all lawful
defenses&
S"$"# I44,%!") 8&/4 S,!"> E1=&/=&!$"!/%
199? N/ 560
De$i is the owner of a piece of land& Without prior e'propriation
or negotiated sale, the national go$ernment used a portion thereof for
the widening of the national highway& De$i filed a money claim with the
1ommission on .udit which was denied& Deft with no other recourse, De$i
filed a complaint for reco$ery of property andQor damages against the
(ecretary of Public Works and Highways and the Republic of the
Philippines, The defendant mo$ed for dismissal of the complaint
contending that the go$ernment cannot be sued without Its consent& The
RT1 dismissed the complaint& 9n appeal, how would you decide the case&
.nswer0
The order dismissing the complaint should be re$ersed& In
!inisterio $& 1ourt of >irst Instance of 1ebu, 24 (1R. 2:2, it was held
that when the go$ernment takes property from a pri$ate landowner without
prior e'propriation or negotiated sale, the landowner may maintain a
suit against the go$ernment without $iolating the doctrine of go$ernment
Immunity from suit& The go$ernment should be deemed to ha$e wai$ed
impliedly its immunity from suit& 9therwise, the constitutional
guarantee that pri$ate property shall not be taken for public use
without %ust compensation will be rendered nugatory&
T$1$"!/%> 56 6=#.!$0 $66#664#%"
1987 N/& F0
(tate whether or not the following city ordinances are $alid and
gi$e reasons in support of your answers0
'''
(b .n ordinance on business establishments to raise funds for
the construction and maintenance of roads in pri$ate subdi$isions, which
roads are open for use by segments of the public who may ha$e business
inside the subdi$ision&
.nswer0
(b The ordinance is $alid& The charge on the business
establishments is not a ta' but a special assessment& Hence, the holding
in Pascual $& (ecretary of Public Works, 554 Phil& 335 (56:4, that
public funds cannot be appropriated for the construction of roads in a
pri$ate subdi$ision, does not apply& .s held in .postolic Prefect $&
1ity Treasurer of @aguio, 75 Phil& )27 (5625, special assessments may
be charged to property owners benefited by public works, because the
essential difference between a ta' and such assessment is precisely that
the latter is based wholly on benefits recei$ed&
(c .n ordinance prohibiting barbershop operators from rendering
massage ser$ice to their customers in a separate room&
Howe$er, if the ordinance le$ies a ta' on all business
establishments located outside the pri$ate subdi$ision, then it is
ob%ectionable on the ground that it appropriate pri$ate funds for a
public purpose& (Pascual $& (ecretary of Public Works, supra
.nswer0
(c The ordinance is $alid& In Felasco $, Fillegas, 584 (1R. :)?
(56?3 such ordinance was upheld on the ground that it is a means of
enabling the 1ity of !anila to collect a fee for operating massage
clinics and of pre$enting immorality which might be committed by
allowing the construction of separate rooms in barber shops&
T$1$"!/%> GOCC L!$(!0!") 8/& R#$0 E6"$"# T$1
1999 N/ FI
1& The Pro$ince of I reAuired the /ational De$elopment 1ompany
to pay real estate ta'es on the land being occupied by /D1 and the
latter argued that since it is a go$ernmentEowned corporation, its
properties are e'empt from real estate ta'es& If you were the Cudge,
how would you decide the case; Reason out& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& In /ational De$elopment 1ompany $& 1ebu 1ity, 85) (1R. 3?8,
the (upreme 1ourt held that the /ational De$elopment 1ompany was not
liable for real estate ta' on the property belonging to the go$ernment
which it occupy& Howe$er, (ection 832 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode
subseAuently withdrew the e'emption from real property ta'es of
go$ernmentEowned or controlled corporations& If I were the Cudge, I
would hold the /ational De$elopment 1ompany liable for real estate
ta'es&
N$"!/%$0 T#&&!"/&)
N$"!/%$0 T#&&!"/&)
199: N/& ?0
5 . law was passed di$iding the Philippines into three regions
(Du#on, Fisayas, and !indanao, each constituting an independent state
e'cept on matters of foreign relations, national defense and national
ta'ation, which are $ested in the 1entral go$ernment&
Is the law $alid; -'plain&
.nswer0
5 The law di$iding the Philippines into three regions, each
constituting an independent state and $esting in a central go$ernment
matters of foreign relations, national defense, and national ta'ation,
is unconstitutional& >irst, it $iolates .rticle I, which guarantees the
integrity of the national territory of the Philippines because it
di$ided the Philippines into three states& (econd, it $iolates (ection
5, .rticle II of the 1onstitution, which pro$ides for the establishment
of democratic and republic (tates by replacing it with three (tates
organi#ed as a confederation& Third, it $iolates (ection 88, .rticle II
of the 1onstitution, which, while recogni#ing and promoting the rights
of indigenous cultural communities, pro$ides for national unity and
de$elopment& >ourth, it $iolates (ection 5), .rticle I of the
1onstitution, which, pro$ides for autonomous regions in !uslim !indanao
and in the 1ordilleras within the framework of national so$ereignty as
well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines& >ifth,
it $iolates the so$ereignty of the Republic of the Philippines&
N$"!/%$0 T#&&!"/&)> A&.9!=#0$'!. D/."&!%#
1989 N/& 840
What do you understand by the archipelagic doctrine; Is this
reflected in the 56?7 1onstitution;
.nswer0
The archipelagic doctrine emphasi#es the unity of land and waters
by defining an archipelago either as a group of islands surrounded by
waters or a body of waters studded with islands& >or this purpose, it
reAuires that baselines be drawn by connecting the appropriate points of
the Houtermost islands to encircle the islands within the archipelago&
The waters on the landward side of the baselines regardless of breadth
or dimensions are merely internal waters&
<es, the archipelagic doctrine is reflected in the 56?7
1onstitution& .rticle I, (ection 5 pro$ides that the national territory
of the Philippines includes the Philippine archipelago, with all the
islands and waters embraced thereinG and the waters around, between, and
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth
and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines&
T#&&!"/&)> E1.0,6!5# E./%/4!. D/%#
1994 N/& 550
In the desire to impro$e the fishing methods of the fishermen, the
@ureau of >isheries, with the appro$al of the President, entered into a
memorandum of agreement to allow Thai fishermen to fish within 844 miles
from the Philippine sea coasts on the condition that >ilipino fishermen
be allowed to use Thai fishing eAuipment and $essels, and to learn
modern technology in fishing and canning&
5 Is the agreement $alid;
.nswerG
5 /o& the President cannot authori#e the @ureau of >isheries to
enter into a memorandum of agreement allowing Thai fishermen to fish
within the e'clusi$e economic #one of the Philippines, because the
1onstitution reser$es to >ilipino citi#ens the use and en%oyment of the
e'clusi$e economic #one of the Philippines&
(ection 8& .rticle III of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
The (tate shall protect the nationBs marine part in its
archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and e'clusi$e economic #one, and
reser$e its use and en%oyment to >ilipino citi#ens&H
(ection 7, .rticle IIII of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe (tate shall protect the rights of subsistence fishermen,
especially of local communities, to the preferential use of the communal
marine and fishing resources, both Inland and offshore& It shall pro$ide
support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and research,
adeAuate financial, production, and marketing assistance, and other
ser$ices& The (tate shall also protect, de$elop, and conser$e such
resources& The protection shall e'tend to offshore fishing grounds of
subsistence fishermen against foreign intrusion& >ishworkers shall
recei$e a %ust share from their labor in the utili#ation of marine and
fishing resources&
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A% P/0!.!#6
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> A&4# 8/&.#6> PNP
200? N/ I
(a .rticle II& (ection 3, of the 56?7 1onstitution e'presses,
in part, that the H.rmed >orces of the Philippines is the protector of
the people and (of the (tate&H Describe briefly what this pro$ision
means& Is the Philippine /ational Police co$ered by the same mandate;
>IR(T .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
(a .rticle II, (ection 3 of the 56?7 1onstitution means that the
.rmed >orces of the Philippines should not ser$e the interest of the
President but of the people and should not commit abuses against the
people& (Record of the 1onstitutional 1ommission, Fol& F, p& 533& This
pro$ision is specifically addressed to the .rmed >orces of the
Philippines and not to the Philippine /ational Police, because the
latter is separate and distinct from the former& (Record of the
1onstitutional 1ommission, Fol& F, p& 86:G !analo $& (isto#a& 358 (1R .
836 L5666M&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
.rticle II, (ection 3 of the 56?7 1onstitution can be interpreted
to mean that the .rmed >orces of the Philippines can be a legitimate
instrument for the o$erthrow of the ci$ilian go$ernment if it has ceased
to be the ser$ant of the people& (@ernas, The 56?7 1onstitution of the
Philippines0 . 1ommentary, 8443 ed&, p& ::& This pro$ision does not
apply to the Philippine /ational Police, because it is separate and
distinct from the .rmed >orces of the Philippines& (Record of the
1onstitutional 1ommission, Fol& F, p& 86:, !analo $& (isto#a& 358 (1R.
836 L5666M&
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> D/."&!%# /7 I%./&=/&$"!/%
1997 N/& 5G
What do you understand by the HDoctrine of IncorporationH in
1onstitutional Daw;
.nswerG
Hie doctrine of Incorporation means that the rules of
International law form part of the law of the land and no legislati$e
action is reAuired to make them applicable to a country& The Philippines
follows this doctrine, because (ection 8& .rticle II of the 1onstitution
states that the Philippines adopts the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land&
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> E$0/-E$0/
1994 N/& 5G
5 What is the state policy on0
a working women;
b ecology;
c the symbols of statehood;
d cultural minorities;
e science and technology; .nswer0
5 a (ection 52, .rticle IIII of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe (tate shall protect working women by pro$iding safe and
healthful working conditions, taking into account their maternal
functions, and such facilities and opportunities that will enhance their
welfare and enable them to reali#e their full potential in the ser$ice
of the nation&H
b (ection 5:, .rticle II of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
The (tate shall protect and ad$ance the right of the people and
their posterity to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the
rhythm and harmony of nature&H
c (ection 5, .rticle IFII of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe flag of the Philippines shall be red, white, and blue, with a
sun and three stars, as consecrated and honored by the people and
recogni#ed by law&H
(ection 8, .rticle IFI of the 1onstitution states0
The 1ongress may& by law, adopt a new name for the country, a
national anthem, or a national seal, which shall all be truly reflecti$e
and symbolic of the ideals, history, and traditions of the people& (uch
law shall take effect only upon its ratification by the people in a
national referendum&H
d (ection 88, .rticle II of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
The (tate recogni#es and promotes the rights of indigenous
cultural communities within the framework of national unity and
de$elopment&H
(ection ), .rticle III of the 1onstitution reads0
The (tate, sub%ect to the pro$isions of this 1onstitution and
national de$elopment policies and programs, shall protect the rights of
indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their
economic, social and cultural wellEbeing&
The 1ongress may pro$ide for the applicability of customary laws
go$erning property rights or relations in determining the ownership and
e'tent of the ancestral domains&H
(ection :, .rt& IIII of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
The (tate shall apply the principles of agrarian reform or
stewardship, whene$er applicable in accordance with law, in the
disposition or utili#ation of other natural resources, including lands
of the public domain under lease or concession suitable to agriculture ,
sub%ect to prior rights, homestead rights of small settlers, and the
rights of indigenous communities to their ancestral lands&
The (tate may resettle landless fanners and farmworkers in its own
agricultural estates which shall be distributed to them in the manner
pro$ided by law&H
(ection 57& .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution states0
HThe (tate shall recogni#e, respect and protect the rights of
indigenous cultural communities to preser$e and de$elop their cultures,
traditions, and institutions& It shall consider these rights in the
formulation of national plans and policies&H
e (ection 57, .rticle II of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe (tate shall gi$e priority to education, science and
technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and
nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human
liberation and de$elopment&H
(ection 52, .rticle III of the 1onstitution reads in part0
HThe sustained de$elopment of a reser$oir of national talents
consisting of >ilipino scientists, entrepreneurs, professionals,
managers, highEle$el technical manpower and skilled workers and
craftsmen shall be promoted by the (tate, The (tate shall encourage
appropriate technology and regulate Its transfer for the national
benefit&
(ubEsection 8, (ection 3& .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution states0
HThey (educational institutions shall inculcate patriotism and
nationalism, foster lo$e of humanity, respect for human rights,
appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical
de$elopment of the country, teach the rights and duties of citi#enship,
strengthen ethical and spiritual $alues, de$elop moral character and
personal discipline, encourage critical and creati$e thinking, broaden
scientific and technological knowledge, and promote $ocational
efficiency&H
(ection 54& .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution declares0
H(cience and technology are essential for national de$elopment and
progress& The (tate shall gi$e priority to research and de$elopment,
in$ention, inno$ation, and their utili#ationG and to science and
technology education, training, ser$ices& It shall support indigenous,
appropriate, and selfEreliant scientific and cultural capabilities, and
their application to the countryBs producti$e systems and national
life&H
(ection 55, .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe 1ongress may pro$ide for incenti$es, including ta'
deductions, to encourage pri$ate participation in programs of basic and
applied scientific research& (cholarships, grantsEinEaid or other forms
of Incenti$es shall be pro$ided to deser$ing science students,
researchers, scientists, in$estors, technologists, and specially gifted
citi#ens&H
(ection 58, .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution reads0
The (tate shall regulate the transfer and promote the adaptation
of technology from all sources for the national benefit& It shall
encourage widest participation of pri$ate groups, local go$ernments, and
communityEbased organi#ations in the generation and utili#ation of
science and technology&H
/9T-0 It Is suggested that if an e'aminee ga$e a substanti$e
answer without gi$ing the e'act pro$isions of the 1onstitution, then he
should be gi$en full credit& >urther, one pro$ision AuotedQdiscussed by
the e'aminee should be suiffcient for him to be gi$en full credit&
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> M,%!.!=$0 L$2 @6 T&#$") P&/5!6!/%6
2004 X-.& @// Republic has a defense treaty with -F. >ederation&
.ccording to the RepublicKs (ecretary of Defense, the treaty allows
temporary basing of friendly foreign troops in case of training
e'ercises for the war on terrorism& The !a%ority Deader of the (enate
contends that whether temporary or not, the basing of foreign troops
howe$er friendly is prohibited by the 1onstitution of @// which pro$ides
that, R/o foreign military bases shall be allowed in @// territory&S
In case there is indeed an irreconcilable conflict between a
pro$ision of the treaty and a pro$ision of the 1onstitution, in a
%urisdiction and legal system like ours, which should pre$ail0 the
pro$ision of the treaty or of the 1onstitution; Why; -'plain with
reasons, briefly& ()*
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> N,.0#$& W#$=/%6
1988 N/& 880
The (ecretary of Custice had recently ruled that the President may
negotiate for a modification or e'tension of military bases agreement
with the +nited (tates regardless of the Hno nukesH pro$isions in the
56?7 1onstitution& The President forthwith announced that she finds the
same opinion HacceptableH and will adopt it& The (enators on the other
hand, led by the (enate President, are skeptical, and had e$en warned
that no treaty or international agreement may go into effect without the
concurrence of twoEthirds of all members of the (enate&
. former senator had said, Hit is completely wrong, if not
erroneous,H and His an amendment of the 1onstitution by
misinterpretation&H (ome members of the Dower House agree with (ecretary
9rdone#, while others lament tbe latterBs opinion as HAuestionable,
unfortunate, and without any basis at all&H
Do you or do you not agree with the aforementioned ruling of the
Department of Custice; Why;
.nswer0
/o& The 1onstitution pro$ides that if foreign military bases,
troops or facilities are to be allowed after the e'piration of the
present PhilippineE.merican !ilitary @ases .greement in 5665, it must be
Hunder a treaty duly concurred in by the (enate and, when the 1ongress
so reAuires, ratified by a ma%ority of the $otes cast by the people in a
national referendum&H (.rt& IFIII, sec& 8) . mere agreement, therefore,
not a treaty, without the concurrence of at least 8Q3 of all the members
of the (enate will not be $alid (.rt& FII, sec& 85, .rt& IFIII, sec& 2&
With respect to the pro$ision allowing nuclear weapons within the bases,
the 1onstitution appears to ban such weapons from the Philippine
territory& It declares as a state policy that Hthe Philippines,
consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of
freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory&H (.rt, II, sec& ?
Howe$er, the deliberations of the 1onstitutional 1ommission would seem
to indicate that this pro$ision of the 1onstitution is Hnot something
absolute nor 544 percent without e'ception&H It may therefore be that
circumstances may %ustify a pro$ision on nuclear weapons&
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> P$."$ S,%" S#&5$%$
2000 N/ I&
The Philippines has become a member of the World Trade
9rgani#ation (WT9 and resultantly agreed that it Hshall ensure the
conformity of its laws, regulations and administrati$e procedures with
its obligations as pro$ided in the anne'ed .greements&H This is assailed
as unconstitutional because this undertaking unduly limits, restricts
and impairs Philippine so$ereignty and means among others that 1ongress
could not pass legislation that will be good for our national interest
and general welfare if such legislation will not conform with the WT9
.greements& Refute this argument& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.ccording to Tanada $& .ngara, 878 (1R. 5? (5667, the so$ereignty
of the Philippines is sub%ect to restriction by its membership in the
family of nations and the limitations imposed of treaty limitations&
(ection 8& .rticle II of the 1onstitution adopts the generally accepted
principles of international law as part of the law of the land& 9ne of
such principles is pacta sunt ser$anda& The 1onstitution did not
en$ision a hermitElike isolation of the country from the rest of the
world&
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> T&$%6=$&#%.) !% M$""#&6 /7 P,(0!. I%"#&#6"
2000 N/ F&
(tate at least three constitutional pro$isions reflecting the
(tate policy on transparency in matters of public interest& What Is the
purpose of said policy; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The following are the constitutional pro$isions reflecting the
(tate policy on transparency In matters of public interest0
5& H(ub%ect to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the
(tate adopts and Implements a policy of full public disclosure of all
its transactions in$ol$ing public interest&H ((ection 8?, .rticle II
8& The right of the people to information on matters of public
concern shall be recogni#ed& .ccess to official records, and to
documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to go$ernment research data used as basis for
policy de$elopment, shall be afforded to citi#en, sub%ect to such
limitations as may be pro$ided by law&H ((ection 7, .rticle HI
3& The records and books of accounts of the 1ongress shall be
preser$ed and be open to the public In accordance with law, and such
books shall be audited by the 1ommission on .udit which shall publish
annually an itemi#ed list of amounts paid to and e'penses incurred for
each !ember&H ((ection 84& .rticle FI
2& The 9ffice of the 9mbudsman shall ha$e the following
powers, functions, and duties0
III III
III
(: Publici#e matters co$ered by its in$estigation when
circumstances so warrant and with due prudence,H ((ection 58, .rticle
II
)& H. public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of
office, and as often as thereafter may be reAuired by law, submit a
declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth& In
the case of the President, the Fice President, the !embers of the
1abinet, the 1ongress, the (upreme 1ourt, the 1onstitutional
1ommissions and other constitutional offices, and officers of the
armed forces with general or flag rank, the declaration shall be
disclosed to the public in the manner pro$ided by law&H ((ection 57,
.rticle II
:& HInformation on foreign loans obtained or guaranteed by
the ,o$ernment shall be made a$ailable to the public&H ((ection 85
.rticle III
.s e'plained In Falmonte $& @elmonte, 574 (1R. 8): (56?6, the
purpose of the policy is to protect the people from abuse of
go$ernmental power& If access to information of public concern is
denied, the postulate Hpublic office is a public trustH would be mere
empty words&
T/ote0 The e'aminee should be gi$en full credit if he gi$es any
three of the abo$eEmentioned pro$isions&P
S"$"# P&!%.!=0#6 A P/0!.!#6> T&$%6=$&#%.) !% M$""#&6 /7 P,(0!. I%"#&#6"
1989 N/& 30
Does the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ide for a policy of transparency in
matters of public interest; -'plain&
.nswer0
<es, the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides for a policy of transparency
in matters of public interest& (ection 8?, .rticle II of the 56?7
1onstitution pro$ides0
H(ub%ect to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the (tate
adopts and implements a policy of full disclosure of all its
transactions in$ol$ing public interest,H
(ection 7, .rticle III of the 56?7 1onstitution states0
HThe right of the people to information on matters of public
concern shall be recogni#ed, .ccess to official records, and to
documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to go$ernment research data used as basis for
policy de$elopment, shall be afforded the citi#en, sub%ect to such
limitations as may be pro$ided by law&H
(ection 84, .rticle FI of the 56?7 1onstitution reads0
HThe records and books of account of the 1ongress shall be
preser$ed and be open to the public in accordance with law, and such
books shall be audited by the 1ommission on .udit which shall publish
annually an itemi#ed list of amounts paid to and e'penses incurred for
each member&H
+nder (ection 57, .rticle II of the 56?7 1onstitution, the sworn
statement of assets, liabilities and net worth of the President, the
FiceEPresident, the !embers of the 1abinet, the 1ongress, the (upreme
1ourt, the 1onstitutional 1ommission and other constitutional offices,
and officers of the armed forces with general or flag rank filed upon
their assumption of office shall be disclosed to the public in the
manner pro$ided by law&
(ection 85, .rticle III of the 1onstitution declares0
HInformation on foreign loans obtained or guaranteed by the
go$ernment shall be made a$ailable to the public&H
.s held in Falmonte $s& @elmonte, ,&R& /o& 72634, >eb& 53, 56?6,
these pro$isions on public disclosures are intended to enhance the role
of the citi#enry in go$ernmental decisionEmaking as well as in checking
abuse in go$ernment,
B!00 /7 R!'9"6
I% G#%#&$0
N#2 8#$",&#6 U%#& 1987 C/%6"!
1991 N/ 50
@& How is the @ill of Rights strengthened in the 56?7
1onstitution;
.nswer0
@& There are se$eral ways in which the @ill of Rights is
strengthened in the 56?7 1onstitution&
5& /ew rights are gi$en e'plicit recognition such as, the
prohibition against detention by reason of political beliefs and
aspirations& The wai$er of !iranda rights is now reAuired to be made in
writing with the assistance of counsel& The use of solitary,
incommunicado and secret detention places is prohibited, while the
e'istence of substandard and inadeAuate penal facilities is made the
concern of legislation&
There is also recognition of the right of e'pression, an e'press
prohibition against the use of torture, a mandate to the (tate to
pro$ide compensation and rehabilitation for $ictims of torture and their
families&
8& (ome rights ha$e been e'panded& >or instance, free access
to courts now includes access to AuasiE%udicial bodies and to adeAuate
legal assistance&
3& The reAuirements for interfering with some rights ha$e been
made more strict& >or instance, only %udges can now issue search
warrants or warrants of arrest& There must be a law authori#ing the
-'ecuti$e Department to interfere with the pri$acy of communication, the
liberty of abode, and the right to tra$el before these rights may be
impaired or curtailed&
2& The 1onstitution now pro$ides that the suspension of the
pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not suspend the right to
bail, thus resol$ing a doctrinal dispute of long standing&
)& The suspension of the pri$ilege of the writ of habeas
corpus and the proclamation of martial law ha$e been limited to si'ty
(:4 days and are now sub%ect to the power of 1ongress to re$oke& In
addition, the (upreme 1ourt is gi$en the %urisdiction, upon the petition
of any citi#en to determine the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
suspension of the pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus and the
proclamation of martial law&
:& The (upreme 1ourt is empowered to adopt rules for the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights&
7& .rt& II& (ec& 55 commits the (tate to a policy which places
$alue on the dignity of e$ery human person and guarantees full respect
for human rights&
?& . 1ommission on Human Rights is created&
6& +nder .rticle IFI& (ec& )(8 the (tate is mandated to
promote respect for the peopleBs rights among the members of the
military in the performance of their duty&
W&!" /7 A4=$&/
1991 N/ 50
.& What is a 1onstitutional writ of .mparo and what is the
basis for such a remedy under the 1onstitution;
.nswer0
.& The writ of .mparo in !e'ican law is an e'traordinary remedy
whereby an interested party may seek the in$alidation of any e'ecuti$e,
legislati$e or %udicial act deemed in $iolation of a fundamental right&
The adoption of such a remedy in the Philippines may be based on .rticle
FIII, (ec& )() of the 1onstitution, which empowers the (upreme 1ourt to
promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights&
S#."!/% 1
D,# P&/.#66> B/"9
1999 N/ FIII
.& ,i$e e'amples of acts of the state which infringe the due
process clause0
5& in its substanti$e aspect and (5* 8& in its procedural
aspect; (5*
@& 9n .pril :, 56:3, Police 9fficer !ario ,atdula was charged
by the !ayor with ,ra$e !isconduct and Fiolation of Daw before the
!unicipal @oard& The @oard in$estigated ,atdula but before the case
could be decided, the 1ity charter was appro$ed& The 1ity >iscal,
citing (ection 34 of the city charter, asserted that he was authori#ed
thereunder to in$estigate city officers and employees& The case
against ,atdula was then forwarded to him, and a reEin$estigation was
conducted& The office of the >iscal subseAuently recommended dismissal&
9n Canuary 55, 56::, the 1ity !ayor returned the records of the case to
the 1ity >iscal for the submission of an appropriate resolution but no
resolution was submitted& 9n !arch 3, 56:?, the 1ity >iscal transmitted
the records to the 1ity !ayor recommending that final action thereon be
made by the 1ity @oard of In$estigators (1@I& .lthough the 1@I did
not conduct an in$estigation, the records show that both the !unicipal
@oard and the >iscalBs 9ffice e'hausti$ely heard the case with both
parties afforded ample opportunity to adduce their e$idence and argue
their cause& The Police 1ommission found ,atdula guilty on the basis
of the records forwarded by the 1@I& ,atdula challenged the ad$erse
decision of the Police 1ommission theori#ing that he was depri$ed of
due process& "uestions0 Is the Police 1ommission bound by the findings
of the 1ity >iscal; Is ,atdulaBs protestation of lack or nonEobser$ance
of due process wellEgrounded; -'plain your answers& (2*
1& 9n /o$ember 7, 5664, nine lawyers of the Degal Department of
< @ank who were all under >red Torre, sent a complaint to management
accusing Torre of abusi$e conduct and mismanagement& >urnished with a
copy of the complaint, Torre denied the charges& Two days later, the
lawyers and Torre were called to a conference in the office of the @oard
1hairman to gi$e their respecti$e sides of the contro$ersy& Howe$er, no
agreement was reached thereat& @ank Director Romulo !oret was tasked to
look further into the matter& He met with the lawyers together with
Torre se$eral times but to no a$ail& !oret then submitted a report
sustaining the charges of the lawyers& The @oard 1hairman wrote Torre
to inform him that the bank had chosen the compassionate option of
HwaitingH for TorreBs resignation& Torre was asked, without being
dismissed, to turn o$er the documents of all cases handled by him to
another official of the bank but Torre refused to resign and reAuested
for a Hfull hearingH& Days later, he reiterated his reAuest for a Hfull
hearingH, claiming that he had been Hconstructi$ely dismissedH& !oret
assured Torre that he is Hfree to remain in the employ of the bankH e$en
if he has no particular work assignment& .fter another reAuest for a
Hfull hearingH was ignored, Torre filed a complaint with the arbitration
branch of /DR1 for illegal dismissal& Reacting thereto, the bank
terminated the ser$ices of Torre& "uestions0 (a Was Torre
Hconstructi$ely dismissedH before he filed his complaint; (b ,i$en the
multiple meetings held among the bank officials, the lawyers and Torre,
is it correct for him to say that he was not gi$en an opportunity to be
heard; -'plain your answers& (2*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
.& 5& . law $iolates substanti$e due process when it is
unreasonable or unduly oppressi$e& >or e'ample, Presidential Deciee /o&
5757, which cancelled all the mortgages and liens of a debtor, was
considered unconstitutional for being oppressi$e& Dikewise, as stated
in -rmitaE!alate Hotel and !otel 9perators .ssociation, Inc& $& 1ity
!ayor of !anila, 84 (1R. ?26, a law which is $ague so that men of common
intelligence must guess at its meaning and differ as to its application
$iolates substanti$e due process& .s held in Tanada $& Tu$era, 52: (1R.
22:, due process reAuires that the law be published&
8& In (tate Prosecutors $& !uro, 83: (1R. )4), it was held that
the dismissal of a case without the benefit of a hearing and without any
notice to the prosecution $iolated due process& Dikewise, as held in
People $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8:8 (1R. 2)8, the lack of impartiality of
the %udge who will decide a case $iolates procedural due process&
@& The Police 1ommission is not bound by the findings of the
1ity >iscal& In !angubat $& de 1astro, 5:3 (1R. :4?, it was held that
the Police 1ommission is not prohibited from making its own findings on
the basis of its own e$aluation of the records& Dikewise, the
protestation of lack of due process is not wellEgrounded, since the
hearings before the !unicipal @oard and the 1ity >iscal offered ,atdula
the chance to be heard& There is no denial of due process if the
decision was rendered on the basis of e$idence contained in the record
and disclosed to the parties affected&
1& a Torre was constructi$ely dismissed, as held in -Auitable
@anking 1orporation $& /ational Dabor Relations 1ommission, 873 (1R.
3)8& .llowing an employee to report for work without being assigned any
work constitutes constructi$e dismissal&
b Torre is correct in saying that he was not gi$en the chance to
be heard& The meetings in the nature of consultations and conferences
cannot be considered as $alid substitutes for the proper obser$ance of
notice and hearing&
D,# P&/.#66> M$'%$ C$&"$ 8/& T#$.9#&6
2002 N/ I
Ten public school teachers of 1aloocan 1ity left their classrooms
to %oin a strike, which lasted for one month, to ask for teachersB
benefits&
The Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports charged them
administrati$ely, for which reason they were reAuired to answer and
formally in$estigated by a committee composed of the Di$ision
(uperintendent of (chools as 1hairman, the Di$ision (uper$isor as member
and a teacher, as another member& 9n the basis of the e$idence adduced
at the formal in$estigation which amply established their guilt, the
Director rendered a decision meting out to them the penalty of remo$al
from office& The decision was affirmed by the D-1( (ecretary and the
1i$il (er$ice 1ommission&
9n appeal, they reiterated the arguments they raised before the
administrati$e bodies, namely0
(b They were depri$ed of due process of law as the In$estigating
1ommittee was improperly constituted because it did not include a
teacher in representation of the teachersB organi#ation as reAuired by
the !agna 1arta for Public (chool Teachers (R&.& /o& 2:74, (ec& 6&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(b The teachers were depri$ed of due process of law& +nder
(ection 6 of the !agna 1arta for Public (chool Teachers, one of the
members of the committee must be a teacher who is a representati$e of
the local, or in its absence, any e'isting pro$incial or national
organi#ation of teachers& .ccording to >abella $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8?3
(1R. 8): (5667, to be considered the authori#ed representati$e of such
organi#ation, the teacher must be chosen by the organi#ation itself and
not by the (ecretary of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports& (ince in
administrati$e proceedings, due process reAuires that the tribunal be
$ested with %urisdiction and be so constituted as to afford a person
charged administrati$ely a reasonable guarantee of impartiality, if the
teacher who is a member of the committee was not appointed in accordance
with the law, any proceeding before it is tainted with depri$ation of
procedural due process&
D,# P&/.#66> P&#5#%"!5# S,6=#%6!/%> R!'9" "/ N/"!.# $% E#$&!%'
2004 NO3 @I
Director W9W failed the lifestyle check conducted by the
9mbudsmanKs 9ffice because W9WKs assets were grossly disproportionate to
his salary and allowances& !oreo$er, some assets were not included in
his statement of .ssets and Diabilities& He was charged of graft and
corrupt practices and pending the completion of in$estigations, he was
suspended from office for si' months&
.& .ggrie$ed, W9W petitioned the 1ourt of .ppeals to annul the
pre$enti$e suspension order on the ground that the 9mbudsman could only
recommend but not impose the suspension& !oreo$er, according to W9W,
the suspension was imposed without any notice or hearing, in $iolation
of due process&
Is the petitionerKs contention meritorious; Discuss briefly& ()*
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0> B$6!. E,4$% R!'9"6 (E3G3 R!'9" "/ M$&&) $% "/
P&/.&#$"#); @$0!!") /7 W$!5#& T9#&#/7
1992 N/& 80
(heila, an actress, signed a twoEyear contract with (olidaridad
>ilms, The film company undertook to promote her career and to feature
her as the leading lady in at least four mo$ies& In turn& (heila
promised that, for the duration of the contract, she shall not get
married or ha$e a babyG otherwise, she shall be liable to refund to the
film company a portion of its promotion e'penses&
a Does this contract impair, or impinge upon, any
constitutionally protected liberty of (heila; -'plain&
b If (olidaridad >ilms tries to enforce this contract
%udicially, will this constitutionally protected liberty pre$ail;
-'plain&
.nswer0
a <es, the contract impairs the right of (heila to marry and to
procreate& The case of Do$ing $s& Firginia, 3?? +&(& 5 and =ablocki
$s& Redhail 232 +&(& 372 recogni#ed the right to marry is a basic ci$il
right& Dikewise, the case of (kinner $s 9klahoma, 35: +&(& )3)
recogni#ed that the right to procreate is a basic ci$il right& These
rights are part of the liberty protected by the due process clause in
(ection 5& .rticle 5 of the 1onstitution&
b <es, the constitutionally protected liberty of (heila will
pre$ail, because it in$ol$es basic human rights& The wai$er of these
basic human rights is $oid& What (olidaridad >ilms is seeking to
reco$er are promotion e'penses& These in$ol$e property rights& .s held
in Philippine @looming !ills -mployees 9rgani#ation $s& Philippine
@looming !ills, Inc&, )5 (1R. 5?6, ci$il rights are superior to property
rights&
.lternati$e .nswerG
The wai$er of the right to marry and the right to procreate is
$alid& -nforcement of the contract does not entail enforcement of the
stipulation not to marry and not to ha$e a baby& It is limited to a
refund of a portion of the promotion e'penses incurred by (olidaridad
>ilms&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0
199: N/ 80
5 .t the trial of a rape case where the $ictimEcomplainant was
a well known personality while the accused was a popular mo$ie star, a
TF station was allowed by the trial %udge to tele$ise the entire
proceedings like the 9&C& (impson trial& The accused ob%ected to the TF
co$erage and petitioned the (upreme 1ourt to prohibit the said co$erage&
.s the (upreme 1ourt, how would you rule on the petition;
-'plain&
.nswerG
5 The (upreme 1ourt should grant the petition& In its
Resolution dated 9ctober 88, 5665, the (upreme 1ourt prohibited li$e
radio and tele$ision co$erage of court proceedings to protect the right
of the parties to due process, to pre$ent the distraction of the
participants in the proceedings, and in the last analysis to a$oid a
miscarriage of %ustice&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0
2001 N/ IIII
The Philippine Ports .uthority (PP. ,eneral !anager issued an
administrati$e order to the effect that all e'isting regular
appointments to harbor pilot positions shall remain $alid only up to
December 35 of the current year and that henceforth all appointments to
harbor pilot positions shall be only for a term of one year from date of
effecti$ity, sub%ect to yearly renewal or cancellation by the PP. after
conduct of a rigid e$aluation of performance& Pilotage as a profession
may be practiced only by duly licensed indi$iduals, who ha$e to pass
fi$e go$ernment professional e'aminations&
The Harbor Pilot .ssociation challenged the $alidity of said
administrati$e order arguing that it $iolated the harbor pilotsB right
to e'ercise their profession and their right to due process of law and
that the said administrati$e order was issued without prior notice and
hearing& The PP. countered that the administrati$e order was $alid as it
was Issued in the e'ercise of its administrati$e control and super$ision
o$er harbor pilots under PP.Bs legislati$e charter, and that in issuing
the order as a rule or regulation, it was performing its e'ecuti$e or
legislati$e, and not a AuasiECudicial function&
Due process of law is classified into two kinds, namely,
procedural due process and substanti$e due process of law& Was there,
or, was there no $iolation of the harbor pilotsB right to e'ercise their
profession and their right to due process of law; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
The right of the harbor pilots to due process was $iolated& .m
held in 1orona $s& +nited Harbor Pilots .ssociation of the Philippines,
8?3 (1R. 35 (5667& pilotage as a profession is a property right
protected by the guarantee of due process& The preEe$aluation
cancellation of the licenses of the harbor pilots e$ery year is
unreasonable and $iolated their right to substanti$e due process& The
renewal is dependent on the e$aluation after the licenses ha$e been
cancelled& The issuance of the administrati$e order also $iolated
procedural due process, since no prior public bearing was conducted& .s
hold in 1ommissioner of Internal Re$enue $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8:5 (1R.
837 (566?, when a regulation is being issued under the AuasiE
legislati$e authority of an administrati$e agency, the reAuirements of
notice, hearing and publication must be obser$ed&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0
1992 N/, 3G
1ongress is considering a law against drunken dri$ing& +nder the
legislation, police authorities may ask any dri$er to take a
Hbreathaly#er testH, wherein the dri$er e'hales se$eral times into a
de$ice which can determine whether he has been dri$ing under the
influence of alcohol& The results of the test can be used, in any legal
proceeding against him& >urthermore, declaring that the issuance of a
dri$erBs license gi$es rise only to a pri$ilege to dri$e motor $ehicles
on public roads, the law pro$ides that a dri$er who refuses to take the
test shall be automatically sub%ect to a 64Eday suspension of his
dri$erBs license,
1ite two L8M possible constitutional ob%ections to this law&
Resol$e the ob%ections and e'plain whether any such infirmities can be
cured&
.nswer0
Possible ob%ections to the law are that reAuiring a dri$er to take
the breathaly#er test will $iolate his right against selfEincrimination,
that pro$iding for the suspension of his dri$erBs license without any
hearing $iolates due process, and that the proposed law will $iolate the
right against unreasonable searches and sei#ures, because it allows
police authorities to reAuire a dri$e to take the breathaly#er test e$en
if there is no probable cause
ReAuiring a dri$er to take a breathaly#er test does not $iolate
his right against selfEincrimination, because he is not being compelled
to gi$e testimonial e$idence& He is merely being asked to submit to a
physical test& This is not co$ered by the constitutional guarantee
against selfEincrimination& Thus, in (outh Dakota $s& /e$ille, 2)6 +&(&
))3, it was held for this reason that reAuiring a dri$er to take a
bloodEalcohol test is $alid&
.s held in !ackey $s& .fontrya 223 +&(& 5, because of compelling
go$ernment interest in safety along the streets, the license of a dri$er
who refuses to take the breathaly#er test may be suspended immediately
pending a postEsuspension hearing, but there must be a pro$ision for a
postEsuspension hearing& Thus, to sa$e the proposed law from
unconstitutionally on the ground of denial of due process, it should
pro$ide for an immediate hearing upon suspension of the dri$erBs
license&
The proposed law $iolates the right against unreasonable searches
and sei#ures& It will authori#e police authorities to stop any dri$er
and ask him to take the breathaly#er test e$en in the absence of a
probable cause&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0
1988 N/& 60
!acabebe, Pampanga has se$eral barrios along the Pampanga ri$er&
To ser$ice the needs of their residentst the municipality has been
operating a ferry ser$ice at the same ri$er, for a number of years
already&
(ometime in 56?7, the municipality was ser$ed a copy of an order
from the Dand Tansportation >ranchising and Regulatory @oard (DT>R@,
granting a certificate of public con$enience to !r& Ricardo !acapinlac,
a resident of !acabebe, to operate ferry ser$ice across the same ri$er
and between the same barrios being ser$iced presently by the
municipalityBs ferry boats& . check of the records of the application of
!acapinlac shows that the application was filed some months before, set
for hearing, and notices of such hearing were published in two
newspapers of general circulation in the town of !acabebe, and in the
pro$ince of Pampanga& The municipality had ne$er been directly ser$ed a
copy of that notice of hearing nor had the (angguniang @ay an been
reAuested by !acapinlac for any operate& The municipality immediately
filed a motion for reconsideration with the DT>R@ which was denied& It
the went to the (upreme 1ourt on a petition for certiorari to nullify
the order granting a certificate of public con$enience to !acapinlac on
two grounds0
5& Denial of due process to the municipalityG and
8& >or failure of !acapinlac to secure appro$al of the
(angguniang @ayan for him to operate a ferry ser$ice in !acabebe,
Resol$e the two points in the petition with reasons&
.nswer0
The petition for certiorari should be granted,
5& .s a party directly affected by the operation of the ferry
ser$ice, the !unicipality of !acabebe, Pampanga was entitled to be
directly notified by the DT>R@ of its proceedings relati$e to
!acapinlacBs application, e$en if the !unicipality had not notified the
DT>R@ of the e'istence of the municipal ferry ser$ice& /otice by
publication was not enough& (!unicipality of -chague $& .bellera, 52:
(1R. 5?4 (56?:&
8& Where a ferry operation lies entirely within the
municipality, the prior appro$al of the !unicipal go$ernment is
necessary& &&&&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0
1987 N/& II0
The !anila Transportation 1ompany applied for upward ad%ustment
of its rates before the Transportation Regulatory @oard& Pending the
petition, the TR@, without pre$ious hearing, granted a general
nationwide pro$isional increase of rates& In another 9rder, TR@ reAuired
the company to pay the unpaid super$isory fees collectible under the
Public (er$ice Daw& .fter due notice and hearing, on the basis of the
e$idence presented by !anila Transportation 1ompany and the 9ppositors,
TR@ issued an 9rder reducing the rates applied for by oneEfourth&
1haracteri#e the powers e'ercised by the TR@ in this case and
determine whether under the present constitutional system the
Transportation Regulatory @oard can be $alidly conferred the powers
e'ercised by it in issuing the 9rders gi$en abo$e& -'plain&
.nswer0
The orders in this case in$ol$e the e'ercise of %udicial function
by an administrati$e agency, and therefore, as a general rule, the
cardinal primary rights enumerated in .ng Tibay $& 1IR, :6 Phil& :3)
(5624 must be obser$ed& In Figart -lectric Dight 1o, $& P(1, 54 (1R. 2:
(56:2 it was held that a rate order, which applies e'clusi$ely to a
particular party and is predicated on a finding of fact, partakes of the
nature of a Auasi %udicial, rather than legislati$e, function&
The first order, granting a pro$isional rate increase without
hearing, is $alid if %ustified by urgent public need, such as increase
in the cost of fuel& The power of the Public (er$ice 1ommission to grant
such increase was upheld in se$eral cases& ((il$a $& 9campo, 64 Phil&
777 (56)8G Halili $& P(1, 68 Phil& 543:(56)3
The second order reAuiring the company to pay unpaid super$isory
fees under the Public (er$ice .ct cannot be sustained& The company has a
right to be heard, before it may be ordered to pay& (.ng Tibay $& 1IR,
:6 Phil& :3) (5624
The third order can be %ustified& The fact that the TR@ has
allowed a pro$isional rate increase does not bind it to make the order
permanent if the e$idence later submitted does not %ustify increase but,
on the contrary, warrants the reduction of rates&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0> A4!%!6"&$"!5#
1994 N/& 60
. complaint was filed by Intelligence agents of the @ureau of
Immigration and Deportation (@ID against (te$ie& a ,erman national, for
his deportation as an undesirable alien& The Immigration 1ommissioner
directed the (pecial @oard of InAuiry to conduct an In$estigation& .t
the said In$estigation, a lawyer from the Degal Department of the @ID
presented as witnesses the three Intelligence agents who filed the
complaint& 9n the basis of the findings, report and recommendation of
the @oard of (pecial InAuiry, the @ID 1ommissioners unanimously $oted
for (te$ieBs deportation& (te$ieBs lawyer Auestioned the deportation
order
5 9n the ground that (te$ie was denied due process because the
@ID 1ommissioners who rendered the decision were not the ones who
recei$ed the e$idence, in $iolation of the HHe who decides must hearH
rule& Is he correct;
8 9n the ground that there was a $iolation of due process
because the complainants, the prosecutor and the hearing officers were
all subordinates of the @ID 1ommissioners who rendered the deportation
decision& Is he correct;
.nswer0
5 /o, (te$ie is not correct& .s held in .damson . .damson, Inc&
$s& .mores, 5)8 (1R. 837, administrati$e due process does not reAuire
that the actual taking of testimony or the presentation of e$idence
before the same officer who will decide the case&
In .merican Tobacco 1o& $& Director of Patents, :7 (1R. 8?7, the
(upreme 1ourt has ruled that so long as the actual decision on the
merits of the cases is made by the officer authori#ed by law to decide,
the power to hold a hearing on the basis of which his decision will be
made can be delegated and is not offensi$e to due process& The 1ourt
noted that0 H.s long as a party is not depri$ed of his right to present
his own case and submit e$idence in support thereof, and the decision is
supported by the e$idence in the record, there is no Auestion that the
reAuirements of due process and fair trial are fully met& In short,
there is no abrogation of responsibility on the part of the officer
concerned as the actual decision remains with and is made by said
officer& It is, howe$er, reAuired that to gi$e the substance of a
hearing, which is for the purpose of making determinations upon e$idence
the officer who makes the determinations must consider and appraise the
e$idence which %ustifies them&
8 /o, (te$ie was not denied due process simply because the
complainants, the prosecutor, and the hearing officers were all
subordinates of the 1ommissioner of the @ureau of Immigration and
Deportation& In accordance with the ruling in -rianger U ,alinger, Inc&
$s& 1ourt of Industrial Relations, 554 Phil& 274, the findings of the
subordinates are not conclusi$e upon the 1ommissioners, who ha$e the
discretion to accept or re%ect them& What is important is that (te$ie
was not depri$ed of his right to present his own case and submit
e$idence in support thereof, the decision is supported by substantial
e$idence, and the commissioners acted on their own independent
consideration of the law and facts of the case, and did not simply
accept the $iews of their subordinates in arri$ing at a decision&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0> 8/&7#!",&# P&/.##!%'6
199? N/& 520
The (Q( H!asoyH of Panamanian registry, while moored at the (outh
Harbor, was found to ha$e contraband goods on board& The 1ustoms Team
found out that the $essel did not ha$e the reAuired shipBs permit and
shipping documents& The $essel and its cargo were held and a warrant of
(ei#ure and Detention was issued after due in$estigation& In the course
of the forfeiture proceedings, the ship captain and the shipBs resident
agent e'ecuted sworn statements before the 1ustom legal officer
admitting that contraband cargo were found aboard the $essel& The
shipping lines ob%ect to the admission of the statements as e$idence
contending that during their e'ecution, the captain and the shipping
agent were not assisted by counsel, in $iolation of due process& Decide,
.nswer0
The admission of the statements of the captain and the shipping
agent as e$idence did not $iolate due process e$en if they were not
assisted by counsel& In >eeder International Dine, Pts& Dtd& $& 1ourt of
.ppeals, 567 (1R. ?28, It was held that the assistance of counsel is not
indispensable to due process in forfeiture proceedings since such
proceedings are not criminal in nature&
!oreo$er, the strict rules of e$idence and procedure will not
apply in administrati$e proceedings like sei#ure and forfeiture
proceedings& What is important is that the parties are afforded the
opportunity to be heard and the decision of the administrati$e authority
is based on substantial e$idence&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0> P&!/& N/"!.# $% E#$&!%'
1987 N/& IIF0
In the morning of .ugust 8?, 56?7, during the height of Ethe
fighting at 1hannel 2 and 1amelot Hotel, the military closed Radio
(tation II, which was e'citedly reporting the successes of the rebels
and mo$ements towards !anila and troops friendly to the rebels& The
reports were correct and factual& 9n 9ctober :, 56?7, after normalcy had
returned and the ,o$ernment had full control of the situation, the
/ational Telecommunications 1ommission, without notice and hearing, but
merely on the basis of the report of the military, cancelled the
franchise of station II&
Discuss the legality of0
(a The action taken against the station on .ugust 8?, 56?7G
(b The cancellation of the franchise of the station on 9ctober
:, 56?7&
.nswer0
(b @ut the cancellation of the franchise of the station on
9ctober :, 56?7, without prior notice and hearing, is $oid& .s held in
-astern @roadcasting 1orp& (D<R- $& Dans, 537 (1R. :27 (56?), the
cardinal primary reAuirements in administrati$e proceedings (one of
which is that the parties must first be heard as laid down in .ng Tibay
$& 1IR, :6 Phil& :3) (5624 must be obser$ed in closing a radio station
because radio broadcasts are a form of constitutionallyEprotected
e'pression&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0> R!'9" "/ (# E#$&
1988 N/& )0
/orberto !alasmas was accused of estafa before the Regional Trial
1ourt of !anila& .fter the trial, he was found guilty& 9n appeal, his
con$iction was affirmed by the 1ourt of .ppeals& .fter the records of
his case had been remanded to the Regional Trial 1ourt for e'ecution,
and after the latter 1ourt had set the date for the promulgation of
%udgment, the accused filed a motion with the 1ourt of .ppeals to set
aside the entry of %udgment, and to remand the case to the Regional
Trial 1ourt for new trial on the ground that he had %ust disco$ered that
H.tty& Deonilo !apormaH whom he had chosen and who had acted as his
counsel before the trial court and the 1ourt of .ppeals, is not a
lawyer& Resol$ed the motion of the accused with reasons&
.nswer0
The motion should be granted and the entry of %udgment should be
set aside& .n accused is entitled to be heard by himself or counsel&
(.rt& III, sec& 52(8& +nless he is represented by an attorney, there
is a great danger that any defense presented in his behalf will be
inadeAuate considering the legal reAuisite and skill needed in court
proceedings& There would certainly be a denial of due process& (Delgado
$& 1ourt of .ppeals, 52) (1R. 3)7 (56?:&
D,# P&/.#66> P&/.#,&$0> R!'9" "/ N/"!.# $% E#$&!%'
1991 N/ 7
9n 86 Culy 5665& the -nergy Regulatory @oard (-R@, in response to
public clamor, issued a resolution appro$ing and adopting a schedule for
bringing down the prices of petroleum products o$er a period of one (5
year starting 5) .ugust 5665, o$er the ob%ection of the oil companies
which claim that the period co$ered is too long to pre%udge and foresee&
Is the resolution $alid;
.nswer0
/o, the resolution is in$alid, since the -nergy Regulatory @oard
issued the resolution without a hearing& The resolution here is not a
pro$isional order and therefore it can only be issued after appropriate
notice and hearing to affected parties& The ruling in Philippine
1ommunications (atellite 1orporation $s& .lcua#, 5?4 (1R. 85?, to the
effect that an order pro$isionally reducing the rates which a public
utility could charge, could be issued without pre$ious notice and
hearing, cannot apply&
D,# P&/.#66> S,(6"$%"!5#
200? N/ III
The municipal council of the municipality of ,uagua, Pampanga,
passed an ordinance penali#ing any person or entity engaged in the
business of selling tickets to mo$ies or other public e'hibitions, games
or performances which would charge children between 7 and 58 years of
age the full price of admission tickets instead of only oneEhalf of the
amount thereof& Would you hold the ordinance a $alid e'ercise of
legislati$e power by the municipality; Why;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The ordinance is $oid& .s held in @alacuit $& 1ourt of >irst
Instance of .gusan del /orte& 5:3 (1R. 5?8 L56??M, the ordinance is
unreasonable& It depri$es the sellers of the tickets of their property
without due process& . ticket is a property right and may be sold for
such price as the owner of it can obtain& There is nothing pernicious in
charging children the same price as adults&
EC,$0 P&/"#."!/%
1987 N/& FI0
!arina /eptunia, daughter of a sea captain and sister to four
marine officers decided as a child to follow in her fatherBs footsteps&
In her growing up years she was as much at home on board a boat as she
was in the family home by the sea& In time she earned a @achelor of
(cience degree in !arine Transportation, ma%or in /a$igation and
(eamanship& (he ser$ed her apprenticeship for a year in a merchant
marine $essel registered for foreign trade and another year on a
merchant marine $essel registered for coastwise trade& @ut to become a
fullEfledged marine officer she had to pass the appropriate board
e'aminations before she could get her professional license and
registration& (he applied in Canuary 56?: to take e'amination for marine
officers but her application was re%ected for the reason that the law
Regulating the Practice of !arine Profession in the Philippines (Pres&
Dec& /o& 67 (5673 specifically prescribes that H/o person shall be
Aualified for e'amination as marine officer unless he is0
!arina feels $ery aggrie$ed o$er the denial and has come to you
for ad$ice& (he wants to know0
(5 Whether the @oard of -'aminers had any plausible or legal
basis for re%ecting her application in 56?:& -'plain briefly&
(8 Whether the 56?7 1onstitution guarantees her the right to
admission to take the coming Canuary 56?? marine officers e'aminations&
-'plain and cite rele$ant pro$isions&
.nswer0
(a The disAualification of females from the practice of marine
profession constitutes as indi$idious discrimination condemned by the
-Aual Protection 1lause of that 1onstitution (.rt& IF, (ec& 5 In the
+nited (tates, under a similar pro$ision, while earlier decisions of the
(upreme 1ourt upheld the $alidity of a statute prohibiting women from
bartending unless she was the wife or daughter of a male owner (,oesart
$& 1leary, 33) +&(& 2:2 (562? and denying to women the right to
practice law (@radwell $& (tate, ?3 +&(& (5: Wall 534 (5?73, recent
decisions ha$e in$alidated statutes or regulations pro$iding for
differential treatment of females based on nothing stereotypical and
inaccurate generali#ations& The 1ourt held that Hclassification based on
se', like classifications based upon race, alienage, or national origin,
are inherently suspect, and must therefore be sub%ected to strict
%udicial scrutiny&H .ccordingly, the 1ourt in$alidated a statute
permitting a male ser$iceman to claim his spouse as a dependent to
obtain increased Auarter allowance, regardless of whether the wife is
actually dependent on him, while denying the same right to a
ser$icewoman unless her husband was in fact dependent on her for o$er
one half of his support& (>rontierro $ Richardson, 255 +&(& :?7 (5673G
.ccord 1raig, $& @oren, 286 +&(& 564 (567: (pro$iding for sale of beer
to males under 85 and to females under 5?G Reed $& Reed& 242 +&(& 75
(5675 (preference gi$en to men o$er women for appointment as
administrators of estates in$alid&
(b In addition to the -Aual Protection 1lause, the 56?7
1onstitution now reAuires the (tate to Hensure the fundamental eAuality
before the law of women and menH (.rt II, (ec& 52 and to pro$ide them
with Hsuch facilities and opportunities that will enhance their welfare
and enable them to reali#e their full potential in the ser$ice of the
nation&H (.rt& IIII, (ec& 52& These pro$isions put in serious doubt the
$alidity of PD 67 limiting the practice of marine profession to males&
EC,$0 P&/"#."!/%
1987 N/& I0
HIH, a scion of a rich family, applied for enrolment with the (an
1arlos (eminary in !andaluyong, !etro !anila& @ecause he had been
pre$iously e'pelled from another seminary for scholastic deficiency, the
Rector of (an 1arlos (eminary denied the application without gi$ing any
grounds for the denial& .fter HIH was refused admission, the Rector
admitted another applicant, who is the son of a poor farmer who was also
academically deficient&
(a Prepare a short argument citing rules, laws, or
constitutional pro$isions in support of HIBsH motion for reconsideration
of the denial of his application&
.nswer0
(a The refusal of the seminary to admit HIH constitutes
in$idious discrimination, $iolati$e of the -Aual Protection 1lause (.rt&
III, (ec& 5 of the 1onstitution& The fact, that the other applicant is
the son of a poor fanner does not make the discrimination any less
in$idious since the other applicant is also academically deficient& The
re$erse discrimination practiced by the seminary cannot be %ustified
because unlike the race problem in .merica, po$erty is not a condition
of inferiority needing redress&
EC,$0 P&/"#."!/%
1994 N/& 58G
The Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports Issued a circular
disAualifying anyone who fails for the fourth time in the /ational
-ntrance Tests from admission to a 1ollege of Dentistry&
I who was thus disAualified, Auestions the constitutionality of
the circular&
5 Did the circular depri$e her of her constitutional right to
education;
8 Did the circular $iolate the eAual protection clause of the
1onstitution;
.nswer0
5 /o, because it is a permissi$e limitation to right to
education, as it is intended to ensure that only those who are Aualified
to be dentists are admitted for enrollment&&&&
8 /o, the circular did not $iolate the eAual protection clause
of the 1onstitution& There is a substantial distinction between
dentistry students and other students& The dental profession directly
affects the li$es and health of people& 9ther professions do not in$ol$e
the same delicate responsibility and need not be similarly treated& This
is in accordance with the ruling in Department of -ducation, 1ulture and
(ports $s& (an Diego, 5?4 (1R. )33&
EC,$0 P&/"#."!/% $% D,# P&/.#66 C0$,6#> A0!#% E4=0/)4#%"
1989 N/ 5?0
.n ordinance of the 1ity of !anila reAuires e$ery alien desiring
to obtain employment of whate$er kind, including casual and partEtime
employment, in the city to secure an employment permit from the 1ity
!ayor and to pay a work permit fee of P)44& Is the ordinance $alid;
.nswer0
/o, the ordinance is not $alid& In Fillegas $s& Hiu 1hiong Tsai
Pao Ho, ?: (1R. 874, it was held that such an ordinance $iolates eAual
protection& It failed to consider the $alid substantial differences
among the aliens reAuired to pay the fee& The same among it being
collected from e$ery employed alien, whether he is casual or permanent,
partEtime or fullEtime& The ordinance also $iolates due process, because
it does not contain any standard to guide the mayor in the e'ercise of
the power granted to him by the ordinance& Thus, it confers upon him
unrestricted power to allow or pre$ent an acti$ity which is lawful per
se&
EC,$0 P&/"#."!/%> C/%6"!","!/%$0!") /7 S,(6!!$&) I4=&!6/%4#%"
1989 N/& 20
HIH was sentenced to a penalty of 5 year and ) months of prision
correctional and to pay a fine of P?,444&44, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of sol$ency& .fter ser$ing his prison term, HIH
asked the Director of Prisons whether he could already be released& HIH
was asked to pay the fine of P),444&44 and he said he could not afford
it, being an indigent& The Director informed him he has to ser$e an
additional prison term at the rate of one day per eight pesos in
accordance with .rticle 36 of the Re$ised Penal 1ode, The lawyer of HIH
filed a petition for habeas corpus contending that the further
incarceration of his client for unpaid fines $iolates the eAual
protection clause of the 1onstitution& Decide&
.lternati$e .nswers0
(5 The petition should be granted, because .rticle 36 of the
Re$ised Penal 1ode is unconstitutional& In Tate $s& (hort, 245 +&(& 36),
the +nited (tates (upreme 1out held that imposition of subsidiary
imprisonment upon a con$ict who is too poor to pay a fine $iolates eAual
protection, because economic status cannot ser$e as a $alid basis for
distinguishing the duration of the imprisonment between a con$ict who is
able to pay the fine and a con$ict who is unable to pay it&
(8 9n the other hand, in +nited (tates e' rel& Pri$itera $s&
Oross, 836 > (upp 55?, it was held that the imposition of subsidiary
imprisonment for inability to pay a fine does not $iolate eAual
protection, because the punishment should be tailored to fit the
indi$idual, and eAual protection does not compel the eradication of
e$ery disad$antage caused by indigence& The decision was affirmed by the
+nited (tates 1ircuit 1ourt of .ppeals in 32) >8d )33, and the +nited
(tates (upreme 1ourt denied the petition for certiorari in 3?8 +&(&
655& This ruling was adopted by the Illinois (upreme 1ourt in People
$s& Williams, 35 .DR3d 684&
EC,$0 P&/"#."!/%> R!'9" "/ C9//6# P&/7#66!/%
2000 N/ IF&
+ndaunted by his three failures in the /ational !edical .dmission
Test (/!.T, 1ru# applied to take it again but he was refused because of
an order of the Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports (D-1(
disallowing flunkers from taking the test a fourth time& 1ru# filed suit
assailing this rule raising the constitutional grounds of accessible
Auality education, academic freedom and eAual protection& The go$ernment
opposes this, upholding the constitutionality of the rule on the ground
of e'ercise of police power& Decide the case discussing the grounds
raised& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.s held in Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports $& (an
Diego,5?4 (1R. )33 (56?6, the rule is a $alid e'ercise of police power
to ensure that those admitted to the medical profession are Aualified&
The arguments of 1ru# are not meritorious& The right to Auality
education and academic freedom are not absolute& +nder (ection )(3,
.rticle IIF of the 1onstitution, the right to choose a profession is
sub%ect to fair, reasonable and eAuitable admission and academic
reAuirements& The rule does not $iolate eAual protection& There is a
substantial distinction between medical students and other students&
+nlike other professions, the medical profession directly affects the
li$es of the people&
S#."!/% 2
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
1990 N/& 6G
(ome police operati$es, acting under a lawfully issued warrant for
the purpose of searching for firearms in the House of I located at /o&
54 (haw @oule$ard, Pasig, !etro !anila, found, instead of firearms, ten
kilograms of cocaine&
(5 !ay the said police operati$es lawfully sei#e the cocaine;
-'plain your answer&
(8 !ay I successfully challenge the legality of the search on
the ground that the peace officers did not inform him about his right to
remain silent and his right to counsel; -'plain your answer&
(3 (uppose the peace officers were able to find unlicensed
firearms in the house in an ad%acent lot, that is& /o, 58 (haw
@oule$ard, which is also owned by I& !ay they lawfully sei#e the said
unlicensed firearms; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
(5 <es, the police operati$es may lawfully sei#e the cocaine,
because it is an item whose possession is prohibited by law, it was in
plain$iew and it was only inad$ertently disco$ered in the course of a
lawful search& The possession of cocaine is prohibited hy (ection ? of
the Dangerous Drugs .ct& .s held in !agoncia $& Palacio, ?4 Phil& 774,
an article whose possession is prohibited by law may be sei#ed without
the need of any search warrant if it was disco$ered during a lawful
search& The additional reAuirement laid down in Roan $& ,on#ales, 52)
(1R. :?7 that the disco$ery of the article must ha$e been made
inad$ertently was also satisfied in this case&
(8 /o, I cannot successfully challenge the legality of the
search simply because the peace officers did not inform him about his
right to remain silent and his right to counsel& (ection 58(5, .rticle
III of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0
H.ny person under in$estigation for the commission of an offense
shall ha$e the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to
ha$e competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice&H
.s held in People $& Dy, 5)? (1R. 555& for this pro$ision to
apply, a suspect must be under in$estigation& There was no in$estigation
in$ol$ed in this case&
(3 The unlicensed firearms stored at 58 (haw @oule$ard may
lawfully be sei#ed since their possession is illegal& .s held in
!agoncia a Palacio, ?4 Phil& 774, when an indi$idual possesses
contraband (unlicensed firearms belong to this category, he is
committing a crime and he can be arrested without a warrant and the
contraband can be sei#ed&
.lternati$e .nswer0
In accordance with the rulings in +y Oeytin $, Fillareal, 28 Phil&
??: and People u& (y Cuco, :2 Phil& ::7, the unlicensed firearms found
in the house at 58 (haw @oule$ard may not be lawfully sei#ed, since they
were not included in the description of the articles to be sei#ed by
$irtue of the search warrant& The search warrant described the articles
to be sei#ed as firearms in the house of I located at 54 (haw @oule$ard&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
2000 N/ IIF&
a 1rack officers of the .ntiE/arcotics +nit were assigned on
sur$eillance of the en$irons of a cemetery where the sale and use of
dangerous drugs are rampant& . man with reddish and glassy eyes was
walking unsteadily mo$ing towards them but $eered away when he sensed
the presence of policemen& They approached him, introduced themsel$es as
police officers and asked him what he had clenched in his hand& .s he
kept mum, the policemen pried his hand open and found a sachet of shabu,
a dangerous drug& .ccordingly charged in court, the accused ob%ected to
the admission in e$idence of the dangerous drug because it was the
result of an illegal search and sei#ure& Rule on the ob%ection& (3*
b What are the instances when warrantless searches may be
effected; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a The ob%ection is not tenable& In accordance with !analili
$& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8?4 (1R. 244 (5667& since the accused had red eyes
and was walking unsteadily and the place is a known hangEout of drug
addicts, the police officers had sufficient reason to stop the accused
and to frisk him& (ince shabu was actually found during the
in$estigation, it could be sei#ed without the need for a search warrant&
b . warrantless search may be effected in the following
cases0
5& (earches incidental to a lawful arrest0
8& (earches of mo$ing $ehiclesG
3& (earches of prohibited articles in plain $iew0
2& -nforcement of customs lawG
)& 1onsented searchesG
:& (top and frisk (People $& !onaco, 8?) (1R. 743 L566?MG
7& Routine searches at borders and ports of entry (+nited (tates
$& Ramsey, 235 +&(& :4: L5677MG and
?& (earches of businesses in the e'ercise of $isitorial powers
to enforce police regulations (/ew <ork $& @urger, 2?8 +&(& :65 (56?7M&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
2001 N/ II
.rmed with a search and sei#ure warrant, a team of policemen led
by Inspector Trias entered a compound and searched the house described
therein as /o& 57 (peaker Pere# (t&, (ta& !esa Heights, "ue#on 1ity,
owned by !r& -rnani Pelets, for a reported cache of firearms and
ammunition& Howe$er, upon thorough search of the house, the police found
nothing&
Then, acting on a hunch, the policemen proceeded to a smaller
house inside the same compound with address at /o& 57E. (peaker Pere#
(t&, entered it, and conducted a search therein o$er the ob%ection of
!r& Pelets who happened to be the same owner of tie first house& There,
the police found the unlicensed firearms and ammunition they were
looking for&
.s a result& !r& -rnani Pelets was criminally charged in court
with Illegal possession of firearms and ammunition as penali#ed under
P&D& 5?::, as amended by R.& ?862& .t the trial, he $ehemently ob%ected
to the presentation of the e$idence against him for being inadmissible&
Is !r& -mani PeletB s contention $alid or not; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The contention of -rnani Pelet is $alid& .s held in People $s&
1ourt of .ppeals, 865(1R. 244 (5663, if the place searched is different
from that stated in the search warrant, the e$idence sei#ed is
inadmissible& The policeman cannot modify the place to be searched as
set out in the search warrant&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
1987 N/& III0
HIH a 1onstabulary 9fficer, was arrested pursuant to a lawful
court order in @aguio 1ity for murder& He was brought to !anila where a
warrantless search was conducted in his official Auarters at 1amp 1rame,
The search team found and sei#ed the murder weapon in a drawer of HIH&
1an HIH claim that the search and sei#ure were illegal and mo$e for
e'clusion from e$idence of the weapon sei#ed; -'plain&
.nswer0
<es, HIH can do so& The warrantless search cannot be %ustified as
an incident of a $alid arrest, because considerable time had elapsed
after his arrest in @aguio before the search of his Auarters in 1amp
1rame, "ue#on 1ity was made, and because the distance between the place
of arrest and the place of search negates any claim that the place
searched is within his Himmediate controlH so as to %ustify the
apprehension that he might destroy or conceal e$idence of crime before a
warrant can be obtained& (1himel $& 1alifornia, 36) +&(& 7)8 (56:6 in
/olasco $& 1ru# Pano, 527 (1R. )46 (56?7, the (upreme 1ourt
reconsidered its pre$ious decision holding that a warrantless search,
made after 34 minutes from the time of arrest, and, in a place se$eral
blocks away from the place of arrest, was $alid& It held that a
warrantless search is limited to the search of the person of the
arrestee at the time and incident to his arrest and for dangerous
weapons or anything which may be used as proof of the offense& .
contrary rule would %ustify the police in procuring a warrant of arrest
and, by $irtue thereof, not only arrest the person but also search his
dwelling . warrant reAuires that all facts as to the condition of the
property and its surroundings and its impro$ements and capabilities must
be considered, and this can only be done in a %udicial proceeding&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
1989 N/& 70
Pursuing reports that great Auantities of prohibited drugs are
being smuggled at nighttime through the shores of 1a$ite, the (outhern
Du#on 1ommand set up checkpoints at the end of the 1a$ite coastal road
to search passing motor $ehicles& . 56Eyear old boy, who finished fifth
grade, while dri$ing, was stopped by the authorities at the checkpoint&
Without any ob%ection from him, his car was inspected, and the search
yielded mari%uana lea$es hidden in the trunk compartment of the car& The
prohibited drug was promptly sei#ed, and the boy was brought to the
police station for Auestioning&
(5 Was the search without warrant legal;
.nswer0
(5 /o, the search was not $alid, because there was no probable
cause for conducting the search& .s held in .lmeda (anche# $s& +nited
(tates, 253 +&(& 8::, while a mo$ing $ehicle can be searched without a
warrant, there must still be probable cause& In the case in Auestion,
there was nothing to indicate that mari%uana lea$es were hidden in the
trunk of the car& The mere fact that the boy did not ob%ect to the
inspection of the car does not constitute consent to the search& .s
ruled in People $s& @urgos, 522 (1R. 5, the failure to ob%ect to a
warrantless search does not constitute consent, especially in the light
of the fact&
.lternati$e .nswer0
(5 <es& The reAuirement of probable cause differs from case to
case& In this one, since the police agents are confronted with
largeEscale smuggling of prohibited drugs, e'istence of which is of
public knowledge, they can set up checkpoints at strategic places, in
the same way that of in a neighborhood a child is kidnapped, it is
lawful to search cars and $ehicles lea$ing the neighborhood or $illage0
This situation is also similar to warrantless searches of mo$ing
$ehicles in customs area, which searches ha$e been upheld& (Papa $s&
!ago, 88 (1R. ?)7 (56:?& The rule is based on practical necessity&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
1992 N/, 3G
dri$erBs license,
cured&
.nswer0
license&
probable cause&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
1992 N/& )0
During the recent elections, checkpoints were set up to enforce
the election period ban on firearms&
During one such routine search one night, while looking through an
open window with a flashlight, the police saw firearms at the backseat
of a car& partially co$ered by papers and clothes&
a& .ntonio, owner and dri$er of the car in Auestion, was
charged for $iolation of the firearms ban& .re the firearms admissible
in e$idence against him; -'plain&
b& If, upon further inspection by the police, prohibited drugs
were found inside the $arious compartments of .ntonioBs car, can the
drugs be used in e$idence against .ntonio if he is prosecuted for
possession of prohibited drugs; -'plain&
.nswer0
a <es, the firearms are admissible in e$idence, because they
were $alidly sei#ed& In Falmonte $s& De Filla, 57? (1R. 855 and 5?)
(1R. ::), the (upreme 1ourt held that checkpoints may be set up to
maintain peace and order for the benefit of the public and checkpoints
are a security measure against unauthori#ed firearms& (ince the search
which resulted in the disco$ery of the firearms was limited to a $isual
search of the car, it was reasonable& @ecause of the ban on firearms,
the possession of the firearms was prohibited& (ince they were found
in plain $iew in the course of a lawful search, in accordance with the
decision in !agancia $s& Palacio, ?4 Phil& 774, they are admissible in
e$idence&
b /o, the drugs cannot be used in e$idence against .ntonio if
he is prosecuted for possession of prohibited drugs& The drugs were
found after a more e'tensi$e search of the $arious compartments of the
car& .s held in Falmonte $s& De Filla, 5?) (1R. ::), for such a search
to be $alid, there must be a probable cause& In this case, there was
no probable cause, as there was nothing to indicate that .ntonio had
prohibited drugs inside the compartments of his car&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6
199? N/& 20
Darry was an o$ernight guest in a motel& .fter he checked out the
following day, the chambermaid found an attache case which she surmised
was left behind by Darry& (he turned it o$er to the manager who, to
determine the name and address of the owner, opened the attache case and
saw packages which had a peculiar smell and upon sAuee#ing felt like
dried lea$es& His curiosity aroused, the manager made an opening on one
of the packages and took se$eral grams of the contents thereof& He took
the packages to the /@I, and in the presence of agents, opened the
packages, the contents of which upon laboratory e'amination, turned out
to be mari%uana flowering tops, Darry was subseAuently found, brought to
the /@I 9ffice where he admitted ownership of the attache case and the
packages& He was made to sign a receipt for the packages& Darry was
charged in court for possession of prohibited drugs& He was con$icted&
9n appeal, he now poses the following issues0
5 The packages are inadmissible in e$idence being the product of
an illegal search and sei#ureG &
8 /either is the receipt he signed admissible, his rights under
custodial in$estigation not ha$ing been obser$ed&
Decide& .nswer0
9n the assumption that the issues were timely raised the answers
are as follows0
5 The packages are admissible in e$idence& The one who opened the
packages was the manager of the motel without any interference of the
agents of the /ational @ureau of In$estigation& .s held in People us&
!arti, 563 (1R. )7, the constitutional right against unreasonable
searches and sei#ures refers to unwarranted intrusion by the go$ernment
and does not operate as a restraint upon pri$ate indi$iduals&
8 The receipt is not admissible in e$idence& &&&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6> A0!#%6
2001 N/ IF
. is an alien& (tate whether, in the Philippines, he0
b Is entitled to the right against illegal searches and sei#ures
and against illegal arrests& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
b .liens are entitled to the right against illegal searches
and sei#ures and illegal arrests& .s applied in People $& 1hua Ho (an,
347 (1R. 238 (5666, these rights are a$ailable to all persons,
including aliens&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6> A==0!.$(!0!")
2002 N/ FIII&
9ne day a passenger bus conductor found a manBs handbag left in
the bus& When the conductor opened the bag, he found inside a catling
card with the ownerBs name (Dante ,alang and address, a few hundred
peso bills, and a small plastic bag containing a white powdery
substance& He brought the powdery substance to the /ational @ureau of
In$estigation for laboratory e'amination and it was determined to be
methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu, a prohibited drug& Dante ,alang
was subseAuently traced and found and brought to the /@I 9ffice where he
admitted ownership of the handbag and its contents& In the course of the
interrogation by /@I agents, and without the presence and assistance of
counsel, ,alang was made to sign a receipt for the plastic bag and its
shabu contents& ,alang was charged with illegal possession of prohibited
drugs and was con$icted&
9n appeal he contends that E
.& The plastic bag and its contents are inadmissible in
e$idence being the product of an illegal search and sei#ureG (3* and
@& The receipt he signed is also inadmissible as his rights
under custodial in$estigation were not obser$ed& (8*
Decide the case with reasons&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& The plastic bag and its contents are admissible in e$idence,
since it was not the /ational @ureau of In$estigation but the bus
conductor who opened the bag and brought it to the /ational @ureau of
In$estigation& .s held In People $& !arti, 563 (1R. )7 (5665, the
constitutional right against unreasonable search and sei#ure is a
restraint upon the go$ernment& It does not apply so as to reAuire
e'clusion of e$idence which came into the possession of the ,o$ernment
through a search made by a pri$ate citi#en&
@& It is inadmissible&&&&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6> W$&&$%"0#66 A&&#6"6
199? N/& 60
Cohann learned that the police were looking for him in connection
with the rape of an 5?Eyear old girl, a neighbor& He went to the police
station a week later and presented himself to the desk sergeant&
1oincidentally& the rape $ictim was in the premises e'ecuting an
e'tra%udicial statement& Cohann, along with si' (: other suspects, were
placed in a police lineEup and the girl pointed to him as the rapist&
Cohann was arrested and locked up in a cell& Cohann was charged with
rape in court but prior to arraignment in$oked his right to preliminary
in$estigation& This was denied by the %udge, and thus, trial proceeded&
.fter the prosecution presented se$eral witnesses, Cohann through
counsel, in$oked the right to ball and filed a motion therefor, which
was denied outright by the Cudge& Cohann now files a petition for
certiorari before the 1ourt of .ppeals arguing that0
5 His arrest was not in accordance with law&
Decide& .nswer0
5 <es, the warrantless arrest of Cohann was not in accordance
with law& .s held in ,o $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 84: (1R. 53?, his case does
not fall under the Instances in Rule 553, sec& ) (a of the 56?) Rules
of 1riminal Procedure authori#ing warrantless arrests& It cannot be
considered a $alid warrantless arrest because Cohann did not commit a
crime in the presence of the police officers, since they were not
present when Cohann had allegedly raped his neighbor& /either can It be
considered an arrest under Rule 553 sec& ) (b which allows an arrest
without a warrant to be made when a crime has in fact %ust been
committed and the person making the arrest has personal knowledge
offsets indicating that the person to be arrested committed it& (ince
Cohann was arrested a week after the alleged rape, it cannot be deemed
to be a crime which Hhas %ust been committedH& /or did the police
officers who arrested him ha$e personal knowledge of facts Indicating
that Cohann raped his neighbor&
S#$&.9#6 $% S#!F,&#6> W$&&$%"6 /7 A&&#6"
1991 N/& ?0
9n the basis of a $erified report and confidential information
that $arious electronic eAuipment, which were illegally imported into
the Philippines, were found in the bodega of the Tikasan 1orporation
located at 5448 @inakayan (t&, 1ebu 1ity, the 1ollector of 1ustoms of
1ebu issued, in the morning of 8 Canuary 56??, a Warrant of (ei#ure and
Detention against the corporation for the sei#ure of the electronic
eAuipment& The warrant particularly describes the electronic eAuipment
and specifies the pro$isions of the Tariff and 1ustoms 1ode which were
$iolated by the importation&
The warrant was ser$ed and implemented in the afternoon of 8
Canuary 56?? by 1ustoms policemen who then sei#ed the described
eAuipment& The in$entory of the sei#ed articles was signed by the
(ecretary of the Tikasan 1orporation& The following day, a hearing
officer in the 9ffice of the 1ollector of 1ustoms conducted a hearing on
the confiscation of the eAuipment&
Two days thereafter, the corporation filed with the (upreme 1ourt
a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus to set aside the
warrant, en%oin the 1ollector and his agents from further proceeding
with the forfeiture hearing and to secure the return of the confiscated
eAuipment, alleging therein that the warrant issued is null and $oid for
the reason that, pursuant to (ection 8 of .rticle III of the 56?7
1onstitution, only a %udge may issue a search warrant& In his comment to
the petition, the 1ollector of 1ustoms, through the 9ffice of the
(olicitor ,eneral, contends that he is authori#ed under the Tariff and
1ustom 1ode to order the sei#ure of the eAuipment whose duties and ta'es
were not paid and that the corporation did not e'haust administrati$e
remedies&
(a (hould the petition be granted; Decide&
.nswer0
(a The petition should not be granted& +nder (ecs& 884) and 884?
of the Tariff and 1ustoms 1ode, customs officials are authori#ed to
enter any warehouse, not used as dwelling, for the purpose of sei#ing
any article which is sub%ect to forfeiture& >or this purpose they need
no warrant issued by a court& .s stated in Fiduya $s& @erdiago, 73 (1R.
))3& for centuries the sei#ure of goods by customs officials to enforce
the customs laws without need of a search warrant has been recogni#ed&
S#."!/% ?
P&!5$.) /7 C/44,%!.$"!/%
2001 N/ III
H.H has a telephone line with an e'tension& 9ne day, H.H was
talking to H@H o$er the telephone& H.H conspired with his friend H1H,
who was at the end of the e'tension line listening to H.BsH telephone
con$ersation with H@H in order to o$erhear and tapeErecord the
con$ersation wherein H@H confidentially admitted that with e$ident
premeditation, he (@ killed HDH for ha$ing cheated him in their
business partnership& H@H was not aware that the telephone con$ersation
was being tapeErecorded&
In the criminal case against H@H for murder, is the tapeErecorded
con$ersation containing his admission admissible in e$idence; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
The tapeErecorded con$ersation is not admissible in e$idence& .s
held in (alcedoE9rtane# $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 83) (1R. 555 (5662&
Republic .ct /o& 2844 makes the tapeErecording of a telephone
con$ersation done without the authori#ation of all the parties to the
con$ersation, inadmissible in e$idence& In addition, the taping of the
con$ersation $iolated the guarantee of pri$acy of communications
enunciated in (ection 3, .rticle III of the 1onstitution&
P&!5$.) /7 C/44,%!.$"!/% $% C/&&#6=/%#%.#
1989 N/& ?0
While ser$ing sentence in !untinglupa for the crime of theft, HIH
stabbed dead one of his guards, HIH was charged with murder& During his
trial, the prosecution introduced as e$idence a letter written in prison
by HIH to his wife tending to establish that the crime of murder was the
result of premeditation& The letter was written $oluntarily& In the
course of inspection, it was opened and read by a warden pursuant to the
rules of discipline of the @ureau of Prisons and considering its
contents, the letter was turned o$er to the prosecutor& The lawyer of
HIH ob%ected to the presentation of the letter and mo$ed for its return
on the ground that it $iolates the right of HIH against unlawful search
and sei#ure& Decide&
.nswer0
The ob%ection of the lawyer must be sustained, (ection 3(5,
.rticle IF of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe pri$acy of communication and correspondence shall be
in$iolable e'cept upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety
or order reAuires otherwise as prescribed by law&H
There was no court order which authori#ed the warden to read the
letter of HIH& /either is there any law specifically authori#ing the
@ureau of Prisons to read the letter of HIH, +nder (ection 3(5, .rticle
III of the 56?7 1onstitution, to interfere with any correspondence when
there is no court order, there must be a law authori#ing it in the
interest of public safety or order&
The ruling of the +nited (tates (upreme 1ourt in the case of
(troud $s& +nited (tates, 8)5 +&(& 5) is not applicable here, because
(ection 3(5, .rticle III of the 56?7 1onstitution has no counterpart in
the .merican 1onstitution&
Hence, in accordance with (ection 3(8, .rticle III of the 56?7
1onstitution, the letter is inadmissible in e$idence&
.lternati$e .nswer0
The ob%ection of the lawyer must be o$erruled& In Hudson $s&
Palmer, 2:? +&(& )57, it was held that the constitutional prohibition
against illegal searches and sei#ures does not e'tend to the confines of
the prison& In (troud $s& +nited (tates, 8)5 +&(& 5), the +nited (tates
(upreme 1ourt held that letters $oluntarily written by a prisoner and
e'amined by the warden which contained incriminatory statements were
admissible in e$idence& Their inspection by the prison authorities did
not $iolate the constitutional prohibition against illegal searches and
sei#ures& This is a established practice reasonably designed to promote
discipline within the penitentiary&
P&!5$.) /7 C/44,%!.$"!/% $% C/&&#6=/%#%.#
1998 N/ FII&
The police had suspicions that Cuan (amson, member of the
sub$ersi$e /ew Proletarian .rmy, was using the mail for propaganda
purposes in gaining new adherents to its cause& The 1hief of Police of
@antolan, Danao del (ur ordered the Postmaster of the town to intercept
and open all mail addressed to and coming from Cuan (amson in the
interest of the national security& Was the order of the 1hief of Police
$alid; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
/o, the order of the 1hief of Police is not $alid, because there
is no law which authori#es him to order the Postmaster to open the
letters addressed to and coming from Cuan (amson& .n official in the
-'ecuti$e Department cannot Interfere with the pri$acy of correspondence
and communication in the absence of a law authori#ing him to do so or a
lawful order of the court&
(ection 3(5, .rticle III of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe pri$acy of communication and correspondence shall be
in$iolable e'cept upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety
or order reAuires otherwise as prescribed by law&H
S#."!/% 4
8&##/4 /7 E1=&#66!/%
1988 N/& 5:0
The (ecretary of Transportation and 1ommunications has warned
radio station operators against selling blocked time, on the claim that
the time co$ered thereby are often used by those buying them to attack
the present administration& .ssume that the department implements this
warning and orders owners and operators of radio stations not to sell
blocked time to interested parties without prior clearance from the
Department of Transportation and 1ommunications&
<ou are approached by an interested party affected ad$ersely by
that order of the (ecretary of Transportation and 1ommunications& What
would you do regarding that ban on the sale of blocked time; -'plain
your answer&
.nswer0
I would challenge its $alidity in court on the ground that it
constitutes a prior restraint on freedom of e'pression& (uch a
limitation is $alid only in e'ceptional cases, such as where the purpose
is to pre$ent actual obstruction to recruitment of ser$ice or the
sailing dates of transports or the number and location of troops, or for
the purpose of enforcing the primary reAuirements of decency or the
security of community life& (/ear $& !innesota, 8?3 +&(, :67 (5635&
.ttacks on the go$ernment, on the other hand, cannot %ustify prior
restraints& >or as has been pointed out, Hthe interest of society and
the maintenance of good go$ernment demand a full discussion of public
affairs& 1omplete liberty to comment on the conduct of public men is a
scalpel in the case of free speech& The sharp incision of its probe
relie$es the abscesses of officialdom& !en in public life may suffer
under a hostile and an un%ust accusationG the wound can be assuaged with
the balm of a clear conscience,H (+nited (tates $ @ustos, 37 Phil& 725
(565?&
The parties ad$ersely affected may also disregard the regulation
as being on its face $oid& .s has been held, Hany system of prior
restraints of e'pression comes to the court bearing a hea$y presumption
against its constitutional $alidity,H and the go$ernment Hthus carries a
hea$y burden of showing %ustification for the imposition of such a
restraint&H (/ew <ork Times 1o& $& +nited (tates, 243 +&(& 753 (5675&
The usual presumption of $alidity that inheres in legislation is
re$ersed in the case of laws imposing prior restraint on freedom of
e'pression&
8&##/4 /7 E1=&#66!/%
200? N/ II
!ay the 1ommission on -lections (19!-D-1 prohibit the posting of
decals and stickers on HmobileH places, public or pri$ate, such as on a
pri$ate $ehicle, and limit their location only to the authori#ed posting
areas that the 19!-D-1 itself fi'es; -'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.ccording to .diong $& 1ommission on -lections& 847 (1R. 758 L5
668M, the prohibition is unconstitutional& It curtails the freedom of
e'pression of indi$iduals who wish to e'press their preference for a
candidate by posting decals and stickers on their cars and to con$ince
others to agree with them& It is also o$erbroad, because it encompasses
pri$ate property and constitutes depri$ation of property without due
process of law& 9wnership of property includes the right to use& The
prohibition is censorship, which cannot be %ustified&
8&##/4 /7 S=##.9
1992 N/& 50
1ongress passes a law prohibiting tele$ision stations from airing
any commercial ad$ertisement which promotes tobacco or in any way
glamori#es the consumption of tobacco products&
This legislation was passed in response to findings by the
Department of Health about the alarming rise in lung diseases in the
country& The World Health 9rgani#ation has also reported that +&(&
tobacco companies ha$eEshifted marketing efforts to the Third World due
to dwindling sales in the healthEconscious .merican market,
1owboy De$yBs, a Ceans company, recently released an ad$ertisement
featuring model Richard @urgos wearing De$yBs %ackets and %eans and
holding a pack of !arlboro cigarettes&
The .sian @roadcasting /etwork (.@/, a pri$ately owned tele$ision
station, refuses to air the ad$ertisement in compliance with the law&
a .ssume that such refusal abridges the freedom of speech& Does
the constitutional prohibition against the abridgement of the freedom of
speech apply to acts done by .@/, a pri$ate corporation; -'plain&
b !ay 1owboy De$yBs, a pri$ate corporation, in$oke the free
speech guarantee in its fa$or; -'plain&
c Regardless of your answers abo$e, decide the
constitutionality of the law in Auestion&
.nswerG
a The constitutional prohibition against the freedom of speech
does not apply to .@/, a pri$ate corporation& .s stated in Hudgens $s&
/ational Dabor Relations @oard, 282 +&(& )47, the constitutional
guarantee of freedom of speech is a guarantee only against abridgement
by the go$ernment& It does not therefore apply against pri$ate parties,
.lternati$e .nswerG
(ince .@/ has a franchise, it may be considered an agent of the
go$ernment by complying with the law and refusing to air the
ad$ertisement, it alined itself with the go$ernment& Thus it rendered
itself liable for a lawsuit which is based on abridgement of the freedom
of speech& +nder .rticle 38 of the 1i$il 1ode, e$en pri$ate parties may
be liable for damages for impairment of the freedom of speech&
b 1owboy De$yBs may in$oke the constitutional guarantee of
freedom of speech in its fa$or& In >irst /ational @ank of @oston $s&
@ellotti, 23) +&(& 7:), it was ruled that this guarantee e'tends to
corporations& In Firginia (tate @oard of Pharmacy $s& Firginia 1iti#ens
1onsumer 1ouncil Inc&, 28) +&(& 72?, it was held that this right e'tends
to commercial ad$ertisements& In .yer Productions Pty, Dtd& $s&
1apulong, 5:4 (1R. ?:5, the (upreme 1ourt held that e$en if the
production of a film is a commercial acti$ity that is e'pected to yield
profits, it is co$ered by the guarantee of freedom of speech&
c The law is constitutional& It is a $alid e'ercise of
police power, &&&&
8&##/4 /7 "9# P&#66
1987 N/& IIF0
In the morning of .ugust 8?, 56?7, during the height of Ethe
fighting at 1hannel 2 and 1amelot Hotel, the military closed Radio
(tation II, which was e'citedly reporting the successes of the rebels
and mo$ements towards !anila and troops friendly to the rebels& The
reports were correct and factual& 9n 9ctober :, 56?7, after normalcy had
returned and the ,o$ernment had full control of the situation, the
/ational Telecommunications 1ommission, without notice and hearing, but
merely on the basis of the report of the military, cancelled the
franchise of station II&
Discuss the legality of0
(a The action taken against the station on .ugust 8?, 56?7G
(b The cancellation of the franchise of the station on 9ctober
:, 56?7&
.nswer0
(a The closing down of Radio (tation II during the fighting is
permissible& With respect news media, wartime censorship has been upheld
on the ground that Hwhen a nation is at war many things that might be
said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its efforts that their
utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no 1ourt
could regard them as protected by any constitutional right&H The
security of community life may be protected against incitements to acts
of $iolence and the o$erthrow by force of orderly go$ernment& (/ear $&
!innesota, 8?3 +&(& :67 (5635, Auoting Custice HolmeBs opinion in
(chenck $& +nited (tates, 826 +&(& 27 (5656G /ew <ork Times $& +nited
(tates, 243 +&(& 753 (5675 With greater reason then may censorship in
times of emergency be %ustified in the case of broadcast media since
their freedom is somewhat lesser in scope& The impact of the $ibrant
speech, as Custice ,utierre# said, is forceful and immediate& +nlike
readers of the printed work, a radio audience has lesser opportunity to
cogitate, analy#e and re%ect the utterance& (-astern @roadcasting 1orp
(D<R- $, Dans, 537 (1R. :27 (56?) & In >11 $& Pacifica >oundation,
23? +&(& 78: (567?, it was held that Hof all forms of communication, it
is broadcasting which has recei$ed the most limited >irst .mendment
Protection&H
8&##/4 /7 "9# P&#66> A.",$0 M$0!.#
2004 @-.& The (T.R, a national daily newspaper, carried an
e'clusi$e report stating that (enator II recei$ed a house and lot
located at << (treet, !akati, in consideration for his $ote cutting
cigarette ta'es by )4*& The (enator sued the (T.R, its reporter, editor
and publisher for libel, claiming the report was completely false and
malicious& .ccording to the (enator, there is no << (treet in !akati,
and the ta' cut was only 84*& He claimed one million pesos in damages&
The defendants denied Ractual malice,S claiming pri$ileged
communication and absolute freedom of the press to report on public
officials and matters of public concern& If there was any error, the
(T.R said it would publish the correction promptly&
Is there Ractual maliceS in (T.RKs reportage; How is Ractual
maliceS defined; .re the defendants liable for damages; ()*
R!'9" "/ A66#4(0) A O&'$%!F#> G/5#&%4#%" E4=0/)##6
2000 N/ III
Public school teachers staged for days mass actions at the
Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports P-1( to press for the
immediate grant of their demand for additional pay& The D-1( (ecretary
issued to them a notice of the illegality of their unauthori#ed action,
ordered them to immediately return to work, and warned them of imposable
sanctions& They ignored this and continued with their mass action& The
D-1( (ecretary issued orders for their pre$enti$e suspension without pay
and charged the teachers with gross misconduct and gross neglect of duty
for unauthori#ed abandonment of teaching posts and absences without
lea$e&
a .re employees in the public sector allowed to form unions;
To strike; Why; (3*
b The teachers claim that their right to peaceably assemble
and petition the go$enment for redress of grie$ances has been curtailed&
.re they correct; Why; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
a (ection ?, .rticle III of the 1onstitution allows employees in
the public sector to form unions& Howe$er, they cannot go on strike& .s
e'plained in (ocial (ecurity (ystem -mployees .ssociation $& 1ourt of
.ppeals& 57) (1R. :?: L56?6M, the terms and conditions of their
employment are fi'ed by law& -mployees in the public sector cannot
strike to secure concessions from their employer&
b& The teachers cannot claim that their right to peaceably
assemble and petition for the redress of grie$ances has been curtailed&
.ccording to @angalisan $& 1ourt of .ppeals& 87: (1R. :56 (5667, they
can e'ercise this right without stoppage of classes&
R!'9" "/ A66#4(0)> P#&4!"6
1992 N/& 20
9lympia .cademy, a pri$ate uni$ersity, issued a student regulation
for maintaining order in the school campus and to ensure that academic
acti$ities shall be conducted effecti$ely&
Henceforth, e$ery student organi#ation intending to hold any
symposium, con$ocation, rally or any assembly within school property and
in$ol$ing at least 84 people must file, for the prior appro$al of the
Dean of (tudents, an .pplication setting forth the time, place, e'pected
si#e of the group, and the sub%ectEmatter and purpose of the assembly&
The Deague of /ationalist (tudents Auestions the $alidity of the
new regulation& Resol$e&
.nswerG
The regulation is $alid& .s held In Rarnento us& !alEabanan, 586
(1R. 3)6, if an assembly will be held by students in school premises,
permit must be sought from the school authorities, who are de$oid of the
power to deny such reAuest arbitrarily or unreasonably& In granting such
permit, there may be conditions as to the time and place of the assembly
to a$oid disruption of classes or stoppage of work of the nonEacademic
personnel&
R!'9" "/ A66#4(0)> T#$.9#&6
2002 N/ I
Ten public school teachers of 1aloocan 1ity left their classrooms
to %oin a strike, which lasted for one month, to ask for teachersB
benefits&
The Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports charged them
administrati$ely, for which reason they were reAuired to answer and
formally in$estigated by a committee composed of the Di$ision
(uperintendent of (chools as 1hairman, the Di$ision (uper$isor as member
and a teacher, as another member& 9n the basis of the e$idence adduced
at the formal in$estigation which amply established their guilt, the
Director rendered a decision meting out to them the penalty of remo$al
from office& The decision was affirmed by the D-1( (ecretary and the
1i$il (er$ice 1ommission&
9n appeal, they reiterated the arguments they raised before the
administrati$e bodies, namely0
(a Their strike was an e'ercise of their constitutional right to
peaceful assembly and to petition the go$ernment for redress of
grie$ances&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a .ccording to De la 1ru# $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 34) (1R. 343
(5666, the argument of the teachers that they were merely e'ercising
their constitutional right to peaceful assembly and to petition the
go$ernment for redress of grie$ance cannot be sustained, because such
rights must be e'ercised within reasonable limits& When such rights were
e'ercised on regular school days instead of during the free time of the
teachers, the teachers committed acts pre%udicial to the best interests
of the ser$ice&
S#."!/% <
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%
1989 N/& )0
HIH is ser$ing his prison sentence in !untinglupa& He belongs to a
religious sect that prohibits the eating of meat& He asked the Director
of Prisons that he be ser$ed with meatless diet& The Director refused
and HIH sued the Director for damages for $iolating his religious
freedom& Decide&
.nswer0
<es, the Director of Prison is liable under .rticle 38 of the
1i$il 1ode for $iolating the religious freedom of HIH& .ccording to the
decision of the +nited (tates (upreme 1ourt in the case of 9BDone $s&
-state of (haba##, 547 (& 1t& 8244, con$icted prisoners retain their
right to free e'ercise of religion& .t the same time, lawful
incarceration brings about necessary limitations of many pri$ileges and
rights %ustified by the considerations underlying the penal system& In
considering the appropriate balance between these two factors,
reasonableness should be the test& .ccommodation to religious freedom
can be made if it will not in$ol$e sacrificing the interests of security
and it will ha$e no impact on the allocation of the resources of the
penitentiary& In this case, pro$iding HIH with a meatless diet will not
create a security problem or unduly increase the cost of food being
ser$ed to the prisoners& In fact, in the case of 9B Done $s& -state of
(haba##, it was noted that the !oslem prisoners were being gi$en a
different meal whene$er pork would be ser$ed&
.lternati$e .nswer0
The suit should be dismissed& The >ree -'ercise 1lause of the
1onstitution is essentially a restraint on go$ernmental interference
with the right of indi$iduals to worship as they please& It is not a
mandate to the state to take positi$e, affirmati$e action to enable the
indi$idual to en%oy his freedom& It would ha$e been different had the
Director of Prisons prohibited meatless diets in the penal institution&
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%
1998 N/ IF&
. religious organi#ation has a weekly tele$ision program& The
program presents and propagates its religious, doctrines, and compares
their practices with those of other religions&
.s the !o$ie and Tele$ision Re$iew and 1lassification @oard
(!TR1@ found as offensi$e se$eral episodes of the program which
attacked other religions, the !TR1@ reAuired the organi#ation to submit
its tapes for re$iew prior to airing&
The religious organi#ation brought the case to court on the ground
that the action of the !TR1@ suppresses its freedom of speech and
interferes with its right to free e'ercise of religion& Decide& L)*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The religious organi#ation cannot in$oke freedom of speech and
freedom of religion as grounds for refusing to submit the tapes to the
!o$ie and Tele$ision Re$iew and 1lassification @oard for re$iew prior to
airing& When the religious organi#ation started presenting its program
o$er tele$ision, it went into the realm of action& The right to act on
oneBs religious belief is not absolute and is sub%ect to police power
for the protection of the general welfare& Hence the tapes may be
reAuired to be re$iewed prior to airing&
In Iglesia ni 1risto $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8)6 (1R. )86, )22, the
(upreme 1ourt held0
HWe thus re%ect petitionerBs postulate that Its religious program
is per se beyond re$iew by the respondent @oard& Its public broadcast on
TF of its religious program brings it out of the bosom of internal
belief& Tele$ision is a medium that reaches e$en the eyes and ears of
children& The 1ourt reiterates the rule that the e'ercise of religions
freedom can be regulated by the (tate when it will bring about the clear
and present danger of some substanti$e e$il which the (tate is duty
bound to pre$ent, i&e&, serious detriment to the mere o$erriding
Interest of public health, public morals, or public welfare&H
Howe$er, the !o$ie and Tele$ision Re$iew and 1lassification @oard
cannot ban the tapes on the ground that they attacked other religions&
In Iglesia ni 1risto $s& 1ourt of .ppeals,& 8)6 (1R. )86, )27, the
(upreme 1ourt held0
H-$en a side glance at (ection 3 of PD /o& 56?: will re$eal that
it is not among the grounds to %ustify an order prohibiting the
broadcast of petitionerBs tele$ision program&H
!oreo$er, the broadcasts do not gi$e rise to a clear and present
danger of a substanti$e e$il& In the case of Iglesia ni 1risto $s& 1ourt
of .ppeals, 8)6 (1R. )86, )260
HPrior restraint on speech, including the religious speech,
cannot be %ustified by hypothetical fears but only by the showing of a
substanti$e and imminent e$il which has taken the reality already on the
ground&H
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%
200? N/ III
1hildren who are members of a religious sect ha$e been e'pelled
from their respecti$e public schools for refusing, on account of their
religious beliefs, to take part in the flag ceremony which includes
playing by a band or singing the national anthem, saluting the
Philippine flag and reciting the patriotic pledge& The students and
their parents assail the e'pulsion on the ground that the school
authorities ha$e acted in $iolation of their right to free public
education, freedom of speech, and religious freedom and worship& Decide
the case&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The students cannot be e'pelled from school& .s held in -bralinag
$& The Di$ision (uperintendent of (chools of 1ebu& 856 (1R. 8): L5663M,
to compel students to take part in the flag ceremony when it is against
their religious beliefs will $iolate their religious freedom& Their
e'pulsion also $iolates the duty of the (tate under .rticle IIF, (ection
5 of the 1onstitution to protect and promote the right of all citi#ens
to Auality education and make such education accessible to all&
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%> 80$' S$0,"#
1997 N/& 580
(ection 8?& Title FI, 1hapter 6, of the .dministrati$e 1ode of
56?7 reAuires all educational institutions to obser$e a simple and
dignified flag ceremony, including the playing or singing of the
Philippine /ational .nthem, pursuant to rules to be promulgated by the
(ecretary of -ducation& 1ulture and (ports, The refusal of a teacher,
student or pupil to attend or participate in the flag ceremony is a
ground for dismissal after due in$estigation& The (ecretary of -ducation
1ulture and (ports issued a memorandum implementing said pro$ision of
law& .s ordered, the flag ceremony would be held on !ondays at 7034 a&m&
during class days& . group of teachers, students and pupils reAuested
the (ecretary that they be e'empted from attending the flag ceremony on
the ground that attendance thereto was against their religious belief&
The (ecretary denied the reAuest& The teachers, students and pupils
concerned went to 1ourt to ha$e the memorandum circular declared null
and $oid&
Decide the case& .nswer0
The teachers and the students should be e'empted from the flag
ceremony& .s held in -bralinag $s& Di$ision (uperintendent of (chools of
1ebu, 8)5 (1R. ):6& to compel them to participate in the flag ceremony
will $iolate their freedom of religion& >reedom of religion cannot be
impaired e'cept upon the showing of a clear and present danger of a
substanti$e e$il which the (tate has a right to pre$ent& The refusal of
the teachers and the students to participate in the flag ceremony does
not pose a clear and present danger&
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%> N/%-E6"$(0!694#%" C0$,6#
1988 N/& 70
TawiETawi is a predominantly !oslem pro$ince& The ,o$ernor, the
FiceE,o$ernor, and members of its (angEguniang Panlalawigan are all
!oslems& Its budget pro$ides the ,o$ernor with a certain amount as his
discretionary funds& Recently, howe$er, the (angguniang Panlalawigan
passed a resolution appropriating P544,444 as a special discretionary
fund of the ,o$ernor, to& be spent by him in leading a pilgrimage of his
pro$incemates to !ecca, (audi .rabia, IslamBs holiest city&
Philconsa, on constitutional grounds, has filed suit to nullify
the resolution of the (angguniang Panlalawigan gi$ing the special
discretionary fund to the ,o$ernor for the stated purpose&
How would you decide the case; ,i$e your reasons&
.nswer0
The resolution is unconstitutional >irst, it $iolates art& FI,
sec& 86(8 of the 1onstitution which prohibits the appropriation of
public money or property, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit
or support of any system of religion, and, second, it contra$enes art&
FI, sec, 8)(: which limits the appropriation of discretionary funds
only for public purposes& The use of discretionary funds for purely
religious purpose is thus unconstitutional, and the fact that the
disbursement is made by resolution of a local legislati$e body and not
by 1ongress does not make it any less offensi$e to the 1onstitution&
.bo$e all, the resolution constitutes a clear $iolation of the /onE
establishment 1lause (art& III, sec& ) of the 1onstitution&
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%> N/%-E6"$(0!694#%" C0$,6#
1992 N/& 540
Recogni#ing the $alue of education in making the Philippine labor
market attracti$e to foreign in$estment, the Department of -ducation,
1ulture and (ports offers subsidies to accredited colleges and
uni$ersities in order to promote Auality tertiary education&
The D-1( grants a subsidy to a 1atholic school which reAuires Its
students to take at least 3 hours a week of religious instruction&
a Is the subsidy permissible; -'plain,
b Presuming that you answer in the negati$e, would it make a
difference if the subsidy were gi$en solely in the form of laboratory
eAuipment in chemistry and physics;
c Presume, on the other hand, that the subsidy is gi$en in the
form of scholarship $ouchers gi$en directly to the student and which the
student can use for paying tuition in any accredited school of his
choice, whether religious or nonEsectarian& Will your answer be
different;
.nswer0
a /o, the subsidy is not permissible& It will foster religion,
since the school gi$es religious instructions to its students& @esides,
it will $iolate the prohibition in (ection 86L8C, .rticle FI of the
1onstitution against the use of public funds to aid religion In Demon $s
Ourt#man& 243 +&(& :48, it was held that financial assistance to a
sectarian school $iolates the prohibition against the establishment of
religion if it fosters an e'cessi$e go$ernment entanglement with
religion& (ince the school reAuires its students to take at least three
hours a week of religious instructions, to ensure that the financial
assistance will not be used for religious purposes, the go$ernment will
ha$e to conduct a continuing sur$eillance& This in$ol$es e'cessi$e
entanglement with religion,
b If the assistance would be in the form of laboratory
eAuipment in chemistry and physics, it will be $alid& The purpose of the
assistance is secular, i&e&, the impro$ement of the Auality of tertiary
education& .ny benefit to religion is merely incidental& (ince the
eAuipment can only be used for a secular purpose, it is religiously
neutral& .s held in Tilton $s& Richardson, 243 +&(& :78, it will not
in$ol$e e'cessi$e go$ernment entanglement with religion, for the use of
the eAuipment will not reAuire sur$eillance&
c In general, the gi$ing of scholarship $ouchers to students
is $alid& (ection 8(3, .rticle IIF of the
1onstitution reAuires the (tate to establish a system of subsidies to
deser$ing students in both public and pri$ate schools& Howe$er, the law
is $ague and o$erEbroad& +nder it, a student who wants to study for
the priesthood can apply for the subsidy and use it for his studies&
This will in$ol$e using public funds to aid religion&
8&##/4 /7 R#0!'!/%> N/%-E6"$(0!694#%" C0$,6#
1997 N/& 20
+pon reAuest of a group of o$erseas contract workers in @runei,
Re$& >ather Cuan de la 1ru#, a Roman 1atholic priest, was sent to that
country by the President of the Philippines to minister to their
spiritual needs& The tra$el e'penses, per diems, clothing allowance and
monthly stipend of P),444 were ordered charged against the PresidentBs
discretionary fund& +pon post audit of the $ouchers therefor, the
1ommission on .udit refused appro$al thereof claiming that the
e'penditures were in $iolation of the 1onstitution&
Was the 1ommission on .udit correct in disallowing the $ouchers
in Auestion;
.nswerG
<es, the 1ommission on .udit was correct in disallowing the
e'penditures& (ection 86(8, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution prohibits
the e'penditure of public funds for the use, benefit, or support of any
priest& The only e'ception is when the priest is assigned to the armed
forces, or to any penal institution& or go$ernment orphanage or
leprosarium& The sending of a priest to minister to the spiritual needs
of o$erseas contract workers does not fall within the scope of any of
the e'ceptions&
S#."!/% :
L!(#&") /7 A(/#
199: N/ 80
8 The military commanderEin charge of the operation against
rebel groups directed the inhabitants of the island which would be the
target of attack by go$ernment forces to e$acuate the area and offered
the residents temporary military hamlet&
1an the military commander force the residents to transfer their
places of abode without a court order; -'plain&
.nswerG
8 /o, the military commander cannot compel the residents to
transfer their places of abode without a court order& +nder (ection :,
.rticle III of the 1onstitution, a lawful order of the court is reAuired
before the liberty of abode and of changing the same can be impaired&
.lternati$e .nswerG
<es, the military commander can compel the residents to transfer
their places of abode without a court order& If there is no reasonable
time to get a court order and the change of abode Is merely temporary,
because of the e'igency, this e'ercise of police power may be %ustified&
L!(#&") /7 A(/#
1998 N/ FIII
Cuan 1asano$a contracted HansenBs disease (leprosy with open
lesions& . law reAuires that lepers be isolated upon petition of the
1ity Health 9fficer& The wife of Cuan 1asano$a wrote a letter to the
1ity Health 9fficer to ha$e her formerly philandering husband confined
in some isolated leprosarium& Cuan 1asano$a challenged the
constitutionality of the law as $iolating his liberty of abode& Will the
suit prosper; L)*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
/o, the suit will not prosper&
(ection :, .rticle III of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits
prescribed by law shall not be Impaired e'cept upon lawful order of the
court&H
The liberty of abode is sub%ect to the police power of the (tate&
ReAuiring the segregation of lepers is a $alid e'ercise of police power&
In Doren#o us& Director of Health& )4 Phil )6), )6?, the (upreme 1ourt
held0
HCudicial notice will be taken of the fact that leprosy is
commonly belie$ed to be an infectious disease tending to cause one
afflicted with it to be shunned and e'cluded from society, and that
compulsory segregation of lepers as a means of pre$enting the spread of
the disease is supported by high scientific authority&H
R!'9" "/ T&$5#0> R!'9" "/ B$!0
1991 N/& :0
!r& -steban Orony, a >ilipino citi#en, is arrested for the crime
of smuggling& He posts bail for his release& (ubseAuently, he %umps bail
and is about to lea$e the country when the Department of >oreign .ffairs
(D>. cancels his passport& He sues the D>., claiming $iolation of his
freedom to tra$el, citing the new pro$ision in the @ill of Rights of the
56?7 1onstitution, to wit0 H/either shall the right to tra$el be
impaired e'cept in the interest of national security, public safety, or
public health, as may be pro$ided by law&
Decide the case&
.nswer0
The case should be dismissed& .ny person under an order of arrest
is under restraint and therefore he can not claim the right to tra$el&
If he is admitted to bail his freedom of mo$ement is confined within the
country& Therefore, if he subseAuently %umps bail, he can not demand
passport which in effect will facilitate his escape from the countryG he
is in fact liable to be arrested anytime& Indeed, the right to tra$el
under the 1onstitution presupposes that the indi$idual is under no
restraint such as that which would follow from the fact that one has a
pending criminal case and has been placed under arrest&
S#."!/% 12
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> E1"&$B,!.!$0 C/%7#66!/% "/ P&!5$"# I%!5!,$06
1994 N/& 540
.n information for parricide was filed against Danny& .fter the
/@I found an eyewitness to the commission of the crime& Danny was placed
in a police lineEup where he was identified as the one who shot the
$ictim& .fter the lineEup, Danny made a confession to a newspaper
reporter who inter$iewed him&
5 1an Danny claim that his identification by the eyewitness be
e'cluded on the ground that the lineEup was made without benefit of his
counsel;
8 1an Danny claim that his confession be e'cluded on the ground
that he was not afforded his H!irandaH rights;
.nswer0
5 /o, the identification of Danny, a pri$ate person, by an
eyewitness during the lineEup cannot be e'cluded &&&
8 /o& Danny cannot ask that his confession to a newspaper
reporter should be e'cluded in e$idence& .s held in People $s& @ernardo,
884 (1R. 35, such an admission was not made during a custodial
interrogation but a $oluntary statement made to the media&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> E1"&$B,!.!$0 C/%7#66!/%
2001 N/ II
Rafael, 1arlos and Coseph were accused of murder before the
Regional Trial 1ourt of !anila& .ccused Coseph turned state witness
against his coEaccused Rafael and 1arlos, and was accordingly discharged
from the information& .mong the e$idence presented by the prosecution
was an e'tra%udicial confession made by Coseph during the custodial
In$estigation, implicating Rafael and 1arlos who, he said, together with
him (Coseph, committed the crime& The e'tra%udicial confession was
e'ecuted without the assistance of counsel&
.ccused Rafael and 1arlos $ehemently ob%ected on the ground that
said e'tra%udicial confession was inadmissible in e$idence against them&
Rule on whether the said e'tra%udicial confession is admissible in
e$idence or not& ()*
.ccording to People $s& @alisteros, 837 (1R. 266 (5662, the
confession is admissible& +nder (ection 58, .rticle III of the
1onstitution, the confession is inadmissible only against the one who
confessed& 9nly the one whose rights were $iolated can raise the
ob%ection as his right is personal&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-RG
.ccording to People us& Cara, 522 (1R. )5:(56?:, the confession
is inadmissible& If it is inadmissible against the one who confessed,
with more reason it should be inadmissible against others&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> P/0!.# L!%#-U=
1994 N/& 540
.n information for parricide was filed against Danny& .fter the
/@I found an eyewitness to the commission of the crime& Danny was placed
in a police lineEup where he was identified as the one who shot the
$ictim& .fter the lineEup, Danny made a confession to a newspaper
reporter who inter$iewed him&
5 1an Danny claim that his identification by the eyewitness be
e'cluded on the ground that the lineEup was made without benefit of his
counsel;
8 1an Danny claim that his confession be e'cluded on the ground
that he was not afforded his H!irandaH rights;
.nswer0
5 /o, the identification of Danny, a pri$ate person, by an
eyewitness during the lineEup cannot be e'cluded in e$idence& In
accordance with the ruling in People $s& Hatton, 854 (1R. 5, the accused
is not entitled to be assisted by counsel during a police lineEup,
because it is not part of custodial in$estigation&
.lternati$e .nswerG
<es, in +nited (tates $& Wade, 33? +&(& 85? (56:7 and ,ilbert $&
1alifornia, 33? +&(& 8:3 (56:7& it was held that on the basis of the
(i'th, rather than the >ifth .mendment (eAui$alent to .rt& III, (ec& 52
(8 rather than (ec& 58(5, the police lineEup is such a critical stage
that it carries Hpotential substantial pre%udiceH for which reason the
accused is entitled to the assistance of 1ounsel&
8 /o& &&&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> P/0!.# L!%#-U=
1997 N/& 540
., while on board a passenger %eep one night, was held up by a
group of three teenagers who forcibly di$ested her of her watch,
necklace and wallet containing P544&44& That done, the trio %umped off
the passenger %eep and fled& @, the %eep dri$er, and . complained to the
police to whom they ga$e description of the culprits& .ccording to the
%eep dri$er, he would be able to identify the culprits if presented to
him& /e't morning . and @ were summoned to the police station where fi$e
persons were lined up before them for identification& . and @ positi$ely
identified 1 and D as the culprits& .fter preliminary in$estigation& 1
and D and one Cohn Doe were charged with robbery in an information filed
against them in court& 1 and D set tip, in defense, the illegality of
their apprehension, arrest and confinement based on the identification
made of them by . and @ at a police lineEup at which they were not
assisted by counsel&
How would you resol$e the issues raised by 1 and D;
.nswer0
The arguments of the accused are untenable& .s held in People $s&
.cot, 838 (1R. 24:, the warrantless arrest of accused robbers
Immediately after their commission of the crime by police officers sent
to look for them on the basis of the information related by the $ictims
is $alid under (ection )(b&Rule 553 of the Rules on 1riminal Procedure&
.ccording to People $s& Damsing, 82? (1R. 275, the right to counsel does
not e'tend to police lineEups, because they are not part of custodial
in$estigations& Howe$er, according to People $s& !acan 83? (1R. 34:,
after the start of custodial in$estigation, if the accused was not
assisted by counsel, any identification of the accused in a police lineE
up is inadmissible&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9" "/ C/,%6#0
1988 N/& 5)0
.rmando (alamanca, a notorious police character, came under
custodial in$estigation for a robbery in 1aloocan 1ity& >rom the outset,
the police officers informed him of his right to remain silent, and also
his right to ha$e a counsel of his choice, if he could afford one or if
not, the go$ernment would pro$ide him with such counsel&
He thanked the police in$estigators, and declared that he fully
understands the rights enumerated to him, but that, he is $oluntarily
wai$ing them& 1laiming that he sincerely desires to atone for his
misdeeds, he ga$e a written statement on his participation in the crime
under in$estigation&
In the course of the trial of the criminal case for the same
robbery, the written admission of (alamanca which he ga$e during the
custodial in$estigation, was presented as the only e$idence of his
guilt& If you were his counsel, what would you do; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
I would ob%ect to it on the ground that the wai$er of the rights
to silence and to counsel is $oid, ha$ing been made without the presence
of counsel& (.rt& III, sec& 58(5G People $& ,alit, 53) (1R. 2:) (56?4&
The wai$er must also be in writing, although this reAuirement might
possibly ha$e been complied with in this case by embodying the wai$er in
the written confession& It should also be noted that under Rule 532,
sec& 3, e$en if the e'tra%udicial confession is $alid, it is not a
sufficient ground for con$iction if it is not corroborated by e$idence
of corpus delicti&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9" "/ C/,%6#0; I%#=#%#%"
199? N/& 57G
In his e'tra%udlclal confession e'ecuted before the police
authorities, Cose Walangtakot admitted killing his girlfriend in a fit
of %ealousy& This admission was made after the following answer and
Auestion to wit0
T E Ikaw ay may karapatan pa rin kumuha ng serbisyo ng isang
abogado para makatulong mo sa imbestigasyong ito at kung wala kang
makuha, ikaw ay aming bibigyan ng libreng abogado, ano ngayon ang iyong
masasabi;H
H( E /andiyan naman po si >iscal (point to .ssistant >iscal
.niceto !alaputo kaya hindl ko na kinakailanganang abogado&H
During the trial& Cose Walangtakot repudiated his confession
contending that it was made without the assistance of counsel and
therefore Inadmissible in e$idence& Decide&
.nswer0
The confession of Cose Walangtakot is inadmissible in e$idence&
The warning gi$en to him Is insufficient In accordance with the ruling
in People $& Duero, 542 (1R. 376, he should ha$e been warned also that
he has the right to remain silent and that any statement he makes may be
used as e$idence against him& @esides, under .rt& III, (ec& 58(5 of the
1onstitution, the counsel assisting a person being In$estigated must be
Independent& .ssistant >iscal .niceto !alaputo could not assist Cose
Walangtakot& .s held in People $& Fiduya, 5?6 (1R. 243, his function is
to prosecute criminal cases& To allow him to act as defense counsel
during custodial in$estigations would render nugatory the constitu
Etional rights of the accused during custodial in$estigation& What the
1onstitution reAuires is a counsel who will effecti$ely undertake the
defense of his client without any conflict of interest& The answer of
Cose Walangtakot indicates that he did not fully understand his rights&
Hence, it cannot be said that he knowingly and intelligently wai$ed
those rights&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9" "/ C/,%6#0
2000 N/ II&
a 9n 9ctober 5, 56?), Ramos was arrested by a security
guard because he appeared to be HsuspiciousH and brought to a police
precinct where in the course of the in$estigation he admitted he was the
killer in an unsol$ed homicide committed a week earlier& The
proceedings of his in$estigation were put in writing and dated 9ctober
5, 56?), and the only participation of counsel assigned to him was his
mere presence and signature on the statement& The admissibility of
the statement of Ramos was placed in issue but the prosecution claims
that the confession was taken on 9ctober 5, 56?) and the 56?7
1onstitution pro$iding for the right to counsel of choice and
opportunity to retain, took effect only on >ebruary 8,56?7 and cannot be
gi$en retroacti$e effect& Rule on this& (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a The confession of Ramos is not admissible, since the counsel
assigned to him did not ad$ise him of his rights& The fact that his
confession was taken before the effecti$ity of the 56?7 1onstitution is
of no moment& -$en prior to the effecti$ity of the 56?7 1onstitution,
the (upreme 1ourt already laid down strict rules on wai$er of the rights
during in$estigation in the case of People $& ,alit, 53) (1R. 2:)
(56?)&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9" "/ C/,%6#0> R#.#!=" /7 P&/=#&") S#!F#
2002 N/ FIII&
9ne day a passenger bus conductor found a manBs handbag left in
the bus& When the conductor opened the bag, he found inside a catling
card with the ownerBs name (Dante ,alang and address, a few hundred
peso bills, and a small plastic bag containing a white powdery
substance& He brought the powdery substance to the /ational @ureau of
In$estigation for laboratory e'amination and it was determined to be
methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu, a prohibited drug& Dante ,alang
was subseAuently traced and found and brought to the /@I 9ffice where he
admitted ownership of the handbag and its contents& In the course of the
interrogation by /@I agents, and without the presence and assistance of
counsel, ,alang was made to sign a receipt for the plastic bag and its
shabu contents& ,alang was charged with illegal possession of prohibited
drugs and was con$icted&
9n appeal he contends that E
.& The plastic bag and its contents are inadmissible in
e$idence being the product of an illegal search and sei#ureG (3* and
@& The receipt he signed is also inadmissible as his rights
under custodial in$estigation were not obser$ed& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& It is admissible&&&
@& The receipt which ,alang signed without the assistance of
counsel is not admissible in e$idence& .s held in People $& 1astro, 872
(1R. 55) T5667, since the receipt is a document admitting the offense
charged, ,alang should ha$e been assisted by counsel as reAuired by
.rticle III, (ection 55 of the 1onstitution&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9"6
199? N/& 60
8 He should ha$e been informed of his right to be represented
by counsel prior to his identification $ia the police line up&
Decide& .nswer0
8P Pursuant to the decision in People us& 1astmillo& 853& (1R.
777, Cohann need not be informed of his right to counsel prior to his
Identification during the police lineEup& The police lineEup is not part
of custodial In$estigation, since Cohann was not being Auestioned but
was merely being asked to e'hibit his body for identification by a
witness&
.s an alternati$e answer& It may be argued that in +nited (tates
$s& Wade& 3?? +&(& 85? (56:7 and ,ilbert $s& 1alifornia& 3?? +&(& 8:3
(56:7 It was held that on the basis of the (i'th, rather than the >ifth
.mendment (eAui$alent to .rt& III& sec& 52 (8 rather than sec& 58 (5,
the police lineup is such a Hcritical stageH that it carries Hpotential
substantial pre%udiceH for which reason the accused is entitled to the
assistance of counsel&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9"6
199? N/& 20
Darry was an o$ernight guest in a motel& .fter he checked out the
following day, the chambermaid found an attache case which she surmised
was left behind by Darry& (he turned it o$er to the manager who, to
determine the name and address of the owner, opened the attache case and
saw packages which had a peculiar smell and upon sAuee#ing felt like
dried lea$es& His curiosity aroused, the manager made an opening on one
of the packages and took se$eral grams of the contents thereof& He took
the packages to the /@I, and in the presence of agents, opened the
packages, the contents of which upon laboratory e'amination, turned out
to be mari%uana flowering tops, Darry was subseAuently found, brought to
the /@I 9ffice where he admitted ownership of the attache case and the
packages& He was made to sign a receipt for the packages& Darry was
charged in court for possession of prohibited drugs& He was con$icted&
9n appeal, he now poses the following issues0
5 The packages are inadmissible in e$idence being the product of
an illegal search and sei#ureG &
8 /either is the receipt he signed admissible, his rights under
custodial in$estigation not ha$ing been obser$ed&
Decide& .nswer0
9n the assumption that the issues were timely raised the answers
are as follows0
5 The packages are admissible in e$idence& &&&
8 The receipt is not admissible in e$idence& .ccording to the
ruling in People $s& !irantes, 846 (1R. 576, such receipt is in effect
an e'tra%udicial confession of the commission of an offense& Hence, if
it was signed without the assistance of counsel, in accordance with
(ection 58(3, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution, it is inadmissible in
e$idence& LPeople $& Duhan, 528 (1R. 544 (56?:M&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9"6
1990 N/& 6G
(ome police operati$es, acting under a lawfully issued warrant for
the purpose of searching for firearms in the House of I located at /o&
54 (haw @oule$ard, Pasig, !etro !anila, found, instead of firearms, ten
kilograms of cocaine&
(5 !ay the said police operati$es lawfully sei#e the cocaine;
-'plain your answer&
(8 !ay I successfully challenge the legality of the search on
the ground that the peace officers did not inform him about his right to
remain silent and his right to counsel; -'plain your answer&
(3 (uppose the peace officers were able to find unlicensed
firearms in the house in an ad%acent lot, that is& /o, 58 (haw
@oule$ard, which is also owned by I& !ay they lawfully sei#e the said
unlicensed firearms; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
(5 <es, the police operati$es may lawfully sei#e the
cocaine, &&&&
(8 /o, I cannot successfully challenge the legality of the
search simply because the peace officers did not inform him about his
right to remain silent and his right to counsel& (ection 58(5, .rticle
III of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0
H.ny person under in$estigation for the commission of an offense
shall ha$e the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to
ha$e competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice&H
.s held in People $& Dy, 5)? (1R. 555& for this pro$ision to
apply, a suspect must be under in$estigation& There was no in$estigation
In$ol$ed in this case&
(3 The unlicensed firearms stored at 58 (haw @oule$ard may
lawfully be sei#ed &&&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9"6
199: N/& 30
5 ., who was arrested as a suspect in a murder case& was not
represented by counsel during the HAuestion and answerH stage& Howe$er,
before he was asked to sign his statements to the police in$estigator,
the latter pro$ided . with a counsel, who happened to be at the police
station& .fter conferring with ., the counsel told the police
in$estigator that . was ready to sign the statements&
1an the statements of . be presented in court as his confession;
-'plain&
.nswer0
5 /o, the statements of . cannot be presented in court as his
confession& He was not assisted by counsel during the actual
Auestioning& There is no showing that the lawyer who belatedly conferred
with him fully e'plained to him the nature and conseAuences of his
confession& In People $s& 1ompil 822 (1R. 53), the (upreme 1ourt held
that the accused must be assisted by counsel during the actual
Auestioning and the belated assistance of counsel before he signed the
confession does not cure the defect&
.lternati$e .nswer0
<es, the statements of . can be presented in court as his
confession& .s held in People $s& Rous, 828 (1R. 738, e$en if the
accused was not assisted by counsel during the Auestioning, his
confession is admissible if he was able to consult a lawyer before he
signed&
C,6"/!$0 I%5#6"!'$"!/%> R!'9"6
1989 N/& 70
Pursuing reports that great Auantities of prohibited drugs are
being smuggled at nighttime through the shores of 1a$ite, the (outhern
Du#on 1ommand set up checkpoints at the end of the 1a$ite coastal road
to search passing motor $ehicles& . 56Eyear old boy, who finished fifth
grade, while dri$ing, was stopped by the authorities at the checkpoint&
Without any ob%ection from him, his car was inspected, and the search
yielded mari%uana lea$es hidden in the trunk compartment of the car& The
prohibited drug was promptly sei#ed, and the boy was brought to the
police station for Auestioning&
(5 Was the search without warrant legal;
(8 @efore interrogation, the policeman on duty informed the boy
in -nglish that he does Hha$e a right to remain silent and the right to
counsel&H Howe$er, there was no counsel a$ailable as it was midnight& He
declared orally that he did not need any lawyer as he was innocent,
since he was only bringing the mari%uana lea$es to his employer in
"ue#on 1ity and was not a drug user& He was charged with illegal
possession of prohibited drugs& Is his wai$er of the right to counsel
$alid;
.nswer0
(5 /o, the search was not $alid, because there was no probable
cause &&&&
(8 /o, the wai$er of the right to counsel is not $alid, since it
was not reduced in writing and made in the presence of counsel& +nder
(ection 58(5, .rticle III of the 56?7 1onstitution to be $alid, the
wai$er must be made in writing and in the presence of counsel&
S#."!/% 1?
R!'9"6 /7 "9# A..,6#> R!'9" "/ B$!0
1989 N/& 5)0
!ay an alien in$oke the constitutional right to bail during the
pendency of deportation proceedings;
.nswer0
/o& an alien may not in$oke the constitutional right to bail
during the pendency of deportation proceedings& In Har$ey $s (antiago,
5:8 (1R. ?24, it was held that the constitutional guarantee to bail may
not be in$oked in deportation proceedings, because they do not partake
of the nature of a criminal action&
R!'9"6 /7 "9# A..,6#> R!'9" "/ B$!0
199? N/& 60
3 He is entitled to bail as a matter of right, thus the Cudge
should not ha$e denied his motion to fi' ball outright&
Decide&
.nswer0
3 In accordance with .rt& III& sec& 53 of the 1onstitution,
Cohann may be denied bail if the e$idence of his guilt is strong
considering that the crime with which he is charged is punishable by
reclusion perpetua& It is thus not a matter of right for him to be
released on bail in such case& The court must first make a determination
of the strength of the e$idence on the basis of e$idence already
presented by the prosecution, unless it desires to present some more,
and gi$e the accused the opportunity to present counter$ailing e$idence&
If ha$ing done this the court finds the e$idence not to be strong, then
it becomes the right of Cohann to be admitted to bail& The error of the
trial court lies in outrightly denying the motion for bail of Cohann&
S#."!/% 14
R!'9"6 /7 "9# A..,6#> R!'9" "/ S=##) T&!$0
2000 N/ IF&
1harged by >rancisco with libel, Pablo was arraigned on Canuary 3,
8444, PreEtrial was dispensed with and continuous trial was set for
!arch 7, ? and 6, 8444& 9n the first setting, the prosecution mo$ed for
its postponement and cancellation of the other settings because its
principal and probably only witness, the pri$ate complainant >rancisco,
suddenly had to go abroad to fulfill a professional commitment& The
%udge instead dismissed the case for failure to prosecute&
a Would the grant of the motion for postponement ha$e
$iolated the accusedBs right to speedy trial; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a The grant of the motion for postponement would not ha$e
$iolated the right of the accused to speedy trial& .s held In People $&
De$iste, 8)) (1R. 83? (566:& since the motion for postponement was the
first one reAuested, the need for the offended party to attend to a
professional commitment is a $alid reason, no substantial right of the
accused would be pre%udiced, and the prosecution should be afforded a
fair opportunity to prosecute its case, the motion should be granted&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
a (ince continuous trial of cases is reAuired and since the
date of the initial hearing was set upon agreement of all parties,
including the pri$ate complainant, the %udge properly dismissed the case
for failure to prosecute&
R!'9"6 /7 "9# A..,6#> R!'9" "/ (# P&#6,4# I%%/.#%"
2004 @-@& 9= lost fi$e head of cattle which he reported to the
police as stolen from his barn& He reAuested se$eral neighbors,
including RR, for help in looking for the missing animals& .fter an
e'tensi$e search, the police found two head in RRKs farm& RR could not
e'plain to the police how they got hidden in a remote area of his farm&
Insisting on his innocence, RR consulted a lawyer who told him he
has a right to be presumed innocent under the @ill of Rights& @ut there
is another presumptionEEof theft arising from his une'plained possession
of stolen cattleEEunder the penal law&
.re the two presumptions capable of reconciliation in this case;
If so, how can they be reconciled; If not, which should pre$ail; ()*
S#."!/% 17
S#07-I%.&!4!%$"!/%
1990 N/& 20
The pri$ilege of selfEincrimination must be timely in$oked,
otherwise it is deemed wai$ed&
(5 In a ci$il case, the plaintiff called the defendant a hostile
witness and announced that the defendant would be asked incriminating
Auestions in the direct e'amination& When should the defendant in$oke
the pri$ilege against selfEincrimination;
(8 In a criminal case, the prosecution called the accused to the
witness stand as the first witness in $iew of certain facts admitted by
the accused at the preEtrial& When should the accused in$oke the
pri$ilege against selfEincrimination;
(3 In an administrati$e case for malpractice and the
cancellation of license to practice medicine filed against 1, the
complainant called 1 to the witness stand& When should 1 in$oke the
pri$ilege against selfEincrimination;
-'plain your answers to the three Auestions&
.nswerG
(5 .s held in @agadiong $, De ,u#man, 62 (1R. 64:, the defendant
should take the witness stand and ob%ect when a Auestion calling for an
incriminating Auestion is propounded& +nlike in proceedings which are
criminal in character in which the accused can refuse to testily, the
defendant must wait until a Auestion calling for an incriminatory answer
is actually asked& ((uare# $& Tongco, 8 (1R. 75
(8 .s held in 1ha$e# $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 82 (1R. ::3, in a
criminal case the accused may altogether refuse to take the witness and
refuse to answer any Auestion, because the purpose of calling him as a
witness for the prosecution has no other purpose but to incriminate him&
(3 .s in a criminal case, 1 can refuse to take the witness stand
and refuse to answer any Auestion& In Pascual $& @oard of !edical
-'aminers, 8? (1R. 322, it was held that an administrati$e case for
malpractice and cancellation of the license to practice medicine is
penal in character, because an unfa$orable decision would result in the
re$ocation of the license of the respondent to practice medicine&
1onseAuently, he can refuse to take the witness stand&
S#07-I%.&!4!%$"!/%
1988 N/& 30
Dr& Cuan (to& Tomas is a practicing dentist in !arikina, !etro
!anila& He was charged with immorality before the @oard of Dentistry by
a lady patient, who claims that Dr& (to& Tomas took liberties with her
person and kissed her while she was under the treatment at the latterBs
clinic&
.t the initial hearing of the administrati$e complaint, the
complainantBs counsel called the respondent as his first witness& The
respondent through counsel, ob%ected $igorously, claiming his
constitutional right to be e'empt from being a witness against himself&
The @oard noted the ob%ection, but ruled that in the ne't scheduled
hearing, a month and a half later, the respondent would be called to
testify as a witness, as the right he claims is not a$ailable in
administrati$e in$estigations, but only in criminal prosecutions&
Dr& (to& Tomas is decided not to testify& .s his lawyer, what
would you do; Why;
.nswer0
I will file a petition for prohibition with prayer >or preliminary
in%unction with the Regional Trial 1ourt& The pri$ilege against self
incrimination is a$ailable not only in %udicial proceedings but also in
administrati$e in$estigations& In Pasatal $& @oard of !edical -'aminers,
8? (1R. 322 (56:6, it was held that the re$ocation of a license as a
medical practitioner can be an e$en greater depri$ation than mere
forfeiture of property& In some aspects it is similar to criminal
proceedings and, therefore, the respondent can not be made to testify as
a witness for the complainant&
S#07-I%.&!4!%$"!/%
1992 N/, 3G
dri$erBs license,
cured&
.nswer0
license&
probable cause&
S#07-I%.&!4!%$"!/%
2000 N/ II&
b . man was shot and killed and his killer fled& !oments
after the shooting, an eyewitness described to the police that the
slayer wore white pants, a shirt with floral design, had boots and was
about 74 kilos and 5&:) meters& @or%a, who fit the description gi$en,
was seen nearby& He was taken into custody and brought to the police
precinct where his pants, shirt and boots were forcibly taken and he was
weighed, measured, photographed, fingerprinted and sub%ected to
paraffin testing& .t his trial, @or%a ob%ected to the admission In
e$idence of the apparel, his height and weight, his photographs,
fingerprints comparison and the results of the paraffin test, asserting
that these were taken in $iolation of his right against selfE
incrimination& Rule on the ob%ection& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
b The ob%ection of @or%a is not tenable& .s held in People $&
Paynor, 8:5 (1R. :5) (566:, the rights guaranteed by (ection 58,
.rticle in of the 1onstitution applies only against testimonial
e$idence& .n accused may be compelled to be photographed or measured,
his garments may be remo$ed, and his body may be e'amined&
S#."!/% 18
I%5/0,%"$&) S#&5!",#
199? N/& 5:G
Coy, an RT1 stenographer, retired at the age of :)& (he left
unfinished the transcription of her notes in a criminal case which was
on appeal& The 1ourt of .ppeals ordered Coy to transcribe her notes& (he
refused to comply with the order reasoning that she was no longer in the
go$ernment ser$ice& The 1. declared Coy in contempt of court and she was
incarcerated& Coy filed a petition for habeas corpus arguing that her
incarceration is tantamount to illegal detention and to reAuire her to
work sans compensation would be in$oluntary ser$itude& Decide&
.nswerG
Coy can be incarcerated for contempt of court for refusing to
transcribe her stenographic notes& .s held In .doracion $& ,atmaitan, :2
(1R. 538, her incarceration does not constitute illegal detention& It is
lawful, because it is the conseAuence of her disobedience of the court
order& /either can she claim that to reAuire her to work without
compensation is tantamount to In$oluntary ser$itude& (ince courts ha$e
the Inherent power to Issue such orders as are necessary for the
administration of Custice, the 1ourt of .ppeals may order her to
transcribe her stenographic notes e$en if she is no longer In the
go$ernment ser$ice&
S#."!/% 20
N/%-I4=&!6/%4#%" 8/& N/%-P$)4#%" /7 D#("
199? N/ 580
(ec& 53 of PD 55) (Trust Receipts Daw pro$ides that when the
entrustee in a trust receipt agreement fails to deli$er the proceeds of
the sale or to return the goods if not sold to the entrusteeEbank, the
entrustee is liable for estafa under the RP1& Does this pro$ision not
$iolate the constitutional right against imprisonment for nonEpayment of
a debt; -'plain&
.nswer0
/o, (ection 53 of Presidential Decree /o& 55) does not $iolate the
constitutional right against imprisonment for nonEpayment of a debt& .s
held in Dee $s& Rodil, 57) (1R. 544, the criminal liability arises from
the $iolation of the trust receipt, which is separate and distinct from
the loan secured by it& Penali#ing such an act is a $alid e'ercise of
police power& ((ee also People $s& /itafan, 847 (1R. 734,
S#."!/% 21
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
1988 N/& 850
The >ilipino seamen detained at Oota Oinabalu, allegedly fishing
in !alaysian territorial waters, had been acAuitted, after trial, by the
sessions court in the same city& They could not be released and returned
to the Philippines, because the prosecution had appealed the %udgment of
acAuittal to the (upreme 1ourt of !alaysia&
.ssume the situations had been re$ersed and a !alaysian had been
apprehended in (hasi, (ulu, for an alleged offense, charged before the
Regional Trial 1ourt and after trial acAuitted& !ay the Pro$incial
>iscal of (ulu appeal such %udgment of acAuittal to the (upreme 1ourt,
like what the !alaysians did in the case of the >ilipino fishermen at
Oota Oinabalu; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
/o, because it would place the accused in double %eopardy,
contrary to .rt& III, sec& 85 of our 1onstitution& PD /o& 5)66 prohibits
any person not a citi#en to e'plore or e'ploit any of the resources of
the e'clusi$e economic #one and makes $iolation of the prohibition a
crime punishable by a fine of P8,444&44 to P544,444&44 andQor
imprisonment of not less than : months nor more than 54 years& If aliens
are arrested for fishing within this #one but for some reason are
acAuitted, the decision against them cannot be appealed to the 1ourt of
.ppeals because that would place them in double %eopardy& This is so
well established that the (upreme 1ourt turned down many pleas for reE
e'amination of the doctrine first announced in Oepner $& +nited (tates&
55 Phil& ::6 (5642& The doctrine is said to be part and parcel not only
of settled %urisprudence but also of constitutional law& /or does it
matter that the accused are aliens& This guarantee has been applied e$en
to aliens without thought of their citi#enship& ((ee e&g&, People $& .ng
1hio Oio, 6) Phil& 27) (56)2 (1hinese pre$iously con$icted of murderG
People $& Pomeroy, 67 Phil 687 (56)) ( .merican pre$iously con$icted of
rebellion with murder, arson and robbery&
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
199? N/& 530
. Pa%ero dri$en by Coe sideswiped a motorcycle dri$en by /elson
resulting in damage to the motorcycle and in%uries to /elson& Coe sped
on without gi$ing assistance to /elson& The >iscal filed two
Informations against Coe, to wit0 (5 reckless imprudence resulting in
damage to property with physical in%uries under .rt& 3:), RP1, before
the RT1G and (8 abandonment of oneBs $ictim under par& 8 .rt 87),
before the !T1&
Coe was arraigned, tried and con$icted for abandonment of oneBs
$ictim in the !T1& He appealed to the RT1& It was only a year later that
he was arraigned in the reckless imprudence charge before the RT1& He
pleaded not guilty&
(ubseAuently, the RT1 affirmed the decision of the !T1 relati$e to
the abandonment of oneBs$ictim charge& Coe filed a petition for re$iew
before the 1ourt of .ppeals, in$oking his right to double Ceopardy,
contending that the prosecution for abandonment under .rt& 87) of the
Re$ised Penal 1ode is a bar to the prosecution for negligence under
.rticle 3:) of the same 1ode& Decide&
.nswer0
Coe cannot claim that his con$iction for abandoning his $ictim in
$iolation of .rticle 87) of the Re$ised Penal 1ode is a bar to his
prosecution for negligence under .rticle 3:) of the Re$ised Penal 1ode&
.s held in Damera $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 56? (1R. 5?:, there is no double
%eopardy, because these two offenses are not identical& Reckless
imprudence is a crime falling under the chapter on criminal negligence,
while abandonment of oneBs $ictim is a crime falling under the chapter
on crimes against security& The former is committed by means of culpa,
while the latter is committed by means of dolo& >ailure to help oneBs
$ictim is not an offense by itself nor an element of reckless
imprudence& It merely Increases the penalty by one degree&
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
1997 N/& 80
The (angguniang Panlungsod of !anila appro$ed an ordinance (/o&
5444 prohibiting the operation in the streets within the city limits of
ta'icab units o$er eight years old (from year of manufacture& The
imposable penalty for $iolation thereof is a fine of P2,444&44 or
imprisonment for one year upon the erring operator& Thereafter and while
the city ordinance was already in effect& 1ongress enacted a law
(Republic .ct /o& )44 prohibiting the operation in the streets of
cities throughout the country of ta'icab units beyond ten years old& The
imposable penalty for $iolation thereof is the same as in 9rdinance /o&
5444& ., an ownerQoperator of a ta'icab unit operating in the 1ity of
!anila, was charged with $iolation of the city ordinance& +pon
arraignment, he pleaded not guiltyG whereupon, trial was set fi$e days
thereafter& >or failure of the witnesses to appear at the trial, the
1ity 1ourt dismissed the case against .& The 1ity Prosecutor of !anila
forthwith filed another information in the same court charging . with
$iolation of Republic .ct /o& )44 for operating the ta'icab unit sub%ect
of the Information in the first case& The accused mo$ed to dismiss the
second case against him in$oking double Ceopardy&
How would you rule on .Bs motion if you were the Cudge;
.nswer0
If I were the %udge, I would grant the motion& The dismissal of
the first case for failure of the witnesses to appear terminated the
first %eopardy& .s held in 1aes $s& Intermediate .ppellate 1ourt, 576
(1R. )2, the dismissal of a case for failure of the witnesses for the
prosecution to appear constitutes an acAuittal& The acAuittal of . for
$iolation of 9rdinance /o& 5444 bars his prosecution for $iolation of
Republic .ct /o& )44& +nder (ection 85, .rticle in of the 1onstitution,
if an act is punished by a law and an ordinance, con$iction or acAuittal
under either bars another prosecution for the same act&
.lternati$e .nswerG
If I were the %udge, I would deny the motion& The dismissal of
the first case is $oid and does not gi$e rise to double %eopardy& The
dismissal of the first case is arbitrary and denied the prosecution due
process of law& The trial was set fi$e days after the arraignment& There
was no sufficient time to subpoena the witnesses and this was the first
time the witnesses failed to appear& .s held in People $s& Declaro 574
(1R. 528, the dismissal of a case for failure of the witnesses to appear
at the initial hearing is arbitrary and $oid and does not gi$e rise to
double %eopardy&
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
1999 N/ FII
.& Discuss the right of e$ery accused against double %eopardy;
(8*
@& What are the reAuisites of double %eopardy; (8*
1& 9n 9ctober 85, 56?:, 57 year old Firginia (agrado brought a
complaint against !artin ,eralde for consented abduction& With the
accused pleading not guilty upon arraignment, trial ensued& .fter
trial, a %udgment of con$iction was rendered against ,eralde& When the
case was appealed to it, the 1ourt of .ppeals re$ersed the %udgment of
the Trial 1ourt, ratiocinating and ruling as follows0 HThis is not to
say that the appellant did nothing wrong&&&she was seduced by the
appellant with promises (of marriage %ust to accomplish his lewd
designs&H <ears later, Firginia brought another complaint for "ualified
(eduction& ,eralde presented a !otion to "uash on the ground of double
%eopardy, which motion and his subseAuent motion for reconsideration
were denied0 "uestion0 !ay ,eralde $alidly in$oke double %eopardy in
Auestioning the institution of the case for "ualified (eduction; He
placed reliance principally on the Hsame e$idenceH test to support his
stance& He asserted that the offenses with which he was charged
arose from the same set of facts& >urthermore, he a$erted that the
complaint for "ualified (eduction is barred by wai$er and estoppel on
the part of the complainant, she ha$ing opted to consider the case as
consented abduction& >inally, he argued that her delay of more than
eight (? years before filing the second case against him constituted
pardon on the part of the offended party& How would you resol$e
,eraldBs contentions; -'plain& (2*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& .ccording to !elo $& People, ?) Phil& 7::, the rule of double
%eopardy means that when a person was charged with an offense and the
case was terminated by acAuittal or con$iction or in any other manner
without his consent, he cannot again be charged with the same or
identical offense&
@& .s held in 1uison $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 8?6 (1R. 5)6, for a
claim of double %eopardy to prosper, the following reAuisites must
concur0 (5 a first %eopardy has attachedG (8 the first %eopardy was
$alidly terminatedG and (3 the second is for the same offense& . first
%eopardy attaches0
(5 upon a $alid complaint or informationG
(8 before a competent courtG
(3 after arraignmentG
(2 a $alid entry of pleaG and
() the dismissal or termination of the case without the e'press
consent of the accused&
1& ,eralde cannot in$oke double %eopardy& .ccording to Pere# $&
1ourt of .ppeals, 5:? (1R. 83:, there is no identity between consented
abduction and Aualified seduction& 1onsented abduction reAuires that
the taking away of the offended party must be with her consent, after
solicitation or ca%olery from the offender, and the taking away of the
offended party must be with lewd designs& 9n the other hand, Aualified
seduction reAuires that the crime be committed by abuse of authority,
confidence or relationship and the offender had se'ual intercourse with
the woman&
The delay in filing the second case does not constitute pardon,
according to .rticle 322 of the Re$ised Penal 1ode, to be $alid the
pardon of the offender by the offended party must be e'pressly gi$en&
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
2000 N/ IF&
1harged by >rancisco with libel, Pablo was arraigned on Canuary 3,
8444, PreEtrial was dispensed with and continuous trial was set for
!arch 7, ? and 6, 8444& 9n the first setting, the prosecution mo$ed for
its postponement and cancellation of the other settings because its
principal and probably only witness, the pri$ate complainant >rancisco,
suddenly had to go abroad to fulfill a professional commitment& The
%udge instead dismissed the case for failure to prosecute&
b Would the re$ersal of the trial courtBs assailed dismissal
of the case place the accused in double %eopardy; (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
b (ince the postponement of the case would not $iolate the
right of the accused to speedy trial, the precipitate dismissal of the
case is $oid& The re$ersal of the dismissal will not place the accused
in double Ceopardy&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
b (ince the dismissal of the case is $alid, its re$ersal will
place the accused in double %eopardy&
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
2001 N/ I
>or the death of Coey, -rning was charged with the crime of
homicide before the Regional Trial 1ourt of Falen#uela& He was
arraigned& Due to numerous postponements of the scheduled hearings at
the instance of the prosecution, particularly based on the ground of
una$ailability of prosecution witnesses who could not be found or
located, the criminal case was pending trial for a period of se$en
years& +pon motion of accused -rning who in$oked his right to speedy
trial, the court dismissed the case&
-$entually, the prosecution witnesses surfaced, and a criminal
case for homicide, in$ol$ing the same incident was filed anew against
-rning& .ccused -rning mo$ed for dismissal of the case on the ground of
double %eopardy& The prosecution ob%ected, submitting the reason that it
was not able to present the said witnesses earlier because the latter
went into hiding out of fear&
Resol$e the motion& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The motion should be granted& .s held in 1aes us& Intermediate
.ppellate 1ourt, 576 (1R. )2 (56?6, the dismissal of a criminal case
predicated on the right of the accused to a speedy trial amounts to an
acAuittal for failure of the prosecution to pro$e his guilt and bars his
subseAuent prosecution for the same offense&
D/,(0# +#/=$&)
2002 N/ II&
. Tamaraw >I dri$en by .siong 1ascasero, who was drunk, sideswiped
a pedestrian along -D(. in !akati 1ity , resulting in physical in%uries
to the latter& The public prosecutor filed two separate informations
against 1ascasero, the first for reckless imprudence resulting in
physical in%uries under the Re$ised Penal 1ode, and the second for
$iolation of an ordinance of !akati 1ity prohibiting and penali#ing
dri$ing under the influence of liAuor&
1ascasero was arraigned, tried and con$icted for reckless
imprudence resulting in physical in%uries under the Re$ised Penal 1ode&
With regard to the second case (i&e&, $iolation of the city ordinance,
upon being arraigned, he filed a motion to Auash the information
in$oking his right against double %eopardy& He contended that, under
.rt& Ill, (ection 85 of the 1onstitution, if an act is punished by a law
and an ordinance, con$iction or acAuittal under either shall constitute
a bar to another prosecution for the same act He argued that the two
criminal charges against him stemmed from the same act of dri$ing
allegedly under the influence of liAuor which caused the accident&
Was there double %eopardy; -'plain your answer ()*
<es, there is double %eopardy& +nder the second sentence of
.rticle III, (ection 85 of the 1onstitution, if an act is punished by a
law and an ordinance, con$iction or acAuittal under either shall
constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same act& In this case,
the same act is in$ol$ed in the two cases& The reckless imprudence which
resulted In physical in%uries arose from the same act of dri$ing under
the influence of liAuor& In <ap $& Dutero, ,&R& /o& DE58::6, .pril 34,
56)6, the (upreme 1ourt held that an accused who was acAuitted of
dri$ing recklessly in $iolation of an ordinance could not be prosecuted
for damage to property through reckless imprudence because the two
charges were based on the same act& In People $, Relo$a, 52? (1R. 868
(56?7, it was held that when there is identity in the act punished by a
law and an ordinance, con$iction or acAuittal under either shall bar
prosecution under the other&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
There is no double %eopardy because the act penali#ed under the
Re$ised Penal 1ode is different from the act penali#ed by the ordinance
of !akati 1ity& The Re$ised Penal 1ode penali#es reckless imprudence
resulting in physical in%uries, while the ordinance of !akati 1ity
penali#es dri$ing under the influence of liAuor&
S#."!/% 22
B!00 /7 A""$!%#&
1987 N/& II0
1ongress passed a law relating to officials and employees who had
ser$ed in the ,o$ernment for the period from (eptember 85, 5678 up to
>ebruary 8), 56?:&
(a 9ne pro$ision of the law declared all officials from the
rank of assistant head of a department, bureau, office or agency H+nfitH
for continued ser$ice in the go$ernment and declared their respecti$e
positions $acant&
(b .nother pro$ision reAuired all the other officials and
employees to take an oath of loyalty to the flag and go$ernment as a
condition for their continued employment&
.re the two pro$isions $alid; Why; .nswer0
(a The law is a bill of attainder by which 1ongress, by assuming
%udicial magistracy, in effect declares all officials and employees
during martial law ((eptember 85, 5678E>ebruary 8), 56?: as disloyal
and, on this basis, remo$es some while sub%ecting others to a loyalty
test&
With respect to the pro$ision declaring positions $acant, e$en
the power to reorgani#e can not be in$oked because under the >reedom
1onstitution such power can be e'ercised only by the President and only
up to >ebruary 8), 56?7& (ince the law under Auestion was presumably
passed after >ebruary 8), 56?7 and by 1ongress, it is unconstitutional&
(b With respect to the pro$ision reAuiring the loyalty test,
loyalty as a general rule is a rele$ant consideration in assessing
employeesB fitness& Howe$er, the reAuirement in this case is not a
general reAuirement but singles out Hmartial lawH employees and
therefore is administered in a discriminatory manner& Doyalty,
therefore, while a rele$ant consideration in other circumstances, is
being employed in this case for a unconstitutional purpose&
B!00 /7 A""$!%#&
1990 N/& 5G
-'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5 and 8 issued by President 1ora#on 1&
.Auino created the Presidential 1ommission on ,ood ,o$ernment (P1,, and
empowered it to seAuester any property shown prtma%acie to be illEgotten
wealth of the late President !arcos, his relati$es and cronies&
-'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 52 $ests on the (andiganbayan %urisdiction to try
hidden wealth cases& 9n .pril 52, 56?:, after an in$estigation, the P1,,
seAuestered the assets of I 1orporation, Inc&
(5 I 1orporation, Inc& claimed that President .Auino, as
President, could not lawfully issue -'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52,
which ha$e the force of law, on the ground that legislation is a
function of 1ongress& Decide&
(8 (aid corporation also Auestioned the $alidity of the three
e'ecuti$e orders on the ground that they are bills of attainder and,
therefore, unconstitutional& Decide&
.nswer0
(5 -'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52 were issued in 56?:& .t that
time President 1ora#on .Auino e'ercised legislati$e power &&&&
(8 -'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52 are not bills of attainder&
. bill of attainder is a legislati$e act which inflicts punishment
without %udicial trial& .ccordingly, it was held in @ataan (hipyards and
-ngineering company& Inc& $& Presidential 1ommission on ,ood ,o$ernment,
that -'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52 are not bills of attainder,
because they do not inflict any punishment& 9n the contrary, they
e'pressly pro$ide that any %udgment that the property seAuestered is
illEgotten wealth is to be made by a court (the (andiganbayan only
after trial&
C!"!F#%69!=
C!"!F#%69!=
1987 N/& FIII0
H.H was born in 56)5 in the +nited (tates of a 1hinese father and
a >ilipina mother& +nder 1hinese laws, H.BsH mother automatically became
a 1hinese national by her marriage&
In 5673, upon reaching the age of ma%ority, H.H elected to
acAuire Philippine citi#enship& Howe$er, H.H continued to reside in
1alifornia and to carry an .merican passport& He also paid allegiance to
the Taipei go$ernment& In the 56?7 Philippine /ational elections, he was
elected (enator& His opponent mo$ed to disAualify him on the grounds0
(a That he was not a natural born citi#enG and
(b That he had Hdual allegianceH not only to the +nited (tates
but also to the Republic of 1hina&
Decide,
.nswer0
The electoral contest must be dismissed&
(a H.H is a natural born citi#en& .rt& IF, (ec& 8 of the 56?7
1onstitution pro$ides that Hthose who elect Philippine citi#enship in
accordance with paragraph (3, (ec& 5 hereof shall be deemed natural bom
citi#ens&H The purpose of this pro$ision is to eAuali#e the status of
those who elected Philippine citi#enship before and those who did so
after Canuary 57, 5673 when the pre$ious 1onstitution took effect&
(b The Hdual allegianceH declared inimical to national interest
in .rt& IF, (ec& ) refers to the dual allegiance of some such as
naturali#ed >ilipino citi#ens (mostly 1hinese who maintain allegiance
to /ationalist 1hina as shown in some cases by their membership in the
legislati$e <uan after their naturali#ation as citi#ens of the
Philippines& The prohibition does not apply in situations brought about
by dual citi#enship, such as the one in$ol$ed in the problem& Indeed, a
>ilipino woman can ha$e dual allegiance resulting from her marriage to a
foreigner under (ec& 2, so long as she does not do or omit to do an act
amounting to renunciation under 1ommonwealth .ct& /o& :3, (ec& 5(8&
+nder this law, e'press renunciation is different from an act of
allegiance to a foreign power as a ground for loss of Philippine
citi#enship& !oreo$er, what constitutes Hdual allegianceH inimical to
national interest is and what the sanctions for such dual allegiance
will be, will still ha$e to be defined by law pending adoption of such
legislation, ob%ection based on dual allegiance will be premature&
C!"!F#%69!=
1988 N/& 530
Robert @rown was born in Hawaii on !ay 5),56:8, of an .merican
father and a >ilipina mother& 9n !ay 5:, 56?3 while holding an .merican
passport, he registered as a >ilipino with the Philippine 1onsulate at
Honolulu, Hawaii& In (eptember, 56?3 he returned to the Philippines, and
took up residence at @oac, !arinduAue, hometown of his mother& He
registered as a $oter, $oted, and e$en participated as a leader of one
of the candidates in that district in the 56?2 @atasan elections& In the
elections of 56?7, he ran for 1ongressman, and won& His sole opponent is
now Auestioning his Aualifications and is trying to oust him on two
basic claims0
5& He is not a natural born >ilipino citi#en, but is in fact, an
.merican, born in Hawaii, an integral portion of the +&(&.&, who holds
an .merican passportG
8& He did not meet the age reAuirementG and
3& He has a Hgreen cardH from the +&(& ,o$ernment&
.ssume that you are a member of the House -lectoral Tribunal where
the petition for @rownBs ouster is pending& How would you decide the
three issues raised against him;
.nswer0
The first and third grounds ha$e no merit& @ut the second is well
taken and, therefore, @rown should be disAualified&
5& Robert @rown is a natural born citi#en of the Philippines& .
person born of a >ilipino mother and an alien father before Canuary 57,
5673, who thereafter upon reaching the age of ma%ority elect Philippine
citi#enship, is a citi#en of the Philippines (.rt& IF, sec& 5(3& +nder
.rt& IF, sec, 8 he is also deemed a naturalEborn citi#en&
8& The 1onstitution reAuires, among other things, that a
candidate for member of the House of Representati$es must be at least 8)
years of age Hon the day of the election&H (.rt& FI, sec& :& .s @rown
was born on !ay 5), 56:8, he did not become 8) years old until !ay 5),
56?7& Hence on !ay 55, 56?7, when the election was held, he was 2 days
short of the reAuired age&
3& The 1onstitution pro$ides that those who seek either to change
their citi#enship or to acAuire the status of an immigrant of another
country Hduring their tenureH shall be dealt with by law (.rt& II, sec&
57& The pro$ision cannot apply to @rown for the following reasons0
>irst, @rown is in addition an .merican citi#en and thus has a dual
citi#enship which is allowed by the 1onstitution& (1f& .rt& IF, sec& 2,
(econd, @rown did not seek to acAuire the status of an immigrant, but is
an .merican by birth under the principle of %us soli obtaining in the
+nited (tates& Third, he did not seek to change his status during his
tenure as a public officer& >ourth, the pro$ision of .rt& II, sec& 57 is
not selfEe'ecuting but reAuires an implementing law& >ifth, but abo$e
all, the House -lectoral Tribunal has no %urisdiction to decide this
Auestion since it does not concern the Aualification of a memberEelect&
C!"!F#%69!=
1989 N/, 80
(5 Dily Teh arri$ed in !anila on one of her regular tours to the
Philippines from Taipeh& (he met Peter ,o, a naturali#ed >ilipino
citi#en& .fter a whirlwind courtship, Dily and Peter were married at the
(an .gustin 1hurch& . week after the wedding, Dily Teh petitioned in
administrati$e proceedings before immigration authorities to declare her
a >ilipino citi#en stating that she had none of the disAualifications
pro$ided in the Re$ised /aturali#ation Daw& The %ilted >ilipino
girlfriend of Peter ,o opposed the petition claiming that Dily Teh was
still a minor who had not e$en celebrated her 85st birthday, who ne$er
resided in the Philippines e'cept during her oneEweek $isit as tourist
from Taipeh during the 1hinese /ew <ear, who spoke only 1hinese, and who
had radical ideas liked ad$ocating unification of Taiwan with mainland
1hina& Dily Teh, howe$er, swore that she was renouncing her 1hinese
allegiance and while she knew no >ilipino customs and traditions as yet,
she e$inced a sincere desire to learn and embrace them& Would Dily Teh
succeed in becoming a >ilipino citi#en through her marriage to Peter ,o;
-'plain&
(8 . child was born to a Capanese father and a >ilipina mother&
Would he be eligible to run for the position of !ember of the House of
Representati$es upon reaching twentyEfi$e years of age;
.nswer0
(5 <es, Dily Teh ipso facto became a Philippine citi#en upon her
marriage to Peter ,o, who is a Philippine citi#en, pro$ided she
possesses none of the disAualifications laid down in (ection 2 of the
Re$ised /aturali#ation Daw& .ccording to to the ruling in !oy <a Dim <ao
$s& 1ommissioner of Immigration, 25 (1R. 868, an alien woman who marries
a >ilipino husband ipso facto becomes a >ilipino citi#en without ha$ing
to possess any of the Aualifications prescribed in (ection 8 of the
Re$ised /aturali#ation Daw pro$ided she possesses none of the
disAualifications set forth in (ection 2 of the same law& .ll of the
grounds in$oked by the former girlfriend of Peter ,o for opposing the
petition of Dily Teh, e'cept for the last one, are Aualifications, which
Dily Teh need not possess& The fact that Dily Teh is ad$ocating the
unification of Taiwan with mainland 1hina is not a ground for
disAualification under (ection 2 of the Re$ised /aturali#ation Daw&
(8 The child can run for the House of Representati$es pro$ided
upon reaching the age of ma%ority he elected Philippine citi#enship&
+nder (ection :, .rticle FI of the 56?7 1onstitution, to Aualify to be a
member of the House of Representati$es, one must be a naturalEborn
Philippine citi#en& .ccording to (ection 5 (3, .rticle IF of the 56?7
1onstitution, children bom before Canuary 57, 5673 of >ilipino mothers,
who elect Philippine citi#enship upon reaching the age of ma%ority are
Philippine citi#ens&
(ection 8, .rticle IF of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0 HThose
who elect Philippine citi#enship in accordance with paragraph (3,
(ection 5 hereof shall be deemed naturalEborn citi#ens&H 9n the other
hand, if the child was born after Canuary 57, 5673, he would be
considered a natural born citi#en without need of election pursuant to
.rt& IF, (ec& 5(8,
C!"!F#%69!=
1990 N/& 30
< was elected (enator in the !ay 56?7 national elections& He was
born out of wedlock in 5626 of an .merican father and a naturali#ed
>ilipina mother& < ne$er elected Philippine citi#enship upon reaching
the age of ma%ority&
(5 @efore what body should T, the losing candidate, Auestion the
election of <; (tate the reasons for your answer&
(8 Is < a >ilipino citi#en; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
(5 T, the losing candidate, should Auestion the election of <
before the (enate -lectoral Tribunal, &&&&
(8 <es, < is a >ilipino citi#en& !ore than that he is a natural
born citi#en of the Philippines Aualified to become a (enator& (ince <
is an illegitimate child of a >ilipino mother, he follows the
citi#enship of his mother& He need not elect Philippine citi#enship upon
reaching the age of ma%ority as held In re !allare& )6 (1R. 2)& In 9sias
$& .ntonino, -lectoral 1ase /o& 55, .ugust :, 5675, the (enate -lectoral
Tribunal held that the illegitimate child of an alien father and a
>ilipino mother is a >ilipino citi#en and is Aualified to be a (enator,
C!"!F#%69!=
1992 N/& 5:0
-dwin /icasio, born in the Philippines of >ilipino parents and
raised in the pro$ince of /ue$a -ci%a, ran for ,o$ernor of his home
pro$ince& He won and he was sworn into office& It was recently re$ealed,
howe$er, that /icasio is a naturali#ed .merican citi#en&
a Does he still possess Philippine citi#enship;
b If the secondEplacer in the gubematorial elections files a Auo
warranto suit against /icasio and he is found to be disAualified from
office, can the secondEplacer be sworn into office as go$ernor;
c If, instead, /icasio had been born (of the same set of
parents in the +nited (tates and he thereby acAuired .merican
citi#enship by birth, would your answer be different;
.nswer0
a /o, /icasio no longer possesses Philippine citi#enship& .s
held in >ri$aldo $s& 1ommission on -lections, 572 (1R. 82), by becoming
a naturali#ed .merican citi#en, /icasio lost his Philippine citi#enship&
+nder (ection 5(5 of 1ommonwealth .ct /o& :3, Philippine citi#enship is
lost by naturali#ation in a foreign country,
b 8
nd
placer canKt be sworn to office&&&
c If /icasio was bom in the +nited (tates, he would still be
a citi#en of the Philippines, since his parents are >ilipinos& +nder
(ection 5(8, those whose fathers or mothers are citi#ens of the
Philippines are citi#ens of the Philippines& /icasio would possess
dual citi#enship, since under .merican Daw persons born in the +nited
(tates are .merican citi#ens& .s held in .#nor $s& 1ommission on
-lections& 5?) (1R. 743, a person who possessess both Philippine and
.merican citi#enship is still a >ilipino and does not lose his
Philippine citi#enship unless he renounces it&
C!"!F#%69!=
199: N/& ?0
8 I was bom in the +nited (tates of a >ilipino father and a
!e'ican mother& He returned to the Philippines when he was twentyEsi'
years of age, carrying an .merican passport and he was registered as an
alien with the @ureau of Immigration&
Was I Aualified to run for membership in the House of
Representati$es in the 566) elections; -'plain&
.nswer0
8 Whether or not I was Aualified to run for membership in the
House of Representati$es in the 566) election depends on the
circumstances&
If I was an Illegitimate child, he is not Aualified to run for
the House of Representati$es& .ccording to the case of in re !ollare, )6
(1R. 2), an illegitimate child follows the citi#enship of the mother&
(ince the mother of I is a !e'ican, he will be a !e'ican citi#en if he
is an illegitimate child, e$en if his father is a >ilipino&
If I is a legitimate child, he is a >ilipino citi#en& +nder
(ection 8(8, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution, those whose fathers are
citi#ens of the Philippines are >ilipino citi#ens& (ince I was born in
the +nited (tates, which follows %us soli, I is also an .merican
citi#en& In accordance with .#nar $s& 1ommission, on -lections, 5?) (1R.
743, the mere fact a person with dual citi#enship registered as an alien
with the 1ommission on Immigration and Deportation does not necessarily
mean that he is renouncing his Philippine citi#enship& Dikewise, the
mere fact that I used an .merican passport did not result in the loss of
his Philippine citi#enship& .s held in Oawakita $s& +ntied (tates, 323
+&(& 757, since a person with dual citi#enship has the rights of
citi#enship in both countries, the use of a passport issued by one
country is not inconsistent with his citi#enship in the other country&
.lternati$e .nswer0
If I has taken an oath of allegiance to the +&(& he will be
deemed to ha$e renounced his Philippine citi#enship& 1onseAuently, he is
disAualified to run for the House of Representati$es&
C!"!F#%69!=
1998 N/ IF
.ndres .ng was born of a 1hinese father and a >ilipino mother in
(orsogon, (orsogon& on Canuary 84, 5673& In 56??& his father was
naturali#edas a >ilipino citi#en& 9n !ay 55,566?& .ndres .ng was elected
Representati$e of the >irst District of (orsogon& Cuan @onto who
recei$ed the second highest number of $otes, filed a petition for "uo
Warranto against .ng& The petition was filed with the House of
Representati$e -lectoral Tribunal (HR-T& @onto contends that .ng is not
a natural born citi#en of the Philippines and therefore is disAualified
to be a member of the House&
The HR-T ruled in fa$or of .ng& @onto filed a petition for
certiorari in the (upreme 1ourt& The following issues are raised0
5& Whether the case is %usticiable considering that .rticle FI&
(ection 57 of the 1onstitution declares the HR-T to be the Hsole CudgeH
of all contests relating to the election returns and disAualifications
of members of the House of Representati$es& L)*M
8& Whether .ng is a natural bom citi#en of the Philippines& V
)*M
How should this case be decided; (+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& The case is %usticiable& (det of gra$e abuse of
discretion&&&
8& .ndres .ng should be considered a natural born citi#en of
the Philippines& He was born of a >ilipino mother on Canuary 84, 5673&
This was after the effecti$ity of the 5673 1onstitution on Canuary 57,
5673& +nder (ection (5, .rticle III of the 5673 1onstitution, those
whose fathers or mothers are citi#ens of the Philippines are citi#ens of
the Philippines& .ndres .ng remained a citi#en of the Philippines after
the effecti$ity of the 56?7 1onstitution& (ection 5, .rticle IF of the
56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe following are citi#ens of the Philippines0
H(l Those who are citi#ens of the Philippines at the time of the
adoption of this 1onstitutionGH
C!"!F#%69!=
2001 N/ I
>rom mainland 1hina where he was born of 1hinese parents, !r /ya
Tsa 1han migrated to the Philippines in 5?62& .s of .pril 55, 5?66, he
was already a permanent resident of the Philippine Islands and continued
to reside in this country until his death& During his lifetime and when
he was already in the Philippines, !r& /ya Tsa 1han married 1haring, a
>ilipina, with whom he begot one son, Hap 1han, who was born on 9ctober
5?& 5?67& Hap 1han got married also to /imfa, a >llipina, and one of
their children was DacAui 1han who was born on (eptember 87, 563:&
DacAui 1han finished the course @achelor of (cience in 1ommerce and
e$entually engaged in business&
In the !ay 56?6 election, DacAui 1han ran for and was elected
Representati$e (1ongressman& His ri$al candidate, Ramon Deloria, filed
a Auo warranto or disAualification case against him on the ground that
he was not a >ilipino citi#en& It was pointed out in particular, that
DacAui 1han did not elect Philippine citi#enship upon reaching the age
of 85&
Decide whether !r& DacAui 1han suffers from a disAualification or
not& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
DacAui 1han is a >ilipino citi#en and need not elect Philippine
citi#enship& His father, Hap 1han, was a (panish sub%ect, was residing
in the Philippines on .pril 55, 5?66, and continued to reside in the
Philippines& In accordance with (ection 2 of the Philippine @ill of
5648, he was a >ilipino citi#en& Hence, in accordance with (ection 5(3P
of the 563) 1onstitution, DacAui 1han is a natural born >ilipino
citi#en, since his father was a >ilipino citi#en&
C!"!F#%69!=
200? N/ IF
(a !iguel (in was bom a year ago in 1hina to a 1hinese father and
a >ilipino mother His parents met in (hanghai where they were lawfully
married %ust two years ago& Is !iguel (in a >ilipino citi#en;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a !iguel (in is a >ilipino citi#en because he is the
legitimate child of a >ilipino mother& +nder .rticle IF, (ection 2 of
the 56?7 1onstitution, his mother retained her Philippine citi#enship
despite her marriage to an alien husband, and according to .rticle IF,
(ection 5(8 of the 56?7 1onstitution, children born of a >ilipino
mother are >ilipino citi#ens&
C!"!F#%69!=
2004 I@-.& T1., a >ilipina medical technologist, left in 567) to
work in =9= (tate& In 56?? she married 9DH, a citi#en of =9=& Pursuant
to =9=Ks law, by taking an oath of allegiance, she acAuired her
husbandKs citi#enship&
9DH died in 8445, lea$ing her financially secure& (he returned
home in 8448, and sought electi$e office in 8442 by running for !ayor of
.PP, her hometown& Her opponent sought to ha$e her disAualified because
of her =9= citi#enship& (he replied that although she acAuired =9=Ks
citi#enship because of marriage, she did not lose her >ilipino
citi#enship& @oth her parents, she said, are >ilipino citi#ens&
Is T1. Aualified to run for !ayor; ()*
C!"!F#%69!=> A."!/% 8/& C$%.#00$"!/%> P&#6.&!="!/% A E77#." /7 D#$"9
1994 N/& 70
-n#o, a 1hinese national, was granted Philippine citi#enship in a
decision rendered by the 1ourt of >irst Instance of Pampanga on Canuary
54, 56):& He took his oath of office on Cune ), 56)6& In 5674, the
(olicitor ,eneral filed a petition to cancel his citi#enship on the
ground that in Culy 56:6 the 1ourt of Ta' .ppeals found that -n#o had
cheated the go$ernment of income ta'es for the years 56): to 56)6& (aid
decision of the Ta' 1ourt was affirmed by the (upreme 1ourt in 56:6&
@etween 56:4 and 5674, -n#o had acAuired substantial real property In
the Philippines,
5 Has the action for cancellation of -n#oBs citi#enship
prescribed;
8 1an -n#o ask for the denial of the petition on the ground
that he had a$ailed of the Ta' .mnesty for his ta' liabilities;
3 What is the effect on the petition for cancellation of -n#oBs
citi#enship if -n#o died during the pendency of the hearing on said
petition;
.nswer0
5 /o, the action has not prescribed& .s held in Republic $s& Di
<ao, 852 (1R. 72?, a certificate of naturali#alion may be cancelled at
any time if it was fraudulently obtained by misleading the court
regarding the moral character of the petitioner&
8 /o, -n#o cannot ask for the denial of the petition for the
cancellation of his certificate of naturali#ation on the ground that he
had a$ailed of the ta' amnesty& In accordance with the ruling in
Republic $s& Di <ao, 882 (1R. 72?, the ta' amnesty merely remo$ed all
the ci$il, criminal and administrati$e liabilities of -n#o& It did not
obliterate his lack of good moral character and irreproachable conduct&
3 9n the assumption that he left a family, the death of -n#o
does not render the petition for the cancellation of his certificate of
naturali#ation moot& .s held in Republic $s& Di <ao, 882 (1R. 72?, the
outcome of the case will affect his wife and children&
C!"!F#%69!=> D,$0 C!"!F#%69!=
1994 N/& ?0
In 56?6, =eny Reyes married @en Tulog, a national of the (tate of
Oongo& +nder the laws of Oongo, an alien woman marrying a Oongo national
automatically acAuires Oongo citi#enship& .fter her marriage, =eny
resided in Oongo and acAuired a Oongo passport& In 5665, =eny returned
to the Philippines to run for ,o$ernor of (orsogon&
5 Was =eny Aualified to run for ,o$ernor;
8 (uppose instead of entering politics& =eny %ust got herself
elected as $iceEpresident of the Philippine @ulletin, a local newspaper&
Was she Aualified to hold that position;
.nswer0
5 +nder (ection 2, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution& =eny retained
her >ilipino citi#enship& (ince she also became a citi#en of Oongo, she
possesses dual citi#enship& Pursuant to (ection 24 (d of the Docal
,o$ernment 1ode, she is disAualified to run for go$ernor& In addition,
if =eny returned to the Philippines, less than a year immediately before
the day of the election, =eny is not Aualified to run for ,o$ernor of
(orsogon& +nder (ection 36(a of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, a candidate
for go$ernor must be a resident in the pro$ince where he intends to run
at least one (5 year immediately preceding the day of the election& @y
residing in Oongo upon her marriage in 56?6, =eny abandoned her
residence in the Philippines&
This is in accordance with the decision in 1aasi $s& 1ourt of
.ppeals, 565 (1R. 886&
.lternati$e .nswer0
/o& =eny was not Aualified to run for ,o$ernor& +nder the
1onstitution, Hciti#ens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain
their citi#enship, unless by their act or omission they are deemed,
under the law to ha$e renounced it&H ((ec& 2, .rt& IF, 1onstitution&
Her residing in Oongo and acAuiring a Oongo passport are indicati$e of
her renunciation of Philippine citi#enship, which is a ground for loss
of her citi#enship which she was supposed to ha$e retained& When she ran
for ,o$ernor of (orsogon, =eny was no longer a Philippine citi#en and,
hence, was disAualified for said position&
8 .lthough under (ection 55(5, .rticle IFI of the 1onstitution,
mass media must be wholly owned by >ilipino citi#ens and under (ection 8
of the .ntiEDummy Daw aliens may not inter$ene in the management of any
nationali#ed business acti$ity& =eny may be elected $ice president of
the Philippine @ulletin, because she has remained a >ilipino citi#en&
+nder (ection 2, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution, >ilipino citi#ens who
marry aliens retains their citi#enship unless by their act or omission
they are deemed, under the law, to ha$e renounced it& The acts or
omission which will result in loss of citi#enship are enumerated in
1ommonwealth .ct /o, :3& =eny is not guilty of any of them& .s held in
Oawakita $s& +nited (tates, 323 +&(& 757, a person who possesses dual
citi#enship like =eny may e'ercise rights of citi#enship in both
countries and the use of a passport pertaining to one country does not
result in loss of citi#enship in the other country&
.lternati$e .nswer0
/either, was =eny Aualified to hold the position of $iceEpresident
of Philippine @ulletin& +nder the 1onstitution, Hthe ownership and
management of mass media shall be limited to citi#ens, of the
Philippines, or to corporation, cooperati$es or associations wholly
owned and managed by such citi#ensH ((ection II L5M, .rt& IFI, @eing a
nonEPhilippine citi#en, =eny can not Aualify to participate in the
management of the @ulletin as FiceEPresident thereof&
C!"!F#%69!=> E77#." /7 R#=$"&!$"!/%
1999 N/ III
@& Culio Hortal was born of >ilipino parents& +pon reaching
the age of ma%ority, he became a naturali#ed citi#en in another country&
Dater, he reacAuired Philippine citi#enship& 1ould Hortal regain his
status as natural born >ilipino citi#en; Would your answer be the same
whether he reacAuires his >ilipinoEciti#enship by repatriation or by act
of 1ongress; -'plain& (3*
@& Culian !ortal can regain his status as a natural born citi#en
by repatriating& (ince repatriation in$ol$es restoration of a person to
citi#enship pre$iously lost by e'patriation and Culian !ortal was
pre$iously a natural born citi#en, in case he repatriates he will be
restored to his status as a natural born citi#en& If he reacAuired his
citi#enship by an act of 1ongress, Culian Hortal will not be a natural
born citi#en, since he reacAuired his citi#enship by legislati$e
naturali#ation&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
@& Culian Hortal cannot regain his status as a natural born
citi#en by repatriating& He had to perform an act to acAuire his
citi#enship, i&e&, repatriation& +nder (ection 8, .rticle IF of the
1onstitution, natural born citi#ens are those who are citi#ens from
birth without ha$ing to perform an act to acAuire or perfect their
citi#enship& If he reacAuired his citi#enship by an act of 1ongress,
Culian Hortal will not be a natural born citi#en since he reacAuired his
citi#enship by legislati$e naturali#ation&
C!"!F#%69!=> E77#." /7 R#=$"&!$"!/%
2002 N/ I
. was born in the Philippines of >ilipino parents& When martial
law was declared in the Philippines on (eptember 85, 5678, he went to
the +nited (tates and was naturali#ed as an .merican citi#en& .fter the
-D(. Re$olution, he came home to the Philippines and later on reacAuired
Philippine citi#enship by repatriation&
(uppose in the !ay 8442 elections he is elected !ember of the
House of Representati$es and a case is filed seeking his
disAualification on the ground that he is not a naturalEborn citi#en of
the Philippines, how should the case against him be decided; -'plain
your answer& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The case should be decided in fa$or of .& .s held In @engson $&
House of Representati$es -lectoral Tribunal, 3)7 (1R. )2) (8445,
repatriation results in the reco$ery of the original nationality& (ince
. was a naturalEbom >ilipino citi#en before he became a naturali#ed
.merican citi#en, he was restored to his former status as a naturalEborn
>ilipino when he repatriated&
C!"!F#%69!=> E77#." /7 R#=$"&!$"!/%
200? N/ IF
(b Cuan 1ru# was born of >ilipino parents in 56:4 in Pampanga& In
56?), he enlisted in the +&(& !arine 1orps and took an oath of
allegiance to the +nited (tates of .merica& In 5664, he was naturali#ed
as an .merican citi#en& In 5662, he was repatriated under Republic .ct
/o& 8234& During the 566? /ational -lections, he ran for and was elected
representati$e of the >irst District of Pampanga where he resided since
his repatriation& Was he Aualified to run for the position; -'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(b 1ru# was Aualified to run as representati$e of the >irst
District of Pampanga& (ince his parents were >ilipino citi#ens, he was a
naturalEborn citi#en& .lthough he became a naturali#ed .merican
citi#en, under the ruling in @engson $& House of Representati$es
-lectoral Tribunal& 3)7 (1R. )2) L8445M, by $irtue of his repatriation,
1ru# was restored to his original status as a naturalEborn >ilipino
citi#en&
C!"!F#%69!=> E77#."6 /7 M$&&!$'#6
1999 N/ III
.& What are the effects of marriages of0
5 a citi#en to an alienG (5*
8 an alien to a citi#enG on their spouses and children;
Discuss& (5*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& 5& .ccording to (ection 2, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution,
>ilipino citi#ens who marry aliens retain their citi#enship, unless by
their act or omission they are deemed, under the law, to ha$e renounced
it&
8 .ccording to !o <a Dim <ao $& 1ommissioner of Immigration, 25
(1R. 868, under (ection 5) of the Re$ised /aturali#ation Da$, a foreign
woman who marries a >ilipino citi#en becomes a >ilipino citi#en pro$ided
she possesses none of the disAualifications for naturali#ation& .
foreign man who marries a >ilipino citi#en does not acAuire Philippine
citi#enship& Howe$er, under (ection 3 of the Re$ised /aturali#ation .ct,
in such a case the residence reAuirement for naturali#ation will be
reduced from ten (54 to fi$e () years& +nder (ection 5(8, .rticle IF
of the 1onstitution, the children of an alien and a >ilipino citi#en are
citi#ens of the Philippines&
C!"!F#%69!=> N$",&$0-B/&%
199? N/& 50
In 56:2& Ruffa, a >ilipina domestic helper working in Hongkong,
went to Taipei for a $acation, where she met 1heng (io Pao& whom she
married& +nder 1hinese Daw, Ruffa automatically became a 1hinese
citi#en& The couple resided in Hongkong, where on !ay 6, 56:), Ruffa
ga$e birth to a boy named -rnest& +pon reaching the age of ma%ority,
-rnest elected Philippine citi#enship& .fter the -D(. Re$olution, -rnest
decided to li$e permanently in the Philippines, where he prospered as a
businessman& During the !ay 55, 5663 election, -rnest ran and won as a
congressman& His opponent, noting -rnestBs 1hinese ancestry, filed a
petition to disAualify the latter on the following groundsG (5 -rnest
1heng is not a natural bom >ilipinoG and (8 he is underaged& Decide&
.nswer0
5 -rnest cannot be disAualified&
(ection 5, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution pro$ides0 HThe following
are citi#ens of the PhilippinesG
III III III
H(3 Those born before Canuary 57, 5673, of >ilipino mothers, who
elect Philippine citi#enship upon reaching the age of ma%orityGH
-rnest could elect Philippine citi#enship since he was bom before
Canuary 57& 5673 and his mother is a >ilipino& .s stated in the cases of
Torres $s& Tan 1him, :6 Phil& )5? and 1u $s& Republic, ?3 Phil& 273, for
this pro$ision to apply, the mother need not be a >ilipino citi#en at
the time she ga$e birth to the child in Auestion& It is sufficient that
she was a >ilipino citi#en at the time of her marriage& 9therwise, the
number of persons who would be benefited by the foregoing pro$ision
would be limited&
Ha$ing elected Philippine citi#enship, -rnest is a naturalEborn
>ilipino citi#en in accordance with (ection 8, .rticle IF of the
1onstitution, which reads0
Those who elect Philippine citi#enship in accordance with
paragraph (3, (ection 5 hereof shall be deemed natural born citi#ens&H
8 -rnest is not underaged& (minimum 8) yrs old&&&&
C!"!F#%69!=> N$",&$0!F$"!/%> C$%.#00$"!/% /7 C!"!F#%69!=
1998 N/ I&
Dim Tong @iao, a 1hinese citi#en applied for and was granted
Philippine citi#enship by the court& He took his oath as citi#en of the
Philippines to Culy 56:3, In 567), the 9ffice of the (olicitor ,eneral
filed a petition to cancel his Philippine citi#enship for the reason
that in .ugust 56:3, the 1ourt of Ta' .ppeals found him guilty of ta'
e$asion for deliberately understating his income ta'es for the years
56)6E56:5&
5& 1ould Dim Tong @iao raise the defense of prescription of
the action for cancellation of his >ilipino citi#enship; L3*M
8& (upposing Dim Tong @iao had a$ailed of the Ta' .mnesty of
the go$ernment for his ta' liabilities, would this constitute a $alid
defense to the cancellation of his >ilipino citi#enship; L8*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& /o, Dim Tong @iao cannot raise the defense of prescription&
.s held in Republic us& ,o @on Dee, 5 (1R. 55::, 5574, a decision
granting citi#enship is not res %udicata and the right of the go$ernment
to ask for the cancellation of a certificate cancellation is not barred
by the lapse of time&
8& The fact that Dim Tong @iao a$ailed of the ta' amnesty is
not a $alid defense to the cancellation of his >ilipino citi#enship&
In Republic $s& Di <ao, 852 (1R. 72?, 7)2, the (upreme 1ourt held0
HIn other words, the ta' amnesty does not ha$e the effect of
obliterating his lack of good moral character and irreproachable conduct
which are grounds for denaturali#ation,H
C!"!F#%69!=> R#$.C,!6!"!/%; 2$)6 /7
2000 N/ IFIII&
b 1ru#, a >ilipino by birth, became an .merican citi#en& In his
old age he has returned to the country and wants to become a >ilipino
again& .s his lawyer, enumerate the ways by which citi#enship may be
reacAuired& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
b 1ru# may reacAuire Philippine citi#enship in the following
ways0
5& @y naturali#ationG
8& @y repatriation pursuant to Republic .ct /o& ?575G and
3& @y direct act of 1ongress ((ection 8 of 1ommonwealth .ct /o&
:3&
L#'!60$"!5# D#=$&"4#%"
L#'!60$",&#> A==&/=&!$"!/% L$2> N$",&#
199: N/ )0
.re the following bills filed in 1ongress constitutional;
5 . bill originating from the (enate which pro$ides for the
creation of the Public +tility 1ommission to regulate public ser$ice
companies and appropriating the initial funds needed to establish the
same& -'plain&
.nswer0
5 . bill pro$iding for the creation of the Public +tility
1ommission to regulate public ser$ice companies and appropriating funds
needed to establish it may originate from the (enate& It is not an
appropriation bill, because the appropriation of public funds is not the
principal purpose of the bill& In .ssociation of (mall Dandowners of the
Philippines, Inc& $s& (ecretary of .grarian Reform 57) (1R. 323, it was
held that a law is not an appropriate measure if the appropriation of
public funds is not its principal purpose and the appropriation is only
incidental to some other ob%ecti$e&
L#'!60$",&#> A==&/=&!$"!/% L$2> R!#& P&/5!6!/%
2001 N/ FII
(uppose that the forthcoming ,eneral .ppropriations Daw for <ear
8448, in the portion pertaining to the Department of -ducation, 1ulture
and (ports, will contain a pro$ision to the effect that the Reser$e
9fficers Training 1ourse (R9T1 in all colleges and uni$ersities Is
hereby abolished, and in lieu thereof all male college students shall be
reAuired to plant ten (54 trees e$ery year for two (8 years in areas
to be designated by the Department of -n$ironment and /atural Resources
in coordination with the Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports and
the local go$ernment unit concerned& It further pro$ides that the same
pro$ision shall be incorporated In future ,eneral appropriations .cts&
There is no specific item of appropriation of funds for the purpose&
1omment on the constitutionality of said pro$ision&
()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The pro$ision is unconstitutional, because it is a rider& (ection
8)(8, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution pro$ides, H/o pro$ision or
enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless it
relates specifically to some particular appropriation therein&H The
abolition of the Reser$e 9fficers Training 1ourse in$ol$es a policy
matter& .s held in Philippine 1onstitution .ssociation $s& -nriAue#, 83)
(1R. )4: (5662, this cannot be incorporated in the ,eneral
.ppropriations .ct but must be embodied in a separate law&
L#'!60$",&#> A==&/=&!$"!/% L$2> A,"/4$"!. R#%#2$0 A P2& /7 A,'4#%"$"!/%
1998 N/ II&
(uppose the President submits a budget which does not contain
pro$isions for 1D> (1ountrywide De$elopment >unds, popularly known as
the pork barrel, and because of this 1ongress does not pass the budget&
5& Will that mean parali#ation of go$ernment operations in the
ne't fiscal year for lack of an appropriation law;
(8*
8& (uppose in the same budget, there is a special pro$ision
in the appropriations for the .rmed >orces authori#ing the 1hief of
(taff, .>P, sub%ect to the appro$al of the (ecretary of /ational
Defense, to use sa$ings in the appropriations pro$ided thereto to co$er
up whate$er financial losses suffered by the .>P Retirement and
(eparation @enefits (ystem (R(@( in the last fi$e () years due to
alleged bad business %udgment Would you Auestion the
constitutionality Q$alidity of the special pro$ision; L3*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& /o, the failure of 1ongress to pass the budget win not
paralyse the operations of the ,o$ernment&
(ection 8)(7, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution proETides0
HIf, by the end of any fiscal year, the 1ongress shall ha$e failed
to pass the general appropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the
general appropriations law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed
reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until the general
appropriations bill is passed by the 1ongress&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
8& <es, the pro$ision authori#ing the 1hief of (taff, with the
appro$al of the (ecretary of /ational Defense, to use sa$ings to co$er
the losses suffered by the .>P Retirement and (eparation @enefits (ystem
is unconstitutional&
(ection 8)()M, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
H/o law shall be passed authori#ing any transfer of
appropriationsG howe$er, the President, the President of the (enate, the
(peaker of the House of Representati$es, the 1hief Custice of the
(upreme 1ourt, and the heads of 1onstitutional 1ommissions may, by law,
be authori#ed to augment any item in the general appropriation law for
their respecti$e offices from sa$ings in other Items of their respecti$e
appropriations&H
In Philippine 1onstitution $s -nriAue#, 83) (1R. )4:, )22, the
(upreme 1ourt held that a pro$ision in the ,eneral .ppropriation .ct
authori#ing the 1hief of (taff to use sa$ings to augment the funds of
the .>P Retirement and (eparation @enefits (ystems was unconstitutional&
HWhile (ection 8)() allows as an e'ception the realignment of
sa$ings to augment items in the general appropriations law for the
e'ecuti$e branch, such right must and can be e'ercised only by the
President pursuant to a specific law&H
L#'!60$",&#> A==&/=&!$"!/% /7 P,(0!. 8,%6> O%0) 7/& P,(0!. P,&=/6#6
1988 N/& 70
TawiETawi is a predominantly !oslem pro$ince& The ,o$ernor, the
FiceE,o$ernor, and members of its (angEguniang Panlalawigan are all
!oslems& Its budget pro$ides the ,o$ernor with a certain amount as his
discretionary funds& Recently, howe$er, the (angguniang Panlalawigan
passed a resolution appropriating P544,444 as a special discretionary
fund of the ,o$ernor, to& be spent by him in leading a pilgrimage of his
pro$incemates to !ecca, (audi .rabia, IslamBs holiest city&
Philconsa, on constitutional grounds, has filed suit to nullify
the resolution of the (angguniang Panlalawigan gi$ing the special
discretionary fund to the ,o$ernor for the stated purpose&
How would you decide the case; ,i$e your reasons&
.nswer0
The resolution is unconstitutional >irst, it $iolates art& FI,
sec& 86(8 of the 1onstitution which prohibits the appropriation of
public money or property, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit
or support of any system of religion, and, second, it contra$enes art&
FI, sec, 8)(: which limits the appropriation of discretionary funds
only for public purposes& The use of discretionary funds for purely
religious purpose is thus unconstitutional, and the fact that the
disbursement is made by resolution of a local legislati$e body and not
by 1ongress does not make it any less offensi$e to the 1onstitution&
.bo$e all, the resolution constitutes a clear $iolation of the /onE
establishment 1lause (art& III, sec& ) of the 1onstitution&
L#'!60$",&#> A==&/=&!$"!/% /7 P,(0!. 8,%6> D#(" S#&5!.!%'
1992 N/ 530
-'plain how the automatic appropriation of public funds for debt
ser$icing can be reconciled with .rticle FI, (ection 86(5 of the
1onstitution& (aid pro$ision says that Hno money shall be paid out of
the Treasury e'cept in pursuance of an appropriation made by lawH&
.nswer0
.s stated in ,uingona $s& 1arague, 56: (1R. 885, the presidential
decrees pro$iding for the appropriation of funds to pay the public debt
do not $iolate (ection 86(5, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution& They
pro$ide for a continuing appropriation, there is no constitutional
prohibition against this& The presidential decrees appropriate as much
money as is needed to pay the principal, interest, ta'es and other
normal banking charges on the loan& .lthough no specific amounts are
mentioned, the amounts are certain because they can be computed from the
books of the /ational Treasury&
L#'!60$",&#> A==&/=&!$"!/% /7 P,(0!. 8,%6> 4,6" (# () 0$2
1988 N/& :0
!etropolitan newspapers ha$e reported that the Philippine ,ames
and .musement 1orporation (P.,19R gi$es hefty contributions to
!alacanang, to fund HsocioEeconomic and ci$ic pro%ectsH of the
President, The reports add that for 56?? alone, some si' hundred million
(P:44! pesos ha$e already been earmarked for remittance to the 9ffice
of the President& P.,19R had also been reported to ha$e funded, as
coordinated by a 1ongressman from !indanao, special pro%ects of Auite a
number of members of the House of Representati$es&
.ssuming that money earned by P.,19R from its operations are
public funds, are such contributions to !alacanang and to certain
1ongressmen and their e'penditure as reported, legal; 1ite
constitutional or decisional rules in support of your answer&
.nswer0
The contributions made to !alacanang and to certain congressmen
are illegal& +nder art& FI, sec& 86(5 no money can be paid out of the
Treasury e'cept in pursuance of an appropriation made by law& The
disbursement of public funds by P.,19R, not being made pursuant to an
appropriation made by law, $iolates the 1onstitution&
L#'!60$",&#> C/44!66!/% O% A==/!%"4#%"6
2002 N/ III
(uppose there are 848 members in the House of Representati$es& 9f
this number, 5?) belong to the Progressi$e Party of the Philippines or
PPP, white 57 belong to the 1iti#ens Party or 1P& How would you answer
the following Auestions regarding the representation of the House in the
1ommission on .ppointments;
. How many seats would the PPP be entitled to ha$e in the
1ommission on .ppointments; -'plain your answer fully& ()*
@& (uppose 5) of the 1P representati$es, while maintaining their
party affiliation, entered into a political alliance with the PPP in
order to form the HRainbow 1oalitionBB in the House& What effect, if
any, would this ha$e on the right of the 1P to ha$e a seat or seats in
the 1ommission on .ppointments; -'plain your answer fully& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& The 5?) members of the Progressi$e Party of the Philippines
represent 65&)? per cent of the 848 members of the House of
Representati$es& In accordance with .rticle FI, (ection 5? of the
1onstitution, it is entitled to ha$e ten of the twel$e seats in the
1ommission on .ppointments& .lthough the 5?) members of Progressi$e
Party of the Philippines represent 54&6? seats in the 1ommission on
.ppointments, under the ruling in ,uingona $& ,on#ales, 852 (1R. 7?6
(5668, a fractional membership cannot be rounded off to full membership
because it will result in o$erErepresentation of that political party
and underErepresentation of the other political parties&
@& The political alliance formed by the 5) members of the 1iti#ens
Party with the Progressi$e Party of the Philippines will not result in
the diminution of the number of seats in the 1ommission on .ppointments
to which the 1iti#ens Party is entitled& .s held in 1unanan $& Tan, )
(1R. 5 (56:8, a temporary alliance between me members of one political
party and another political party does not authori#e a change in the
membership of the 1ommission on .ppointments, 9therwise, the 1ommission
on .ppointments will ha$e to be reorgani#ed as often as $otes shift from
one side to another in the House of Representati$es&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%,." /7 8/&#!'% A77$!&6
199: N/& 70
) 1an the House of Representati$es take acti$e part in the
conduct of foreign relations, particularly in entering Into treaties and
international agreements; -'plain&
.nswerG
) /o, the House of Representati$es cannot take acti$e part in
the conduct of foreign relations, particularly in entering into treaties
and international agreements& .s held in +nited (tates $s& 1urtissE
Wright -'port 1orporation, 866 +&(& 342, the President alone is the
representati$e of the nation in the conduct of foreign affairs& .lthough
the (enate has the power to concur in treaties, the President alone
negotiates treaties and 1ongress is powerless to intrude into this&
Howe$er, if the matter In$ol$es a treaty or an e'ecuti$e agreement, the
House of Representati$es may pass a resolution e'pressing its $iews on
the matter&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%,." /7 8/&#!'% A77$!&6> R/0# /7 S#%$"#
1994 N/& 530
5 +nder the 1onstitution, what is the role of the (enate in the
conduct of foreign affairs;
.nswer0
5 The (enate plays a role in the conduct of foreign affairs,
because of the reAuirement in (ection 85, .rticle FII of the
1onstitution that to be $alid and effecti$e a treaty or international
agreement must be concurred in by at least twoEthirds of all the !embers
of the (enate&
(ection 2, .rticle IFIII of the 1onstitution pro$ides0
H.ll e'isting treaties or international agreements which ha$e not
been ratified shall not be renewed or e'tended without the concurrence
of at least twoEthirds of all the !embers of the (enate&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%,." /7 8/&#!'% A77$!&6> T&#$"!#6
199: N/ )0
.re the following bills filed in 1ongress constitutional;
8 . bill creating a %oint legislati$eEe'ecuti$e commission to
gi$e, on behalf of the (enate, its ad$ice, consent and concurrence to
treaties entered into by the President& The bill contains the guidelines
to be followed by the commission In the discharge of its functions&
-'plain&
.nswer0
8 . bill creating a %oint legislati$eEe'ecuti$e commission to
gi$e, on behalf of the (enate, its ad$ice, consent and concurrence to
treaties entered into by the President& The (enate cannot delegate this
function to such a commission, because under (ection 85, .rticle FII of
the 1onstitution, the concurrence of at least twoEthirds of the (enate
itself is reAuired for the ratification of treaties&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> D!6.!=0!%#> S,6=#%6!/% /7 A M#4(#&
2002 N/ II&
(imeon Falera was formerly a Pro$incial ,o$ernor who ran and won
as a !ember of the House of Representati$es for the (econd 1ongressional
District of lloilo& >or $iolation of (ection 3 of the .ntiE,raft and
1orrupt Practices .ct (R&.& /o&3456, as amended, allegedly committed
when he was still a Pro$incial ,o$ernor, a criminal complaint was filed
against him before the 9ffice of the 9mbudsman for which, upon a finding
of probable cause, a criminal case was filed with the (andiganbayan&
During the course of trial, the (andiganbayan issued an order of
pre$enti$e suspension for 64 days against him&
Representati$e Falera Auestioned the $alidity of the (andiganbayan
order on the ground that, under .rticle FI , (ection 5:(3 of the
1onstitution, he can be suspended only by the House of Representati$es
and that the criminal case against him did not arise from his actuations
as a member of the House of Representati$es&
Is Representati$e FaleraBs contention correct; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The contention of Representati$e Falera is not correct .s held in
(antiago $& (andiganbayan, 3): (1R. :3:, the suspension contemplated in
.rticle FI, (ection 5:(3 of the 1onstitution is a punishment that is
imposed by the (enate or House of Representati$es upon an erring member,
it is distinct from the suspension under (ection 53 of the .ntiE,raft
and 1orrupt Practices .ct, which is not a penalty but a pre$enti$e
measure& (ince (ection 53 of the .ntiE,raft and 1orruption Practices .ct
does not state that the public officer must be suspended only in the
office where he is alleged to ha$e committed the acts which he has been
charged, it applies to any office which he may be holding&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> D!6.!=0!%#> M/#6 /7 R#4/5$0
199? N/& 550
How may the following be remo$ed from office0
5 (enators U 1ongressmen
8 Cudges of lower courts
3 9fficers and employees in the 1i$il (er$ice
.nswer0
5 In accordance with .rt& III, section 5:(3, of the
1onstitution, (enators and 1ongressmen may be remo$ed by their e'pulsion
for disorderly beha$ior, with the concurrence of at least twoEthirds of
all the members of the House to which they belong& In addition, they may
also be remo$ed in conseAuence of an election contest filed with the
(enate or House of Representati$es -lectoral Tribunal&
8 .s to Cudges, .rt& FIII, sec& 55 of the 1onstitution, &&&&
3 .s to 1i$il (er$ice -mployees, .rt& IIE@& (ec& 8(3 of the
1onstitution&&&&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> L/$%6 E1"#%# "/ M#4(#&6 /7 C/%'&#66
1991 N/& 60
.& .fter 8 >ebruary 56?7, the Philippine /ational @ank (P/@
grants a loan to 1ongressman I& Is the loan $iolati$e of the
1onstitution;
(uppose the loan had instead been granted before 8 >ebruary 56?7,
but was outstanding on that date with a remaining balance on the
principal in the amount of P)4,444&44, can the P/@ $alidly gi$e
1ongressman I an e'tension of time after said date to settle the
obligation;
.nswerG
.& Whether or not the loan is $lolati$e of the 56?7 1onstitution
depends upon its purpose& If it was obtained for a business purpose, it
is $lolati$e of the 1onstitution& If it was obtained for some other
purpose, e&g&, for housing& It is not $iolati$e of the 1onstitution
because under (ection 5:, .rticle II& !embers of 1ongress are
prohibited from obtaining loans from go$ernmentEowned banks only if it
is for a business purpose,
If the loan was granted before the effecti$ity of the 1onstitution
on >ebruary 8, 56?7, the Philippine /ational @ank cannot e'tend its
maturity after >ebruary 8, 56?7, if the loan was obtained for a business
purpose& In such a case the e'tension is a financial accommodation which
is also prohibited by the 1onstitution&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> P&/9!(!"!/%6 $% I%9!(!"!/%6 /7 P,(0!. O7!.#
2004 III-.& C.R faces a dilemma0 should he accept a 1abinet
appointment now or run later for (enator; Ha$ing succeeded in law
practice as well as prospered in pri$ate business where he and his wife
ha$e substantial in$estments, he now contemplates public ser$ice but
without losing the fle'ibility to engage in corporate affairs or
participate in professional acti$ities within ethical bounds&
Taking into account the prohibitions and inhibitions of public
office whether as (enator or (ecretary, he turns to you for ad$ice to
resol$e his dilemma& What is your ad$ice; -'plain briefly& ()*
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> Q,$0!7!.$"!/%6> $'#
199? N/& 50
In 56:2& Ruffa, a >ilipina domestic helper working in Hongkong,
went to Taipei for a $acation, where she met 1heng (io Pao& whom she
married& +nder 1hinese Daw, Ruffa automatically became a 1hinese
citi#en& The couple resided in Hongkong, where on !ay 6, 56:), Ruffa
ga$e birth to a boy named -rnest& +pon reaching the age of ma%ority,
-rnest elected Philippine citi#enship& .fter the -D(. Re$olution, -rnest
decided to li$e permanently in the Philippines, where he prospered as a
businessman& During the !ay 55, 5663 election, -rnest ran and won as a
congressman& His opponent, noting -rnestBs 1hinese ancestry, filed a
petition to disAualify the latter on the following groundsG (5 -rnest
1heng is not a natural bom >ilipinoG and (8 he is underaged& Decide&
.nswer0
5 -rnest cannot be disAualified&&&&&
8 -rnest is not underaged& Ha$ing been born on !ay 6, 56:), he
was o$er twentyEfi$e years old on the date of the !ay 55, 5663 election&
(-lection was held on !ay 55, 5668& (ection :, .rticle FI of the
1onstitution, reAuires congressmen to be at least twentyEfi$e years of
age on the day of the election&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> Q,$0!7!.$"!/%6
1988 N/& 530
Robert @rown was born in Hawaii on !ay 5),56:8, of an .merican
father and a >ilipina mother& 9n !ay 5:, 56?3 while holding an .merican
passport, he registered as a >ilipino with the Philippine 1onsulate at
Honolulu, Hawaii& In (eptember, 56?3 he returned to the Philippines, and
took up residence at @oac, !arinduAue, hometown of his mother& He
registered as a $oter, $oted, and e$en participated as a leader of one
of the candidates in that district in the 56?2 @atasan elections& In the
elections of 56?7, he ran for 1ongressman, and won& His sole opponent is
now Auestioning his Aualifications and is trying to oust him on two
basic claims0
5& He is not a natural born >ilipino citi#en, but is in fact, an
.merican, born in Hawaii, an integral portion of the +&(&.&, who holds
an .merican passportG
8& He did not meet the age reAuirementG and
3& He has a Hgreen cardH from the +&(& ,o$ernment&
.ssume that you are a member of the House -lectoral Tribunal where
the petition for @rownBs ouster is pending& How would you decide the
three issues raised against him;
.nswer0
The first and third grounds ha$e no merit& @ut the second is well
taken and, therefore, @rown should be disAualified&
5& Robert @rown is a natural born citi#en of the Philippines& .
person born of a >ilipino mother and an alien father before Canuary 57,
5673, who thereafter upon reaching the age of ma%ority elect Philippine
citi#enship, is a citi#en of the Philippines (.rt& IF, sec& 5(3& +nder
.rt& IF, sec, 8 he is also deemed a naturalEborn citi#en&
8& The 1onstitution reAuires, among other things, that a
candidate for member of the House of Representati$es must be at least 8)
years of age Hon the day of the election&H (.rt& FI, sec& :& .s @rown
was born on !ay 5), 56:8, he did not become 8) years old until !ay 5),
56?7& Hence on !ay 55, 56?7, when the election was held, he was 2 days
short of the reAuired age&
3& The 1onstitution pro$ides that those who seek either to change
their citi#enship or to acAuire the status of an immigrant of another
country Hduring their tenureH shall be dealt with by law (.rt& II, sec&
57& The pro$ision cannot apply to @rown for the following reasons0
>irst, @rown is in addition an .merican citi#en and thus has a dual
citi#enship which is allowed by the 1onstitution& (1f& .rt& IF, sec& 2,
(econd, @rown did not seek to acAuire the status of an immigrant, but is
an .merican by birth under the principle of %us soli obtaining in the
+nited (tates& Third, he did not seek to change his status during his
tenure as a public officer& >ourth, the pro$ision of .rt& II, sec& 57 is
not selfEe'ecuting but reAuires an implementing law& >ifth, but abo$e
all, the House -lectoral Tribunal has no %urisdiction to decide this
Auestion since it does not concern the Aualification of a memberEelect&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> Q,$0!7!.$"!/%6
1999 N/ III
1& Fictor .hmad was born on December 5:, 5678 of a >ilipino
mother and an alien father& +nder the law of his fatherBs country, his
mother did not acAuire his fatherBs citi#enship& Fictor consults you on
December 85, 5663 and informs you of his intention to run for 1ongress
in the 566) elections& Is he Aualified to run; What ad$ice would you
gi$e him; Would your answer be the same if he had seen and consulted you
on December 5:, 5665 and informed you of his desire to run for 1ongress
in the 5668 elections; Discuss your answer& (3*
1& /o, Fictor .hmad is not Aualified to run for 1ongress in
the 566) elections& +nder (ection :, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution, a
member of the House of Representati$es must be at least twentyEfi$e (8)
years of age on the day of the election& (ince he will be less than
twentyEfi$e (8) years of age in 566), Fictor .hmad is not Aualified to
run&
+nder (ection 8, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution, to be deemed a
naturalEborn citi#en, Fictor .hmad must elect Philippine citi#enship
upon reaching the age of ma%ority& I shall ad$ise him to elect
Philippine citi#enship, if he has not yet done so, and to wait until the
566? elections&
!y answer will be the same if he consulted me in 5665 and informed
me of bis desire to run in the 5668 elections&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
1& +nder (ection 8, .rticle IF of the 1onstitution, Fictor .hmad
must ha$e elected Philippine citi#enship upon reaching the age of
ma%ority to be considered a natural born citi#en and Aualified to run
for 1ongress& Republic .ct /o& :?46 reduced the ma%ority age to eighteen
(5? years& 1uenco $& (ecretary of Custice, ) (1R. 54? recogni#ed three
(3 years from reaching the age of ma%ority as the reasonable period for
electing Philippine citi#enship& (ince Republic .ct /o& :?46 took effect
in 56?6 and there is no showing that Fictor .hmad elected Philippine
citi#enship within three (3 years from the time he reached the age of
ma%ority on December 5:, 5661, he is not Aualified to run for 1ongress&
If he consulted me on December 5:, 5665, I would inform him that
he should elect Philippine citi#enship so that he can be considered a
natural born citi#en&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> T9&##-T#&4 L!4!"
199: N/& 530
8 I, a member of the House of Representati$es, was ser$ing his
third consecuti$e term in the House& In Cune 566: he was appointed
(ecretary of /ational Defense&
1an he run for election to the (enate in the 566? elections;
-'plain&
.nswerG
8 <es, I can run for the (enate in the 56?? election& +nder
(ection 7, .rticle I of the 1onstitution, ha$ing ser$ed for three
consecuti$e terms as !ember of the House of Representati$es& I is only
prohibited from running for the same position&
L#'!60$",&#> C/%'&#664#%> T9&##-T#&4 L!4!"
2001 N/ F
During his third term, H.H, a !ember of the House of
Representati$es, was suspended from office for a period of :4 days by
his colleagues upon a $ote of twoEthirds of all the !embers of the
House& In the ne't succeeding election, he filed his certificate of
candidacy for the same position& H@H, the opposing candidate, filed an
action for disAualification of H.H on the ground that the latterBs,
candidacy $iolated (ection 7& .rticle FI of the 1onstitution which
pro$ides that no !ember of the House of Representati$es shall ser$e for
more than three consecuti$e terms& H.H answered that he was not barred
from running again for that position because his ser$ice was interrupted
by his :4Eday suspension which was in$oluntary&
1an B.B, legally continue with his candidacy or is he already
barred; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
H.H cannot legally continue with his candidacy& He was elected as
!ember of the House of Representati$es for a third term& This term
should be included in the computation of the term limits, e$en if H.H
did not ser$e for a full term& (Record of the 1onstitutional 1ommission,
Fol& n, p& )68& He remained a !ember of the House of Representati$es
e$en if he was suspended&
L#'!60$",&#> E0#."/&$0 T&!(,%$0
2002 N/ IF&
In an election case, the House of Representati$es -lectoral
Tribunal rendered a decision upholding the election protest of
protestant ., a member of the >reedom Party, against protestee @, a
member of the >ederal Party The deciding $ote in fa$or of . was cast by
Representati$e I, a member of the >ederal Party &
>or ha$ing $oted against his partymate, Representati$e I was
remo$ed by Resolution of the House of Representati$es, at the instance
of his party (the >ederal Party, from membership in the HR-T&
Representati$e I protested his remo$al on the ground that he $oted on
the basis of the e$idence presented and contended that he had security
of tenure as a HR-T !ember and that he cannot be remo$ed e'cept for a
$alid cause&
With whose contention do you agree, that of the >ederal Party or
that of Representati$e I; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
I agree with the contention of Representati$e I& .s held In @ondoc
$& Pineda, 845 (1R. 768 (5665, the members of the House of
Representati$es -lectoral Tribunal are entitled to security of tenure
like members of the %udiciary& !embership In it may not be terminated
e'cept for a %ust cause& Disloyalty to party is not a $alid ground for
the e'pulsion of a member of the House of Representati$es -lectoral
Tribunal& Its members must discharge their functions with impartiality
and independence from the political party to which they belong&
L#'!60$",&#> E0#."/&$0 T&!(,%$0; S#%$"#> +,&!6!."!/%
1990 N/& 30
< was elected (enator in the !ay 56?7 national elections& He was
born out of wedlock in 5626 of an .merican father and a naturali#ed
>ilipina mother& < ne$er elected Philippine citi#enship upon reaching
the age of ma%ority&
(5 @efore what body should T, the losing candidate, Auestion the
election of <; (tate the reasons for your answer&
(8 Is < a >ilipino citi#en; -'plain your answer&
.nswer0
(5 T, the losing candidate, should Auestion the election of <
before the (enate -lectoral Tribunal, because the issue in$ol$ed is the
Aualification of < to be a (enator& (ection 57, .rticle FI of the 56?7
1onstitution pro$ides that& The (enate and the House of Representati$es
shall eachEha$e an -lectoral Tribunal which shall be the sole %udge of
all contests relating to the election, returns, and Aualifications of
their respecti$e !embers&H
(8 <es, < is a natural born >ilipino citi#en& &&&&
L#'!60$",&#> M,0"!-P$&") S)6"#4
1999 N/ IIF
Discuss the merits and demerits of the multiEparty system& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
. multiEparty system pro$ides $oters with a greater choice of
candidates, ideas, and platforms instead of limiting their choice to two
parties, whose ideas may be sterile& It also lea$es room for deser$ing
candidates who are not acceptable to those who control the two dominant
parties to seek public office&
9n the other hand, a multiEparty system may make it difficult to
obtain a stable and workable ma%ority, since probably no party will get
a ma%ority& Dikewise, the opposition will be weakened if there are
se$eral minority parties&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> L$2 M$G!%'> P$66$'# /7 A L$2
1988 N/& 580
8& . bill upon filing by a (enator or a !ember of the House of
Representati$es goes through specified steps before it lea$es the House
of Representati$es or the (enate, as the case may be& .fter lea$ing the
legislature, please name the three methods by which said bill may become
a law&
.nswer0
8& . bill passed by 1ongress may become a law in any of the
following cases0
(a If it is signed into law by the President& (.rt& FI, sec&
87(5&
(b If it is repassed o$er the PresidentBs $eto by the $ote of
two thirds of all the members of the House of Representati$es and of the
(enate& (Id&
(c If the President fails to $eto it within thirty days after
receipt thereof and communicate the $eto to the House from which it
originated, (Id&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> L$2 M$G!%'> P&/.#66 A P,(0!.$"!/%
199? N/& 8G
-rnest 1heng, a businessman, has no knowledge of legislati$e
procedure& 1heng retains you as his legal ad$iser and asks enlightenment
on the following matters0
5 When does a bill become a law e$en without the signature of
the PresidentG
8 When does the law take effect;
.nswer0
5 +nder (ection 87(5, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution, a bill
becomes a law e$en without the signature of the President if he $etoed
it but his $eto was o$erriden by twoEthirds $ote of all the members of
both the (enate and the House of Representati$es and If the President
failed to communicate his $eto to the House from which the bill
originated, within thirty days after the date of receipt of the bill by
the President&
8 .s held in Tanada us, Tu$era, 52: (1R. 22:, a law must be
published as a condition for its effecti$ity and in accordance with
.rticle 8 of the 1i$il 1ode, it shall take effect fifteen days following
the completion of its publication in the 9fficial ,a#ette or in a
newspaper of general circulation unless it is otherwise pro$ided&
(-'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 868, Re$ised .dministrati$e 1ode of 56?6
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> L$2 M$G!%'> O5#&&!!%' "9#
P&#6!#%"!$0 @#"/
1991 N/& 80
The President signs into law the .ppropriations .ct passed by
1ongress but she $etoes separate items therein, among which is a
pro$ision stating that the President may not increase an item of
appropriation by transfer of sa$ings from other items&
The House of Representati$es chooses not to o$erride this $eto&
The (enate, howe$er, proceeds to consider two options0 (5 to o$erride
the $eto and (8 to challenge the constitutionality of the $eto before
the (upreme 1ourt&
(a Is option (5 $iable; If so& what is the $ote reAuired to
o$erride the $eto;
(b Is option (8 $iable; If not& why not; If $iable, how should
the 1ourt decide the case;
.nswer0
(a 9ption 5 is not $iable in as much as the House of
Representati$es, from which the .ppropriations .ct originated and to
which the President must ha$e returned the law, is unwilling to o$erride
the presidential $eto& There is, therefore, no basis for the (enate to
e$en consider the possibility of o$erriding the PresidentBs $eto&
+nder the 1onstitution the $ote of twoEthird of all the members of the
House of Representati$es and the (enate, $oting separately, will be
needed to o$erride the presidential $eto&
(b It is not feasible to Auestion the constitutionality of the
$eto before the (upreme 1ourt& In ,on#ales $s& !acaraig, 565 (1R. 5)8,
the (upreme 1ourt upheld the constitutionality of a similar $eto&
+nder .rticle FI, (ec& 87(8 of the 1onstitution, a distinct and
se$erable part of the ,eneral .ppropriations act may be the sub%ect of a
separate $eto& !oreo$er, the $etoed pro$ision does not relate to any
particular appropriation and is more an e'pression of a congressional
policy in respect of augmentation from sa$ings than a budgetary
pro$ision& It is therefore an inappropriate pro$ision and it should be
treated as an item for purposes of the $eto power of the President&
The (upreme 1ourt should uphold the $alidity of the $eto in the
e$ent the Auestion is brought before it&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> L$2 M$G!%'
1990 N/& 5G
-'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5 and 8 issued by President 1ora#on 1&
.Auino created the Presidential 1ommission on ,ood ,o$ernment (P1,, and
empowered it to seAuester any property shown prtma%acie to be illEgotten
wealth of the late President !arcos, his relati$es and cronies&
-'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 52 $ests on the (andiganbayan %urisdiction to try
hidden wealth cases& 9n .pril 52, 56?:, after an in$estigation, the P1,,
seAuestered the assets of I 1orporation, Inc&
(5 I 1orporation, Inc& claimed that President .Auino, as
President, could not lawfully issue -'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52,
which ha$e the force of law, on the ground that legislation is a
function of 1ongress& Decide&
(8 (aid corporation also Auestioned the $alidity of the three
e'ecuti$e orders on the ground that they are bills of attainder and,
therefore, unconstitutional& Decide&
.nswer0
(5 The contention of I 1orporation should be re%ected& -'ecuti$e
9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52 were issued in 56?:& .t that time President
1ora#on .Auino e'ercised legislati$e power (ection 5, .rticle II of the
Pro$isional 1onstitution established by Proclamation /o, 3, pro$ided0
H+ntil a legislature is elected and con$ened under a new
constitution, the President shall continue to e'ercise legislati$e
power&H
Dikewise, (ection :, .rticle IFIII of the 56?7 1onstitution reads0
The incumbent President shall continue to e'ercise legislati$e
power until the first 1ongress is con$ened&H
In the case of Oapatiran ng mga /aglilingkod sa PamaEhalaan ng
Pilipinas& Inc& $& Tan, 5:3 (1R. 375& the (upreme 1ourt ruled that the
Pro$isional 1onstitution and the 56?7 1onstitution, both recogni#ed the
power of the president to e'ercise legislati$e powers until the first
1ongress created under the 56?7 1onstitution was con$ened on Culy 87,
56?7&
(8 -'ecuti$e 9rders /os& 5, 8 and 52 are not bills of
attainder& &&&&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> D#0#'$"!/% /7 L#'!60$"!5# 8,%."!/%6
2002 N/ IFII&
(uppose that 1ongress passed a law creating a Department of Human
Habitat and authori#ing the Department (ecretary to promulgate
implementing rules and regulations& (uppose further that the law
declared that $iolation of the implementing rules and regulations so
issued would be punishable as a crime and authori#ed the Department
(ecretary to prescribe the penalty for such $iolation& If the law
defines certain acts as $iolations of the law and makes them punishable,
for e'ample, with imprisonment of three (3 years or a fine in the
amount of P54,444&44, or both such imprisonment and fine, in the
discretion of the court, can it be pro$ided in the implementing rules
and regulations promulgated by the Department (ecretary that their
$iolation will also be sub%ect to the same penalties as those pro$ided
in the law itself; -'plain your answer fully& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The rules and regulations promulgated by the (ecretary of Human
Habitat cannot pro$ide that the penalties for their $iolation will be
the same as the penalties for the $iolation of the law& .s held in
+nited (tates $& @arrias, 55 Phil& 387 (564?, the fi'ing of the penalty
for criminal offenses in$ol$es the e'ercise of legislati$e power and
cannot be delegated& The law itself must prescribe the penalty&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> I%5#6"!'$"!/%6 !% A! /7 L#'!60$"!/%>
R!'9"6 "/ S#07-I%.&!4!%$"!/% /7 W!"%#66
1992 N/& ?0
. case was filed before the (andiganbayan regarding a Auestionable
go$ernment transaction& In the course of the proceedings, newspapers
linked the name of (enator C& de Deon to the scandal&
(enator de Deon took the floor of the (enate to speak on a Hmatter
of personal pri$ilegeH to $indicate his honor against those Hbaseless
and maliciousH allegations& The matter was referred to the 1ommittee on
.ccountability of Public 9fficers, which proceeded to conduct a
legislati$e inAuiry& The 1ommittee asked !r& Fince Dedesma& a
businessman linked to the transaction and now a respondent before the
(andiganbayan, to appear and to testify before the 1ommittee&
!r Dedesma refuses to appear and file suit before the (upreme
1ourt to challenge the legality of the proceedings before the 1ommittee&
He also asks whether the 1ommittee had the power to reAuire him to
testify&
Identify the issues In$ol$ed and resol$e them&
.nswer0
The issues in$ol$ed in this case are the following0
5& Whether or not the (upreme 1ourt has %urisdiction to
entertain the caseG
8& Whether or not the 1ommittee on .ccountability of Public
9fficers has the power to in$estigate a matter which is in$ol$ed in a
case pending in courtG and
3& Whether or not the petitioner can in$oke his right against
selfEincrimlnation&
.ll these Issues were resol$ed in the case of @eng#on $s& (enate
@lue Ribbon 1ommittee, 843 (1R. 7:7&
The (upreme 1ourt has %urisdiction o$er the case (determination
of gra$e abuse of discretion&&&&
The 1ommittee on .ccountability of Public 9fficers has no power to
in$estigate the scandal& (no %udicial functions&&&
The petitioner can in$oke his right against selfEincrimiEnation,
because this right is a$ailable in all proceedings& (ince the petitioner
is a respondent in the case pending before the (andiganbayan, he may
refuse to testify&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#
1989 N/& 520
.n e'isting law grants go$ernment employees the option to retire
upon reaching the age of )7 years and completion of at least 34 years of
total go$ernment ser$ice& .s a fiscal retrenchment measure, the 9ffice
of the President later issued a !emorandum 1ircular reAuiring physical
incapacity as an additional condition for optional retirement age of :)
years& . go$enment employee, whose application for optional retirement
was denied because he was below :) years of age and was not physically
incapacitated, filed an action in court Auestioning the disappro$al of
his application claiming that the !emorandum 1ircular is $oid& Is the
contention of the employee correct; -'plain&
.nswer0
<es, the contention of the employee is correct& In !araEsigan $s&
1ru#, 5)4 (1R . 5, it was held that such a memorandum circular is $oid&
@y introducing physical capacity as an additional condition for optional
retirement, the memorandum circular tried to amend the law& (uch a power
is lodged with the legislati$e branch and not with the e'ecuti$e branch&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> L#'!60$"!5#> L$2 M$G!%'> @$0!!") /7 I"#4 @#"/
1991 N/& 80
The President signs into law the .ppropriations .ct passed by
1ongress but she $etoes separate items therein, among which is a
pro$ision stating that the President may not increase an item of
appropriation by transfer of sa$ings from other items&
The House of Representati$es chooses not to o$erride this $eto&
The (enate, howe$er, proceeds to consider two options0 (5 to o$erride
the $eto and (8 to challenge the constitutionality of the $eto before
the (upreme 1ourt&
(a Is option (5 $iable; If so& what is the $ote reAuired to
o$erride the $eto;
(b Is option (8 $iable; If not& why not; If $iable, how should
the 1ourt decide the case;
.nswer0
(a 9ption 5 is not $iable in as much as the House of
Representati$es, from which the .ppropriations .ct originated and to
which the President must ha$e returned the law, is unwilling to o$erride
the presidential $eto& There is, therefore, no basis for the (enate to
e$en consider the possibility of o$erriding the PresidentBs $eto&
+nder the 1onstitution the $ote of twoEthird of all the members of the
House of Representati$es and the (enate, $oting separately, will be
needed to o$erride the presidential $eto&
(b It is not feasible to Auestion the constitutionality of the
$eto before the (upreme 1ourt& In ,on#ales $s& !acaraig, 565 (1R. 5)8,
the (upreme 1ourt upheld the constitutionality of a similar $eto&
+nder .rticle FI, (ec& 87(8 of the 1onstitution, a distinct and
se$erable part of the ,eneral .ppropriations act may be the sub%ect of a
separate $eto& !oreo$er, the $etoed pro$ision does not relate to any
particular appropriation and is more an e'pression of a congressional
policy in respect of augmentation from sa$ings than a budgetary
pro$ision& It is therefore an inappropriate pro$ision and it should be
treated as an item for purposes of the $eto power of the President&
The (upreme 1ourt should uphold the $alidity of the $eto in the
e$ent the Auestion is brought before it&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> N/%-L#'!60$"!5#> E4#&'#%.) P/2#&6> R#C,!6!"#6
1997 N/& 550
During a period of national emergency& 1ongress may grant
emergency powers to the President, (tate the conditions under which such
a $esture is allowed&
.nswer0
+nder (ection 83(8, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution& 1ongress may
grant the President emergency powers sub%ect to the following
conditions0
5& There is a war or other national emergency0
8& The grant of emergency powers must be for a limited periodG
3& The grant of emergency powers is sub%ect to such
restrictions as 1ongress may prescribeG and
2& The emergency powers must be e'ercised to carry out a
declared national policy&
L#'!60$",&#> P/2#&6> N/%-L#'!60$"!5#
1988 N/& 580
5& Degislati$e powers had been $ested by the 1onstitution in the
1ongress of the Philippines& In addition, the 1onstitution also granted
the lawmaking body, nonElegislati$e powers& Oindly name fi$e of the
latter&
.nswer0
5& 1ongress has the following nonElegislati$e powers0
(a To act as national board of can$assers for President and
Fice President& (.rt& FII, sec& 2&
(b To decide whether the President is temporarily disabled in
the e$ent he reassumes his office after the 1abinet, by a ma%ority of
$ote of its members, declared that he is unable to discharge the powers
and duties of his office and now within fi$e days insists that the
President is really unable to discharge the powers and duties of the
presidency& (.rt& FII, sec& 55,
(c To concur in the grant of amnesty by the President& (.rt&
FII, sec& 56,
(d To initiate through the House of Representati$es and, through
the (enate, to try all cases of impeachment against the President, Fice
President, the !embers of the (upreme 1ourt, the !embers of the
1onstitutional 1ommissions and the 9mbudsman, for culpable $iolation of
the 1onstitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high
crimes, or betrayal of public trust& (.rt& II, secs& 8E3&
(e To act as a constituent assembly for the re$ision or amendment
of the 1onstitution& (.rt& IFII&
E1#.,"!5# D#=$&"4#%"
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&
1999 N/ I
.& 5& What are the si' categories of officials who are
sub%ect to the appointing power of the President; (8*
8& /ame the category or categories of officials whose
appointments need confirmation by the 1ommission
on .ppointments; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& l& +nder (ection 5:, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, the si'
categories of officials who are sub%ect to the appointing power of the
President are the following0
a& Head of e'ecuti$e departmentsG
b& .mbassadors, other public ministers and consulsG
c& 9fficers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or
na$al captainG
d& 9ther officers whose appointments are $ested in him by the
1onstitutionG
e& .ll other officers of the go$ernment whose appointments are
not otherwise pro$ided by lawG and
f& Those whom he may be authori#ed by law to appoint& (1ru#,
Philippine Political Daw, 566? ed&, pp& 842E84)
(It is suggested that if the e'aminee followed the classification
in (armiento $& !ison, 5): (1R. )26 and named only four categories,
because he combined the first three categories into one, he be gi$en
full credit&
8& .ccording to (armiento $& !ison, 5): (1R. )26, the only
officers whose appointments need confirmation by the 1ommission on
.ppointments are the head of e'ecuti$e departments, ambassadors, other
public ministers and consuls, officers of the armed forces from the rank
of colonel or na$al captain, and other officials whose appointments are
$ested in the President by the 1onstitution&
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&> A==/!%"4#%"6 R#C,!&!%' C/%7!&4$"!/%
2002 N/ F
9n December 53, 5664, the President signed into law Republic .ct
/o& :67) (subseAuently amended by R. /o& ?))5 creating the Department
of Interior and Docal ,o$ernment& (ections 8: and 35 of the law pro$ide
that senior officers of the Philippine /ational Police (P/P, from
(enior (uperintendent, 1hief (uperintendent, Deputy Director ,eneral to
Director ,eneral or 1hief of P/P shall, among others, be appointed by
the President sub%ect to confirmation by the 1ommission on .ppointments&
In 5665 the President promoted 1hief (uperintendent Roberto
!atapang and (enior (uperintendent 1onrado !ahigpit to the positions of
Director and 1hief (uperintendent of the P/P, respecti$ely& Their
appointments were in a permanent capacity& Without undergoing
confirmation by the 1ommission on .ppointments, !atapang and !ahigpit
took their oath of office and assumed their respecti$e positions&
Thereafter, the
Department of @udget and !anagement authori#ed disbursements for
their salaries and other emoluments
Cuan @antay filed a ta'payerBs suit Auestioning the legality of
the appointments and disbursements made& @antay argues that the
appointments are in$alid inasmuch as the same ha$e not been confirmed by
the 1ommission on .ppointments, as reAuired under (ections 8: and 35 of
R&.& /o& :67)&
Determine with reasons the legality of the appointments and the
disbursements for salaries by discussing the constitutional $alidity of
(ections 8: and 35 of R&.& /o& :67)& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The appointments of !atapang and !ahigpit are $alid e$en if they
were not confirmed by the 1ommission on .ppointments, because they are
not among the public officials whose appointments are reAuired to be
confirmed by the first sentence of .rticle FII, (ection 5: of the
1onstitution& .ccording to !analo $& (isto#a, 358 (1R. 836 (5666,
(ections 8: and 35 of Republic .ct :67) are unconstitutional, because
1ongress cannot by taw e'pand the list of public officials reAuired to
be confirmed by the 1ommission on .ppointments& (ince the appointments
of !atapang and !ahigpit are $alid, the disbursements of their salaries
and emoluments are $alid&
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&> A==/!%"4#%"6 R#C,!&!%' C/%7!&4$"!/% A $
!%"#&!4 $==/!%"4#%"6
1991 N/& 30
9n 3 !ay 5668, while 1ongress is on a short recess for the
elections, the president appoints Renato de (il$a to the rank of ,eneral
(2Estar in the .rmed >orces& (he also designates him as 1hief of (taff
of the .>P& He immediately takes his oath and assumes that office, with
the rank of 2Estar ,eneral of the .>P&
When 1ongress resumes its session on 57 !ay 5668, the 1ommission
on .ppointments informs the 9ffice of the President that it has recei$ed
from her office only the appointment of De (il$a to the rank of 2Estar
,eneral and that unless his appointment to the 9ffice of the 1hief of
(taff of the .>P is also submitted, the 1ommission will not act on the
matter&
The President maintains that she has submitted to the 1ommission
all that the 1onstitution calls for&
(a Who is correct;
(b Did ,en& de (il$a $iolate the 1onstitution in immediately
assuming office prior to a confirmation of his appointment;
(c .re the appointment and designation $alid;
.nswer0
(a The President is correct& +nder Presidential Decree /o& 3:4,
the grade of fourEstar general is conferred only upon the 1hief of
(taff& Hence, the appointment of Renato de (il$a as a fourEstar general
must be deemed to carry with it his appointment as 1hief of (taff of the
.>P,
(b ,en& Renato de (il$a did not $iolate the 1onstitution when
he immediately assumed office before the confirmation of his
appointment, since his appointment was an ad interim appointment& +nder
.rticle FI I, (ec& 5: of the 1onstitution, such appointment is
imediately effecti$e and is sub%ect only to disappro$al by the
1ommission on .ppointments or as a result of the ne't ad%ournment of the
1ongress&
(c The appointment and designation of ,en& de (il$a are $alid
for reasons gi$en abo$e& Howe$er, from another point of $iew they are
not $alid because they were made within the period of the ban for making
appointments& +nder .rticle FII, (ec& 5) the President is prohibited
from making appointments within the period of two (8 months preceeding
the election for President and Fice President& The appointment in this
case will be made on !ay 3& 5668 which is %ust ? days away from the
election for President and Fice President on !ay 55, 5668& >or this
reason the appointment and designation of ,en& de (il$a are after all
in$alid&
L/ote0 !ay 3& 5665 and !ay 57, 5668 are (undays& Howe$er the
1ommittee finds no rele$ance in the fact that these are holidays and
therefore decided to ignore this fact&M
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&> A."!%' @6 P#&4$%#%" A==/!%"4#%"
200? N/ F
What is the nature of an Hacting appointmentH to a go$ernment
office; Does such an appointment gi$e the appointee the right to claim
that the appointment will, in time, ripen into a permanent one; -'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.ccording to (e$illa $& 1ourt of .ppeals& 846 (1R. :37 L5668M, an
acting appointment is merely temporary& .s held in !arohombsar $&
.lonto, 562 (1R. 364 L5665M, a temporary appointment cannot become a
permanent appointment, unless a new appointment which is permanent is
made& This holds true unless the acting appointment was made because of
a temporary $acancy& In such a case, the temporary appointee holds
office until the assumption of office by the permanent appointee&
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&> A I%"#&!4 A==/!%"4#%"6
1994 N/& 5:G
In December 56??, while 1ongress was in recess, . was e'tended an
ad interim appointment as @rigadier ,eneral of the Philippine .rmy, in
>ebruary 56?6& when 1ongress was in session, @ was nominated as
@rigadier ,eneral of the Philippine .rmy& @Bs nomination was confirmed
on .ugust ), 56?6 while .Bs appointment was confirmed on (eptember ),
56?6&
5 Who is deemed more senior of the two, . or @;
8 (uppose 1ongress ad%ourned without the 1ommission on
.ppointments acting on both appointments, can . and @ retain their
original ranks of colonel;
.nswer0
5 . is senior to @& In accordance with the ruling in (ummers
$s& 9#aeta& ?5 Phil& 7)2, the ad interim appointment e'tended to . is
permanent and is effecti$e upon his acceptance although it is sub%ect to
confirmation by the 1ommission on .ppointments&
8 If 1ongress ad%ourned without the appointments of . and @
ha$ing been confirmed by the 1ommission on .ppointments, . cannot return
to his old position& .s held in (ummers $s& "#aeta, ?5 Phil& 7)2, by
accepting an ad interim appointment to a new position, . wai$ed his
right to hold his old position& 9n the other hand, since @ did not
assume the new position, he retained his old position&
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&> A==/!%"4#%"6
1994 N/ 20
5 When is an appointment in the ci$il ser$ice permanent;
8 Distinguish between an Happointment in an acting capacityH
e'tended by a Department (ecretary from an ad interim appointment
e'tended by the President&
3 Distinguish between a pro$isional and a temporary
appointment,
.nswer0
5 +nder (ection 8)(a of the 1i$il (er$ice Decree, an
appointment in the ci$il ser$ice is permanent when issued to a person
who meets all the reAuirements for the position to which he is being
appointed, including the appropriate eligibility prescribed, in
accordance with the pro$isions of law, rules and standards promulgated
in pursuance thereof&
8 .n appointment in an acting capacity e'tended by a Department
(ecretary is not permanent but temporary& Hence, the Department
(ecretary may terminate the ser$ices of the appointee at any time& 9n
the other hand, an ad interim appointment e'tended by the President is
an appointment which is sub%ect to confirmation by the 1ommission on
.ppointments and was made during the recess of 1ongress& .s held in
(ummers $s& "#aeta, ?5 Phil& 7)2, an ad interim appointment is
permanent&
3 In (ection 82 (d of the 1i$il (er$ice .ct of 56)6, a
temporary appointment is one issued to a person to a position needed
only for a limited period not e'ceeding si' months& +nder (ection 8)(b
of the 1i$il (er$ice Decree, a temporary appointment is one issued to a
person who meets all the reAuirements for the position to which he is
being appointed e'cept the appropriate ci$il ser$ice eligibility because
of the absence of appropriate eligibles and it is necessary in the
public Interest to fill the $acancy& 9n the other hand& (ection 82(e of
the 1i$il (er$ice .ct of 56)6 defined a pro$isional appointment as one
Issued upon the prior authori#ation of the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission in
accordance with its pro$isions and the rules and standards promulgated
in pursuance thereto to a person who has not Aualified in an appropriate
e'amination but who otherwise meets the reAuirements for appointment to
a regular position in the competiti$e ser$ice, whene$er a $acancy occurs
and the filling thereof is necessary in the interest of the ser$ice and
there is no appropriate register of eligibles at the time of
appointment&
Pro$isional appointments in general ha$e already been abolished by
Republic .ct :424& Howe$er, it still applies with regard to teachers
under the !agna 1arta for Public (chool Teachers&
.lternati$e .nswer0
The case of Regis $s& 9smena, 567 (1R. 34?, laid down the
distinction between a pro$isional and a temporary appointment&
. pro$isional appointment is e'tended to a person who has not
Aualified in an appropriate e'amination but who otherwise meets the
reAuirements for appointment to a regular position in the competiti$e
ser$ice whene$er a $acancy occurs and the filling thereof is necessary
in the interest of the ser$ice and there is no appropriate register of
eligible at the time of the appointment& 9n the other hand, a temporary
appointment gi$en to a nonEci$il ser$ice eligible is without a definite
tenure and is dependent on the pleasure of the appointing power&
. pro$isional appointment is good only until replacement by a
ci$il ser$ice eligible and in no case beyond 34 days from date of
receipt by the appointing officer of the certificate of eligibility&
((ec& 82 LcV& Republic .ct 88:4&
. pro$isional appointment contemplates a different situation from
that of a temporary appointment& Whereas a temporary appointment is
designed to fill a position needed only for a limited period not
e'ceeding si' (: months, a pro$isional appointment, on the other hand,
is intended for the contingency that Ha $acancy occurs and the filling
thereof is necessary in the interest of the ser$ice and there is no
appropriate register of eligibles at the time of the appointment&H
In other words, the reason for e'tending a pro$isional appointment
is not because there is an occasional work to be done and is e'pected to
be finished in not more than si' months but because the interest of the
ser$ice reAuires that certain work be done by a regular employee, only
that no one with appropriate eligibility can be appointed to it& Hence,
any other eligible may be appointed to do such work in the meantime that
a suitable eligible does not Aualify for the position&
To be more precise, a pro$isional appointment may be e'tended only
to a person who has not Aualified in an appropriate e'amination but who
otherwise meets the reAuirements for appointment to a regular position
in the competiti$e ser$ice, meaning one who must any way be a ci$il
ser$ice eligible&
In the case of a temporary appointment, all that the law en%oins
is that Hpreference in filling such position be gi$en to persons on
appropriate eligible lists&H !erely gi$ing preference presupposes that
e$en a nonEeligible may be appointed& +nder the law, e$en if the
appointee has the reAuired ci$il ser$ice eligibility, his appointment is
still temporary simply because such is the nature of the work to be
done&
/9T-0 (ince pro$isional appointments ha$e already been abolished
e'aminees should be gi$en full credit for whate$er answer they may or
may not gi$e&
E1#.,"!5#> A==/!%"!%' P/2#&> L!4!"$"!/%6 O% P&#6!#%"!$0 A==/!%"4#%"6
1997 N/& 70
. month before a forthcoming election, H.H one of the incumbent
1ommissioners of the 1ommission on -lections, died while in office and
H@H, another 1ommissioner, suffered a se$ere stroke& In $iew of the
pro'imity of the elections and to a$oid paraly#ation in the 1ommission
on -lections, the President who was not running for any office,
appointed 1ommissioner 1 of the 1ommission on .udit, who was not a
lawyer but a certified public accountant by profession, ad interim
1ommissioner to succeed 1ommissioner . and designated & by way of a
temporary measure& .ssociate Custice D of the 1ourt of .ppeals as acting
.ssociate 1ommissioner during the absence of 1ommissioner @&
Did the President do the right thing in e'tending such ad interim
appointment in fa$or of 1ommissioner 1 and designating Custice D acting
1ommissioner of the 1ommission on -lections;
.nswerG
/o& The President was wrong In e'tending an ad interim
appointment In fa$or of 1ommissioner 1& In (ummers $s& 9#aeta, ?5 Phil&
7)2, it was held that an ad interim appointment Is a permanent
appointment& +nder (ection 5), .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, within
two months immediately before the ne't presidential elections and up to
the end of his term, the President cannot make permanent appointments&
The designation of Custice D as acting .ssociate 1ommissioner is
also in$alid& (ection 5(8& .rticle IIE1 of the 1onstitution prohibits
the designation of any 1ommissioner of the 1ommission on -lections in a
temporary or acting capacity& (ection 58, .rticle FIII of the
1onstitution prohibits the designation of any member of the Cudiciary to
any agency performing AuasiE%udicial or administrati$e functions&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)>
1997 N/& 5)G
,o$ernor . was charged administrati$ely with oppression and was
placed under pre$enti$e suspension from office during the pendency of
his case& >ound guilty of the charge, the President suspended him from
office for ninety days& Dater, the President granted htm clemency by
reducing the period of his suspension to the period he has already
ser$ed& The Fice ,o$ernor Auestioned the $alidity of the e'ercise of
e'ecuti$e clemency on the ground that it could be granted only in
criminal, not administrati$e, cases&
How should the Auestion be resol$ed; .nswer&
The argument of the Fice ,o$ernor should be re%ected& .s held in
Dlamas $s& 9rbos, 848 (1R. ?22& the power of e'ecuti$e clemency e'tends
to administrati$e cases& In granting the power of e'ecuti$e clemency
upon the President, (ection 56, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution does not
distinguish between criminal and administrati$e cases& (ection 56,
.rticle FII of the 1onstitution e'cludes impeachment cases, which are
not criminal cases, from the scope of the power of e'ecuti$e clemency&
If this power may be e'ercised only in criminal cases, it would ha$e
been unnecessary to e'clude impeachment cases from this scope& If the
President can grant pardons In criminal cases, with more reason he can
grant e'ecuti$e clemency in administrati$e cases, which are less
serious&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)>
1999 N/ IF
.& What are the constitutional limitations on the pardoning power
of the President; (8*
@& Distinguish between pardon and amnesty& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& The following are the limitations on the pardoning power of
the President&
5& It cannot be granted in cases of impeachmentG
8& Reprie$es, commutations, pardon, and remission of fines and
forfeitures can be granted only after con$iction by final %udgment&
3& The fa$orable recommendation of the 1ommission on -lections
is reAuired for $iolation of election laws, rules and regulations&
@& .ccording to @arrioAuinto $& >ernande#, ?8 Phil& :28, the
following are the distinctions between pardon and amnesty&
5& Pardon is a pri$ate act and must be pleaded and pro$ed by
the person pardonedG while amnesty is a public act of which courts take
%udicial noticeG
8& Pardon does not reAuire the concurrence of 1ongress, while
amnesty reAuires the concurrence of 1ongressG
3& Pardon is granted to indi$iduals, while amnesty is granted
to classes of persons or communitiesG
2& Pardon may be granted for any offense, while amnesty is
granted for political offensesG
)& Pardon is granted after final con$iction, while amnesty may
be granted at any timeG and
:& Pardon looks forward and relie$es the offender from the
conseAuences of his offense, while amnesty looks backward and the person
granted it stands before the law as though he had committed no offense&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)> > A4%#6")
199? N/ 840
The /ational +nification 1ommission has recommended the grant of
absolute and unconditional amnesty to all rebels& There is the $iew that
it is not necessary for the rebels to admit the commission of the crime
charged, it being enough that the offense falls within the scope of the
amnesty proclamation& following the doctrine laid down in @arrioAuinto
$s& >ernande#, ?8 Phil& :28& In other words, admission of guilt is not a
condition sine Aua non for the a$ailment of amnesty& Is this correct;
-'plain&
.nswerG
The $iew that it is not necessary for rebels to admit the
commission of the crime charged in order to a$ail themsel$es of the
benefits of amnesty is not correct& .s stated in Fera $& People, 7 (1R.
5):, the doctrine laid down in @orrioAuinto $s& >ernande#, ?8 Phil& :28
has been o$erturned& .mnesty presupposes the commission of a crime& It
is Inconsistent for someone to seek for forgi$eness for a crime which he
denies ha$ing committed& (People $s& Pasilan, 52 (1R. :62&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)> > A4%#6")
199< N/& )0
Ducas, a ranking member of the /D>, was captured by policemen
while about to board a passenger bus bound for (orsogon& 1harged with
rebellion he pleaded not guilty when arraigned& @efore trial he was
granted absolute pardon by the President to allow him to participate in
the peace talks between the go$ernment and the communist rebels&
3& Instead of a pardon, may the President grant the accused
amnesty if fa$orably recommended by the /ational .mnesty 1ommission;
-'plain&
2& !ay the accused a$ail of the benefits of amnesty despite the
fact the he continued to profess innocence; -'plain&
.nswer0
3& The President may grant the accused amnesty& .ccording to
@arrioAuinto $s& >ernande#, ?8 Phil& :28, .mnesty may be granted before
or after the institution of the criminal prosecution&
2& /o, the accused cannot a$ail of the benefits of amnesty if
he continues to profess his innocence& In Fera $s& People, 7 (1R. 5)8&
since amnesty presupposes the commission of a crime& It is inconsistent
for an accused to seek forgi$eness for something which he claims he has
not committed&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)> > P$&/%; C/%!"!/%$0
1997 N/& 5:G
.& while ser$ing imprisonment for estafa& upon recommendation of
the @oard of Pardons and Parole, was granted pardon by the President on
condition that he should not again $iolate any penal law of the land&
Dater, the @oard of Pardons and Parole recommended to the President the
cancellation of the pardon granted him because . had been charged with
estafa on 84 counts and was con$icted of the offense charged although he
took an appeal therefrom which was still pending& .s recommended, the
President canceled the pardon he had granted to .& . was thus arrested
and imprisoned to ser$e the balance of his sentence in the first case& .
claimed in his petition for habeas corpus filed in court that his
detention was illegal because he had not yet been con$icted by final
%udgment and was not gi$en a chance to be heard before he was
recommitted to prison&
Is .Bs argument $alid; .nswerG
The argument of . is not $alid& .s held in Torres $s& ,on#ales&
5)8 (1R. 878 a %udicial pronouncement that a con$ict who was granted a
pardon sub%ect to the condition that he should not again $iolate any
penal law is not necessary before he can be declared to ha$e $iolated
the condition of his pardon& !oreo$er, a hearing is not necessary before
. can be recommitted to prison& @y accepting the conditional pardon& .
agreed that the determination by the President that he $iolated the
condition of his pardon shall be conclusi$e upon him and an order for
his arrest should at once issue,
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)> > P$&/%
199< N/& )0
Ducas, a ranking member of the /D>, was captured by policemen
while about to board a passenger bus bound for (orsogon& 1harged with
rebellion he pleaded not guilty when arraigned& @efore trial he was
granted absolute pardon by the President to allow him to participate in
the peace talks between the go$ernment and the communist rebels&
5& Is the pardon of the President $alid; -'plain&
8& .ssuming that the pardon is $alid, can Ducas re%ect it;
-'plain&
.nswer0
5& The pardon is not $alid& +nder (ection 56, .rticle FII of the
56?7 1onstitution, pardon may be granted only after con$iction by final
Cudgment&
8& <es, Ducas can re%ect the pardon .s held in +nited (tates
$s& Wilson, 7 Pet& 5)4 and @urdick $s& +nited (tates, 872 +&(& 2?4&
acceptance is essential to complete the pardon and the pardon may be
re%ected by the person to whom it is tendered, for it may inflict
conseAuences of greater disgrace than those form which it purports to
relie$e&
.lternati$e .nswer0
/o, Ducas cannot re%ect the pardon& .ccording to @iddle $s&
Pero$ich, 872 +&(& 2?4, acceptance is not necessary, for the grant of
pardon in$ol$es a determination by the President that public welfare
will be better ser$ed by inflicting less than what the %udgment fi'ed&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. C0#4#%.)> > P$&/%
1988 N/& 820
The first paragraph of (ection 56 of .rticle FII of the
1onstitution pro$iding for the pardoning power of the President,
mentions reprie$e, commutation, and pardon& Please define the three of
them, and differentiate one from the others&
.nswer0
The terms were defined and distinguished from one another in
People $& Fera, :) Phil& ):, 555E558 (5634, as follows0
Reprie$e is a postponement of the e'ecution of a sentence to a day
certain,
1ommutation is a remission of a part of the punishment, a
substitution of less penalty for the one originally imposed&
. pardon, on the other hand, is an act of grace, proceeding from
the power intrusted with the e'ecution of the laws which e'empts the
indi$idual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts
for a crime he has committed&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> 1:> M$&"!$0 L$2 A S,6=#%6!/% /7 W&!" /7 E$(#$6
C/&=,6
1987 N/& IFII0
9ne of the features of the go$ernment established under the 56?7
1onstitution is the restoration of the principle of checks and balances&
This is especially noteworthy in the 1ommanderEinE1hief powers of the
President which substantially affects what was styled under the past
dispensation as the Hcalibrated responseH to national emergencies,
(a Discuss fully the pro$isions of the 56?7 1onstitution,
gi$ing the scope, limits and the role of the principle of checks and
balances on the PresidentBs e'ercise of the power0
5& To suspend the pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus
8& Proclamation of martial law&
(b 1onsidering the pressing problems of insurgency, rebel
acti$ities, liberation mo$ements and terrorist $iolence, which in your
considered opinion among the options a$ailable to the President as
1ommanderEinE1hief would be the most effecti$e in meeting the
emergencies by the nation; -'plain&
.nswer0
(a The PresidentBs power to suspend the pri$ilege of the writ of
habeas corpus and to proclaim martial law is sub%ect to se$eral checks
by 1ongress and by the (upreme 1ourt& The President is reAuired to
report to 1ongress within 2? hours his action in declaring martial law
or suspending the pri$ilege of the writ, and 1ongress is in turn
reAuired to con$ene, if it is not in session, within 82 hours following
the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the pri$ilege
without need of any call, in accordance with its rules& The proclamation
of martial law or suspension of the writ is effecti$e for :4 days only,
but 1ongress can cut short its effecti$ity by re$oking the proclamation
by the $ote of at least a ma%ority of all its members, $oting, %ointly&
.ny e'tension of the proclamation of martial law or suspension of the
writ can only be granted by 1ongress which will determine also the
period of such e'tension&
9n the other hand, the (upreme 1ourt e'ercises a check on
-'ecuti$e action in the form of %udicial re$iew at the instance of any
citi#en& The 1onstitution embodies in this respect the ruling in ,arcia
$& Dansang, 28 (1R. 22? (5675 that the 1ourt can determine the
sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or
the suspension of the pri$ilege or the e'tension thereof not for the
purpose of supplanting the %udgment of the President but to determine
whether the latter did not act arbitrarily& Indeed, .rt& FIII, (ec& 5
imposes upon the courts the duty of determining whether or not there has
been gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e'cess of
%urisdiction on the part of the other branches of the go$ernment, in
this case, the President&
The President cannot, by means of the proclamation of martial
law, suspend the 1onstitution or supplant the courts and the
legislature& /either can he authori#e the trial of ci$ilians by military
tribunals so long as courts are open and functioning, thus o$erruling
the case of .Auino $& !ilitary 1ommission /o& 8, :3 (1R. )2: (567)& His
proclamation of martial law does not carry with it the suspension of the
writ of habeas corpus, so that the decision on .Auino $& Ponce -nrile,
)6 (1R. 5?3 (5673 is now o$erruled& /or does the suspension of the writ
depri$e courts of their power to admit persons to bail, where proper&
The 1onstitution thus o$errules the cases of ,arciaEPadilla $& Ponce
-nrile, 585 (1R. 278 (56?3 and !orales $& Ponce -nrile& 585 (1R. )3?
(56?3&
(b The President has three options0 (5 to call out the armed
forces to pre$ent or suppress lawless $iolence, in$asion or rebellionG
(8 to suspend the pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus or (3 to
proclaim martial law& The last two options can be resorted to only in
cases of in$asion or rebellion when public safety reAuires either the
supension of the pri$ilege or the proclamation of martial law&
It is submitted that the most effecti$e means of meeting the
current emergency which is brought about by rebellion, liberation
mo$ements, and terrorism is to simply call out the armed forces for the
following reasons0 (5 the e'igencies to be met are not solely those
caused by in$asion or rebellion but terrorism and other crimes& (8
(uspension of the pri$ilege will only be for a limited period and then
the period of retention is limited to 3 days which may not really be
effecti$e& 9n the other hand, public criticism of the action may only
erode the PresidentBs authority& (3 There is practically little
difference, as far as the ability of the President to meet an emergency
is concerned, between option 5, on the other hand, the options 8 and 3&
The President may well take comfort in the following thought0
H,o$ernment of limited power need not be anemic go$ernment& .ssurance
that rights are secure tends to diminish fear and %ealousy of strong
go$ernment, and, by making us feel safe to li$e under it makes for its
better support&H (West Fs& (tate @rd& of -duc& $& @arnette, 356 +&(& :82
(5623
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> 1:> M$&"!$0 L$2
2000 N/ IFII&
Declaring a rebellion, hostile groups ha$e opened and maintained
armed conflicts on the Islands of (ulu and @asilan&
a To Auell this, can the President place under martial law
the islands of (ulu and @asilan; ,i$e your reasons; (3*
b What are the constitutional safeguards on the e'ercise of
the PresidentBs power to proclaim martial law; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a If public safety reAuires it, the President can place (ulu
and @asilan under martial law since there is an actual rebellion& +nder
(ection 5?, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, the President can place any
part of the Philippines under martial law in case of rebellion, when
public safety reAuires it&
b The following are the constitutional safeguards on the e'ercise
of the power of the President to proclaim martial law0
5 There must be actual in$asion or rebellionG
8 The duration of the proclamation shall not e'ceed si'ty days0
3 Within fortyEeight hours, the President shall report his
action to 1ongress& If 1ongress is not in session, it must con$ene
within twentyEfour hoursG
2 1ongress may by ma%ority $ote of all its members $oting
Cointly re$oke the proclamation, and the President cannot set aside the
re$ocationG
) @y the same $ote and in the same manner, upon Initiati$e of
the President, 1ongress may e'tend the proclamation If the in$asion or
rebellion continues and public safety reAuires the e'tensionG
:P The (upreme 1ourt may re$iew the factual sufficiency of the
proclamation, and the (upreme 1ourt must decide the case within thirty
days from the time it was filedG
7 !artial law does not automatically suspend the pri$ilege of the
writ of habeas corpus or the operation of the 1onstitution& It does not
supplant the functioning of the ci$il courts and of 1ongress& !ilitary
courts ha$e no Curisdiction o$er ci$ilians where ci$il courts are able
to function& (1ru#, Philippine Political Daw, 566) ed&, pp& 853E852&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> 1:> S,6=#%6!/% /7 W&!" /7 E$(#$6 C/&=,6
1997 N/& 520
(a When may the pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus be
suspended;
(b If $alidly declared, what would be the full conseAuences of
such suspension;
.nswer0
(a +nder (ection 5:, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, the
pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended when there is an
in$asion or rebellion and public safety reAuires it&
(b .ccording to (ection 5?, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution,
the suspension of the pri$ilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply
only to persons %udicially charged with rebellion or offenses Inherent
to or directly connected with in$asion& .ny person arrested or detained
should be %udicially charged within three days& 9therwise, he should be
released& !oreo$er, under (ection 53& .rticle III of the 1onstitution,
the right to ball shall not be Impaired e$en when the pri$ilege of the
writ of habeas corpus is suspended&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> P/2#& /7 "9# P&#6!#%" "/ E%"#& I%"/ L/$%
A'&##4#%"6
1994 N/& 530
The President of the Philippines authori#ed the (ecretary of
Public Works and Highways to negotiate and sign a loan agreement with
the ,erman ,o$ernment for the construction of a dam& The (enate, by a
resolution, asked that the agreement be submitted to it for
ratification& The (ecretary of >oreign .ffairs ad$ised the (ecretary of
Public Works and Highways not to comply with the reAuest of the (enate&
8 Is the President bound to submit the agreement to the (enate
for ratification;
.nswer0
8 /o, the President is not bound to submit the agreement to the
(enate for ratification& +nder (ection 84, .rticle FII of the
1onstitution, only the prior concurrence of the !onetary @oard is
reAuired for the President to contract foreign loans on behalf of the
Republic of the Philippines&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> P/2#& "/ C/%"&$." O& G,$&$%"## 8/&#!'% L/$%6
1999 N/ I
@& What are the restrictions prescribed by the 1onstitution on
the power of the President to contract or guarantee foreign loans on
behalf of the Republic of the Philippines; -'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@& +nder (ection 84, .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, the power
of the President to contract or guarantee loans on behalf of the
Republic of the Philippines is sub%ect to the prior concurrence of the
!onetary @oard and sub%ect to such limitations as may be prescribed by
law&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> P/2#& "/ E%"#& I%"/ E1#.,"!5# A'&##4#%"6
200? N/ II
.n -'ecuti$e .greement was e'ecuted between the Philippines and a
neighboring (tate& The (enate of the Philippines took it upon itself to
procure a certified true copy of the -'ecuti$e .greement and, after
deliberating on it, declared, by a unanimous $ote, that the agreement
was both unwise and against the best interest of the country& Is the
-'ecuti$e .greement binding (a from the standpoint of Philippine law
and (b from the standpoint of international law; -'plain
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a >rom the standpoint of Philippine law, the -'ecuti$e
.greement is binding& .ccording to 1ommissioner of 1ustoms $& -astern
(ea Trading& 3 (1R. 3)5 L56:5M, the President can enter into an
-'ecuti$e .greement without the necessity of concurrence by the (enate&
(b The -'ecuti$e .greement is also binding from the
standpoint of international law&&&
E1#.,"!5#> E1#. P/2#&6> P/2#& "/ I4=/6# T$&!77 R$"#6; I4=/&" $% E1=/&"
Q,/"$6; E".3
1999 N/ I
1& What are the limitationsQrestrictions pro$ided by the
1onstitution on the power of 1ongress to authori#e the President to fi'
tariff rates, import and e'port Auotas, tonnage and wharfage dues&
-'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& .ccording to (ection 8?(8, .rticle FI of the 1onstitution,
1ongress may, by law, authori#e the President to fi' within specified
limits, and sub%ect to such limitations and restrictions it may impose,
tariff rates, import and e'port Auotas, tonnage and wharfage dues and
other duties or imposts within the framework of the national de$elopment
program of the ,o$ernment&
E1#.,"!5#> P&#6!#%"!$0 I44,%!") 8&/4 S,!"
1997 N/& 530
+pon complaint of the incumbent President of the Republic, H.H
was charged with libel before the Regional Trial 1ourt& H.H mo$ed to
dismiss the information on the ground that the 1ourt had no %urisdiction
o$er the offense charged because the President, being immune from suit,
should also be disAualified from filing a case against H.H in court&
Resol$e the motion& .nswer0
The motion should be denied according to (oli$en us& !akasiar,
5:7 (1R. 363, the immunity of the President from suit is personal to the
President& It may be in$oked by the President only and not by any other
person&
E1#.,"!5#> P&/9!(!"!/% A'$!%6" M,0"!=0# P/6!"!/%6 () G/5H" O77!.!$06
1987 N/& I0
.ssume that a law has been passed creating the -'port 1ontrol
@oard composed of0
a& The (ecretary of Trade and Industry as 1hairman and as
!embers0
b& The 1hairman of the (enate 1ommittee on Trade and Industry
c& .n .ssociate Custice of the (upreme 1ourt designated by the
1hief Custice
d& The 1ommissioner of 1ustoms, and
e& The President of the Philippine 1hamber of 1ommerce and
Industry,
The /ational 1onstitutional .ssociation of the Philippines has
filed suit to challenge the constitutionality of the law&
Determine whether the membership of each of the abo$e in the
@oard can be upheld& 1ite rele$ant constitutional pro$isions&
.nswer0
a& The chairmanship of the (ecretary of Trade and Industry in the
@oard can be upheld on the basis of .rt& II, @, (ec& 7, which allows
appointi$e officials to hold other offices if allowed by law (such as
the law in this case creating the -'port 1ontrol @oard or %ustified by
the primary functions of their offices& The functions of the @oard is
related to his functions as (ecretary of Trade and Industry& The
pro$ision of .rt, FII, (ec, 53, prohibiting 1abinet members from holding
any other office or employment, is sub%ect to the e'ceptions in .rt& II,
@, (ec& 7&
b& Dean (inco belie$es that members of 1ongress cannot be members
of the @oard of Regents of the +ni$ersity of the Philippines under the
Incompatibility 1lause of the 563) 1onstitution which is similar to the
pro$ision of .rt& FI, (ec& 53 of the present 1onstitution& +nder this
$iew, the membership of the 1hairman of the (enate 1ommittee on Trade
and Industry in the -'port 1ontrol @oard cannot be sustained& ((inco,
Philippine Political Daw 53: (llth -d& 56:8&
!oreo$er, since the apparent %ustification for the membership of
the 1hairman of the (enate 1ommittee is to aid him in his legislati$e
functions, this purpose can easily be achie$ed through legislati$e
in$estigations under .rt& FI, (ec&85&
9n the other hand, Dean 1ortes appears to suggest a contrary
$iew, noting that after the decision in ,o$ernment of the Philippine
Islands $& (pringer )4 Phil& 8)6 (5687, in $alidating the law
designating the (enate President and (peaker as members of the @oard of
1ontrol of go$ernment corporations, no other decision has been rendered&
9n the contrary, laws ha$e been enacted, making members of 1ongress
members of $arious boards&
Indeed, the membership of the 1hairman of the (enate 1ommittee on
Trade and Industry may be upheld as being in aid of his legislati$e
functions since what is prohibited by .rt& FI, (ec& 53 is the acceptance
of an incompatible office or employment in the go$ernment& (1ortes,
Philippine Presidency, pp& 555E558(56::
(c The designation of an .ssociate Custice of the (upreme 1ourt
cannot be sustained being the imposition on the members of the 1ourt, of
non%udicial duties, contrary to the principle of separation of powers&
It is %udicial power and %udicial power only which the (upreme 1ourt and
its members may e'ercise& (.rt FIII& (ec& 5G !anila -lectric 1o& $&
Pasay Trans& 1o&, )7 Phil& :44 (5638
(d The 1ommissioner of 1ustoms may be made member of the @oard
for the same reason in the case of the (ecretary of Trade and Industry,
under .rt& II, @, (ec& 7&
(e The membership of the President of the Philippine 1hamber of
1ommerce may also be upheld on the ground that 1ongress has the power to
prescribe Aualifications for the office&
E1#.,"!5#> P&/9!(!"!/% A'$!%6" M,0"!=0# P/6!"!/%6 A A!"!/%$0
C/4=#%6$"!/%> C$(!%#" M#4(#&6
2002 N/ FI&
! is the (ecretary of the Department of >inance& He is also an e'E
officio member of the !onetary @oard of the @angko (entral ng Pilipinas
from which he recei$es an additional compensation for e$ery @oard
meeting attended&
/, a ta'payer, filed a suit in court to declare (ecretary !Bs
membership in the !onetary @oard and his receipt of additional
compensation illegal and in $iolation of the 1onstitution& / in$oked
.rticle FII, (ection 53 of the 1onstitution which pro$ides that the
President, FiceEPresident, the !embers of the 1abinet, and their
deputies or assistants shall not, unless otherwise pro$ided in the
1onstitution, hold any other office or employment during their tenure& /
also cited .rticle IIE@, (ection ? of the 1onstitution, which pro$ides
that no electi$e or appointi$e public officer or employee shall recei$e
additional, double, or indirect compensation, unless specifically
authori#ed by law&
If you were the %udge, how would you decide the following0
(a the issue regarding the holding of multiple positions; (3*
(b the issue on the payment of additional or double
compensation;(8*
-'plain your answers fully&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a If I were the %udge, I would uphold the $alidity of the
designation of (ecretary ! as e' officio member of the !onetary @oard,
.s stated in 1i$il Diberties +nion $& -'ecuti$e (ecretary, 562 (1R. 357
(5665, the prohibition against the holding of multiple positions by
1abinet !embers in .rticle FII, (ection 53 of the 1onstitution does not
apply to positions occupied in an e' officio capacity as pro$ided by law
and as reAuired by the primary functions of their office&
(b If I were the Cudge, I would rule that (ecretary ! cannot
recei$e any additional compensation& .s stated in 1i$il Diberties +nion
$& -'ecuti$e (ecretary, 562 (1R. 357 (5665, a 1abinet !ember holding an
e'Eofficio position has no right to recei$e additional compensation, for
his ser$ices in that position are already paid for by the compensation
attached to his principal office&
E1#.,"!5#> P&/9!(!"!/%6 $% I%9!(!"!/%6 /7 P,(0!. O7!.#
2004 III-.& C.R faces a dilemma0 should he accept a 1abinet
appointment now or run later for (enator; Ha$ing succeeded in law
practice as well as prospered in pri$ate business where he and his wife
ha$e substantial in$estments, he now contemplates public ser$ice but
without losing the fle'ibility to engage in corporate affairs or
participate in professional acti$ities within ethical bounds&
Taking into account the prohibitions and inhibitions of public
office whether as (enator or (ecretary, he turns to you for ad$ice to
resol$e his dilemma& What is your ad$ice; -'plain briefly& ()*
+,!.!$0 D#=$&"4#%"
S#."!/% 1
8!%$0!") /7 @/! +,'4#%"6
199? N/& ?G
The .@1 Realty, Inc, filed a complaint against Rico for the
collection of unpaid installments on a subdi$ision lot purchased by the
latter, Rico failed to file an answer, was declared in defaultG and
after reception of plaintiffs e$idence e' parte, %udgment was rendered
against him& The decision became final, and upon motion by .@1 Realty,
the %udge issued a writ of e'ecution&
Rico now files a motion to Auash the writ and to $acate the
Cudgment contending that it is the Housing and Dand +se Regulatory @oard
(HD+R@ which is $ested with original and e'clusi$e Curisdiction o$er
cases in$ol$ing the real estate business& Rico prays for the dismissal
of the complaint and for the nullity of the decision& The realty firm
opposes the motion arguing that under @P 586, RT1s ha$e e'clusi$e and
original %urisdiction o$er cases in which the amount of contro$ersy
e'ceeds P84,444&44& .nswer the following Aueries0
5 Who has %urisdiction o$er the collection suit;
8 The RT1 decision, ha$ing become final and e'ecutory, can it
still be $acated;
.nswer0
5P The HD+R@
8 <es, the decision of the Regional Trial 1ourt can still be
$acated, e$en if it has become final and e'ecutory& (ince the Regional
Trial 1ourt had no %urisdiction o$er the case, the decision is $oid&
+,!.!$0 P/2#&
1989 N/& 540
(5 Where is %udicial power $ested; What are included in such
power;
.nswer0
(5 .ccording to (ection 5, .rticle FIII of the 56?7
1onstitution, %udicial power is $ested in one (upreme 1out and in such
lower courts as may be established by law& It includes the duty of the
courts of %ustice to settle actual contro$ersies in$ol$ing rights which
are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not
there has been a gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e'cess
of %urisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
,o$ernment&
+,!.!$0 P/2#&
2004 I-A& The 563), 5673 and 56?7 1onstitutions commonly pro$ide
that0 RThe %udicial power shall be $ested in one (upreme 1ourt and in
such lower courts as may be established by law&S
What is the effect of the addition in the 56?7 1onstitution of
the following pro$ision0 RCudicial power includes the duty of the
courts of %ustice to settle actual contro$ersies in$ol$ing rights which
are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not
there has been gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e'cess of
%urisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
go$ernmentS;
Discuss briefly, citing at least one illustrati$e case& ()*
+,!.!$0 P/2#&
1992 N/& ?0
. case was filed before the (andiganbayan regarding a Auestionable
go$ernment transaction& In the course of the proceedings, newspapers
linked the name of (enator C& de Deon to the scandal&
(enator de Deon took the floor of the (enate to speak on a Hmatter
of personal pri$ilegeH to $indicate his honor against those Hbaseless
and maliciousH allegations& The matter was referred to the 1ommittee on
.ccountability of Public 9fficers, which proceeded to conduct a
legislati$e inAuiry& The 1ommittee asked !r& Fince Dedesma& a
businessman linked to the transaction and now a respondent before the
(andiganbayan, to appear and to testify before the 1ommittee&
!r Dedesma refuses to appear and file suit before the (upreme
1ourt to challenge the legality of the proceedings before the 1ommittee&
He also asks whether the 1ommittee had the power to reAuire him to
testify&
Identify the issues In$ol$ed and resol$e them&
.nswer0
The issues in$ol$ed in this case are the following0
5& Whether or not the (upreme 1ourt has %urisdiction to
entertain the caseG
8& Whether or not the 1ommittee on .ccountability of Public
9fficers has the power to in$estigate a matter which is in$ol$ed in a
case pending in courtG and
3& Whether or not the petitioner can in$oke his right against
selfEincrimlnation&
.ll these Issues were resol$ed in the case of @eng#on $s& (enate
@lue Ribbon 1ommittee, 843 (1R. 7:7&
The (upreme 1ourt has %urisdiction o$er the case, because it
in$ol$es the Auestion of whether or not the 1ommittee on .ccountability
of Public 9fficers has the power to conduct the in$estigation& +nder
(ection 5, .rticle FIII of the 1onstitution, %udicial power includes the
duty of the courts to determine whether or not any branch of the
go$ernment is acting with gra$e of abuse of discretion amounting to lack
of %urisdiction&
The 1ommittee on .ccountability of Public 9fficers has no power to
in$estigate the scandal& (ince the scandal is in$ol$ed in a case pending
in court, the in$estigation will encroach upon the e'clusi$e domain of
the court& To allow the in$estigation will create the possibility of
conflicting %udgments between the committee and the court& If the
decision of the committee were reached before that of the court, it
might influence the %udgment of the court&
The petitioner can in$oke his right against selfEincrimiE
nation, &&&
+,!.!$0 P/2#&
1998 N/ IF
.ndres .ng was born of a 1hinese father and a >ilipino mother in
(orsogon, (orsogon& on Canuary 84, 5673& In 56??& his father was
naturali#edas a >ilipino citi#en& 9n !ay 55,566?& .ndres .ng was elected
Representati$e of the >irst District of (orsogon& Cuan @onto who
recei$ed the second highest number of $otes, filed a petition for "uo
Warranto against .ng& The petition was filed with the House of
Representati$e -lectoral Tribunal (HR-T& @onto contends that .ng is not
a natural born citi#en of the Philippines and therefore is disAualified
to be a member of the House&
The HR-T ruled in fa$or of .ng& @onto filed a petition for
certiorari in the (upreme 1ourt& The following issues are raised0
5& Whether the case is %usticiable considering that .rticle FI&
(ection 57 of the 1onstitution declares the HR-T to be the Hsole CudgeH
of all contests relating to the election returns and disAualifications
of members of the House of Representati$es& L)*M
8& Whether .ng is a natural bom citi#en of the Philippines& V
)*M
How should this case be decided; (+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& The case is %usticiable& .s stated In Da#atin $s& House
-lectoral Tribunal 5:? (1R. 365, 242, since %udicial power includes the
duty to determine whether or not there has been a gra$e abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or e'cess of %urisdiction on the part of
any branch or instrumentality of the ,o$ernment, the (upreme 1ourt has
the power to re$iew the decisions of the House of Representati$es
-lectoral Tribunal in case of gra$e .buse of discretion on its part&
8& .ndres .ng should be considered a natural born citi#en of
the Philippines& &&&&
+,!.!$0 P/2#& A P/0!"!.$0 Q,#6"!/%; &#0$"#
199< N/& 530
Cudicial power as defined in (ec& 5, 8nd par&, .rt& FIII, 56?7
1onstitution, now Hincludes the duty of the 1ourts of Custice to settle
actual contro$ersies in$ol$ing rights which are legally demandable and
enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a gra$e
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of e'cess of %urisdiction on the
part of any branch or instrumentality of the ,o$ernment& HThis
definition is said to ha$e e'panded the power of the %udiciary to
include political Auestions formerly beyond its %urisdiction&
5& Do you agree with such as interpretation of the
constitutional definition of %udicial power that would authori#e the
courts to re$iew and, if warranted, re$erse the e'ercise of discretion
by the political departments (e'ecuti$e and legislati$e of the
go$ernment, including the 1onstitutional 1ommissions; Discuss fully,
8& In your opinion, how should such definition be construed so
as not to erode considerably or disregard entirely the e'isting
Hpolitical AuestionH doctrine; Discuss fully&
.nswer0
5& <es, the second paragraph of (ection 5, .rticle FIII of the
56?7 1onstitution has e'panded the power of the Cudiciary to include
political Auestions& This was not found in the 563) and the 5673
1onstitution, Precisely, the framers of the 56?7 constitution intended
to widen the scope of %udicial re$iew&
8& .s pointed out in !arcos $s& !anglapus, 577 (1R. ::?, so as
not to disregard entirely the political Auestion doctrine, the e'tent of
%udicial re$iew when political Auestions are in$ol$ed should be limited
to a determination of whether or not there has been a gra$e abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or e'cess of %urisdiction on the part of
the official whose act is being Auestioned& If gra$e abuse of discretion
is not shown, the courts should not substitute their %udgment for that
of the official concerned and decide a matter which by its nature or by
law is for the latter alone to decide&
+,!.!$0 P/2#& A P/0!"!.$0 Q,#6"!/%6
1988 N/& 830
In accordance with the opinion of the (ecretary of Custice, and
belie$ing that it would be good for the country, the President enters
into an agreement with the .mericans for an e'tension for another fi$e
() years of their stay at their military bases in the Philippines, in
consideration of0
5& . yearly rental of one billion +&(& dollars, payable to the
Philippine go$ernment in ad$anceG
8& .n undertaking on the part of the .merican go$ernment to
implement immediately the miniE!arshall plan for the country in$ol$ing
ten billion +&(& dollars in aids and concessional loansG and
3& .n undertaking to help persuade .merican banks to condone
interests and other charges on the countryBs outEstanding loans&
In return, the President agreed to allow .merican nuclear $essels
to stay for short $isits at (ubic, and in case of $ital military need,
to store nuclear weapons at (ubic and at 1lark >ield& . $ital military
need comes, under the agreement, when the sealanes from the Persian ,ulf
to the Pacific, are threatened by hostile military forces&
The /uclear >ree Philippine 1oalition comes to you for ad$ice on
how they could legally pre$ent the same agreement entered into by the
President with the +( go$ernment from going into effect& What would you
ad$ise them to do; ,i$e your reasons&
.nswer0
If the .greement is not in the form of a treaty, it is not likely
to be submitted to the (enate for ratification as reAuired in .rt& FII,
sec& 85& It may not, therefore, be opposed in that branch of the
go$ernment& /or is %udicial re$iew feasible at this stage because there
is no %usticiable contro$ersy& While .rt& FIII, sec& 5, par& 8 states
that %udicial power includes the duty of court of %ustice to Hdetermine
whether or not there has been a gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or e'cess of %urisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the go$ernment,H it is clear that this pro$ision does
not do away with the political Auestion doctrine& It was inserted in the
1onstitution to pre$ent courts from making use of the doctrine to a$oid
what otherwise are %usticiable contro$ersies, albeit in$ol$ing the
-'ecuti$e @ranch of the go$ernment during the martial law period& 9n the
other hand, at this stage, no %usticiable contro$ersy can be framed to
%ustify %udicial re$iew, I would, therefore, ad$ice the /uclear >ree
Philippine 1oalition to resort to the media to launch a campaign against
the .greement&
+,!.!$0 P/2#& A P/0!"!.$0 Q,#6"!/% D/."&!%#
1997 N/& )G
To what e'tent, if at all, has the 56?7 1onstitution affected the
Hpolitical Auestion doctrineH;
.nswerG
(ection 5, .rticle FIII of the 1onstitution has e'panded the
scope of %udicial power by including the duty of the courts of Custice
to settle actual contro$ersies in$ol$ing rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has
been a gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e'cess of
%urisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
,o$ernment& In !arcos $s& !anglapus, 577 (1R. ::?, the (upreme 1ourt
stated that because of this courts of %ustice may decide political
Auestions if there was gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
e'cess of %urisdiction on the part of the official whose action is being
Auestioned&
+,!.!$0 P/2#& "/ R#5!#2 E1#.,"!5# A."6
199: N/& 540
5 I, a clerk of court of the Regional Trial 1ourt of !anila,
was found guilty of being absent without official lea$e for 64 days and
considered dismissed from ser$ice by the (upreme 1ourt& He appealed to
the President for e'ecuti$e clemency& .cting on the appeal, the
-'ecuti$e (ecretary, by order of the President& commuted the penalty to
a suspension of si' months&
a 1an the (upreme 1ourt re$iew the correctness of the action of
the President In commuting the penalty imposed on I; -'plain&
b Was the action of the President constitutional and $alid;
-'plain&
.nswer0
5& a <es, the (upreme 1ourt can re$iew the correctness of the
action of the President In commuting the penalty imposed on I, @y doing
so, the (upreme 1ourt is not deciding a political Auestion& The (upreme
1ourt is not re$iewing the wisdom of the commutation of the penalty&
What it Is deciding is whether or not the President has the power to
commute the penalty of I, .s stated in Da#a $s& (ingson& 5?4 (1R. 26:,
it is within the scope of Cudicial power to pass upon the $alidity of
the actions of the other departments of the ,o$ernment&
b The commutation by the President of the penalty imposed by the
(upreme 1ourt upon I is unconstitutional& (ection :& .rticle FIII of the
1onstitution $ests the (upreme 1ourt with the power of administrati$e
super$ision o$er all courts and their personnel& In ,arcia $s& De la
Pena, 886 (1R. 7::, it was held that no other branch of the ,o$ernment
may intrude into this e'clusi$e power of the (upreme 1ourt&
+,!.!$0 P/2#&> C/%"#4=" P/2#&6
199: N/& 30
8 9n the first day of the trial of a rapeEmurder case where the
$ictim was a popular TF star, o$er a hundred of her fans rallied at the
entrance of the courthouse, each carrying a placard demanding the
con$iction of the accused and the imposition of the death penalty on
him& The rally was peaceful and did not disturb the proceedings of the
case&
a 1an the trial court order the dispersal of the rallyists
under pain of being punished for contempt of court, if they fail to do
so; -'plain&
b If instead of a rally, the fans of the $ictim wrote letters
to the newspaper editors demanding the con$iction of the accused, can
the trial court punish them for contempt; -'plain&
.nswer0
8& a <es, the trial court can order the dispersal of the rally
under pain of being cited for contempt& The purpose of the rally is to
attempt to influence the administration of Custice& .s stated in People
$s& >lores, 836 (1R. ?3, any conduct by any party which tends to
directly or indirectly Impede, obstruct or degrade the administration of
%ustice is sub%ect to the contempt powers of the court&
b /o, the trial court cannot punish for contempt the fans of the
$ictim who wrote letters to the newspaper editors asking for the
con$iction of the accused& (ince the letters were not addressed to the
Cudge and the publication of the letters occurred outside the court, the
fans cannot be punished In the absence of a clear and present danger to
the administration of Custice& In 1abansag $s& >ernande#, 548 Phil 5)8,
it was held that a party who wrote to the Presidential 1omplaints and
.ction 1ommittee to complain about the delay in the disposition of his
case could not be punished for contempt in the absence of a clear and
present danger to the fair administration of Custice&
+,!.!$0 P/2#&> S./=# U%#& "9# P&#6#%" C/%6"!","!/%
1994 N/& 80
5P What is the difference, if any& between the scope of Cudicial
power under the 56?7 1onstitution on one hand, and the 563) and 5673
1onstitutions on the other;
.nswer0
5 The scope of %udicial power under the 56?7 1onstitution is
broader than its scope under the 563) and 5673 1onstitution because of
the second paragraph of (ection 5, .rticle FIII of the 56?7
1onstitution, which states that it includes the duty to determine
whether or not there has been a gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or e'cess of %urisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the ,o$ernment& .s held in !arcos us& !anglapus, 577
(1R. ::?& this pro$ision limits resort to the political Auestion
doctrine and broadens the scope of %uridical inAuiry into areas which
the courts under the 563) and the 5673 1onstitutions would normally ha$e
left to the political departments to decide&
.lternati$e .nswer0
+nder the 563) and 5673 1onstitutions, there was no pro$ision
defining the scope of %udicial power as $ested in the %udiciary& While
these 1onstitutions, both pro$ided for $esture of %udicial power Hin one
(upreme 1ourt and in such inferior courts as may be established by law,H
they were silent as to the scope of such power&
The 56?7 1onstitution, on the other hand, reEwrote the pro$isions
on the $esture of %udicial power originally appearing in the 563) and
5673 1onstitutions, as follows0
HThe %udicial power shall be $ested in one (upreme 1ourt and in
such lower courts as may be established by law&
HCudicial power includes the duty of the courts of %ustice to
settle actual contro$ersies In$ol$ing rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has
been a gra$e abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e'cess of
Curisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
,o$ernment&H ((ec& 5& .rt& FIII
The second paragraph of the cited pro$ision was not found in the
563) and 5673 1onstitution, it contains a new definition of %udicial
power particularly the scope thereof& The first portion thereof
represents the traditional concept of Cudicial power, in$ol$ing the
settlement of conflicting rights as by law, which presumably was
implicit in the 563) and 5673 1onstitutions& The second (latter portion
of the definition represents a broadening of the scope of %udicial power
or, in the language of the (upreme 1ourt, conferment of He'panded
CurisdictionH on the Cudiciary (Da#a $& (ingson, 5?4 (1R. 26: to enable
the courts to re$iew the e'ercise of discretion by the political
departments of go$ernment& This new prerogati$e of the %udiciary as now
recogni#ed under the 56?7 1onstitution was not constitutionally
permissible under the 563) and 5673 1harters&
+,!.!$0 R#5!#2> P&/=#& P$&")
1992 N/& :0
The Philippine -n$ironmentalistsB 9rgani#ation for /ature, a duly
recogni#ed nonEgo$ernmental organi#ation, intends to file suit to en%oin
the Philippine ,o$ernment from allocating funds to operate a power plant
at !ount Tuba In a southern island& They claim that there was no
consultation with the Indigenous cultural community which will be
displaced from ancestral lands essential to their li$elihood and
indispensable to their religious practices&
a& The organi#ation is based in !akati& .ll its officers li$e
and work in !akati& /ot one of its officers or members belong to the
affected indigenous cultural community& Do they ha$e the standing in
this dispute; -'plain&
b& Would your answer be different if the Philippine Power
1orporation, a pri$ate company, were to operate the plant; -'plain&
.nswer0
a +nder (ection ), .rticle III of the 1onstitution, the (tate
should protect the rights of cultural Indigenous communities to their
ancestral lands to ensure their wellEbeing& +nder (ection 57, .rticle
IIF of the 1onstitution, the (tate should protect the rights of
indigenous cultural communities to preser$e and de$elop this cultures,
traditions, and institutions and should consider these rights in the
formulation of national plans and policies& The go$ernment $iolated
these pro$isions, because it decided to operate the power plant without
consulting the indigenous cultural community and the operation of the
power plant will result in its displacement&
If the pro%ected lawsuit will be based on $iolation of the rights
of the indigenous cultural communities, the Philippine -n$ironmentalists
9rgani#ation will ha$e no standing to file the case& /one of its
officers and members belong to the indigenous cultural community& /one
of their rights are affected&
If the lawsuit will seek to en%oin the use of public funds to
operate the power plant, the Philippine -n$ironmentalistsB 9rgani#ation
can file a ta'payerBs suit& .s held in !aceda us& !acaraig, 567 (1R.
775, a ta'payer has standing to Auestion the illegal e'penditure of
public funds&
b The Philippine -n$ironmentalists 9rgani#ation will ha$e no
standing to file the case if it is a pri$ate company that will operate
the power plant, because no public funds will be spent for its
operation& .s held in ,on#ales $s& !arcos, :) (1R. :82, a ta'payer has
no standing to file a case if no e'penditure of public funds is
in$ol$ed&
(ince no member or officer of the Philippine -n$ironmentalistsB
9rgani#ation belongs to the affected indigenous community, none of the
rights of the Philippine -n$ironmentalistsB 9rgani#ation and of its
officers and members are affected& In accordance with the ruling in
/ational -conomic Protectionism .ssociation $s& 9ngpin, 575 (1R. :)7,
the organi#ation has no standing to file the case&
+,!.!$0 R#5!#2> P&/=#& P$&")
199< N/& 580
When the !arcos administration was toppled by the re$olutionary
go$ernment, the !arcoses left behind se$eral 9ld !astersB paintings and
antiAue sil$erware said to ha$e been acAuired by them as personal gifts&
/egotiations were then made with -llen Dayne of Dondon for their
disposition and sale at public auction& Dater, the go$ernment entered
into a H1onsignment .greementH allowing -llen Dayne of Dondon to auction
off the sub%ect art pieces& +pon learning of the intended sale, wellE
known artists, patrons and guardians of the arts of the Philippines
filed a petition in court to en%oin the sale and disposition of the
$alued items asserting that their cultural significance must be
preser$ed for the benefit of the >ilipino people&
5& 1an the court take cogni#ance of the case; -'plain&
8, What are the reAuisites for a ta'payerBs suit to prosper;
.nswer0
5& /o, the court cannot take cogni#ance of the case& .s held in
Coya $s& Presidential 1ommission on ,ood ,o$ernment, 88) (1R. ):6, since
the petitioners were not the legal owners of paintings and antiAue
sil$erware, they had no standing to Auestion their disposition& @esides,
the paintings and the antiAue sil$erware did not constitute Important
cultural properties or national cultural treasures, as they had no
e'ceptional historical and cultural significance to the Philippines&
8& .ccording to Coya us& Presidential 1ommission on ,ood
,o$ernment, 88) (1R. ):?& for a ta'payerBs suit to prosper, four
reAuisites must be considered0 (5 the Auestion must be raised by the
proper partyG (8 there must be an actual contro$ersyG (3 the Auestion
must be raised at the earliest possible opportunityG and (2 the
decision on the constitutional or legal Auestion must be necessary to
the determination of the case& In order that a ta'payer may ha$e
standing to challenge the legality of an official act of the go$ernment,
the act being Auestioned must in$ol$e a disbursement of public funds
upon the theory that the e'penditure of public funds for an
unconstitutional act is a misapplication of such funds, which may be
en%oined at the instance of a ta'payer&
+,!.!$0 R#5!#2> R#C,!6!"#6
1994 N/& 80
8 .ssume that the constitutional Auestion raised in a petition
before the (upreme 1ourt is the Iis mota of the case, gi$e at least two
other reAuirements before the 1ourt will e'ercise its power of %udicial
re$iew;
.nswer0
8 .ccording to !acasiano $s& /ational Housing .uthority, 882 (1R.
83:, in addition to the reAuirement that the constitutional Auestion
raised be the lis mota of the case, the following reAuisites must be
present for the e'ercise of the power of %udicial re$iew0
a There must be an actual case or contro$ersy in$ol$ing a
conflict of legal rights susceptible of Cudicial determinationG
b The constitutional Auestion must be raised by the proper
partyG and
c The constitutional Auestion must be raised at the earliest
opportunity&
+,&!6!."!/% /7 C/,&"6> I%B,%."!/% O&#&6
1992 N/& 70
1ongress is considering new measures to encourage foreign
corporations to bring their in$estments to the Philippines& 1ongress has
found that foreign in$estments are deterred by the uncertain in$estment
climate in the Philippines& 9ne source of such uncertainty is the
heightened %udicial inter$ention in in$estment matters&
9ne such measure pro$ides that Hno court or administrati$e agency
shall issue any restraining order or in%unction against the 1entral
@ankH in the @ankBs e'ercise of its regulatory power o$er specific
foreign e'change transactions&
Would this be a $alid measure; -'plain&
.nswerG
<es, the measure is $alid& In !antruste (ystems, Inc& $s& 1ourt of
.ppeals, 576 (1R. 53:, the (upreme 1ourt held that a law prohibiting the
issuance of an in%unction is $alid, because under (ection 8, .rticle
FIII of the 1onstitution, the %urisdiction of the courts may be defined
by law&
.lternati$e .nswer0
(ince under (ections 5 and )(8, .rticle FIII of the 1onstitution,
the courts are gi$en the power of Cudicial re$iew, the measure is $oid,
(uch power must be preser$ed& The issuance of restraining orders and
In%unctions is in aid of the power of %udicial re$iew&
+,&!6!."!/% /7 ELURB
199? N/& ?G
The .@1 Realty, Inc, filed a complaint against Rico for the
collection of unpaid installments on a subdi$ision lot purchased by the
latter, Rico failed to file an answer, was declared in defaultG and
after reception of plaintiffs e$idence e' parte, %udgment was rendered
against him& The decision became final, and upon motion by .@1 Realty,
the %udge issued a writ of e'ecution&
Rico now files a motion to Auash the writ and to $acate the
Cudgment contending that it is the Housing and Dand +se Regulatory @oard
(HD+R@ which is $ested with original and e'clusi$e Curisdiction o$er
cases in$ol$ing the real estate business& Rico prays for the dismissal
of the complaint and for the nullity of the decision& The realty firm
opposes the motion arguing that under @P 586, RT1s ha$e e'clusi$e and
original %urisdiction o$er cases in which the amount of contro$ersy
e'ceeds P84,444&44& .nswer the following Aueries0
5 Who has %urisdiction o$er the collection suit;
8 The RT1 decision, ha$ing become final and e'ecutory, can it
still be $acated;
.nswer0
5P .s held in -state De$elopers and In$estors 1orporation $s&
1ourt of .ppeals, 853 (1R. 3)3, pursuant to Presidential Decree /o&
5322, it is the Housing and Dand +se Regulatory @oard which has
%urisdiction o$er the claim of a de$eloper against a buyer for the
payment of the balance of the purchase price of a lot& The %urisdiction
of the Regional Trial 1ourt o$er cases in which the amount of
contro$ersy e'ceeds P84,444&44 e'ists only in all cases where the case
does not otherwise fall within the e'clusi$e %urisdiction of any other
court, tribunal, person or body e'ercising Cudicial or AuasiE%udicial
functions,
8 <es, because it is $oid&&&&
+,6"!.!$(0# Q,#6"!/%
2004 I-B& (D9 was elected 1ongressman& @efore the end of his
first year in office, he inflicted physical in%uries on a colleague,
-TI, in the course of a heated debate& 1harges were filed in court
against him as well as in the House -thics 1ommittee& Dater, the House
of Representati$es, di$iding along party lines, $oted to e'pel him&
1laiming that his e'pulsion was railroaded and tainted by bribery, he
filed a petition seeking a declaration by the (upreme 1ourt that the
House gra$ely abused its discretion and $iolated the 1onstitution& He
prayed that his e'pulsion be annulled and that he should be restored by
the (peaker to his position as 1ongressman&
Is (D9Ks petition before the (upreme 1ourt %usticiable; 1ite
pertinent issues for consideration& ()*
P&/ E$. @!.# C$6#6
1999 N/ II
@& What does if mean when a (upreme 1ourt Custice concurs in a
decision pro hac $ice; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@& When a decision is pro hac $ice, it means the ruling will
apply to this particular case only&
S,=&#4# C/,&" A6 A C/%"!%,!%' C/%6"!","!/%$0 C/%5#%"!/%
2000 N/ I&
a 9ne (enator remarked that the (upreme 1ourt is a
continuing 1onstitutional 1on$ention& Do you agree; -'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a I do not agree that the (upreme 1ourt is a continuing
1onstitutional 1on$ention& The criticism is based on the assumption that
in e'ercising its power of %udicial re$iew the (upreme 1ourt Is not
merely interpreting the 1onstitution but is trying to remake the
,o$ernment on the basis of the personal predilections of the !embers of
the (upreme 1ourt, this is a power that properly belongs to the people
and their elected representati$es&
The (upreme 1ourt cannot decide cases merely on the basis of the
letter of the 1onstitution& It has to interpret the 1onstitution to gi$e
effect to the intent of its framers and of the people adopting it& In
Interpreting the 1onstitution, the (upreme 1ourt has to adopt it to the
e$erEchanging circumstances of society& When the (upreme 1ourt strikes
down an act of the Degislati$e or the -'ecuti$e Department, it is merely
discharging Its duty under the 1onstitution to determine conflicting
claims of authority&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
To a certain e'tent, the (upreme 1ourt is a continuing
1onstitutional 1on$ention& When a case is brought in court In$ol$ing a
constitutional issue& It becomes necessary to interpret the
1onstitution, (ince the (upreme 1ourt is supreme within its own sphere,
its interpretation of the 1onstitution will form part of the law of the
land&
S#."!/% ?
8!6.$0 A,"/%/4)
1999 N/ II
D& What do you understand by the mandate of the 1onstitution that
the %udiciary shall en%oy fiscal autonomy; 1ite the constitutional
pro$isions calculated to bring about the reali#ation of the said
constitutional mandate& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
D& +nder (ection 3, .rticle FIII of the 1onstitution, the fiscal
autonomy of the Cudiciary means that appropriations for the Cudiciary
may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount appropriated
for the pre$ious year and, after appro$al, shall be automatically and
regularly released&
In @eng#on $& Drilon, 84? (1R. 533, the (upreme 1ourt e'plained
that fiscal autonomy contemplates a guarantee of full fle'ibility to
allocate and utili#e resources with the wisdom and dispatch that the
needs reAuire& It recogni#es the power and authority to deny, assess and
collect fees, fi' rates of compensation not e'ceeding the highest rates
authori#ed by law for compensation and pay plans of the go$ernment and
allocate and disburse such sums as may be pro$ided by law or prescribed
by it in the course of the discharge of its functions&
+,!.!$0 I%#=#%#%.#> S$7#',$&
2000 N/ I&
b /ame at least three constitutional safeguards to maintain
%udicial independence& (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
b The following are the constitutional safeguards to maintain
%udicial independence0
5& The (upreme 1ourt is a constitutional body and cannot be
abolished by mere legislation&
8& The members of the (upreme 1ourt cannot be remo$ed e'cept by
impeachment&
3& The (upreme 1ourt cannot be depri$ed of its minimum
%urisdiction prescribed in (ection ), .rticle I of the 1onstitution&
2& The appellate %urisdiction of the (upreme 1ourt cannot be
increased by law without its ad$ice and concurrence&
)& .ppointees to the Cudiciary are nominated by the Cudicial and
@ar 1ouncil and are not sub%ect to confirmation by the 1ommission on
.ppointments&
:& The (upreme 1ourt has administrati$e super$ision o$er all
lower courts and their personnel&
7& The (upreme 1ourt has e'clusi$e power to discipline Cudges of
lower courts&
?& The !embers of the Cudiciary ha$e security of tenure, which
cannot be undermined by a law reorgani#ing the Cudiciary&
6& !embers of the Cudiciary cannot be designated to any agency
performing AuasiECudicial or administrati$e functions&
54& The salaries of !embers of the Cudiciary cannot be decreased
during their continuance in office&
55& The Cudiciary has fiscal autonomy&
58& The (upreme 1ourt has e'clusi$e power to promulgate rules of
pleading, practice and procedure&
53& 9nly the (upreme 1ourt can temporarily assign %udges to other
stations&
52& It is the (upreme 1ourt who appoints all officials and
employees of the Cudiciary& (1ru#, Philippine Political Daw, 566) ed&
(pp& 886E35&
S#."!/% 4
C$6#6 "/ (# E#$& E% B$%.
1999 N/ II
.& -numerate the cases reAuired by the 1onstitution to be heard
en banc by the (upreme 1ourt; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& The following are the cases reAuired by the 1onstitution to
be heard en banc by the (upreme 1ourt0
5& 1ases in$ol$ing the constitutionality of a treaty,
international or e'ecuti$e agreement, or lawG
8& 1ases which under the Rules of 1ourt are reAuired to be
heard en banc&
3& 1ases in$ol$ing the constitutionality, application, or
operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions,
ordinances, and other regulationsG
2& 1ases heard by a di$ision when the reAuired ma%ority is not
obtainedG
)& 1ases where a doctrine or principle of law pre$iously laid
down will be modified or re$ersedG
:& .dministrati$e cases against %udges when the penalty is
dismissalG and
7& -lection contests for President or FiceEPresident&
S#."!/% 8
+,!.!$0 $% B$& C/,%.!0
1988 N/& 550
. no$el feature of the present 1onstitution is the Cudicial and
@ar 1ouncil& Please state0
5& Its principal functionG
8& Its compositionG and
3& Who super$ises it, and takes care of its appropriations;
.nswer0
5& The Cudicial and @ar 1ouncil has the principal function of
recommending appointees to the Cudiciary& It may e'ercise such other
functions and duties as the (upreme 1ourt may assign to it& (.rt& FIII,
sec& ?()&
8& The C@1 is composed of the 1hief Custice as e' officio
1hairman, the (ecretary of Custice and a representati$e of the 1ongress
as e' officio !embers, a representati$e of the Integrated @ar, a
professor of law, a retired !ember of the (upreme 1ourt, and a
representati$e of the pri$ate sector& (.rt& FIII, sec& ?(5&
3, The (upreme 1ourt super$ises the C@1 and pro$ides in the annual
budget of the 1ourt the appropriations of the C@1& (.rt& FIII, sec&
?(2&
+,!.!$0 $% B$& C/,%.!0
1999 N/ II
1& What is the composition of the Cudicial and @ar 1ouncil and
the term of office of its regular members; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& The Cudicial and @ar 1ouncil is composed of the following0
5& The 1hief Custice as e' officio chairmanG
8& The (ecretary of Custice as e' officio memberG
3& . representati$e of 1ongress as e' officio memberG
2& . representati$e of the Integrated @arG
)& . professor of lawG
:& . retired Custice of the (upreme 1ourtG and
7& . representati$e of the pri$ate sector& ((ection ? (5,
.rticle FIII of the 1onstitution
The term of office of the regular members is four (2 years&
((ection ?(8, .rticle FIII of the 1onstitution
S#."!/% 11
M/#6 /7 R#4/5$0 /7 L/2#& C/,&" +,'#6
199? N/& 550
.nswer0
5 .s to (en U 1ong, .rt& III, section 5:(3, of the
1onstitution, &&&
8 +nder .rt& FIII, sec& 55 of the 1onstitution, Cudges of lower
courts may be remo$ed by dismissal by the (upreme by a $ote of a
ma%ority of the !embers who actually took part in the deliberation on
the issues in the case and $oted thereon&
3 .s to 1i$ (er$ice -mpl, .rt& IIE@& (ec& 8(3 of the
1onstitution, &&&
T#&4 /7 O77!.# /7 +,6"!.#6
199: N/& 60
5 ., an associate %ustice of the (upreme 1ourt reached the age
of se$enty on Culy 5, 566:& There was a case calendared for
deliberation on that day where the $ote of . was crucial&
1an . hold o$er the position and participate in the deliberation
of the case on Culy 5, 566:; -'plain&
.nswerG
5 /o& . cannot hold o$er his position as .ssociate Custice of
the (upreme 1ourt and participate in the deliberations of the case on
Culy 5, 566:& +nder (ection 55, .rticle FIII of the 1onstitution,
!embers of the (upreme 1ourt hold office until they reach the age of
se$enty years or become Incapacitated to discharge their duties&
1onstitutional officers whose terms are fi'ed by the 1onstitution ha$e
no right to hold o$er their positions until their successors shall ha$e
been appointed and Aualified unless otherwise pro$ided in the
1onstitution& (!echem, . Treaties on the Daw of Public 9ffices and
9fficers, p& 8)?&
S#."!/% 1<
M$%$"/&) P#&!/ 8/& D#.!!%' C$6#6
1989 N/& 540
(8 Despite the lapse of 2 months from the time that the trial
was terminated and the case submitted for decision, the trial court
failed to decide the case& The defense counsel mo$ed to dismiss the case
on the ground that after the lapse of 64 days, the court had lost
%urisdiction to decide the case& (hould the motion be granted;
.nswer0
(8 /o, the motion should not be granted& (ection 5) (2, .rticle
FIII of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0
HDespite the e'piration of the applicable mandatory period, the
court, without pre%udice to such responsibility as may ha$e been
incurred in conseAuence thereof, shall decide or resol$e the case or
matter submitted thereto for determination, without further delay&H
Thus, the failure of the trial court to decide the case within
ninety days did not oust it of %urisdiction to decide the case&
.lternati$e .nswer0
The 5673 1onstitution pro$ided for certain conseAuences on the
decisions of courts in case of the failure of the (upreme 1ourt and
other inferior collegiate courts to decide cases within prescribed
periods& @ut it did not pro$ide for conseAuences on the decisions of
trial courts as a result of their failure to decide cases within three
months (.rt& I, (ec& 55& In !arcelino $s& 1ru#, 585 (1R. )5 (56?3 it
was held that the periods prescribed are only directory, not mandatory&
C/%6"!","!/%$0 C/44!66!/%6
I% G#%#&$0
R/"$"!/%$0 S.9#4#
1999 N/ IIII
What are the reAuisites for the effecti$e operation of the soE
called HRotational (chemeH for 1onstitutional 1ommissions; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.s held in Republic $& Imperial, 6: Phil& 774, for the effecti$e
operation of the rotational scheme of the 1onstitutional 1ommission, the
first 1ommissioner should start on a common date and any $acancy before
the e'piration of the term should be filled only for the une'pired
balance of the term&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> R#.#!5!%' /7 I%!&#." C/4=#%6$"!/%
1997 N/& 5?G
., while an incumbent ,o$ernor of his pro$ince, was in$ited by
the ,o$ernment of 1ambodia as its official guest& While there, the
so$ereign king awarded ,o$ernor . with a decoration of honor and gifted
him with a gold ring of insignificant monetary $alue, both of which he
accepted
Was ,o$ernor .Bs acceptance of the decoration and gift $iolati$e
of the 1onstitution;
.nswer0
<es, it $iolated (ection ?, .rticle IIE@ of the 1onstitution& >or
his acceptance of the decoration of honor and the gold ring from the
,o$ernment of 1ambodia to be $alid, ,o$ernor . should first obtain the
consent of 1ongress&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> 8,%."!/% /7 CSC
1994 N/& 5)
8 1an the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission re$oke an appointment by the
appointing power and direct the appointment of an indi$idual of its
choice;
.nswer0
8 .ccording to the ruling in !edalla $s& (to& Tomas, 84? (1R.
3)5, the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission cannot dictate to the appointing power
whom to appoint& Its function is limited to determining whether or not
the appointee meets the minimum Aualification reAuirements prescribed
for the position& 9therwise, it would be encroaching upon the
discretion of the appointing power&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> C$&##& S#&5!.#> C9$&$."#&!6"!.6
1999 N/ II
@& What characteri#es the career ser$ice and what are included in
the career ser$ice; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@& .ccording to (ection 7, 1hapter 8, Title I, @ook F of the
.dministrati$e 1ode of 56?7, the career ser$ice is characteri#ed by (5
entrance based on merit and fitness to be determined as far as
practicable by competiti$e e'amination or based on highly technical
AualificationsG (8 opportunity for ad$ancement to higher career
positionsG and (3 security of tenure&
The career ser$ice includes0
(5 9pen career positions for appointment to which prior
Aualifications in an appropriate e'amination is reAuiredG
(8 1losed career positions which are scientific or highly
technical in natureG
(3 Positions in the career e'ecuti$e ser$iceG
(2 1areer officers other than those in the career e'ecuti$e
ser$ice, who are appointed by the PresidentG
() 1ommissioned officers and enlisted men of the .rmed >orcesG
(: Personnel of go$ernment E owned or controlled corporations,
whether performing go$ernmental or proprietary functions, who do not
fall under the nonEcareer ser$iceG and
(7 Permanent laborers, whether skilled, semiskilled, or
unskilled&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> GOCC6> ./5#&$'#
1999 N/ II
1& Du#$iminda !arfel, %oined by ele$en other retrenched
employees, filed a complaint with the Department of Dabor and -mployment
(D9D- for unpaid retrenchment or separation pay, underpayment of wages
and nonEpayment of emergency cost of li$ing allowance& The complaint
was filed against >ood Terminal, Inc& >ood Terminal Inc& mo$ed to
dismiss on the ground of lack of %urisdiction, theori#ing that it is a
go$ernmentEowned and controlled corporation and its employees are
go$erned by the 1i$il (er$ice Daw and not by the Dabor 1ode& !arfel
opposed the motion to dismiss, contending that although >ood Terminal,
Inc& is a corporation owned and controlled by the go$ernment earlier
created and organi#ed under the general corporation law as HThe ,reater
!anila >ood Terminal, Inc&H, it has still the marks of a pri$ate
corporation0 it directly hires its employees without seeking appro$al
from the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission and its personnel are co$ered by the
(ocial (ecurity (ystem and not the ,o$ernment (er$ice Insurance (ystem,
The Auestion posed in the petition for certiorari at bar is whether or
not a labor law claim against a go$ernmentEowned or controlled
corporation like the >ood Terminal, Inc& falls within the %urisdiction
of the Department of Dabor and -mployment or the 1i$il (er$ice
1ommission; Decide and ratiocinate& (2*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& The claim of the retrenched employees falls under the
%urisdiction of the /ational Dabor Relations 1ommission and not under
the %urisdiction of the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission& .s held in Dumanta $&
/ational Dabor Relations 1ommission, 574 (1R. 76, since >ood Terminal,
Inc& was organi#ed under the 1orporation Daw and was not created by a
special law in accordance with (ection 8(5, .rticle IIE@ of the
1onstitution, it is not co$ered by the ci$il ser$ice&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> GOCC6 W!"9/," O&!'!%$0 C9$&"#& @6 G/..6 W!"9 O&!'!%$0
C9$&"#&>
1998 N/ II&
The 1onstitution distinguishes between two types of owned andQor
controlled corporations0 those with original charters and those which
are subsidiaries of such corporations& In which of the following
ruleQrules is such a distinction made; 1onsider each of the following
items and e'plain briefly your answer, citing pertinent pro$isions of
the 1onstitution&
5& The rule prohibiting the appointment to certain go$ernment
positions, of the spouse and relati$es of the President within the
fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity& L8*M
8& The rule making it incompatible for members of 1ongress to
hold offices or employment in the go$ernment& L8*M
3& The rule prohibiting members of the 1onstitutional
1ommissions, during their tenure, to be financially interested in any
contract with or any franchise or pri$ilege granted by the go$ernment,
L8*M
2& The rule pro$iding for post audit by the 19. of certain
go$ernment agencies& L8*M
)& The rule reAuiring 1ongress to pro$ide for the
standardi#ation of compensation of go$ernment officials and employees&
L8*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& (ection 53& .rticle FII of the 1onstitution, which
prohibits the President from appointing his spouse and relati$es within
the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity does not distinguish
between go$ernment corporations with original charters and their
subsidiaries, because the prohibition applies to both&
8& (ection 53, .rticle FII of me 1onstitution, which prohibits
!embers of 1ongress from holding any other office during their term
without forfeiting their seat, does not distinguish between go$ernment
corporations with original charters and their subsidiaries, because the
prohibition applies to both&
3& (ection 8, .rticle IIE. of the 1onstitution, which
prohibits !embers of the 1onstitutional 1ommissions from being
financially interested in any contract with or any franchise or
pri$ilege granted by the ,o$ernment, does not distinguish between
go$ernment corporations with original charters and their subsidiaries,
because the prohibition applies to both&
2& (ection 8(5, .rticle IIED of the 1onstitution which
pro$ides for post audit by the 1ommission on audit of go$ernment
corporations, does not distinguish between go$ernment corporations with
original charters and their subsidiaries, because the pro$ision applies
to both&
)& (ection ), .rticle IIE@ of the 1onstitution, which pro$ides
for the standardisation of the compensation of go$ernment officials and
employees, distinguishes between go$ernment corporations and their
subsidiaries, for the pro$ision applies only to go$ernment corporations
with original charters&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> GOCC6; +,&!6!."!/% /5#&
200? N/ FII
. corporation, a holder of a certificate of registration issued by
the (ecurities and -'change 1ommission, is owned and controlled by the
Republic of the Philippines& The 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission (1(1, in a
memorandumEorder, directs the corporation to comply with 1i$il (er$ice
Rules in the appointment of all of its officers and employees& The
memorandumEorder of the 1(1 is assailed by the corporation, as well as
by its officers and employees, before the court& How should the case be
resol$ed;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The memorandumEorder of the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission should be
declared $oid& .s held in ,amogamo $& P/91 (hipping and Transit
1orporation& 3?5 (1R. 728 (8448& under .rticle IIE@, (ection 8(5 of
the 56?7 1onstitution go$ernmentEowned or controlled corporations
organi#ed under the 1orporation 1ode are not co$ered by the 1i$il
(er$ice Daw but by the Dabor 1ode, because only go$ernmentEowned or
controlled corporations with original charters are co$ered by the 1i$il
(er$ice&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> M/#6 /7 R#4/5$0
199? N/& 550
.nswer0
5 (enators, 1ong&, .rt& III, section 5:(3, of the
1onstitution, &&&
8 Cudges, .rt& FIII, sec& 55 of the 1onstitution, &&&
3 +nder .rt& IIE@& (ec& 8(3 of the 1onstitution, officers and
employees in the 1i$il (er$ice may only be remo$ed for cause as pro$ided
by law and after obser$ance of due process&
Their remo$al must be effected by the appropriate disciplinary
authority in accordance with 1h& 7 secs& 27E2? of @ook F of the
.dministrati$e 1ode of 56?7 and the 1i$il (er$ice Rules and Regulations&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> S#.,&!") /7 T#%,&#
1999 N/ II
.& What is the meaning and guarantee of security of tenure;
(8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& .ccording to Palmera $& 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission, 83) (1R.
?7, security of tenure means that no officer or employee in the 1i$il
(er$ice shall be suspended or dismissed e'cept for cause as pro$ided by
law and after due process&
C!5!0 S#&5!.#> S#.,&!") /7 T#%,&#
1988 N/& 540
-'ercising power he claims had been granted him by the -'ecuti$e
9rder on the reorgani#ation of the go$ernment, the 1ommissioner of
1ustoms summarily dismissed two hundred si'tyEfi$e officials and
employees of the @ureau of 1ustoms& !ost of the ousted employees
appealed to the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission claiming their ouster illegal&
The 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission, after hearing, later ordered the
1ommissioner of 1ustoms to reinstate most of those dismissed& Instead of
following the order of the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission, 1ommissioner !ison
intends to bring for re$iew before the (upreme 1ourt, the same decision
of the 1ommission&
5& If you were the counsel for the 1ommissioner of 1ustoms, how
would you %ustify his dismissal of customs officials and employees;
8& If on the other hand, you were a counsel for the dismissed
officials and employees, how would you sustain the order of the 1i$il
(er$ice 1ommission reinstating most of them; (tate your reasons&
.nswer0
5& I would in$oke the resolution in Cose $& .rroyo, ,&R& /o&
7?23), .ug& 55, 56?7, in which the (upreme 1ourt held that under .rt&
IFIII, sec, 5: of the 1onstitution, career ser$ice employees may be
remo$ed Hnot for cause but as a result of the reorgani#ation pursuant to
Proclamaion /o& 3 dated !arch 8), 56?: and the reorgani#ation following
the ratification of this 1onstitution&H @y $irtue of this pro$ision, it
was held that the reorgani#ation of the @ureau of 1ustoms under
-'ecuti$e 9rder /o, 587 may continue e$en after the ratification of the
1onstitution, and career ser$ice employees may be separated from the
ser$ice without cause as a result of such reorgani#ation,
8& I would argue that art& IFIII, sec& 5: does not really
authori#e the remo$al of career ser$ice employees but simply pro$ides
for the payment of separation, retirement, and other benefits accruing
to them under the applicable laws& The reference to career ser$ice
employees separated Has a result of the&& reorgani#ation following the
ratification of this 1onstitutionH is only to those separated as a
result of reorgani#ation of the structure and functions of go$ernment
(e&g&, as a result of abolition of offices as distinguished from the
reorgani#ation of personnel which is what is referred to therein as Hthe
reorgani#ation pursuant to Proclamation /o& 3 dated !arch 8), 56?:&H >or
the power of the go$ernment to terminate the employment of electi$e and
appointi$e officials pursuant to .rt& III, sec& 8 of Proclamation /o& 3
(otherwise known as the Pro$isional 1onstitution, through the
appointment or designation of their successors has been repeatedly held
to ha$e ended on >ebruary 8, 56?7, when the new 1onstitution took
effect& (De Deon $& -sguerra, 5)3 (1R. :48 (56?7G Reyes $& >errer ,&R&
/o& 77?45, Dec& 55, 56?7G 9sias $& >errer, ,&R, /o& 77426, !arch 8?,
56??, !oreo$er, such replacement of incumbents can only be for cause as
prescribed by -'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 57, dated !ay 8?, 56?:& (ince the
summary dismissals in Auestion are not for cause, the remo$al of the
@ureau of 1ustoms officials $iolates art& II, @, sec, 8(3 of the
1onstitution&
COMELEC
C/4#0#.> EC,$0 S=$.# $% T!4# !% M#!$
1989 N/& 5:0
. 1ommission on -lections (19!-D-1 resolution pro$ides that
political parties supporting a common set of candidates shall be allowed
to purchase %ointly air time and the aggregate amount of ad$ertising
space purchased for campaign purposes shall not e'ceed that allotted to
other political parties or groups that nominated only one set of
candidates& The resolution is challenged as a $iolation of the freedom
of speech and of the press& Is the resolution constitutionally
defensible; -'plain&
.nswer0
<es, the resolution is constitutionally defensible& +nder (ection
2, .rticle II 1 of the 56?7 1onstitution, during the election period the
1ommission on -lections may super$ise or regulate the media of
communication or information to ensure eAual opportunity, time, and
space among candidates with the ob%ecti$e of holding free, orderly,
honest, peaceful, and credible elections& To allow candidates which are
supported by more than one political party to purchase more air time and
ad$ertising space than candidates supported by one political party only
will depri$e the latter of eAual time and space in the media&
.lternati$e .nswer0
/o& .lthough the e'penditure limitation applies only to the
purchase of air time, thus lea$ing political parties free to spend for
other forms of campaign, the limitation nonetheless results in a direct
and substantial reduction of the Auantity of political speech by
restricting the number of issues that can be discussed, the depth of
their discussion and the si#e of the audience that can be reached,
through the broadcast media& (ince the purpose of the >ree (peech 1lause
is to promote the widest possible dissemination of information, and the
reality is that to do this reAuires the e'penditure of money, a
limitation on e'penditure for this purpose cannot be %ustified, not e$en
for the purpose of eAuali#ing the opportunity of political candidates&
This is the ruling in @uckley $s& Faleo, 282 +&(& 5 (567:, which
in$alidated a law limiting the e'penditures of candidates for
campaigning in the +nited (tates& In the Philippines, a pro$ision of the
TanadaE(ingson Daw, limiting the period for campaigning, was nearly
in$alidated on this same principle, e'cept that the ma%ority of court
lacked one more $ote to make their decision effecti$e& ((ee ,on#ale# $s&
1omelec, 87 (1R. ?3) (56:6&
C/4#0#.> G&$%" /7 P$&/% !% E0#."!/% O77#%6#6
1991 N/& 55
In connection with the !ay 56?7 1ongressional elections, Duis
!illanes was prosecuted for and con$icted of an election offense and was
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for si' years& The court did not impose
the additional penalty of disAualification to hold public office and of
depri$ation of the right of suffrage as pro$ided for in (ection 5:2 of
the 9mnibus -lection 1ode of the Philippines (@&P& @lg& ??5&
In .pril 5665, the President granted him absolute pardon on the
basis of a strong recommendation of the @oard of Pardons and Parole&
Then for the election in !ay 5668, Duis !illanes files his
certificate of candidacy for the office of !ayor in his municipality&
(a What is the effect of the failure of the court to impose the
additional penalty;
(b Is the pardon $alid;
.nswer0
(a /o need to e'pressly impose W they are accessory penalties&
(b The pardon is $oid, since Duis !illanes was con$icted for the
commission of an election offense and his pardon was not made upon the
recommendation of the 1ommission on -lections& +nder .rticle II, 1, (ec&
) of the 1onstitution, no pardon for $iolation of an election law may be
granted without the fa$orable recommendation of the 1ommission on
-lections
C/4#0#.> R#4/5$0 /7 C/44!66!/%#&6
1998 N/ II&
(uppose a 1ommissioner of the 19!-D-1 is charged before the
(andiganbayan for allegedly tolerating $iolation of the election laws
against profileration of prohibited billboards and election propaganda
with the end in $iew of remo$ing him from office& Will the action
prosper; L)*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
/o, the action will not prosper& +nder (ection ?, .rticle II of
the 1onstitution, the 1ommissioners of the 1ommission on -lections are
remo$able by impeachment& .s held in the case of In re ,on#ales& 5:4
(1R. 775, 772E77), a public officer who Is remo$able by impeachment
cannot be charged before the (andiganbayan with an offense which carries
with it the penalty of remo$al from office unless he is first impeached&
9therwise, he will be remo$ed from office by a method other than
Impeachment&
C/44!66!/% /% A,!"
C/44!66!/% O% A,!"> +,&!6!."!/%
2001 N/ FIII
The Philippine /ational @ank was then one of the leading
go$ernmentEowned banks and it was under the audit %urisdiction of the
1ommission on .udit (19.& . few years ago, it was pri$ati#ed&
What is the effect, if any, of the pri$ati#ation of P/@ on the
audit Curisdiction of the 19.; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
In accordance with the ruling in Philippine .irlines $s&
1ommission on .udit, 82) (1R. 36,(566), since the Philippine /ational
@ank is no longer owned by the ,o$ernment, the 1ommission on .udit no
longer has %urisdiction to audit it as an institution& +nder (ection
8(8, .rticle IIED of the 1onstitution, it is go$ernmentEowned or
controlled corporations and their subsidiaries which are sub%ect to
audit by the 1ommission on .udit& Howe$er, in accordance with (ection
8(5, .rticle IIED of the 1onstitution, the 1ommission on .udit can
audit the Philippine /ational @ank with respect to its accounts because
the ,o$ernment still has eAuity in it&
C/44!66!/% O% A,!"> M/%#) C0$!46
1998 N/ I&
The Department of /ational Defense entered into a contract with
Raintree 1orporation for the supply of ponchos to the .rmed >orces of
the Philippines (.>P, stipulating that, in the e$ent of breach, action
may be filed in the proper courts in !anila&
(uppose the .>P fails to pay for deli$ered ponchos, where must
Raintree 1orporation file its claim; Why; L 54*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
Raintree 1orporation must file its claim with the 1ommission on
.udit, +nder (ection 8(5 IIED of the 1onstitution, the 1ommission on
.udit has the authority to settle all accounts pertaining to e'penditure
of public funds& Raintree 1orporation cannot file a case in court& The
Republic of the Philippines did not wai$e its Immunity from suit when it
entered into the contract with Raintree 1orporation for the supply of
ponchos for the use of the .rmed >orces of the Philippines& The contract
In$ol$es the defense of the Philippines and therefore relates to a
so$ereign function&
In +nited (tates $s& Rui#, 53: (1R. 2?7, 268, the (upreme 1ourt
heldG
HThe restricti$e application of (tate immunity is proper only when
the proceedings arise out of commercial transactions of the foreign
so$ereign& Its commercial acti$ities or economic affairs& (tated
differently, a (tate may be said to ha$e descended to the le$el of an
indi$idual and can thus be deemed to ha$e tacitly gi$en its consent to
be sued only when it enters into business contracts& It does not apply
where the contract relates to the e'ercise of its so$ereign functions&
In this case the pro%ects are an integral part of the na$al base which
is de$oted to the defence of both the +nited (tates and the Philippines,
indisputably a function of the go$ernment of the highest orderG they are
not utili#ed for nor dedicated to commercial or business purposes&H
The pro$ision for $enue in the contract does not constitute a
wai$er of the (tate Immunity from suit, because the e'press wai$er of
this immunity can only be made by a statute&
In Republic us& Purisima 7? (1R. 274, 272, the (upreme 1ourt
ruled0
H.pparently respondent Cudge was misled by the terms of the
contract between the pri$ate respondent, plaintiff in his sala& and
defendant Rice and 1orn .dministration which, according to htm,
anticipated the case of a breach of contract between the parties and the
suits that may thereafter arise& The consent, to be effecti$e though,
must come from the (tate acting through a duly enacted statute as
pointed out by Custice @eng#on in !obil&H
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
In accordance with the doctrine of e'haustion of administrati$e
remedies, Raintree 1orporation should first file a claim with the
1ommission on .udit& If the claim is denied, it should file a petition
for certiorari with the (upreme 1ourt&
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6
1999 N/ IF
What are the grounds for impeachment& -'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
+nder (ection 8, .rticle II of the 1onstitution, the grounds for
impeachment are culpable $iolation of the 1onstitution, treason,
bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, and betrayal of public
trust& 1ulpable $iolation of the 1onstitution means intentional
$iolation of the 1onstitution and not $iolations committed in good
faith& Treason and bribery ha$e the same meaning as in the Re$ised Penal
1ode& ,raft and corruption refers to prohibited acts enumerated in the
.ntiE,raft and 1orrupt Practices .ct& High crimes refer to offenses that
strike at the $ery life or orderly working of the go$ernment& @etrayal
of public trust refers to any $iolation of the oath of office& (1ru#,
Philippine Political Daw, 566? ed&, pp& 33:E337G @ernas, The 56?7
1onstitution of the Philippines0 . 1ommentary, 566: ed&, pp& 665E668
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6
1998 N/ F&
(uppose 1ongress passed a law to Implement the 1onstitutional
principle that a public office is a public trust, by pro$iding as
follows0
H/o employee of the 1i$il (er$ice shall be e'cused from attending
and testifying or from producing books, records, correspondence,
documents or other e$idence in any administrati$e in$estigation
concerning the office in which he is employed on the ground that his
testimony or the e$idence reAuired of him may tend to incriminate him or
sub%ect him to a penalty or forfeitureG but his testimony or any
e$idence produced by him shall not be used against him in criminal
prosecution based on the transaction, matter or thing concerning which
is compelled, after in$oking his pri$ilege against selfEincriminatton,
to testify or produce e$idence& Pro$ided, howe$er, that such indi$idual
so testifying shall not be e'empt from prosecution and punishment for
per%ury committed in so testifying nor shall he be e'empt from demotion
or remo$al from office& .ny employee who refuses to testify or produce
any documents under this .ct shall be dismissed from the ser$ice,H
(uppose further, that 9ng, a member of the Professional Regulatory
@oard, is reAuired to answer Auestions In an in$estigation regarding a
D-.O.,- in a medical e'amination&
5& 1an 9ng refuse to answer Auestions on the ground that he
would incriminate himself; L2*M
8& (uppose he refuses to answer, and for that reason, is
dismissed from the ser$ice, can he pausibly argue that the 1i$il (er$ice
1ommission has inferred his guilt from his refusal to answer in
$iolation of the 1onstitution; V3*M
3& (uppose, on the other hand, he answers the Auestion and on the
basis of his answers, he is found guilty and is dismissed& 1an he
plausibly assert that his dismissal is based on coerced confession; I3*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& /o, 9ng cannot refuse to answer the Auestion on the ground that
he would incriminate himself, since the law grants him immunity and
prohibits the use against him in a criminal prosecution of the testimony
or e$idence produced by him& .s stated by the +nited (tates (upreme
1ourt in @rown $s& Walker& 5:5 +&(& )65, )67, what the constitutional
prohibition against selfEincrimination seeks to pre$ent is the
con$iction of the witness on the basis of testimony elicited from him&
The rule is satisfied when he is granted immunity&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
5& In accordance with -$angelista $s& Carencio, :? (1R. 66, 547E
54?, If 9ng is being cited merely as a witness, he may not refuse to
answer& Howe$er, if the Auestion tends to $iolate his right against
selfEincrimiEnation, he may ob%ect to it& 9n the other hand, under the
ruling in 1ha$e# $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 82 (1R. ::3, :?4, If he is a
respondent, 9ng may refuse to answer any Auestion because of his right
against selfEincrlmlnation&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
8& /o 9ng cannot argue that the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission inferred
his guilt from his refusal to answer& He was not dismissed because of
his in$ol$ement in the leakage in the medical e'amination but for his
refusal to answer& This is a $iolation of the law& He could be compelled
to answer the Auestion on pain of being dismissed in case of his
refusal, because he was granted Immunity&
In Defkowit# $s& Turley& 252 +&(& 74, ?2, the +nited (tates
(upreme 1ourt held0
H>urthermore, the accomodation between the interest of the (tate
and the >ifth .mendment reAuires that the (tate ha$e means at its
disposal to secure testimony if immunity is supplied and testimony is
still refused& This is recogni#ed by the power of courts to compel
testimony, after a grant of immunity, by use of ci$il contempt and
coerced imprisonment& (hilitani $& +nited (tates, 3?2 +( 3:2& 5: D -d 8d
:88& ?: ) 1t 5)35 (56::& .lso, gi$en adeAuate immunity the (tate may
plainly insist that employees either answer Auestions under oath about
the performance of their %ob or suffer the loss of employment&H
3& Ces 9ng can argue that his dismissal was based on coerced
confession& In ,arrity $s& /ew Cersey, 3?) +&(& 263, )44, the +nited
(tates (upreme 1ourt held0
HWe now hold the protection of the indi$idual under the >ourteenth
.mendment against coerced statements prohibits use in subseAuent
criminal proceedings of statements obtained under threat of remo$al from
office, and that it e'tends to all, whether they are policemen or other
members of the body politic&H
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> I4=#$.94#%"
2000 N/ II&
Is cronyism a legal ground for the impeachment of the President;
-'plain& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
<es, cronyism is a legal ground for the impeachment of the
President& +nder (ection 8, .rticle II of the 1onstitution, betrayal of
public trust is one of the grounds for Impeachment& This refers to
$iolation of the oath of office and includes cronyism which in$ol$es
unduly fa$oring a crony to the pre%udice of public interest, (Record of
the 1onstitutional 1ommission, Fol& II, p& 878
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> I4=#$.94#%"
1988 N/& 520
5& What is impeachment, what are the grounds therefor, and who are
the high officials remo$able thereby;
8& Presidential Decree /o& 5:4: pro$ides that Custices of the
(andiganbayan may be remo$ed only by impeachment& Is this Presidential
Decree still $alid; Why;
.nswer0
5& Impeachment is a method by which persons holding go$ernment
positions of high authority, prestige, and dignity and with
definite tenure may be remo$ed from office for causes closely related to
their conduct as public officials, (F&,& (I/19, PHIDIPPI/- P9DITI1.D D.W
373 (llth ed& 56:8&
The grounds for impeachment are culpable $iolation of the
1onstitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes
and betrayal of public trust& (.rt& II, sec& 8&
The officials remo$able by impeachment are the
President, Fice President, the !embers of the (upreme 1ourt,
!embers of the 1onstitutional 1ommissions and the 9mbudsman& (Id&
8& PD /o& 5:4:, sec& 5, in so far as it pro$ides for the remo$al
of the members of the (andiganbayan only by impeachment must be deemed
to ha$e been rendered inoperati$e by the new 1onstitution which pro$ides
that with the e'ception of the officials there mentioned, H.ll other
public officers and employees may be remo$ed from office as pro$ided by
law, but not by impeachment&H !oreo$er, under .rt& FIII, sec, 55, the
power to remo$e lower court %udges is $ested in the (upreme 1ourt en
banc which, by the $ote of a ma%ority of the members who actually take
part in the deliberation on the issues in the case and $ote thereon, can
dismiss lower court %udges&
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> O4(,64$%> +,&!6!."!/%
2004 III-@& 1TD, a 1ommissioner of the /ational Dabor Relations
1ommission (/DR1, sports a /o& 54 car plate& . disgruntled litigant
filed a complaint against him for $iolation of the .ntiE,raft and
1orrupt Practices .ct before the 9mbudsman& 1TD now seeks to en%oin the
9mbudsman in a petition for prohibition, alleging that he could be
in$estigated only by the (upreme 1ourt under its power of super$ision
granted in the 1onstitution& He contends that under the law creating
the /DR1, he has the rank of a Custice of the 1ourt of .ppeals, and
entitled to the corresponding pri$ileges& Hence, the 9!@ has no
%urisdiction o$er the complaint against him&
(hould 1TDKs petition be granted or dismissed; Reason briefly&
()*
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> O4(,64$%> P/2#& "/ I4=/6# P&#5#%"!5#
S,6=#%6!/%
199: N/& 540
8 .n administrati$e complaint for $iolation of the .ntiE,raft
and 1orrupt Practices .ct against I was filed with the 9mbudsman&
Immediately after taking cogni#ance of the case and the affida$its
submitted to him, the 9mbudsman ordered the pre$enti$e suspension of I
pending preliminary in$estigation& I Auestioned the suspension order,
contending that the 9mbudsman can only suspend pre$enti$ely subordinate
employees in his own office&
Is I correct; -'plain&
.nswer0
8 /o, I is not correct& .s held in @uenaseda $s& >la$ier, 88:
(1R. :2)& under (ection 82 of Republic .ct /o& :774, the 9mbudsman can
place under pre$enti$e suspension any officer under his disciplinary
authority pending an in$estigation& The moment a complaint is filed with
the 9mbudsman, the respondent is under his authority& 1ongress intended
to empower the 9mbudsman to suspend all officers, e$en if they are
employed in other offices in the ,o$ernment& The words HsubordinateH and
Hin his bureauH do not appear in the grant of such power to the
9mbudsman&
A../,%"$(!0!") /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> O4(,64$%> P/2#& "/ I%5#6"!'$"#
200? N/ II
. group of losing litigants in a case decided by the (upreme 1ourt
filed a complaint before the 9mbudsman charging the Custices with
knowingly and deliberately rendering an un%ust decision in utter
$iolation of the penal laws of the land& 1an the 9mbudsman $alidly take
cogni#ance of the case; -'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
/o, the 9mbudsman cannot entertain the complaint& .s stated in the
case of In re0 Daureta& 52? (1R. 3?8 L56?7M, pursuant to the principle
of separation of powers, the correctness of the decisions of the (upreme
1ourt as final arbiter of all %usticiable disputes is conclusi$e upon
all other departments of the go$ernmentG the 9mbudsman has no power to
re$iew the decisions of the (upreme 1ourt by entertaining a complaint
against the Custices of the (upreme 1ourt for knowingly rendering an
un%ust decision&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
.rticle II, (ection 5 of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides that
public officers must at all times be accountable to the people& (ection
88 of the 9mbudsman .ct pro$ides that the 9ffice of the 9mbudsman has
the power to in$estigate any serious misconduct allegedly committed by
officials remo$able by impeachment for the purpose of filing a $erified
complaint for impeachment if warranted& The 9mbudsman can entertain the
complaint for this purpose&
N$"!/%$0 E./%/4) $% P$"&!4/%)
S#."!/% 2
A&"!.0# XII> E1=0/&$"!/% $% D#5#0/=4#%" /7 M!%#&$06
1994 N/& 550
In the desire to impro$e the fishing methods of the fishermen, the
@ureau of >isheries, with the appro$al of the President, entered into a
memorandum of agreement to allow Thai fishermen to fish within 844 miles
from the Philippine sea coasts on the condition that >ilipino fishermen
be allowed to use Thai fishing eAuipment and $essels, and to learn
modern technology in fishing and canning&
5 Is the agreement $alid;
8 (uppose the agreement is for a %oint $enture on the same area
with a Thai oil corporation for the e'ploration and e'ploitation of
minerals with the Thai corporation pro$iding technical and financial
assistance& Is the agreement $alid;
.nswerG
5 /o& 9nly >ilipinos may fish in e'clusi$e economic #one&&&
8 The President can enter into a memorandum of agreement with a
Thai oil corporation in$ol$ing technical and financial assistance for
the e'ploration and e'ploitation of minerals, but there should be no
Coint $enture& (ection 8, .rticle III of the 1onstitution authori#es the
President to enter into agreements with foreignEowned corporations
in$ol$ing technical or financial assistance for the e'ploration,
de$elopment, and utili#ation of minerals& Howe$er, the same pro$ision
states the %oint $enture for the e'ploration, de$elopment and
utili#ation of natural resources may be undertaken only with >ilipino
citi#ens, or corporations or associations at least si'ty per cent of
whose capital is owned by >ilipino citi#en&
S#."!/% ?
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% $% L#$6# /7 P,(0!. L$%6
1998 N/ III&
-'press your agreement or disagreement with any of the following
statements& @egin your answer with the statement0 HI .,R--H or
HDI(.,R--H as the case may be&
5& .nyone, whether Indi$idual, corporation or association,
Aualified to acAuire pri$ate lands is also Aualified to acAuire public
lands in the Philippines& L8*M
8& . religious corporation is Aualified t o ha$e lands in the
Philippines on which it may build Its church and make other impro$ements
pro$ided these are actually, directly and e'clusi$ely used for religious
purposes& L8*M
3& . religious corporation cannot lease pri$ate lands In the
Philippines& L8*M
2& . religious corporation can acAuire pri$ate lands in the
Philippines pro$ided all its members are citi#ens of the Philippines&
L8*M
)& . foreign corporation can only lease pri$ate lands in the
Philippines& L8*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
5& I disagree& +nder (ection 7, .rticle III of the 1onstitution, a
corporation or association which is si'ty percent owned by >ilipino
citi#ens can acAuire pri$ate land, because it can lease public land and
can therefore hold public land& Howe$er, it cannot acAuire public land&
+nder (ection 3, .rticle III of the 1onstitution, pri$ate corporations
and associations can only lease and cannot acAuire public land&
+nder (ection ?, .rticle III of the 1onstitution, a naturalEborn
>ilipino citi#en who lost his Philippine citi#enship may acAuire pri$ate
land only and cannot acAuire public land&
8& I disagree& The mere fact that a corporation is religious
does not entitle it to own public land& .s held In Register of Deeds $s&
+ng (iu (i Temple, 67 Phil& )?, :5, land tenure is not indispensable to
the free e'ercise and en%oyment of religious profession of worship& The
religious corporation can own pri$ate land only if it is at least si'ty
per cent owned by >ilipino citi#ens&
3& I disagree& +nder (ection 5 of Presidential Decree /o&
275, corporations and associations owned by aliens are allowed to lease
pri$ate lands up to twentyEfi$e years, renewable for another period of
twentyEfi$e years upon agreement of the lessor and the lessee& Hence,
e$en if the religious corporation is owned by aliens, it can lease
pri$ate lands&
2& I disagree& >or a corporationB to Aualify to acAuire
pri$ate lands in the Philippines, under (ection 7, .rticle In of the
1onstitution in relation to (ection 8, .rticle III of the 1onstitution,
only si'ty per cent (:4* of the corporation is reAuired to be owned by
>ilipino citi#ens for it to Aualify to acAuire pri$ate lands&
)& I agree& . foreign corporation can lease pri$ate lands only
and cannot lease public land& +nder (ection 8, .rticle III of the
1onstitution, the e'ploration, de$elopment and utili#ation of public
lands may be undertaken through coEproduction& Coint $enture or
productionEsharing agreements only with >ilipino citi#en or corporations
or associations which are at least si'ty per cent owned by >ilipino
citi#en&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6
1987 N/& IF0
9n !arch 5, 56?7, H.@1H 1orporation, a company engaged in the
e'port trade, applied for %udicial confirmation of its title o$er ten
hectares of timber lands& The company bought the land fromHIH who in
turn inherited it from his father H<H& The latter had been in open,
notorious, public and continued possession of the land since 568)& 9n
what $alid grounds can you, as (olicitor ,eneral, oppose the
application;
.nswer0
.s (olicitor ,eneral, I can oppose the application for
confirmation of title on the ground that under .rt& III, (ec& 3 timber
lands cannot be alienated& The ruling in Director of Dands $& I.1, 52:
(1R. )46 (56?:, and Director of Dands $, @eng#on, /o& )242), Culy 8?,
56?7, reiterated in Director of Dands $& !anila -lectric 1o&, ,&R, /o&
)72:5, (ept& 55, 56?7, to the effect that a corporation is entitled to
the confirmation of imperfect title to lands acAuired by it from pri$ate
indi$iduals who ha$e possessed the same for 34 years, under bona fide
claim of ownership, for the reason that such persons are presumed to
ha$e performed all conditions essential to a go$ernment grant and,
therefore, are entitled to the issuance of a certificate of title,
applies only to agricultural lands&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6
2000 N/ IFIII&
a .ndy Dim, an ethnic 1hinese, became a naturali#ed >ilipino in
563)& @ut later he lost his >ilipino citi#enship when he became a
citi#en of 1anada in 5675& Wanting the best of both worlds, he bought,
in 56?7, a residential lot in >orbes Park and a commercial lot in
@inondo& .re these sales $alid; Why; (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a /o, the sales are not $alid& +nder (ection ?, .rticle III
of the 1onstitution, only a naturalEborn citi#en of the Philippines who
lost his Philippine citi#enship may acAuire pri$ate land& (ince .ndy
Dim was a former naturali#ed >ilipino citi#en, he is not Aualified to
acAuire pri$ate lands&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6 () E#&#!"$&) S,..#66!/%
2002 N/ II&
., a >ilipino citi#en, and his wife @, a Capanese national, bought
a fi$eEhectare agricultural land from I, a >ilipino citi#en& The couple
later e'ecuted a deed of donation o$er the same land in fa$or of their
only child 1& . year later, howe$er, 1 died in $ehicular accident
without lea$ing a last will and testament&
/ow, I brought suit to reco$er the land on the ground that @,
being an alien, was not Aualified to buy the land when @ and . %ointly
bought the land from him and that, upon the death of 1, the land was
inherited by his parents but @ cannot legally acAuire andQor inherit it&
How should the case be decided; If I filed the suit against 1 when
the latter was still ali$e, would your answer be the same; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
I cannot reco$er the land whether from 1or . and @& +nder .rticle
IF, (ection 5 (8 of the 1onstitution, 1 is a >ilipino citi#en since his
father is a >ilipino& When . and @ donated the land to 1, it became
property of a >ilipino citi#en& .s held in Halili $& 1ourt of .ppeals,
8?7 (1R. 2:) (566?, the sale of land to an alien can no longer be
annulled if it has been con$eyed to a >ilipino citi#en& (ince 1 left no
will and his parents are his heirs, in accordance with .rticle III,
(ection 7 of the 1onstitution, @ can acAuire the land by hereditary
succession&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6> C!"!F#%69!= !66,#
1989 N/& 50
!aria, a naturalEborn >ilipino citi#en, went to the +nited (tates
in 56:) to work as a nurse& With her sa$ings, she bought a parcel of
land consisting of 5,444 sAuare meters in a residential subdi$ision in
!etro !anila& (he had the said property titled in her name in 5674& In
Culy, 5678, !aria acAuired .merican citi#enship by naturali#ation& Two
months later, she married her 1anadian boyfriend&
(5 1an !aria $alidly sell this parcel of land to the younger
sister of her husband who is also a 1anadian citi#en;
(8 (upposing !ariaBs husband dies and she decides to reside in
the Philippines permanently, can !aria buy the parcel of land consisting
of 244 sAuare meters neighboring her own;
.nswer0
(5 /o, !aria cannot $alidly sell the parcel of land to the
younger sister of her husband who is a 1anadian citi#en& +nder (ection
7, .rticle III of the 56?7 1onstitution, as a general rule, aliens
cannot acAuire pri$ate land since pursuant to (ection 8, in relation to
(ection 3, .rticle III, of the 56?7 1onstitution they are not Aualified
to acAuire or hold lands of the public domain& +nder (ection 7, .rticle
III of the 56?7 1onstitution, an alien can acAuire public land by
hereditary succession& +nder (ection ?, .rticle III of the 56?7
1onstitution, a naturalEbom Philippine citi#en who lost his Philippine
citi#enship may be a transferee of pri$ate land& The younger sister of
the husband of !aria is not acAuiring the pri$ate land by hereditary
succession out by sale& /either is she a former naturalEborn Philippine
citi#en who lost her Philippine citi#enship& 1onseAuently, neither of
the e'ceptions found in the abo$eEmentioned pro$isions is applicable to
her&
(8 /o, !aria cannot buy the ad%oining parcel of land& +nder
(ection 8 of @atas Pambansa @lg& 5?), a naturalEborn Philippine citi#en
who lost his Philippine citi#enship, may acAuire only up to 5,444 sAuare
meters of pri$ate urban land& (ince !aria has pre$iously acAuired a
parcel of land with an area of 5,444 sAuare meters, she can no longer
purchase any additional parcel of urban land&
.lternati$e .nswer0
<es, she can acAuire the ad%acent land which has an area of 244
sAuare meters since the law limits acAuisition of lands to 5,444 sAuare
meters after the loss of Philippine citi#enship&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6> C!"!F#%69!= !66,#
1994 N/& 570
. and @ leased their residential land consisting of one thousand
(5,444 sAuare meters to Peter 1o, a 1hinese citi#en, for a period of
fifty ()4 years& In 5668, before the term of the lease e'pired& 1o
asked . and @ to con$ey the land to him as the contract ga$e him the
option to purchase said land if he became a naturali#ed >ilipino
citi#en& 1o took his oath as a >ilipino citi#en in 5665&
5 Was the contract of lease for a period of fifty ()4 years
$alid considering that the lessee was an alien;
8 What is the effect of the naturali#ation of Peter 1o as a
>ilipino citi#en on the $alidity of the option to purchase gi$en him;
.nswer0
5 .s held in Philippine @anking 1orporation $s& Dui (he& 85
(1R. )8, the lease of a parcel of land with an option to buy to an alien
is a $irtual transfer of ownership to the alien and falls within the
scope of the prohibition in (ection 7, .rticle III of the 1onstitution
against the acAuisition of pri$ate lands by aliens&
8 @ecause of the naturali#ation of Peter 1o as a >ilipino
citi#en, he can e'ercise the option to purchase the land& In accordance
with the ruling in <ap $s& ,rageda, 585 (1R. 822& since he is Aualified
to own land, the policy to preser$e lands for >ilipinos will be
achie$ed&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6> C!"!F#%69!= !66,#
1994 N/&5?G
Cohn (mith, a +( national, was married to Petra de Cesus, a
>ilipino citi#en, on Cune ), 56?4& Two (8 years later, Petra purchased
a parcel of residential land from Cose 1ru# using her own funds& The
Deed of (ale states that the land was sold to HPetra married to Cohn
(mithH and was registered as such& With the knowledge of Cohn (mith,
Petra administered the land, leasing parts thereof to se$eral
indi$iduals& Three (3 years later, Petra, without the knowledge of Cohn
(mith, sold the land to Da$id Pere#& +pon learning of the transaction,
Cohn (mith filed a case to annul the Deed of (ale& 1iting .rt& 5:4 of
the 1i$il 1ode, he argued that said sale was without his consent, the
property being con%ugal as it was purchased at the time he was married
to Petra& He presented the Deed of (ale e'ecuted by Petra stating that
she is married to Cohn (mith& He wants to reco$er at least his con%ugal
share&
5 Is Cohn (mith entitled to his con%ugal share;
8 !ay the Deed of (ale e'ecuted by Petra In fa$or of Da$id
Pere# be annulled;
.nswer0
5 /o, Cohn (mith is not entitled to his con%ugal share in the
land& >irstly, since it was acAuired with the personal funds of Petra de
Cesus, in accordance with the ruling in !irasol $s& Dim, )6 Phil& 745,
the presumption that the property is con%ugal has been rebutted&
(econdly, a declaration that Cohn (mith is entitled to a con%ugal share
in the land will $iolate the prohibition against the con$eyance of
pri$ate lands to aliens embodied in (ection 7, .rticle III of the
1onstitution&
8 The Deed of (ale cannnot be annulled& .s held in 1heesman $s&
Intermediate .ppellate 1ourt, 563 (1R. 63& to accord to Cohn (mith, an
alien, the right to ha$e a decisi$e $ote as to the disposition of the
land would permit an indirect contro$ersion of the constitutional
prohibition against the acAuisition of pri$ate lands by aliens&
A&"!.0# XII> A.C,!6!"!/% /7 L$%6> C!"!F#%69!= !66,#
199< N/ 55G
In Cune 567? spouses Coel and !ichelle purchased a parcel of
land& Dot /o& 523, 1adastral (ur$ey /o& 3?ED, with an area of :44 sAuare
meters for their residence in 1ainta, Ri#al, from 1ecille who by herself
and her predecessorEinEinterest had been in open, public, peaceful,
continuous and e'clusi$e possession of the property under a bona fide
claim of ownership long before 58 Cune 562)& .t the time of purchase,
the spouses Coel and !ichelle were then natural born >ilipino citi#ens&
In >ebruary 56?7 the spouses filed an application for
registration of their title before the proper court& This time howe$er
Coel and !ichelle were no longer >ilipino citi#ens& The go$ernment
opposed their application for registration alleging that they ha$e not
acAuired proprietary rights o$er the sub%ect lot because of their
subseAuent acAuisition of 1anadian citi#enship, and that unregistered
lands are presumed to be public lands under the principle that lands of
whate$er classification belong to the (tate under the Regalian doctrine,
hence, they still pertain to the (tate&
How will you resol$e the issues raised by the applicants and the
oppositor; Discuss fully&
.nswer0
The argument of the go$ernment that unregistered lands are
presumed to be public lands is utterly unmeritorlous& .s held in
Republic $s& 1ourt of .ppeals& 83) (1R. ):8, in accordance with (ection
2? of the Public Dand .ct, since the predecessorsEinE interest of Coel
and !ichelle had been in open, public, peaceful, continuous and
e'clusi$e possession of the land under a bona fide claim of ownership
long before Cune 58& 562), their predecessorsE inEinterest had acAuired
the land, because they were conclusi$ely presumed to ha$e performed all
conditions essential to a go$ernment grant& The land ceased to be a part
of the public domain& It is alienable and disposable land& Coel and
!ichelle acAuired the rights of their predecessorsEinEinterest by $irtue
of the sale to them&
Coel and !ichelle can ha$e the land registered in their names&
They were natural bom >ilipino citi#ens at the time of their acAuisition
of the land& In any e$ent they were >ilipino citi#ens at the time of
their acAuisition of the land& Their becoming 1anadian citi#ens
subseAuently is immaterial& .rticle III, (ec& ? of the 56?7 1onstitution
presupposes that they purchased the land after they lost >ilipino
citi#enship& It does not apply in this case at all&
A&"!.0# XII> L#$6# /7 P&!5$"# A'&!.,0",&$0 L$%6
2001 N/ IF
. is an alien& (tate whether, in the Philippines, he0
a 1an be a lessee of a pri$ate agricultural land, (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
a <es, an alien can be a lessee of pri$ate agricultural
land& .s stated in Ori$enko $s& Register of Deeds of !anila, 76 Phil&
2:5 (5627, aliens can lease pri$ate agricultural land, because they
are granted temporary rights only and this is not prohibited by the
1onstitution&
A&"!.0# XII> S$0# /7 P,(0!. L$%6> L!4!"$"!/%6
2004 @III-@& -.P is go$ernment corporation created for the
purpose of reclaiming lands, including foreshore and submerged areas, as
well as to de$elop, impro$e, acAuire, lease and sell any and all kinds
of lands& . law was passed transferring title to -.P of lands already
reclaimed in the foreshore and offshore areas of !! @ay, particularly
the soEcalled Diberty Islands, as alienable and disposable lands of the
public domain& Titles were duly issued in -.PKs name&
(ubseAuently, -.P entered into a %oint $enture agreement (CF.
with .RI, a pri$ate foreign corporation, to de$elop Diberty Islands&
.dditionally, the CF. pro$ided for the reclamation of 8)4 hectares of
submerged land in the area surrounding Diberty Islands& -.P agreed to
sell and transfer to .RI a portion of Diberty Islands and a portion of
the area to be reclaimed as the consideration for .RIKs role and
participation in the %oint $enture, upon appro$al by the 9ffice of the
President&
Is there any constitutional obstacle to the sale and transfer by
-.P to .RI of both portions as pro$ided for in the CF.; ()*
S#."!/% 10
A&"!.0# XII> N$"!/%$0 P$"&!4/%)> #7!%!"!/%
1999 N/ III
What is meant by /ational Patrimony; -'plain the concept of
/ational Patrimony; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.ccording to !anila Prince Hotel $& ,o$ernment (er$ice Insurance
(ystem, 8:7 (1R. 24?, the national patrimony refers not only to our
natural resources but also to our cultural heritage&
O"9#& P&/5!6!/%6
A&"!.0# XII> C!"!F#%69!= R#C,!&#4#%" !% M$%$'#4#%" /7 A5#&"!6!%'
I%,6"&)
1989 N/& 550
(8 !ay a foreigner who owns substantial stockholdings in a
corporation engaged in the ad$ertising industry sit as a treasurer of
said corporation; 1ite the consitutional pro$ision in point&
.nswer0
(ection 55(5, .rticle IFI of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$idesG
(8 /o, a foreigner who owns shares of stock in a corporation
engaged in the ad$ertising industry cannot ser$e as treasurer in the
corporation, for a treasurer is an e'ecuti$e or managing officer&
(ection 55(8, .rticle IFI of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides0
HThe participation of foreign in$estors in the go$erning body of
entities in such industry shall be limited to their proportionate share
in the capital thereof, and all the e'ecuti$e and managing officers of
such entities must be citi#ens of the Philippines&H
A&"!.0# XII> E%'$'#4#%" !% B,6!%#66
1987 N/& II0
The Philippine entered into a Treaty of >riendship, 1omity and
1ommerce with Indonesia with the following pro$isions0
(5 The nationals of each contracting (tate admitted to the
practice of law in said (tate, to practice law without taking the bar
e'aminations in the other contracting (tate&
(8 The nationals of each contracting (tate to engage in retail
trade business in the territory of the other contracting (tate&
Is the treaty $alid;
.nswer0
The treaty is $alid&
(5 .rt& III, (ec& 52 pro$ides that the practice of all
professions in the Philippines shall be limited to >ilipino citi#ens,
sa$e in cases prescribed by law& Here the treaty has the force of law&
(8 .rt& III& (ec& 54 pro$ides that 1ongress shall reser$e to
citi#ens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least
:4* of the capital of which is owned by such citi#ens certain areas of
in$estment& There can be no Auestion then as to the $alidity of the
/ationali#ation of Retail Trade Daw, the constitutionality of which was
sustained in Ichong $& Hernande#, 545 Phil& 55)) (56)7 e$en in the
absence of a similar e'press grant of power to 1ongress under the 563)
1onstitution& .lthough 1ongress can repeal or amend such law, it may not
be amended by a treaty in $iew of .rt& III, (ec& 88 which declares acts
of circum$ent or negate any pro$isions of this .rt& III to be inimical
to national interest and sub%ect the offenders to criminal and ci$il
sanctions& >or then the Retail Trade /ationali#ation Daw becomes part of
.rt& III, ha$ing been passed pursuant to the mandate in (ec& 54&
Howe$er, it may also be plausibly argued that a treaty may amend
a prior law and treaty of friendship, comity and commerce with Indonesia
may be deemed to ha$e created an e'ception in the /ationali#ation of
Retail Trade Daw in fa$or of Indonesian citi#en&
A&"!.0# XII> E1#&.!6# /7 P&/7#66!/%
1987 N/& II0
The Philippine entered into a Treaty of >riendship, 1omity and
1ommerce with Indonesia with the following pro$isions0
(5 The nationals of each contracting (tate admitted to the
practice of law in said (tate, to practice law without taking the bar
e'aminations in the other contracting (tate&
(8 The nationals of each contracting (tate to engage in retail
trade business in the territory of the other contracting (tate&
Is the treaty $alid;
.nswer0
The treaty is $alid&
(5 .rt& III, (ec& 52 pro$ides that the practice of all
professions in the Philippines shall be limited to >ilipino citi#ens,
sa$e in cases prescribed by law& Here the treaty has the force of law&
(8 .rt& III& (ec& 54 pro$ides that 1ongress shall reser$e to
citi#ens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least
:4* of the capital of which is owned by such citi#ens certain areas of
in$estment& &&&& Howe$er, it may also be plausibly argued that a treaty
may amend a prior law and treaty of friendship, comity and commerce with
Indonesia may be deemed to ha$e created an e'ception in the
/ationali#ation of Retail Trade Daw in fa$or of Indonesian citi#en&
A&"!.0# XII> E1=&/=&!$"!/% /7 P,(0!. U"!0!"!#6
1992 N/& 55
The Philippine 1ommodities 9ffice (P19, a go$ernment agency,
wishes to establish a direct computer and fa' linkup with trading
centers in the +nited (tates& The ad$anced technology of a pri$ate
company, Philippine Pacific Telecommunications, is necessary for that
purpose but negotiations between the parties ha$e failed& The Republic,
in behalf of the P19, files suit to compel the telecommunications
company to e'ecute a contract with P19 for P19Bs access and use of the
companyBs facilities&
Decide& If the case will not prosper, what alternati$e will you
propose to the Republic;
.nswer0
The action will not prosper& .s held in Republic of the
Philippines $s& Philippine Dong Distance Telephone 1ompany, 8: (1R. :84,
parties cannot be compelled to enter into a contract& Howe$er, since
under (ection 5?, .rticle III of the 1onstitution, the (tate may
e'propriate public utilities, the Republic of the Philippines may compel
the Philippine Pacific Telecommunications to allow access to its
facilities& If the Republic of the Philippines can take title to the
facilities of Philippine Pacific Telecommunications by its power of
e'propriation, there is no reason why it cannot use such power to impose
only a burden upon Philippine Pacific Telecommunication without loss of
title&
A&"!.0# XII> N$"!/%$0!F# A."!5!"!#6
1994 N/ )0
5 ,i$e a business acti$ity the eAuity of which must be owned by
>ilipino citi#ens0
a at least :4*
b at least 74*
c 544*
8 ,i$e two cases in which aliens may be allowed to acAuire
eAuity in a business acti$ity but cannot participate in the management
thereof;
.nswerG
5 a .t least si'ty per cent (:4* of the eAuity of the
entities engaged in the following business must be owned by >ilipino
citi#ens under the 1onstitution&
5& 1oEproduction, Coint $enture, or productionEsharing agreement
with the (tate for the e'ploration, de$elopment, and utili#ation of
natural resources ((ection 8, .rticle III
8& 9peration of a public utility ((ection 55, .rticle III
3& -ducation ((ection 2(8, .rticle IIF
b .t least se$enty percent (74* of the eAuity of business
entities engaged in ad$ertising must be owned by >ilipino citi#ens under
the 1onstitution& ((ection 55(8, .rticle IFI
c !ass media must be wholly owned by >ilipino citi#ens under
the 1onstitution ((ection 55(5, .rticle IFI&
8 +nder the 1onstitution, aliens may acAuire eAuity but cannot
participate in the management of business entities engaged in the
following acti$ities0
5 Public utilities ((ection 55, .rticle III
8 -ducation ((ection 2(8 &.rticle IIF
3 .d$ertising ((ection 55(8, .rticle IFI
A&"!.0# XII> O2%#&69!= R#C,!&#4#%" /7 M$66 M#!$
1989 N/& 550
(5 . domestic corporation with 34* foreign eAuity proposes to
publish a weekly maga#ine for general circulation in !etro !anila which
will feature the lifestyles of the rich and the famous& !ay this be
done; 1ite the constitutional pro$ision in point&
.nswer0
(5 /o, the corporation cannot publish a weekly maga#ine since it
is engaged in the operation of a mass medium and is not wholly owned by
Philippine citi#ens&
(ection 55(5, .rticle IFI of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$idesG
HThe ownership and management of mass media shall be limited to
citi#ens of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperati$es or
associations, whollyEowned and managed by such citi#ens&H
S/.!$0 +,6"!.# A E,4$% R!'9"6
I% G#%#&$0
S/.!$0 +,6"!.# U%#& "9# P&#6#%" C/%6"!","!/%
199< N/& 5
5& Discuss the concept of social %ustice under the 56?7
1onstitution,
8& How does it compare with the old concept of social Custice
under the 5673 1onstitution; +nder the 563) 1onstitution;
.nswer
5& (ection 54, .rticle II of the 56?7 1onstitution pro$ides& HThe
(tate shall promote social %ustice in all phases of national
de$elopmentH& .s stated in !arAue# $s& (ecretary of Dabor, 575 (1R. 337,
social %ustice means that the (tate should assist the underpri$ileged&
Without such help, they might not be able to secure %ustice for
themsel$es& (ince the pro$ision on social %ustice in the 56?7
1onstitution co$ers all phases of national de$elopment, it is not
limited to the remo$al of socioEeconomic ineAuities but also includes
political and cultural ineAuities& The 56?7 1onstitution elaborated on
the concept of social %ustice by de$oting an entire article, .rticle
IIII, to it&
a (ection ), .rticle II of the 563) 1onstitution pro$ided, HThe
promotion of social %ustice to Insure the wellEbeing and economic
security of all the people should be the concern of the (tate&H While
this pro$ision embodied the concept of social %ustice as an obligation
of the (tate to alle$iate the plight of the underpri$ileged by remo$ing
IneAuities, it simply made a general policy declaration and focused on
social and economic ineAuities,
b In the 56?7 1onstitution, social Custice is conceptuali#ed as
a set of specific economic, social and cultural rights&
c The 56?7 1onstitutional pro$ision on social %ustice includes
all phases of national de$elopment& It includes economic, political,
social and cultural rights&
.nswer0
8& In 1alalang $& Williams, et& al&& 74 Phil& 78:, social %ustice
was defined as Hneither communism nor despotism, nor atomism, nor
anarchy, but the humani#ation of laws and the eAuali#ation of social and
economic forces by the (tate so that %ustice in its rational and
ob%ecti$ely secular conception may at least be appro'imated& (ocial
%ustice means the promotion of the welfare of all the people, the
adoption by the go$ernment of measures calculated to insure economic
stability of all the competent elements of society, through the
maintenance of a proper economic and social eAuilibrium in the
interrelations of the members of the community,H
9n the other hand& (ection :, .rticle II of the 5673 1onstitution
pro$ided& The (tate shall promote social %ustice to ensure the dignity,
welfare, and security of all the people& Toward this end& the (tate
shall regulate the acAuisition, ownership, use, en%oyment, and
disposition of pri$ate property, and eAuitably diffuse property
ownership and profits&H This pro$ision e'pounded on the concept of
social %ustice by e'pressly mentioning the regulation of property and
the eAuitable diffusion of ownership&
/ote0 It is suggested that the e'aminer should correlate the
answers to both Auestions and gi$e credit to answers which state that
there is an e'pansion of the range of social Custice in the 56?7
1onstitution compared to the 563) and the 5673 1onstitution
A'&$&!$%
A'&$&!$%
1992 N/& 580
Teodoro Du#ung is engaged in the business of prawn farming, The
prawns are nurtured in his fishponds in !indoro and, upon har$est, are
immediately fro#en for e'port&
1ongress passed the 1omprehensi$e .grarian Reform Daw of 56??
which pro$ides among others that all pri$ate lands de$oted to
agriculture shall be sub%ect to agrarian reform& The law includes under
the term HagricultureH the following acti$ities0 culti$ation of the
soil, planting of crops, growing of fruit trees, raising of li$estock,
poultry or fish& The Department of .grarian Reform issued an
implementing order which pro$ides that commercial farms used for aAuaE
culture, including saltEbeds, fishponds and prawn farms are within the
scope of the law&
1an the law be declared unconstitutional; Decide&
.nswer0
.s held in Du# >arms $s& (ecretary of the Department of .grarian
Reform, 568 (1R. )5, the law is unconstitutional insofar as it included
li$estock, poultry and swine raising& In the definition of the
agricultural land which the 1onstitutional 1ommission adopted in
connection with agrarian reform, lands de$oted to such purposes were not
included& Howe$er, both the law and the implementing order are
constitutional insofar as they included fishponds& The definition of
agricultural land which the 1onstitutional 1ommission adopted included
fishponds&
E,4$% R!'9"6
C/44!66!/% O% E,4$% R!'9"6> +,&!6!."!/%
1997 N/& ?
.bout a hundred people occupied a parcel of land in "ue#on 1ity
belonging to the city go$ernment and built shanties thereon which they
utili#ed for dwelling, sariEsari stores, etc& The 1ity !ayor issued an
order directing the occupants to $acate the structures within fi$e days
from notice, otherwise they would be e$icted and relocated and their
shanties remo$ed, in order that the parcel of land could be con$erted
into a park for public use and en%oyment& The inhabitants of the parcel
of land complained to the 1ommission on Human Rights urging that the
!ayor of "ue#on 1ity be stopped from doing what he has threatened to do&
The 1ommission on Human Rights, after conducting an in$estigation and
finding that the shanties of petitioners were already being demolished
by then, ordered the "ue#on 1ity !ayor and persons Implementing his
order to cease and desist from demolishing petitionersB shanties under
pain of contempt&
What ha$e you to say on the $alidity of the actuation of the
1ommission on Human Rights in relation to that of the "ue#on 1ity !ayor;
.nswer0
The actuation of the 1ommission on Human Rights is $oid& In
(irnon $s& 1ommission on Human Rights, 886 (1R. 557& the 1ourt held that
the 1ommission on Human Rights has no power to issue a restraining order
or a writ of in%unction and has no power to cite for contempt for
$iolation of the restraining order or a writ of preliminary in%unction&
The cease and desist order, according to the 1ourt, is a semantic
Interplay for a restraining order& Its power to cite for contempt should
be understood to apply only to $iolations of its adopted operational
guidelines and rules of procedure essential to carry out its
in$estigatorial powers, which it is constitutionally authori#ed to
adopt&
C/44!66!/% O% E,4$% R!'9"6> +,&!6!."!/%
2001 N/ FI
In order to implement a big go$ernment flood control pro%ect, the
Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH and a local go$ernment
unit (D,+ remo$ed sAuatters from the bank of a ri$er and certain
esteros for relocation to another place& Their shanties were demolished&
The 1ommission on Human Rights (1HR conducted an in$estigation and
issued an order for the DPWH and the D,+ to cease and desist from
effecting the remo$al of the sAuatters on the ground that the human
rights of the sAuatters were being $iolated& The DPWH and the D,+
ob%ected to the order of the 1HR
Resol$e which position is correct& Reasons ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
The position of the Department of Public Works and Highways and of
the local go$ernment unit is correct& .s held in -'port Processing =one
.uthority $& 1ommission on Human Rights, 84? (1R.58) (5668, no
pro$ision in the 1onstitution or any law confers on the 1ommission on
Human Rights %urisdiction to issue temporary restraining orders or writs
of preliminary in%unction& The 1ommission on Human Rights has no
%udicial power& Its powers are merely in$estigatory&
C/44!66!/% O% E,4$% R!'9"6> +,&!6!."!/%
1992 N/& 5)0
Walang (ugat, a $igilante group composed of pri$ate businessmen
and ci$ic leaders pre$iously $ictimi#ed by the /ationalist Patriotic
.rmy (/P. rebel group, was implicated in the torture and kidnapping of
Dr& !engele, a known /P. sympathi#er&
b Does the 1ommission on Human Rights ha$e the power to
in$estigate and ad%udicate the matter;
.nswer0
b +nder (ection 5?, .rticle IIII of the 1onstitution, the
1ommission on Human Rights has the power to in$estigate all forms of
human rights $iolations in$ol$ing ci$il and political rights and to
monitor the compliance by the go$ernment with international treaty
obligations on human rights& .s held in 1arino $s& 1ommission on Human
Rights, 842 (1R. 2?3, the 1ommission on Human Rights has no power to
decide cases in$ol$ing $iolations of ci$il and political rights& It can
only in$estigate them and then refer the matter to the appropriate
go$ernment agency&
.lternati$e .nswer0
If what is referred to in the problem is the 1ommission on Human
Rights under the +nited /ational -conomic and (ocial 1ouncil, the case
may be in$estigated by the 1ommission based on a special procedure for
factEfinding and inAuiry based on the consent of the (tates concerned&
Howe$er, this does not constitute in$estigation in the usual sense of
the term, with no ob%ecti$e of establishing culpability& The 1ommission
on Human Rights is not empowered to make ad%udications&
L$(/&
L$(/&> R!'9" "/ S#07-O&'$%!F$"!/%
1988 N/& 80
@ecause of the marked increase in the incidence of labor strikes
and of work stoppages in industrial establishments, 1ongress intending
to help promote industrial peace, passed, o$er the ob%ections of
militant labor unions, an amendment to the Dabor 1ode, pro$iding that no
person who is or has been a member of the 1ommunist Party may ser$e as
an officer of any labor organi#ation in the country& .n association of
former /P.s (/ew Peoples .rmy who had surrendered, a$ailed of amnesty,
and are presently leading Auiet and peaceful li$es, comes to you asking
what could be done against the amendment& What would you ad$ise the
association to do; -'plain&
.nswer0
In P.>D+ $& (ecretary of Dabor, 87 (1R. 24 (56:6 the (upreme
1ourt upheld the $alidity of sec& 83 of the Industrial Peace .ct
reAuiring labor unions to submit, within :4 days of the election of its
officers, affida$its of the latter that they are not members of the
1ommunist Party, against the claim that the reAuirement unduly curtailed
freedom of assembly and association& The 1ourt pointed out that the
filing of the affida$its was merely a condition for the acAuisition by a
labor organi#ation of legal personality and the en%oyment of certain
rights and pri$ileges which the 1onstitution does not guarantee& 9n the
other hand, the reAuirement constitutes a $alid e'ercise of the (tateBs
police power to protect the public against abuse, fraud and impostors&
@ut the disAualification of members of the 1PP and its military
arm, the /P., from being officers of a labor union would (5 nullify the
amnesty granted by the President with the concurrence, it may be
assumed, of the ma%ority of the members of 1ongress and (8 permit the
condemnation of the former /P. members without %udicial trial in a way
that makes it contrary to the prohibition against the enactment of bill
of attainder and e' post facto law& The amnesty granted to the former
/P.s obliterated their offense and relie$ed them of the punishment
imposed by law& (@arrioAuinto $, >ernande#, ?8 Phil& :28 (5626& The
amendment would make them guilty of an act, that of ha$ing been former
members of the /P., for which they ha$e already been forgi$en by
Presidential amnesty&
>or these reasons, I would ad$ise the association to work for the
$eto of the bill and, if it is not $etoed but becomes a law, to
challenge it in court&
L$(/&> R!'9" "/ S"&!G#
1988 N/& 50
Hearings before a congressional committee ha$e established that
many firms at the @ataan -'port Processing =one had closed down or
pulled out because of unstable labor conditions resulting in so many
strikes& To remedy the situation and in%ect $itality to the e'port
e'pansion program, some congressional leaders and business e'ecuti$es
propose that strikeEfree e'port #ones be established&
Do you belie$e that under the present 1onstitution, it is legally
possible to put up such a strikeEfree e'port processing #one in the
country; Why or why not;
.nswer0
/o& The fact that many firms at the @ataan -P=. ha$e been forced
to close down by unstable labor condition brought about by strike does
not %ustify the ban on strike& The 1onstitution guarantees the rights of
workers to engage in Hpeaceful concerted acti$ities, including the right
to strike in accordance with law&H (.rt& IIII, sec& 3& It is illegal
strikes which can be prohibited but not all strikes& >or strike is
laborBs legitimate weapon& In the absence of a compelling interest of
the state (such as health and safety, e&g&, the prohibition of strike in
hospitals and industries indispensable to the national interest it
cannot be prohibited&
L$(/&> R!'9" "/ S"&!G#
199? N/& 5)0
1ongressman 1heng says he is one of the coEauthors of the (ubic
@ay !etropolitan .uthority 1harter& He declares that the (@!. is the
answer to rapid economic growth and the attainment of the PresidentBs
Philippine 8444H dream& Howe$er, 1heng is worried that foreign capital
might be slow in coming in due to unstable working conditions resulting
from too many strikes& To remedy this situation& 1heng proposes an
amendment to (@!. law declaring it as a strikeEfree #one or total ban on
strikes& Is this proposal legally defensible; -'plain briefly&
.nswer0
.rt& IIII& sec& 3 of the 1onstitution guarantees the right of all
workers to engage in peaceful concerted acti$ities, including the right
to strike in accordance with law& Thus, a law cannot totally prohibit
the right to strike but can only regulate the e'ercise thereof& His
proposal to ban strikes totally in the (ubic (pecial -conomic and
>reeport =one is, therefore unconstitutional&
.lternati$e .nswer0
While the 1onstitution guarantees to workers the right to engage
in peaceful concerted acti$ities, Including the right to strike, such
right can only be e'ercised in accordance with law& The phrase Hin
accordance with lawH was Inserted precisely to Indicate that in some
e'ceptional cases workers would not ha$e the right to strike if it is
prohibited by law& Hence, the proposal to ban strikes totally in the
(ubic (pecial -conomic and >reeport =one is constitutional& ((ocial
(ecurity (ystem -mployees .ssociation $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 57) (1R.
:?:, Culy 8?& 56?6G !anila Public (chool Teachers .ssociation $& Daguio,
844 (1R. 383 (5665&
W/4#%
W/4#%
2000 N/ II&
b What are the pro$isions of the 1onstitution on women; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
b The following are the pro$isions of the 1onstitution on women0
5P HIt (the (tate shall eAually protect the life of the mother
and the life of the unborn from conception&H ((ection 58, .rticle II
8 The (tate recogni#es the role of women in nationEbuilding, and
shall ensure the fundamental eAuality before the law of women and men&H
((ection 52, .rticle II
3 HThe (tate shall protect working women by pro$iding safe and
healthful working conditions, taking into account their maternal
functions, and such faculties and opportunities that will enhance their
welfare and enable them to reali#e their full potential in the ser$ice
of the nation&H ((ection 52, .rticle IIII
E,.$"!/%
E,.$"!/%> A.$#4!. 8&##/4
1987 N/& I0
HIH, a scion of a rich family, applied for enrolment with the (an
1arlos (eminary in !andaluyong, !etro !anila& @ecause he had been
pre$iously e'pelled from another seminary for scholastic deficiency, the
Rector of (an 1arlos (eminary denied the application without gi$ing any
grounds for the denial& .fter HIH was refused admission, the Rector
admitted another applicant, who is the son of a poor farmer who was also
academically deficient&
'''
(b Prepare a brief argument citing rules, laws, or
1onstitutional pro$isions in support of the RectorBs denial of the
motion for reconsideration&
(c ,i$e your decision on the appeal of HIH from the RectorBs
denial of HIBsH application,
.nswer0
(b The seminary has institutional autonomy which gi$es it
the right, all things being eAual, to choose whom it will admit as
student& (,arcia $& >aculty of .dmission, Doyola (chool of
Theology, :? (1R. 877 (567)G Fillar $& Technological Institute of the
Philippines, 53) (1R. 74: (56?)G Tangonan $& 1ru# Pano, 537 (1R. 82)
(56?) This autonomy is sufficiently large to permit in this case the
seminary to choose between the rich manBs son and the poor manBs son&
(c The preference gi$en to the poor manBs son is %ustified& /ot
only is the seminary entitled to choose whom it will admit because it
en%oys institutional autonomy (.rt& IIF, (ec& )(8 but the choice made
in this case is a wise and %udicious one& The rich manBs son had been
e'pelled from another school because of academic delinAuency& Despite
the economic ad$antage and opportunity he had, he still failed in his
school work, warranting a finding that he cannot really do school work&
9n the other hand, the poor manBs son may be academically deficient
precisely as a result of po$erty so that if relie$ed of its effects it
is probable he will do better in school& The democrati#ation of wealth
and power, implicit in .rt& IIII, (ec& 5, and %ustifies the decision of
the Rector in this case&
E,.$"!/%> A.$#4!. 8&##/4
1989 N/& 60
What do you understand by academic freedom;
.nswer0
.ccording to (idney Hook, academic freedom is the freedom of
professionally Aualified persons to inAuire, disco$er, publish and teach
the truth as they see it in the field of their competence without being
sub%ect to any control or authority e'cept the control or authority of
the rational methods by which truths or conclusions are sought and
established in these disciplines&
In ,arcia $s& >aculty .dmission 1ommittee, :? (1R. 877, it was
held that the academic freedom of institutions of higher learning
in$ol$es a wide sphere of autonomy in deciding their ob%ecti$es and the
best means of attaining them without outside interference e'cept when
o$erriding public welfare calls for some restraint& Thus, a school can
determine for itself who may teach, who may be taught, how it shall be
taught, and who may be admitted to study& In Tangonon $s& Pano, 537 (1R.
82), it was held that the academic freedom of an institution of higher
learning includes the right to prescribe academic standards and to reuse
reEenrollment to students for academic deficiencies and $iolation of
disciplinary regulations& .ccording to +ni$ersity of (an 1arlos $s&
1ourt of .ppeals, ,&R& /o& 76837, 9ctober 5?, 56??, academic freedom
includes the right to prescribe reAuirements for the conferment of
honors
E,.$"!/%> A.$#4!. 8&##/4
199? N/& 5?0
Ting, a student of @angkerohan +ni$ersity, was gi$en a failing
grade by Professor !ahigpit& Ting confronted Professor !ahigpit at the
corridor after class and a heated argument ensued& 1ooler heads
pre$ented the $erbal war ending in physical confrontation& !ahigpit left
the campus and went shopping In a department store& Ting saw !ahigpit
and without any warning mauled the latter& !ahigpit filed an
administrati$e complaint against Ting before the Dean of (tudents for
breach of uni$ersity rules and regulations& The Dean set the complaint
for hearing& Howe$er, Ting filed a petition before the RT1 to prohibit
the Dean and the school from in$estigating him contending that the
mauling incident happened outside the school premises and therefore,
outside the schoolBs %urisdiction& The school and the Dean answered that
the school can in$estigate Ting since his conduct outside school hours
and e$en outside of school premises affect the welfare of the schoolG
and furthermore, the case in$ol$es a student and faculty member& If you
were the %udge, how would you decide the case;
.nswerG
If I were the Cudge, I would dismiss the petition& In .ngeles $
(ison, 558 (1R. 8:, it was held that a school can sub%ect to
disciplinary action a student who assaulted a professor outside the
school premises, because the misconduct of the student in$ol$es his
status as,a student or affects the good name or reputation of the
school& The misconduct of Ting directly affects his suitability as a
student&
E,.$"!/%> A.$#4!. 8&##/4> E1"#%"
1999 N/ II
.& What is .cademic >reedom; Discuss the e'tent of .cademic
>reedom en%oyed by institutions of higher learning& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& .ccording to Reyes $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 562 (1R. 248, academic
freedom is the freedom of a faculty member to pursue his studies in his
particular specialty and thereafter to make known or publish the result
of his endea$ors without fear that retribution would be $isited on him
in the e$ent that his conclusions are found distasteful or ob%ectionable
by the powers that be, whether in the political, economic, or academic
establishments&
In ,arcia $& >aculty .dmission 1ommittee, :? (1R. 877, it was held
that the academic freedom of an institution of higher learning includes
the freedom to determine who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall
be taught, and who may be admitted to study& @ecause of academic
freedom, an institution of higher learning can refuse to reEenroll a
student who is academically deficient or who has $iolated the rules of
discipline& .cademic freedom grants institutions of higher learning the
discretion to formulate rules for the granting of honors& Dikewise,
because of academic freedom, an institution of higher learning can close
a school&
E,.$"!/%> A0!#% E%&/00##6 A D/%/&6
1999 N/ II
1& What is the rule on the number of aliens who may enroll in
educational institutions in the Philippines& ,i$e the e'ception to
the rule& !ay such institutions accept donations from foreign students
under the prete't that such donations are to be used to buy eAuipment
and impro$e school facilities; -'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& +nder (ection 2(8, .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution, no
group of aliens shall comprise more than oneEthird of the enrollment in
any school& The e'ception refers to schools established for foreign
diplomatic personnel and their dependents and, unless otherwise pro$ided
by law, for other foreign temporary residents&
-ducational institutions may accept donations from foreign
students& /o pro$ision in the 1onstitution or any law prohibits it&
E,.$"!/%> D,"!#6 /7 S"$"# !% R# E,.$"!/%
1999 N/ II
@& ,i$e two duties of the state mandated by the 1onstitution
regarding education& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@& .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution imposes the following duties
regarding education upon the (tate0
5 The (tate shall protect and promote the right of all
citi#ens to Auality education at all le$els and shall take appropriate
steps to make such education accessible to all& ((ection 5
8 The (tate shall establish, maintain and support a complete,
adeAuate, and integrated system of education rele$ant to the needs of
the people and society& L(ection 8(5M
3 The (tate shall establish and maintain a system of free
public education in the elementary and high school le$els& L(ection
8(8M
2 The (tate shall establish and maintain a system of
scholarship grants, student loan programs, subsidies, and other
incenti$es which shall be a$ailable to deser$ing students in both public
and pri$ate schools, especially to the underpri$ileged& L(ection 8(3M
) The (tate shall encourage nonEformal, informalP and
indigenous learning systems, as well as selfElearning, independent and
outEofEschool study program particularly those that respond to community
needs, L(ection 8V2VM
: The (tate shall pro$ide adult citi#ens, the disabled, and
outEofEschool youth with training in ci$ics, $ocational efficiency and
other skills& L(ection 8()M
7 The (tate shall take into account regional and sectoral
needs and conditions and shall encourage local planning in the
de$elopment of educational policies and programs& L(ection )(5VM
? The (tate shall enhance the rights of teachers to
professional ad$ancement& /onEteaching academic and nonEacademic
personnel shall en%oy the protection of the (tate& L(ection )(2M
6 The (tate shall assign the highest budgetary priority to
education and ensure that teaching will attract and retain its rightful
share of the best a$ailable talents through adeAuate remuneration and
other means of %ob satisfaction and fulfillment& L(ection )()M
L/ote0 The Auestion asks for two constitutional duties of the
state regarding education&M
E,.$"!/%> 80$' S$0,"#
1987 N/& IIII0
The reAuirement that school children participate in flag
ceremonies has been the sub%ect of contro$ersy& 9n the one hand is the
$iew that the reAuirement $iolates religious freedomG on the other is
the (upreme 1ourt decision that because of rele$ant pro$isions of the
563) 1onstitution the flag salute may be $alidly reAuired&
Which of the abo$e finds support on 56?7 1onstitution, 1ite at
least two pro$isions to pro$e your point&
.nswer0
The $iew that flag salute may $alidly be reAuired finds support
in the following pro$isions of the 56?7 1onstitution0
(a .rt, IIF, (ec& 3(8, which pro$ides that all educational
institutions shall inculcate in students, among other ci$il $irtues,
patriotism and nationalism and teach them the rights and duties of
citi#enship& Thus considerably broadening the aims of schools is
originally stated in the 563) 1onstitution which the (upreme 1ourt
relied upon for its decision in ,erona $& (ecretary of -ducation, 54:
Phil& 8 (56)6, upholding the flag salute in the Philippines& The 563)
1onstitution simply mentioned the de$elopment of ci$ic conscience and
the teaching of the duties of citi#enship&
(b .rt II, (ec, 53 mandates the (tate to Hinculcate in the
youth patriotism and nationalism,H while (ec& 57 reAuires the (tate to
gi$e priority to education, among other concerns, Hto foster patriotism
and nationalism&H
E,.$"!/%> R!'9" "/ C9//6# P&/7#66!/%
2000 N/ IF&
+ndaunted by his three failures in the /ational !edical .dmission
Test (/!.T, 1ru# applied to take it again but he was refused because of
an order of the Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports (D-1(
disallowing flunkers from taking the test a fourth time& 1ru# filed suit
assailing this rule raising the constitutional grounds of accessible
Auality education, academic freedom and eAual protection& The go$ernment
opposes this, upholding the constitutionality of the rule on the ground
of e'ercise of police power& Decide the case discussing the grounds
raised& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.s held in Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports $& (an
Diego,5?4 (1R. )33 (56?6, the rule is a $alid e'ercise of police power
to ensure that those admitted to the medical profession are Aualified&
The arguments of 1ru# are not meritorious& The right to Auality
education and academic freedom are not absolute& +nder (ection )(3,
.rticle IIF of the 1onstitution, the right to choose a profession is
sub%ect to fair, reasonable and eAuitable admission and academic
reAuirements& The rule does not $iolate eAual protection& There is a
substantial distinction between medical students and other students&
+nlike other professions, the medical profession directly affects the
li$es of the people&
E,.$"!/%> R!'9" "/ Q,$0!") E,.$"!/%
200? N/ III
1hildren who are members of a religious sect ha$e been e'pelled
from their respecti$e public schools for refusing, on account of their
religious beliefs, to take part in the flag ceremony which includes
playing by a band or singing the national anthem, saluting the
Philippine flag and reciting the patriotic pledge& The students and
their parents assail the e'pulsion on the ground that the school
authorities ha$e acted in $iolation of their right to free public
education, freedom of speech, and religious freedom and worship& Decide
the case&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The students cannot be e'pelled from school& .s held in -bralinag
$& The Di$ision (uperintendent of (chools of 1ebu& 856 (1R. 8): L5663M,
to compel students to take part in the flag ceremony when it is against
their religious beliefs will $iolate their religious freedom& Their
e'pulsion also $iolates the duty of the (tate under .rticle IIF, (ection
5 of the 1onstitution to protect and promote the right of all citi#ens
to Auality education and make such education accessible to all&
E,.$"!/%> T#$.9!%' /7 R#0!'!/%
1999 N/ II
D& What is the constitutional pro$ision concerning the teaching
of religion in the elementary and high schools in the Philippines;
-'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
D& +nder (ection 3(3, .rticle IIF of the 1onstitution, at the
option e'pressed in writing by the parents or guardians, religion shall
be allowed to be taught to their children or wards in public elementary
and high schools within the regular class hours by instructors
designated or appro$ed by the religious authorities to which the
children or wards belong, without additional cost to the ,o$ernment&
E,.$"!/%> @$0!!") /7 A.$#4!. R#C,!&#4#%"6
1994 N/& 58G
The Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports Issued a circular
disAualifying anyone who fails for the fourth time in the /ational
-ntrance Tests from admission to a 1ollege of Dentistry&
I who was thus disAualified, Auestions the constitutionality of
the circular&
5 Did the circular depri$e her of her constitutional right to
education;
8 Did the circular $iolate the eAual protection clause of the
1onstitution;
.nswer0
5 /o, the circular disAualifying anyone who fails for the
fourth time in the /ational -ntrance Tests from admission to the 1ollege
of Dentistry did not depri$e I of her constitutional right to education&
.s held in Department of -ducation, 1ulture and (ports $s& (an Diego,
5?4 (1R. )33, this right is not absolute& (ection )(3& .rticle IIF of
the 1onstitution pro$ides that the right to choose a profession or
course of study is sub%ect to fair, reasonable and eAuitable admission
and academic reAuirements& ReAuiring that those who will enroll in a
1ollege of Dentistry should pass the /ational -ntrance Test is $alid,
because it is intended to ensure that only those who are Aualified to be
dentists are admitted for enrollment&
8 /o, the circular did not $iolate the eAual protection clause
of the 1onstitution& &&&
G#%#&$0 P&/5!6!/%6
G#%#&$0 P&/5!6!/%6> L/.$0 D!$0#."
1987 N/& F0
(a .n ordinance prescribing the use of the local dialect as
medium of instruction in the primary grades&
.nswer0
(a The ordinance, which prescribes the use of the local dialect
as medium of instruction in the primary grades, is in$alid& The
1onstitution pro$ides in .rt IIF, (ec& 7 for the use of regional dialect
as au'iliary medium of instruction& If the ordinance prescribes the use
of local dialect not as au'iliary, but as e'clusi$e language of
instruction, then it is $iolati$e of the 1onstitution for this
additional reason& The ordinance would thus allow more dialects to be
used than it is desirable and make the Auest for national unity more
difficult&
A4#%4#%"6 $% R#5!6!/%6
A4#%4#%"6 $% R#5!6!/%6
2004 I@-@& .n amendment to or a re$ision of the present
1onstitution may be proposed by a 1onstitutional 1on$ention or by the
1ongress upon a $ote of threeEfourths of all its members&
Is there a third way of proposing re$isions of or amendments to
the 1onstitution; If so, how; ()*
A4#%4#%"6 $% R#5!6!/%6> M/#6
1997 N/& 840
(tate the $arious modes of, and steps in, re$ising or amending
the Philippine 1onstitution&
.nswerG
There are three modes of amending the 1onstitution&
5& +nder (ection 5, .rticle IFIII of the 1onstitution& 1ongress
may by threeEfourths $ote of all its !embers propose any amendment to or
re$ision of the 1onstitution&
8& +nder the same pro$ision, a constitutional con$ention may
propose any amendment to or re$ision of the 1onstitution& .ccording to
(ection 3, .rticle IFII of the 1onstitution& 1ongress may by a twoE
thirds $ote of all its !embers call a constitutional con$ention or by a
ma%ority $ote of all its !embers submit the Auestion of calling such a
con$ention to the electorate&
3& +nder (ection 8& .rticle IFII of the 1onstitution, the
people may directly propose amendments to the 1onstitution through
initiati$e upon a petition of at least twel$e per cent of the total
number of registered $oters, of which e$ery legislati$e district must be
represented by at least three per cent of the registered $oters therein&
.ccording to (ection 2, .rticle IFII of the 1onstitution, to be
$alid any amendment to or re$ision of the 1onstitution must be ratified
by a ma%ority of the $otes cast In a plebiscite&
T&$%6!"/&) P&/5!6!/%6
T&$%6!"/&) P&/5!6!/%6> 8/&#!'% M!0!"$&) B$6#6
199: N/& 2
5 +nder the e'ecuti$e agreement entered into between the
Philippines and the other members of the .(-./, the other members will
each send a battalionEsi#e unit of their respecti$e armed forces to
conduct a combined military e'ercise in the (ubic @ay area& . group of
concerned citi#ens sought to en% oin the entry of foreign troops as
$lolati$e of the 56?7 1onstitution that prohibited the stationing of
foreign troops and the use by them, of local facilities&
.s the Cudge, decide the case& -'plain&
.nswer0
5 .s a %udge, I shall dismiss the case& What (ection 8), .rticle
IFII of the 1onstitution prohibits in the absence of a treaty is the
stationing of troops and facilities of foreign countries in the
Philippines& It does not include the temporary presence in the
Philippines of foreign troops for the purpose of a combined military
e'ercise& @esides, the holding of the combined military e'ercise is
connected with defense, which is a so$ereign function& In accordance
with the ruling in @aer us& Ti#on, )7 (1R. 5, the filing of an action
interfering with the defense of the (tate amounts to a suit against the
(tate without its consent&
T&$%6!"/&) P&/5!6!/%6> 8/&#!'% M!0!"$&) B$6#6
1988 N/& 880
The (ecretary of Custice had recently ruled that the President may
negotiate for a modification or e'tension of military bases agreement
with the +nited (tates regardless of the Hno nukesH pro$isions in the
56?7 1onstitution& The President forthwith announced that she finds the
same opinion HacceptableH and will adopt it& The (enators on the other
hand, led by the (enate President, are skeptical, and had e$en warned
that no treaty or international agreement may go into effect without the
concurrence of twoEthirds of all members of the (enate&
. former senator had said, Hit is completely wrong, if not
erroneous,H and His an amendment of the 1onstitution by
misinterpretation&H (ome members of the Dower House agree with (ecretary
9rdone#, while others lament tbe latterBs opinion as HAuestionable,
unfortunate, and without any basis at all&H
Do you or do you not agree with the aforementioned ruling of the
Department of Custice; Why;
.nswer0
/o& The 1onstitution pro$ides that if foreign military bases,
troops or facilities are to be allowed after the e'piration of the
present PhilippineE.merican !ilitary @ases .greement in 5665, it must be
Hunder a treaty duly concurred in by the (enate and, when the 1ongress
so reAuires, ratified by a ma%ority of the $otes cast by the people in a
national referendum&H (.rt& IFIII, sec& 8) . mere agreement, therefore,
not a treaty, without the concurrence of at least 8Q3 of all the members
of the (enate will not be $alid (.rt& FII, sec& 85, .rt& IFIII, sec& 2&
With respect to the pro$ision allowing nuclear weapons within the bases,
the 1onstitution appears to ban such weapons from the Philippine
territory& It declares as a state policy that Hthe Philippines,
consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of
freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory&H (.rt, II, sec& ?
Howe$er, the deliberations of the 1onstitutional 1ommission would seem
to indicate that this pro$ision of the 1onstitution is Hnot something
absolute nor 544 percent without e'ception&H It may therefore be that
circumstances may %ustify a pro$ision on nuclear weapons&
A4!%!6"&$"!5# L$2
A4!% L$2> E19$,6"!/% /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# R#4#!#6
2000 N/ IIII&
a -'plain the doctrine of e'haustion of administrati$e
remedies& (8*
b ,i$e at least three (3 e'ceptions to its application& (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The doctrine of e'haustion of administrati$e remedies means that
when an adeAuate remedy is a$ailable within the -'ecuti$e Department, a
litigant must first e'haust this remedy before he can resort to the
courts& The purpose of the doctrine is to enable the administrati$e
agencies to correct themsel$es if they ha$e committed an error& (Rosales
$& 1ourt of .ppeals, 5:) (1R. 322 L56??5
b The following are the e'ceptions to the application of the
doctrine of e'haustion of administrati$e remedies0
5 The Auestion in$ol$ed is purely legalG
8 The administrati$e body is in estoppelG
3 The act complained of is patently illegalG
2 There is an urgent need for Cudicial inter$entionG
) The claim in$ol$ed is smallG
: ,ra$e and irreparable in%ury will be sufferedG
7 There is no other plain, speedy and adeAuate remedyG
? (trong public interest is in$ol$edG
6 The sub%ect of the contro$ersy is pri$ate lawG 54P The case
in$ol$es a Auo warranto proceeding
((un$ille Timber Products, Inc& $& .bad& 84: (1R. 2?8 T5668G
55P The party was denied due process ((amahang !agbubukid ng
Oapdula, Inc& $& 1ourt of .ppeals, 34) (1R. 527 L5666MG
58 The decision is that of a Department (ecretary& (/a#areno $&
1ourt of .ppeals, ,&R& /o& 535:25, >ebruary 83& 8444G
53 Resort to administrati$e remedies would be futile (+ni$ersity
of the Philippines @oard of Regents $& Rasul 844 (1R. :?) L5665MG
52 There is unreasonable delay (Republic $, (andiganbayan, 345
(1R. 837 L5666MG
5) HThe action in$ol$es reco$ery of physical possession of public
land (,abrito u& 1ourt of .ppeals, 5:7 (1R. 775 T56??MG
5: The party is poor ((abello $& Department of -ducation,
1ulture and (ports, 5?4 (1R. :83 L56?6MG and
57 The law pro$ides for immediate resort to the court (Rulian $
Falde#, 58 (1R. )45 L56:2M&
T/ote0 The e'aminee should be gi$en full credit if he gi$es three
of the abo$eEmentioned e'ceptions&P
A4!% L$2> E19$,6"!/% /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# R#4#!#6
1991 N/& 60
@, >or being notoriously undesirable and a recidi$ist, Cose
Tapulan, an employee in the first le$el of the career ser$ice in the
9ffice of the Pro$incial ,o$ernor of !asbate, was dismissed by the
,o$ernor without formal in$estigation pursuant to (ection 24 of the
1i$il (er$ice Decree (P&D& /o& ?47P which authori#es summary proceedings
in such cases&
.s a lawyer of Cose what steps, if any, would you take to protect
his rights;
.nswerG
@& (ection 24 of the 1i$il (er$ice Decree has been repealed by
Republic .ct /o& ::)2& .s lawyer of Cose Tapulan, I will file a
petition for mandamus to compel his reinstatement& In accordance with
the ruling in !angubat us& 9smena, ,&R /o& DE58?37, .pril 34, 56)6, 54)
Phil& 534?, there is no need to e'haust all administrati$e remedies by
appealing to the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission, since the act of the go$ernor
is patently Illegal&
A4!% L$2> E19$,6"!/% /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# R#4#!#6
2004 NO3 @I
Director W9W failed the lifestyle check conducted by the
9mbudsmanKs 9ffice because W9WKs assets were grossly disproportionate to
his salary and allowances& !oreo$er, some assets were not included in
his statement of .ssets and Diabilities& He was charged of graft and
corrupt practices and pending the completion of in$estigations, he was
suspended from office for si' months&
@& >or his part, the 9mbudsman mo$ed to dismiss W9WKs petition&
.ccording to the 9mbudsman the e$idence of guilt of W9W is strong, and
petitioner failed to e'haust administrati$e remedies& W9W admitted he
filed no motion for reconsideration, but only because the order
suspending him was immediately e'ecutory&
(hould the motion to dismiss be granted or not; Discuss briefly&
()*
A4!% L$2> E19$,6"!/% /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# R#4#!#6 56 D/."&!%# /7 P&!4$&)
+,&!6!."!/%
199: N/& 550
5 Distinguish the doctrine of primary %urisdiction from the
doctrine of e'haustion of administrati$e remedies&
8 Does the failure to e'haust administrati$e remedies before
filing a case in court oust said court of %urisdiction to hear the case;
-'plain&
.nswerG
5 The doctrine of primary %urisdiction and the doctrine of
e'haustion of administrati$e remedies both deal with the proper
relationships between the courts and administrati$e agencies& The
doctrine of e'haustion of administrati$e remedies applies where a claim
is cogni#able in the first instance by an administrati$e agency alone&
Cudicial interference is withheld until the administrati$e process has
been completed& .s stated in Industrial -nterprises, Inc& $s& 1ourt of
.ppeals, 5?2 (1R. 28:& the doctrine of primary %urisdiction applies
where a case is within the concurrent %urisdiction of the court and an
administrati$e agency but the determination of the case reAuires the
technical e'pertise of the administrati$e agency& In such a case,
although the matter is within the %urisdiction of the court, it must
yield to the %urisdiction of the administrati$e case&
8 /o, the failure to e'haust administrati$e remedies before
filing a case in court does not oust the court of %urisdiction to hear
the case& .s held in Rosario $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 855 (1R. 3?2, the
failure to e'haust administrati$e remedies does not affect the
%urisdiction of the court but results in the lack of a cause of action,
because a condition precedent that must be satisfied before action can
be filed was not fulfilled&
A4!% L$2> E19$,6"!/% /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# R#4#!#6> E1.#="!/%6
1991 N/& ?0
9n the basis of a $erified report and confidential information
that $arious electronic eAuipment, which were illegally imported into
the Philippines, were found in the bodega of the Tikasan 1orporation
located at 5448 @inakayan (t&, 1ebu 1ity, the 1ollector of 1ustoms of
1ebu issued, in the morning of 8 Canuary 56??, a Warrant of (ei#ure and
Detention against the corporation for the sei#ure of the electronic
eAuipment& The warrant particularly describes the electronic eAuipment
and specifies the pro$isions of the Tariff and 1ustoms 1ode which were
$iolated by the importation&
The warrant was ser$ed and implemented in the afternoon of 8
Canuary 56?? by 1ustoms policemen who then sei#ed the described
eAuipment& The in$entory of the sei#ed articles was signed by the
(ecretary of the Tikasan 1orporation& The following day, a hearing
officer in the 9ffice of the 1ollector of 1ustoms conducted a hearing on
the confiscation of the eAuipment&
Two days thereafter, the corporation filed with the (upreme 1ourt
a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus to set aside the
warrant, en%oin the 1ollector and his agents from further proceeding
with the forfeiture hearing and to secure the return of the confiscated
eAuipment, alleging therein that the warrant issued is null and $oid for
the reason that, pursuant to (ection 8 of .rticle III of the 56?7
1onstitution, only a %udge may issue a search warrant& In his comment to
the petition, the 1ollector of 1ustoms, through the 9ffice of the
(olicitor ,eneral, contends that he is authori#ed under the Tariff and
1ustom 1ode to order the sei#ure of the eAuipment whose duties and ta'es
were not paid and that the corporation did not e'haust administrati$e
remedies&
(a (hould the petition be granted; Decide&
(b If the 1ourt would sustain the contention of the 1ollector of
1ustoms on the matter of e'haustion of administrati$e remedies, what is
the administrati$e remedy a$ailable to the corporation;
(c What are the e'ceptions to the rule on e'haustion of
administrati$e remedies;
.nswer0
(a /o& /o search warrant from court needed&
(b .s pointed out in 1hia us& .cting 1ollector of 1ustoms, 577
(1R. 7)3, the administrati$e remedy a$ailable under (ection 8353 of the
Tariff and 1ustoms 1ode is to appeal to the 1ommissioner of 1ustoms,
from whose decision an appeal to the 1ourt of Ta' .ppeals lies&
(c The following are the e'ceptions to the doctrine of e'haustion
of administrati$e remedies0
5& The case deals with pri$ate landG
8& The Auestion in$ol$ed is purely legalG
3& The case in$ol$es a Auo warranto proceedingG
2& There is denial of due processG
)& The decision is patently illegalG
:& The aggrie$ed party will suffer irreparable in%uryG
7& There is estoppelG
?& Resort to administrati$e remedies would be futileG
6& The decision is that of a department headG
54& The law e'pressly pro$ides for immediate %udicial re$iewG
55& Public interest is in$ol$edG
58& There was unreasonable delay in the administrati$e
proceedingsG and
53& The aggrie$ed party is poor&
A4!% L$2> +,!.!$0 R#5!#2 /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# A."!/%
2001 N/ IIF
,i$e the two (8 reAuisites for the %udicial re$iew of
administrati$e decisionQactions, that is, when is an administrati$e
action ripe for Cudicial re$iew; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The following are the conditions for ripeness for %udicial re$iew
of an administrati$e action0
5& The administrati$e action has already been fully completed
and, therefore, is a final agency actionG and
8& .ll administrati$e remedies ha$e been e'hausted&
L,on#ales, .dministrati$e Daw, Re' @ookstore0 !anila, p& 53: (5676M&
A4!% L$2> +,!.!$0 R#5!#2 /7 A4!%!6"&$"!5# D#.!6!/%6
1988 N/& 570
.pe' Dogging 1o& and @atibot Dogging 1o& are ad%acent timber
concession holders in Isabela& @ecause of boundary conflicts, and mutual
charges of incursions into their respecti$e concession areas, the @ureau
of >orestry ordered a sur$ey to establish on the ground their common
boundary& The @ureau of >orestryBs decision in effect fa$ored @atibot&
.pe' appealed to the Department of /atural Resources and -n$ironment and
this department re$ersed the decision of the @ureau of >orestry and
sustained .pe'& It was the turn of @atibot to appeal to the 9ffice of
the President& The 9ffice of the President through an .sst& -'ecuti$e
(ecretary sustained the Department of /atural Resources arid
-n$ironment& 9n a motion for reconsideration by @atibot, howe$er, an
.sst& -'ecuti$e (ecretary other than the one who signed the decision
affirming the decision of the Department of /atural Resources and
-n$ironment decided for @atibot, Dissatisfied with the .dministrati$e
action on the contro$ersy& .pe' filed an action with the Regional Trial
1ourt against @atibot, the Director of >orestry, and the .sst& -'ecuti$e
(ecretaries insisting that a %udicial re$iew of such di$ergent
administrati$e decisions is necessary to determine the correct boundary
line of the licensed areas in Auestion&
@atibot mo$ed to dismiss the action, but the Regional Trial 1ourt
denied the same and e$en en%oined enforcement of the decision of the
9ffice of the President& @atibotBs motion for reconsideration was
likewise denied&
@atibot then filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition to
re$iew and annul the orders of the Regional Trial 1ourt& Do you belie$e
the petition for certiorari and prohibition is meritorious; Why or why
not;
.nswer0
The petition for certiorari and prohibition is meritorious, The
order of the trial court must accordingly be set aside& .s held in a
similar case, Dianga @ay Dogging 1o& $& -nage, 5)8 (1R. ?4 (56?7,
decisions of administrati$e officers should not be disturbed by the
courts e'cept when the former ha$e acted without or in e'cess of their
%urisdiction or with gra$e abuse of discretion& The mere suspicion of
.pe' that there were anomalies in the nonrelease of the first HdecisionH
and its substitution of a new one by another .ssistant -'ecuti$e
(ecretary does not %ustify %udicial re$iew& !ere beliefs, suspicions and
con%ectures cannot o$ercome the presumption of regularity of official
action&
A4!% L$2> M#$%!%' /7 IG/5#&%4#%" /7 "9# P9!0!==!%#6J
1997 N/& 30
.re go$ernmentEowned or controlled corporations within the scope
and meaning of the H,o$ernment of the PhilippinesH;
.nswer0
(ection 8 of the Introductory Pro$ision of the .dministrati$e
1ode of 56?7 defines the go$ernment of the Philippines as the corporate
go$ernmental entity through which the functions of go$ernment are
e'ercised throughout the Philippines, including, same as the contrary
appears from the conte't, the $arious arms through which political
authority is made effecti$e in the Philippines, whether pertaining to
the autonomous regions, the pro$incial, city, municipal or barangay
subdi$isions or other forms of local go$ernment&
,o$ernment owned or controlled corporation are within the scope
and meaning of the ,o$ernment of the Philippines if they are performing
go$ernmental or political functions&
A4!% L$2> P/2#& /7 "9# P&#6!#%" "/ R#/&'$%!F# A4!%!6"&$"!5# S"&,.",&#
200? N/ FI
The President abolished the 9ffice of the Presidential (pokesman
in !alacanang Palace and a longEstanding @ureau under the Department of
Interior and Docal ,o$ernments& The employees of both offices assailed
the action of the President for being an encroachment of legislati$e
powers and thereby $oid& Was the contention of the employees correct;
-'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The contention of the employees is not correct& .s held in @uklod
ng Oawaning -H@ $& =amora& 3:4 (1R. 75? L8445M, (ection 35, @ook III of
the .dministrati$e 1ode of 56?7 has delegated to the President
continuing authority to reorgani#e the administrati$e structure of the
9ffice of the President to achie$e simplicity, economy and efficiency&
(ince this includes the power to abolish offices, the President can
abolish the 9ffice of the Presidential (pokesman, pro$ided it is done in
good faith& The President can also abolish the @ureau in the Department
of Interior and Docal ,o$ernments, pro$ided it is done in good faith
because the President has been granted continuing authority to
reorgani#e the administrati$e structure of the /ational ,o$ernment to
effect economy and promote efficiency, and the powers include the
abolition of go$ernment offices& (Presidential Decree /o& 525:, as
amended by Presidential Decree /o& 5778G Darin $& The -'ecuti$e
(ecretary& 8?4 (1R. 753 L5667M&
A4!% L$2> R,0#6 $% R#',0$"!/%6> D,# P&/.#66
2000 N/ III&
The !aritime Industry .uthority (!.RI/. issued new rules and
regulations go$erning pilotage ser$ices and fees, and the conduct of
pilots in Philippine ports& This it did without notice, hearing nor
consultation with harbor pilots or their associations whose rights and
acti$ities are to be substantially affected& The harbor pilots then
filed suit to ha$e the new !.RI/. rules and regulations declared
unconstitutional for ha$ing been issued without due process& Decide the
case& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The issuance of the new rules and regulations $iolated due
process& +nder (ection 6, 1hapter II, @ook FII of the .dministrati$e
1ode of 56?7, as far as practicable, before adopting proposed rules, an
administrati$e agency should publish or circulate notices of the
proposed rules and afford interested parties the opportunity to submit
their $iewsG and in the fi'ing of rates, no rule shall be $alid unless
the proposed rates shall ha$e been published in a newspaper of general
circulation at least two weeks before the first hearing on them& In
accordance with this pro$ision, in 1ommissioner of Internal Re$enue $
1., 8:5 (1R. 83: (566:, it was held that when an administrati$e rule
substantially increases the burden of those directly affected, they
should be accorded the chance to be heard before its issuance&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
(ubmission of the rule to the +ni$ersity of the Philippines Daw
1enter for publication is mandatory& +nless this reAuirement is complied
with, the rule cannot be enforced&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> A($%/%4#%" /7 O77!.#
2000 N/ FII&
.lcantara was elected barangay chairman and later president of the
.ssociation of @arangay 1ouncils in his municipality& In that capacity,
he was appointed by the President as member of the (angguniang @ayan of
his municipality& Dater, the (ecretary of Interior and Docal ,o$ernments
appointed .lcantara as member of the (anggunlang Panlalawigan of their
pro$ince to meet a reorgani#ational contingency, and !endo#a took his
place in the (angguniang @ayan& .lcantara then wrote a letter of
resignation from the (angguniang @ayan addressed to the !ayor of the
municipality, ceased functioning as member thereof and assumed office
and performed his functions as member of the (anggunlang Panlalawigan&
Dater, the reorgani#ation of the (angguniang Panlalawigan and the
appointment of !endo#a were $oided& 1an .lcantara reassume office as
member of the (anggunlang @ayan or has he lost it because of
resignation; abandonment; -'plain& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.lcantara cannot reassume office as member of the (angguniang
@ayan& .s held in (angguniang @ayan of (an .ndres $& 1ourt of .ppeals,
8?2 (1R. 87: (566?, .lcantara should be deemed to ha$e abandoned his
position as member of the (angguniang @ayan& His intention to abandon
his position is shown by his failure to perform his function as member
of the (angguniang @ayan, his failure to collect the salary for the
position, his failure to ob%ect to the appointment of his replacement,
and his failure to initiate any act to reassume his post after the
reorgani#ation of the (angguniang @ayan was $oided&
.lcantara effected his intention by his letter of resignation, his
assumption of office as member of the (angguniang Panlalawigan, his
discharge of his duties as its member, and his receipt of the salary for
such post&
.lcantara cannot be deemed to ha$e lost his office as member of
the (angguniang @ayan by resignation& +nder (ection ?8 of the Docal
,o$ernment 1ode, the resignation should be submitted to the (angguniang
@ayan& He submitted it to the !ayor instead, and the resignation was not
accepted&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D# 8$."/ O77!.#&
2000 N/ IFI&
In the elections of !ay 5668, 1ru# and (antos were the candidates
for the office of !unicipal !ayor, the term of which was to e'pire on
Cune 34, 566)& >inding that he won by a margin of 84 $otes, the
!unicipal @oard of 1an$assers proclaimed 1ru# as the duly elected !ayor&
(antos filed an election protest before the Regional Trial 1ourt (RT1
which decided that it was (antos who had the plurality of 34 $otes and
proclaimed him the winner& 9n motion made, the RT1 granted e'ecution
pending the appeal of 1ru# to the 1ommission on -lections (1omelec and
on this basis& (antos assumed office and ser$ed as !unicipal !ayor& In
time, the 1omelec re$ersed the ruling of the RT1 and instead ruled that
1ru# won by a margin of 24 $otes and proclaimed him the duly elected
!unicipal !ayor&
a It is now beyond Cune 34, 566)& 1an 1ru# still hold
office for the portion of the term he has failed to ser$e; Why; (3*
b Was (antos a usurper and should he pay back what he has
recei$ed while holding the office as !unicipal !ayor; Why; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
a 1ru# can no longer hold office for the portion of the term he
failed to ser$e since his term has e'pired&
b (antos was not a usurper& He was a de facto officer, since he
had a color of election to the office of !unicipal !ayor by $irtue of
the decision in the election protest& Hence, he is entitled to the
emoluments of the office&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D# 8$."/ O77!.#&> #77#."6
2004 X-@& .F- ran for 1ongressman of "+ pro$ince& Howe$er, his
opponent, @.RT, was the one proclaimed and seated as the winner of the
election by the 19!-D-1& .F- filed seasonably a protest before HR-T
(House of Representati$es -lectoral Tribunal& .fter two years, HR-T
re$ersed the 19!-D-1Ks decision and .F- was proclaimed finally as the
duly elected 1ongressman& Thus, he had only one year to ser$e in
1ongress&
1an .F- collect salaries and allowances from the go$ernment for
the first two years of his term as 1ongressman;
(hould @.RT refund to the go$ernment the salaries and allowances
he had recei$ed as 1ongressman;
What will happen to the bills that @.RT alone authored and were
appro$ed by the House of Representati$es while he was seated as
1ongressman; Reason and e'plain briefly& ()*
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D!6.!=0!%#> C0#4#%.)> D/."&!%# /7 C/%/%$"!/%
2000 N/ FI&
. pro$incial go$ernor duly elected to office was charged with
disloyalty and suspended from office pending the outcome of the formal
in$estigation of the charges against him& The (ecretary of Interior and
Docal ,o$ernments found him guilty as charged and remo$ed him from
office& He filed a petition before the (upreme 1ourt Auestioning his
remo$al& While the case was pending before the (upreme 1ourt, he filed
his certificate of candidacy for the position of ,o$ernor and won, and
was proclaimed ,o$ernor& He claims his reelection to the position of
,o$ernor has rendered the pending administrati$e case against him moot
and academic& Is he correct; -'plain& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
<es, the reEelection of the go$ernor has rendered the pending
administrati$e case against him moot& .s e'plained in .guinaldo $&
(antos, 858 (1R. 7:? (5668, a local electi$e official cannot be remo$ed
from office for misconduct committed during his pre$ious term, because
each term is separate and the people by reEelecting him are deemed to
ha$e forgi$en his misconduct&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D!6.!=0!%#> C0#4#%.)> E77#." /7 P$&/% G&$%"#
!% 8$5/& /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6
1999 N/ IF
1& . 1ity .ssistant Treasurer was con$icted of -stafa through
falsification of public document& While ser$ing sentence, he was granted
absolute pardon by the President&
5& .ssuming that the position of .ssistant 1ity Treasurer has
remained $acant, would he be entitled to a reinstatement without the
need of a new appointment; -'plain& (8*
8 If later the same position becomes $acant, could he
reapply and be reappointed; -'plain& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& 5& .s held in !onsanto $& >actoran, 574 (1R. 564, pardon
merely frees the indi$idual from all the penalties and legal
disabilities imposed upon him because of his con$iction& It does not
restore him to the public office relinAuished by reason of the
con$iction&
8& The .ssistant 1ity Treasurer can reapply and be appointed to
the position, since the pardon remo$ed the disAualification to hold
public office&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
8& The .ssistant 1ity Treasurer cannot reapply and be appointed
to the position, +nder .rticle 3: of the Re$ised Penal 1ode, a pardon
does not restore the right to hold public office unless such right be
e'pressly restored by the pardonG
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D!6.!=0!%#> D!64!66$0 /7 E4=0/)##6 !% B$ 8$!"9>
P$)4#%" /7 B$.G2$'#6
2004 IX-.& >ormer ,o$ernor PP of .D( Pro$ince had dismissed
se$eral employees to scale down the operations of his 9ffice& The
employees complained to the !erit (ystems Protection @oard, which ruled
that the 1i$il (er$ice rules were $iolated when the employees were
dismissed& The 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission (1(1 affirmed the !(P@
decision, and ordered .D( to reinstate the employees with full
backwages& .D( did not appeal and the order became final&
Instead of complying immediately, @9P, the incumbent ,o$ernor of
.D(, referred the matter to the 1ommission on .udit (19., which ruled
that the amounts due are the personal liabilities of the former ,o$ernor
who dismissed the employees in bad faith& Thus, .D( refused to pay&
The final 1(1 decision, howe$er, did not find the former ,o$ernor in bad
faith& The former ,o$ernor was likewise not heard on the Auestion of
his liability&
Is .D(K refusal %ustified; 1an 19. disallow the payment of
backwages by .D( to the dismissed employees due under a final 1(1
decision; Decide and reason briefly& ()*
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D!6.!=0!%#> P&#5#%"!5# S,6=#%6!/%
1990 N/& :0
In 56?:, >, then the officerEinEcharge of @otolan, =ambales, was
accused of ha$ing $iolated the .ntiE,raft and 1orrupt Practices .ct
before the (andiganbayan& @efore he could be arrainged, he was elected
,o$ernor of =ambales, .fter his arraignment, he was put under pre$enti$e
suspension by the (andiganbayan Hfor the duration of the trialH&
(5 1an > successfully challenge the legality of his pre$enti$e
suspension on the ground that the criminal case against him in$ol$ed
acts committed during his term as officerEinEcharge and not during his
term as ,o$ernor;
(8 1an > $alidly ob%ect to the aforestated duration of his
suspension;
.nswer0
(5 /o, > cannot successfully challenge the legality of his
pre$enti$e suspension on the ground that the criminal case against him
in$ol$e acts committed during his term as 9I1 and not during his term as
go$ernor because suspension from office under Republic .ct 3456 refers
to any office that the respondent is presently holding and not
necessarily to the one which he hold when he committed the crime with
which he is charged& This was the ruling in Deloso $& (andiganbayan 573
(1R. 246&
(8 <es, > can $alidly ob%ect to the duration of the suspension&
In Deloso u& (andiganbayan, 573 (1R. 246, it was held that the
imposition of pre$enti$e suspension for an indefinite period of time is
unreasonable and $iolates the right of the accused to due process& The
people who elected the go$ernor to office would be depri$ed of his
ser$ices for an indefinite period, and his right to hold office would be
nullified& !oreo$er, since under (ection 28 of the 1i$il (er$ice
Decree the duration of pre$enti$e suspension should be limited to
ninety (64 days, eAual protection demands that the duration of
pre$enti$e suspension under the .ntiE,raft and 1orrupt Practices .ct he
also limited to ninety (64 days&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D!6.!=0!%#> P&#5#%"!5# S,6=#%6!/%
2002 N/ II&
(imeon Falera was formerly a Pro$incial ,o$ernor who ran and won
as a !ember of the House of Representati$es for the (econd 1ongressional
District of lloilo& >or $iolation of (ection 3 of the .ntiE,raft and
1orrupt Practices .ct (R&.& /o&3456, as amended, allegedly committed
when he was still a Pro$incial ,o$ernor, a criminal complaint was filed
against him before the 9ffice of the 9mbudsman for which, upon a finding
of probable cause, a criminal case was filed with the (andiganbayan&
During the course of trial, the (andiganbayan issued an order of
pre$enti$e suspension for 64 days against him&
Representati$e Falera Auestioned the $alidity of the (andiganbayan
order on the ground that, under .rticle FI , (ection 5:(3 of the
1onstitution, he can be suspended only by the House of Representati$es
and that the criminal case against him did not arise from his actuations
as a member of the House of Representati$es&
Is Representati$e FaleraBs contention correct; Why; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The contention of Representati$e Falera is not correct .s held in
(antiago $& (andiganbayan, 3): (1R. :3:, the suspension contemplated in
.rticle FI, (ection 5:(3 of the 1onstitution is a punishment that is
imposed by the (enate or House of Representati$es upon an erring member,
it is distinct from the suspension under (ection 53 of the .ntiE,raft
and 1orrupt Practices .ct, which is not a penalty but a pre$enti$e
measure& (ince (ection 53 of the .ntiE,raft and 1orruption Practices .ct
does not state that the public officer must be suspended only in the
office where he is alleged to ha$e committed the acts which he has been
charged, it applies to any office which he may be holding&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> D!6.!=0!%#> P&#5#%"!5# S,6=#%6!/% A A==#$0>
#%"!"0#4#%" "/ 6$0$&) =#%#%"#
2001 N/ IF
.lfonso @eit, a supply officer in the Department of (cience and
Technology (D9(T, was charged administrati$ely& Pending in$estigation,
he was pre$enti$ely suspended for 64 days& The D9(T (ecretary found him
guilty and meted him the penalty of remo$al from office& He appealed to
the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission (1(1& In the meantime, the decision was
e'ecuted pending appeal& The 1(1 rendered a decision which modified the
appealed decision by imposing only a penalty of reprimand, and which
decision became final&
a 1an .lfonso @elt claim salary for the period that his case
was pending in$estigation; Why; (3*
b 1an he claim salary for the period that his case was
pending appeal; Why; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
a .lfonso @eit cannot claim any salary for the period of his
pre$enti$e suspension during the pendency of the in$estigation& .s held
in ,loria $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 34: (1R. 8?7 (5667, under (ection )8 of
the 1i$il (er$ice Daw, the pro$ision for payment of salaries during the
period of pre$enti$e suspension during the pendency of the in$estigation
has been deleted& The pre$enti$e suspension was not a penalty& Its
imposition was lawful, since it was authori#ed by law,
b If the penalty was modified because .lfonso @eit was
e'onerated of the charge that was the basis for the decision ordering
his dismissal, he is entitled to back wages, otherwise, this would be
tantamount to punishing him after e'oneration from the charge which
caused his dismissal& L,loria $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 39: (1R. 8?7
(5667M& If he was reprimanded for the same charge which was the basis
of the decision ordering his dismissal, .lfonso @elt is not entitled to
back wages, because he was found guilty, and the penalty was merely
commuted& (Dela 1ru# $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 34) (1R. 343 (566?M&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> G&$7" $% C/&&,="!/%> P&#6.&!="!/% /7 C&!4# A
R!'9" "/ R#./5#& I00#'$00) A.C,!&# W#$0"9
2002 N/ III&
(uppose a public officer has committed a $iolation of (ection 3
(b and (c of the .ntiE,raft and 1orrupt Practices .ct TR. /o, 3456,
as amended, by recei$ing monetary and other material considerations for
contracts entered into by him in behalf of the go$ernment and in
connection with other transactions, as a result of which he has amassed
illegally acAuired wealth&
(a Does the criminal offense committed prescribe; (8*
(b Does the right of the go$ernment to reco$er the illegally
acAuired wealth prescribe; (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a . $iolation of (ection 3(b and (c of the .ntiE,raft and
1orrupt Practices .ct prescribes& .s held in Presidential .dEHoc >actE
>inding 1ommittee on @ehest Doans $& Desierto, 357 (1R. 878 (5666,
.rticle II, (ection 5) of the 1onstitution does not apply to criminal
cases for $iolation of the .ntiE,raft and 1orrupt Practices .ct
(b .rticle II, (ection 5) of the 1onstitution pro$ides that
the right of the (tate to reco$er properties unlawfully acAuired by
public officials or employees, or from them or from thefr nominees or
transferees, shall not be barred by prescription&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> L!$(!0!") 8/& D$4$'#6 !% P#&7/&4$%.# /7 O77!.!$0
8,%."!/%6
1990 N/& 540
The (ecretary of Public Works, after an in$estigation, ordered the
demolition of the fishpond of I as a nuisance per se on the ground that
it encroached on na$igable ri$ers and impeded the use of the ri$ers& The
(ecretary submitted to the President of the Philippines a report of said
in$estigation, which report contained clearly libelous matters ad$ersely
affecting the reputation of I, a wellEknown ci$ic and religious leader
in the community&
The (upreme 1ourt later found that the ri$ers were manEmade and
were constructed on pri$ate property owned by I&
(5 !ay I reco$er damages from the (ecretary of Public Works for
the cost in$ol$ed in rebuilding the fishponds and for lost profits;
(tate your reason&
(8 (uppose I files a libel suit against the (ecretary of
Public Works& Will the said libel suit prosper; -'plain your
answer&
.nswer0
(5 /o, I cannot reco$er damages from the (ecretary of Public
Works& The (ecretary of Public Works ordered the demolition of the
fishpond in the performance of his official duties& He did not act in
bad faith or with gross negligence& He issued the order only after due
in$estigation& In !abutol $& Pascual, 582 (1R. ?7:, it was held that the
members of the .d Hoc 1ommittee created to implement Presidential Decree
/o& 86: and Detter of Instruction /o, 56, which ordered the demolition
of structures obstructing public waterways, couldB not be sued for
damages although they ordered the demolition of a building that
encroached upon a creek, because the public officers concerned did not
act in bad faith&
(8 /o, the libel suit will not prosper& The report submitted
by the (ecretary of Public Works to the President constitutes pri$ileged
communication, as it was sent in the performance of official duty&
.rticle 3)2 of the Re$ised Penal 1ode pro$idesG
H-$ery defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, e$en if
it be true, if no good intention and %ustifiable moti$e for making it is
shown, e'cept in the following cases0
5& . pri$ate communication made by any person to another in the
performance of any legal, moral or social dutyGH
In Deano $& ,odine#, 58 (1R. 2?3, it was held that a report sent
by a public official to his superior is pri$ileged communication,
because its submission is pursuant to the performance of a legal duty&
@esides, in sending his report, the (ecretary of Public Works
acted in the discharge of his official duties& Hence, he was acting in
behalf of the Republic of the Philippines and within the scope of his
authority .ccording to the ruling in (anders $& Feridiano, 5:8 (1R. ??,
a suit brought against a public official for writing a letter which is
alleged to be libelous but which was written while he was acting as
agent of the go$ernment and within the scope of his authority is
actually a suit against the (tate without its consent&
.lternati$e .nswer0
The Auestion does not specify how the libel was committed& If the
libelous statement was not rele$ant to the report on the alleged illegal
encroachment of the ri$er, the fact that it was made in the course of an
official report does not immuni#e the (ecretary of Public Works from
liability for libel&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> L!4!"$"!/%6 O%
A!"!/%$0 D,"!#6
199< N/& 540
. 1ity !ayor in !etro !anila was designated as !ember of the
Docal .mnesty @oard (D.@ as allowed under the Rules and Regulations
Implementing .mnesty Proclamation /os& 327 and 32?& as amended by
Proclamation /o& 377& The D.@ is entrusted with the functions of
recei$ing and processing applications for amnesty and recommending to
the /ational .mnesty 1ommission appro$al or denial of the applications&
The term of the 1ommission and, necessarily, the Docal .mnesty @oards
under it e'pires upon the completion of its assigned tasks as may be
determined by the President&
!ay the 1ity !ayor accept his designation without forfeiting his
electi$e position in the light of the pro$ision of (ec& 7, 5st par& .rt&
IIE@ of the 56?7 1onstitution which pertinently states that HL/Mo
electi$e official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in
any capacity to any public office or position during his tenure;H
Discuss fully, .nswer0
/o, the 1ity !ayor may not accept his designation without
forfeiting his electi$e positions& .s stated in >lores $s& Drilon 883
(1R. ):?, it is the intention of (ection 7, .rticle IE@ of the 56?7
1onstitution that local electi$e officials should de$ote their full time
to their constituents& While second paragraph of (ection 7, .rticle IIE@
of the 56?7 1onstitution allows appointi$e officials to hold other
offices when allowed by law or by the primary functions of their
positions, no such e'ception is made in the first paragraph, which deals
with electi$e officials& It is the Intention of the 56?7 1onstitution to
be more stringent with electi$e local officials&
.lternati$e .nswer0
<es, he may accept such designation without forfeiting his
mayorship& The 1onstitutional pro$ision being cited contemplates a
Hpublic office or positionH& It is belie$ed that the Docal .mnesty @oard
is not such an office since it is merely an ad hoc body& @esides, it is
belie$ed that its functions are not Hso$ereignH in character which is
one of the elements of a public office&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> N#1"-!%-R$%G R,0#
1994 N/& 5)
Pedro 1ru#, the 1ity -ngineer of @aguio, retired& To fill the
$acant position, the 1ity !ayor appointed Cose Reyes, a ci$il engineer
who formerly worked under 1ru# but had been assigned to the 9ffice of
the !ayor for the past fi$e years&
Ficente -strada, the .ssistant 1ity -ngineer filed a protest with
the 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission claiming that being the officer ne't in
rank he should ha$e been appointed as 1ity -ngineer&
5 Who has a better right to be appointed to the contested
position;
.nswer0
5 9n the assumption that Cose Reyes possesses the minimum
Aualification reAuirements prescribed by law for the position, the
appointment e'tended to him is $alid& 1onseAuently, he has a better
right than Ficente -strada&
The claim of -strada that being the officer ne't in rank he should
ha$e been appointed as 1ity -ngineer is not meritorious& It is a settled
rule that the appointing authority is not limited to promotion in
filling up $acancies but may choose to fill them by the appointment of
persons with ci$il ser$ice eligibility appropriate to the position& -$en
if a $acancy were to be filled by promotion, the concept of Hne't in
rankH does not import any mandatory reAuirement that the person ne't in
rank must be appointed to the $acancy& What the ci$il ser$ice law
pro$ides is that if a $acancy is filled by promotion, the person holding
the position ne't in rank thereto Hshall be considered for promotion&H
-spanol $& 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission 84: (1R. 75),
.lternati$e .nswerG
/either Cose Reyes nor Ficente -strada has a better right to be
appointed 1ity -ngineer& .s held in @arro#o $s& 1i$il (er$ice
1ommission, 56? (1R. 2?7, the appointing authority is not reAuired to
appoint the one ne'tEinErank to fill a $acancy& He is allowed to fill it
also by the transfer of an employee who possesses ci$il ser$ice
eligibility&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> P/2#& "/ I66,# S,(=/#%$> 5$0!!") /7 #0#'$"!/%
1989 N/& 570
.ssume that under the charter of the 1ity of !anila, the 1ity
!ayor has the power to in$estigate city officials and employees
appointed by him and in connection therewith, administer oath, take
testimony and issue subpoenas& The mayor issued an e'ecuti$e order
creating a committee, chaired by HIH, to in$estigate anomalies in$ol$ing
licensed inspectors of the Dicense Inspection Di$ision of the 9ffice of
the 1ity Treasurer, In the course of its in$estigation, HIH subpoenaed
H<H, a pri$ate citi#en working as bookkeeper of .sia Hardware& H<H
refused to appear contending that the 1ommittee of HIH has no power to
issue subpoenas& Decide&
.nswer0
<es, the committee has no power to issue subpoenas according to
1armelo $s, Ramos, : (1R. ?3:& In creating the committee, the mayor did
not grant it the power to issue subpoenas& @esides, the mayor cannot
delegate his power to issue subpoenas&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> P&/9!(!"!/% O% E0#."!5# O77!.#& "/ E/0 P,(0!.
O77!.#
2002 N/ FII&
I was e%ected pro$incial go$ernor for a term of three years& He
was subseAuently appointed by the President of the Philippines ser$ing
at her pleasure, as concurrent Presidential .ssistant for Political
.ffairs in the 9ffice of the President, without additional compensation&
Is IBs appointment $alid; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The appointment of I is not $alid, because the position of
Presidential .ssistant for Political .ffairs is a public office& .rticle
IIE@ (ection 7 of the 1onstitution pro$ides that no electi$e official
shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any
public office or position during his tenure& .s held in >lores $&
Drilon, 883 (1R. ):? (5663, since an electi$e official is ineligible
for an appointi$e position, his appointment is not $alid&
L$2 /7 P,(0!. O77!.#&6> R#"!&#4#%" B#%#7!"6
199: N/& 60
8 ., an employee of the /ational Treasurer, retired on Canuary
54, 566:& @efore she could collect her retirement benefits, the /ational
Treasurer disco$ered that . had been negligent in the encashment of
falsified treasury warrants& It appears, howe$er, that . had recei$ed
all money and property clearances from the /ational Treasurer before her
retirement&
1an the /ational Treasurer withhold the retirement of . pending
determination of her negligence in the encashment of the falsified
treasury warrants; -'plain&
.nswerG
8 In accordance with Tantuico $s& Domingo, 834 (1R. 365 and
1ru# us& Tantuico, 5:: (1R. :74, the /ational Treasurer cannot withhold
the payment of the retirement benefits of . pending determination of her
liability for negligence in the encashment of the falsified treasury
warrants, because her retirement benefits are e'empt from e'ecution&
E0#."!/% L$26
E0#."!/% L$26> 2
%
P0$.#& R,0#
1990 N/& 70
. filed a protest with the House -lectoral Tribunal Auestioning
the election of @ as !ember of the House of Representati$es in the 56?7
national elections on the ground that @ is not a resident of the
district the latter is representing& While the case was pending& @
accepted an adEinterim appointment as (ecretary of the Department of
Custice&
(5 !ay . continue with his election protest in order to
determine the real winner in the said elections; (tate your reason&
(8 1an ., who got the second highest number of $otes in the
elections, ask that he be proclaimed elected in place of @; -'plain your
answer&
.nswer0
(5 /o, . may not continue with his protest& &&&&
(8 /o, . cannot ask that he be proclaimed elected in place of @&
The $otes cast for @ were not in$alid $otes& Hence, . garnered only the
second highest number of $otes& 9nly the candidate who obtained the
ma%ority or plurality of the $otes is entitled to be proclaimed elected&
9n Dhis ground, it was held in Dabo $& 1ommission on -lections, 57: (1R.
5, that the fact that the candidate who obtained the highest number of
$otes is not eligible does not entitle the candidate who obtained the
second highest number of $otes to be proclaimed the winner&
E0#."!/% L$26> 2
%
P0$.#& R,0#
200? N/ FIII
In the municipal mayoralty elections in 56?4, the candidate who
obtained the highest number of $otes was subseAuently declared to be
disAualified as a candidate and so ineligible for the office to which he
was elected& Would this fact entitle a competing candidate who obtained
the second highest number of $otes to ask and to be proclaimed the
winner of the electi$e office; Reasons&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.ccording to Trinidad $& 1ommission on -lections& 35) (1R. 57)
L5666M, if the candidate who obtained the highest number of $otes is
disAualified, the candidate who obtained the second highest number of
$otes cannot be proclaimed the winner& (ince he was not the choice of
the people, he cannot claim any right to the office&
E0#."!/% L$26> 2
%
P0$.#& R,0#> !% Q,/ W$&&$%"/ C$6#6
1992 N/& 5:0
-dwin /icasio, born in the Philippines of >ilipino parents and
raised in the pro$ince of /ue$a -ci%a, ran for ,o$ernor of his home
pro$ince& He won and he was sworn into office& It was recently re$ealed,
howe$er, that /icasio is a naturali#ed .merican citi#en&
a Does he still possess Philippine citi#enship;
b If the secondEplacer in the gubematorial elections files a Auo
warranto suit against /icasio and he is found to be disAualified from
office, can the secondEplacer be sworn into office as go$ernor;
c If, instead, /icasio had been born (of the same set of parents
in the +nited (tates and he thereby acAuired .merican citi#enship by
birth, would your answer be different;
.nswer0
a /o, /icasio no longer possesses Philippine citi#enship& &&&
b In accordance with the ruling in .bella us& 1ommission on
-lections, 845 (1R. 8)3, the second placer cannot be sworn to office,
because he lost the election& To be entitled to the office, he must
ha$e garnered the ma%ority or plurality of the $otes&
c <es because he will be a dual citi#en &&&
E0#."!/% L$26> A==&#.!$"!/% /7 B$00/"6
1994 N/& 3G
3 If a candidate for town mayor is an engineer by profession,
should $otes for him with the prefi' H-ngineerH be in$alidated as
Hmarked ballotsH;
.nswerG
3 /o, a ballot In which the name of a candidate for town mayor
who is an engineer which is prefi'ed with HengineerH should not be
in$alidated as a marked ballot& +nder Rule /o& 58 of the rules for the
appreciation of ballots, ballots which contain such prefi'es are $alid&
E0#."!/% L$26> C/4#0#.> +,!.!$0 R#5!#2 /7 D#.!6!/%6
2001 N/ IFI
In an election protest In$ol$ing the position of ,o$ernor of the
Pro$ince of Daguna between H.H, the protestee, and H@H, the protestant,
the >irst Di$ision of the 1ommission on -lections rendered a decision
upholding @Bs protest
1an H.H file a petition for certtorari with the (upreme 1ourt
under Rule :) of the Rules of 1ourt, from the decision of the 19!-D-1
>irst Di$ision; If yes& Why; If not what procedural step must he
undertake first; ( )*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
H.H cannot file a petition for certiorari with the (upreme 1ourt&
.s held in !astura $s& 1ommission on -lections, 8?) (1R. 263 (566?, the
(upreme 1ourt cannot re$iew the decisions or resolutions of a di$ision
of the 1ommission on -lections& H.H should first file a motion for
reconsideration with the 1ommission on -lections en banc&
E0#."!/% L$26> C/4#0#.> +,&!6!."!/%
2001 N/ II
3et us suppose that 2ongress enacted a law which amended the 1mnibus Election 2ode
:particularly !ections 158 159 16* 165; by vesting in the 2ommission on Elections the
%urisdiction over inclusion and exclusion cases filed by voters instead of in the courts :<T2
then &T2;.
Is the law valid or not and why= ()* (+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The law granting the 1ommission on -lections %urisdiction o$er
inclusion and e'clusion cases is unconstitutional& +nder (ection 8(3,
.rticle IIE1 of the 1onstitution, the 1ommission on -lections cannot
decide the right to $ote, which refers to the inclusion and e'clusion of
$oters& +nder (ection 8(:, .rticle IIE1 of the 1onstitution, it can
only file petitions in court for inclusion or e'clusion of $oters&
E0#."!/% L$26> D!6C,$0!7!.$"!/%> G&/,%6
1991 N/& 55
In connection with the !ay 56?7 1ongressional elections, Duis
!illanes was prosecuted for and con$icted of an election offense and was
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for si' years& The court did not impose
the additional penalty of disAualification to hold public office and of
depri$ation of the right of suffrage as pro$ided for in (ection 5:2 of
the 9mnibus -lection 1ode of the Philippines (@&P& @lg& ??5&
In .pril 5665, the President granted him absolute pardon on the
basis of a strong recommendation of the @oard of Pardons and Parole&
Then for the election in !ay 5668, Duis !illanes files his
certificate of candidacy for the office of !ayor in his municipality&
(c Is a petition to disAualify !illanes $iable;
(d What are the effects of a petition to disAualify;
.nswer0
(c In accordance with (ec& :? of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode,
Duis !illanes may be disAualified from running for mayor as he was
con$icted of an election offense&
(d +nder (ec& : of the -lectoral Reforms Daw, any candidate who
has been declared by final %udgment to be disAualified shall not be
$oted for, and $otes cast for him shall not be counted& If before the
election he is not declared by final %udgment to be disAualified and he
is $oted for and he recei$es the winning number of $otes, the hearing on
the Auestion of disAualification should continue& +pon motion of the
complainant or any inter$enor, the court or the 1ommission on -lections
may order the suspension of the proclamation of the winning candidate if
the e$idence of his guilt is strong,
E0#."!/% L$26> E77#." /7 8!0!%' /7 C#&"!7!.$"# /7 C$%!$.)> A==/!%"!5#
O77!.#& @6 E0#."!5# O77!.#&
2002 N/ IIII&
., a 1ity Degal 9fficer, and @, a 1ity FiceE!ayor, filed
certificates of candidacy for the position of 1ity !ayor in the !ay 52,
8445 elections&
.& Was . ipso facto considered resigned and, if so, effecti$e
on what date; (8*
@& Was @ ipso facto considered resigned and, if so, effecti$e
on what date; (3*
In both cases, state the reason or reasons for your answer&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
. . was considered ipso facto resigned upon the filing of his
certificate of candidacy, because being a 1ity Degal 9fficer, he is an
appointi$e official& (ection :: of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode pro$ides
that any person holding a public appointi$e office shall be considered
ipso facto resigned upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy&
@ @ is not considered ipso facto resigned& (ection :7 of the
9mnibus -lection 1ode considers any electi$e official ipso facto
resigned from office upon his filing of a certificate of candidacy for
any office other than the one he is holding e'cept for President and
FiceEPresident, was repealed by the >air -lection .ct
E0#."!/% L$26> E77#." /7 8!0!%' /7 C#&"!7!.$"# /7 C$%!$.)> 8$!&
E0#."!/% A."
200? N/ I
(a Pedro Reyes is an incumbent FiceE!ayor of "ue#on 1ity& He
intends to run in the regular elections for the position of 1ity !ayor
of "ue#on 1ity whose incumbent mayor would ha$e fully ser$ed three
consecuti$e terms by 8442& Would Pedro Reyes ha$e to gi$e up his
position as FiceE!ayorE
(i 9nce he files his certificate of candidacyG or
(ii When the campaign period startsG or
(iii 9nce and if he is proclaimed winner in the electionG
or
(i$ +pon his assumption to the electi$e officeG or
($ /one of the abo$e&
1hoose the correct answer
(b If Pedro Reyes were, instead, an incumbent 1ongressman of
"ue#on 1ity, who intends to seek the mayoralty post in "ue#on 1ity,
would your choice of answer in letter (a abo$e be the same; If not,
which would be your choice;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a The correct answer is ($& (ection 52 of the >air -lection .ct
repealed (ection :7 of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode, which pro$ided that
any elected official, whether national or local, who runs for any office
other than the one he is holding in a permanent capacity, e'cept for
President and Fice President, shall be considered ipso facto resigned
from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy& (ection
52 of the >air -lection .ct likewise rendered ineffecti$e the first
pro$iso in the third paragraph of (ection 55 of Republic .ct /o& ?23:&
1onseAuently, Pedro Reyes can run for !ayor without gi$ing up his
position as FiceE!ayor& He will ha$e to gi$e up his position as FiceE
!ayor upon e'piration of his term as FiceE!ayor on Cune 34, 8442&
(/ote0 The Auestion did not ask the e'aminee to e'plain the reason
for his choice and the general instructions reAuires such discussion
only to a HyesH or HnoH answer&
(b The answer is the same if Pedro Reyes is a 1ongressman of
"ue#on 1ity, because the repeal of (ection :7 of the 9mnibus -lection
1ode co$ers both electi$e national and local officials&
E0#."!/% L$26> E0#."!/% O77#%6#6> C/%6=!&$.) "/ B&!(# @/"#&6
1991 N/& 580
Discuss the disputable presumptions (a of conspiracy to bribe
$oters and (b of the in$ol$ement of a candidate and of his principal
campaign managers in such conspiracy&
.nswer0
(a +nder (ec, 8? of the -lectoral Reforms Daw proof that at
least one $oter in different precincts representing at least twenty per
cent of the total precincts in any municipality, city or pro$ince was
offered, promised or gi$en money, $aluable consideration or other
e'penditure by the relati$es, leader or sympathi#er of a candidate for
the purpose of promoting the candidacy of such candidate, gi$es rise to
a disputable presumption of conspiracy to bribe $oters&
(b +nder (ec& 8? if the proof affects at least twenty percent
of the precincts of the municipality, city or pro$ince to which the
public office aspired for by the fa$ored candidate relates, this shall
constitute a disputable presumption of the in$ol$ement of the candidate
and of his principal campaign managers in each of the municipalities
concerned, in the conspiracy&
E0#."!/% L$26> E0#."!/% P&/"#6"
1990 N/& 70
. filed a protest with the House -lectoral Tribunal Auestioning
the election of @ as !ember of the House of Representati$es in the 56?7
national elections on the ground that @ is not a resident of the
district the latter is representing& While the case was pending& @
accepted an adEinterim appointment as (ecretary of the Department of
Custice&
(5 !ay . continue with his election protest in order to
determine the real winner in the said elections; (tate your reason&
(8 1an ., who got the second highest number of $otes in the
elections, ask that he be proclaimed elected in place of @; -'plain your
answer&
.nswer0
(5 /o, . may not continue with his protest& There is no dispute
as to who was the winner in the election, as it is not disputed that it
was @ who obtained the ma%ority& The purpose of the protest is simply
to seek the remo$al of @ from office on the ground that he is
ineligible& Howe$er, @ forfeited his claim to the position of
congressman by accepting an ad interim appointment as (ecretary of
Custice, the protest against him has become moot& /othing will be
gained by resol$ing it& In the case of Purisima $& (olis, 23 (1R. 583,
it was held that where a protestant in an election case accepted his
appointment as %udge, he abandoned his claim to the public office
in$ol$ed in the protest& Hence, the protest must be dismissed for ha$ing
become moot& (imilarly, in Pere# $ Pro$incial @oard of /ue$a -ci%a, 553
(1R. 5?7, it was held that the claim of a petitioner to an appointi$e
office had become moot, because the petitioner had forfeited his claim
to the office by filing a certificate of candidacy for mayor&
(8 /o, . cannot ask that he be proclaimed elected in place of
@&&&&&
E0#."!/% L$26> E0#."!/% P&/"#6" @6 Q,/ W$&&$%"/
2001 N/ IFII
+nder the 9mnibus -lection 1ode (@&P& ??5, as amended, briefly
differentiate an election protest from a Auo warranto case, as to who
can file the case and the respecti$e grounds therefor& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
.n election protest maybe filed by a losing candidate for the same
office for which the winner filed his certificate of candidacy& . Auo
warranto case may be filed by any $oter who is a registered $oter in the
constituency where the winning candidate sought to be disAualified ran
for officeX In an election contest, the issues are0 (a who recei$ed the
ma%ority or plurality of the $otes which were legally cast and (b
whether there were irregularities in the conduct of the election which
affected its results& In a Auo warranto case, the issue is whether the
candidate who was proclaimed elected should be disAualified because of
ineligibllity or disloyalty to the Philippines&
E0#."!/% L$26> E0#."!/% P&/"#6"> +,&!6!."!/%
199: N/, 520
5 .s counsel for the protestant, where will you file an
election protest in$ol$ing a contested electi$e position in0
a the barangay;
b the municipality;
c the pro$ince;
d the city;
e the House of Representati$es;
.nswer0
5 In accordance with (ection 8(8, .rticle IIE1 of the
1onstitution an election protest in$ol$ing the electi$e position
enumerated below should be filed in the following courts or tribunals0
a @arangay E !etropolitan Trial 1ourt, !unicipal 1ircuit Trial
1ourt, or !unicipal Trial 1ourt
b !unicipality E Regional Trial 1ourt
c Pro$ince E 1ommission on -lections
d 1ity E 1ommission on -lections
e +nder (ection 57& .rticle FI of the 1onstitution, an
election protest in$ol$ing the position of !ember of the House of
Representati$es shall be filed in the House of Representati$es -lectoral
Tribunal&
E0#."!/% L$26> E1=!&$"!/% /7 "#&4 ($&6 6#&5!.# "9#&#/7
2000 N/ IFI&
In the elections of !ay 5668, 1ru# and (antos were the candidates
for the office of !unicipal !ayor, the term of which was to e'pire on
Cune 34, 566)& >inding that he won by a margin of 84 $otes, the
!unicipal @oard of 1an$assers proclaimed 1ru# as the duly elected !ayor&
(antos filed an election protest before the Regional Trial 1ourt (RT1
which decided that it was (antos who had the plurality of 34 $otes and
proclaimed him the winner& 9n motion made, the RT1 granted e'ecution
pending the appeal of 1ru# to the 1ommission on -lections (1omelec and
on this basis& (antos assumed office and ser$ed as !unicipal !ayor& In
time, the 1omelec re$ersed the ruling of the RT1 and instead ruled that
1ru# won by a margin of 24 $otes and proclaimed him the duly elected
!unicipal !ayor&
a It is now beyond Cune 34, 566)& 1an 1ru# still hold
office for the portion of the term he has failed to ser$e; Why; (3*
b Was (antos a usurper and should he pay back what he has
recei$ed while holding the office as !unicipal !ayor; Why; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-RG
a .s held in !alaluan $& 1ommission on -lections, 8)2 (1R. 367
(566:& 1ru# can no longer hold office for the portion of the term he
failed to ser$e since his term has e'pired&
b (antos was not a usurper& He was a de facto officer, &&&
E0#."!/% L$26> P#"!"!/% "/ D#.0$&# 8$!0,&# /7 E0#."!/%6> R#C,!6!"#6 A
E77#."6
199< N/& :0
Due to $iolence and terrorism attending the casting of $otes in a
municipality in Danao del (ur during the last ? !ay 566) elections, it
became impossible to hold therein free, orderly and honest elections&
(e$eral candidates for municipal positions withdrew from the race& 9ne
candidate for !ayor petitioned the 19!-D-1 for the postponement of the
elections and the holding of special elections after the causes of such
postponement or failure of elections shall ha$e ceased&
5& How many $otes of the 19!-D-1 1ommissioners may be cast to
grant the petition; -'plain&
8& . person who was not a candidate at the time of the
postponement of the elections decided to run for an electi$e position
and flled a certificate of candidacy prior to the special elections& !ay
his certificate of candidacy be accepted; -'plain&
3& (uppose he ran as a substitute for a candidate who pre$iously
withdrew his candidacy, will your answer be the same; -'plain&
.nswer0
5& .ccording to (ection 7, .rticle IIE. of the 56?7
1onstitution, the 1ommission on -lections shall decide by a ma%ority
$ote of all its members any case or matter brought before it In 1ua $s&
1ommission on -lections, 5): (1R.)?8, the (upreme 1ourt stated that a
twoEtoEone decision rendered by a Di$ision of the 1ommission on
-lections and a threeEtoEtwo decision rendered by the 1ommission on
-lections en banc was $alid where only fi$e members took part in
deciding the case&
8& /o, his certificate of candidacy cannot be accepted& +nder
(ection 7) of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode, as a rule in cases of
postponement or failure of election no additional certificate of
candidacy shall be accepted&
3& /o, the answer will be different& +nder (ection 7) of the
9mnibus -lection 1ode, an additional certificate of candidacy may be
accepted in cases of postponement or failure of election if there was a
substitution of candidatesG but the substitute must belong to and must
be endorsed by the same party&
E0#."!/% L$26> P&#-P&/.0$4$"!/% C/%"#6"
1987 N/& FII0
H.H and H@H were candidates for representati$es in the 56?7
/ational -lections, H@H filed a preEproclamation contest with the
19!-D-1 on the ground that rampant $ote buying and terrorism accompanied
the elections& Particulars were supplied of H@BsH followers boughtEoff
and other followers pre$ented from casting their $otes& The 19!-D-1
dismissed the preEproclamation contest on the ground that all the
returns appear complete and untampered&
Determine if the 19!-D-1 decided correctly and if H@H has any
recourse for contesting H.BsH election&
.nswer0
The 19!-D-1 correctly dismissed H@BsH preEproclamation contest&
(uch a contest is limited to claims that the election returns are
incomplete or that they contain material defects or that they ha$e been
tampered with, falsified or prepared under duress or that they contain
discrepancies in the $otes credited to the candidates, the difference of
which affects the result of the election& (9mnibus -lection 1ode, sees&
823, 832E83: 9n the other hand, the Auestion whether or not there was
terrorism, $ote buying and other irregularities in the elections cannot
be the sub%ect of a preEproclaEmation contest but must be raised in a
regular election protest& ((anche# $& 19!-D-1, ,R& /o& 7?2:5G Ponce
-nrile $& 19!-D-1, ,&R& /os& 7652: U 76858, .ug& 58, 56?7G .bes $&
19!-D-1, 85 (1R. 58)8 (56:7 (ince the basis of H@BsH petition is that
his followers had been bought while others had been pre$ented from
casting their ballots, his remedy is to file an election contest and
this should be brought in the House or (enate -lectoral Tribunal which,
under .rt& FI, (ec& 57, is the sole %udge of the election, returns and
Aualifications of members of each House of 1ongress&
E0#."!/% L$26> P&#-P&/.0$4$"!/% C/%"#6"
1988 N/& 5?0
In election law, what is a preEproclamation contro$ersy; Where may
it be litigated with finality; .fter the ultimate winner has been duly
proclaimed, does the loser still ha$e any remedy to the end than he may
finally obtain the position he aspired for in the election; -'plain&
.nswer0
. preEproclamation contro$ersy refers to any Auestion pertaining
to or affecting the proceedings of the board of can$assers which may be
raised by any candidate or by any registered political party or
coalition of political parties before the board or directly with the
19!-D-1, or any matter raised under secs& 833E83: of the 9mnibus
-lection 1ode in relation to the preparation, transmission, receipt,
custody or appreciation of the election returns& (9mnibus -lection 1ode,
sec, 825&
The 19!-D-1 has e'clusi$e %urisdiction of all preEproclamation
contro$ersies& (Id&, sec& 825 Its decisions become e'ecutory after the
lapse of ) days from receipt by the losing party of the decision, unless
restrained by the (upreme 1ourt& (Id&, sec& 82:
. loser may still bring an election contest concerning the
election, returns, and Aualifications of the candidate proclaimed& In
the case of electi$e barangay officials, the contest may be filed with
the municipal trial courtsG in the case of electi$e municipal officials,
in the Regional Trial 1ourtG in the case of electi$e pro$incial and city
officials, in the 19!-D-1 (.rt& II, 1, sec& 8(8G in the case of
(enators or 1ongressmen, in the (enate or House -lectoral Tribunals
(.rt& FI, sec& 57G and in the case of the President and Fice President,
in the Presidential -lectoral Tribunal& (.rt& FII, sec& 2&
E0#."!/% L$26> P&#-P&/.0$4$"!/% C/%"#6" @6 E0#."!/% C/%"#6"6
1997 N/, 570
(tate how (a preEprocla!ation contro$ersies, on the one hand,
and (b election protests, on the other, are initiated, heard and
finally resol$ed&
.nswer0
(a PreEProclamation 1ontro$ersies
"uestions affecting the composition or proceedings of the board
of can$assers may be initiated in the board of can$assers or directly
with the 1ommission on -lections& "uestions In$ol$ing the election
returns and the certificates of can$ass shall be brought in the first
Instance before the board of can$assers only, ((ection 57, Republic .ct
/o, 85::&
The board of can$assers should rule on the ob%ections summarily&
((ection 84, Republic .ct /o& 75::&
.ny party ad$ersely affected may appeal to the 1ommission on
-lections& ((ection 84& Republic .ct /o& 75::&
The decision of the 1ommission on -lection may be brought to the
(upreme 1ourt on certIorari by the aggrie$ed party, ((ection 7, .rticle
IIE. of the 1onstitution&
.ll preEproclamation contro$ersies pending before the 1ommission
on -lections shall be deemed terminated at the beginning of the term of
the office in$ol$ed and the rulings of the board of can$assers shall be
deemed affirmed, without pre%udice to the filing of an election protest&
Howe$er, the proceedings may continue when on the basis of the e$idence
presented so far, the 1ommission on -lections or the (upreme 1ourt
determines that the petition appears to be meritorious& ((ection 5:,
Republic .ct /o& 75::
(b -lection 1ontests
.n election protest is initiated by filing a protest containing
the following allegations0
5& The protestant is a candidate who duty filed a certificate of
candidacy and was $oted for in the election0
8& The protestee has been proclaimedG and
3& The date of the proclamation, (!iro $s& 1ommission on
-lections, 585 (1R. 2::
The following ha$e %urisdiction o$er election contests0
5& @arangay officials E Inferior 1ourtG
8& !unicipal officials E Regional Trial 1ourtG
3& Regional, pro$incial, and city officials E 1ommission on
-lections ((ection 8(8, .rt& IIE1 of the 1onstitutionG
2& 1ongressman E House of Representati$es -lectoral Tribunal&
)& (enators E (enate -lectoral Tribunal& ((ection 5& .rticle FI
of the 1onstitutionG
:& President and Fice President E (upreme 1ourt ((ection 2,
.rticle FII of the 1onstitution&
The decision of the inferior court in election contests in$ol$ing
barangay officials and of the Regional Trial 1ourt in election contests
in$ol$ing municipal officials are appealable to the 1ommission on
-lections& ((ection 8(8& .rticle IIE1 of the 1onstitution& The
decision of the 1ommission on -lections may be brought to the (upreme
1ourt on certtorart on Auestions of law& (Ri$era us& 1ommission on
-lections, 566 (1R. 57?
The decision of the 1ommission on -lections in election contests
in$ol$ing regional, pro$incial and city officials may be brought to the
(upreme 1ourt on certtorart ((ection 7, .rticle IIE. and (ection 8(8,
.rticle IIE1 of the 1onstitution&
The decisions of the (enate -lectoral Tribunal and of the House
of Representati$es -lectoral Tribunal may be ele$ated to the (upreme
1ourt on certiorari if there was gra$e abuse of discretion& (Da#atin $s
19!-D-1 5:? (1R. 365
E0#."!/% L$26> P&#-P&/.0$4$"!/% C/%"#6"> P&/=#& I66,#6
199: N/, 520
8 ,i$e three issues that can be properly raised and brought in
a preEproclamation contest&
.nswer0
8 .ccording to (ection 823 of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode, the
following issues can be properly raised&
a The composition or proceedings of the board of can$assers are
illegalG
b The can$assed election returns are incomplete, contain
material defects, appro$ed to be tampered with, or contain discrepancy
in the same returns or in other authenticated copiesG
c The election returns were prepared under duress, threats,
coercion, or intimidation, or they are ob$iously manufactured or not
authenticG and
d (ubstitute or fraudulent returns in contro$erted polling
places were can$assed, the results of which materially affected the
standing of the aggrie$ed candidate or candidates&
Howe$er, according to (ection 5) of the (ynchroni#ed -lection
Daw& no preEproclamation cases shall be allowed on matters relating to
the preparation, transmission, receipt, custody and appreciation of the
election returns or the certificates of can$ass with respect to the
positions of President, FiceEPresident, (enator and !ember of the House
of Representati$es& /o preEproclamation case are allowed in the case of
barangay elections&
E0#."!/% L$26> P&/.#66> I00!"#&$"# @/"#&6
1987 N/& III0
H.H, while of legal age and of sound mind, is illiterate& He has
asked your ad$ice on how he can $ote in the coming election for his
brother, who is running for mayor& This will be the first time H.H will
$ote and he has ne$er registered as a $oter before& What ad$ice will you
gi$e him on the procedure he needs to follow in order to be able to
$ote;
.nswer0
The 1onstitution pro$ides that until 1ongress shall ha$e pro$ided
otherwise, illiterate and disabled $oters shall be allowed to $ote under
e'isting laws and regulations (.rt, F, (ec& 8& It is necessary for any
Aualified $oter to register in order to $ote& (9mnibus -lection 1ode,
(ec& 55) In the case of illiterate and disabled $oters, their $oterBs
affida$it may be prepared by any relati$e within the fourth ci$il degree
of consanguinity or affinity or by any member of the board of election
inspectors who shall prepare the affida$it in accordance with the data
supplied by the applicant& (Id&, sec& 587
E0#."!/% L$26> P&/.#66> P&!%.!=0# /7 I#4 S/%$%6
1994 N/& 3G
5 What is your understanding of the principle of idem sonans as
applied in the -lection Daw;
.nswerG
5 +nder Rule /o& 7 of the rules for the appreciation of ballots
in (ection 855 of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode, the idem scrums rule means
that a name or surname incorrectly written which, when read, has a sound
similar to the name or surname of a candidate when correctly written
shall be counted in his fa$or&
a Idem sonans literally means the same or similar sound& This
principle is made manifest in one of the rules for the appreciation of
ballots embodied in the 9mnibus -lection 1ode ((ec& 855, @P ??5 stating
that H. name or surname incorrectly written which when read, has a sound
similar to the name or surname of a candidate when correctly written
shall be counted in his fa$or& Thus, if the name as spelled in the
ballot, though different from the correct spelling thereof, con$eys to
the ears when pronounced according to the commonly accepted methods, a
sound practically Identical with the sound of the correct name as
commonly pronounced, the name thus gi$en is a sufficient designation of
the person referred to& The Auestion whether one name is idem sonans
with another is not a Auestion of spelling but of pronunciation&
(!andac $& (amonte, 26 Phil& 8?2& Its application is aimed at
reali#ing the ob%ecti$e of e$ery election which is to obtain the
e'pression of the $oters will&
b The term means sounding the same or nearly alike& The rule Is
based on the Idea that the misspelling of a name or lack of skill in
writing should not be taken as a ground for re%ecting the $otes
apparently intended for a candidate, so long as the intention of the
$oter appears to be clear& The (upreme 1ourt has ruled that the
principle of idem sonans is liberally construed& 1orpu# $& Ibay, ?2
Phil& 5?2 (5626&
E0#."!/% L$26> P&/.#66> S"&$) B$00/"
1994 N/& 3G
8 What is a Hstray ballotH;
.nswerG
8 +nder Rule /o& 56 of the rules for the appreciation of
ballots in (ection 855 of the 9mnibus -lection 1ode, stray ballot is one
cast in fa$or of a person who has not filed a certificate of candidacy
or in fa$or of a candidate for an office for which he did not present
himself&
.lthough the 1ode does not pro$ide for stray ballot, it is
presumed that stray ballot refers to stray $ote&
L/.$0 G/5#&%4#%"
P,(0!. C/&=> A==/!%"4#%" /7 B,'#" O77!.#&> ./%"&/0 56 6,=#&5!6!/%
1999 N/ F
D& 9n !ay 57, 56??, the position of Pro$incial @udget 9fficer of
Pro$ince I became $acant& Pedro 1astahon, go$ernor of the pro$ince,
pursuant to (ec& 5 of -&9& /o& 558, submitted the names of three
nominees for the aforesaid position to the Department of @udget
!anagement (D@!, one of whom was that of !arta !ahonhon& . month later,
1astahon informed the D@! that !ahonhon had assumed the office of P@9
and reAuested that she be e'tended the appropriate appointment& The D@!
(ecretary appointed Cosefa Oalayon instead& 1astahon protested the
appointment of Oalayon insisting that it is he who had the right to
choose the P@9 by submitting the names of his three nominees and Oalayon
was not one of them& The D@! countered that none of the go$ernorBs
nominees ha$e the necessary Aualifications for the position&
(pecifically, !ahonhon lacked the fi$eEyear e'perience in budgeting&
Hence, the D@! was left with no alternati$e but to name one who
possesses all the reAuisite Aualifications in the person of Oalayon& It
cited (ection :&4 of the D@! Docal @udget 1ircular /o& 35 which states,
HThe D@! reser$es the right to fill up any e'isting $acancy where none
of the nominees of the local chief e'ecuti$e meet the prescribed
reAuirements&H
(a Was the D@!Bs appointment $alid; (8*
(b What can you say regarding the abo$eEAuoted (ection :&4 of
D@!Bs Docal @udget 1ircular /o& 35; -'plain your answers& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
D& (a +nder (ection 5 of -'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 558, the Pro$incial
@udget 9fficer must be recommended by the ,o$ernor& (ince Cosefa Oalayon
was not recommended by the ,o$ernor, her appointment is not $alid& .s
held in (an Cuan $& 1i$il (er$ice 1ommission, 56: (1R. :6, if the person
recommended by the ,o$ernor is not Aualified, what the (ecretary of
@udget and !anagement should do is to ask him to recommend someone who
is eligible&
(b D@! Docal @udget 1ircular /o& 35 is not $alid, since it is
inconsistent with -'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 558, which reAuires that the
appointee for Pro$incial @udget 9fficer be recommended by the ,o$ernor&
(+nder the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, it is now the local chief e'ecuti$e
who is empowered to appoint the budget officer&
P,(0!. C/&=> B/,%$&) D!6=,"# S#""0#4#%"
1999 N/ F
1& What body or bodies are $ested by law with the authority to
settle disputes in$ol$ing0
5& two or more towns within the same pro$inceG (5*
8& two or more highly urbani#ed cities& (5*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& 5& +nder (ection 55?(b of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode,
boundary disputes in$ol$ing two or more municipalities within the same
pro$ince shall be settled by the sangguniang panlalawigan concerned&
8& +nder (ection 55?(d of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, boundary
disputes in$ol$ing two or more highly urbani#ed cities shall be settled
by the sangguniang panlungsod of the parties&
P,(0!. C/&=> C0/6,&# O& L#$6# /7 P&/=#&"!#6 8/& P,(0!. U6#
200? N/ II
.n aggrie$ed resident of the 1ity of !anila filed mandamus
proceedings against the city mayor and the city engineer to compel these
officials to remo$e the market stalls from certain city streets which
they had designated as flea markets& Portions of the said city streets
were leased or licensed by the respondent officials to market
stallholders by $irtue of a city ordinance& Decide the dispute&
The petition should be granted& In accordance with !acasiano $&
Diokno& 858 (1R. 2:2 L5668M, since public streets are properties for
public use and are outside the commerce of man, the 1ity !ayor and the
1ity -ngineer cannot lease or license portions of the city streets to
market stallholders&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
The petition should be denied& +nder (ection 85(dof the Docal
,o$ernment 1ode, a city may by ordinance temporarily close a street so
that a flea market may be established&
P,(0!. C/&=> C&#$"!/% /7 N#2 L/.$0 G/5#&%4#%" U%!"6> P0#(!6.!"#
R#C,!&#4#%"
2004 NO3 @II
!.D.O9 is a municipality composed of ?4 barangays, 34 west of
!adako Ri$er and )4 east thereof& The 34 western barangays, feeling
left out of economic initiati$es, wish to constitute themsel$es into a
new and separate town to be called !asigla&
.& ,ranting that !asiglaKs proponents succeed to secure a law
in their fa$or, would a plebiscite be necessary or not; If it is
necessary, who should $ote or participate in the plebiscite;
Discuss briefly& ()*
P,(0!. C/&=> D# 8$."/ P,(0!. C/&=/&$"!/%6> E77#." /7 O77!.!$0 A."6 /7
"9# M,%!.!=$0 C/&=/&$"!/% $% I"6 O77!.#&6
2004 NO3 @II
!.D.O9 is a municipality composed of ?4 barangays, 34 west of
!adako Ri$er and )4 east thereof& The 34 western barangays, feeling
left out of economic initiati$es, wish to constitute themsel$es into a
new and separate town to be called !asigla& . law is passed creating
!asigla and a plebiscite is made in fa$or of the law&
@ (uppose that one year after !asigla was constituted as a
municipality, the law creating it is $oided because of defects& Would
that in$alidate the acts of the municipality andQor its municipal
officers; -'plain briefly& ()*
P,(0!. C/&=> D#5/0,"!/%
1999 N/ F
.& 5& Define de$olution with respect to local go$ernment
units&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& 5& (ection 57(e of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode defines
de$olution as the act by which the /ational ,o$ernment confers power and
authority upon the $arious local go$ernment units to perform specific
functions and responsibilities&
P,(0!. C/&=> E%"!"0#4#%" /7 LGU6 "/ EC,!"$(0# S9$&# !% U"!0!F$"!/% $%
D#5#0/=4#%" /7 N$"!/%$0 W#$0"9
1991 N/& )G
The pro$ince of Palawan passes an ordinance reAuiring all
ownersQoperators of fishing $essels that fish in waters surrounding the
pro$ince to in$est ten percent (54* of their net profits from
operations therein in any enterprise located in Palawan&
/.R19 >ishing 1orp&, a >ilipino corporation with head office in
/a$otas, !etro !anila, challenges the ordinance as unconstitutional&
Decide the case&
.nswer0
The ordinance is in$alid& The ordinance was apparently enacted
pursuant to .rticle I, (ec& 7 of the 1onstitution, which entitles local
go$ernments to an eAuitable share in the proceeds of the utili#ation and
de$elopment of the national wealth within their respecti$e areas&
Howe$er, this should be made pursuant to law, . law is needed to
implement this pro$ision and a local go$ernment cannot constitute itself
unto a law& In the absence of a law the ordinance in Auestion is
in$alid&
P,(0!. C/&=> 8&$%.9!6#> =&!/& $==&/5$0 /7 LGU %#.#66$&)
1988 N/& 60
!acabebe, Pampanga has se$eral barrios along the Pampanga ri$er&
To ser$ice the needs of their residentst the municipality has been
operating a ferry ser$ice at the same ri$er, for a number of years
already&
(ometime in 56?7, the municipality was ser$ed a copy of an order
from the Dand Tansportation >ranchising and Regulatory @oard (DT>R@,
granting a certificate of public con$enience to !r& Ricardo !acapinlac,
a resident of !acabebe, to operate ferry ser$ice across the same ri$er
and between the same barrios being ser$iced presently by the
municipalityBs ferry boats& . check of the records of the application of
!acapinlac shows that the application was filed some months before, set
for hearing, and notices of such hearing were published in two
newspapers of general circulation in the town of !acabebe, and in the
pro$ince of Pampanga& The municipality had ne$er been directly ser$ed a
copy of that notice of hearing nor had the (angguniang @ay an been
reAuested by !acapinlac for any operate& The municipality immediately
filed a motion for reconsideration with the DT>R@ which was denied& It
the went to the (upreme 1ourt on a petition for certiorari to nullify
the order granting a certificate of public con$enience to !acapinlac on
two grounds0
5& Denial of due process to the municipalityG and
8& >or failure of !acapinlac to secure appro$al of the
(angguniang @ayan for him to operate a ferry ser$ice in !acabebe,
Resol$e the two points in the petition with reasons&
.nswer0
The petition for certiorari should be granted,
5& .s a party directly affected by the operation of the ferry
ser$ice, the !unicipality of !acabebe, Pampanga was entitled to be
directly notified by the DT>R@ &&&&
8& It has been held that where a ferry operation lies entirely
within the municipality, the prior appro$al of the !unicipal go$ernment
is necessary& 9nce appro$ed, the operator must then apply with the DT>R@
for a certificate of public con$enience and shall be sub%ect to DT>R@
super$ision, (!unicipality of -chague $& .bellera, supra&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> E77#." /7 @!.#-M$)/& A."!%' A6
M$)/&
2002 N/ IIF&
(uppose ., a !unicipal !ayor, went on a sick lea$e to undergo
medical treatment for a period of four (2 months& During that time
.& Will @, the !unicipal FiceE!ayor, be performing e'ecuti$e
functions; Why; (8*
1& Will @ at the same time be also performing legislati$e
functions as presiding officer of the (angguniang @ayan; Why; (3*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& (ince the !unicipal !ayor is temporarily incapacitated to
perform his duties, in accordance with (ection 2:(a of the Docal
,o$ernment 1ode, the !unicipal FiceE!ayor shall e'ercise his powers and
perform his duties and functions& The !unicipal FiceE!ayor will be
performing e'ecuti$e functions, because the functions of the !unicipal
!ayor are e'ecuti$e&
@& The !unicipal FiceE!ayor cannot continue as presiding
officer of the (angguniang @ayan while he is acting !unicipal !ayor& In
accordance with ,amboa $& .guirre, 354 (1R. ?:7 (5666, under the Docal
,o$ernment 1ode, the FiceE!unicipal !ayor was depri$ed of the power to
preside o$er the (angguniang @ayan and is no longer a member of it& The
temporary $acancy in the office of the !unicipal !ayor creates a
corresponding temporary $acancy in the 9ffice of the !unicipal FiceE
!ayor when he acts as !unicipal !ayor& This constitutes inability on his
part to preside o$er the sessions of the (angguniang @ayan&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> Q,$0!7!.$"!/%6
1999 N/ F
.&8& +nder the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, name four persons who
are disAualified from running for any electi$e position& (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.8& +nder (ection 24 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, the following
are disAualified from running for any local electi$e position0
a Those sentenced by final %udgment for an offense in$ol$ing
moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by one (5 year or more of
imprisonment, within two (8 years after ser$ing sentenceG
b Those remo$ed from office as a result of an administrati$e
caseG
c Those con$icted by final %udgment for $iolating the oath of
allegiance to the Republic of the PhilippinesG
d Those with dual citi#enshipG
e >ugiti$es from %ustice in criminal or nonpolitiEcal cases
here or abroadG
f Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who ha$e
acAuired the right to reside abroad and continue to a$ail of the same
right after the effecti$ity of the Docal ,o$ernment 1odeG and
g The insane or feebleEminded&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> R#.$00
2002 N/ IFI&
(uppose the people of a pro$ince want to recall the pro$incial
go$ernor before the end of his threeEyear term of office,
.& 9n what ground or grounds can the pro$incial go$ernor be
recalled; (5*
@& How will the recall be initiated; (8*
1& When will the recall of an electi$e local official be
considered effecti$e; T8*P
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& In accordance with (ection :6 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, the
,o$ernor can be recalled for loss of confidence&
@& +nder (ection 74 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, the recall
may be initiated by a resolution adopted by a ma%ority of all the
members of the preparatory recall assembly, which consists of all the
mayors, the $iceEmayors, and the sangguniang members of the
municipalities and component cities, or by a written petition signed by
at least twentyEfi$e per cent (8)* of the total number of registered
$oters in the pro$ince&
1& .ccording to (ection 78 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, the
recall of an electi$e local official shall take effect upon the election
and proclamation of a successor in the person of the candidate recei$ing
the highest number of $otes cast during the election on recall&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> R,0# /7 S,..#66!/%
2002 N/ IF&
. $acancy occurred in the sangguniang bayan of a municipality when
I, a member, died& I did not belong to any political party&
To fill up the $acancy, the pro$incial go$ernor appointed . upon
the recommendation of the sangguniang panlalawigan& 9n the other hand,
for the same $acancy, the municipal mayor appointed @ upon the
recommendation of the sangguniang bayan&
Which of these appointments is $alid; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.s held in >arinas $& @arba, 8): (1R. 36: (566:, neither of the
appointments is $alid& +nder (ection 2) of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, in
case of a permanent $acancy in the (angguniang @ayan created by the
cessation In office of a member who does not belong to any political
party, the ,o$ernor shall appoint a Aualified person recommended by the
(angguniang @ayan& (ince . was not recommended by the (angguniang @ayan,
his appointment by the ,o$ernor is not $alid& (ince @ was not appointed
by the ,o$ernor but by the !unicipal !ayor, his appointment is also not
$alid&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> R,0# /7 S,..#66!/% A 2
%
P0$.#&
R,0#
199: N/& 530
5 . and @ were the only candidates for mayor of @igaa, @ulacan
in the !ay 566) local elections& . obtained 54,444 $otes as against
3,444 $otes for @& In the same elections, I got the highest number of
$otes among the candidates for the (angguniang @ayan of the same town& .
died the day before his proclamation&
a Who should the @oard of 1an$assers proclaim as elected
mayor, ., @ or I; -'plain,
b Who is entitled to discharge the functions of the office of
the mayor, @ or I; -'plain&
.nswerG
5& a In accordance with @enito $s& 1ommission on -lections, 83)
(1R. 23:, it is . who should be proclaimed as winner, because he was the
one who obtained the highest number of $otes for the position of mayor,
but a notation should be made that he died for the purpose of applying
the rule on succession to office& @ cannot be proclaimed, because the
death of the candidate who obtained the highest number of $otes does not
entitle the candidate who obtained the ne't highest number of $otes to
be proclaimed the winner, since he was not the choice of the electorate&
I is not entitled to be proclaimed elected as mayor, because he ran for
the (angguniang @ayan&
b /either @ nor I is entitled to discharge the functions of the
office of mayor& @ Is not entitled to discharge the office of mayor,
since he was defeated in the election& I is not entitled to discharge
the office of mayor& +nder (ection 22 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, it
is the $ice mayor who should succeed in case of permanent $acancy in the
office of the mayor& It is only when the position of the $ice mayor is
also $acant that the member of the (angguniang @ayan who obtained the
highest number of $otes will succeed to the office of mayor&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> R,0# /7 S,..#66!/% !% L/.$0
O77!.#
199< N/& 70
The Fice !ayor of a municipality flled his certificate of
candidacy for the same office in the last elections& The !unicipal !ayor
was also running for reEelection& @oth were official candidates of the
same political party& .fter the last day for the filing of certificates
of candidacy, the !ayor died& +nder these facts E
5& 1an the Fice !ayor succeed to the office of !ayor pursuant to
the pro$isions of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode; -'plain&
8& .ssuming that the Fice !ayor succeeds to the position of
!ayor after the incumbent died, which position is now different from the
one for which he has filed his certificate of candidacy, can he still
continue to run as Fice !ayor; -'plain&
3& Is there any legal impediment to the Fice !ayor to replace
the reelectionist !ayor who died; -'plain,
.nswer0
5& <es, the $ice mayor can succeed to the office of mayor& +nder
(ection 22 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, he stands ne't in line to the
office of mayor in case of a permanent $acancy in it& His filing of a
1ertificate of 1andidacy for !ayor did not automatically result to his
being considered resigned ((ec& :7, 9mnibus -lection 1ode&
8& <es, the $ice mayor can continue to run as $ice mayor& .t
the time that he filed his certificate of candidacy, the $ice mayor ran
for the same office he was holding& In determining whether a candidate
is running for a position other than the one he is holding in a
permanent capacity and should be considered resigned, it is the office
he was holding at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy should
be considered&
3& There is no legal impediment to the $ice mayor running as
mayor to replace the $ice mayor who died under (ection 77 of the 9mnibus
-lection 1ode, if a candidate dies after the last day for filing
certificates of candidacy, he may be replaced by a person belonging to
his political party& Howe$er, it is reAuired that he should first
withdraw his 1ertificate of 1andidacy for FiceE!ayor and file a new
1ertificate of 1andidacy for !ayor&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E0#."!5# O77!.!$06> T9&##-T#&4 L!4!"
2001 N/ III
In the !ay 5668 elections, !anuel !analo and (egundo Parate were
elected as !ayor and Fice !ayor, respecti$ely& +pon the death of !analo
as incumbent municipal mayor, Fice !ayor (egundo Parate succeeded as
mayor and ser$ed for the remaining portion of the term of office& In the
!ay 566) election, (egundo Parate ran for and won as mayor and then
ser$ed for the full term& In the !ay 566? elections, Parate ran for
reelection as !ayor and won again& In the !ay 8445 election, (egundo
Parate filed his certificate of candidacy for the same position of
mayor, but his ri$al mayoralty candidate sought his disAualification
alleging $iolation of the threeEterm limit for local electi$e officials
pro$ided for in the 1onstitution and in the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode&
Decide whether the disAualification case will prosper or not& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The disAualification case should be dismissed& .s held in @or%a
$s& 1ommission on -lections, 86) (1R.5)7 (566:, in computing the threeE
term limitation imposed upon electi$e local officials, only the term for
which he was elected to should be considered& The term which he ser$ed
as a result of succession should not be included& It is not enough that
the official has ser$ed three consecuti$e terms& He must ha$e been
elected to the same position three consecuti$e times&
P,(0!. C/&=> L/.$0 E1#.,"!5#6> @$0!!") /7 C/%"&$."6 E%"#&# I%"/>
R#C,!6!"#6
199< N/& 20
5& What are the conditions under which a local e'ecuti$e may
enter into a contract in behalf of his go$ernment unit;
.nswer0
5& The following are the conditions under which a local e'ecuti$e
may enter into a contract in behalf of the go$ernment until0
(a The local go$ernment unit must ha$e the power to enter into
the particular contractG
(b Pursuant to (ection 88(c of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode,
there must be a prior authori#ation by the sanggunian concerned, and a
legible copy of the contract shall be posted at a conspicuous place
in&the pro$incial capitol or the city, municipal or barangay hall&
(c In accordance with (ections 2: and 27, 1hapter ?, (ubtitle
@& @ook F of the 56?7 .dministrati$e 1ode, if the contract In$ol$es the
e'penditure of public funds, there must be an appropriation therefore
and a certificate of a$ailability of funds by the treasurer of the local
go$ernment unit&
(d The contract must conform with the formal reAuisites of
written contracts prescribed by law&
(e Pursuant to (ection 84:? of the Re$ised .dministrati$e 1ode,
if a pro$ince is a party to a contract con$eying title to real property,
the contract must be appro$ed by the President& +nder (ection 856: of
the Re$ised .dministrati$e 1ode, if a municipality is a party to a
contract con$eying real property or any Interest in it or creating a
lien upon it, the contract must be appro$ed by the pro$incial go$ernor&
P,(0!. C/&=> O&!%$%.#6> @$0!!")
1988 N/& 20
Cose <& (abater is a real estate de$eloper& He acAuires raw lands
and con$erts them into subdi$isions& .fter acAuiring a lot of around 5)
hectares in 1abanatuan 1ity, he caused the preparation of a subdi$ision
plan for the property& @efore he was able to submit the subdi$ision plan
to the @ureau of Dands andQor Dand Registration 1ommission for
$erification andQor appro$al, he was informed that he must first present
the plan to the 1ity -ngineer who would determine whether the #oning
ordinance of the 1abanatuan 1ity had been obser$ed& He was surprised
when he was asked to pay the city go$ernment a ser$ice fee of P4&34 per
sAuare meter of land, co$ered by his subdi$ision plan& He was e$en more
surprised when informed that a fine of P844&44 andQor imprisonment for
not e'ceeding si' months or both, ha$e been fi'ed in the ordinance as
penalty for $iolation thereof& @elie$ing that the city ordinance is
illegal, he filed suit to nullify the same&
.nswer0
The ordinance is null and $oid& In Fillacorta $& @ernardo, 523
(1R. 2?4 (56?: the (upreme 1ourt held that a municipal ordinance cannot
amend a national law in the guise of implementing it& In this case, the
reAuirement actually conflicts with sec& 22 of .ct /o& 26: because the
latter does not reAuire subdi$ision plans to be submitted to the 1ity
-ngineer before they can be submitted for appro$al to, and $erification
by, the Dand Registration 1ommission andQor the @ureau of Dands&
P,(0!. C/&=> O&!%$%.#6> @$0!!")
1991 N/& 540
The municipality of .lcoy, 1ebu, passed 9rdinance /o& 54, series
of 5665, reAuiring owners, administrators, or tenants of buildings and
premises to keep and maintain them in sanitary condition, and should
they fail to do so, cause them to be cleared and kept in sanitary
condition and the cost thereof to be assessed against the owner,
administrator or tenant, as the case may be& which cost shall constitute
a lien against the property& It further penali#es $iolation thereof with
a fine not e'ceeding 9ne Thousand Pesos (P5,444&44 or imprisonment for
one (5 year at the discretion of the court&
Is the ordinance $alid;
.nswer0
The ordinance is $alid insofar as it reAuires owners,
administrators, or tenants of buildings and premises to keep and
maintain them in sanitary condition and pro$ides that should they fail
to do so, the municipality shall cause them to be cleaned and the cost
shall be assessed against the owner, administrator, or tenant and shall
be a lien against the property& This is e'pressly authori#ed by (ec&
526(kk of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode,
Howe$er, the penalty for the $iolation of the ordinance is
in$alid, because it is e'cessi$e The penalty in this case is a fine not
e'ceeding P5,444 or imprisonment for one year, in the discretion of the
court& +nder (ec& 526 (c of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, howe$er, the
penalty for the $iolation of a municipal ordinance can not e'ceed a fine
of P5,444&44 or Imprisonment for si' months, or both at the discretion
of the court&
P,(0!. C/&=> O&!%$%.#6> @$0!!")> '#%#&$0 2#07$&# .0$,6#
1987 N/& F0
'''
(c .n ordinance prohibiting barbershop operators from rendering
massage ser$ice to their customers in a separate room&
Howe$er, if the ordinance le$ies a ta' on all business
establishments located outside the pri$ate subdi$ision, then it is
ob%ectionable on the ground that it appropriate pri$ate funds for a
public purpose& (Pascual $& (ecretary of Public Works, supra
.nswer0
(c The ordinance is $alid& In Felasco $, Fillegas, 584 (1R. :)?
(56?3 such ordinance was upheld on the ground that it is a means of
enabling the 1ity of !anila to collect a fee for operating massage
clinics and of pre$enting immorality which might be committed by
allowing the construction of separate rooms in barber shops&
P,(0!. C/&=> O&!%$%.#6> @$0!!") /7 G$4(0!%' P&/9!(!"!/%
199< N/& 20
8& P.,19R decided to operate a casino in Tacloban 1ity under
authority of P&D& /o& 5?:6& It leased a portion of a building belonging
to -llen !c,uire& reno$ated and eAuipped it in preparation for its
inauguration& The (angguniang Panlungsod of Tacloban 1ity enacted an
ordinance prohibiting the operation of casinos in the 1ity and pro$iding
penalty for its $iolation& -llen !c,uire and P.,19R assailed the
$alidity of the ordinance in court&
How would you resol$e the issue; Discuss fully&
.nswer0
8& The ordinance should be declared in$alid& .s held in !agta%as
$s& Pryce Properties 1orporation& Inc&, 832 (1R. 8))& such an ordinance
contra$enes Presidential Decree /o& 5?:6, which authori#es the
Philippine .musement and ,aming 1orporation to operate casinos within
the territorial Curisdiction of the Philippines, because it pre$ents the
said corporation from e'ercising the power conferred on it to operate a
casino in Tacloban 1ity& The power of Tacloban 1ity to suppress gambling
and prohibited games of chance e'cludes of chance permitted by law&
Implied repeals are not fa$ored& (@asco $& P.,19R
P,(0!. C/&=> O&!%$%.#6> @#"/ P/2#&
199: N/& 580
5 How does the local legislati$e assembly o$erride the $eto by
the local chief e'ecuti$e of an ordinance;
8 9n what grounds can a local chief e'ecuti$e $eto an
ordinance;
3 How can an ordinance $etoed by a local chief e'ecuti$e
become a law without it being o$erridden by the local legislati$e
assembly;
.nswerG
5 +nder (ections )2 (a and )) (c of the Docal ,o$ernment
1ode, the local legislati$e assembly can o$erride the $eto of the local
chief e'ecuti$e by twoEthirds $ote of all its members&
8 +nder (ection ))LaM of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, the local
chief e'ecuti$e may $eto an ordinance on the ground that it is ultra
$ires or pre%udicial to the public welfare&
3 Pursuant to (ection )2(b of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, an
ordinance $etoed by the local chief e'ecuti$e shall be deemed appro$ed
if he does not communicate his $eto to the local legislati$e assembly
within fifteen days in the case of a pro$ince and ten days in the case
of a city or a municipality& Dikewise, if the $eto by the local
e'ecuti$e has been o$erridden by the local legislati$e assembly, a
second $eto will be $oid& +nder (ection ))(c of the Docal ,o$ernment
1ode, the local chief e'ecuti$e may $eto an ordinance only once&
P,(0!. C/&=> P/0!.# P/2#&> LLDA
199< N/& 60
The !unicipality of @inangonan, Ri#al, passed a resolution
authori#ing the operation of an open garbage dumpsite in a 6E hectare
land in the Reyes -state within the !unicipalityBs territorial limits&
(ome concerned residents of @inangonan filed a complaint with the Daguna
Dake De$elopment .uthority (DDD. to stop the operation of the dumpslte
due to its harmful effects on the health of the residents& The DDD.
conducted an onEsite In$estigation, monitoring, testing and water
sampling and found that the dumpsite would contaminate Daguna de @ay and
the surrounding areas of the !unicipality& The DDD. also disco$ered that
no en$ironmental clearance was secured by the !unicipality from the
Department of -n$ironment and /atural Resources (D-/R and the DDD. as
reAuired by law& The DDD. therefore issued to the @inangonan municipal
go$ernment a cease and desist order to stop the operation of the
dumpsite& The !unicipality of @inangonan filed a case to annul the order
issued by the DDD.&
5& 1an the !unicipality of @inangonan in$oke police power to
pre$ent its residents and the DDD. from interfering with the operation
of the dumpsite by the !unicipality; -'plain&
8& 1an the DDD. %ustify its order by asserting that the health
of the residents will be ad$ersely affected& -'plain&
.nswerG
5& /o, the !unicipality of @inangonan cannot In$oke its police
power& .ccording to Daguna Dake De$elopment .uthority $s& 1ourt of
.ppeals, 835 (1R. 868, under Republic .ct /o, 2?)4, the Daguna Dake
De$elopment .uthority is mandated to promote the de$elopment of the
Daguna Dake area, including the surrounding Pro$ince of Ri#al, with due
regard to the pre$ention of pollution& The Daguna Dake De$elopment
.uthority is mandated to pass upon and appro$e or disappro$e all
pro%ects proposed by local go$ernment offices within the region&
8& <es, the Daguna Dake De$elopment .uthority can %ustify its
order& (ince it has been authori#ed by -'ecuti$e 9rder /o& 687 to make
orders reAuiring the discontinuance of pollution, its power to issue the
order can be inferred from this& 9therwise, it will be a toothless
agency& !oreo$er, the Daguna Dake De$elopment .uthority is specifically
authori#ed under its 1harter to issue cease and desist orders&
P,(0!. C/&=> P/2#&6 /7 B$&$%'$) A66#4(0)>
200? N/ IIII
(a 1an a @arangay .ssembly e'ercise any police power;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a /o, the @arangay .ssembly cannot e'ercise any police power&
+nder (ection 36? of the Docal ,o$ernment 1ode, it can only recommend to
the (angguniang @arangay the adoption of measures for the welfare of the
barangay and decide on the adoption of an initiati$e&
P,(0!. C/&=> P/2#&6 O7 L!'$ N' M'$ B$&$%'$)
200? N/ IIII
(b 1an the Diga ng mga @arangay e'ercise legislati$e powers;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(b The Diga ng !ga @arangay cannot e'ercise legislati$e powers&
.s stated in @itoE9non $& >ernande#& 3)4 (1R. 738 L8445M, it is not a
local go$ernment unit and its primary purpose is to determine
representation of the !ga in the sangguniansG to $entilate, articulate,
and crystalli#e issues affecting barangay go$ernment administrationG and
to secure solutions for them through proper and legal means&
P,(0!. C/&=> R#C,!6!"#6 8/& C/%"&$."6 I%5/05!%' P,(0!. 8,%6
1991 N/& 20
The !unicipality of (ibonga, 1ebu, wishes to enter into a contract
in$ol$ing e'penditure of public funds& What are the legal reAuisites
therefor;
.nswerG
The following are the legal reAuisites for the $alidity of a
contract to be entered into by the !unicipality of (ibonga, which
in$ol$es the e'penditure of public funds0
5& The contract must be within the power of the municipalityG
8& The contract must be entered into by the proper officer,
i&e&, the mayor, upon resolution of the (angguniang @ayan pursuant to
(ection 528 of the Docal ,o$ernment 1odeG
3& In accordance with (ec& :4: of the Re$ised .dministrati$e
1ode, there must be an appropriation of the public fundsG and in
accordance with (ec& :47, there must be a certificate of a$ailability of
funds issued by the municipal treasurerG and
2& The contract must conform with the formal reAuisites of
written contracts prescribed by law&
P,(0!. C/&=> S$%'',%!$%> P/2#& "/ I66,# S,(=/#%$ A C!"# 8/& C/%"#4="
199? N/ :0
!ayor .lfredo Dim dosed the funhouses in the -rmita district
suspected of being fronts for prostitution& To determine the feasibility
of putting up a legali#ed red light district, the city council conducted
an inAuiry and in$ited operators of the closed funhouses to get their
$iews& /o one honored the In$itation& The city council issued subpoenas
to compel the attendance of the operators but which were completely
disregarded& The council declared the operators guilty of contempt and
issued warrants for their arrest&
The operators come to you for legal ad$ice, asking the following
Auestions0
5 Is the council empowered to issue subpoenas to compel their
attendance;
8 Does the council ha$e the power to cite for contempt; .nswerG
5 The city council is not empowered to issue subpoenas to compel
the attendance of the operators of the funEhouses In the -rmita
district& There is no pro$ision in the 1onstitution, the Docal
,o$ernment 1ode, or any law e'pressly granting local legislati$e bodies
the power to subpoena witnesses& .s held in /egros 9riental II -lectric
1ooperati$e, Inc& $s& (angguniang Panlungsod of Dumaguete, 5)) (1R. 285,
such power cannot be implied from the grant of delegated legislated
power& (uch power is Cudicial& To allow local legislati$e bodies to
e'ercise such power without e'press statutory basis would $iolate the
doctrine of separation of powers,
8 The city council does not ha$e the power to cite for contempt&
There is likewise no pro$ision in the 1onstitution, the Docal ,o$ernment
1ode, or any other laws granting local legislati$e bodies the power to
cite for contempt& (uch power cannot be deemed implied in the delegation
of legislati$e power to local legislati$e bodies, for the e'istence of
such power poses a potential derogation of indi$idual rights&
E0#."!/% 0$2> '&##% .$& 9/0#&> =&#6,4="!/% /7 =#&4$%#%" 7/&#!'%
&#6!#%.) A #77#." /7 7!0!%' .#&"!7!.$"# /7 .$%!$.) /% &#6!#%.)
199? N/& 70
>erdie immigrated to the +nited (tates in the 56?4s& Thereafter,
he $isited his hometown, !akahoy, e$ery other year during town fiestas&
In Canuary 5663& >erdie came home and filed his certificate of candidacy
for !ayor of !akahoy& He won in the elections& Coe, the defeated
candidate, learned that >erdie is a greencard holder which on its face
identifies >erdie as a Hresident alienH and on the back thereof is
clearly printed0
HPerson identified by this card is entitled to reside permanently
and work in the +nited (tates&H Coe filed a case to disAualify >erdie
from assuming the mayorship of !akaEhoy&
"uestions0
5 Whether or not a green card is proof that the holder is a
permanent resident of the +nited (tates&
8 Whether or not >erdieBs act of filing his certificate of
candidacy constitutes wai$er of his status as a permanent resident of
the +nited (tates&
.nswer0
5 .ccording to the ruling in 1oast $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 565 (1R.
886, a green card is proof that the holder is a permanent resident of
the +nited (tates, for it identifies the holder as a resident of the
+nited (tates and states that the holder is entitled to reside
permanently and work in the +nited (tates&
8 The filing of a certificate of candidacy does not constitute a
wai$er of the status of the holder of a green card as a permanent
resident of the +nited (tates& .s held in 1oast $s& 1ourt of .ppeals,
565 (1R.886, the wai$er should be manifested by an act independent of
and prior to the filing of his certificate of candidacy&
P,(0!. C/&=> S/,&.#6 /7 R#5#%,#
1999 N/ F
@& +nder the 1onstitution, what are the three main sources of
re$enues of local go$ernment units; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@, The following are the main sources of re$enues of local
go$ernment units under the 1onstitution0
5 Ta'es, fees, and charges& ((ection ), .rticle I
8 (hare in the national ta'es& ((ection :, .rticle I
3P (hare in the proceeds of the utili#ations and de$elopment of
the national wealth within their areas& ((ection 7, .rticle IP
P,(0!. C/&=> U6# $% L#$6# /7 P&/=#&"!#6 8/& P,(0!. U6#
1997 N/& 60
Due to o$erEcrowding in the public market in Paco, !anila, the
1ity 1ouncil passed an ordinance allowing the lease to $endors of parts
of the streets where the public market Is located, pro$ided that the
lessees pay to the city go$ernment a fee of P)4 per sAuare meter of the
area occupied by the lessees& The residents in the area complained to
the !ayor that the lease of the public streets would cause serious
traffic problems to them& The !ayor cancelled the lease and ordered the
remo$al of the stalls constructed on the streets&
Was the act of the !ayor legal; .nswer0
The cancellation of the lease and the remo$al of the stalls are
$alid& .s held in !acasiano $s& Diokno, 858 (1R. 2:2, the lease of
public streets is $oid, since they are reser$ed for public use and are
outside the commerce of man&
P,(0!. C/&=> W!"9&$2$0 /7 P,(0!. P&/=#&") 8&/4 P,(0!. U6#
1990 N/& ?0
I<=, a corporation organi#ed under the laws of Hongkong, with 544*
foreign eAuity, obtained from the (ecurities and -'change 1ommission a
license to operate a prawn hatchery pro%ect on a piece of land leased
from the 1ity of Dagupan& The land was formerly a park and pla#a
belonging to the 1ity and was con$ened by the 1ity to deri$e much needed
funds&
(5 !ay the 1ity of Dagupan lawfully con$ert the park to prawn
ponds and lease the same; -'plain your answer&
(8 !ay the 1ity of Dagupan and I<= corporation $alidly enter into
the lease contract for the prawn ponds; .nswer with reasons&
.nswer0
(5 <es, the 1ity of Dagupan may lawfully con$ert the park into
prawn ponds and lease them& . city may close a park and pla#a and once
the property has been withdrawn from public use, it falls within the
commerce of man and may be leased& (ection 54 of the Docal ,o$ernment
1ode pro$ides0
H. local go$ernment unit may likewise, through its head acting
pursuant to a resolution of its sanggunian and In accordance with
e'isting law and the pro$isions of this 1ode, close any barangay,
municipal, city or pro$incial road, street, alley park or sAuare& /o
such way or place or any part thereof shall be closed without
indemnifying any person pre%udiced thereby& . property thus withdrawn
from public use may be used or con$eyed for any purpose for which other
real property belonging to the local unit concerned might be lawfully
used or con$eyed&H
In >a$is $& 1ity @aguio, 87 (1R. 54:4, it was held that the 1ity
of @aguio could close a street and lease it since it had become
patrimonial property& Dikewise, in 1ebu 9'ygen and .cetylene 1ompany,
Inc& a @erceles, :: (1R. 2?5, it was held that the 1ity of 1ebu could
close a street and sell it thereafter&
(8 (ince the 1ity of Dagupan has the power to con$ert the park
into prawn ponds it can also lease it to I<= e$en though I<= is a 544*E
foreign corporation& The operation of a prawn hatchery does not in$ol$e
e'ploitation of natural resources within the meaning of (ections 8 and
3, .rticle III of the 56?7 1onstitution& ((ecretary of Custice, 9p& /o&
3, s& 56?? (ince the portion of the park had been withdrawn from public
use, it could be disposed for any lawful purpose including leasing it to
a foreign corporation&
P,(0!. I%"#&%$"!/%$0 L$2
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")
2004 @III-.& !@1, an alien businessman dealing in carpets and
ca$iar, filed a suit against policemen and <=, an attachY of II -mbassy,
for damages because of malicious prosecution& !@1 alleged that <=
concocted false and malicious charges that he was engaged in drug
trafficking, whereupon narcotics policemen conducted a RbuyEbustS
operation and without warrant arrested him, searched his house, and
sei#ed his money and %ewelry, then detained and tortured him in
$iolation of his ci$il and human rights as well as causing him, his
family and business serious damages amounting to two million pesos& !@1
added that the trial court acAuitted him of the drug charges&
.ssailing the courtKs %urisdiction, <= now mo$es to dismiss the
complaint, on the ground that (5 he is an embassy officer entitled to
diplomatic immunityG and that (8 the suit is really a suit against his
home state, without its consent& He presents diplomatic notes from II
-mbassy certifying that he is an accredited embassy officer recogni#ed
by the Philippine go$ernment& He performs official duties, he says, on
a mission to conduct sur$eillance on drug e'porters and then inform
local police officers who make the actual arrest of suspects&
.re the two grounds cited by <= to dismiss the suit tenable; ()*
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")
2000 N/ II
. foreign ambassador to the Philippines leased a $acation house in
Tagaytay for his personal use& >or some reason, he failed to pay rentals
for more than one year& The lessor filed an action for the reco$ery of
his property in court&
a 1an the foreign ambassador in$oke his diplomatic immunity
to resist the lessorBs action; (3*
b The lessor gets hold of e$idence that the ambassador is
about to return to his home country& 1an the lessor ask the court to
stop the ambassadorBs departure from the Philippines; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a /o, the foreign ambassador cannot in$oke his diplomatic
immunity to resist the action, since he is not using the house in
Tagaytay 1ity for the purposes of his mission but merely for $acation&
+nder .rticle 3(l(a of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations,
a diplomatic agent has no immunity in case of a real action relating to
pri$ate immo$able property situated in the territory of the recei$ing
(tate unless he holds it on behalf of the sending (tate for purposes of
the mission&
b /o, the lessor cannot ask the court to stop the departure
of the ambassador from the Philippines& +nder .rticle 86 of the Fienna
1on$ention, a diplomatic agent shall not be liable to any form of arrest
or detention&
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")
2001 N/ II
Dr& Felen, an official of the World Health 9rgani#ation (WH9
assigned in the Philippines, arri$ed at the /inoy .Auino International
.irport with his personal effects contained in twel$e crates as
unaccompanied baggage& .s such, his personal effects were allowed free
entry from duties and ta'es, and were directly stored at .rshaine
1orporationBs warehouse at !akati, pending Dr& FelenBs relocation to his
permanent Auarters&
.t the instance of police authorities, the Regional Trial 1ourt
(RT1 of !akati issued a warrant for the search and sei#ure of Dr&
FelenBs personal effects in $iew of an alleged $iolation of the Tariff
and 1ustomBs 1ode& .ccording to the police, the crates contained
contraband items& +pon protest of WH9 officials, the (ecretary of
>oreign .ffairs formally ad$ised the RT1 as to Dr& FelenBs immunity& The
(olicitor ,eneral likewise %oined Dr& FelenBs plea of immunity and
motion to Auash the search warrant& The RT1 denied the motion&
Is the denial of the motion to Auash proper; ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The denial of the motion is improper& .s held in World Health
9rgani#ation us& .Auino, 2? (1R. 828 (5678& as an official of the World
Health 9rgani#ation, Dr& Felen en%oyed diplomatic immunity and this
included e'emption from duties and ta'es& (ince diplomatic immunity
in$ol$es a political Auestion, where a plea of diplomatic immunity Is
recogni#ed and affirmed by the -'ecuti$e Department, it Is the duty of
the court to accept the claim of immunity&
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")
200? N/ IFIII
. group of highEranking officials and rankEandEfile employees
stationed in a foreign embassy in !anila were arrested outside embassy
grounds and detained at 1amp 1rame on suspicion that they were acti$ely
collaborating withHterroristsH out to o$erthrow or destabili#e the
Philippine ,o$ernment& The >oreign .mbassador sought their immediate
release, claiming that the detained embassy officials and employees
en%oyed diplomatic immunity& If in$ited to e'press your legal opinion on
the matter, what ad$ice would you gi$e;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
I shall ad$ice that the highEranking officials and rankEandEfile
employees be released because of their diplomatic immunity& .rticle 86
of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations pro$ides0
HThe person of a diplomatic agent shall be in$iolable& He shall
not be liable to any form of arrest or detention&H
+nder .rticle 37 of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations,
members of the administrati$e and technical staff of the diplomatic
mission, shall, if they are not nationals of or permanent residents in
the recei$ing (tate, en%oy the pri$ileges and immunities specified in
.rticle 86&
+nder .rticle 6 of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations,
the remedy is to declare the highEranking officials and rankEandEfile
employees personae non gratae and ask them to lea$e&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
+nder the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations, a diplomatic
agent Hshall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention (.rticle
86 and he en%oys immunity from criminal %urisdiction (.rticle 35&
This immunity may co$er the HhighEranking officialsH in Auestion,
who are assumed to be diplomatic officers or agents&
With respect to the HrankEandEfile employeesH they are co$ered by
the immunity referred to abo$e, pro$ided they are not nationals or
permanent residents of the Philippines, pursuant to .rticle 37(8 of the
said 1on$ention&
If the said rankEandEfile employees belong to the ser$ice staff of
the diplomatic mission (such as dri$ers they may be co$ered by the
immunity (e$en if they are not Philippine nationals or residents as set
out in .rticle 37(3, if at the time of the arrest they were in Hacts
performed in the course of their duties&H If a dri$er was among the said
rankEandEfile employees and he was arrested while dri$ing a diplomatic
$ehicle orengaged in related acts, still he would be co$ered by
immunity&
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")> A4($66$/&6
1990 N/& )0
D, the .mbassador of the Oingdom of /epal to the Philippines,
leased a house in @aguio 1ity as his personal $acation home& 9n account
of military disturbance in /epal, D did not recei$e his salary and
allowances from his go$ernment and so he failed to pay his rentals for
more than one year& -, the lessor, filed an action for reco$ery of his
property with the Regional Trial 1ourt of @aguio 1ity&
(5 1an the action against D prosper;
(8 1an - ask for the attachment of the furniture and other
personal properties of D after getting hold of e$idence that D is about
to lea$e the country;
(3P 1an - ask for the court to stop DBs departure from the
Philippines;
.nswer0
(5 <es, the action can prosper&
.rticle 35 of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations
pro$ides0
H5& . diplomatic agent shall en%oy immunity from the criminal
%urisdiction of the recei$ing (tate& He shall also en%oy immunity from
its ci$il and administrati$e %urisdiction, e'cept in the case of0
(a . real action relating to pri$ate immo$able property situated
in the territory of the recei$ing (tate, unless he holds it on behalf of
the sending (tate for the purposes of the missionGH
The action against the .mbassador is a real action in$ol$ing
pri$ate immo$able property situated within the territory of the
Philippines as the recei$ing state& The action falls within the
e'ception to the grant of immunity from the ci$il and administrati$e
%urisdiction of the Philippines&
.lternati$e .nswerG
/o, the action will not prosper& .lthough the action is a real
action relating to pri$ate immo$able property within the territory of
the Philippines, nonetheless, the $acation house may be considered
property held by the .mbassador In behalf of his state (the Oingdom of
/epal for the purposes of the mission and, therefore, such is beyond
the ci$il and administrati$e %urisdiction of the Philippines, including
its courts,
(8 /o, - cannot ask for the attachment of the personal
properties of the .mbassador& .rts& 34 and 35 of the Fienna 1on$ention
on Diplomatic Relations pro$ides that the papers, correspondence and the
property of diplomat agents shall be in$iolable& Therefore, a writ of
attachment cannot be issued against his furniture and any personal
properties& !oreo$er, on the assumption that the Oingdom of /epal grants
similar protection to Philippine diplomatic agents& (ection 2 of
Republic .ct /o& 7) pro$ides that any writ or process issued by any
court in the Philippines for the attachment of the goods or chattels of
the ambassador of a foreign (tate to the Philippines shall be $oid&
(3 /o, - cannot ask the court to stop the departure of the
.mbassador of the Oingdom of /epal from the Philippines& .rticle 86 of
the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations pro$ides0 HThe person of a
diplomatic agent shall be in$iolable& He shall not be liable to any form
of arrest or detention&H
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")> D!=0/4$"!. E%5/) $% C/%6,0$& O77!.#&6
1997 N/ 560
I, a (ecretary and 1onsul in the .merican -mbassy in !anila,
bought from @ a diamond ring in the amount of P)4,444&44 which he later
ga$e as a birthday present to his >ilipino girlfriend& The purchase
price was paid in check drawn upon the 1itibank& +pon presentment for
payment, the check was dishonored for insufficiency of funds& @ecause of
IBs failure to make good the dishonored check, @ filed a complaint
against I in the 9ffice of the 1ity Prosecutor of !anila for $iolation
of @atas Pambansa @ig& 88& .fter preliminary in$estigation, the
information was filed against I in the 1ity 1ourt of !anila& I filed a
motion to dismiss the case against him on the ground that he is a
(ecretary and 1onsul in the .merican -mbassy en%oying diplomatic
immunity from criminal prosecution in the Philippines&
If you were the Cudge, how would you resol$e the motion to
dismiss;
.nswerG
If I were the Cudge, I would grant the motion to dismiss&
.s consul, I is not immune from criminal prosecution& +nder
Paragraph 3 of .rticle 25 of the Fienna 1on$ention on 1onsular
Relations, a consular officer is not immune from the criminal
%urisdiction of the recei$ing state& In (chneckenburger $s& !oron, :3
Phil& 826, it was held that a consul is not e'empt from criminal
prosecution in the country where he is assigned& Howe$er, as secretary
in the .merican -mbassy, I en%oys diplomatic immunity from criminal
prosecution .s secretary, he is a diplomatic agent& +nder Paragraph 5 of
.rticle 35 of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations, a
diplomatic agent en%oys immunity from the criminal %urisdiction of the
recei$ing (tate&
PIL> D!=0/4$"!. I44,%!")> D!=0/4$"!. E%5/) $% C/%6,0$& O77!.#&6
199< N/& 30
5& Discuss the differences, if any, in the pri$ileges or
immunities of diplomatic en$oys and consular officers from the ci$il or
criminal %urisdiction of the recei$ing state&
8& . consul of a (outh .merican country stationed in !anila was
charged with serious physical in%uries& !ay he claim Immunity from
%urisdiction of the local court; -'plain&
3& (uppose after he was charged, he was appointed as his
countryBs ambassador to the Philippines& 1an his newlyEgained diplomatic
status be a ground for dismissal of his criminal case; -'plain&
.nswer0
5& +nder .rticle 38 of the Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic
Relations, a diplomatic agent shall en%oy immunity from the criminal
%urisdiction of the recei$ing (tate& He shall also en%oy immunity from
its ci$il and administrati$e %urisdiction e'cept in the case of0
(a . real action relating to pri$ate immo$able property
situated in the territory of the recei$ing (tate, unless he holds it on
behalf of the sending (tate for the purposes of the missionG
(b .n action relating to succession in which the diplomatic
agent is in$oked as e'ecutor, administrator, heir or legatee as a
pri$ate person and not on behalf of the sending (tateG
(c .n action relating to any professional or commercial
acti$ity e'ercised by the diplomatic agent in the recei$ing (tate
outside his official functions&
9n the other hand, under .rticle 25 of the Fienna 1on$ention on
1onsular Relations, a consular officer does not en%oy Immunity from the
1riminal %urisdiction of the recei$ing (tate& +nder .rticle 23 of the
Fienna 1on$ention on 1onsular Relations, consular officers are not
amenable to the Curisdiction of the Cudicial or administrati$e
authorities of the recei$ing (tate in respect of acts performed in the
e'ercise of consular functions& Howe$er, this does not apply in respect
of a ci$il action either0
(a arising out of a contract concluded by a consular officer in
which he did not contract e'pressly or impliedly as an agent of the
sending (tateG or
(b by a third party for damage arising from an accident in the
recei$ing (tate caused by a $ehicle, $essel, or aircraft&
8& /o, he may not claim immunity from the %urisdiction of the
local court& +nder .rticle 25 of the Fienna 1on$ention of 1onsular
Relations, consuls do not en%oy immunity from the criminal Curisdiction
of the recei$ing (tate& He is not liable to arrest or detention
pending trial unless the offense was committed against his father,
mother, child, ascendant, descendant or spouse& 1onsuls are not liable
to arrest and detention pending trial e'cept in the case of a gra$e
crime and pursuant to a decision by the competent %udicial authority&
The crime of physical In%uries is not a gra$e crime unless it be
committed against any of the abo$eEmentioned persons& ((chneckenburger
$& !oran :3 Phil& 826&
3& <es, the case should be dismissed& +nder .rticle 24 of the
Fienna 1on$ention on Diplomatic Relations, if a diplomatic agent is in
the territory of a third (tate, which has granted him a passport $isa if
such $isa was necessary, while proceeding to take up his post, the third
(tate shall accord him in$iolability and such other immunities as may be
reAuired to ensure his transit&
PIL> E1.0,6!5# E./%/4!. D/%#
2000 N/ III&
b What is the concept of the e'clusi$e economic #one under
the +/ 1on$ention on the Daw of the (ea; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
b The e'clusi$e economic #one under the 1on$ention on the Daw of
the (ea is an area beyond and ad%acent to the territorial sea, which
shall not e'tend beyond 844 nautical miles from (he baselines from which
the territorial sea is measured& The coastal (tate has in the e'clusi$e
economic #one0
(a (o$ereign rights for the purpose of e'ploring and e'ploiting,
conser$ing and managing the natural resources, whether li$ing or nonE
li$ing, if the waters super%acent to the seaEbed and of the seabed and
subsoil, and with regard to other acti$ities for the economic
e'ploitation and e'ploration of the #one, such as the production of
energy from the water, currents and windsG
(b Curisdiction as pro$ided in the rele$ant pro$isions of the
1on$ention with regard to0
(i the establishment and use of artificial islands,
installations and structuresG
(ii marine scientific researchG and
(iiii the protection and preser$ation of the marine en$ironmentG
(c 9ther rights and duties pro$ided form the 1on$ention&
L.rticle ): of the 1on$ention of the Daw of the (ea&
PIL> E1#.,"!5# A'&##4#%"6> B!%!%' E77#."
200? N/ II
.n -'ecuti$e .greement was e'ecuted between the Philippines and a
neighboring (tate& The (enate of the Philippines took it upon itself to
procure a certified true copy of the -'ecuti$e .greement and, after
deliberating on it, declared, by a unanimous $ote, that the agreement
was both unwise and against the best interest of the country& Is the
-'ecuti$e .greement binding (a from the standpoint of Philippine law
and (b from the standpoint of international law; -'plain
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
(a .s to Philippine law, the -'ecuti$e .greement is
binding&&&&
(b The -'ecuti$e .greement is also binding from the
standpoint of international law& .s held in @a$an $& =amora& 328 (1R.
226 L8444M, in international law e'ecuti$e agreements are eAually
binding as treaties upon the (tates who are parties to them&
.dditionally, under .rticle 8T5(a of the Fienna 1on$ention on the Daw
of Treaties, whate$er may be the designation of a written agreement
between (tates, whether it is indicated as a Treaty, 1on$ention or
-'ecuti$e .greement, is not legally significant& (till it is considered
a treaty and go$erned by the international law of treaties&
PIL> E1"&$!"!/%> D/."&!%# /7 S=#.!$0")
199? N/& 540
8 Patrick is charged with illegal recruitment and estafa before
the RT1 of !anila& He %umped bail and managed to escape to .merica&
.ssume that there is an e'tradition treaty between the Philippines and
.merica and it does not include illegal recruitment as one of the
e'traditable offenses& +pon surrender of Patrick by the +&(& ,o$ernment
to the Philippines, Patrick protested that he could not be tried for
illegal recruitment& Decide&
.nswer0
8 +nder the principle of specialty in e'tradition, Patrick cannot
be tried for illegal recruitment, since this is not included In the list
of e'traditable offenses in the e'tradition treaty between the
Philippines and the +nited (tates, unless the +nited (tates does not
ob%ect to the trial of Patrick for Illegal recruitment&
PIL> E1"&$!"!/%> E77#."!5!") /7 "&#$")
199: N/& :G
5 The -'tradition Treaty between >rance and the Philippines is
silent as to its applicability with respect to crimes committed prior to
its effecti$ity&
a 1an >rance demand the e'tradition of ., a >rench national
residing in the Philippines, for an offense committed in >rance prior to
the effecti$ity of the treaty; -'plain&
b 1an . contest his e'tradition on the ground that it $iolates
the e' post facto pro$ision of the Philippine 1onstitution; -'plain&
.nswer0
5& a <es, >rance can ask for the e'tradition of . for an offense
committed In >rance before the effecti$ity of the -'tradition Treaty
between >rance and the Philippines& In 1leugh $s& (trakosh& 546 >8d 334,
it was held that an e'tradition treaty applies to crimes committed
before its effecti$ity unless the e'tradition treaty e'pressly e'empts
them& .s Whiteman points out, e'tradition does not define crimes but
merely pro$ides a means by which a (tate may obtain the return and
punishment of persons charged with or con$icted of ha$ing committed a
crime who fled the %urisdiction of the (tate whose law has been
$iolated& It is therefore immaterial whether at the time of the
commission of the crime for which e'tradition is sought no treaty was in
e'istence& If at the time e'tradition is reAuested there is in force
between the reAuesting and Hthe reAuested (tates a treaty co$ering the
offense on which the reAuest is based, the treaty is applicable&
(Whiteman, Digest of International Daw, Fol& :, pp& 7)3E7)2&
b /o, . cannot contest his e'tradition on the ground that it
$iolates the e' post facto pro$ision of the 1onstitution& .s held in
Wright $s& 1ourt of .ppeals, 83) (1R. 325, the prohibition against
e'postfacto laws in (ection 88, .rticle III of the 1onstitution applies
to penal laws only and does not apply to e'tradition treaties&
PIL> E1"&$!"!/%> G&/,%6
2002 N/ IFIII&
Cohn is a former President of the Republic I, bent on regaining
power which he lost to President Harry in an election& >ully con$inced
that he was cheated, he set out to destabili#e the go$ernment of
President Harry by means of a series of protest actions& His plan was to
weaken the go$ernment and, when the situation became ripe for a takeE
o$er, to assassinate President Harry&
William, on the other hand, is a belie$er in human rights and a
former follower of President Harry& /oting the systematic acts of
harassment committed by go$ernment agents against fanners protesting the
sei#ure of their lands, laborers complaining of low wages, and students
seeking free tuition, William organi#ed groups which held peaceful
rallies in front of the Presidential Palace to e'press their grie$ances&
9n the e$e of the assassination attempt, CohnBs men were caught by
members of the Presidential (ecurity ,roup& President Harry went on air
threatening to prosecute plotters and dissidents of his administration&
The ne't day, the go$ernment charged Cohn with assassination attempt and
William with inciting to sedition&
Cohn fled to Republic .& William, who was in Republic @ attending
a lecture on democracy, was ad$ised by his friends to stay in Republic
@&
@oth Republic . and Republic @ ha$e con$entional e'tradition
treaties with Republic I&
If Republic I reAuests the e'tradition of Cohn and William, can
Republic . deny the reAuest; Why; (tate your reason fully& ()*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
Republic . can refuse to e'tradite Cohn, because his offense is a
political offense& Cohn was plotting to take o$er the go$ernment and the
plan of Cohn to assassinate President Harry was part of such plan&
Howe$er, if the e'tradition treaty contains an attentat clause, Republic
. can e'tradite Cohn, because under the attentat clause, the taking of
the life or attempt against the life of a head of state or that of the
members of his family does not constitute a political offense and is
therefore e'traditable&
Republic . may or can refuse the reAuest of e'tradition of William
because he is not in its territory and thus it is not in the position to
deli$er him to Republic I&
-$en if William were in the territorial %urisdiction of Republic
., he may not be e'tradited because inciting to sedition, of which he is
charged, constitutes a political offense& It is a standard pro$ision of
e'tradition treaties, such as the one between Republic . and Republic I,
that political offenses are not e'traditable&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
Republic @ can deny the reAuest of Republic I to e'tradite
William, because his offense was not a political offense& 9n the basis
of the predominance or proportionality test his acts were not directly
connected to any purely political offense&
PIL> E1"&$!"!/%> @6 D#=/&"$"!/%
199? N/& 540
5 What is the difference if any between e'tradition and
deportation;
.nswer0
5 The following are the differences between e'tradition and
deportation0
a& -'tradition is effected for the benefit of the state to which
the person being e'tradited will be surrendered because he is a fugiti$e
criminal in that state, while deportation is effected for the protection
of the (tate e'pelling an alien because his presence is not conduci$e to
the public good&
b& -'tradition is effected on the basis of an e'tradition treaty
or upon the reAuest of another state, while deportation is the
unilateral act of the state e'pelling an alien&
c& In e'tradition, the alien will be surrendered to the state
asking for his e'tradition, while in deportation the undesirable alien
may be sent to any state willing to accept him&
PIL> G#%/.!#
1988 N/& 560
5& The 1harter of the +nited /ations prohibits not only recourse
to war but also resort to the use of force or threat& In the ardent
desire to maintain peace, the 1harter obliges members to settle their
international disputes by peaceful means and to refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force& The
same 1harter, howe$er, recogni#ing perhaps the realities of
international relations, allows the use of force in e'ceptional
occasions&
Please state two occasions when the use of armed forces is allowed
by the +&/& 1harter&
8& What is H,enocide,H and what is the foremost e'ample thereof
in recent history;
.nswer0
5& +nder art& 28 of the +/ 1harter, should the (ecurity 1ouncil
consider that pacific methods of settling disputes are inadeAuate, it
may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to
maintain or restore international peace and security (uch action may
include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or
land forces of members of the +/&
+nder art& )5 member states also ha$e the inherent right of
collecti$e self defense if an armed attack occurs against a member
state, until the (ecurity 1ouncil has taken measures necessary to
maintain international peace and security&
8& H,enocideH refers to any of the following acts, whether
committed in time of war or peace, with intent to destroy in whole or in
part national, ethnic, racial or religious group0 (a Oilling members of
a groupG (b 1ausing bodily or mental harm to its membersG (c
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to
bring about its physical destruction in whole or in partG (d Imposing
measures to pre$ent births within the groupG and (e >orcibly
transforming children of the group to another group& (C& (.D9/,. U P&
<.P, P+@DI1 I/T-R/.TI9/.D D.W 366E244 (56::&
The foremost e'ample of genocide is the Holocaust (5633E562)
where about : million Cews (two thirds of the Cewish population of
-urope before World War II were e'terminated by the /a#is& .long with
the Cews, another 6 to 54 million people (,ypsies and (la$s were
massacred& (W9RDD .D!./.1 584 (24th ed&, 56?7&
PIL> 9$0/-9$0/
2004 II-.& Distinguish briefly but clearly between0
(5 The territorial sea and the internal waters of the
Philippines&
(8 The contiguous #one and the e'clusi$e economic #one&
(3 The flag state and the flag of con$enience&
(2 The constituti$e theory and the declaratory theory concerning
recognition of states&
() The Wilson doctrine and the -strada doctrine regarding
recognition of go$ernments& ()*
PIL> 9$0/-9$0/
1991 N/& 5)0
(elect any fi$e () of the following and e'plain each, using
e'amples0
(a Reprisal
(b Retorsion
(c Declaratory Theory of Recognition Principle
(d Recognition of @elligerency
(e 1ontinental (helf
(f -'eAuatur
(g Principle of Double 1riminality
(h Protecti$e Personality
(i Innocent Passage
(% Cus cogens in International Daw
.nswer0
(a Reprisal is a coerci$e measure short of war, directed by a
state against another, in retaliation for acts of the latter and as
means of obtaining reparation or satisfaction for such acts& Reprisal
in$ol$es retaliatory acts which by themsel$es would be illegal& >or
e'ample, for $iolation of a treaty by a state, the aggrie$ed state
sei#es on the high seas the ships of the offending state&
(b Retorsion is a legal but deliberately unfriendly act
directed by a state against another in retaliation for an unfriendly
though legal act to compel that state to alter its unfriendly conduct&
.n e'ample of retorsion is banning e'ports to the offending state&
(c The declaratory theory of recognition is a theory according to
which recognition of a state is merely an acknowledgment of the fact of
its e'istence& In other words, the recogni#ed state already e'ists and
can e'ist e$en without such recognition& >or e'ample, when other
countries recogni#ed @angladesh, @angladesh already e'isted as a state
e$en without such recognition&
(d Recognition of belligerency is the formal acknowledgment by a
third party of the e'istence of a state of war between the central
go$ernment and a portion of that state& @elligerency e'ists when a
si#eable portion of the territory of a state is under the effecti$e
control of an insurgent community which is seeking to establish a
separate go$ernment and the insurgents are in de facto control of a
portion of the territory and population, ha$e a political organi#ation,
are able to maintain such control, and conduct themsel$es according to
the laws of war& >or e'ample, ,reat @ritain recogni#ed a state of
belligerency in the +nited (tates during the 1i$il War,
(e 1ontinental shelf of a coastal state comprises the seaEbed
and subsoil of the submarine areas that e'tend beyond its territorial
sea throughout the natural prolongation of its land territory to the
outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 844 nautical
miles from the Hbaselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea
is measured where the outer edge of the continental shelf does not
e'tend up to that distance&
(f -'eAuatur is an authori#ation from the recei$ing state
admitting the head of a consular post to the e'ercise of his functions&
>or e'ample, if the Philippines appoints a consul general for /ew <ork,
he cannot start performing his functions unless the President of the
+nited (tates issues an e'eAuatur to him,
(g The principle of double criminality is the rule in
e'tradition which states that for a reAuest to be honored the crime for
which e'tradition is reAuested must be a crime in both the reAuesting
state and the state to which the fugiti$e has fled& >or e'ample, since
murder is a crime both in the Philippines and in 1anada, under the
Treaty on -'tradition between the Philippines and 1anada, the
Philippines can reAuest 1anada to e'tradite a >ilipino who has fled to
1anada&
(h Protecti$e personality principle is the principle by which
the state e'ercise %urisdiction o$er the acts of an alien e$en if
committed outside its territory, if such acts are ad$erse to the
interest of the national state&
(i Innocent passage means the right of continuous and e'peditious
na$igation of a foreign ship through the territorial sea of a state for
the purpose of tra$ersing that sea without entering the internal waters
or calling at a roadstead or port facility outside internal waters, or
proceeding to or from internal waters or a call at such roadstead or
port facility& The passage is innocent so long as it is not pre%udicial
to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state&
(% Cus cogens is a peremptory norm of general international law
accepted and recogni#ed by the international community as a whole as a
norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified
only by a subseAuent norm of general international law ha$ing the same
character, .n e'ample is the prohibition against the use of force&
PIL> E,4$% R!'9"6
1999 N/ I
.& ,i$e three multilateral con$entions on Human Rights adopted
under the direct auspices of the +nited /ations; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
.& The following are multilateral con$entions on Human Rights
adopted under the direct auspices of the +nited /ations0
5& International 1o$enant on 1i$il and Political RightsG
8& 1on$ention on the -limination of .ll >orms of Discrimination
against WomenG
3& 1on$ention on the Rights of the 1hildG
2& 1on$ention against Torture and 9ther 1ruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or PunishmentG
)& International 1on$ention on the -limination of .ll >orms of
Racial DiscriminationG
:& 1on$ention on the Pre$ention and Punishment of the 1rime of
,enocideG and
7& International 1on$ention on -conomic, (ocial, and 1ultural
Rights
PIL> E,4$% R!'9"6> C!5!0 $% P/0!"!.$0 R!'9"6
199: N/& 50
5 Distinguish ci$il rights from political rights and gi$e an
e'ample of each right&
8 What are the relations of ci$il and political rights to
human rights;
-'plain& .nswer0
5 The term Hci$il rightsH refers to the rights secured by the
constitution of any state or country to all its Inhabitants and not
connected with the organi#ation or administration of go$ernment, L@lack,
Handbook of .merican 1onstitutional Daw, 2th ed&, )8:&
Political rights consist in the power to participate, directly or
indirectly, in the management of the go$ernment& Thus, ci$il rights ha$e
no relation to the establishment, management or support of the
go$ernment& (.nthony $s& @urrow, 586 > 7?3&
1i$il Rights defines the relations of indi$idual amongst
themsel$es white political rights defines the relations of Indi$iduals
$isEaE$is the state&
1i$il Rights e'tend protection to all inhabitants of a state,
while Political Rights protect merely its citi#ens&
-'amples of ci$il rights are the rights against in$oluntary
ser$itude, religious freedom, the guarantee against unreasonable
searches and sei#ures, liberty of abode, the prohibition against
imprisonment for debt, the right to tra$el, eAual protection, due
process, the right to marry, right to return to this country and right
to education&
-'amples of political rights are the right of suffrage, the right
of assembly, and the right to petition for redress of grie$ances&
8 Human rights are broader in scope than ci$il and political
rights& They also include social, economic, and cultural rights& Human
rights inhere in persons from the fact of their humanity& -$ery man
possesses them e$erywhere and at all times simply because he is a human
being& 9n the other hand, some ci$il and political rights are not
natural rights& They e'ist because they are protected by a constitution
or granted by law& >or e'ample, the liberty to enter into contracts is
not a human right but is a ci$il right&
PIL> E,4$% R!'9"6> C!5!0 $% P/0!"!.$0 R!'9"6
1992 N/& 5)0
Walang (ugat, a $igilante group composed of pri$ate businessmen
and ci$ic leaders pre$iously $ictimi#ed by the /ationalist Patriotic
.rmy (/P. rebel group, was implicated in the torture and kidnapping of
Dr& !engele, a known /P. sympathi#er&
a +nder public international law, what rules properly apply;
What liabilities, if any, arise thereunder if Walang (ugatBs in$ol$ement
is confirmed&
b Does the 1ommission on Human Rights ha$e the power to
in$estigate and ad%udicate the matter;
.nswer0
a 9n the assumption that Dr& !engele is a foreigner, his torture
$iolates the International 1o$enant on 1i$il and Political Rights, to
which the Philippine has acceded& .rticle 7 of the 1o$enant on 1i$il
and Political Rights pro$ides0 H/o one shall be sub%ected to torture or
to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment&H
In accordance with .rticle 8 of the 1o$enant on 1i$il and
Political Rights, it is the obligation of the Philippines to ensure that
Dr& !engele has an effecti$e remedy, that he shall ha$e his right to
such a remedy determined by competent authority, and to ensure the
enforcement of such remedy when granted&
.lternati$e .nswer0
9n the assumption that Dr& !engele is a foreigner, his claim will
ha$e to be directed against the members of Walang (ugat on the basis of
the Philippine law and be addressed to the %urisdiction of Philippine
courts& His claim may be based on the generally accepted principles of
international law, which form part of Philippine law under (ection 8,
.rticle II of the 1onstitution& His claim may be premised on rele$ant
norms of international law of human rights&
+nder international law, Dr& !engele must first e'haust the
remedies under Philippine law before his indi$idual claim can be taken
up by the (tale of which he is a national unless the said (tate can
satisfactorily show it Is its own interests that are directly in%ured&
If this condition is fulfilled, the said (tateBs claim will be directed
against the Philippines as a sub%ect of international law& Thus it would
cease to be an indi$idual claim of Dr& !engele&
Dr& !engeleBs case may concern international law norms on (tate
responsibility& @ut the application of these norms reAuire that the
basis of responsibility is the rele$ant acts that can be attributed to
the Philippines as a (tate&
Hence, under the principle of attribution it is necessary to show
that the acts of the $igilante group Walang (ugat can be legally
attributed to the Philippines by the (tate of which Dr& !engele is a
national&
The application of treaty norms of international law on human
rights, such as the pro$ision against torture in the International
1o$enants in 1i$il and Political Rights pertain to (tates& The acts of
pri$ate citi#ens composing Walang (ugat cannot themsel$es constitute a
$iolation by the Philippines as a (tate&
.nswer0
b 1an only in$estigate, no power of ad%udication
PIL> IC+> +,&!6!."!/% O5#& S"$"#6
1994 N/& 56G
The (tate of /o$a, controlled by an authoritarian go$ernment, had
unfriendly relations with its neighboring state, .meria& @resla, another
neighboring state, had been shipping arms and ammunitions to /o$a for
use in attacking .rneria&
To forestall an attack, .meria placed floating mines on the
territorial waters surrounding /o$a& .meria supported a group of rebels
organi#ed to o$erthrow the go$ernment of /o$a and to replace it with a
friendly go$ernment&
/o$a decided to file a case against .meria in the International
1ourt of Custice
5 9n what grounds may /o$aBs causes of action against .meria be
based;
8 9n what grounds may .meria mo$e to dismiss the case with the
I1C;
3 Decide the case& .nswer0
5 If /o$a and .meria are members of the +nited /ations, /o$a
can premise its cause of action on a $iolation of .rticle 8(2 of the
+nited /ations 1harter, which reAuires members to refrain from the
threat or use of force &&&
8 @y $irtue of the principle of so$ereign immunity, no
so$ereign state can be made a party to a proceeding before the
International 1ourt of Custice unless it has gi$en its consent& If
.meria has not accepted the Curisdiction of the International 1ourt of
Custice& .meria can in$oke the defense of lack of %urisdiction& -$en if
.meria has accepted the %urisdiction of the court but the acceptance is
limited and the limitation applies to the case, it may in$oke such
limitation its consent as a bar to the assumption of %urisdiction&
If %urisdiction has been accepted, .meria can in$oke the principle
of anticipatory selfEdefense, recogni#ed under customary international
law, because /o$a is planning to launch an attack against .meria by
using the arms it bought from @resia&
3 If %urisdiction o$er .meria is established, the case should be
decided in fa$or of /o$a, &&&& if %urisdiction o$er .meria is not
established, the case should be decided in fa$or of .meria because of
the principle of so$ereign immunity&
PIL> IC+> +,&!6!."!/% O5#& S"$"#6
1994 N/& 840
The so$ereignty o$er certain islands is disputed between (tate .
and (tate @& These two states agreed to submit their disputes to the
International 1ourt of Custice LI1CM&
5 Does the I1C ha$e %urisdiction to take cogni#ance of the
case;
8 Who shall represent the parties before the 1ourt;
.nswer0
5 The International 1ourt of Custice has %urisdiction o$er the
case, because the parties ha$e %ointly submitted the case to it and ha$e
thus indicated their consent to its %urisdiction&
8 Parties to a case may appoint agents to appear before the
International 1ourt of Custice in their behalf, and these agents need
not be their own nationals& Howe$er, under .rticle 5: of the (tatutes
of the International 1ourt of Custice, no member of the court may appear
as agent in any case&
PIL> IC+> L!4!"$"!/%6 O% +,&!6!."!/%
1999 N/ I
@& +nder its (tatute, gi$e two limitations on the %urisdiction
of the International 1ourt of Custice; (8*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@& The following are the limitations on the %urisdiction of the
International 1ourt of Custice under its (tatute0
5& 9nly states may be parties in cases before it& (.rticle 32
8& The consent of the parties is needed for the court to
acAuire %urisdiction o$er a case& (.rticle 3:
PIL> IC+> R#=&#6#%"$"!/% /7 P$&"!#6> L$%',$'# !% P0#$!%'6 $% O&$0
A&',4#%"
1994 N/& 840
The so$ereignty o$er certain islands is disputed between (tate .
and (tate @& These two states agreed to submit their disputes to the
International 1ourt of Custice LI1CM&
3 What language shall be used in the pleadings and oral
argument;
2 In case (tate ., the petitioner, falls to appear at the oral
argument, can (tate @, the respondent, mo$e for the dismissal of the
petition;
.nswer0
3 +nder .rticle 36 of the (tatutes of the International 1ourt
of Custice, the official languages of the court are -nglish and >rench&
In the absence of an agreement, each party may use the language it
prefers& .t the reAuest of any party, the court may authori#e a party to
use a language other than -nglish or >rench&
2 +nder .rticle )3 of the (tatutes of the International 1ourt
of Custice, whene$er one of the parties does not appear before the court
or fails to defend its case, the other party may ask the court to decide
in fa$or of its claim& Howe$er, the court must, before doing so,
satisfy itself it has Curisdiction and that the claim is well founded in
fact and law&
PIL> M$%$"#6 $% T&,6" T#&&!"/&!#6
200? N/ IFII
What are the soEcalled !andates and Trust Territories; Does the
+nited /ations e'ercise so$ereignty o$er these territories; In the
affirmati$e, how is this %urisdiction e'ercised;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The !andates were the o$erseas possessions of the defeated states
of ,ermany and Turkey which were placed by the Deague of /ations under
the administration of mandatories to promote their de$elopment and
ultimate independence& (Harris, 1ases and !aterials on International
Daw, )th ed&, p& 535& When the +nited /ations replaced the Deague of
/ations, the system of !andates was replaced by the (ystem of Trust
Territories& The +nited /ations e'ercised residuary so$ereignty o$er the
Trust Territories through the Trustee Powers, who e'ercised the powers
of so$ereignty sub%ect to super$ision by and accountability to the
+nited /ations& (9ppenheimEDauterpacht, International Daw, Fol& I, 7th
ed&, pp& 853E852& ((ince there are no more Trust Territories, this is
%ust a matter of historical interest&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
!andates pertains to the mandate system established under .rticle
88 of the 1o$enant of the Deague of /ations for the tutelage and
guardianship of colonies and territories formerly held by ,ermany and
Turkey before the >irst World War, by a $ictorious power on behalf of
the Deague of /ations until they were prepared for independence&
Territories under mandate were not under the so$ereignty of any (tateG
they were administered by a mandatory power which was responsible to the
Deague of /ations for the de$elopment and welfare of the disad$antaged
sub%ect peoples towards independence& Thus, mandated territories were
under the %urisdiction of the mandatory power, sub%ect to the
super$ision of the Deague of /ations&
The general legal framework of the mandate system passed into the
trusteeship system of the +nited /ations, together with mandated
territories which did not attain independence status by the end of the
(econd World War& Trust territories and the Trusteeship 1ouncil are
created by the +/ 1harter&
The trusteeship system under 1hapters III and IIII of the +/
1harter is established under the super$ision of the +/ Trusteeship
1ouncil under the authority of the ,eneral .ssembly for the promotion of
political and socioEeconomic de$elopment of peoples in trust territories
towards independent status& . new feature of the +/ trusteeship system
is the creation of a new category of territories, the strategic trust
territories, which is under the super$ision of the (ecurity 1ouncil
instead of the Trusteeship 1ouncil&
+nder the foregoing conditions, the +nited /ations may not be said
to e'ercise so$ereignty o$er trust territories, the functions and powers
of the Trusteeship 1ouncil and the ,eneral .ssembly being limited to
administration and super$ision under the principle of selfEdetermination
as set forth in indi$idual trust agreements concluded in accordance with
the +/ 1harter& +/ %urisidiction is e'ercised through the Trusteeship
1ouncil under the authority of the ,eneral .ssembly, e'cept with respect
to strategic areas or territories which are placed under the
%urisdiction of the (ecurity 1ouncil&
PIL> M,%!.!=$0 L$2 @6 I%"#&%$"!/%$0 L$2
200? N/ IFI
.n organi#ation of law students sponsored an interEschool debate
among three teams with the following assignments and propositions for
each team to defend0
Team H.H E International law pre$ails o$er municipal law& Team H@H
E !unicipal law pre$ails o$er international law& Team H1H E . countryBs
1onstitution pre$ails o$er international law but international law
pre$ails o$er municipal statutes&
If you were gi$en a chance to choose the correct proposition,
which would you take and why;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
I shall take the proposition for Team 1& International Daw and
municipal law are supreme in their own respecti$e fields& /either has
hegemony o$er the other& (@rownlie, Principles of Public International
Daw, 2th ed& p& 5)7& +nder .rticle II, (ection 8 of the 56?7
1onstitution, the generally accepted principles of international law
form part of the law of the land& (ince they merely ha$e the force of
law, if it is Philippine courts that will decide the case, they will
uphold the 1onstitution o$er international law& If it is an
international tribunal that will decide the case, it will uphold
international law o$er municipal law& .s held by the Permanent
International 1ourt of Custice in the case of the Polish /ationals in
Dan#ig, a (tate cannot in$oke its own 1onstitution to e$ade obligations
incumbent upon it under international law&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R
I would take the proposition assigned to Team H1H as being nearer
to the legal reality in the Philippines, namely, H. countryBs
1onstitution pre$ails o$er international law but international law
pre$ails o$er municipal statutesH&
This is, howe$er, sub%ect to the place of international law in the
Philippine 1onstitutional setting in which treaties or customary norms
in international law stand in parity with statutes and in case of
irreconcilable conflict, this may be resol$ed by Qe' posteriori derogat
le' priori as the (upreme 1ourt obiter dictum in .bbas $& 19!-D-1 holds&
Hence, a statute enacted later than the conclusion or effecti$ity of a
treaty may pre$ail&
In the Philippine legal system, there are no norms higher than
constitutional norms& The fact that the 1onstitution makes generally
accepted principles of international law or con$entional international
law as part of Philippine law does not make them superior to statutory
law, as clarified in (ecretary of Custice $& Dantion and Philip !orris
decisions&
PIL> N#,"&$0!") /7 S"$"#6
1988 N/& 840
(wit#erland and .ustralia are outstanding e'amples of neutrali#ed
states,
5& What are the characteristics of a neutrali#ed state;
8& Is neutrality synonymous with neutrali#ation; If not,
distinguish one from the other&
.nswer0
5& Whether simple or composite, a (tate is said to be neutrali#ed
where its independence and integrity are guaranteed by an international
con$ention on the condition that such (tate obligates itself ne$er to
take up arms against any other (tate, e'cept for selfEdefense, or enter
into such international obligations as would indirectly in$ol$e it in
war& . (tate seeks neutrali#ation where it is weak and does not wish to
take an acti$e part in international politics& The power that guarantee
its neutrali#ation may be moti$ated either by balance of power
considerations or by the desire to make the weak state a buffer between
the territories of the great powers& (C& (.D9/,. U P& <.P, P+@DI1
I/T-R/.TI9/.D D.W 7: (56::&
8& >irstly, neutrality obtains only during war, whereas
neutrali#ation is a condition that applies in peace or in war& (econdly,
neutrali#ation is a status created by means of treaty, whereas
neutrality is a status created under international law, by means of a
stand on the part of a state not to side with any of the parties at war&
Thirdly, neutrality is brought about by a unilateral declaration by the
neutral (tate, while neutrali#ation cannot be effected by unilateral
act, but must be recogni#ed by other (tates& (Id&
PIL> O,"#& S=$.#> +,&!6!."!/%
200? N/ III
What is outerEspace; Who or which can e'ercise %urisdiction o$er
astronauts while in outer space;
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
There are se$eral schools of thought regarding the determination
of outer space, such as the limit of air flight, the height of
atmospheric space, infinity, the lowest altitude of an artificial
satellite, and an altitude appro'imating aerodynamic lift& .nother
school of thought proceeds by analogy to the law of the sea& It proposes
that a (tate should e'ercise full so$ereignty up to the height to which
an aircraft can ascend& /onEmilitant flight instrumentalities should be
allowed o$er a second area, a contiguous #one of 344 miles& 9$er that
should be outer space& The boundary between airspace and outer space has
not yet been defined& (Harris, 1ases and !aterials on International Daw,
)th ed&& pp& 8)5E8)3& +nder .rticle ? of the Treaty on the Principles
,o$erning the .cti$ities of (tates in the -'ploration and +se of 9uter
(pace, Including the !oon and 9ther 1elestial @odies, a (tate on whose
registry an ob%ect launched into outer space retains %urisdiction o$er
the astronauts while they are in outer space&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
9uter space is the space beyond the airspace surrounding the -arth
or beyond the national airspace& In law, the boundary between outer
space and airspace has remained undetermined& @ut in theory, this has
been estimated to be between ?4 to 64 kilometers& 9uter space in this
estimate begins from the lowest altitude an artificial satellite can
remain in orbit& +nder the !oon Treaty of 5676 the moon and the other
celestial bodies form part of outer space&
In outer space, the space satellites or ob%ects are under the
%urisdiction of (tates of registry which co$ers astronauts and
cosmonauts& This matter is co$ered by the Registration of 9b%ects in
(pace 1on$ention of 5672 and the Diability for Damage 1aused by (paced
9b%ects 1on$ention of 5678&
PIL> R#=$&$"!/%6 A'&##4#%"> @$0!!")
1992 N/& 520
The Capanese ,o$ernment confirmed that during the (econd World
War, >ilipinas were among those conscripted as Hcomfort womenH (or
prostitutes for Capanese troops in $arious parts of .sia&
The Capanese ,o$ernment has accordingly launched a goodwill
campaign and has offered the Philippine ,o$ernment substantial
assistance for a program that will promote Z through go$ernment and nonE
go$ernmental organi#ations Z womensB rights, child welfare, nutrition
and family health care&
.n e'ecuti$e agreement is about to be signed for that purpose& The
agreement includes a clause whereby the Philippine ,o$ernment
acknowledges that any liability to the Hcomfort womenH or their
descendants are deemed co$ered by the reparations agreements signed and
implemented immediately after the (econd World War&
Culiano Iglesias, a descendant of a now deceased comfort woman,
seeks your ad$ice on the $alidity of the agreement& .d$ise him&
.nswer0
The agreement is $alid& The comfort women and their descendants
cannot assert indi$idual claims against Capan& .s stated in Da$is U
!oore $s& Regan, 2)3 +&(& :)2, the so$ereign authority of a (tate to
settle claims of its nationals against foreign countries has repeatedly
been recogni#ed& This may be made without the consent of the nationals
or e$en without consultation with them& (ince the continued amity
between a (tate and other countries may reAuire a satisfactory
compromise of mutual claims, the necessary power to make such
compromises has been recogni#ed& The settlement of such claims may be
made by e'ecuti$e agreement&
PIL> R!'9" "/ I%%/.#%" P$66$'#
1999 N/ I
1& (tate -psilon, during peace time, has allowed foreign ships
innocent passage through !antranas (trait, a strait within -psilonBs
territorial sea which has been used by foreign ships for international
na$igation& (uch passage enabled the said ships to tra$erse the strait
between one part of the high seas to another& 9n Cune 7, 5667, a
warship of (tate @eta passed through the abo$eEnamed strait& Instead of
passing through continuously and e'peditiously, the ship delayed its
passage to render assistance to a ship of (tate ,amma which was
distressed with no one nearby to assist& When confronted by -psilon
about the delay, @eta e'plained that the delay was due to force ma%eure
in conformity with the pro$ision of .rticle 5?(8 of the 56?8 1on$ention
on the Daw of the (ea (+/1D9(& (e$en months later, -psilon suspended
the right of innocent passage of warships through !antranas (trait
without gi$ing any reason therefor& (ubseAuently, another warship of
@eta passed through the said strait, and was fired upon by -psilonBs
coastal battery& @eta protested the aforesaid act of -psilon drawing
attention to the e'isting customary international law that the regime of
innocent passage (e$en of transit passage is nonEsuspendable& -psilon
countered that !antranas (trait is not a necessary route, there being
another suitable alternati$e route& Resol$e the abo$eEmentioned
contro$ersy, -'plain your answer& (2*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
1& .ssuming that -psilon and @eta are parties to the +/1D9(,
the contro$ersy maybe resol$ed as follows0
+nder the +/1D9(, warships en%oy a right of innocent passage& It
appearing that the portion of -psilonBs territorial sea in Auestion is a
strait used for international na$igation, -psilon has no right under
international law to suspend the right of innocent passage& .rticle
2)(8 of the +/1D9( is clear in pro$iding that there shall be no
suspension of innocent passage through straits used for international
na$igation&
9n the assumption that the straits in Auestion is not used for
international na$igation, still the suspension of innocent passage by
-psilon cannot be effecti$e because suspension is reAuired under
international law to be duly published before it can take effect& There
being no publication prior to the suspension of innocent passage by
@etaBs warship, -psilonBs act acAuires no $alidity&
!oreo$er, -psilonBs suspension of innocent passage may not be
$alid for the reason that there is no showing that it is essential for
the protection of its security& The actuation of @etaBs warship in
resorting to delayed passage is for cause recogni#ed by the +/1D9( as
e'cusable, i&e&, for the purpose of rendering assistance to persons or
ship in distress, as pro$ided in .rticle 5?(8 of the +/1D9(& Hence,
@etaBs warship complied with the international law norms on right of
innocent passage&
PIL> R!'9" "/ T&$%6!" $% I%%/.#%" P$66$'#
2004 II-@& En route to the tuna fishing grounds in the Pacific
9cean, a $essel registered in 1ountry TW entered the @alintang 1hannel
north of @abuyan Island and with special hooks and nets dragged up red
corals found near @atanes& @y international con$ention certain corals
are protected species& Cust before the $essel reached the high seas,
the 1oast ,uard patrol intercepted the $essel and sei#ed its cargo
including tuna& The master of the $essel and the owner of the cargo
protested, claiming the rights of transit passage and innocent passage,
and sought reco$ery of the cargo and the release of the ship& Is the
claim meritorious or not; Reason briefly& ()*
PIL> S/,&.#6 /7 I%"#&%$"!/%$0 L$2
200? N/ IF
(tate your general understanding of the primary sources and
subsidiary sources of international law, gi$ing an illustration of each&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
+nder .rticle 3? of the (tatute of the International 1ourt of
Custice, the primary sources of international law are the following0
5& International con$entions, e&g&, Fienna 1on$ention on the Daw
of Treaties&
8& International customs, e&g&, cabotage, the prohibition
against sla$ery, and the prohibition against torture&
3& ,eneral principles of law recogni#ed by ci$ili#ed nations,
e&g&, prescription, res %udicata, and due process&
The subsidiary sources of international law are %udicial
decisions, sub%ect to the pro$isions of .rticle )6, e&g&, the decision
in the .ngloE/orwegian >isheries 1ase and /icaragua $& +nited (tates,
and teachings of the most highly Aualified publicists of $arious
nations, e&g&, Human Rights in International Daw by Dauterpacht and
International Daw by 9ppenhe im EDauterpacht&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
Reflecting general international law, .rticle 3?(5 of the
(tatute of the International 1ourt of Custice is understood as pro$iding
for international con$ention, international custom, and general
principles of law as primary sources of international law, while
indicating that %udicial decisions and teachings of the most highly
Aualified publicists as Hsubsidiary means for the determination of the
rules of law&H
The primary sources may be considered as formal sources in that
they are the methods by which norms of international law are created and
recogni#ed& . con$entional or treaty norm comes into being by
established treatyEmaking procedures and a customary norm is the product
of the formation of general practice accepted as law&
@y way of illustrating International 1on$ention as a source of
law, we may refer to the principle embodied in .rticle : of the Fienna
1on$ention on the Daw of Treaties which reads0 H-$ery (tate possesses
capacity to conclude treatiesH& It tells us what the law is and the
process or method by which it came into being& International 1ustom may
be concretely illustrated by pacta sunt ser$anda, a customary or general
norm which came about through e'tensi$e and consistent practice by a
great number of states recogni#ing it as obligatory&
The subsidiary means ser$es as e$idence of law& . decision of the
International 1ourt of Custice, for e'ample, may ser$e as material
e$idence confirming or showing that the prohibition against the use of
force is a customary norm, as the decision of the 1ourt has demonstrated
in the /icaragua 1ase& The status of a principle as a norm of
international law may find e$idence in the works of highly Aualified
publicists in international law, such as !c/air, Oelsen or 9ppenheim
PIL> S/5#&#!'% I44,%!") /7 S"$"#6
1998 N/ IIII&
What is the doctrine of (o$ereign immunity in intemational Daw;
L)*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
@y the doctrine of so$ereign immunity, a (tate, its agents and
property are immune from the %udicial process of another (tate, e'cept
with its consent& Thus, immunity may be wai$ed and a (tate may permit
itself to be sued in the courts of another (tate,
(o$ereign immunity has de$eloped into two schools of thought,
namely, absolute immunity and restricti$e immunity& @y absolute
immunity, all acts of a (tate are co$ered or protected by immunity& 9n
the other hand, restricti$e immunity makes a distinction between
go$ernmental or so$ereign acts (acta %ure imperii and nongo$ernmental,
propriety or commercial acts (acta %ure gestiones& 9nly the first
category of acts is co$ered by so$ereign immunity&
The Philippine adheres to the restricti$e immunity school of
thought&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-RG
In +nited (tates $s& Rui#, 53: (1R. 2?7& 264E265& the (upreme
1ourt e'plained the doctrine of so$ereign immunity in international lawG
HThe traditional rule of (tate immunity e'empts a (tate from being
sued in the courts of another (tate without its consent or wai$er, this
rule is a necessary conseAuence of the principles of independence and
eAuality of states& Howe$er, the rules of International Daw are not
petrified, they are constantly de$eloping and e$ol$ing& .nd because the
acti$ities of states ha$e multiplied& It has been necessary to
distinguish them Z between so$ereign and go$ernment acts L%ure imperiiM
and pri$ate, commercial and proprietary acts (%ure gestionis, The
result is that (tate immunity now e'tends only to acts %ure imperil&H
PIL> S/5#&#!'%") /7 S"$"#6
1989 N/& 560
The Republic of 1hina (Taiwan, in its bid to de$elop a hydrogen
bomb and defend itself against threats of in$asion coming from the
PeopleBs Republic of 1hina, conducted a series of secret nuclear weapons
tests in its own atmosphere& The tests resulted in radioacti$e fallouts
which contaminated the ri$ers in and around .parri and other bodies of
water within the territorial %urisdiction of the Philippines, 1an the
Philippines complain against the Republic of 1hina for $iolation of its
so$ereignty;
.nswer0
In the Trial (melter .rbitration between the +nited (tates and
1anada, the .rbitral Tribunal held that air pollution from 1anada should
be en%oined, because so$ereignty includes the right against any
encroachment which might pre%udice the natural use of the territory and
the free mo$ement of its inhabitants&
(ince the nuclear tests conducted by the Republic 1hina resulted
in radioacti$e falEouts which contaminated the ri$ers and other bodies
of water within the Philippines, the Republic of 1hina $iolated the
so$ereignty of the Philippines&
<es, the Philippines can complain against the Republic of 1hina
for $iolation of its so$ereignty& .rticle 562 of the 1on$ention on the
Daw of the (ea reAuires (tates to take all measures necessary to ensure
that acti$ities under their %urisdiction or control are so conducted as
not to cause damage by pollution to other (tates and their en$ironment&
Principle 85 of the +nited /ations 1onference on the Human -n$ironment
imposes upon states the responsibility to ensure that acti$ities within
their %urisdiction or control do not cause damage to the en$ironment of
other (tates&
PIL> S"$"#0#66 P#&6/%6
199< N/& 8G
5& Who are stateless persons under International Daw;
8& What are the conseAuences of statelessness;
3& Is a stateless person entirely without right, protection or
recourse under the Daw of /ations; -'plain&
2, What measures, if any, has International Daw taken to
pre$ent statelessness;
.nswer0
5& (tateless persons are those who are not considered as
nationals by any (tate under the operation of its laws&
8& The conseAuences of statelessness are the following0
(a /o (tate can inter$ene or complain in behalf of a stateless
person for an international delinAuency committed by another (tate in
inflicting in%ury upon him&
(b He cannot be e'pelled by the (tate if he is lawfully in its
territory e'cept on grounds of national security or public order&
(c He cannot a$ail himself of the protection and benefits of
citi#enship like securing for himself a passport or $isa and personal
documents&
3& /o& +nder the 1on$ention in Relation to the (tatus of
(tateless Person, the 1ontracting (tates agreed to accord to stateless
persons within their territories treatment at least as fa$orable as that
accorded to their nationals with respect to freedom of religion, access
to the courts, rationing of products in short supply, elementary
education, public relief and assistance, labor legislation and social
security& They also agreed to accord to them treatment not less
fa$orable than that accorded to aliens generally in the same
circumstances& The 1on$ention also pro$ides for the issuance of
identity papers and tra$el documents to stateless person&
2& In the 1on$ention on the 1onflict of /ationality Daws of
5634, the 1ontracting (tates agreed to accord nationality to persons
born in their territory who would otherwise be stateless& The 1on$ention
on the Reduction of (tatelessness of 56:5 pro$ides that if the law of
the contractEing (tates results in the loss of nationality as a
conseAuence of marriage or termination of marriage, such loss must be
conditional upon possession or acAuisition of another nationality&
.lternati$e .nswerG
+nder the 1on$ention on the Reduction of (tatelessEness of 56:5,
a contracting state shall grant its nationality to a person born in its
territory who would otherwise be stateless and a contracting state may
not depri$e a person or a group of persons of their nationality for
racial, ethnic, religious or political grounds&
PIL> #77#."!5# /..,=$"!/%
2000 N/ III&
a What is the basis of the PhilippinesB claim to a part of
the (pratly Islands;
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
a The basis of the Philippine claim is effecti$e occupation of a
territory not sub%ect to the so$ereignty of another state& The Capanese
forces occupied the (pratly Island group during the (econd World War&
Howe$er, under the (an >rancisco Peace Treaty of 56)5 Capan formally
renounced all right and claim to the (pratlys& The (an >rancisco Treaty
or any other International agreement howe$er, did not designate any
beneficiary state following the Capanese renunciation of right
(ubseAuently, the (pratlys became terra nullius and was occupied by the
Philippines in the title of so$ereignty& Philippine so$ereignty was
displayed by open and public occupation of a number of islands by
stationing of military forces, by organi#ing a local go$ernment unit,
and by awarding petroleum drilling rights, among other political and
administrati$e acts& In 567?, it confirmed its so$ereign title by the
promulgation of Presidential Decree /o& 5)6:, which declared the
Oalayaan Island ,roup part of Philippine territory&
PIL> R#./'%!"!/% /7 S"$"#6
1998 N/ III&
Distinguish between de facto recognition and de %ure recognition
of states& L)*
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The following are the distinctions between de facto recognition
and de Cure recognition of a go$ernment0
De facto recognition is pro$isional, de Cure recognition is
relati$ely permanentG
De facto recognition does not $est title in the go$ernment to its
properties abroadG de Cure recognition doesG
De facto recognition is limited to certain %uridical relationsG
de%we recognition brings about full diplomatic relations& (1ru#&
International Daw& 566: ed&& p& ?3&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
The distinction between de facto recognition and de %ure
recognition of a (tate is not clear in international law& It is,
howe$er, usually assumed as a point of distinction that while de facto
recognition is pro$isional and hence may be withdrawn, de %ure
recognition is final and cannot be withdrawn&
1onfronted with the emergence of a new political entity in the
international community, a (tate may e'perience some difficulty in
responding to the Auestion whether the new political order Aualifies to
be regarded as a state under international law, in particular from the
$iewpoint of its effecti$eness and independence on a permanent basis&
The recogni#ing (tate may consider its act in regard to the new
political entity as merely a de facto recognition, implying that it may
withdraw it if in the end it turns out that the conditions of statehood
are not fulfilled should the new authority not remain in power&
@ut e$en then, a de facto recognition in this conte't produces
legal effects in the same way as de %ure recognition& Whether
recognition is de facto or de %ure, steps may be taken to withdraw
recognition if the conditions of statehood in international law are not
fulfilled& Thus, from this standpoint, the distinction is not legally
significant&
/ote0 The Auestion should refer to recognition of go$ernment not
recognition of state because there is no such distinction in recognition
of state&
PIL> S"$"# L!$(!0!"!#6
199< N/& ?0
In a raid conducted by rebels in a 1ambodian town, an .merican
businessman who has been a longEtime resident of the place was caught by
the rebels and robbed of his cash and other $aluable personal
belongings& Within minutes, two truckloads of go$ernment troops arri$ed
prompting the rebels to withdraw& @efore fleeing they shot the .merican
causing him physical in%uries& ,o$ernment troopers immediately launched
pursuit operations and killed se$eral rebels& /o cash or other $aluable
property taken from the .merican businessman was reco$ered&
In an action for indemnity filed by the +( ,o$ernment in behalf
of the businessman for in%uries and losses In cash and property, the
1ambodian go$ernment contended that under International Daw it was not
responsible for the acts of the rebels&
5& Is the contention of the 1ambodian go$ernment correct;
-'plain&
8& (uppose the rebellion is successful and a new go$ernment
gains control of the entire (tate, replacing the lawful go$ernment that
was toppled, may the new go$ernment be held responsible for the in%uries
or losses suffered by the .merican businessman; -'plain&
.nswerG
5& <es& the contention of the 1ambodian ,o$ernment is correct&
+nless it clearly appears that the go$ernment has failed to use promptly
and with appropriate force its constituted authority it cannot be held
responsible for the acts of rebels, for the rebels are not its agents
and their acts were done without its $olition& In this case, go$ernment
troopers immediately pursued the rebels and killed se$eral of them&
8& The new go$ernment may be held responsible if it succeeds in
o$erthrowing the go$ernment& Fictorious rebel mo$ements are responsible
for the illegal acts of their forces during the course of the rebellion&
The acts of the rebels are imputable to them when they assumed as duly
constituted authorities of the state&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#
1988 N/& 560
5& The 1harter of the +nited /ations prohibits not only recourse
to war but also resort to the use of force or threat& In the ardent
desire to maintain peace, the 1harter obliges members to settle their
international disputes by peaceful means and to refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force& The
same 1harter, howe$er, recogni#ing perhaps the realities of
international relations, allows the use of force in e'ceptional
occasions&
Please state two occasions when the use of armed forces is allowed
by the +&/& 1harter&
.nswer0
5& +nder art& 28 of the +/ 1harter, should the (ecurity 1ouncil
consider that pacific methods of settling disputes are inadeAuate, it
may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to
maintain or restore international peace and security (uch action may
include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or
land forces of members of the +/&
+nder art& )5 member states also ha$e the inherent right of
collecti$e self defense if an armed attack occurs against a member
state, until the (ecurity 1ouncil has taken measures necessary to
maintain international peace and security&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#> R!'9"6 $% O(0!'$"!/% U%#& "9# UN C9$&"#&
1991 N/& 520
(tate I in$ades and conAuers (tate <& The +nited /ations (ecurity
1ouncil declares the in$asion and conAuest illegal and orders an
international embargo against (tate I& (ubseAuently, the same +&/& body
adopts a resolution calling for an enforcement action against (tate I
under 1hapter FII of the +&/& 1harter& (tate =, a +&/& member,
religiously complies with the embargo but refuses to take part in the
enforcement action, sending a medical mission instead of fighting troops
to the troubled area&
(a Did (tate = $iolate its obligations under the +&/& 1harter;
(b If so, what sanctions may be taken against it;
(c If not, why not;
.nswer0
(a /o, (tate = did not $iolate its obligations under the +nited
/ations 1harter& It complied with the resolution calling for enforcement
action against (tate I, because it sent a medical team&
(b /o sanctions may be taken against (tate =& because it did not
$iolate its obligation under the +nited /ations 1harter&
(c 1ompliance with the resolution calling for enforcement action
against (late I does not necessarily call for the sending of fighting
troops& +nder .rt 23 of the +nited /ations 1harter, compliance with the
call for enforcement action against (tate I has to be made in accordance
with a special agreement with the (ecurity 1ouncil and such agreement
shall go$ern the numbers and types of forces, their degree of readiness
and general locations, and the nature of the facilities and assistance
to be supplied by members of the +nited /ations&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#> S#07-D#7#%6#> A%"!.!=$"/&) S#07-D#7#%6#
200? N/ IIF
/ot too long ago, Hallied forcesH, led by .merican and @ritish
armed forces, in$aded IraA to Hliberate the IraAis and destroy suspected
weapons of mass destruction&H The (ecurity 1ouncil of the +nited /ations
failed to reach a consensus on whether to support or oppose the Hwar of
liberationH&
1an the action taken by the allied forces find %ustification in
International Daw; -'plain&
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
The +nited (tates and its allied forces cannot %ustify their
in$asion of IraA on the basis of selfEdefense under .rticle )5 attack by
IraA, and there was no necessity for anticipatory selfEdefense which may
be %ustified under customary international law& /either can they %ustify
their in$asion on the ground that .rticle 28 of the 1harter of the
+nited /ations permits the use force against a (tate if it is sanctioned
by the (ecurity 1ouncil& Resolution 5225, which ga$e IraA a final
opportunity to disarm or face serious conseAuences, did not authori#e
the use of armed force&
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
In International Daw, the action taken by the allied forces cannot
find %ustification& It is co$ered by the prohibition against the use of
force prescribed by the +nited /ations 1harter and it does not fall
under any of the e'ceptions to that prohibition&
The +/ 1harter in .rticle 8(2 prohibits the use of force in the
relations of states by pro$iding that all members of the +/ Hshall
refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force
against the territorial integrity or political independence of any
state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the
+nited /ations&H This mandate does not only outlaw warG it encompasses
all threats of and acts of force or $iolence short of war&
.s thus pro$ided, the prohibition is addressed to all +/ members&
Howe$er, it is now recogni#ed as a fundamental principle in customary
international law and, as such, is binding on all members of the
international community&
The action taken by the allied forces cannot be %ustified under
any of the three e'ceptions to the prohibition against the use of force
which the +/ 1harter allows& These are0 (5 inherent right of indi$idual
or collecti$e selfEdefense under .rticle )5G (8 enforcement measure
in$ol$ing the use of armed forces by the +/ (ecurity 1ouncil under
.rticle 28G and (3 enforcement measure by regional arrangement under
.rticle )3, as authori#ed by the +/ (ecurity 1ouncil& The allied forces
did not launch military operations and did not occupy IraA on the claim
that their action was in response to an armed attack by IraA, of which
there was none&
!oreo$er, the action of the allied forces was taken in defiance or
disregard of the (ecurity 1ouncil Resolution /o& 5225 which set up Han
enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and $erified
completion the disarmament processH, gi$ing IraA Ha final opportunity to
comply with its disarmament obligationsH& This resolution was in the
process of implementationG so was IraABs compliance with such
disarmament obligations&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#> S#07-D#7#%6#> W$&
1998 N/ IIF&
.t the /uremberg trial of the /a#i war criminals at the end of the
World War II& the defense argued on behalf of the ,erman defendants that
although a nation could not wage aggressi$e war without transgressing
International law, it could use war as an Instrument of selfEdefense,
and that the nation itself must be the sole %udge of whether its actions
were in selfEdefense& How would you meet the argument if you were a
member of the Tribunal trying the case; L)*M
(+,,-(T-D ./(W-R0
/o rule of International law gi$es a state resorting to war
allegedly in selfEdefense the right to determine with a legally
conclusi$e effect the legality of such action&
The Cudgment of the /uremberg International !ilitary Tribunal
re%ected the defense of the /a#i war criminals0
H@ut whether action taken under the claim of selfEdefense was in
fact agressi$e or defensi$e must ultimately be sub%ect to in$estigation
and ad%udication if international law is e$er to be enforced&H
.DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
International law on selfEdefense cannot assume the nature of war&
War reAuires Ha declaration of war gi$ing reasonsH under the Hague
1on$ention II of 5647& Precisely, the /a#i war criminal were indicted
before the /uremberg Tribunal for $iolating this 1on$ention and were
found guilty&
(ince the /a#i war criminal argued that war as selfEdefense is
understood by them as meaning Hthat the nation itself must be the sole
Cudge of whether its action were in selfEdefenseH, it is clear that what
they had in mind in fact is Hwar as an instrument of national policyH,
not selfEdefense as an ob%ecti$e right under International law&
Waging was as an instrument of national law is prohibited by the
Pact of Paris of 568? (Oellog E @raid Part of which ,ermany was already
a state party before the (econd World War& Precisely, the ,erman Reich
was indicted before the /uremberg Tribunal for $iolation of the Pact of
Paris and the /a#i war criminals were found guilty of this as a war
crime&
Hence, the argument is itself an admission of $iolation of
international law&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#> T#&&/&!64> S#07-D#7#%6#
2002 N/ III&
9n 9ctober 53, 8445, members of .li @aba, a political e'tremist
organi#ation based in and under the protection of 1ountry I and
espousing $iolence worldwide as a means of achie$ing its ob%ecti$es,
planted highEpowered e'plosi$es and bombs at the International Trade
Tower (ITT in Cewel 1ity in 1ountry <, a member of the +nited /ations&
.s a result of the bombing and the collapse of the 544Estory twin
towers, about 8,444 people, including women and children, were killed or
in%ured, and billions of dollars in property were lost&
Immediately after the incident, .li @aba, speaking through its
leader @in Derdandat, admitted and owned responsibility for the bombing
of ITT, saying that it was done to pressure 1ountry < to release
captured members of the terrorist group& .li @aba threatened to repeat
its terrorist acts against 1ountry < if the latter and its allies failed
to accede to .li @abaBs demands& In response, 1ountry F demanded that
1ountry I surrender and deli$er @in Derdandat to the go$ernment
authorities of 1ountry < for the purpose of trial and Hin the name of
%ustice&H 1ountry I refused to accede to the demand of 1ountry <&
What action or actions can 1ountry < legally take against .li @aba
and 1ountry I to stop the terrorist acti$ities of .li @aba and dissuade
1ountry I from harboring and gi$ing protection to the terrorist
organi#ation; (upport your answer with reasons& ()*
(5 1ountry < may e'ercise the right of selfEdefense, as
pro$ided under .rticle )5 of the +/ 1harter Huntil the (ecurity 1ouncil
has taken measure necessary to maintain international peace and
securityH& (elfEdefense enables 1ountry < to use force against 1ountry I
as well as against the .li @aba organi#ation&
(8 It may bring the matter to the (ecurity 1ouncil which may
authori#e sanctions against 1ountry I, including measure in$oking the
use of force& +nder .rticle 2 of the +/ 1harter, 1ountry < may use force
against 1ountry I as well as against the .li @aba organi#ation by
authority of the +/ (ecurity 1ouncil&
(-19/D .DT-R/.TIF- ./(W-R0
+nder the (ecurity 1ouncil Resolution /o& 53:?, the terrorist
attack of .li @aba may be defined as a threat to peace, as it did in
defining the (eptember 55, 8445 attacks against the +nited (tates& The
resolution authori#es military and other actions to respond to terrorist
attacks& Howe$er, the use of military force must be proportionate and
intended for the purpose of detaining the persons allegedly responsible
for the crimes and to destroy military ob%ecti$es used by the
terrorists&
The fundamental principles of international humanitarian law
should also be respected& 1ountry < cannot be granted sweeping
discretionary powers that include the power to decide what states are
behind the terrorist organi#ations& It is for the (ecurity 1ouncil to
decide whether force may be used against specific states and under what
conditions the force may be used&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#> UN C9$&"#&> T9&#$" O& U6# /7 8/&.#
1994 N/& 56G
The (tate of /o$a, controlled by an authoritarian go$ernment, had
unfriendly relations with its neighboring state, .meria& @resla, another
neighboring state, had been shipping arms and ammunitions to /o$a for
use in attacking .rneria&
To forestall an attack, .meria placed floating mines on the
territorial waters surrounding /o$a& .meria supported a group of rebels
organi#ed to o$erthrow the go$ernment of /o$a and to replace it with a
friendly go$ernment&
/o$a decided to file a case against .meria in the International
1ourt of Custice
5 9n what grounds may /o$aBs causes of action against .meria be
based;
8 9n what grounds may .meria mo$e to dismiss the case with the
I1C;
3 Decide the case& .nswer0
5 If /o$a and .meria are members of the +nited /ations, /o$a
can premise its cause of action on a $iolation of .rticle 8(2 of the
+nited /ations 1harter, which reAuires members to refrain from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any state& If either or both /o$a or .meria are not
members of the +nited /ations, /o$a may premise its cause of action on a
$iolation of the nonEuse of force principle in customary international
law which e'ists parallel to .rticle 8(2 of the +nited /ations 1harter&
In the 1ase 1oncerning !ilitary and Paramilitary .cti$ities in and
.gainst /icaragua (56?: I1C Rep& 52, the International 1ourt of Custice
considered the planting of mines by one state within the territorial
waters of another as a $iolation of .rticle 8(2 of the +nited /ations
1harter& If the support pro$ided by .meria to the rebels of /o$a goes
beyond the mere gi$ing of monetary or psychological support but consists
in the pro$ision of arms and training, the acts of .meria can be
considered as indirect aggression amounting to another $iolation of
.rticle 8(2&
In addition, e$en if the pro$ision of support is not enough to
consider the act a $iolation of the nonEuse of force principle, this is
a $iolation of the principle of nonEinter$ention in customary
International law&
.ggression is the use of armed force by a state against the
so$ereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another
state or in any other manner inconsistent with the +nited /ations
1harter&
8 @y $irtue of the principle of so$ereign immunity, no
so$ereign state can be made a party to a proceeding before the
International 1ourt of Custice unless it has gi$en its consent& &&&
3 If %urisdiction o$er .meria is established, the case should be
decided in fa$or of /o$a, because .meria $iolated the principle against
the use of force and the principle of nonEInter$ention& The defense of
anticipatory selfEdefense cannot be sustained, because there is no
showing that /o$a had mobili#ed to such an e'tent that if .meria were to
wait for /o$a to strike first it would not be able to retaliate&
Howe$er, if %urisdiction o$er .meria is not established, the case
should be decided in fa$or of .meria because of the principle of
so$ereign immunity&
PIL> U6# /7 8/&.#> W$&> C/4($"$%"6KP&!6/%#&6 /7 W$&
199? N/& 30
Reden, Colan and .ndy& >ilipino tourists, were in @osniaE
Her#ego$ina when hostilities erupted between the (erbs and the !oslems&
Penniless and caught in the crossfire, Reden, Colan, and .ndy, being
retired generals, offered their ser$ices to the !oslems for a handsome,
salary, which offer was accepted& When the (erbian /ational ,uard
approached (ara%e$o, the !oslem ci$ilian population spontaneously took
up arms to resist the in$ading troops& /ot finding time to organi#e, the
!oslems wore armbands to identify themsel$es, $owing to obser$e the laws
and customs of war& The three >ilipinos fought side by side with the
!oslems& The (erbs pre$ailed resulting in the capture of Reden, Colan
and .ndy, and part of the ci$ilian fighting force&
5 .re Reden, Colan and .ndy considered combatants thus entitled
to treatment as prisoners of war;
8 .re the captured ci$ilians likewise prisoners of war; .nswer0
5 Reden, Colan and .ndy are not combatants and are not entitled
to treatment as prisoners of war, because they are mercenaries& .rticle
27 of the Protocol I to the ,ene$a 1on$entions of 5626 pro$ides0
H. !ercenary shall not ha$e the right to be combatant or a
prisoner of war&H
Pursuant to .rticle 27 of Protocol I of the ,ene$a 1on$entions of
5626, Reden, Colan, and .ndy are mercenaries, because they were
recruited to fight in an armed conflict, they in fact took direct part
in the hostilities, they were moti$ated to take part in the hostilities
essentially by the desire for pri$ate gain and in fact was promised a
handsome salary by the !oslems, they were neither nationals of a party
to the conflict nor residents of territory controlled by a party to the
conflict, they are not members of the armed forces of a party to the
conflict, and they were not sent by a state which is not a party to the
conflict on official duty as members of its armed forces&
8 The captured ci$ilians are prisoners of war& +nder .rticle 2
of the ,ene$a 1on$ention relati$e to the Treatment of Prisoners of War,
inhabitants of a nonEoccupied territory, who on the approach of the
enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the in$ading forces, without
ha$ing had time to form themsel$es into regular armed forces, pro$ided
they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war, are
considered prisoners of war if they fall into the power of the enemy&

Political Law Review Q & A 1987-2004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Political Law Review Q & A 1987-2004

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Political Law Review Q & A 1987-2004

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANSWERS TO BAR

You might also like