EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
President
➢ Chief Executive
o He is the head of all the different heads of
different department, bureaus and agencies or
instrumentalities of the Government
o Represents the Republic of the Philippines
➢ Administer the laws of the land
o Faithful Execution Clause- ensures that
laws are faithfully executed
Residual Power
➢ When there is no express provision in the constitution
giving to a particular branch to exercise the power
Example:
Who is supposed to Deport the Undesirable Aliens?
→ In as much as it was not assigned to any department. The
President, being the Chief Executive is understood to be
exercising such power.
Immunity from Suit
➢ The president cannot be sued, for as long as he is the
Incumbent President (sitting President, during his
tenure), even for personal actions
➢ BUT, he can be sued if he is no longer the president,
even if his term has not expired yet.
Example:
President Estrada was sued with Plunder. Remember his term
was not expired yet because he was considered to have
resigned, he has 3 more years.
➢ That is why he asked for the dismissal of his plunder
case in the Sandiganbayan.
➢ According to the Supreme Court, the immunity from suit
is only available during the tenure of the president, in as
much as he has already considered a resigned →
therefore, he is no longer the president, then he is not
suable.
Question: Is this immunity from suit absolute? (Meaning in every
action, he is not suable?
Answer: This is not absolute. He may be held accountable under
the concept of COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY. Being the
commander-in-chief of the AFP, in the context of Amparo
Proceedings.
Amparo Proceedings/ Writ of Amparo
Question: When do you apply for a Writ of Amparo?
Answer: When there is a violation of a person’s right to life,
liberty, or security.
Example:
In relation to enforced disappearance of extrajudicial killings-
afraid that anytime you will be abducted.
➢ Remedy- apply for Writ of Amparo
➢ Consequence- filed against the military- case/ petition/
complaint.
Question: Who will you include then?
Answer: The president is the Commander-in-Chief of the AFP,
therefore all of these members of the AFP including the officials
are under the President.
JGS, 11-29-18
Rodriguez vs Macapagal-Arroyo
Former president cannot use the presidential immunity from suit
to shield himself/herself from judicial scrutiny that would assess
whether, without the context of Amparo Proceedings, she was
responsible or accountable for the abduction.
Balao vs Macapagal-Arroyo
Amparo Proceedings Determine:
➢ Responsibility- or the extend the actors have been
established by substantial evidence to have participated
in whatever way, by action or omission, in an enforced
disappearance
➢ Accountability- or the measurement of remedies that
should be addressed to those:
a. Who exhibited involvement in the enforced
disappearance without bringing the level of
their complicity to the level of responsibility
defined above; or
b. Who are imputed with knowledge relating to
the enforced disappearance and who carry the
burden of disclosure; o
c. Those who carry, but have failed to discharge
the burden of extraordinary diligence in the
investigation of the enforced disappearance.
➢ Thus, although there is no determination of criminal,
civil, or administrative liabilities, the Doctrine of
Command Responsibility may nevertheless be
applied to ascertain responsibility and
accountability within these foregoing definitions.
Question: What is this Doctrine of Command Responsibility?
Answer: The Doctrine of Command Responsibility is applicable
in Amparo Proceedings.
➢ The president, as the Commander-in-chief of the
military, can be held responsible or accountable for
extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.
➢ To hold someone liable under the Doctrine of Command
Responsibility, the following elements must obtain:
1. The existence of a superior-subordinate relationship
between the accused superior and the perpetrator of the
crime as his subordinate
2. The superior knows or had reason to know that the
crime was about to be or had to be committed
3. The superior failed to take the necessary and
reasonable measures to prevent the criminal acts to
punish the perpetrators thereof.
Commanders may therefore be impleaded- not actually on the
basis of Command Responsibility- but rather on the ground of
their responsibility, or at least accountability.
Take note, this immunity from suit of the President is personal to
him, this is non-delegable, his alter-ego cannot use the same
immunity from suit, because this is only exclusively enjoyed by
the President. Also, it cannot be invoked by anyone whom the
President filed a case against.
According to one Supreme Court, that the matter of invocation of
immunity from suit is personal to the President. It is the
prerogative of the President to invoked or to waived it anyway.
How the President is Elected
Qualifications:
1. He must be a natural-born citizen
2. At least 40 years of age at the day of election
3. Registered voter
4. Able to read and write
 5. He must be a resident for 10 years immediately
preceding the election
How?
Together with the Vice President, they are elected by the people
nationwide.
Term: 6 years without re-election
Question: Can a president hold office as a President for more
than a term?
Answer: Yes. For Example, GMA. She was the Vice President
then she became the President. Therefore, when the term was
finished, she rand and she won. This is only applicable when the
President (successor-former VP) had served not more than 4
years, because if she/he had served for more than 4 years of the
terms of his/her predecessor, then he/she is disqualified.
In the case of GMA, she only assumed the 3 years unexpired
term of Estrada. That is, less than 4 years, so she is qualified.
She served 2 terms (As a successor and as an elected president)
Question: Who canvass election returns of the President and the
Vice President?
Answer: It is the Congress. In case of a tie, it is going to b decided
by the congress in a joint session, majority votes, voting
separately.
If there is any contest relating to election returns and qualification
of a President or Vice President.
Question: Where do you file your election protest or your petition
for quo warranto?
Answer: Remedy: when you going to filed an Election Protest on
the ground of Fraud and Anomalies on the conduct of election or
in the preparation of the returns, it would be in an Ordinary or
Regular Election Protest but if the question is on the
qualifications of the President or Vice President, the petition will
be on a Quo Warranto Procedures. All this will be filed at the
Presidential Electoral Tribunal (Supreme Court, at the same time
the PET)
Question: Is it unconstitutional for the Supreme Court to
Supreme Court to act as the same time as the PET?
Answer: Macalintal vs PET
…The Supreme Court’s method of deciding presidential and vice-
presidential election contests, through PET, is actually a
derivative of the exercise of the prerogative conferred by the afore
quoted constitutional convention.
It is also beyond the cavil that when the SC, as PET,
resolves a presidential or vice-presidential election contest, it
performs what is essentially a judicial power.
TN: The Supreme Court performs Judicial Functions not Quasi-
Judicial
Question: What would be the effect if the electoral protest is
pending in PET, then she came back to job as senator?
Answer:
Santiago v. Ramos, 253 SCRA 559
In assuming the Office of Senator protestant Santiago
has effectively abandoned or withdrawn her protest to the
election protestee Ramos as President. (Santiago v. Ramos, 253
SCRA 559).
Legarda v. De Castro, February 12, 2008
Citing Defensor Santiago v. Ramos, the PET stressed
that Legarda effectively abandoned or withdrawn her protest
when she ran in the Senate, which term coincides with the term
of the Vice
JGS, 11-29-18
Rule 14. Election Protest. – Only the registered candidate for President or for Vice-
President of the Philippines who received the second or third highest number of
votes may contest the election of the President or the Vice-President, as the case
may be, by filing a verified petition with the Clerk of the Presidential Electoral
Tribunal within thirty (30) days after the proclamation of the winner
Matter of Succession
➢ Vacancy may happen before the president-elect
assumes office or it may happen during his
incumbency—temporary or permanent.
Before President Assumes Office:
➢ Reason: There was a tie or a question on qualification
Question: Who would then become the President?
Answer:
o The VP-elect shall act as the President
o If no VP → President of the Senate
o If no senate Pres. → Speaker of the House
Question: If the President-elect dies before assumption of
Office, who would then be the New President?
Answer:
o The VP will become the President
o If no VP → The Senate President
o If no Senate Pres → the Speaker of the House
will act as President
Question: If there is no President or Vice-President?
Answer: The Congress will call for a Special Election
President/ Vice-President Assume Office
➢ Vacancy can either be permanent or temporary
Permanent Vacancy
➢ Permanent vacancy may be caused by:
1. Death
2. Resignation
3. Impeachment
4. Permanent Disability
➢ The VP will become the New President → If not, the
Senate President will Act only or the Speaker of the
House
➢ The VP- Permanent Vacancy → the President will
nominate from Congress to be chosen by Majority votes
→ Congress → Voting Separately
Temporary Disability
➢ Will happen during the incumbency of the President. (e.
g. Vacation) → Automatically, the VP will sit as
president.
Question: Who can declare a Temporary Disability?
Answer: Congress only. How?
It has to be initiated by Majority of the Cabinet Members,
then they will report to the Congress. Upon reporting, the VP
immediately act as the President.
If Disputed by the President → Contrary to the claim of
majority of his Cabinet Member → Reassumes his functions.
**There is only a declaration of Temporary Disability when
majority of the cabinet members insist for the 2 nd Time into
the Congress. Congress not has to decide in a joint session.
2/3 votes, voting separately → declaring the President under
Temporary Disability
Estrada vs Desierto: especially since what are involved are natural
resources.
The question whether the claimed temporary disability
of Estrada is a Political Question beyond the SC’s power of Appointing Power
review. The decision that President Arroyo is the De Jure
President made by a co-equal branch of government cannot be ➢ The president appoints personnel to the key positions in
reviewed by SC. the Government and by nature it is executive.
➢ Take note that there are certain appointments that must
Powers of the President be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments, that
is provided in Sec. 16, Art. VII. Otherwise, the
Alter-Ego Doctrine (Political Qualified Agency) nomination of the President is ineffective. These are:
1. Heads of the Executive Department
➢ You have the president as a head-of-state, he has his
(Cabinet Secretaries), except, when it was
cabinet members
the Vice-Pres. who was appointed to a cabinet
1. With portfolio- regular
seat/position
2. Without portfolio- not regular
2. Officers of the AFP from the rank of colonel
➢ This means that the act of the subordinate like a cabinet
to general or naval captain to admiral and
secretary is the act of the President, because the
all other positions equivalent to those
cabinet secretary is the alter-ego of the president.
ranks mentioned in other branches of the
➢ Unless the act of that cabinet secretary is set-aside,
AFP. Remember that the PNP is not a member
nullified, modified or reprobated by the President.
of AFP. So, the promotions in PNP to General
➢ Example: The Secretary of the Department of Tourism
does not need a confirmation from the CA.
or DENR will decide to close Boracay or El Nido,
Also, the coastguard, before they are under in
whatever their decisions are, is considered to be the
the navy but they are now under in the
decisions of the President himself. This is because they
Department of Transportation and there is no
are considered as agent (department secretary) of the
need for such confirmation
principal (President). So, it would be as if it was the
3. Ambassadors, other public ministers and
decision of the President, unless the President will
consuls
reverse or nullify it.
4. Any other appointments that the
➢ This is very relevant such as in the case of Trillanes,
Constitution vests in the President
upon the papers shown to the media so far, the one who
✓ Regular members of JBC (Judicial
signed the pardon (amnesty) was the Secretary of the
and Bar Council)
Department National Defense (DND). Accordingly, the
1. Member representing the private
being the Secretary of DND, he became an alter-ego of
sector
the President, since he was the one who signed the
2. Member representing the IBP
pardon, it would be as if it was the President who signed
3. Member representing the academe
the grant of pardon.
4. Retired Justice of the SC
➢ The general rule is the act of a cabinet Secretary is the
act of the President. However, there are powers of the
✓ The Commissioners – COA,
President that are non-delegable.
COMELEC AND CSC
Question: What are the powers even if the President
** these appointments cannot be
approves it, it is still invalid if it was exercised by a delegate?
increased by ordinary legislation neither
Answer: the enumeration can be reduced by
Congress.
1. The declaration of martial law
2. The suspension of the privilege of the writ of REGULAR and AD INTERIM APPOINTMENT
habeas corpus
1. Regular Appointment
3. The grant of pardon, amnesty, commutation
➢ An appointment made by the President while
and reprieve, that is, the exercise executive
the Congress is in session.
clemency
➢ When the appointment is permanent and it is
Constantino vs. Cuisia, G.R. No. 106064, October 13, 2005 done in a regular session, the President has to
submit the nomination to CA.
There are certain constitutional powers and prerogatives of the ➢ The CA will immediately act on it within 30
Chief Executive of the Nation which must be exercised by him in days. If the CA cannot act on it within 30 days,
person and no amount of approval or ratification will validate the the nomination of the President is considered
exercise of any of those powers by any other person. Such, for by-passed.
instance, in his power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus and ➢ If confirmed by the CA, then the appointment
proclaim martial law (PAR. 3, SEC. 11, Art. VII) and the exercise of the President becomes permanent.
by him of the benign prerogative of mercy (par. 6, sec. 11, idem]. ➢ If disapproved, the she is considered to have
been removed or just her term was already
** benign prerogative of mercy – that is the pardoning
expired.
power – exclusive to the President. So, the grant
➢
therefore of pardon by the President through the
Question: Can she be re-nominated?
Secretary of DND is questionable.
Disapproved? By-passed?
➢ Recently, in the case of Resident Marine Mammals v.
Answer:
Reyes. SC said that the contract was invalid because
If it was disapproved by the CA, she cannot
the Constitution is clear that the power to enter into
be re-nominated on the same position but
contracts in connection with exploration, development
she can be nominated to other position.
and utilization of natural resources is exclusive to the
If by- passed, she can be re-nominated.
President, it is non-delegable. The doctrine of political
qualified agency may not be validly invoked if it is
➢ Question: Remember that Congress is in
the Constitution itself that provides the act that
session but the nomination of the President is
should be performed by the President, no less

JGS, 11-29-18
 only temporary acting capacity, does he
need to submit the nominations in the CA?
Answer: NO
Pimentel, Jr. v. Office of the Executive Secretary, 462 SCRA
622, July 6, 2005
The law allows the President to make such acting
appointment. The President may even appoint in acting capacity
a person not yet in the government service, as long as the
President deems that person competent.
Acting appointment - It is temporary in nature. It is a
stopgap measure intended to fill an office for a limited time until
the appointment of a permanent occupant to the office. In case of
vacancy in an office occupied by an alter ego of her choice as
acting secretary before the permanent appointee of her choice
could assume office. It may be extended any time there is
vacancy, given while Congress is in session.
2. Ad Interim Appointment
➢ these are the appointment made by the president while
Congress in recess or not in session.
➢ Also known as recess appointment
➢ It is not temporary, in fact it is permanent but its
effectivity is limited if not confirmed by the CA upon the
resumption of session
➢ It is only temporary in the sense that it is only effective
until it is disapproved by the CA upon resumption of its
session.
➢ If it was by-passed by the CA upon its resumption, then
it is understood that the appointment is only effective
until the next adjournment of session of Congress (at
most). After, he can be re-nominated by the President.
➢ Always remember that the Ad Interim or Recess
Appointment is a permanent appointment but its
effectivity is limited
➢ An acting president can make an appointment, but that
it is also limited unless it was revoked within 90 days
upon assumption if a regular President, otherwise it
becomes final. It is subject to revocation.
MIDNIGHT APPOINMENT
➢ It is prohibited.
➢ When the President makes and appointment within 60
days immediately before the regular presidential
elections or until his term expires, like CJ Corona.
Q: Was Pres. Arroyo wrong in appointing Corona as the
CJ given the prohibition against midnight appointment?
A: According to the SC, in the case of (De Castro v.
JBC; GR No. 191032, Soriano v. JBC; GR No. 191057,
PHILCONSA v. JBC), the prohibition under Article VII,
Section 15 of the Constitution against presidential
appointments immediately before the next presidential
elections and up to the end of the term of the outgoing
President does not apply to vacancies in the High
Tribunal.
(There is this requirement in the Constitution that it must
filled-up within 90 days immediately from the
occurrence of vacancy because it may prejudice the
judiciary.)
“Although Valenzuela came to hold that the prohibition
covered even judicial appointments, it cannot be
disputed that the Valenzuela dictum did not firmly rest
on the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission.
Thereby, the confirmation made to the JBC by then
Senior Associate Justice Florenz D. Regalado of this
Court, a former member of the Constitutional
Commission, about the prohibition not being intended to
JGS, 11-29-18
apply to the appointments to the Judiciary, which
confirmation Valenzuela even expressly mentioned,
should prevail.“ Had the framers intended to extend the
prohibition contained in Section 15, Article VII to the
appointment of members of the Supreme Court, they
could have explicitly done so.”
• Another point, if you are a President you cannot appoint
your relatives in certain key positions in the
Government. Like, you cannot appoint your spouse or
your relative collateral or by affinity within the 4 th civil
degree - (Cabinet Secretary, Ombudsman, Deputy
Ombudsman or in Government owned and controlled
corporations)
• Removal from office: If the President has the power
to appoint, he can also remove that Government official.
It was emphasized on those cases of Gonzales v.
Ochoa and Sulit v. Ochoa). If the President is the one
who appoints you, there is no reason why he cannot
remove you from office. However, in the case of
Gonzales, he is a Deputy Ombudsman, so the removal
will undermine the independence of Ombudsman. So,
according to the Supreme Court, a Deputy Ombudsman
cannot be removed from office by the President.
• Judges cannot be removed by the President in order to
maintain the independence of the Judiciary, it is only the
SC who can dismiss a judge. The Justices of the SC
are removable only by impeachment, although it was the
President who make the appointment.
Power of Control and Supervision
➢ Because the President is the head of the Government
and he is the Chief Executive, he has control and
supervision over all government officials under his
office and all government offices under the
executive branch.
➢ This power of control of the President includes the
power to reorganize the national government, on the
grounds of efficiency, economy and simplicity.
Control
Presidential Decree No. 1772 which amended Presidential
Decree No. 1416
These decrees expressly grant the President of the
Philippines the continuing authority to reorganize the national
government, which includes the power to group, consolidate
bureaus and agencies, to abolish offices, to transfer functions,
to create and classify functions, services and activities and to
standardize salaries and materials.
Domingo vs. Zamora, GR No. 142283, February 6, 2003
The President’s power to reorganize offices outside of
the Office of the President Proper is limited merely transferring
functions or agencies from the Office of the President to
Departments or Agencies and vice-versa.
(Q: As a matter or rule, who will create office? A: It is Congress
because they are the one who will appropriate funds for the
operation of office. However, in Biraogo v. Philippine Truth
Commission, for as long as it does not involve appropriation,
the President has the power to create an office such as the
Philippine Truth Commission, the budget will be taken in the
appropriation from the office of the President. There is no
violation on the separations of power.)
Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB vs. Zamora, July 10, 2001
The general rule has always been that the power to
abolish a public office is lodged with the legislature. The
exception, however, is that as far as bureaus, agencies or offices
in the executive department are concerned, the President’s
power of control may justify him to inactivate the functions of a
particular office, or certain laws may grant him broad authority to
carry out reorganization measures. The chief executive, under
our laws, has the continuing authority to reorganize the
administrative structure of the Office of the President.
(** If it is Congress that creates an office, then, it is
understood that it is only Congress that can abolish it. However,
in the case of Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB, the President as part of
his power of control can reorganize or enact debate or in effect
abolish an office.)
Supervision
Q: What is the difference of control from supervision?
A: Control – the President can change the decision of a
subordinate and discipline. Supervision – the President only
oversees the officer to make sure that he performs his functions
in accordance with the law and ensures that the laws are faithfully
executed by the subordinate.
On Local Government Units
➢ The power on the President is only general
supervision, he has no control over LGUs
Being the CHIEF EXECUTIVE
➢ The President is also the highest military authority but
remains a civilian authority, that is in his capacity as the
Commander-in Chief of the AFP.
Powers of the President:
1. Declare martial law
2. Suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
3. Calling-out power – to call the AFP whenever it becomes
necessary to suppress or prevent violence, lawless
rebellion or invasion
4. Reviews the decisions of court-martials
Lacson vs. Perez, May 10, 2001
The declaration by the President of “state of rebellion”
during or in the aftermath of the May 1, 2001 seige of Malacanang
is not violative of the separation of powers doctrine. The
President, as Commander in chief of Armed Forces of the
Philippines, may call upon such armed forces to prevent or
suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion
Sanlakas vs. Executive Committee, 421 SCRA 656, February
3, 2004
The President’s authority to declare a state of rebellion
springs in the main from her powers as chief executive and, at
the same time draws strength from her Commander-in-Chief
powers pursuant to her calling out power
Kulayan v. Tan, G.R. No. 187298
The calling out powers contemplated under the
Constitution is exclusive to the President of the Philippines as
Commander-in-Chief and that a provincial governor is not
endowed with the power to call upon the Armed Forces at its own
bidding. It ruled that only the President is authorized to exercise
emergency powers as provided under Section 23, Article VI
and the calling out powers under Section 7, Article VII of the
1987 Constitution. While the President exercises full
supervision and control over the police, a local chief executive,
such as a provincial governor, only exercises operational
supervision over the police, and may exercise control only in day-
to-day operations. As discussed in the deliberation of the
Constitutional Commission, only the President has “full
discretion to call the military when in his judgment it is
necessary to do so in order to prevent or suppress lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion,” the Court stressed
JGS, 11-29-18
On Declaration of Martial Law in Mindanao
Lagman v. Medialdea
Q: Should there be first a calling out of the military before a
President makes a declaration of martial law or suspends the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus?
A: This was the idea of the 1973 Constitution, that there is
graduation of the exercise of power from the benign to the most
potent (Calling out → suspension of the writ of habeas corpus
→ declaration of martial law).
In the Lagman case, the SC held that it is discretionary
to the President. In other words, the President need not first call
the military to assist and then suspend, he can directly declare
martial law. It is now the discretion of the President by
determining the circumstances.
Q: What are the parameters of the President’s declaration of
martial law or suspension of the privilege of writ of habeas
corpus? (You all know that the calling out of military all that is
needed is whenever it becomes necessary, in order to prevent
or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. This calling
out of power is not subject to revocation by Congress and
judicial review by Judiciary)
A: Requisites:
1) there is sufficient factual basis of rebellion or invasion
2) there is sufficient factual basis to believe that public
safety requires either the declaration of martial law and
the suspension of the privilege of writ of habeas corpus
or both
3) Probable Cause
➢ Once the President finds probable cause (sufficiency
of factual basis test from the POV of the President),
that probably there was rebellion or invasion at that
time, he has to declare it or probably public safety
requires
➢ Probable Cause- facts and circumstances that would
lead a prudent man to believe that there is probably a
rebellion or invasion and probably public safety
requires → he can declare martial law and suspend the
privilege of writ of habeas corpus.
➢ BUT he must report within 48 hours to Congress, and
immediately Congress must convene if they are not in
session, in a joint session to revoke and not to
confirm. In order to revoke the declaration of martial law
and the suspension of the privilege of writ of habeas
corpus, it only requires majority votes of the members
of Congress, voting jointly.
Q: Is there a need to wait for the decision of the Congress
whether to revoke it or not? While waiting, is it allowed to file
a petition to question the sufficiency of factual basis to the
SC? (meaning, can the SC exercise judicial review even if
there is a pending deliberation on the factual basis of the
declaration of martial law and the suspension of the privilege
of writ of habeas corpus in the Congress?)
A: YES. It will not depend on the outcome of the deliberation
of Congress. Unlike before, in the case of Ampatuan vs.
Puno, SC said that in fairness to the co-equal branch of the
government, there is a need to wait for the outcome. NOW,
it can be done simultaneously, because this power to
declare martial law and suspend the privilege of writ of
habeas corpus is subject to revocation by Congress OR
subject to judicial review by the SC, and they can act
independently from each other.
** any concerned citizen of the country can go to the SC,
even if he is not directly injured
Bar question: What is the difference of the determination of
sufficiency of factual basis in declaration of martial law and
 the suspension of the privilege of writ of habeas corpus
among the President, Congress or SC?
A: President, on the day of declaration, the probable cause
of sufficiency of the factual basis is only needed
Congress, they may not rely on the report President they
may go beyond and may even call witnesses, in order to
ascertain whether there is sufficient factual basis of the
President declaring martial law and the suspending he
privilege of writ of habeas corpus.
Supreme Court, it cannot go beyond to the pleadings filed
in the courts in determining the sufficient factual basis,
because it is a court of law and it is based on pleadings filed
and report submitted by the President or any opposition.
** The SC cannot go beyond the documents submitted to the
Court unlike Congress
Lagman v. Medialdea
The Court may strike down the presidential proclamation in an
appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen on the ground of lack
of sufficient factual basis. On the other hand, Congress may
revoke the proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall
not be set aside by the President.
In reviewing the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
proclamation or suspension, the Court considers only the
information and data available to the President prior to or at the
time of the declaration; it is not allowed to “undertake an
independent investigation beyond the pleadings.” Congress, for
its part, may take into consideration not only data available prior
to, but likewise events supervening the declaration.
Unlike the Court which does not look into the absolute
correctness of the factual basis, Congress could probe deeper
and further. It can delve into the accuracy of the facts presented
before it.
In addition, the Court’s review power is passive. It is only initiated
by the filing of a petition “in an appropriate proceeding” by a
citizen. On the part of Congress, its review mechanism is
automatic in the sense that it may be activated by Congress itself
at any time after the proclamation or suspension was made.
“The Court can simultaneously exercise its power of review with,
and independently from, the power to revoke by Congress.
Corollary, any perceived inaction or default on the part of
Congress does not deprive or deny the Court of its power to
review.
Among the three extraordinary powers, the calling out power is
the most benign and involves ordinary police action. The
President may resort to this extraordinary power whenever it
becomes necessary to prevent or suppress lawless violence,
invasion or rebellion.
Thus, the power to review by the Court and the power to revoke
by Congress are not only totally different but likewise
independent from each other although concededly, they have the
same trajectory, which is the nullification of the presidential
proclamation
The powers to declare martial law and suspend the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus involve curtailment and suppression of
civil rights and individual freedom. Thus, the declaration of martial
law serves as a warning to the citizens that the Executive
Department has called upon the military to assist in the
maintenance of law and order, and while the emergency remains,
the citizens must, under pain of arrest and punishment, not act in
a manner that will render it more difficult to restore order and
enforce the law. As such, their exercise requires more stringent
safeguards by the Congress and review by the Court.
A state of martial law is peculiar because the President, at such
a time exercises police power. In particular, the President
JGS, 11-29-18
exercises police power, with the military’s assistance, to ensure
public safety and in place of government agencies which for the
time being are unable to cope with the condition in a locality,
which remains under the control of the State.
This so-called “graduation of powers” does not dictate or restrict
the manner by which the President decides which power to
choose. It is thus beyond doubt that the power of judicial review
does not extend to calibrating the President’s decision pertaining
to which extraordinary power to avail given a set of facts or
conditions.
Extension
➢ Martial law is only good for 60 days, upon expiration of
the 60 days without extension, automatically it is lifted.
➢ If there is an extension¸ it has to be initiated by the
President, meaning the President must request an
extension and immediately Congress must act, and
there are indefinite days thereafter.
➢ In the case of Lagman, SC ruled that they cannot
review the rules promulgated by Congress on manner
of President’s request of extension for the absence of
any Constitutional violation.
➢ What is clear is that on limitations in the exercise of
congressional authority to extend such proclamations or
suspension are:
1) Suspension should be upon the President’s initiative
2) It should be grounded on the persistence of invasion or
rebellion and the demands for public safety
3) Subject to the Supreme Court review of the sufficiency
of its factual basis upon petition of any citizen
➢ Congress has the authority to decide on each duration,
thus the provisions state that the extension shall be for
a period to be determined by Congress
➢ On limitations: (1) subject to revocation on Congress,
majority votes in a joint session or (2) subject to
nullification by the SC exercising its judicial review
➢ Other safeguards: (a) only for 60 days unless extended
Q: When there is suspension on the privilege of writ of habeas
corpus, can a person be imprisoned indefinitely?
A: NO, because the Constitution is clear that the suspension of
the privilege of writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons
judicially charged for or offenses inherent in or directly
connected with invasion. During the suspension, any person
thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within 3
days or 72 hours, otherwise he shall be released. In effect, it
extends the period of custodial investigation
Suspension of the Privilege of Writ of Habeas Corpus (What
is being suspended?)
➢ the court has no jurisdiction to inquire into the legality of
detention
➢ (So, kung madakpan gani ka sa militar without a
warrant, pwede ka mapriso, unya ang Court dili ka
inquire ug legality, dili ka kapangayo ug habeas corpus)
Bar Question: When is this lifted?
A: Upon expiration within sixty days, automatically it is lifted if
there is no extension.
• When the President himself lifts it before expiration of
the 60 days period.
• When it is revoked by Congress by a majority votes
• When it is declared null and void by the SC exercising
judicial review
Pardoning Power
➢ Sometimes called as executive clemency or power of
mercy of the President.
 ➢ The President can grant pardon, amnesty,
commutations, reprieve and remission of fines and
forfeitures
Difference of Pardon and Amnesty
Pardon
➢ Only granted to persons who are convicted by final
judgement for ordinary offenses
➢ When pardon was granted to you by the President,
criminal records will stay but only if you are still in service
of your sentence, you can be discharged.
➢ can be applied in a criminal case or administrative case
• when you dismissed from service in one of the
departments of the government but granted pardon,
you can be reinstated
➢ Limitations: sole discretionary of the President
• Not subject to appeal
• Absolute to the President
Drilon vs. CA, 202 SCRA 370-
The pardoning power of the President is final and unappealable.
ATTY. ALICIA RISOS - VIDAL, ALFREDO S. LIM, vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and JOSEPH EJERCITO
ESTRADA, G.R. No. 206666, January 21, 2015
Former President Estrada was granted an absolute
pardon that fully restored all his civil and political rights, which
naturally includes the right to seek public elective office, the focal
point of this controversy. The wording of the pardon extended
to former President Estrada is complete unambiguous, and
unqualified. It is likewise unfettered by Articles 36 and 41 of the
Revised Penal Code. The only reasonable, objective, and
constitutional interpretation of the language of the pardon is
that the same in fact conforms to Articles 36 and 41 of the
Revised Penal Code. Recall that the petition for disqualification
filed by Risos-Vidal against former President Estrada, docketed
as SPA No. 13-211 (DC), was anchored on Section 40 of
the LGC, in relation to Section 12 of the OEC, that is,
having been convicted of a crime punishable by
imprisonment of one year or more, and involving moral
turpitude, former President Estrada must be disqualified to
run for and hold public elective office notwithstanding the
fact that he is a grantee of a pardon that includes a
statement expressing "ʺhe is hereby restored to his civil and
political rights."ʺ Risos-Vidal theorizes that former President
Estrada is disqualified from running for Mayor of Manila in
the May 13, 2013 Elections, and remains disqualified to
hold any local elective post despite the presidential pardon
extended to him in 2007 by former President Arroyo for
the reason that it (pardon) did not expressly provide for the
remission of the penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification,
particularly the restoration of his (former President Estrada)
right to vote and be voted upon for public office. She
invokes Articles 36 and 41 of the Revised Penal Code as the
foundations of her theory.
➢ Cannot be granted to an impeachable officials
convicted in an impeachment proceedings.
➢ Cannot be granted to court personnel and judges who
had disciplined by the SC
➢ Cannot be granted to those convicted with election
offenses without favorable recommendation by the
COMELEC
Amnesty
➢ Granted by the president with the concurrence of
majority of members of Congress.
➢ It can be granted before or after the finality of conviction
JGS, 11-29-18
➢ If granted, unlike pardon, the criminal records are
erased, it would be as if no crime was committed, on the
condition that he must admit to his guilt
➢ It is granted to persons or a class of individuals charged
with offenses political in nature
➢ In the case of TRILLANES, it was amnesty, it was
granted supposedly by the President with the
concurrence of majority of the members of Congress.
(There are questions on the validity of the grant of
amnesty because according to the Malacañang it was
first and foremost not applied for and there is no showing
that he admitted to his guilt, because he only admitted
that he violated to a certain laws or rules but not
admission of guilt. Also, it was only the Secretary of
DND who issued amnesty, not the President.
On the other hand, they question if the President can
unilaterally revoked amnesty considering that it requires
concurrence of Congress in order to grant it)
Commutation
➢ Simply reduction of the penalty one degree lower from
death to life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua, RP to
RT, RT to PM ….
Reprieve
➢ Postponement of the execution of death penalty
Remission
➢ Cancellation if fine that is imposed or the forfeiture of a
privilege that you are enjoying
Foreign Relation Power of the President
Sec. 21, Article VII of the Constitution states that:
“No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and
effective unless concurred in by at least 2/3 of all the
members of Senate.”
➢ The President is the sole organ of Foreign Relations, he
can enter into treaties, International Agreements, or
Executive Agreements
On Treaty-Making Power
➢ The power to enter into treaties and international
agreements and negotiate
➢ But such treaty or international agreements need to
pass to the senate w/ the following options:
1. Approved with 2/3 votes
2. Disapprove outright or Approved conditionally
with suggested amendments which a pre-
negotiated and the senate suggestions are
incorporated. The treaty will go into effect
without the need of senate approval
3. Renegotiated- No Treaty
4. Conflict between Municipal Law and Treaties
▪ If it’s PH Courts that decides the
case- Municipal Law will prevail
▪ If it’s the International Tribunal- treaty
will prevail
➢ Ultimately, it is the president that has an exclusive
power to ratify or sign, with or without the concurrence
of the Senate. To bind, however, the republic, if it is a
treaty or an international agreement, it has to be
concurred by 2/3 votes of the members of the Senate.
Executive Agreement (Exchange of Notes)
➢ Provides details of what has already been agreed under
a treaty
➢ Providing for details that are not permanent but merely
transitory that will implement an existing treaty or an
International Agreement. Therefore, they did not require
concurrence of the senate.
 ➢ Take note in the case of Akbayan vs. Ermita, the
Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) was an executive
agreement but it requires the concurrence of the Senate
because the Constitution no less requires than any
initial entry of foreign troops into the country must
have the concurrence of the Senate and that is the
reason why although it was just an executive
agreement, it was concurred by the Senate.
➢ The effects of an international agreement or treaty on
one hand and on executive agreement on the other
hand are the same – it binds the country in the
international sphere. The only difference is an
executive agreement does not require concurrence of
the Senate.
➢ In the case of Saguisag v. Ochoa, Enhanced Defense
Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) was an executive
agreement and therefore, it was not concurred by the
Senate.

Question: What is the difference of VFA and EDCA?

Answer: In VFA, there was an initial entry of US
troops into the country while in EDCA, it was no
longer initial entry because the US troops are already
in the country, all that was needed is to identify places
where they can stay and have some leisure. Therefore,
since it is no longer an initial entry and being an
executive agreement, it requires only the signature of
the president without the need of concurrence by the
Senate.
➢ Also, as the sole organ of international relations, the
President has the power to appoint ambassadors and
other public ministers and consuls. He has also the
power to receive ambassadors and other public
ministers accredited to the Philippines.
➢ Also, the power to contract and guarantee foreign loans
on behalf of the Republic and only requires the
concurrence of the Central Bank or Bangko Sentral
ng Pilipinas

✓ Likewise, the President has the power to deport aliens

who are undesirable
✓ The President has also he power to classify public
lands and sell the same
✓ Power of supervision over Local Government

JGS, 11-29-18