ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R.

REGADO 1
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

CONSTI SYLLABUS

ART 1: NATIONAL TERRITORY

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all
other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial
domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. 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 .
NOTES
Purpose of Definition of National territory Archipelagic Principle
1. 1953 Consti Assertion that waters around,
Fear that US govt might between and connecting the islands of
dismember PH territory hence archipelago, irrespective of their bredth
this dismemberment could be and dimension form part of the internal
forestalled by definition waters of the Philippines
2. Under 1973 + Straight baseline method of
For preservation of national delineating the territorial Sea
wealth, security and
manifestation of our solidarity 2 ways of Drawing Baseline
as people 1. NORMAL
3. Under 1987 Drawn following low water line along
For educational value + coast as marked on large-scale charts
Apprehension officialy recognized by coastal state
2. STRAIGHT
Drawn connecting selected points on
coasts. These divide internal waters
from territorial waters.
SCOPE OF NATIONAL TERRITORY EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
1.) Philippine Archipelago --- 200 nautical miles. A coastal nation has control
2.) All other territories over which of all economic resources within this zone,
Philippines has sovereignty or including fishing, mining, oil exploration etc.
jurisdiction
3.) Territorial Sea, Sea bed,
Subsoil, Insular Shelves and
other Submarine Areas
1. PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO
Archipelago
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 2
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

Body of water studded Territorial Sea

with islands marginal belt of maritime water adjacent to the
Phil archipelago was base lines extending 12 nautical miles outward,
delineated n Treaty of - subject to right of innocent
Paris, modified by Treaty passage by other states
of Washington and Treaty RIGHT F INNOCENT PASSAGE
with Great Brtain 1. INTERNATIONAL STRAITS
1973 Const deleted 2. TERRITORIAL SEA (NO AIR
mention of treaties to PASAGE OF AIRCRAFT
erase every trace of our GEENERALLY ALLOWED
colonial history 3. ARCHIPELAGIC WATERS (AIR
All other territories over which PASSAGE ALLOWED)
Phil has sovereignty or INTERNAL WATERS
jurisdiction absolute sovereignty.
Present or future Waters around, between and connecting.
Territorial Sea, Sea bed, the TERRESTRIAL
subsoil and insular shelves All surfaces of land above sea
and other submarine areas FLUVIAL
corresponding to 1st and 2nd Inland water
mentioned above. AERIAL
- Lays claim to extent Air directly above territorial Sea
recognized by
International Law
I. TREATY OF PARIS
Dec 1898
Spain ceded US archipelago
known as Phil islands and
coprehendng islands lying within.
Technical descrption left some
doubt about inclusion within
ceded territory of Batanes islands
to the north and of islands of
Sibutu and Cagayan de sulu as
well as Turtle and Mangsee
Islands.
II. TREATY OF WASHINGTON
Nov 1900, corrected error w/
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 3
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

respect to Islands of Sibutu and

Cagayan de Sulu and jurisdiction
over Turtle and Mangsee Islands.
III. TREATY OF GREAT BRITAIN
Jan 1930
Doubts about Batanes, left
unclarified.

CASES: (VALIDITY OF RA 9255)

MAGALONA V. EXEC SECRETARY ERMITA
Recit Ready:
Petitioners are assailing constitutionality of RA 9522 which mandates the
adjustment of PHs archipelagic baselines and classifying the baseline
regime of nearby territories.
HISTORY (PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF RA 9522)
1961 RA 3046
- Demarcating maritime baselines of Philippines as an Archipelagic state
- Followed framing of (UNCLOS 1 in 1958) [United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea]
- UNCLOS codified sovereign right of states parties over the territorial
sea
1968 RA 5446
- Legislature passed correcting typographical errors and reserving the
drawing of baselines around Sabah in North Borneo
2009 RA 9522
- Act of congress amending RA 3046
- Propted by need to make RA 3046 compliant with terms of UNCLOS III
- UNCLOS III, prescribes water-land ratio, length and contour of
baselines of archipelagic state and sets deadline for filing application
for extended continental shelf
- Shortened one baseline, optimized location of some basepoints around
PH and classified adjacent territories (Kalayaan Island Group) and
Scarborough Shoal as regime of islands whose islands generate their
own maritime zones.

*Petitioners, professors of law, law students, legislatr assail the constitutionality of RA

9522.

ISSUES: + HELD :
1. Whether RA 9522 reduces Philippine maritime tterritory and logically, the
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 4
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

reach of Philippine States sovereign power in violation of Art 1 of 1987

Consti which embodies terms of Treaty of Paris and ancillary treaties
NO . UNCLOS III, has nothing to do w/ acquisition or loss of territory. It is
a multilateral treaty regulating sea-use rights over martime zones.
Baseline law such as RA 9522 are enacted by UNCLOS III, only serve to
mark out specific basepoints from which baselines are drawn either
straight/contoured and to serve as geographic starting points to measure
the breadth of maritime zones and continental shelf.
This baseline delimitation done by states serves sto give notice to
international community of the scope that states can exercise treaty based
rights (sovereignty over territorial wasters, jurisdiction to enforce custom,
fiscal, immigration and other laws) and the right to exploit resources from
exclusive areas.
Boundaries of rectangular delineated in the treaty of Paris cannot be used
as a basis SINCE UNCLOS IS ALREADY INTERNATIONALY AGREED
ruler or set of standards in measuring baselines.
States acquire or lose territory through occupation, cession, accretion and
prescription. NOT THROUGH MULTILATERAL TREATIES.
UNCLOS III did not surrender any territory since it only pertains to sea use
rights.
2. Whether RA 9522 opens countrys waters landard of baselines to maritime
passage by all vessels and aircrafts undermining Phil sovereignty and
national security contravening the countrys nuclear free policy and
damaging marine resources in violation of relevant consti provisions.
NO. Philippines cannot defy customary international law of right to safe
passage as identified by Sec 2 of Art 2 Phil adopts the generally accepted
principles of intl law as part of the law of the land.
UNCLOS III provides a safeguard since it allows states to exercise
sovereignty over the body of water lying landward of baselines, airspace
over t and submarine areas underneath.
BUT IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW
PRINCIPLES OF FREEDOM OF NAVIGATION, government may pass
legislation designating routhes within archipelagic waters for innocent and
sea lanes passage.
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 5
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

3. Whether there is loss of large maritime area (loss of 15,000 nautical miles)
prejudicing the livelihood and subsistence fishermen by treating KIG as
regime of islands
NO. RA 9522 followed basepoints of RA 3046, except for at least 9
basepoints that it skipped to optimize the location of basepoints and adjst
the length to comply with limitations of UNCLOS III
This resulted in an increase of Philippines total maritime space by
145,216 nautical miles.
RA 3046 RA 9522
Internal or Archipelagic 166,858 171,435
Waters
Territorial Sea 274,136 32,106

Exclusive Economic Zone 382,669

TOTAL 440,994 586,210

4. Whether Failure of RA 9522 to reference either Treaty of Paris or Sabah and

use of UNCLOS framework of regime of islands to determine maritime
zones of KIG and Scarborough Shoal. Thus the statute dismembers a large
portion of national territory under 1935, 1973, 1987 constitutions. The
technical description under treaty of Paris is that Philippine Sovereignty
over territorial waters extends hundreds of nautical miles around the
archipelago embracing the rectangular area delineated in treaty.
NO. Although Scarborough and KIG are outside baselines drawn around
archipelago under RA 9522, determination of KIG as regime of islands
under Philippines means that international community SHOULD
RESPECT PHILIPPINES CLAIM TO REGIME OF ISLANDS AS PART
OF ITS TERRITORY OF ISLANDS.
According to Sen.Santiago, we are still allowed by international law to
claim them as our own. Regime of Islands classification is an exercise
of observance of PHs pacta sunt servanda obligation under UNCLOS
III.
any naturally formed area of land surrounded by water above high
tide.
Portions of KIG falls under the category of regime of islands that generate
their own applicable maritime zones.
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 6
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

We cannot enclose KIG and Scarborough in baseline with the Philippine

archipelago for it would be breach of UNCLOSIII.
UNCLOS III: Length of baseline shall not exceed 100 nautical miles save
3% of the total number of baselines which can reach up to 125 nautical
miles. (Art 47-2)
As for Sabah, Sec 2 Explicitly states that the definition of baselines of
territorial sea of the Philippine archipelago asprovided in this act is
without prejudice to the delineation of baselines of the territorial sea
around the territory of Sabah, situated in North Borneo over which PH
has acquired dominion and sovereignty
NOTES:
*Innocent Passage passage not prejudicial to interest of coastal state or contrary to
principles of international law.
**Baseline laws statutory mechanisms for UNCLOS III to delimit with precision the
extent of maritime zones and continental shelves
*** UNCLOS law of the seas not law of the territory
**** Territorial Sea marginal belt of maritime water adjacent to the base lines
extending 12 nautical miles outward, subject to right of innocent passage by other
states
***** Internal Waters/Territoral waters all parts of the sea landwards from baseline
and inland rivers and lakes (under 1973 consti, no right to innocent passage.
{established right of innocent passage BUT new rule applies to areas NOT previously
considered as internal waters.
PCA CASE In matter of South China Sea Arbitration
RECIT READY:
Arbitration between Philippines and China concerns disputes regarding legal
basis of maritime rights and entitlements in the South China Sea the status of
certain geographic features in South China Sea an the lawfulness of certain
action taken by China in said sea.
South China Sea lies south of china and west of Philippines. Also near to
other countries such as Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei.
(3.5 million sq.k)
Southern portion of SC Sea is also location of Spratly Islands, a constellation
of small islands and coral reefs existing above or below water
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 7
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

Basis for arbitration is the 1982 UNCLOS where both Phil and China are
parties in order to settle all issues relating to laws of the sea.
CHINA CLAIMS PHILIPPINE CLAIMS
-has historic rights based on - Respective right is govered by UNCLOS
nine-dash line - Scarborough Shoal and eight of such
- subject matter of arbitration features of Spratlys are low-tide
is the territorial sovereignty elevations or submerged bas that merely
beyond scope of convention. generate Territorial Sea and not
exclusive economic zone or Continental
Shelf
- China violated UNCLOS by interefering
with Phs sovereign rights and freedoms,
through construction and fishing
activities.
WHAT + DECISIONS
1. Nine Dash Line and Chinas claim of historic rights in maritime areas of
SCS
- Chinas claim of historic rights to resources was incompatible with the
detailed allocation of rights and maritime zones in the convention.
- China had historic rights to resources of SCS waters, extinguished when
Convention entered into force to the extent that they were incompatible
with Conventions system of maritime zones.
- Prior to convention, waters of SCS beyond territorial sea were legally
considered part of high seas where vessels of any state can fish and
navigate,
- Historical navgaton as claimed were exercise of high sea freedoms
rather than a historic right. No evidence if china had historically
exercised exclusive control.
- NO BASIS FOR HISTORIC RIGHTS
2. Statues of features in SCS
ART 13 & 121
: features above water at high tide: entitlement of at least 12 nautical
mile territorial sea
: features submerged during high tide generate no entitlement to
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 8
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

maritime zones
WHAT STATUS
Scarborough Shoal, Johnson Reef, High Tide Features
Cuateron Reef and Fiery Cross Reef
Subi Reef, Hughes Reef, Mischief Reef, Submerged at high tide in their natural
and Second Thomas Shoal condition
Gaven Reef and McKennan Reef High Tide features.

Whether any of the features claimed by China could generate an entitlement

to martime zones beyond 12 nautical miles
Art 121 of Convention
Islands generate entitlement to an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles
and to a continental shelf
(NO EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OR CONTINENTAL SHELF) But rocks
which
1.) Cannot sustain human habitation
2.) Or economic life
3.) Of their own
All high tide features of Spratly Isands are legally rocks that do not generate an
exclusive economic zone.

ART 2: DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES

PRELIMINARY ISSUE: LEGAL VALUE OF ART 2

KILOSBAYAN V. MORATO
Facts:
As a result of decision in Kilosbayan Incorporated v. Guingona invalidating
Contract of Lease betwee PCSO and PGMC on ground that it had been
made in violation of charter of PCSO, parties entered into negotiations for
a new agreement that will be consistent with latters PCSO Charter.
In Jan. 25, 1995, PCSO and PGMC signed an Equipment Lease
Agreement (ELA) wherein PGMC leased online lottery equipment and
accessories to PCSO. (Rental of 4.3% of the gross amount of ticket or at
least P35,000 per terminal annually).
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 9
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

30% of the net receipts is allotted to charity.

Term of lease is for 8 years. PCSO is to employ its own personnel and
responsible for the facilities.
Upon the expiration of lease, PCSO may purchase the equipment for P25
million.
Feb. 21, 1995. A petition was filed to declare ELA invalid because it is the
same as the Contract of Lease Petitioner's Contention: ELA was
substantially the same to the old lease contract.
It is still violative of PCSO's charter. It is violative of the law regarding
public bidding.
It violates Sec. 2(2) of Art. 9-D of the 1987 Constitution: Standing can no
longer be questioned because it has become the law of the case
Respondent's reply: ELA is different from the Contract of Lease. There is
no bidding required because it fell in the exceptions provided in EO 301.
The power to determine if ELA is advantageous is vested in the Board of
Directors of PCSO. And tht PCSO does not have funds to purchase its
own on-line lottery equipment and has to enter lease contract
Respondents question right of petitioners to bring suit on the ground that
they are not parties to contract of lease which they seek to nullify, they
have no personal and substantial interest likely to be enjoyed.
Petitioners invoke the following Principles and State policies found in Art 2
of constitution
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life,
liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare are
essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of
democracy.
Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall
protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social
institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of
the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty
of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the
development of moral character shall receive the support of the
Government.
Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 10
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral,

spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the
youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement
in public and civic affairs.
Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and
technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and
nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human
liberation and development.
ISSUE:
WHETHER RESPONDENTS ARE REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST
These are not however self-executing provisions, disregard of which can
give rise to cause of action in the court. They do not embody judicially
enforceable constitutional rights but guidelines for legislation.
In actions for annulment of contracts, real parties are those who are
parties to the agreement and are bound ether principally or subsidiarity or
are prejudiced in their rights with respect to one of the contracting parties
and can show the detriment which would positively result to them from the
contract even though they did not intervene in it or wo claim a right to take
part in public bidding but have been legally excluded from it
PREVIOUS CONTRACT PRESENT CONTRACT
- PCSO and PGMC for operation of an on-line PCSO now bears all loses
lottery system was actually a joint venture because the operation of the system is
agreement or at the very least a contract completely in its hands
involving collaboration or association with Feature of new contract
another party and for that reason was void negates any doubt that it is anything
1.) PCSO had neither funds nor expertise to but a lease agreement
operate the online lottery system so it would
be dependent with PGMC for operations
2.) PGMC would exclusively bear all costs and
expenses for printing tickets, payment of
salaries. Unusual in lessor-lessee
relationship but inherent with joint venture .
PGMC binds itself to bear all risks if revenue
for ticket sales on an annual basis are
insufficient to pay entire prize money
It was in a effect a lease by PCSO of its
franchise to PGMC
What PCSO is prohibited from doing is to invest in a business engaged in same
nature and it is prohibited from doing so whether in collaboration, association or
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 11
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

joint venture with others or by itself. PCSO should not invest in business of a
competitor.
(MOTION for RECONSIDERATION)
It was previously held that because there are no genuine issues of
constitutionality in this case, the rule concerning real party in
interest, applicable to private litigation rather than the more liberal
rule on standing applies to petitoners
Two objections are made against the ruling
1. Constitutional policies and principles invoked by petitioners, while not
supplying the basis for affirmative relief from the courts, may
nonetheless be resorted to for striking down laws or official actions
which are inconsistent with them.
2. Constitution, by guaranteeing to independent peoples organizations
the effective and reasonable participation in all levels of social, political
and economic decision making (Art XIII, Sec 6) grants them standing
to sue on constitutional ground.
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and
property, and promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by
all the people of the blessings of democracy.
Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally
protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The
natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic
efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the
Government.
Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and
shall promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social
well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and
encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.

Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts,
culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social
progress, and promote total human liberation and development
As already stated however, this provisions are not self-executing. They do not
confer rights which can be enforced in courts but only provide guidelines for
legislative or executive action.
It is noteworthy that petitioners do not question the validity of law allowing
lotteries. It is the contract entered into by the PCSO and PGMC which they are
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 12
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

assailing.
This case therefore does not raise issues of constitutionality but only of contract
of law which petitioners , not being privies to the agreement cannot raise.
TONDO MEDICAL V. CA
RECIT READY:
Petitioner Estrada issued E.O 102, entitled Redirecting the Functions and
Operations of the DOH which provided for the changes in roles, functions
and organizational process of DOH
Under assailed executive order, DOH refocused its mandate from being a
sole provider of health services to being a provider of specific health
services and technical assistance and LGUs are responsible for providing
medical assistance to their territories as part of the devolution of govt.
In line with said E.O, DOH launched the HSRA Health Sector Reform
Agenda by HSRA technical working group which provided for 5 general
areas of reform
1. To provide fiscal autonomy to government hospitals
2. Secure funding for priority public health programs
3. Promote the development of local health systems and secure its
effective performance
4. Strengthen capacities of health regulatory agencies
5. Expand coverage of NHIP (National Health Insurance Program)
Herein petitioners questioned the following violation of Sections of Article
2 of 1987 Consti
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life,
liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare are
essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of
democracy
Section 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order
that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and
free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate
social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living,
and an improved quality of life for all.
Section 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of
national development.
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 13
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

Section 11. The State values the dignity of every human person and
guarantees full respect for human rights.
Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-
building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral,
spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the
youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement
in public and civic affairs.
Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of
the people and instill health consciousness among them.
Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic
force. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.
When cases reached CA, it ruled that HSRA cannot be
declared void because of he aforementioned provisions of the
constitution are not self-executing; they are not judicially
enforceable constitutional rights and they provide only
guidelines for legislation
ISSUE + HELD:
Whether CA erred in ruling that any question on wisdom and efficacy of HSRA is
not a justiciable controversy and that the constitutional provisions protecting
health of Filipino people are not judicially enforceable
No.
As a general rule:
The constitution is considered self-executing since if it still requires future
legislation for their enforcement, the mandate of fundamental law can be easily
nullified by inaction of Congress.
HOWEVER
Some provisions were declared by court as non-self-executing. As stated in
Tanada v. Agrava, the sections under Art II are not self-executing because Art 2
of consti is a declaration of principles ready for enforcement through the courts.
They are used by judiciary as aids or as guides in the exercise of its power of
judicial review and by the legislature in its enactment of laws.
(mere directives addressed to the executive and legislative departments)
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 14
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

Bases Conversion and Development Authority V. COA

RECIT READY:
March 1992, Congress approved RA No. 7227 creating Bases Conversion
and Development Authority.
Under Section 10, functions of the board include the determination of the
organizational structure and the adoption of a compensation and benefit
scheme at least equivalent to that of BSP.
In line with its power to compensate in 1996, BCDA released Year end
Benefit (YEB) worth P10,000 and granted it to each contractual employee
and Board member.
In 1999, BSP gave P30,000 YEB to its officials and employees
In 2000, BSP increased YEB from P30,000 to P35,000.
So pursuant to Sec 10 of RA 7227, which states that compensation and
benefit scheme of BCDA shall be at least equivalent to that of BSP, board
increased YEB .
On February 2003, State Auditor IV, Corazon Espano of COA, issued
Audit Observattion Memorandum stating that the grant of Year End
Benefit to Board members was contrary to the DBM circular.
They served a notice of disallowance to YEB thereafter.
BCDA president and Chief Executive Officer Rufo Colayco requested the
reconsideration of decision appealing to COA.
ISSUE + HELD:
Whether board can grant YEB to its members and full time consultant on ground
that it is consistent with Sec 5 and 8 of Article 2.
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and
property, and promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by
all the people of the blessings of democracy
Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall
protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.

NO. Art 2 is a statement of general ideological principles and policies. It is not a

source of enforceable rights. Sec 5 and 18 of Article 2 are not self-executing
provisions.
Board members and full time consultants cannot be granted YEB because of
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 15
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

said functions of the Board under Sec 10 of RA 7227. Since under Sec 9 of said
RA, it specifies that Board members shall receive a per diem for every board
meeting. It is limited only to not more than P5,000. This is limited to the total
amount of per diem for one month to not more than 4 meetings. Thus board is
limited by the law in terms of compensation
Additionally, Under DBM Circular, it states that members of Board of Directors of
agencies are not salaried officials of govt,. As non-salaried officials they are not
entitled to YEB and retirement benefits unless expressly provided by law to
which RA 7227 does not state
As to full-time consultants, BCDA shall pay consultants a contract price because
they are not basic salary due because there is no employer-employee
relationship between them and BCDA
** PERA, ADCOM, YEB, Retirement Benefits
SEC 1: PHILIPPINE AS A DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN STATE
PEOPLE
TERRITORY
GOVERNMENT
FUNCTION OF GOVT
CONSTITUENT V. MINISTRANT
BACANI V. NACOCO (INCORPORATED)

ACCFA V. CUGCO ( UNINCORPORATED)

RECIT READY:
Agricultral Credit and Cooperative Financing Administration (ACFA) was a
government agency created under RA No. 821.
Its administrative machinery was reorganized ad its name is changed to
Agricultural Credit Administration (ACA) under the Land Reform Code (RA
3844)
On the otherhand ACCFA Supervisors Association (ASA) and ACCFA
Workers Association (AWA) herein referred to as Unions are labor
organizations composed of the supervisors aand rank and file employees,
respectively in ACCFA (now ACA)
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 16
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

On Sept 1961, a Collective Barganing Agreement which was effective for

1 year was entered between the Unions and ACA
A few months after, Unions started protesting against alleged violations on
non-implemetation of said agreement.
Oct 1962, Unions declared a strike which was ended when the strikers
voluntarily returned to work of Nov 1962.
Oct 1962, Unions, together with mother union, Confederation of Unions in
Government Coproroations and Offices (CUGCO) filed a complaint
against ACCFA for having allegedly committed acts of unfair labor practice
in violation of CBA, the right to self-organization, discrimination against
said members in the matter of promotions and refusal to bargain.
CIR rendered its decision and asked ACA to desist from committing any
acts of violation to CBA.
ACA appealed decision by challenging jurisdiction of CIR to entertain
petition of Unions for certification election on ground that it (ACA) is
engaged in government functions
ISSUE + HELD:
Whether CIR has jurisdiction to entertain petition of Unions for Certification
election given that ACA is engaged in governmental functions
No. Union have no right to the certification election sought by them nor
consequently to bargain collectively with petitioner
No fringe benefits may be demanded based on CBA
The power to audit operations of farmers cooperatives and otherwise
inquire into their affairs as given in Sec 113 is in nature of a visitorial
power of the sovereign which only government agency specially delegated
to do so by Congress may legally exercise. The implementation of the
land reform program of government is most certainly a government and
not a proprietary function.
Although ACA is a government office and agency engaged in govt and not
proprietary function, these functins may not be strictly described as
constituent as distinguished from ministrant
The growing complexities of modern society however have rendered this
traditional classification of the functions of govt quite unrealistic not to say
obsolete.
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 17
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

The areas which used to be left to private enterprise and initiative and
which govt was called upon to enter optionally and only because it was
better equipped to administer for public welfare than private individual or
group of individuals, continute to lose their well defined bounderies and to
be absorbed within activities that the govet must undertake in its sovereign
capacity if it is to meet the increasing challenges of the times.
ACA was delegated under Land Reform Project Administration, a
government agency tasked to implement land reform. There can be no
dispute as to the fact that land reform program contemplated beyond the
capabilities of any private enterprise to translate into reality is a purely
government function.
Therefore, respondent unions are not entitled to the certification election
sought. Such certification admittedly for purpose of bargaining in behalf of
employees with respect to terms and conditions of employment including
right to strike,.
Given ACA has govt character, strike was contrary to RA 875 which
prohibits strikes against govt.
NOTES:
GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS
CONSTITUENT (BACANI V. NACOCO) MINISTRANT
- Constitute the very bonds of the - Undertaken only by way of
society and are compulsory in advancing general interests of
nature society and are merely otional
- Example: maintaining peace
and prevention of crime ,
regulating property.
- Exercised by state as attribute
of sovereignty
*** ACA is a government office or agency engaged in governmental not
proprietary functions

EXAMPLES OF GOVT EXERCISING FUNCTIONS THROUGH CORP OR

INSTRUMENTALITIES
GOCC
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 18
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

VFP V. REYES
RECIT READY:
Veterans Federation of the Philippines is an organization created under
RA 2640 in 1960.
Over 2002-2003, VFP received multiple letters from the Secretary of
National Defense
1st letter
------ asking for a clarification between the relationship of VFP and the Philippine
Veterans Bank to DND.
Sections of RA 2640:
Sec 1: VFP shall be under the control and supervision of DND secretary
Sec 12: VFP shall make an audit to the President or to DND Secretary
2nd letter
---- circular clarifying relationship between VFP and DND
Sec 3: Clarifies that VFPindeed is underneath control and supervision of DND
and is required to make audits like a government agency.
3rd Letter
----- mandating VFP to conduct a management audit.
VFP filed a petition for certiorari claiming that DND unfairly expanded the
scope of control and supervision in RA 2640. Petitioner laims that it is not
a public nor government entity but a private organization and advances
this claim to prove that DND Circular is invalid exercise of respondent
secretarys control and supervision.
They pray that court issue an injunction of the DND circular and may it be
declared as null and void
ISSUE + HELD:
Whether veterans federation created by law is a public office, considering that it
does not possess a portion of the sovereign functions of government and
considering fthrer that it has no budgetary appropriation from DBM and its funds
comes from membership dues.
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 19
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

Yup, VFP is a public corporation.This is evident in the definition of power to

control.
Power of an officer to alter, modify or nullify and set aside what a subordinate
has done in the performance of his duties to substitute the judgment of the
former or that of the latter.
Definition of supervision on the other hand is overseeing or the power or
authority of an officer to see the subordinate officers perform their duties.
If the later fail or neglect to fulfill them, the former may take such ation or step as
prescribed by law to make them perform their duties.
Thus department circular are mere consequences of control and supervision.
As such, VFP is underneath the DND secretary, a public officer.
Our constitution explicitly prohibit the regulation by special laws of private
corporations with the exception of GOCC.
Hence it would be impermissible for law to grant control of VFP to a public official
if it were neither a public corp or unincorporated government entity nor GOCC
Additionally public character can be understood as that of exercising sovereign
function. In several cases, we have dealt with issue of whether certain specific
activities can be classified as sovereign functions. These cases, which deal with
activities not immediately apparent to be sovereign functions, upheld the public
sovereign nature of operations needed either to promote social justice or
stimulate patriotic sentiments for love of country
Areas which used to be left to private enterprice and initiative continue to lose
their well-defined bounderies and to be absorbed within activities that
government must undertake in its sovereign capacity.
In the case at bar, functions of petitioner corporation enshrined in Sec 4 of RA
2640 should most certainly fall within category of sovereign functions.
Protection of interests of war veterans is not only meant to promote social justice,
but is also intended to reward patriotism.
All the functions in Sec 4 cocern the lives and lost their limbs in fighting for and
defending our nation. It would be injustice of catastrophic proportions to say that
it is beyond sovereigntys power to reward the people who defend her.
Source of funds does not matter. RA 2640 itsself states that these are public
funds. (Exclusive benefit of veterans, sole purpose of benefits and not profit of
members.
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 20
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

Defense that DND did not exercise control because it historically has never done
sso, letting members control for themselves voluntarily. As we all know, laws are
repealed by disuse, custom or practice to the contrary,.
NOTES:
Public office
- is the right, authority, and duty created and conferred by law by which, for a given
period, either fixed b law or enduring at the pleasure of the creating power, an individual
is invested with some portion of sovereign functions of government to be exercised by
him for the benefit of the public
** there is nothing wrong whether legally or morally from raising revenues through non-
traditional methods.
*** DND more of an expert than DBM in knowing the organizations under it.

JAVIER V. SANDIGANBAYAN

INSTRUMENTALITIES
MIAA V. CA
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 21
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

FUNA V. MECO AND COA

QUASI-PUBLIC CORP
PHIL SOCIETY V. COA
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 22
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

STATE UNIV
SERENA V. SANDIGANBAYAN
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 23
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

DE JURE AND DE FACTO GOVT

CO KIM CHAM V. VALDEZ TAN KEH

LETTER OF ASSOCIATE JUSTICE PUNO

ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 24
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

REPUBLIC V. SANDIGANBAYAN

SOVEREIGNTY
ALEEZAH GERTRUDE R. REGADO 25
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEWER

PEOPLE V. GOZO