Pointers: Oct. 26 Political Law Lecture Atty.

Sandoval

 JUDICIAL POWER
o following the doctrine of separation of powers, judicial power shall be vested in
one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law
o Article 8, Section 1, Par 1
o Memorize 2nd paragraph – definition of Judicial Power
o In our earlier Constitutions (1935, 1978), there was no definition of Judicial
Power there. The provisions there merely states that judicial power shall be vested
in the Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law.
o includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies – highlight
the word DUTY. In other words, it is not simply a power. Duty of the courts of
justice mandatorily to be performed by the courts to remain faithful to the
constitution.
o TRADITIONAL CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL POWER:
 Duty to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable
 How Judicial power is understood in our previous Constitution; limited
only to the duty of the courts to settle actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable. Previously, whenever a
case is filed before a Court, the SolGen would normally argue that the
question being raised is a political question. If the court is convinced that
such question raised is a political question, then the court has no choice
but to dismiss it in view of the doctrine of separation of powers.
o EXPANDED POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
 Duty of the courts of justice to determine whether or not there has been
a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.
 because of this expanded power, the so-called political question doctrine
has been expressly amended
 At present, even if the question presented before the court is a political
question, as long as there is a grave abuse of discretion…. then the court
may still intrude into those questions.
 a.k.a. Extraordinary power of the courts
 POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE
 In general are questions of policy
 They involve the wisdom of an act or efficacy of a particular measure
 Courts are not supposed to intrude into those questions because courts are
not supposed to lay out policies. This is from the doctrine of separation of
powers. The Philippines has a presidential form of government and the
three important powers of government (legislative, executive, judicial) has
been distributed into the three great branches of the government.
 The executive and legislative are the so called ‘political branches’ of
government. These are the branches where policies are formulated. Laws
are enacted and eventually implemented by these branches.
Pointers: Oct. 26 Political Law Lecture Atty. Sandoval

 This is why judicial legislation is prohibited because the power to legislate

is vested not in courts but in Congress.
 JUSTICIABLE QUESTION
o
 Requisites for the proper exercise of judicial review
o Actual issue or controversy – existing case or controversy which is both ripe for
resolution and susceptible to judicial determination
o Petitioner must have sufficient Legal standing or locus standi to question the act;
Must be raised by the proper party
o The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible time
o The question must constitute lis mota; there is now way to resolve the controversy
unless the court first resolves the constitutional question raised
 Belgica VS Ochoa
o first two requisites are the most important
 Exceptions to Moot and Academic
o There is a grave violation of the constitution
o Exceptional character of the situation is of paramount public interest
o Issues raised requires formulation of principles to guide the bench, the bar and the
public
o the case is capable of repetition yet evading review
 Legal Standing – right of appearance in a court of justice in a given question
o parties’ personal and substantial interest in the case where he has sustained or will
sustain direct injury as a result of the governmental act that is being challenged.
o Opposa V Factoran liberalized the rule on legal standing since minors had no
legal capacity, the court allowed them to be represented by their parents
o Resident Marine Mammals case
 They issue on whether resident marine mammals may be proper parties
has been eliminated and they were joined by human beings as stewards of
nature
 Citizen’s suit – Any Filipino may file a petition in court for the
enforcement of environmental laws
 Rule-making power of the SC – Section 5, paragraph 5, Article 8
o Power of the Supreme Court En Banc to promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, admission
to the practice of law
o Judicial Legislation VS Rule-making
 Judicial Legislation not allowed. Courts cannot legislate – encroachment
on the power of Congress
 Rule-making among the powers of the SC
 Academic freedom – right of a school or college to decide for itself its aims and
objectives and how best to attain them free from outside coercion or interference except
possibly when the overriding public calls for some restrain
Pointers: Oct. 26 Political Law Lecture Atty. Sandoval

o 4 Essential freedoms subsumed therein. Freedom of schools to decide for itself on

academic grounds:
 who may teach
 what may be taught
 how it shall be taught
 who may be admitted to study
 Federal Paramountcy Doctrine
o Republic vs. Provincial Government of Palawan
 Discovery and Production of oil in Malampaya, Palawan – big boost to
our economy
 Sec 7, Art 3 – Local government shall be entitled to a portion in the
proceeds of the utilization of natural wealth within their respective areas in
a manner provided by law
 Local Government Code – equitable share is 40% after tax
 There was a Memorandum of Agreement between the National
Government and the local government of Palawan to release the equitable
share of Palawan in the production of oil. SC ruled that the province of
Palawan is not entitled to the 40% equitable share because Malampaya is
outside the territorial jurisdiction of Palawan.
 The territorial jurisdiction of Palawan is determined by its charter. Charter
is a special law creating the local government unit. Territorial jurisdiction
of the LGU refers only to the land area including its municipal waters (50
kms from the land). Malampaya is 80 kms away.
 Despite the fact that the national government already previously released
equitable share to Palawa, SC ruled that estoppel does not lie against the
State.
o Federal Paramountcy Doctrine not applicable in this case because we are not a
Federal country. We have a unitary form of government. This doctrine is only
raised in case of conflicting claims between National (Federal) Government and
the local state as to the natural wealth found in the local state. In the US, the SC
has consistently ruled in favor of the superior right of the Federal Government.
 Concept of Association
o Province of Cotabato vs. GRP
o Court declared unconstitutional the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral
Domains (MOA-AD). Allowing the establishment of Mindanao Bangsamoro
Juridical Entity to replace the existing ARMM.
o Self-determination was merely a transitional device of former colonies on their
way to full independence.
o Right to self-determination – has now been elevated into the status of a generally
accepted principles of international law; Thus, it becomes binding upon us.
 Distinguish between internal self-determination and external self-
determination
Pointers: Oct. 26 Political Law Lecture Atty. Sandoval

Internal – A peoples’ pursuit of its own political, economic, social

and cultural development within the framework of an existing state
 External – form of the assertion of the right to unilateral
separation; ma be invoked only in extreme cases:
o people under colonial rule
o people under foreign exploitation
 Generally, when right to self-determination is invoked, such refers only to
internal.
 Appointing power of the President
o ad interim – appointment made by the president while congress is on recess
whether voluntary or compulsory, or when Congress is not in session
 literal meaning – in the meantime or for the time being
 Sec 19, Article VI – COA shall meet only when Congress is in session.
o Regular – appointment made by the president while Congress is in session
o Most important distinction between ad interim and regular appointment
 effectivity of the appointment
 if ad interim, appointment takes effect immediately
 regular appointment – takes effect after confirmation of
Commission on Appointment
 Implications
 Ad interim – if appointee currently holding a public office
immediately assumes office to which he has been newly appointed,
he shall vacate the position he was holding prior appointment. If
the COA does not confirm his appointment, he then loses both
positions.
 regular appointment – no such risk of losing both posts because he
won’t assume position until COA confirms his appointment
 Is an ad interim appointment permanent or temporary?
 Matibag vs. Benipayo – an ad interim appointment is a permanent
appointment because it takes effect immediately and can no longer
be withdrawn by the president once the appointee is qualified to
the office
 the fact that it is subject to the confirmation of the CoA does not
alter its permanent character. The Constitution makes an ad interim
appointment permanent in character by making it effective until
the approval of the commission on appointment or until the next
adjournment of Congress.
 Note: When CoA disapproves an appointment, the President can
no longer re-appoint the official by virtue of the principle of
checks and balances
 A disapproval of an appointment by the Commission on
Appointment in an ad interim appointment is actually adjustment
Pointers: Oct. 26 Political Law Lecture Atty. Sandoval

in the merits and qualifications by the commission. Therefore, that

involves of the exercise by the commission its executive function
following the principle of checks and balances. In this case, you
may no longer be validly be reappointed by the Commission on
Appointments. However, if your ad interim appointment is simply
by pass by the Commission on Appointments, you may still be
reappointed by the President because by pass by the Commission
on Appointment is not really adjustment on the merits and
qualifications by the commission.
 Ad interim appointment vs appointment in acting capacity
o Pimentel vs. Ermita
 Appointment of Mike Defensor, the acting DENR Secretary
 Appointment in acting capacity does not require approval from the
Commission on Appointment
Ad Interim Acting Capacity
 may be made only when  May be made regardless of
Congress is on recess or whether the congress is in
not in session session or not in session
 permanent  temporary
 require confirmation by the  does not require
COA confirmation from COA

 Treaty-making power of the President

o Section 21, Article 7 – No treaty or international agreement shall be effective
unless concurred in by at least 2/3 of all the members of the Senate
o Bayan vs. Zamora (VFA is a treaty, it was no less than the President who
determined it.
 The power to ratify treaties is vested in the President not in the legislature.
The role of the Senate is limited to giving its concurrence to the
ratification
 Visiting Forces Agreement with the United States to conduct joint-military
exercises with the armed forces
 Is the VFA a treaty or executive agreement? The president considered this
as a Treaty because he subjected it to the concurrence of the Senate.
 What should be the governing provision? Section 21 of Art 7, or Sec 25 of
Art 18?
 Section 25, Art 18 is a special provision
 Sec 21, Art. 7 deals with treaties or international agreements in
general.
o Pimentel vs. Office of the Exec. Secretary
 Amnesty proclamation of the president
o requires concurrence of majority of Congress
 Pardon
Pointers: Oct. 26 Political Law Lecture Atty. Sandoval

o does not require concurrence of Congress

 treaty vs. Executive agreement
Treaty / International Agreement Executive Agreement
 Requires concurrence of  does not require
Senate concurrence of senate
o Is an executive agreement an equally binding international obligation?
 Bayan V Zamora - In international law, there is no distinction between
treaties and executive agreement. They are equally binding obligations
among nations concerned.
 Hence, the distinction between a treaty and an executive agreement is
more on a matter of municipal law
 When does life begin?
o Imbong V Ochoa
o 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.|||
o Life begins at fertilization not implantation
 Belgica vs. Ochoa
o 2 kinds of pork barrel

The Pork Barrel System involves two (2) kinds of lump-sum discretionary funds:

First, there is the Congressional Pork Barrel which is herein defined as a kind of
lump-sum, discretionary fund wherein legislators, either individually or
collectively organized into committees, are able to effectively control certain
aspects of the fund's utilization through various post-enactment measures and/or
practices. In particular, petitioners consider the PDAF, as it appears under the
2013 GAA, as Congressional Pork Barrel since it is, inter alia,a post-enactment
measure that allows individual legislators to wield a collective power; 160 and

Second, there is the Presidential Pork Barrel which is herein defined as a kind of
lump-sum, discretionary fund which allows the President to determine the manner
of its utilization.For reasons earlier stated, 161 the Court shall delimit the use of
such term to refer only to the Malampaya Funds and the Presidential Social Fund.