PCU 2018 Political Law Reviewer PDF

2018 BAR EXAMINATIONS
PRE-WEEK NOTES IN
“POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC
INTERNATIONAL LAW”
Prepared by:
Subject Head: Accel J. Celis
Assistant Subject Head: Gretel M. Erum
Members: Jorel R. Flauta
Ralph Rienz C. Mayo
ACADS Head: Malyn Gonzales

Subject Adviser: Atty. Enrique V. Dela Cruz
ACADS Advisers: Atty. Ismael Sarangaya Jr. and Atty. Jude Itutud
PCU Bar Operations 2018
PRE-WEEK NOTES (POLITICAL LAW)
I. CONSTITUTION proposed change is qualitative effects of
so extensive in its the proposed change
That body of rules and maxims in
provisions as to in the constitution.
accordance with which the powers of
change directly the
sovereignty are habitually exercised
substantial entirety
(Cooley, Constitutional Limitations, p.
of the constitution
4).Under the doctrine of constitutional
by the deletion or
supremacy, if a law or contract violates
alteration of
any norm of the constitution that law or
numerous existing
contract whether promulgated by the
provisions.
legislative or by the executive branch or
The court examines The qualitative test
entered into by private persons for private
only the number of The main inquiry is
purposes is null and void and without any
provisions affected whether the change
force and effect. Thus, since the
and does not will accomplish such
Constitution is the fundamental,
consider the degree far reaching changes
paramount and supreme law of the nation,
of the change. in the nature of our
it is deemed written in every statute and
basic governmental
contract. (Manila Prince Hotel vs GSIS,
plan as to amount to
G.R. No.122156, February 3, 1997)
a revision. (Lambino
Ways of amending the Constitution vs COMELEC, G.R.
No. 174153, October
a. By way of a constitutional 25, 2006)
convention;
b. By proposal of ¾ of Congress as a
constituent body; and II. General Considerations
c. The people through initiative upon
National Territory
petition of at least twelve per cent
of the total number of registered Archipelago - under the UNCLOS (United
voters, of which every legislative Nations Convention on the Law of the
district must be represented by at Sea), it is a group of islands,
least three per cent of the interconnecting waters and other natural
registered voters in it, may directly features which are so closely inter-related
propose amendments to the that such islands, waters and natural
Constitution. This right is not features from an intrinsic geographical,
operative without an implementing economic and political entity, or which
law. (Section 2, Article XVII of the historically regarded as such.
1987 Constitution)
Is RA 9552 constitutional?
Two (2) part test in determining whether a
Yes. The configuration of the baselines
proposal involves an amendment or
drawn under RA 3046 and RA 9522 shows
revision.
that RA 9522 merely followed the base
Quantitative Test Qualitative Test points mapped by RA 3046, (and thus
Asks whether the Inquires into the comply with UNCLOS IIIs limitation on the
Philippine Christian University College of Law _2 | P a g e
CONFIDENTILITY NOTICE: The contents of this document and any attachments herewith are intended solely for the PCU College of Law
Alumni who are taking the bar Examinations this November 2018 and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be
legally protected from disclosure.
maximum length of baselines).The act does peace, equality, justice, freedom,
not touch on the definition or redefinition cooperation, and amity with all nations.
of the character of the waters, much less
territorial sea. (Magallona vs Ermita, G.R NOTE: The Philippines renounces
No. 187167) aggressive war only. The president has no
power to declare war against another but
Archipelagic Baseline and Straight this does not mean we can’t defend our
Baseline state.
Archipelagic baseline- a baseline system This prohibition with the
that is appropriate for a geological feature declaration of war is consistent with
that is classified as mid-ocean archipelago Article 2(4) of the UN charter which says:
or archipelagic state. "All members shall refrain in their
international relations from the threat or
Straight baseline - a baseline method that
use of force against the territorial integrity
is generally applicable to coastal states or or political independence of any state, or in
continental archipelagos “where the any other manner inconsistent with the
coastline is deeply indented and cut into, purposes of the United Nations."
or if there is a fringe of islands along the
coast in its immediate vicinity. NOTE: The Philippines is also a signatory
in the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty, albeit
Maritime disputes and Territorial it is not yet ratified.
disputes
Immunity from Suit
Maritime disputes are subject to
compulsory arbitration because under a. “The State cannot be sued without
UNCLOS a party state has given its its consent”(Sec. 3, Art. XVI).
advance consent to compulsory
arbitration, unless a state has opted out of
compulsory arbitration involving certain BASIS: There can be no legal right
specified disputes. against the authority which makes the
law on which the right depends
Territorial disputes can be subject
(Republic vs Villasor, G.R. No. L-30671
to arbitration only with the consent of each
November 28, 1973), However, it may be
disputant state to every arbitration, unless
sued if it gives consent, whether express
such consent has been given advance in a
or implied. The doctrine is also known as
treaty.
the Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty.
Doctrine of incorporation
b. Immunity is enjoyed by other
The Philippines renounces war as States, consonant with the public
an instrument of national policy, adopts international law principle of par
the generally accepted principles of in parem non habet imperium.
International Law as part of the law The Head of State, who is deemed
ofthe land and adhere to the policy of the personification of the State, is

inviolable, and thus, enjoys NO. Suability of the state does not
immunity from suit. necessary mean its liability. The primary
c. The State’s diplomatic agents, jurisdiction to examine, audit, and settle all
including consuls to a certain claims of any sort due from the
extent, are also exempt from the government or any of its subdivisions,
jurisdiction of local courts and agencies, and instrumentalities pertains to
administrative tribunals. COA. (UP vs Judge Dizon, G.R. No.
171182, August 23, 2012)
NOTE:Defense of State Immunity does
not apply where the public official May prescription and laches apply to
ischarged in his official capacity foracts defeat an action for just compensation
that are unauthorized or unlawful and which was filed 50 years after the date
injurious to the rights of others neither of taking?
does it apply where the public official is
No. When private property is taken by the
clearly being sued not in his official
government for public without use without
capacity but in his personal capacity,
first acquiring title thereto, the owner’s
although the acts complained of may
action to recover the land or the value
have been committed while he occupied a
thereof does not prescribe. (Sec. of DPWH
public position.(Department of Health
vs Sps. Tecson, G.R. No. 179334, April 21,
vs Phil Pharmawealth Inc., G.R. No.
2015)
182358, February 20, 2013, Del Castillo)
The application of the doctrine of
Can the Doctrine of state immunity be
immunity from suit has been restricted to
invoked to perpetrate an injustice
sovereign or governmental activities (jure
against its citizens?
imperii). The mantle of state immunity
NO. The doctrine of state immunity cannot cannot be extended to commercial, private
serve as an instrument for perpetrating an and proprietary acts (jure gestionis). The
injustice to a citizen. Under the Law, use of the term state corporation to refer to
eminent domain should be exercised CNMEG was only descriptive of its nature
through expropriation proceedings in as a government-owned and/or -controlled
court. Whenever private property is taken corporation, and its assignment as the
for public use, it becomes the ministerial Primary Contractor did not imply that it
duty of the concerned office or agency to was acting on behalf of China in the
initiate expropriation proceedings. To performance of the latter’s sovereign
allow the expropriation by the government functions.
without just compensation will render
Article III, Section 9 of the Constitution NOTE: In Public International Law,
nugatory. (DOTC vs Spouses Abecina, when a state or international agency
G.R. No. 2106484 | June 29, 2016) wishes to plead sovereign or diplomatic
immunity in a foreign court, it requests the
Can a government entity be ordered by Foreign Office of the state where it is sued
the court to garnish its fund in favor of to convey to the court that said defendant
a private individual? is entitled to immunity. (China National

Machinery & Equipment Corp. vs Santa laws. The Stewards need to show in their
Maria, G.R No. 185572, February 7, 2012) petition that there may be possible
violations of laws concerning the habitat of
When a suit is filed not against the Resident Marine Mammals before they
the government itself but against one may be declared to possess the legal
of its entities, it must be ascertained standing. (Resident Marine Mammals of
whether or not the State, as the Protected Seascape and Stewards vs
principal may ultimately be liable, has Reyes, G.R. No. 180771, April 21, 2015)
given its consent to be sued. This Even before the Rules of Procedure
ascertainment will depend in the first in Environmental case, in the case of
instance on whether the government Oposa vs Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, the
agency impleaded is incorporated or court allowed the suit to be brought in the
unincorporated. If the agency is name of generations yet unborn "based on
incorporated, the test of its suability is the concept of intergenerational
found in its charter. The simple rule is responsibility insofar as the right to a
that it is suable if its charter says so, balanced and healthful ecology is
and this is true regardless of the concerned." Furthermore, the right to a
balanced and healthful ecology, a right that
functions it is performing. (GTZ vs CA,
does not even need to be stated in the
G.R. No. 152318, April 16, 2009) Constitution as it is assumed to exist from
Citizen suit the inception of humankind, carries with it
the correlative duty to refrain from
A citizen suit allows any Filipino to impairing the environment.
act as a representative of a party who has
enforceable rights under environmental The use of the Oposa doctrine in
laws before Philippine courts as defined environmental cases should be allowed
under Section 5, Rules of Procedure for only when (a) there is a clear legal basis for
Environmental Case. To further the representative suit; (b) there are actual
encourage the protection of the concerns based squarely upon an existing
environment, the Rules enable litigants legal right; (c) there is no possibility of any
enforcing environmental rights to file their countervailing interests existing within the
cases as citizen suits. This provision population represented or those that are
liberalizes standing for all cases filed yet to be born; and (d) there is an absolute
enforcing environmental laws and necessity for such standing because there is
collapses the traditional rule on personal a threat of catastrophe so imminent that
and direct interest, on the principle that an immediate protective measure is
humans are stewards of nature. In light of necessary. Better still, in the light of its
the foregoing, the need to give animals and costs and risks, we abandon the precedent
inanimate objects legal standing has been all together. (Concurring Opinion of
eliminated by the Rules, which allow any Justice Marvic Leonen, Resident Marine
Filipino citizen, as a steward of nature, to Mammals vs Reyes, G.R. No. 180771,
bring a suit to enforce our environmental April 21, 2015)

Epistolary Jurisdiction feature of all forms of Congressional Pork
Barrel would be the authority of
It is the power and authority of the legislators to participate in the post-
court to hear, try, and decide a case arising enactment phases of project
from a letter petition introduced by a third implementation. These post-enactment
person, rather than the aggrieved party, for measures which govern the areas of
the protection of public interest, pursuant project identification, fund release and
to the concept of Judicial Activism. fund realignment are not related to
(Resident Marine Mammals of
functions of congressional oversight and,
Protected Seascape and Stewards vs hence, allow legislators to intervene
Reyes, G.R. No. 180771, April 21, 2015) and/or assume duties that properly
Separation of Powers belong to the sphere of budget execution.
Hence, the 2013 PDAF Article is violative
The principle of separation of of the separation of powers principle and
powers and its concepts of autonomy and thus unconstitutional.
independence stem from the notion that
the powers of government must be NOTE: Any post-enactment
divided to avoid concentration of these congressional measure should be limited
powers in any one branch; the division, it to scrutiny and investigation, otherwise it
is hoped, would avoid any single branch will undermine the separation of powers
from lording its power over the other guaranteed by the Constitution. (Belgica
branch or the citizenry. vs Ochoa, G.R. No. 208566, November
19, 2013)
There is a violation of the
principle when there is (a) impermissible Non-delegability of legislative power
interference with and/or (b) assumption General Rule: Legislative power shall be
of another department’s functions. exclusively exercised by the body to
The enforcement of the national which the Constitution has conferred the
budget, as primarily contained in the same.
GAA, is indisputably a function both Exceptions :
constitutionally assigned and properly
entrusted to the Executive branch of a. Delegated legislative power to
government. Unless the Constitution local governments which are allowed to
provides otherwise, the Executive legislate on purely local matters;
department should exclusively exercise all
roles and prerogatives which go into the b. Constitutionally-grafted
implementation of the national budget as exceptions; and
provided under the GAA as well as any c. Grant of rule-making power to
other appropriation law. The Legislative administrative agencies.
branch of government should not cross
over the field of implementing the NOTE: It must be emphasized that the
national budget since the same the rule-making power must be confined to
domain of the Executive. The defining details for regulating the mode or

proceeding to carry into effect the law as provision of law which happens to be put
it has been enacted. The power cannot be into an appropriation bill.
extended to amending or expanding the
statutory requirements or to embrace Under the 2013 PDAF Article,
matters not covered by the statute. Rules these intermediate appropriations are
that subvert the statute cannot be made by legislators only after the GAA is
sanctioned. passed and hence, outside of the law, it
necessarily means that the actual items of
The 2013 PDAF Article, insofar as PDAF appropriation would not have been
it confers post-enactment identification written into the General Appropriations
authority to individual legislators, violates Bill and thus effectuated without veto
the principle of non-delegability since consideration. This kind of lump-
said legislators are effectively allowed to sum/post-enactment legislative
individually exercise the power of identification budgeting system fosters
appropriation, which is lodged in the creation of a budget within a budget"
Congress. Under the 2013 PDAF Article, which subverts the prescribed procedure
individual legislators are given a personal of presentment and consequently impairs
lump-sum fund from which they are able the President‘s power of item veto.
to dictate how much from such fund Hence, the Court finds the 2013 PDAF
would go to a specific project or Article, as well as all Congressional Pork
beneficiary that they themselves also Barrel Laws of similar operation, to be
determine. Clearly, the 2013 PDAF Article unconstitutional. (Belgica vs Ochoa,
authorizes individual legislators to G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013)
perform an act of appropriation which
undoubtedly, the Constitution does not Forms of government
allow. (Belgica vs Ochoa, G.R. No. a. As to the centralization of control
208566, November 19, 2013) i. Unitary government- One in
Checks and balances which the control of national and local
affairs is exercised by the central or
a. Statement of Principle; Item-Veto national government; single, centralized
Power. government, exercising powers over both
the internal and external affairs of the
The system of checks and balances
State.
secures the coordination in the workings
ii. Federal government- One in
of the various departments of the
which the powers of the government are
government.
divided between two sets of organs, one for
For the President to exercise his national affairs and the other for local
item-veto power, it necessarily follows affairs, each organ being supreme within
that there exists a proper "item" which its own sphere; consists of autonomous
may be the object of the veto. An item of local government units merged into a
an appropriation bill obviously means an single State, with the national government
item which, in itself, is a specific exercising a limited degree of power
appropriation of money, not some general overthe domestic affairs but generally full
discretion of the external affairs of the Under Sec. 11, Art. VI of 1987
State. Constitution, it grants the legislators the
privilege from arrest while Congress is “in
b. As to the existence or absence of title session” with respect to offenses
and/or control punishable by more than 6 years of
i. De jure- Has a rightful title but imprisonment.
no power or control, either because the
same has been withdrawn from it or This rule is inapplicable to searches
because the Constitution provides only a
because it has not yet actually entered into
the exercise thereof. The government privilege from arrest in order to ensure the
under Cory Aquino and the Freedom attendance of Congressmen.
Constitution was de jure government NOTE: So long as he is an incumbent
because it was established by authority of congressman and so long as Congress is in
the legitimate sovereign, the people. (In re session, whether or not he is attending it,
Letter of Associate Justice Puno, A.M. he shall be immune from arrest. (People vs
No. 90-11-2697-CA, June 29, 1992) The Jalosjos, G.R. Nos. 132875-76, February 3,
government under Gloria Macapagal- 2000)
Arroyo, established after the ouster of
Estrada was a de jure government. Requirements for the privilege of
(Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, speech and debate to operate
March 2, 2001) a. The remarks must be made while
ii. De facto- Actually exercises the legislature or the legislative committee
power or control but without legal title is functioning, that is, in session; and
(Lawyers League for a Better
b. They must be made in
Philippines vs Aquino, G.R. No. 73748,
connection with the discharge of official
May 22, 1986)
duties.
III. Legislative Department
Disciplinary power of Congress
Conflict of interest Each house may punish its
members for disorderly behavior and, with
All members of the Senate and the concurrence of 2/3 of all its members,
HOR shall, upon assumption of office, suspend, for not more than 60 days, or
make a full disclosure of their financial and expel a member. (Sec. 16, par. 3, Art.) VI)
business interests. They shall notify the
House concerned of a potential conflict of NOTE: Members of Congress may also be
interest that may arise from the filing of a suspended by the Sandiganbayan or by the
proposed legislation of which they are Office of the Ombudsman. The suspension
author. in the Constitution is different from the
suspension prescribed in RA 3019, Anti-
Legislative privileges Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The latter
is not a penalty but a preliminary
Immunity from arrest preventive measure and is not imposed

upon the petitioner for misbehaviour as a garnered a majority elections, which were
member of Congress. (Santiago vs of the legal votes not held or were
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 128055, April cast suspended, or if
18, 2001) there was one,
resulted in a failure
to elect
Tribunal
The Electoral Tribunals of the

Houses of Congress shall be the sole judge NOTE: When COMELEC declares a failure
of all contests relating to the election, of elections, special elections will have to
returns and qualifications of their be conducted. There is no overlap of
respective members. (Nachura, 2015) jurisdiction because when the COMELEC
declares a failure of elections on the
NOTE: HRET’s jurisdiction as the sole ground of violence, intimidation, terrorism
judge of all contests relating to elections, or other irregularities, it does so in its
etc. of members of Congress begins only administrative capacity. In contrast, when
after a candidate has become a member of electoral tribunals annul elections under
the House of Representatives. the same grounds, they do so in the
(Romualdez-Marcos vs COMELEC, G.R. performance of their quasi-judicial
No. 119976, September 18, 1995) functions.(Abayon vs HRET, G.R.
COMELEC vs House of Representatives No.222236, May 3, 2016)
Electoral Tribunal
Legislative Inquiries
Jurisdiction of Administrative SCOPE: Indefinite. The field of legislation
HRET Jurisdiction of is very wide as compared to that of the
COMELEC American Congress. And because of such,
Annulment of Declaration of failure the field of inquiry is also very broad. It
election of election may cover administrative inquiries, social,
economic, political problem (inquiries),
Incident of the Exercise of discipline of members, etc. Suffice it to say
judicial function administrative that it is co-extensive with legislative
function power. (Arnault vs Nazareno, G.R. No. L-
3820, July 18, 1950)
Only annul the Relates to the entire
election results election in the NOTE:“In aid of legislation” does not mean
connected with the concerned precinct that there is pending legislation regarding
election contest or political unit the subject of the inquiry. In fact,
before it investigation may be needed for purposes
of proposing future legislation.
Only to determine The objective of
Categories of congressional oversight
who among the holding or
candidates continuing the

The acts done by Congress power. It typically utilizes veto provisions
purportedly in the exercise of its oversight when granting the President or an
powers may be divided into the following: executive agency the power to promulgate
regulations with the force of law. These
a. Scrutiny- it implies a lesser provisions require the President or an
intensity and continuity of attention to agency to present the proposed regulations
administrative operations. Its primary to Congress, which retains a "right" to
purpose is to determine economy and approve or disapprove any regulation
efficiency of the operation of government
before it takes effect. Such legislative veto
activities. In the exercise of legislative provisions usually provide that a proposed
scrutiny, Congress may request regulation will become a law after the
information and report from the other expiration of a certain period of time, only
branches of government. It can give if Congress does not affirmatively
recommendations or pass resolutions for disapprove of the regulation in the
consideration of the agency involved. It is meantime. Less frequently, the statute
regarded as a passive process of looking at provides that a proposed regulation will
facts readily available; become law if Congress affirmatively
b. Congressional investigation- approves it. (Abakada Guro vs Purisima,
involves a more intense digging of facts. G.R. No. 166715, August 14, 2008)
The power of Congress to conduct IV. Executive Department
investigation is recognized by the 1987
Constitution under section 21, Article VI Faithful-Execution Clause
; and
The President’s power to conduct
c. Legislative supervision- the investigations to ensure that laws are
most encompassing form by which faithfully executed is well recognized. It
Congress exercises its oversight power is flows from the faithful-execution clause of
thru legislative supervision. "Supervision" the Constitution under Article VII,
connotes a continuing and informed Section 17 thereof. As the Chief Executive,
awareness on the part of a congressional the president represents the government as
committee regarding executive operations a whole and sees to it that all laws are
in a given administrative area. While both enforced by the officials and employees of
congressional scrutiny and investigation his department.
involve inquiry into past executive branch
actions in order to influence future NOTE: The powers of the President are not
executive branch performance, limited to those specific powers under the
congressional supervision allows Congress Constitution. One of the recognized
to scrutinize the exercise of delegated law- powers of the President granted pursuant
making authority, and permits Congress to to this constitutionally-mandated duty is
retain part of that delegated authority. the power to create ad hoc committees.
This flows from the obvious need to
Congress exercises supervision over ascertain facts and determine if laws have
the executive agencies through its veto

been faithfully executed.(Biraogo vs PTC, b. The chairman shall only vote in
G.R. No. 192935, December 7, 2010) case of tie; and
Concept or nature of the faithful c. The CA shall act on all
execution clause. appointments within 30 session days from
their submission to Congress. (Section 18,
The faithful execution clause is best
Article VI)
construed as an obligation imposed on the
President, not a separate grant of power. It Doctrine of qualified political agency
simply underscores the rule of law and,
corollary, the cardinal principle that the The doctrine of qualified political
President is not above the laws but is agency essentially postulates that the
obliged to obey and execute them. This is heads of the various executive departments
precisely why the law provides that are the alter egos of the President, and,
thus, the actions taken by such heads in
"administrative or executive acts, orders
and regulations shall be valid only when the performance of their official duties are
they are not contrary to the laws or the deemed the acts of the President unless the
Constitution." (National Artist for President himself should disapprove such
Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs The acts. (Atty. Manalang-Demigillo vs
Executive Secretary, et al., G.R. No. Trade and Investment Development
189028, July 16, 2013). Corporation of the Philippines, G.R. No.
168613, March 5, 2013)
Presidential appointments subject to
confirmation by the Commission However, in the same case of
Manalang-Demigillo vs TIDCORP, G.R.
a. Heads of the Executive No. 168613, March 5, 2013, the Supreme
departments. (except if it is the Vice- Court held that the doctrine of qualified
President who is appointed to the post) political agency could not be extended to
the acts of the Board of Directors of
b. Ambassadors, other Public
TIDCORP despite some of its members
ministers, or Consuls being themselves the appointees of the
c. Officers of the AFP from the rank President to the Cabinet. Such Cabinet
of colonel or naval captain members sat on the Board of Directors of
TIDCORP ex officio, or by reason of their
d. Other officers whose office or function, not because of their
appointments are vested in him by the direct appointment to the Board by the
Constitution (i.e. COMELEC members) President. Evidently, it was the law, not the
(Bautista v. Salonga, G.R. No. 86439, President that sat them in the Board. They
April 13, 1989) were acting as the responsible members of
NOTE: The enumeration is exclusive. the Board of Directors of TIDCORP
constituted pursuant to law, not as the
Rules on voting alter egos of the President. We cannot
stretch the application of a doctrine that
a. The CA shall rule by a majority
already delegates an enormous amount of
vote of all the members;
power. Also, it is settled that the delegation exercises police power, which is normally a
of power is not to be lightly inferred. function of the legislature. In particular,
the President exercises police power, with
In the case of Manubay vs the military assistance, to ensure public
Garilao, G.R. No. 140717, April 16, 2009, safety and in place of government agencies
the Supreme Court held that an aggrieved which for the time being are unable to
party affected by the decision of a cabinet cope with the condition in a locality, which
secretary need not appeal to the OP and remains under the control of the State.
may file a petition for certiorari directly in
the Court of Appeals assailing the act of In David v. President Macapagal-
the said secretary. Arroyo, it was said that under a valid
declaration of martial law, the President as
Who can challenge the declaration of Commander-in-Chief may order the:
Martial Law?
a. Arrests and seizures without judicial
Any citizen would have legal warrants;
standing to challenge the constitutionality
of the declaration of martial law or the b. Ban on public assemblies;
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.
(Fortun vs President Macapagal Arroyo, c. Takeover of news media and
G.R. No. 190293, March 20, 2012) agencies and press censorship; and
Is it mandatory for the Congress d. Issuance of Presidential Decrees

convening jointly after the declaration NOTE: A state of martial law does not
of Martial Law? suspend the Constitution. The President
No. They only need to convene if they will may issue orders which have the effect of
law but strictly in a theater of war.
lift the declaration. (Padilla vs Congress,
G.R. No. 231671, July 25, 2017) (Lagman vs Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658,
July 4, 2017, Del Castillo)
Sufficiency of factual basis
Pardon(Executive Clemency)
The factual basis of the declaration
of martial law or the suspension of the Power to grant reprieves,
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is not commutations, pardons and amnesty
a political question but precisely within the which is granted to provide relief on the
ambit of judicial review. harshness of the law or to correct mistakes
in the administration of justice.
NOTE: This is the only test for judicial
a. Reprieve- the temporary
review. (Lagman vs Medialdea, G.R. No.
231658, July 4, 2017, Del Castillo) suspension of the execution of a
death sentence to a certain time.
Police power exercised during martial
law by the President. b. Commutation- reduction of the
sentence imposed to a lesser
A state of martial law is peculiar punishment.
because the President, at such a time,
May be granted for May only be granted
c. Remit fines and forfeiture- any offense. for Political
exoneration of fines and forfeited Offenses.
property. Can be granted even
if there is no case
d. Amnesty- an act of grace yet.
concurred by the legislature, It looks forward; the It erases everything;
usually extended to groups of record of the case is it is as if it never
persons who committed political still there. happened. (People
offenses, which puts into oblivion vs Casido, G.R. No.
the offense itself. 116512, March 7,
2012)
e. Pardon- an act of grace which
exempts individual on whom it is
bestowed from the punishment the Requisites for the valid transfer of
law inflicts for a crime he has appropriated funds under Section 25(5),
committed: Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.
The transfer of appropriated funds,
i. Absolute Pardon- granted to be valid under Art. VI, Section 25(5) of
without conditions and the Constitution must be made upon a
removes all the disabilities concurrence of the following requisites,
resulting from conviction. namely:
ii. Conditional Pardon- subject
to such conditions or a. There is a law authorizing the
qualifications as it may President, the President of the
deem necessary or see fit. Senate, the Speaker of the House of
NOTE: Between Pardon and the law, b. Representatives, the Chief Justice of
pardon is higher. No law can limit the the Supreme Court, and the heads of the
constitutional power of pardon. (Risos- Constitutional Commissions to transfer
Vidal vs COMELEC, G.R. No. 206666, funds within their respective offices;
January 21, 2015)
c. The funds to be transferred are
Difference of Pardon and Amnesty savings generated from the appropriations
for their respective offices; and
Pardon Amnesty
Pardon is a private Amnesty is a public d. The purpose of the transfer is to
act. act. augment an item in the general
appropriations law for their respective
Granted to Granted to a group offices. (Araullo, et al. vs Aquino III, et
Individuals; the of persons; need not al., G.R. No. 209135 & companion cases,
name must be be specific. July 11, 2014).
indicated.
Diplomatic Powers

The chief architect of our foreign Presidential succession
policy is our President.
Section 7- Vacancies occurring before the
Who has the power to ratify a treaty? President’s term:
President to refuse to submit a a. Death or permanent
treaty to the Senate for its ratification and disability of President-elect: Vice-
the decision not to ratify the treaty is President-elect shall become President;
within the competence of the President
alone which cannot be encroached by the b. President-elect fails to
courts. (Pimentel vs Romulo, G.R. No. qualify: Vice President-elect shall act as
158088, July 6, 2005) President until the President-elect shall
have qualified; and
NOTE: The signature does not mean its
ratification. c. President shall not have
been chosen: Vice President-elect shall act
Can a President unilaterally withdraw as President until a President shall have
the Philippines from a treaty? been chosen and qualified. (Nachura, 2015)
Yes. A state party may withdraw from this If no President and Vice President
statute. Since the President is the chief were chosen nor shall have qualified, or
architect of our foreign policy, he can both shall have died or become
withdraw. However, the withdrawal shall permanently disabled: The President of the
take effect one year after the date of receipt Senate or, in case of his inability, the
of the notification. (Article 127, Rome Speaker of the House of Representatives
Statute) shall act as President until a President or
Vice President shall been chosen and
Executive agreements
qualified. In the event of inability of the
Executive agreements may be officials mentioned, the Congress shall, by
entered into with other states and are law, provide for the manner in which one
effective, even without the concurrence of is to act as President until one is chosen.
the Senate. From the point of view of (Nachura, 2015)
international law, there is no difference Section 8- Vacancies occurring during the
between treaties and executive agreements President’s term:
in their binding effect upon states
concerned, as long as the negotiating a. In case of death, permanent
functionaries have remained within their disability, removal from office, or
powers. “The distinction between so-called resignation of the President, the Vice
executive agreements and ‘treaties’ is President shall become President.
purely a constitutional one and has no
international legal significance.” (USAFFE b. Death, permanent
disability, removal from office, or
Veterans Association, Inc. v. Treasurer
of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-10500, July resignation of President and Vice
30, 1959) President: the Senate President or, in case
of his inability, the Speaker of the House of

Representatives, shall act as President until For that purpose, the Congress shall
a President or Vice President shall be convene, if it is not in session, within forty-
elected and qualified. eight hours, in accordance with its rules
and without need of call. If the Congress,
Congress, by law, shall provide for within ten days after receipt of the last
the manner in which one is to act as written declaration, or, if not in session,
President in the event of inability of the within twelve days after it is required to
officials mentioned above. (Nachura, 2015) assemble, determines by a two-thirds vote
Section 11- Temporary disability of the of both Houses, voting separately, that the
President: President is unable to discharge the powers
and duties of his office, the Vice-President
a. When the President shall act as the President; otherwise, the
transmit to the Senate President and the President shall continue exercising the
Speaker of the House his written powers and duties of his office. (Nachura,
declaration that he is unable to discharge 2015)
the powers and duties of his office, and
until he transmits to them a written Section 10- Duties of the Congress
declaration to the contrary: such powers a. The Congress shall, at ten
and duties shall be discharged by the Vice o’clock in the morning of the third day
President as Acting President; after the vacancy in the offices of the
b. When a majority of all the President and Vice-President occurs,
Members of the Cabinet transmit to the convene in accordance with its rules
President of the Senate and to the Speaker without need of a call and within seven
of the House of Representatives their days enact a law calling for a special
written declaration that the President is election to elect a President and a Vice-
unable to discharge the powers and duties President to be held not earlier than forty-
of his office, the Vice-President shall five days nor later than sixty days from the
immediately assume the powers and duties time of such call. The bill calling such
of the office as Acting President. special election shall be deemed certified
Thereafter, when the President transmits under paragraph 2, Section 26, Article VI
to the President of the Senate and to the of the Constitution and shall become law
Speaker of the House of Representatives upon its approval on third reading by the
his written declaration that no inability Congress. Appropriations for the special
exists, he shall reassume the powers and election shall be charged against any
duties of his office. Meanwhile, should a current appropriations and shall be exempt
majority of all the Members of the Cabinet from the requirements of paragraph 4,
transmit within five days to the President Section 25, Article VI of the
of the Senate and to the Speaker of the Constitution. The convening of the
House of Representatives their written Congress cannot be suspended nor the
declaration that the President is unable to special election postponed. No special
discharge the powers and duties of his election shall be called if the vacancy
office, the Congress shall decide the issue? occurs within eighteen months before the

date of the next presidential election. Under this doctrine, the law is
(Nachura, 2015) recognized as unconstitutional but the
effects of the unconstitutional law, prior to
V. JUDICIARY DEPARTMENT its declaration of nullity, may be left
Judicial Review undisturbed as a matter of equity and fair
play. It is a rule of equity. (League of
Judicial review may be availed of Cities of the Philippines vs COMELEC,
when the following requisites concur: G.R. No. 176951, November 18, 2008)
a. the existence of an actual and
appropriate case; NOTE: The invocation of this doctrine is
b. the existence of personal and an admission that the law is
substantial interest on the part of unconstitutional. Under Hacienda Luisita
the party raising the question of Inc., v. Presidential Agrarian Reform
constitutionality; Council, et. al., G.R. No. 171101,
c. recourse to judicial review is made November 22, 2011, the doctrine also
at the earliest opportunity; and applies to executive acts subsequently
declared as invalid.
d. The question of constitutionality is Moot questions
the lis mota of the case. (Manila
Memorial Park VS Secretary of An action is considered "moot"
Department of Social Welfare, when it no longer presents a justiciable
G.R. No. 175356, December 3, 2013) controversy because the issues involved
have become academic or dead or when
The judicial power to review versus the
the matter in dispute has already been
congressional power to revoke.
resolved and hence, one is not entitled to
The Court's review power is judicial intervention unless the issue is
passive; it is only initiated by the filing of a likely to be raised again between the
petition "in an appropriate proceeding" by parties. There is nothing for the court to
a citizen. On the other hand, Congress' resolve as the determination thereof has
review mechanism is automatic in the been overtaken by subsequent events.
sense that it may be activated by Congress
itself at any time after the proclamation or GR: The courts should decline jurisdiction
suspension was made. The framers of the over such cases or dismiss it on ground of
1987 Constitution was to vest the Court mootness.
and Congress with veto powers
independently from each other (Rep. XPNs:
Edcel Lagman, et al. vs Hon. Medialdea, a. There is a grave violation of the
et al., G.R. No. 231658, July 4, 2017, Del Constitution
Castillo, J) b. There is an exceptional character
of the situation and the paramount public
Doctrine of operative fact interest is involved

c. When the constitutional issue e. The Supreme Court has the
raised requires formulation of controlling exclusive power to discipline judges/
principles to guide the bench, the bar, and justices of inferior courts.
the public
f. The members of the Judiciary
d. The case is capable of repetition
have security of tenure.
yet evading review. (International
Service for the Acquisition of Agri- g. The members of the Judiciary
biotech Applications, Inc. vs may not be designated to any agency
Greenpeace Southeast Asia Philippines, performing quasi-judicial or administrative
G.R. No. 209271, July 26, 2016) functions.
Political questions h. Salaries of judges may not be

reduced; the Judiciary enjoys fiscal
Those questions which, under the autonomy.
constitution, are to be decided by the i. The Supreme Court, alone, may
people in their sovereign capacity; or in initiate and promulgate the Rules of Court.
regard to which full discretionary authority
has been delegated to the legislative or j. The Supreme Court, alone, may
executive branches of government. order temporary detail of judges.
k. The Supreme Court can appoint
NOTE: Political Question Doctrine has
all officials and employees of the Judiciary.
been greatly diminished.
(Nachura, 2015)
Constitutional safeguards to insure the
Judicial restraint
independence of the Judiciary.
Theory of judicial interpretation
a.The Supreme Court is a
that encourages judges to limit the exercise
constitutional body; it may not be
of their own power. In terms of legislative
abolished by the legislature.
acts, the principle of judicial restraint
b. The members of the Supreme means that every intendment of the law
Court are removable only by impeachment. must be adjudged by the courts in favor of
its constitutionality, invalidity being a
c. The Supreme Court may not be measure of last resort. In construing
deprived of its minimum original and therefore the provisions of a statute, courts
appellate jurisdiction; appellate must first ascertain whether an
jurisdiction may not be increased without interpretation is fairly possible to sidestep
its advice and concurrence. the question of constitutionality. (Estrada
d. The Supreme Court has vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560,
administrative supervision over all inferior November 19, 2001)
courts and personnel. Rule-making power of the Supreme
Court

a. Promulgate rules concerning the alter, or supplement rules concerning
protection and enforcement of pleading, practice and procedure.
constitutional rights;
Limitations on the rule-making power
NOTE: It is within the competence of the
Supreme Court, in the exercise of its power a. The rules must provide a
simplified and inexpensive procedure for
to create a Special Division in the
Sandiganbayan which will hear and decide the speedy disposition of cases;
the plunder case against former President b. They must be uniform for
Joseph Estrada. (In Re: Request for all courts of the same grade; and
Creation of a Special Division, A.M. No.
02-1-09-SC, January 21, 2002) c. Must not diminish, increase
or modify substantive rights.
b. Pleadings, practice and procedure
in all courts; VI. BILL OF RIGHTS
NOTE: Rules which are substantive in Police Eminent Taxatio

nature are not embraced by the rule- Power Domain n
making power of the Supreme Court. To
incorporate said substantive law would Scope Regulate Affects Affects
have been a travesty of its rule-making s liberty only only
power which, by direct mandate of the and property property
Constitution, is limited to matters referring property; rights; rights;
to pleading, practice and procedure.
(Primicias vs Ocampo, G.R. No. L-6120, Who Exercise Maybe Exercise
June 30, 1953) may d only byexercised d only by
exerci the by the the
c. The admission of the se? governm private governm
practice of law; ent; and entities; ent; and
d. Integrated Bar; and and
Effect Property Property Property
e. Legal assistance to the to taken is is taken is taken
underprivileged. prope destroye for public for
rty d use public
In the case of Echegaray vs
use
Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601,
October 12, 1998, the Supreme Court held
that its rule-making power was expanded. Note:
It was given the power to promulgate rules There
concerning the protection and must be
enforcement of constitutional rights. It was just
compensa
also granted the power to disapprove rules
of procedure of special courts and quasi- tion. For
judicial bodies. The 1987 Constitution took compensa
away the power of Congress to repeal, tion to be

just it police power requires the concurrence of a
must not lawful subject and a lawful method.
only be
full, but it Police power is the power of the
should state to promote public welfare by
likewise restraining and regulating the use of liberty
be not and property. It is the most pervasive, the
delayed. least limitable, and the most demanding of
the three fundamental powers of the State.
The justification is found in the Latin
Police power maxim salus populiest suprema lex(the
Police power, while incapable of an welfare of the people is the supreme law)
exact definition, has been purposely veiled and sic utere tuo ut alienum non
in general terms to underscore its laedas(so use your property as not to
comprehensiveness to meet all exigencies injure the property of others). As an
and provide enough room for an efficient inherent attribute of sovereignty which
and flexible response as the conditions virtually extends to all public needs, police
warrant. Police power is based upon the power grants a wide panoply of
concept of necessity of the State and its instruments through which the State, as
corresponding right to protect itself and its parens patriae, gives effect to a host of its
people. Police power has been used as regulatory powers. We have held that the
justification for numerous and varied power to "regulate" means the power to
actions by the State. (White Light Corp. protect, foster, promote, preserve, and
vs City of Manila, G.R. No. 122846, control, with due regard for the interests,
January 20, 2009) first and foremost, of the public, then of
the utility and of its patrons.
When the conditions so demand as
determined by the legislature, property NOTE: The legislature, which is the
rights must bow to the primacy of police constitutional repository of police power
power because property rights, though and exercises the prerogative of
sheltered by due process, must yield to determining the policy of the State, is by
general welfare. force of circumstances primarily the judge
of necessity, adequacy or reasonableness
Two requisites must concur: (a) the and wisdom, of any law promulgated in the
interests of the public generally, as exercise of the police power, or of the
distinguished from those of a particular measures adopted to implement the public
class, require the interference of the! State; policy or to achieve public interest. The
and (b) the means employed are legislature may also grant rights and
reasonably necessary to the: attainment of impose additional burdens: It may also
the object sought to be accomplished and regulate industries, in the exercise of police
not unduly oppressive upon individuals. In power, for the protection of the public.
other words, the proper exercise of the (Southern Luzon Drug Corp. vs DSWD,
G.R. No. 199669 April 25, 2017)
Eminent domain not based on tort, but on the constitutional
prohibition against the taking of property
Eminent domain is the power of without just compensation. It would very
the nation or a sovereign state to take, or well be contrary to the clear language of
to authorize the taking of, private property the Constitution to bar the recovery of just
for a public use without the owner’s compensation for private property taken
consent, conditioned upon payment of just for a public use solely on the basis of
compensation. statutory prescription. (NPC vs Heirs of
Sangkay, G.R. No. 165828, August 24,
The payment of just compensation 2011)
for private property taken for public use is
guaranteed no less by our Constitution and NOTE: Legislative enactments, as well as
is included in the Bill of Rights. As such, no executive issuances, fixing or providing fix
legislative enactments or executive the method of computing just
issuances can prevent the courts from compensation are tantamount to
determining whether the right of the impermissible encroachment on judicial
property owners to just compensation has prerogatives. Thus, they are not binding on
been violated. It is a judicial function that courts and, at best, are treated as mere
cannot "be usurped by any other branch or guidelines in ascertaining the amount of
official of the government." Thus, we have just compensation.
consistently ruled that statutes and
Private acts and the Bill of Rights
executive issuances fixing or providing for
the method of computing just Due process
compensation are not binding on courts
and, at best, are treated as mere guidelines A law which hears before it
in ascertaining the amount thereof (NPC condemns. The essence of due process is
vs Sps. Zabala ,G.R. No. 173520, January distilled in the immortal cry of
30, 2013, Del Castillo) Themistocles to Eurybiades: “STRIKE IF
YOU MUST, BUT HEAR ME OUT”
The action to recover just
compensation is based on the Constitution1 Relativity of due process
while the action for damages is predicated
on statutory enactments. Indeed, the Arises when the definition of due
former arises from the exercise by the State process has been left to the best judgment
of its power of eminent domain against of our judiciary considering the peculiarity
private property for public use, but the and the circumstances of each case. In a
latter emanates from the transgression of a litany of cases that have been decided in
right. The fact that the owner rather than this jurisdiction, the common requirement
the expropriator brings the former does to be able to conform to due process is fair
not change the essential nature of the suit play, respect for justice and respect for the
as an inverse condemnation, for the suit is better rights of others. In accordance with
the standards of due process, any court at
any particular time, will be well guided,
instead of being merely confined strictly to
a precise definition which may or may not b. It leaves law enforcers an unbridled
apply in every case. discretion in carrying out its provisions.
(People vs. de la Piedra, G.R. No. 128777,
Substantive due process January 24, 2001)
A guarantee that life, liberty and NOTE:The void-for-vagueness doctrine

property shall not be taken away from cannot be used to impugn the validity of a
anyone without due process of law. criminal statute using “facial challenge”
but it may be used to invalidate a criminal
Procedural due process statute “as applied” to a particular
defendant.All persons or things similarly
Relates to the mode of procedure situated should be treated alike, both as to
which government agencies must follow in rights conferred and responsibilities
the enforcement and application of laws. imposed.
Equal protection
Constitutional due process
Does an executive order granting tax
Protects the individual from the exemption to a secured area violative
government and assures him of his rights of the equal protection clause?
in criminal, civil or administrative
proceedings No. The constitutional rights to equal
protection of the law is not violated by an
Statutory due process executive order, issued pursuant to law,
It protects employees from being granting tax and duty incentives only to
unjustly terminated without just cause the business and residents within the
after notice and hearing (Agabon vs "secured area" of the Subic Special
NLRC, G.R. No. 158693, November 17, Economic Zone and denying them to those
2004) who live within the Zone but outside such
"fenced-in" territory. The Constitution
Void-for-vagueness doctrine does not require absolute equality among
residents. It is enough that all persons
A law is vague when it lacks under like circumstances or conditions are
comprehensive standards that men of given the same privileges and required to
common intelligence must necessarily follow the same obligations. In short, a
guess at its common meaning and differ as classification based on valid and
to its application. In such instance, the reasonable standards does not violate the
statute is repugnant to the Constitution equal protection clause. ( Tiu vs Court of
because: Appeals, G.R. No. 127410, January 20,
a. It violates due process for failure to 1999)
accord persons, especially the parties Requisites for a valid classification
targeted by it, fair notice of what conduct
to avoid The concept of equal protection,
however, does not require the universal

application of the laws to all persons or ambit of alleged unlawful intrusion by the
things without distinction. What it simply government.(People vs Marti, G.R. No.
requires is equality among equals as 81561, January 18, 1991)
determined according to a valid
classification. Indeed, the equal protection NOTE: A mere tip from an unnamed
clause permits classification. Such informant does not vest police officers with
classification, however, to be valid must the authority to barge into private homes
pass the test of reasonableness. without first securing a valid warrant of
arrest or search warrant. (Tayson vs
The test has four requisites: People, G.R. No. 200396, March 22, 2017,
Del Castillo)
a. The classification rests on
substantial distinctions;
Miranda doctrine
b. It is germane to the purpose of
the law; Any person under investigation for
the commission of an offense shall have
c. It is not limited to existing the right to be informed of his right to
conditions only; and remain silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own
d.It applies equally to all members choice. If the person cannot afford the
of the same class. services of counsel, he must be provided
NOTE: "Superficial differences do not with one. These rights cannot be waived
make for a valid classification." except in writing and in the presence of
(Bartolome vs SSS, G.R. No. 192531, counsel.
November 12, 2014)
NOTE: Silence should not be equated with
Searches and seizure consent. (People vs Guillen y Atienza,
G.R. No. 191756, November 25, 2013, Del
The right is personal; it may be Castillo)
invoked only by the person entitled to it
(Stonehill vs Diokno, G.R. No. L-19550, The right of an accused to be
June 19, 1967). As such, the right may be informed of the right to remain silent and
waived either expressly or impliedly, but to counsel contemplates the transmission
the waiver must be made by the person of meaningful information rather than just
whose right is invaded, not by one who is the ceremonial and perfunctory recitation
not duly authorized to effect such waiver. of an abstract constitutional principle.
(People vs Damaso, G.R. No. 93516, Such right contemplates effective
August 12, 1992) communication which results in the
NOTE:The protection against subject understanding what is conveyed.
unreasonable searches and seizures cannot (People vs Reyes y Paje, G.R. No. 178300,
be extended to acts committed by private March 17, 2009 )
individuals so as to bring it within the
Valid warrantless searches
NOTE: Each of these requires probable evidence obtained in a warrantless search
cause, except stop and frisk incident to a lawful arrest outside the
suspect’s person and premises under his
Searches incidental to lawful arrest immediate control. This is so because
For dangerous weapons or anything “objects in ‘pain view’ of an officer who has
that may have been used or constitute in the right to be in the position to have that
the commission of an offense. (Rule 126, view are subject to seizure and may be
Rules of Court) presented as evidence. (People vs
Calantiao, G.R No. 203984, June 18, 2014)
Stop and frisk
Overbreadth doctrine
KA passenger carrying a bag and
travelling aboard a jeepney is not within Under the overbreadth doctrine, a
the concept of “suspiciousness” because it proper governmental purpose,
was the driver who signaled to the police constitutionally subject to state regulation,
that Cogaed was “suspicious”. The police may not be achieved by means that
officer should not adopt the suspicion unnecessarily sweep its subject broadly,
initiated by another person. For thereby invading the area of protected
warrantless searches, probable cause was freedoms. But Section 4(a)(3) does not
defined as “a reasonable ground of encroach on these freedoms at all. It
suspicion supported by circumstances simply punishes what essentially is a form
sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant of vandalism, the act of willfully destroying
a cautious man to believe that the person without right the things that belong to
accused is guilty of the offense with which others, in this case their computer data,
he is charged.” (People vs Cogaed, G.R. electronic document, or electronic data
No. 200334, July 30, 2014) message. Such act has no connection to
guaranteed freedoms. There is no freedom
Requisites: to destroy other people’s computer systems
a. The item to be searched was within and private documents. (Disini, Jr., et al.
the arrestee's custody or area of vs The Sec. of Justice, et al., G.R. No.
immediate control; 203335, February 11, 2014).
Airport doctrine
b. The search was contemporaneous
with the arrest; Persons may lose the protection of
the search and seizure clause by exposure
c. Searches of moving vehicles; and of their persons or property to the public in
manner reflecting a lack of subjective
d. Searches of prohibited articles in expectation of privacy, which expectation
plain view. society is prepared to recognize as
reasonable. Such recognition is implicit in
Plain view doctrine airport security procedures due to the
increase concern over airplane hacking and
The plain view doctrine is actually
the exception to the inadmissibility of
terrorism. (People vs Johnson, G.R. No. reasonableness of a person’s expectation of
138881, December 18, 2000) privacy must be determined on a case-to-
case basis since it depends on the factual
Castle doctrine circumstances surrounding the case. (Sps.
A man's house is his castle; a Hing vs Choachuy, G.R. No. 179736, June
citizen enjoys the right againstintrusion 26, 2013, Del Castillo)
and is master of all the surveys within the Privacy of communications and
domain and privacy ofhis own home. correspondence
Right to privacy Anti-Wiretapping Law (RA 4200) -
The right to privacy is the right to invasion of privacy.
be let alone. The right to privacy is In Ramirez vs Court of
enshrined in our Constitution and in our Appeals,G.R. No. 93833,it was held that
laws. It is defined as "the right to be free R.A.4200 clearly and unequivocally makes
from unwarranted exploitation of one’s it illegal for any person, not authorized by
person or from intrusion into one’s private all the parties to any private
activities in such a way as to cause communication, to secretly record such
humiliation to a person’s ordinary communications by means of a tape
sensibilities." It is the right of an individual recorder. The law does not make any
"to be free from unwarranted publicity, or distinction.
to live without unwarranted interference
by the public in matters in which the Right to public access of SALN, PDS,
public is not necessarily concerned." and CV of Justices
Simply put, the right to privacy is "the right
to be let alone." (Sps. Hing vs Choachuy, While public officers in the custody
G.R. No. 179736, June 26, 2013, Del or control of public records have the
Castillo) discretion to regulate the manner in which
the records may be inspected, examined or
Reasonable expectation of privacy test copied by interested persons, such
discretion does not carry with it the
This test determines whether a authority to prohibit access, inspection,
person has a reasonable expectation of examination or copying of the records.
privacy and whether the expectation has After all, public office is a public trust.
been violated. The reasonableness of a (A.M. No. 09-9-6- SC, June 13, 2012)
person’s expectation of privacy depends on
a two-part test: (a) whether, by his Freedom of expression
conduct, the individual has exhibited an
expectation of privacy; and (b) this Doctrine of fair comment
expectation is one that society recognizes Defense in an action for libel or
as reasonable." Customs, community slander. It means that while in general
norms, and practices may, therefore, limit every discreditable imputation publicly
or extend an individual’s "reasonable made is deemed false, because every man is
expectation of privacy." Hence, the presumed innocent until his guilt is

judicially proved, and every false Today, religion has transcended
imputation is deemed malicious, mere rubric and has permeated into every
nevertheless, when the discreditable sphere of human undertaking. As a result,
imputation is directed against a public religious freedom, to a limited extent, has
person in his public capacity, it is not come under the regulatory power of the
necessarily actionable. State.
NOTE: The right is not absolute; subject to Every person is free to tread the far
police power and may be regulated territories of their conscience, no matter
(freedom of expression does not cover where they may lead - for the freedom to
ideas offensive to public order) believe and act on one's own convictions
and the protection of such freedom
Freedom of religion extends to all people, from the theistic to
Non-establishment Clause the godless. The State must, as a matter of
duty rather than consequence, guarantee
The non-establishment clause that such pursuit remains unfettered.
means that the state should adopt a
“position of neutrality” when it comes to As representatives of the State,
religious matters. (Suarez, 2011) educational institutions are bound to
safeguard the religious freedom of their
Clear and present danger is not the students. Thus, to such end, our schools
only test to restrain forms of speech carry the responsibility to restrict its own
The court ruled that “where the academic liberties, should they collide with
legislation under constitutional attack constitutionally preferred rights. (Almores
interferes with the freedom of speech and vs DR. Achacoso, G.R. No. 217453, July 19,
assembly in a more generalized way and 2017)
where the effect of the speech and Expression
assembly in terms of the probability of
realization of a specific danger is not Freedom of expression enjoys an
susceptible even of impressionistic exalted place in the hierarchy of
calculation,” then the “balancing interests” constitutional rights. Free expression
test can be applied. (Soriano vs however, "is not absolute for it may be so
Laguardia, et al., G.R. No. 164785, April regulated that [its exercise shall neither] be
29, 2009) injurious to the equal enjoyment of others
In a nutshell, the Constitution having equal rights, nor injurious to the
guarantees the freedom to believe rights of the community or society." Libel
absolutely, while the freedom to act based stands as an exception to the enjoyment of
on belief is subject to regulation by the that most guarded constitutional right.
State when necessary to protect the rights (Lopez y Aberasturi, vs People, G.R. No.
of others and in the interest of public 172203, February 14, 2011, Del Castillo)
welfare.
Four (4) aspects of the freedom of the
press
Philippine jurisprudence, even as Self-incrimination- “No person shall be
early as the period under the 1935 compelled witness against himself” (Sec.
Constitution, has recognized four aspects 17, Art. Il)
of freedom of the press. These are:
G.R.: “The kernel of the right is not against
a. freedom from prior restraint; all compulsion, but against testimonial
compulsion.” (Agustin vs CA, G.R. No.
b. freedom from punishment 162571, June 15, 2005)
subsequent to publication;
XPN: When books of account are to be
c. freedom of access to information; examined in exercise of power of taxation
and and police power.
d. freedom of circulation (Chavez Mandatory drug testing of students
v. Raul Gonzales, et al., G.R. No. 168338, constitutional.
February 15, 2008)
The drug test prescribed under Sec.
Liberty of abode and freedom of 36(c) and (d), for secondary and tertiary
movement
level students and public and private
Right to travel employees, while mandatory, is a random
and suspicion less arrangement. The
The liberty of travel may be impaired even primary legislative intent is not criminal
without court order but the appropriate prosecution, as those found positive for
executive officer can impose only on the illegal drug use as a result of this random
basis of national security, public safety, or testing are not necessarily treated as
public health as may be provided by law. criminals, hence, constitutional.
Impairment is also subject to judicial
review, even emergency measures. (Del Schools, acting in loco parentis,
Rosario vs Pascua, A.M. No. P-11-2999, have a duty to safeguard the health and
February 27, 2012) well - being of their students and may
adopt such measures as may reasonably be
Watch-list and HDO necessary to discharge such duty; and
The right to travel should not be schools have the right to impose
construed as delimiting the inherent power conditions on applicants for admission that
of the Courts to use all means necessary to are fair, just, and non-discriminatory.
carry their orders into effect in criminal Indeed, it is within the prerogative of
cases pending before them. When by law educational institutions to require, as a
jurisdiction is conferred on a Court or condition for admission, compliance with
judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, process reasonable school rules and regulations
and other means necessary to carry into and policies. To be sure, the right to enroll
effect may be employed by such Court or is not absolute; it is subject to fair,
officer. reasonable, and equitable requirements.
(Social Justice Society vs Dangerous
Drugs Board, G.R. No. 157870, November
3, 2008)
Right to bail at trial. (Enrile vs Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. 213847, August 18, 2015)
GR: All persons shall, before conviction, be
bailable.
NOTE: After one is convicted by the trial
XPN: Those who are charged with offenses court, the presumption of innocence, and
punishable by reclusion perpetua, life with it, the constitutional right to bail,
imprisonment or death when the evidence ends. ( Qui vs People G.R. No. 196161,
of guilt is strong. September 26, 2012)
NOTE: The prosecution cannot adduce Is the right to bail suspended if the
evidence for the denial of bail where it is a President declares martial law or when
matter of right. However, where the grant the privilege of the Writ of Habeas
of bail is discretionary, the prosecution Corpus is suspended?
may show proof to deny the bail.
No. The right to bail shall not be
In the case of Enrile vs suspended even if the privilege of the writ
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August of habeas corpus is suspended. You can
18, 2015, Bail for the provisional liberty of post bail with the Office of the Executive
the accused, regardless of the crime Judge.
charged, should be allowed independently
of the merits of the charge, provided his Double jeopardy
continued incarceration is clearly shown to
The evil sought to be avoided by
be injurious to his health or to endanger
prohibiting double jeopardy is trial and
his life. Indeed, denying him bail despite
double conviction, not necessarily double
imperiling his health and life would not
punishment.
serve the true objective of preventive
incarceration during trial. Requisites:
It is worthy to note that bail is not a. Valid complaint or information;

granted to prevent the accused from NOTE: Double jeopardy does not attach in
committing additional crimes. The purpose preliminary investigation.
of bail is to guarantee the appearance of
the accused at the trial, or whenever so b. Filed before a competent court;
required by the trial court. The amount of
bail should be high enough to assure the c. To which the defendant had
presence of the accused when so required, pleaded; and
but it should be no higher than is
reasonably calculated to fulfill this d. Defendant was previously acquitted
purpose. Thus, bail acts as a reconciling or convicted, or the case dismissed
mechanism to accommodate both the or otherwise terminated without
accused’s interest in his provisional liberty his express consent
before or during the trial, and the society’s
interest in assuring the accused’s presence

NOTE: Consent of the accused to the Ways of acquiring Philippine
dismissal cannot be implied or presumed; citizenship:
it must be expressed as to have no doubt as
to the accused’s conformity. (Caes vs a. Judicial naturalization(CA 473);
Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. Nos.
74989-90, November 6, 1989) b. Administrative naturalization
(R.A. No. 9139); and
The right against double jeopardy
cannot be raised in a petition for certiorari c. Derivative naturalization-
under Rule 65 except: available to alien women
married to Filipino husband.
a. In a judgement of acquittal
rendered with grave abuse of NOTE: It is universally accepted that a
discretion by the court; and State, in extending the privilege of
b. Where the prosecution had been citizenship to an alien wife of one of its
deprived of due process. citizens could have had no other objective
Outside of these circumstances, than to maintain a unity of allegiance
Rule 65 cannot be used as this petition among the members of the family.
does not involve a review of facts and law (Republic vs Batuigas, G.R. No. 183110,
on the merits in the manner done in an October 7, 2013, Del Castillo)
appeal. (Brion, Ysidro v. Leonardo- Naturalization laws should be
Castro, G.R. No. 171513 February 6, 2012) rigidly enforced and strictly construed in
Doctrine of supervening event favor of the government and against the
applicant. The burden of proof rest upon
The accused may still be the applicant to show full and complete
prosecuted for another offense if a compliance with the requirement of law.
subsequent development changes the (Republic vs Ong, G.R. No. 175430, June
character of the first indictment under 18, 2012, Del Castillo)
which he may have already been charged
or convicted. Adoption
VII. Citizenship Domestic laws on adoption also

support the principle that foundlings are
The Philippine law on citizenship Filipinos. These laws do not provide that
adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis. adoption confers citizenship upon the
Thereunder, a child follows the nationality adoptee. Rather, the adoptee must be a
or citizenship of the parents regardless of Filipino in the first place to be adopted.
the place of his/her birth, as opposed to The most basic of such laws is Article 15 of
the doctrine of jus soli which determines the Civil Code which provides that "laws
nationality or citizenship on the basis of relating to family rights, duties, status,
place of birth. (Valles vs COMELEC, G.R. conditions, legal capacity of persons are
No. 137000, August 9, 2000) binding on citizens of the Philippines even
though living abroad." Adoption deals with

status, and a Philippine adoption court will office, and is discharging its duties under
have jurisdiction only if the adoptee is a color of authority, by which is meant
Filipino. authority derived from an appointment,
however irregular or informal, so that the
The "Inter-Country Adoption Act of incumbent is not a mere volunteer.
1995”, the Domestic Adoption Act of 1998 Consequently, the acts of the de facto
and "Rule on Adoption," all expressly refer officer are just as valid for all purposes as
to "Filipino children" and include those of a de jure officer, in so far as the
foundlings as among Filipino children who
public or third persons who are interested
may be adopted. Foundlings are likewise therein are concerned. (Funa vs Agra,
citizens under international law. Under the G.R. No. 191644, February 19, 2013)
1987 Constitution, an international law can
become part of the sphere of domestic law A de jure officer is an officer in all
either by transformation or incorporation. respect, legally appointed or elected and
qualifies to exercise the office, and has a
NOTE: The DFA issues passports to
complete legal title to the office as against
foundlings. Passports are by law, issued the whole world.
only to citizens. This shows that even the
executive department, acting through the Impeachment
DFA, considers foundlings as Philippine
citizens. (Poe-Llamanzares vs The method by which persons
COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, March 8, holding government positions of high
2016) authority, prestige, and dignity and with
definite tenure may be removed from office
Repatriation for causes closely related to their conduct
as public officials.
The privilege of repatriation under
R.A. 8171 is extended directly to the natural PURPOSE: For the protection of the
born Filipinos who could prove that they State, not for the punishment of the
acquired citizenship in a foreign country offender. The penalties attached to the
due to political and economic reasons and impeachment are merely incidental to the
extended indirectly to the minor children primary intention of protecting the people
at the time of repatriation. as a body politic.
NOTE: The child must be of minor age at Impeachable officers
the time the petition for repatriation is
a. President
filed by the parent.
VIII. Law on Public Officer b. Vice-President
A de facto officer is one who c. Members of the Supreme Court

derives his appointment from one having d. Members of the Constitutional
colorable authority to appoint, if the office Commissions
is an appointive office, and whose
appointment is valid on its face. He may e. Ombudsman (Sec. 2, Art. XI,
also be one who is in possession of an 1987 Constitution)
NOTE: The enumeration is exclusive. The impeachment proceeding is
not initiated when the House deliberates
NOTE: An impeachable officer who is a on the resolution passed on to it by the
member of the Bar cannot be disbarred Committee, because something prior to
without first being impeached. that has already been done. The action of
(OMBUDSMAN vs CA and Mojica, G.R. the House is already a further step in the
No. 146486, March 4, 2005) proceeding, not its initiation or beginning.
Article XI, Section 3(1) – House of Rather, the proceeding is initiated or
Representatives shall have the exclusive begins, when a verified complaint is filed
power to initiate all cases of impeachment and referred to the Committee on Justice
for action. This is the initiating step which
Article XI, Section 3(6) - Senate has the triggers the series of steps that follow.
sole power to try and decide all cases of (Gutierrez vs House of Representatives
impeachment Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459,
NOTE: The Constitutional Commission February 15, 2011)
did not restrict promulgation to Ombudsman’s jurisdiction
publication, the former should be
understood to have been used in its Indeed, the power of the Office of
general sense. It is within the discretion of the Ombudsman to investigate extends to
the Congress to determine on how to all kinds of malfeasance, misfeasance and
promulgate its Impeachment Rules, in nonfeasance that have been committed
much the same way the Judiciary is during his tenure of office by any officer or
permitted to determine that to promulgate employee of the Government, or of any
a decision means to deliver the decision to subdivision, agency or instrumentality
the clerk of court for filing and publication. thereof, including government-owned or
It is not for this court to tell a co-equal controlled corporations.
branch of the government how to The Office of the Ombudsman also
promulgate when the Constitution itself has the power to act on all complains
has not prescribed a specific method of relating, but not limited, to acts or
promulgation. The court is in no position omissions that are:
to dictate a mode of promulgation beyond
the dictates of the Constitution. ( a. contrary to law or regulations;
Gutierrez vs House of Representatives
Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459, b. unreasonable, unfair, oppressive
February 15, 2011) or discriminatory;
The one-year bar rule c. inconsistent with the general

course of an agency’s functions, though in
Article XI, Section 3(5) of the accordance with law;
Constitution states that No impeachment
proceedings shall be initiated against the d. proceeds from a mistake of law
same official more than once within a or an arbitrary ascertainment of facts;
period of one year.

e. in the exercise of discretionary (Gonzales III vs Office ofthe President,
powers but for an improper purpose; or G.R. Nos. 196231 & 196232, January 28,
2014)
f. otherwise irregular, immoral or
devoid of justification. At the same time, IX. Administrative Law
the Office of the Ombudsman, in the
The doctrine of exhaustion of
exercise of its administrative disciplinary
authority, can impose the penalty of administrative remedies
removal, suspension, demotion, fine, Under the doctrine of exhaustion of
censure or persecution of public or administrative remedies, before a party is
employee found to be at fault. The exercise allowed to seek the intervention of the
of all such powers is well founded on the court, one should have availed first of all
Constitution and on Republic Act. No. the means of administrative processes
6770(Office of the Ombudsman vs De available. If resort to a remedy within the
Leon, G.R. No. 154083, February 27, 2013) administrative machinery can still be made
May the President remove a Deputy by giving the administrative officer
Ombudsman and a Special Prosecutor concerned every opportunity to decide on
from service? a matter that comes within his jurisdiction,
then such remedy should be exhausted
Yes. By granting express statutory power to first before the court’s judicial power can
the President to remove a Deputy be sought. For reasons of comity and
Ombudsman and a Special Prosecutor convenience, courts of justice shy away
(ground for removal: culpable violation of from dispute until the system of
the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft administrative redress has been completed
and corruption), Congress merely filled an and complied with, so as to give the
obvious gap in the law. While the removal administrative agency concerned every
of the Ombudsman himself is also opportunity to correct its error and dispose
expressly provided for in the Constitution, of the case. (Ocampo, et al. vs Rear
which is by impeachment under Section 2 Admiral Ernesto C. Enriquez, et al., G.R.
of the same Article, there is, however, no No. 225973, November 8, 2016)
constitutional provision similarly dealing
with the removal from office of a Deputy Exceptions to the application of the
Ombudsman, or a Special Prosecutor, for doctrine:
that matter. By enacting Section 8(2) of a. Violation of due process
R.A. 6770, Congress simply filled a gap in b. When there is estoppel on the part
the law without running afoul of any of the administrative agency
provision in the Constitution or existing concerned
statutes. In fact, the Constitution itself, c. When the issue involved is a purely
under Section 2, authorizes Congress to legal question
provide for the removal of all other public d. When there is irreparable injury
officers, including the Deputy e. When the administrative action is
Ombudsman and Special Prosecutor, who patently illegal amounting to lack
are not subject to impeachment. or excess of jurisdiction
f. When the respondent is a COMELEC, G.R. No. 210164, August 18,
Department Secretary whose acts 2015, Del Castillo)
as an alter ego of the President
bears the implied and assumed Domicile
approval of the latter A place to which, whenever absent
g. When the subject matter is a for business or for pleasure, one intends to
private land case proceeding return, and depends on facts and
h. When it would be unreasonable circumstances in the sense that they
i. When no administrative review is disclose intent. (Romualdez-Marcos v.
provided by law COMELEC, G.R. No. 119976, September
j. When the rule does not provide a 18, 1995)
plain, speedy, and adequate remedy
k. When the issue of non-exhaustion Election campaign
of administrative remedies has An act designed to promote the
been rendered moot election or defeat of a particular candidate
l. When there are circumstances or candidates to a public office.
indicating the urgency of judicial
intervention NOTE: Premature campaigning is no
m. When it would amount to a longer an election offense under the
nullification of a claim; and country’s automated election law that
n. Where the rule of qualified political repealed the old manual election system.
agency applies. (Laguna CATV (Penera vs COMELEC, G.R. No. 181613,
Network vs Maraan, G.R. No. November 25, 2009)
139492, November 19, 2002)
Effect of absolute pardon
NOTE: Factual findings of administrative
The disqualification of former
bodies charged with their specific field
President Estrada under Section 40 of the
ofexpertise, are afforded great weight by
LGC in relation to Section 12 of the OEC
the courts, and in the absence of
was removed by his acceptance of the
substantial showing that such findings
absolute pardon granted to him. Former
were made from an erroneous estimation
President Estrada was granted an absolute
of the evidence presented, they are
pardon that fully restored all his civil and
conclusive, and in the interest of stability
political rights, which naturally includes
of the governmental structure, should not
the right to seek public elective office. The
be disturbed. (Lumayna vs Del Castillo,
wording of the pardon extended to former
G.R. No. 185001, September 25, 2009, Del
President Estrada is complete,
Castillo)
unambiguous, and unqualified. (Atty.
X. Election Law Risos-Vidal vs COMELEC and
Estrada,G.R. No. 206666, January 21,
NOTE: Only natural-born Filipinos who 2015)
owe total and undivided allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines could run for and Doctrine of forgiveness
hold elective public office.(Arnado vs
A public official cannot be removed When in the exigencies of
for administrative misconduct committed government it is necessary to create and
during a prior term, since his re-election to define duties, the legislative department
office operates as a condonation of the has the discretion to determine whether
officer’s previous misconduct to the extent additional offices shall be created, or
of cutting off the right to remove him whether these duties shall be attached to
therefor. The foregoing rule, however, and become ex-officio duties of existing
finds no application to criminal cases offices. An office created by the legislature
pending against petitioner. (Aguinaldo vs is wholly within the power of that body,
Santos, G.R. No. 94115, August 21, 1992) and it may prescribe the mode of filling the
office and the powers and duties of the
NOTE:This doctrine was abandoned in the incumbent, and if it sees fit, abolish the
case of Morales vs Court of Appeals, G.R. office. (Eugenio vs Civil Service
No. 217126-27, November 10, 2015. The Commission, G.R. No. 115863, March 31,
court held that the concept of public office 1995)
is a public trust and the corollary
requirement of accountability to the Abolition of office
people at all times, as mandated under the
1987 Constitution, is plainly inconsistent The rule is that while abolition of
with the idea that an elective local official's the office does not imply removal of the
administrative liability for a misconduct incumbent, it is true only where the
committed during a prior term can be abolition is made in good faith; that the
wiped off by the fact that he was elected to right to abolish can not be used to
a second term of office, or even another discharge employees in violation of the
elective post. Election is not a mode of civil service law nor can it be exercised for
condoning an administrative offense, and personal or political reasons. (Briones vs
there is simply no constitutional or Osmena, G.R. No. L-12536. September 24,
statutory basis in our jurisdiction to 1958)
support the notion that an official elected
for a different term is fully absolved of any Abolition of office is constitutional
administrative liability arising from an when:
offense done during a prior term. In this
jurisdiction, liability arising from a. In good faith;
administrative offenses may be condoned
by the President in light of Section 19, b. Not for personal or political
Article VII of the 1987 Constitution. reasons; and
XI. Local Governments c. Not in violation of the law.

The creation and abolition of public
offices is primarily a legislative NOTE: Evidence of bad faith is shown
function. when the purpose of the abolition of office
is to discharge the incumbent in violation

of the civil service law. (Roque vs Ericta, least one Member. (Sema vs Comelec G.R.
G.R. No. L-30244, September 28, 1973) No. 177597 July 16, 2008 )
The power to fix common
Creation and dissolution of municipal boundary, in order to avoid or settle
corporation conflicts of jurisdiction between adjoining
municipalities, may partake of an
In the cases where a de facto administrative nature — involving, as it
municipal corporation was recognized as does, the adoption of means and ways to
such despite the fact that the statute carry into effect the law creating said
creating it was later invalidated, the municipalities — the authority to create
decisions could fairly be made to rest on municipal corporations is essentially
the consideration that there was some legislative in nature. In the language of
other valid law giving corporate vitality to other courts, it is "strictly a legislative
the organization. The mere fact that a function" (Pelaez vs Auditor General,
Municipality was organized at a time when
G.R. No. L-23825, December 24, 1965)
the statute had not been invalidated
cannot conceivably make it a de facto Principle of local autonomy
corporation, as, independently of the
Administrative Code provision in question, Under the 1987 Constitution, it
there is no other valid statute to give color simply means decentralization; it does
of authority to its creation. (Camid vs not make the local governments sovereign
Office of the President, G.R. NO. 161414, within the state or an “imperium in
January 17, 2005) imperio”. (Basco vs PAGCOR, G.R. No.
91649, May 14, 1991)
NOTE: There is no provision in the
Constitution that conflicts with the Requisites for a valid ordinance:
delegation to regional legislative bodies of a. Must not contravene the
the power to create municipalities and Constitution and any statute;
barangays, provided Section 10, Article X
of the Constitution is followed. However, b. Must not be unfair or oppressive;
the creation of provinces and cities is
another matter. Section 5 (3), Article VI of c. Must not be partial or
the Constitution provides, each city with a discriminatory;
population of at least two hundred fifty d. Must not prohibit, but may
thousand, or each province, shall have at regulate trade;
least one representative in the House of
Representatives. Similarly, Section 3 of the e. Must not be unreasonable; and
Ordinance appended to the Constitution
provides, any province that may hereafter f. Must be general in application and
be created, or any city whose population consistent with public policy (City
may hereafter increase to more than two of Manila vs Laguio, Jr., G.R. No.
hundred fifty thousand shall be entitled in 118127. April 12, 2005)
the immediately following election to at XII. Public International Law
Obligation erga omnes and jus cogens Treaties, 1969) The time-honored
international principle of pacta sunt
When a State admits into its servanda demands the performance in
territory foreign investments or foreign good faith of treaty obligations on the part
nationals, whether natural or juristic of the states that enter into the agreement.
persons, it is bound to extend to them the Every treaty in force is binding upon the
protection of the law and assumes parties, and obligations under the treaty
obligations concerning the treatment to be must be performed by them in good faith.
afforded them. These obligations, however,
More importantly, treaties have the force
are neither absolute nor unqualified. In and effect of law in this jurisdiction.
particular, an essential distinction should (Deutsche Bank AG Manila Branch vs
be drawn between the obligations of a Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R.
State towards the international community No. 18850, August 28,2013)
as a whole, and those (jus cogens) arising
vis-à-vis another State in the field of Obligation of the State of refuge to the
diplomatic protection. By their very nature refugee
the former are the concern of all States. In
view of the importance of the rights The State of refuge is required to treat
involved, al1 States can be held to have a the refugee no less favorably than other
legal interest in their protection; they are aliens who are there and not to
obligations erga omnes. (Barcelona discriminate as between refugees on
Traction, Light and Power Co. Case, grounds of race, religion or country of
Belgium vs Spain, ICJ Reports, 1970) origin.(Article 1 (1), Convention Relating
to the Status of Stateless Persons)
Unilateral statements
Jurisdiction of ICC
Declaration made through
unilateral acts may have the effect of The ICC is a permanent
creating legal obligations. In this case, the international court established to
statement made by the President of France investigate, prosecute and try individuals
must be held to constitute an engagement accused of committing the most serious
of the State in regard to the circumstances crimes of concern to the international
and intention with which they were made. community as a whole, namely the crime
Therefore, these statements made by the of genocide, crimes against humanity, war
France (D) are relevant and legally binding. crimes and the crime of aggression.
(Nuclear Test Cases, Australia vs France a. Territorial or Personal
and New Zealand vs France, Merits, ICJ Jurisdiction- When a State
Reports, 1974) becomes a party to the Rome
Statute, it agrees to submit itself to
Pacta sunt servanda
the jurisdiction of the ICC with
Every treaty in force is binding respect to the crimes enumerated
upon the parties to it and must be in the Statute. The Court may
performed by them in good faith. (Article exercise its jurisdiction in
26, Vienna Convention on the Law of situations where the alleged
perpetrator is a national of a State No. Withdrawal shall not affect criminal
Party or where the crime was investigations and proceedings which were
committed in the territory of a commenced prior to the date on which the
State Party. Also, a State not party withdrawal became effective. (Article 127,
to the Statute may decide to accept Rome Statute)
the jurisdiction of the ICC.
International Humanitarian Law and
NOTE: These conditions do not apply Human Rights Law
when the Security Council, acting under
Chapter VII, action with respect to threats International Human
to the peace, breaches of the peace, and Humanitarian Rights Law
acts of aggression, of the United Nations Law
Charter, refers a situation to the Office of Temporal Exclusively in In peace
the Prosecutor. Scope of armed conflict time and
Application during
b. Temporal Jurisdiction- The ICC armed
has jurisdiction only with respect to conflict
events which occurred after the Geographic Applies Applies
entry into force of its Statute on 1 al Scope of extraterritorial extra
July 2002. If a State becomes a party Application ly and not teterritorial
to the Statute after its entry into subject to ly based,
force, the Court may exercise its controversy inter alia,
jurisdiction only with respect to on
crimes committed after the entry decisions
into force of the Statute for that by regional
State, unless that State has made a and
declaration accepting the internation
jurisdiction of the ICC al courts
retroactively. Personal All parties to Only States
c. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction- The Scope of an armed
ICC has jurisdiction to try Application conflict
individuals and to hold such
persons accountable for the most
serious crimes of concern to the James 1:5 New International Version
international community as a (NIV)
whole, namely the crime of
genocide, war crimes, crimes If any of you lacks wisdom, you
against humanity, and the crime of should ask God, who gives
aggression. generously to all without finding
fault, and it will be given to you.
Does the withdrawal from the Rome
Statute mean the ICC can no longer
prosecute the President?



PCU 2018 Political Law Reviewer PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PCU 2018 Political Law Reviewer PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PCU 2018 Political Law Reviewer PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2018 BAR EXAMINATIONS

ACADS Head: Malyn Gonzales

Philippine Christian University College of Law _3 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _4 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _5 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _6 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _8 | P a g e

The Electoral Tribunals of the

Philippine Christian University College of Law _9 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _10 | P a g e

Is it mandatory for the Congress d. Issuance of Presidential Decrees

Philippine Christian University College of Law _13 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _14 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _15 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _16 | P a g e

Political questions h. Salaries of judges may not be

Philippine Christian University College of Law _17 | P a g e

NOTE: Rules which are substantive in Police Eminent Taxatio

Philippine Christian University College of Law _18 | P a g e

A guarantee that life, liberty and NOTE:The void-for-vagueness doctrine

Philippine Christian University College of Law _21 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _24 | P a g e

It is worthy to note that bail is not a. Valid complaint or information;

Philippine Christian University College of Law _27 | P a g e

VII. Citizenship Domestic laws on adoption also

Philippine Christian University College of Law _28 | P a g e

A de facto officer is one who c. Members of the Supreme Court

The one-year bar rule c. inconsistent with the general

Philippine Christian University College of Law _30 | P a g e

XI. Local Governments c. Not in violation of the law.

Philippine Christian University College of Law _33 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _36 | P a g e

Philippine Christian University College of Law _37 | P a g e

You might also like