4 Art II Sec1-28 CHAP 4 7 - 8 PDF

SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017
MENDIOLA, MANILA
ART II. DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND ALBANO

STATE POLICIES What does the Constitution say on the
nature of the Philippines as a State?
PRINCIPLES
The Constitution provides that the
Section 1. The Philippines is a democratic Philippines is a democratic and republican
and republican State. Sovereignty resides in state. (Sec. 1, Art. II, 1987 Constitution)
the people and all government emanates from
them. What is a republican form of government?
NACHURA It is a government of the people, by the

people, and for the people, a representative
Essential features of Republicanism:
government wherein the powers and duties
1. Representation of government are exercised and discharged
2. Renovation for the common good and welfare. (Guido vs.
Rural progress Administration)
Manifestations of Republicanism: What are some of the underlying

L-MABIS principles in a republican government?
1. Ours is a government of Laws and not
of men. (Villavicencio v Lukban) Some characteristics of a republican form of
2. Rule of Majority government are:
3. Accountability of public officials 1. The people do not govern themselves
4. Bill of rights directly but through their
5. Legislature cannot pass Irrepealable representatives;
laws 2. It is founded upon popular suffrage;
6. Separation of powers and
3. There is the tripartite system of
government, the mutual
Purpose of Republicanism: interdependence of the three (3)
departments of government. (Vargas
1. To prevent concentration of authority vs. Rilloraza)
in one person that might lead to an
irreversible error or abuse in its Upon whom is the power of sovereignty
exercise to the detriment of the vested? Explain.
republican institutions.
Sovereignty resides in the people and all
2. To secure action, to forestall over government authority emanates from them.
action, to prevent despotism and to (Sec. 1, Art. II, 1987 Constitution). The
obtain efficiency. ultimate power resides in the people. The acts
of their representatives are merely
manifestations of such sovereignty. Whatever
power their elected representatives have are
COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM
"I am not what happened to me, i am what i choose to become."
SUBIJANO, CHRISTOPHER | DE TORRES, RECHEL | SIERRA, DONABELLE | DILANGALEN, BAI DONNA | DOMINGO, KEVIN[ DAGUIO, ROY ]
MALONZO, ANNA MARGARITA | GAMMAD, GREG | TUNGOL, REGINA | DULAY, DEUS | GOZON, GLADSY
Page | 1
MENDIOLA, MANILA
their own powers, exercised only through confined to their houses in the district by the
such elected officials. Such power the elected police. At about midnight of October 25, the
officials have is only borrowed from the police, acting pursuant to the orders from the
people. chief of the police and Justo Lukban,
descended upon the houses, hustled some
CASE DOCTRINES: 170 inmates into patrol wagons, and placed
them aboard the steamers “Corregidor” and
Villavicencio v Lukban: GOOD INTENTIONS
“Negros”. They had no knowledge that they
CANNOT JUSTIFY ACTS DONE WITHOUT
were destined for a life in Mindanao. The two
AUTHORITY FROM LAW
steamers with their unwilling passengers
DOCTRINE: No official, no matter how high, is sailed for Davao during the night of October
above the law. The courts are the forum 25, 1918.
which functionate to safeguard individual
liberty and to punish official transgressors. ISSUE: Whether or not the act of the Mayor of
"The law," said Justice Miller, delivering the the City of Manila is constitutional.
opinion of the Supreme Court of the United
States, "is the only supreme power in our HELD:
system of government, and every man who by The Supreme Court condemned the mayor’s
accepting office participates in its functions is act. Respondent’s intention to suppress the
only the more strongly bound to submit to social evil was commutable. But his methods
that supremacy, and to observe the were unlawful. Alien prostitutes can be
limitations which it imposes upon the expelled from the Philippines in conformity
exercise of the authority which it gives." with an act of Congress. The Governor-
General can order the eviction of undesirable
These prostitutes, despite their being in a aliens after a hearing from the Islands. One
sense lepers of society are nevertheless not can search in vain for any law, order, or
chattels but Philippine citizens protected by regulation, which even hints at the right of the
the same constitutional guaranties, as are Mayor of the City of Manila or the Chief of
other citizens — to change their domicile Police of that City to force citizens of the
from Manila to another locality. Philippine Islands, and these women despite
their being in a sense, lepers of society are
nevertheless not chattels but Philippine
citizens protected by the same constitutional
VILLAVICENCIO VS. LUKBAN guarantees as
(39 PHIL 778) other citizens.
FACTS: Law defines power. The law is the only
Respondent Justo Lukban, Mayor of the city of supreme power in our system of government,
Manila, for the best of all reasons, to and every man who by accepting office
exterminate vise, ordered the segregated participates in its functions is only the more
district for women of ill repute, which had strongly bound to submit to that supremacy,
been permitted for a number of years in the and to observe the limitations which gives
City of Manila, closed. The women were kept itself and imposes upon the exercise of the
Page | 2
MENDIOLA, MANILA
authority which it gives. The fundamental 3. A person’s right to life, liberty and due
rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of process
happiness, considered as individual 4. Pactasuntservanda
possessions, are secured by those maxims of
constitutional law which are the monuments
showing the victorious progress of the race in 2 Ways how international can become part
securing to men the blessings of civilization of the sphere of domestic law
under the reign of just and equal laws, so that,
1. By transformation
in the famous language of the Massachusetts
2. By incorporation
Bill of Rights, the government of the
commonwealth may be “government of laws
and not of men”.
Doctrine of Transformation: international
law principle is transformed into domestic
Atty G: Intention was commendable but the law through a constitutional mechanism, such
methods are unlawful. as local legislation.
Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as Doctrine of Incorporation: by mere

an instrument of national policy, adopts the constitutional declaration, international law
generally accepted principles of international is deemed to have the force of domestic law.
law as part of the law of the land and adheres
to the policy of peace, equality, justice, Atty G: If there is no express declaration that
freedom, cooperation, and amity with all the Philippines renounce war, can the
nations. Philippines engage in an aggressive war?
Doctrine of Incorporation: By virtue of this Answer: No, because of the doctrine of

clause, our Courts have applied the rules of incorporation under Sec. 2 of Art. II.
international law in a number of cases even if Rule in case of conflict between a rule of
such rules had not previously been subject of
international law and the provisions of the
statutory enactments, because these constitution or statute of the local state:
generally accepted principles of international
law are automatically part of our own laws. 1. Efforts should first to be exerted to
harmonize them, so as to give effect to
The phrase, “generally accepted principles both.
of international law” refers to: norms of 2. In case the conflict is irreconcilable,
general or customary international law, jurisprudence dictates that the
which are binding on all states. municipal courts should uphold
municipal law.
Example:
Atty G: In all instances, will municipal laws
1. Renunciation of war as an instrument
prevail over a treaty?
of national policy
2. Sovereign immunity

Page | 3
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Answer: Qualify if the issue is presented to the policy of peace, equality, justice,
before the: freedom, cooperation and amity with all
nations.”
1. Local courts: municipal laws will
prevail How may international law become a
2. International tribunals: international party of domestic law? Explain.
laws will prevail.
Under the 1987 Constitution, international
law can become part of the sphere of
In other countries, the doctrine of domestic law either by transformation or
incorporation dictates that rules of incorporation. The transformation method
international law are given equal standing requires that an international law be
with, and are not superior to, national transformed into a domestic law through a
legislative enactments. And in these other constitutional mechanism such as local
countries the principle of lex posterior legislation. The incorporation method applies
derogat prioritakes effect. Lex posterior when, by mere constitutional declaration,
derogate priori means more recent law international law is deemed to have the force
prevails over an inconsistent earlier law. of domestic law.
However, in the Philippines, where the Treaties become part of the law of the land
constitution is the highest law of the land, through transformation pursuant to Section
statutes and treaties may be invalidated if VII, Article 21 of the Constitution which
they are in conflict with the constitution. provides that “no treaty or international
agreement shall be valid and effective unless
concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the
members of the Senate.” Thus, treaties or
What is the doctrine of incorporation in
conventional international law must go
the Constitution?
through a process prescribed by the
It is a doctrine where the generally accepted Constitution for it to be transformed into
principles of international law are made part municipal law that can be applied to domestic
of the law of the land either by express conflicts. (Pharmaceutical & Health Care
provision of the Constitution or by means of Assn. of the Phil vs. Health secretary Duque,
judicial declaration or fiat. et al)
What is the basis of the doctrine of May generally accepted principles of

incorporation? international law form part of the law of
the land even if they do not derive from
It is based from Section 2, Article II of the treaty obligations? Explain.
1987 Constitution which provide:
Yes. Generally accepted principles of
“The Philippines renounces war as an international law, by virtue of the
instrument of national policy, adopts the incorporation clause of the Constitution, form
generally accepted principles of international part of the laws of the land even if they do not
law as part of the law of the land, and adheres derive from treaty obligations. The classical

Page | 4
MENDIOLA, MANILA
formulation in international law sees those a just and acceptable solution.

customary rules accepted as binding result (Pharmaceutical &Health Care Assn. of the
from the combination of the two elements: Phil. Vs. sec. of Health Duque, et al.,)
the established, widespread, and consistent
practice on the part of States; and a What is customary international law?
psychological element knows as the opinion Explain.
jurissive necessitates opinion as to law or
Custom or customary international law
necessity). Implicit in the latter element is a
means “a general and consistent practice of
belief that the practice in question is
states followed by them from a sense of legal
rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule
obligation (opinion juris).” This statement
of law requiring it. (Mijares vs. Ranada)
contains the two basic elements of custom:
State the concept of the term “generally the material factor that is, how states behave,
accepted principles of international law” and the psychological or subjective factor,
and give examples. that is, why they behave the way they do.
“Generally accepted principles of The initial factor for determining the

international law” refers to norms of general existence of custom is the actual behavior of
or customary international law which are States. This includes several elements:
binding on all States, i.e., renunciation of war duration, consistency, and generality of the
as an instrument of national policy, the practice of states.
principle of sovereign immunity, a person’s
The required duration can be either short or
right to life, liberty, and due process and
long.
pactasuntservanda, among others. The
concept of “generally accepted principles of Duration therefore is not the most important
law” has also been depicted in this wise: element. More important is the consistency
and the generality of the practice.
Some legal scholars and judges upon certain
“general principles of law” as a primary Once the existence of State practice has been
source of international law because they have established it becomes necessary to
the “character of jus rationale” and are “valid determine why States behave the way they do.
through all kinds of human societies.” (Judge Do States behave the way they do because
Tanaka in his dissenting opinion in the 1966 they consider it obligatory to behave thus or
South West Africa Case, 1966, I.C.J. 296). do they it only as a matter of courtesy? Opinio
O’Conell holds that certain principles are part Juris or the belief that a certain form of
of international law because they are “basic to behavior is obligatory, is what makes practice
legal systems generally” and hence part of the an international rule. Without it, practice is
jus gentium. These principles, he believes, are not law. (Pharmaceutical & Health Care
established by a process of reasoning based Assn. of the Phil. vs Sec. of Health Duque, et
on the common identity of all legal systems. If al)
there should be doubt or disagreement, one
must look to state practice and determine
whether the municipal law principle provides

Page | 5
MENDIOLA, MANILA
CASE DOCTRINES:Kuroda v Jalandoni: BY been deliberately general and extensive in its

INCORPORATION, GENERALLY ACCEPTED scope and is not confined to the recognition of
PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW rule and principle of international law as
AUTOMATICALLY BECOME LAWS OF THE continued inn treaties to which our
PHILIPPINES government may have been or shall be a
signatory.
DOCTRINE: In accordance with the generally
accepted principle of international law of the
present day including the Hague Convention
the Geneva Convention and significant KURODA VS. JALANDONI
precedents of international jurisprudence 83 PHIL. 171
established by the United Nation all those
person military or civilian who have been FACTS:
guilty of planning preparing or waging a war Shigenori Kuroda, formerly a Lieutenant-
of aggression and of the commission of crimes General of the Japanese Imperial Army and
and offenses consequential and incidental Commanding General of the Japanese
thereto in violation of the laws and customs Imperial Forces in the Philippines during a
of war, of humanity and civilization are held period covering 1943 and 1944, disregarded
accountable therefor. Consequently in the and failed "to discharge his duties as such
promulgation and enforcement of Execution commander to control the operations of
Order No. 68 the President of the Philippines members of his command, permitting them to
has acted in conformity with the generally commit brutal atrocities and other high
accepted and policies of international law crimes against noncombatant civilians and
which are part of the our Constitution. prisoners of the Imperial Japanese Forces, in
violation of the laws and customs of war" —
Petitioner argues that respondent Military comes before this Court seeking to establish
Commission has no Jurisdiction to try the illegality of EO No. 68, which established a
petitioner for acts committed in violation of National War Crimes Offices and provides
the Hague Convention and the Geneva that persons accused as war criminals shall
Convention because the Philippines is not a be tried by military commission; and to
signatory to the first and signed the second permanently prohibit respondents from
only in 1947. It cannot be denied that the proceeding with the case of petitioner.
rules and regulation of the Hague and Geneva
conventions form, part of and are wholly Kuroda argues that EO No. 68 is illegal on the
based on the generally accepted principals of ground that it violates not only the provisions
international law. In facts these rules and of our constitutional law but also our local
principles were accepted by the two laws, to say nothing of the fact (that) the
belligerent nation the United State and Japan Philippines is not a signatory nor an adherent
who were signatories to the two Convention, to the Hague Convention on Rules and
Such rule and principles therefore form part Regulations covering Land Warfare and,
of the law of our nation even if the Philippines therefore, petitioner is charged of `crimes' not
was not a signatory to the conventions based on law, national and international.
embodying them for our Constitution has Hence, petitioner argues — "That in view of

Page | 6
MENDIOLA, MANILA
the fact that this commission has been accepted principles and policies of
empanelled by virtue of an unconstitutional international law which are part of our
law and an illegal order, this commission is Constitution.
without jurisdiction to try herein petitioner."
The promulgation of said executive order is
ISSUE: Whether or not the Philippines can an exercise by the President of his powers as
adopt the rules and regulations laid down on Commander in Chief of all our armed forces,
The Hague and Geneva Conventions as upheld by this Court in the case of
notwithstanding that it is not a signatory Yamashita vs. Styer L-129, 42 Off. Gaz., 654)
thereto and whether it can create a Military when we said "War is not ended simply
Commission to try violations of the Hague because hostilities have ceased. After cessation
Convention? of armed hostilities, incidents of war may
remain pending which should be disposed of as
HELD: in time of war”. `An important incident to a
Yes. Executive Order No. 68, establishing a conduct of war is the adoption of measures by
National War Crimes Office and prescribing the military command not only to repel and
rules and regulations governing the trial of defeat the enemies but to seize and subject to
accused war criminals, was issued by the disciplinary measures those enemies who in
President of the Philippines on the 29th day their attempt to thwart or impede our
of July, 1947. This Court holds that this order military effort have violated the law of war.'
is valid and constitutional. Article 2 of our (Ex parte Quirin, 317 U. S., 1; 63 Sup. Ct.,2.)
Constitution provides in its section 3, that Indeed, the power to create a military
"The Philippines renounces war as an commission for the trial and punishment of
instrument of national policy, and adopts the war criminals is an aspect of waging war. And,
generally accepted principles of international in the language of a writer, a military
law as part of the law of the nation." commission `has jurisdiction so long as a
technical state of war continues. This includes
In accordance with the generally accepted the period of an armistice, or military
principles of international law of the present occupation, up to the effective date of a treaty
day, including the Hague Convention, the of peace, and may extend beyond, by treaty
Geneva Convention and significant agreement.' (Cowls, Trial of War Criminals by
precedents of international jurisprudence Military Tribunals, American Bar Association
established by the United Nations, all those Journal, June, 1944.)"
persons, military or civilian, who have been
guilty of planning, preparing or waging a war Consequently, the President as Commander in
of aggression and of the commission of crimes Chief is fully empowered to consummate this
and offenses consequential and incidental unfinished aspect of war, namely, the trial and
thereto, in violation of the laws and customs punishment of war criminals, through the
of war, of humanity and civilization, are held issuance and enforcement of Executive Order
accountable therefor. Consequently, in the No. 68. Petitioner argues that respondent
promulgation and enforcement of Executive Military Commission has no jurisdiction to try
Order No. 68, the President of the Philippines petitioner for acts committed in violation of
has acted in conformity with the generally the Hague Convention and the Geneva
Page | 7
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Convention because the Philippines is not a Agustin v Edu: INTERNATIONAL LAWS

signatory to the first and signed the second WHICH ARE NOT PEREMPTORY MAY ONLY
only in 1947. It cannot be denied that the FIND APPLICATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
rules and regulations of the Hague and BY TRANSFORMATION
Geneva conventions form part of and are
wholly based on the generally accepted (This case is an example of the DOCTRINE
principles of international law. In fact, these BY TRANSFORMATION) This case is a
rules and principles were accepted by the two petition assailing the validity or the
belligerent nations, the United States and constitutionality of a Letter of Instruction No.
Japan, who were signatories to the two 229, issued by President Ferdinand E. Marcos,
Conventions. requiring all vehicle owners, users or drivers
to procure early warning devices to be
Such rules and principles, therefore, form installed a distance away from such vehicle
part of the law of our nation even if the when it stalls or is disabled. In compliance
Philippines was not a signatory to the with such letter of instruction, the
conventions embodying them, for our Commissioner of the Land Transportation
Constitution has been deliberately general Office issued Administrative Order No. 1
and extensive in its scope and is not directing the compliance thereof. This
confined to the recognition of rules and petition alleges that such letter of instruction
principles of international law as contained and subsequent administrative order are
in treaties to which our government may unlawful and unconstitutional as it violates
have been or shall be a signatory. the provisions on due process, equal
protection of the law and undue delegation of
Furthermore, when the crimes charged police power.
against petitioner were allegedly committed,
The conclusion reached by this Court that this
the Philippines was under the sovereignty of
petition must be dismissed is reinforced by
the United States, and thus we were equally
this consideration. The petition itself quoted
bound together with the United States and
these two whereas clauses of the assailed
with Japan, to the rights and obligations
Letter of Instruction: "[Whereas], the hazards
contained in the treaties between the
posed by such obstructions to traffic have
belligerent countries.
been recognized by international bodies
concerned with traffic safety, the 1968 Vienna
These rights and obligations were not erased
Convention on Road Signs and Signals and the
by our assumption of full sovereignty. If at all,
United Nations Organization (U.N.);
our emergence as a free state entitles us to
[Whereas], the said Vionna Convention, which
enforce the right, on our own, of trying and
was ratified by the Philippine Government
punishing those who committed crimes
under P.D. No. 207, recommended the
against our people.
enactment of local legislation for the
installation of road safety signs and devices; *
* * " 35 It cannot be disputed then that this
Declaration of Principle found in the
Constitution possesses relevance: "The

Page | 8
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Philippines * * * adopts the generally HELD:

accepted principles of international law as Not anymore. The petition must be dismissed
part of the law of the land * * *." 36 The 1968 for lack of merit. It cannot be disputed that
Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals this Declaration of Principle found in the
is impressed with such a character. It is not Constitution possesses relevance: "The
for this country to repudiate a commitment to Philippines * * * adopts the generally
which it had pledged its word. The concept accepted principles of international law as
of Pactasuntservanda stands in the way of part of the law of the land, * * *." The 1968
such an attitude, which is, moreover, at war Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals
with the principle of international morality. is impressed with such a character. It is not
for this country to repudiate a commitment to
which it had pledged its word. The concept of
Pacta sunt servanda stands in the way of
AGUSTIN VS. EDU
such an attitude, which is, moreover, at war
88 SCRA 195
with the principle of international morality.
FACTS:
A presidential letter of instruction (LOI)
prescribing the use of triangular reflectorized
early warning devices to prevent vehicular Ichong v Hernandez: TREATIES ARE
accidents was assailed for the lack of a SUBJECT TO QUALIFICATION OR
legislative enactment that would authorize AMENDMENT BY SUBSEQUENT
the issuance of said LOI. The petition quoted LEGISLATION
two whereas clauses of the assailed LOI:
DOCTRINE: The Treaty of Amity between the
[Whereas], the hazards posed by such Republic of the Philippines and the Republic
obstructions to traffic have been recognized of China of April 18, 1947 is also claimed to be
by international bodies concerned with traffic violated by the law in question. All that the
safety, the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road treaty guarantees is equality of treatment to
Signs and Signals and the United Nations the Chinese nationals "upon the same terms
Organization (U.N.); as the nationals of any other country." But the
nationals of China are not discriminating
[Whereas], the said Vienna Convention which against because nationals of all other
was ratified by the Philippine Government countries, except those of the United States,
under P.D. No. 207, recommended the who are granted special rights by the
enactment of local legislation for the Constitution, are all prohibited from engaging
installation of road safety signs and devices. in the retail trade. But even supposing that
the law infringes upon the said treaty, the
ISSUE: Whether or not a legislative treaty is always subject to qualification or
enactment is necessary in order to authorize amendment by a subsequent law (U. S. vs.
the issuance of said LOI based on the 1968 Thompson, 258, Fed. 257, 260), and the
Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals same may never curtail or restrict the scope
and the United Nations Organization (U.N.).

Page | 9
MENDIOLA, MANILA
of the police power of the State (Plaston vs. HELD:

Pennsylvania, 58 L. ed. 539.) The Supreme Court said it saw no conflict.
The reason given by the Court was that the
Petitioner, for and in his own behalf and on Retail Trade National Law was passed in the
behalf of other alien resident corporations exercise of the police power which cannot be
and partnerships adversely affected by the bargained away through the medium of a
provisions of Republic Act. No. 1180, “An Act treaty or a contract. The law in question was
to Regulate the Retail Business,” filed to enacted to remedy a real actual threat and
obtain a judicial declaration that said Act is danger to national economy posed by alien
unconstitutional contending that: (1) it denies dominance and control of the retail business
to alien residents the equal protection of the and free citizens and country from such
laws and deprives of their liberty and dominance and control; that the enactment
property without due process of law ; (2) the clearly falls within the scope of the police
subject of the Act is not expressed or power of the State, thru which and by which it
comprehended in the title thereof; (3) the Act protects its own personality and insures its
violates international and treaty obligations security and future.
of the Republic of the Philippines; (4) the
provisions of the Act against the transmission Resuming what we have set forth above we
by aliens of their retail business thru hold that the disputed law was enacted to
hereditary succession, and those requiring remedy a real actual threat and danger to
100% Filipino capitalization for a corporation national economy posed by alien dominance
or entity to entitle it to engage in the retail and control of the retail business and free
business, violate the spirit of Sections 1 and 5, citizens and country from such dominance
Article XIII and Section 8 of Article XIV of the and control; that the enactment clearly falls
Constitution. within the scope of the police power of the
state, through which and by which it protects
its own personality and insures its security
ICHONG VS. HERNANDEZ
and future; that the law does not violate the
101 PHIL. 1155
equal protection clause of the Constitution
because sufficient grounds exist for the
FACTS:
distinction between alien and citizen in the
Petitioner filed a suit to invalidate the Retail
exercise of occupation regulated, nor the due
Trade Nationalization Law, on the premise
process of the law clause; because the law is
that it violated several treaties which under
prospective in operation and recognizes the
the rule of pacta sunt servanda, a generally
privilege of aliens already engaged in the
accepted principle of international law,
occupation and reasonably protects their
should be observed by the Court in good faith.
privilege; that the wisdom and efficacy of the
law to carry out its objectives appear to us to
ISSUE: Whether or not the Retail Trade
be plainly evident - as a matter of fact it
Nationalization Law is unconstitutional for it
seems not only appropriate but actually
is in conflict with treaties which are generally
necessary - and that in any case such matter
accepted principles of international law.
falls within the prerogative of the legislature,
with whose power and discretion the judicial
Page | 10
MENDIOLA, MANILA
department of the Government may not have acquired the status of law, by indirectly
interfere; that the provisions of the law are repealing the same through an executive
clearly embraced in the title, and this suffers agreement providing for the performance of
from no duplicity and has not misled the the very act prohibited by said laws.
legislature of the segment of the population
affected; and that it cannot be said to be void The American theory to the effect that, in the
for supposed conflict with treaty obligations event of conflict between a treaty and a
because no treaty has actually been entered statute, the one which is latest in point of time
into on the subject and the police power may shall prevail, is not applicable to the case at
not be curtailed or surrendered by any treaty bar, for respondents not only admit, but,
or any other conventional agreement. also insist that the contracts adverted to are
not treaties. Said theory may be justified upon
the ground that treaties to which the United
States is signatory require the advice and
consent of its Senate, and, hence, of a branch
Gonzales v Hechanova: THE PRINCIPLE OF
of the legislative department. No such
LEX POSTERIOR DEROGAT PRIORI DOES
justification can be given as regards executive
NOT APPLY TO EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS.
agreements not authorized by previous
legislation, without completely upsetting the
DOCTRINE: The Court is not satisfied that the
principle of separation of powers and the
status of said tracts as alleged executive
system of checks and balances which are
agreements has been sufficiently established.
fundamental in our constitutional set up and
The parties to said contracts do not pear to
that of the United States.
have regarded the same as executive
agreements. But, even assuming that said
contracts may properly considered as Exec. Secretary Hechanovaauthorised the
executive agreements, the same are unlawful, importation of foreign rice to be purchased
as well as null and void, from a constitutional from private sources. Gonzales filed a petition
viewpoint, said agreements being opposing the said implementation because
inconsistent with the provisions of Republic RA No. 3542 which allegedly repeals or
Acts Nos. 2207 and 3452. Although the amends RA No. 2207, prohibits the
President may, under the American
importation of rice and corn "by the Rice and
constitutional system enter into executive
agreements without previous legislative Corn Administration or any other
authority, he may not, by executive government agency."
agreement, enter into a transaction which
is prohibited by statutes enacted prior thereto. Respondents alleged that the importation
Under the Constitution, the main function of permitted in RA 2207 is to be authorized by
the Executive is to enforce laws enacted by the President of the Philippines, and by or on
Congress. The former may not interfere in the behalf of the Government of the Philippines.
performance of the legislative powers of the They add that after enjoining the Rice and
latter, except in the exercise of his veto power. Corn administration and any other
He may not defeat legislative enactments that

Page | 11
MENDIOLA, MANILA
government agency from importing rice and GONZALES VS. HECHANOVA

corn, S. 10 of RA 3542 indicates that only 9 SCRA 230
private parties may import rice under its
FACTS: Respondent Executive Secretary
provisions. They contended that the authorized the importation of tons of foreign
government has already constitute valid rice to be purchased from private sources.
executive agreements with Vietnam and Petitioner Gonzales - a rice planter, and
Burma, that in case of conflict between RA president of the Iloilo Palay and Corn Planters
2207 and 3542, the latter should prevail and Association filed this petition, averring that,
the conflict be resolved under the American in making or attempting to make said
jurisprudence. importation of foreign rice, the
aforementioned respondents "are, acting
without jurisdiction or in excess of
It is lastly contended that the Government of
jurisdiction", because RA No. 3452 which
the Philippines has already entered into two
allegedly repeals or amends RA No. 2207 -
(2) contracts for the Purchase of rice, one
explicitly prohibits the importation of rice
with the Republic of Vietnam, and another
and corn by "the Rice and Corn
with the Government of Burma; that these
Administration or any other government
contracts constitute valid executive
agency.”
agreements under international law; that
such agreements became binding effective Respondent contended among others that the
upon the signing thereof by representatives Government of the Philippines has already
the parties thereto; that in case of conflict entered into two contracts for the purchase of
between Republic Acts Nos. 2207 and 3452 rice, one with the Republic of Vietnam, and
on the one hand, and aforementioned another with the Government of Burma; that
contracts, on the other, the latter should these contracts constitute valid executive
prevail, because, if a treaty and a statute are agreements under international law; that
inconsistent with each other, the conflict such agreements became binding and
must be resolved — under the American effective upon signing thereof by
jurisprudence — in favor of the one which is representatives of the parties thereto; that in
latest in point of time; that petitioner herein case of conflict between Republic Act Nos.
assails the validity of acts of the Executive 2207 and 3452 on the one hand, and the
relative to foreign relations in the conduct of aforementioned contracts, on the other, the
which the Supreme Court cannot interfere; latter should prevail, because, if a treaty and a
and the aforementioned contracts have statute are inconsistent with each other, the
already been consummated, the Government conflict must be resolved - under the
of the Philippines having already paid the American jurisprudence - in favor of the one
price of the rice involved therein through which is latest in point of time.
irrevocable letters of credit in favor of the sell
of the said commodity. We find no merit in ISSUE: Whether or not the respondents, in
this pretense. attempting to import foreign rice, are acting
without jurisdiction or in excess of
jurisdiction.

Page | 12
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Republic Acts Nos. 2207 and 3452. Although

HELD: Yes. The respondents acted without the President may, under the American
jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction. It is constitutional system, enter into executive
respondents contend that the Government of agreements without previous legislative
the Philippines has already entered into two authority, he may not, by executive
(2) contracts for the purchase of rice, one agreement, enter into a transaction which
with the Republic of Viet Nam, and another is prohibited by statutes enacted prior
with the Government of Burma; that these thereto. Under the Constitution, the main
contracts constitute valid executive function of the Executive is to enforce laws
agreements under international law; that enacted by Congress. The former may not
such agreements became binding and interfere in the performance of the
effective upon signing thereof by legislative powers of the latter, except in
representatives of the parties thereto; that in the exercise of his veto power. He may not
case of conflict between Republic Act Nos. defeat legislative enactments that have
2207 and 3452 on the one hand, and the acquired the status of laws, by indirectly
aforementioned contracts, on the other, the repealing the same through an executive
latter should prevail, because, if a treaty and a agreement providing for the performance
statute are inconsistent with each other, the of the very act prohibited by said laws.
conflict must be resolved — under the
American jurisprudence — in favor of the one The American theory to the effect that, in the
which is latest in point of time; that petitioner event of conflict between a treaty and a
herein assails the validity of acts of the statute, the one which is latest in point of time
executive relative to foreign relations in the shall prevail, is not applicable to the case at
conduct of which the Supreme Court cannot bar, for respondents not only admit, but, also,
interfere; and that the aforementioned insist that the contracts adverted to are not
contracts have already been consummated, treaties. Said theory may be justified upon the
the Government of the Philippines having ground that treaties to which the United
already paid the price of the rice involved States is signatory require the advice and
therein through irrevocable letters of credit consent of its Senate, and, hence, of a branch
in favor of the sellers of said commodity. We of the legislative department.
find no merit in this pretense. The Court is
not satisfied that the status of said contracts No such justification can be given as regards
as alleged executive agreements has been executive agreements not authorized by
sufficiently established. previous legislation, without completely
upsetting the principle of separation of
The parties to said contracts do not appear to powers and the system of checks and
have regarded the same as executive balances which are fundamental in our
agreements. But, even assuming that said constitutional set up and that of the United
contracts may properly be considered as States.
executive agreements, the same are
unlawful, as well as null and void, from a
constitutional viewpoint, said agreements
being inconsistent with the provisions of
Page | 13
MENDIOLA, MANILA
IN RE: GARCIA DOCTRINE: Article I of the The said Treaty was intended to govern
Treaty, in its pertinent part, provides: Filipino citizens desiring to practice their
profession in Spain, and the citizens of Spain
The nationals of both countries who desiring to practice their professions in the
shall have obtained degree or Philippines. Applicant is a Filipino citizen
diplomas to practice the liberal desiring to practice the legal profession in the
professions in either of the Philippines. He is therefore subject to the
Contracting States, issued by laws of his own country and is not entitled to
competent national authorities, shall the privileges extended to Spanish nationals
be deemed competent to exercise said desiring to practice in the Philippines.
professions in the territory of the
Other, subject to the laws and
regulations of the latter. . . ..
IN RE: GARCIA
It is clear, therefore, that the privileges 2 SCRA 984, 1961
provided in the Treaty invoked by the
applicant are made expressly subject to the FACTS: Arturo E. Garcia, a Filipino citizen,
laws and regulations of the contracting State studied law, became a lawyer and practiced
in whose territory it is desired to exercise the law in Spain. Later, he applied for admission
legal profession; and Section 1 of Rule 127, in to the practice of law in the Philippines
connection with Sections 2,9, and 16 thereof, without taking the Philippine bar
which have the force of law, require that examinations. He cited the provision of
before anyone can practice the legal the Treaty of Academic Degrees and the
profession in the Philippine he must first Exercise of Professions between the
successfully pass the required bar Philippines and Spain and argued that he is
examinations; and entitled to practice the law profession in the
Philippines even without submitting to the
required bar examinations.
The aforementioned Treaty, concluded
between the Republic of the Philippines and Under the Treaty on Academic Degrees and
the Spanish State could not have been the Exercise of Professions between the
intended to modify the laws and regulations Philippines and Spain, nationals of each of the
governing admission to the practice of law in two countries who have obtained the
the Philippines, for the reason that the required degrees can practice their
Executive Department may not encroach professions within the territory of the other.
upon the constitutional prerogative of the Efren Garcia, a Filipino, finished law in the
Supreme Court to promulgate rules for University of Madrid, Spain and was allowed
admission to the practice of law in the to practice the law profession therein. He
Philippines, the lower to repeal, alter or invokes the treaty in order for him to be
supplement such rules being reserved only to allowed to practice in the Philippines without
the Congress of the Philippines. (See Sec. 13, taking the bar examinations.
Art VIII, Phil. Constitution).

Page | 14
MENDIOLA, MANILA
ISSUE: Question: Which on prevails if there is a

Whether or not the Treaty can modify conflict between a treaty and a rule
regulations governing admission to promulgated by the Supreme Court?
Philippine Bar.
Answer: It is the rule because it is based on
HELD: the Constitution.
No. It is clear, under Article 1 of the Treaty,
What is a soft law? Is it an international
that the privileges provided therein are made
law? Explain.
expressly subject to the laws and, regulations
of the contracting State in whose territory it is Soft law is an expression of non-binding
desired to exercise the legal profession; and norms, principles and practices that influence
Section 1 of Rule 127, in connection with State behavior. (David Fidler, Development
Sections 2, 9, and 16 thereof, which have the Involving SARS, International Law &
force of law, require that before anyone can Infectious Disease Control at the Fifty-Six
practice the legal profession in the Meeting of the World Health Assemble;
Philippines he must first successfully pass the Pharmaceutical & health Care Assn. of the
required bar examinations. Phil vs Sec. of Health Duque, et al). It does
not fall under the international law set forth
Moreover, the Treaty was intended to govern in article 38, Chapter II of the 1946 Statute of
Filipino citizens desiring to practice their the International Court of Justice.
profession in Spain, and the citizens of Spain
desiring to practice their profession in the Give examples of soft law.
Philippines. Applicant is a Filipino Citizen
desiring to practice the legal profession in the Certain declarations and resolutions of the
Philippines. He is therefore subject to the UN General Assembly fall under this category.
laws of his own country and is not entitled to (Louis Henkins, et al., International Law,
the privileges extended to Spanish nationals Cases and Materials, 2nd Ed). The UN
desiring to practice in the Philippines. Declaration of Human Rights is an example.
This was applied in Government of
The aforementioned Treaty, concluded Hongkong Special Administrative Region vs.
between the Republic of the Philippines and Olalia; MijaresvsRanada; Shanri-La
the Spanish State could not have been International Hotel Management Ltd. vs
intended to modify the laws and regulations Developers Group of Companies, Ltd.
governing admission to the practice of law in
the Philippines, for the reason that the It is resorted to in order to reflect and
Executive Department may not encroach respond to the changing needs and demands
upon the constitutional prerogative of the of constituents of certain international
Supreme Court to promulgate rules for organizations like the WHO.
admission to the practice of law in the
Philippines, the power to repeal, alter or
supplement such rules being reserved only
to the Congress of the Philippines .

Page | 15
MENDIOLA, MANILA
What is the doctrine of autolimitations? laws. As held in Kilosbayan, Inc. vs. Morato,
the principles enumerated in Article II and
It is the doctrine wherein the Philippines some sections of the Article Xii are not self-
adheres to principles of international law as a executing provisions, the disregard of which
limitation to the exercise of its sovereignty. cannot give rise to a cause of action in courts.
They do not embody judicially enforceable
Whenever a State enters into a treaty, it
constitutional rights but guidelines for
surrenders a part of its sovereignty. How
legislation.
is the alleged impairment of sovereignty
balanced? Economic nationalism should be read with
other constitutional mandates to attain a
The alleged impairment of sovereignty in the
balanced development of economy, like the
exercise of legislative and judicial powers is
provision which provides for the goals of
balanced by the adoption of the generally
national economy (Sec. 1, Art. XII), and the
accepted principles of international law as
mandate for the State to pursue a trade policy
part of the law of the land, and the adherence
that serves the general welfare and utilizes all
of the Constitution to the policy of
forms and arrangements of exchange on the
cooperation and amity with all nations.
basis of equality and reciprocity. Hence, while
(Tañada, et al vs Angara)
economic nationalism is mandated, yet, the
The Philippines signed with other Constitution takes into account the realities of
countries the World Trade Organization or the outside world as it requires the pursuit of
WTO Agreement. One of the provisions of a trade policy that serves the general welfare
which requires the Philippines to place and utilizes all forms and arrangements of
nationals and products of member- exchange on the basis of equality and
countries on the same footing as Filipinos reciprocity. Hence, while economic
and local products. The petitioners went nationalism is mandated, yet the Constitution
to court and questioned Senate Resolution takes into account the realities of the outside
No. 97 concurring to it, contending that the world as it requires the pursuit of a trade
Agreement was violative of the policy that utilizes all forms and
Constitutional mandate to develop a self- arrangements of exchange on the basis of
reliant and independent national economy equality and reciprocity and speaks of
effectively controlled by Filipino and the industries which are competitive in both
provision that promotes the preferential domestic and foreign markets as well as of
use of Filipino labor, domestic materials the protection of Filipino enterprises against
and locally produced goods. Rule on the unfair competition and trade practices.
contentions.
Furthermore, the constitutional policy of a
The contentions are not correct. The cited self-reliant and independent national
provisions on the declaration of principles are economy does not necessarily rule out the
not self-executing principles. They are merely entry of foreign investments, goods and
used by the judiciary as aids or as guides in services. It contemplates neither economic
the exercise of its power of the judicial review seclusion nor mendicancy in the international
and by the Legislature in its enactment of community.

Page | 16
MENDIOLA, MANILA
The WTO reliance on “most favored nation”, By their nature, treaties really limit or restrict
“national treatment”, and “trade without the absoluteness of sovereignty. By their
discrimination” cannot be struck down as voluntary act, nationals may surrender some
unconstitutional as in fact they are rules of aspects of their State power in exchange for
equality and reciprocity that apply to all WTO greater benefits granted by or derived from a
members. (Tañada et al vs. Angara) convention or pact. After all, States, like
individuals, live with co-equals, and in pursuit
of mutually covenanted objectives and
benefits, they also commonly agree to limit
WTO Agreement provides that each
the exercise of their otherwise absolute rights.
Member shall ensure the conformity of its
(Tañada, et al vs. Angara)
laws, regulations and administrative
procedures with its obligations as What is a protocol de cloture?
provided in the Agreements. It was
contended that the undertaking restricts, It is a final act, an instrument which records
limits and impairs Philippine sovereignty the winding up of the proceedings of a
especially the legislative power vested in diplomatic conference and usually includes a
Congress. Is the contention correct? Why? reproduction of the texts of treaties,
conventions, recommendations and other
No. While sovereignty has traditionally been acts agreed upon and signed by the
deemed absolute and all-encompassing on plenipotentiaries attending the conference. It
the domestic level, it is however subject to is rather a summary of the proceedings of a
restrictions and limitations voluntarily protracted conference which may have taken
agreed to by the Philippines, expressly or place over several years. (Tañada et al vs.
impliedly, as a member of the family of Angara)
nations. Unquestionably, the Constitution did
not envision a hermit-type isolation of the What is exterritoriality? Extra-
country from the rest of the world. Under the territoriality?
Declaration of Principles and State Policies,
the Constitution adopts the generally Exterritoriality is the fiction in international
accepted principles of international law as law by virtue of which certain foreign persons
part of the law of the land. By the doctrine of and their things are exempted from the
incorporation, the country is bound by the jurisdiction of a State on the theory that they
generally accepted principles of international form an extension of the territory of their
law which are considered to be automatically own State. Extra-territoriality is the
part of our laws. A treaty agreement is not a exemption of foreign persons from laws and
mere moral obligation but creates a legally jurisdiction of a State in which they presently
binding obligation on the parties. A State reside, an exemption which can only exist by
which has contracted valid international virtue of a treaty stipulation to this effect.
obligations is bound to make in its
What war is renounced by the Philippines?
legislations such modifications as may be
Why?
necessary to ensure the fulfillment of the
obligations undertaken.

Page | 17
MENDIOLA, MANILA
What is renounced by the Philippines through people and the State. Its goal is to secure the
the Constitution is aggressive war because of sovereignty of the State and the integrity of
its membership in the United Nations whose the national territory.
charter renounces war as an instrument of
national policies of its member States. The Read with Sec. 18, Art. VII (Commander-in-
Philippines is also a signatory to the Kellog Chief Clause)
Brian Pact, a treaty renouncing war as an
Question: What do you mean by civilian
instrument of national policies of the
supremacy?
signatory States.
Answer: civilian political leadership rather
than professional military services.
Does the Philippines renounce defensive
war? Why?
Question: Is there still civilian supremacy
No, because it is duty bound to defend its
during martial law?
citizens. Under the Constitution, the prime
duty of the Government is to serve and Suggested Answer: Yes
protect the people. (Sec. 4, Art II, 1987
Constitution). How is civilian supremacy ensured or
institutionalized?
1. The installation of the President, the

If there is a question raised before an highest civilian authority, as the
international tribunal, is the treaty given commander-in-chief of all the armed
preference? forces of the Philippines.
2. The requirement that the members of
If the dispute is raised before an international
the AFP swear to uphold and defend
tribunal, the treaty is given preference.
the Constitution, which is the
If the issue is raised before a local tribunal, fundamental law of the land.
the municipal law or the Constitution shall *But this does not mean that civilian officials
prevail. In Ichong vs. Hernandez, the are superior to military officials. Civilian
Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of official are superior to military officials only
the Retail Trade Nationalization Law because when a law makes them so.
it did not contravene international law, and
What is the reason for the existence of the
even if there is a conflict, the statute would
armed forces?
prevail because it is an exercise of police
power. Police power is inherent in every State They exist in order to secure the sovereignty
and it cannot be bargained away. of the State, and to preserve the integrity of
the national territory. In extraordinary
Section 3. Civilian authority is, at all times,
circumstances they may also be called upon
supreme over the military. The Armed Forces
to protect the people when ordinary law and
of the Philippines is the protector of the
order forces need assistance. (Bernas Primer)

Page | 18
MENDIOLA, MANILA
From ALBANO: Fourteenth Amendment, this court has said,

consists, in part, in the right of a person "to
What is the role of the military in relation live and work where he will," Allgeyer v.
to the security of the State? Louisiana, and yet he may be compelled, by
force if need be, against his will and without
The Armed Forced of the Philippines is the
regard to his personal wishes or his
protector of the people and the State. Its goal
pecuniary interests, or even his religious or
is to secure the sovereignty of the State and
political convictions, to take his place in the
the integrity of the national territory. (Sec. 3,
ranks of the army of his country and risk the
Art II, 1987 Constitution).
chance of being shot down in its defense.
What is the prime duty of the government?
Section 4. The prime duty of the Government

CASE DOCTRINES:
is to serve and protect the people. The
Government may call upon the people to PEOPLE v LAGMAN: COMPULSORY
defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof, MILITARY SERVICE IS CONSTITUTIONAL
all citizens may be required, under conditions
provided by law, to render personal, military DOCTRINE: The National Defense Law, in so
or civil service. far as it establishes compulsory military
service, does not go against this constitutional
What is the prime duty of the
provision but is, on the contrary, in faithful
Government?
compliance therewith. The duty of the
1. To serve the people Government to defend the State cannot be
2. To protect the people performed except through an army. To leave
the organization of an army to the will of the
How does the government comply with its citizens would be to make this duty of the
two duties? Government excusable should there be no
sufficient men who volunteer to enlist therein.
1. The government may call upon the
people to defend the State. In the United States the courts have held in a
2. The government may require all series of decisions that the compulsory
citizens, under conditions provided by military service adopted by reason of the civil
law, to render personal, military, or war and the world war does not violate the
civil service. Constitution, because the power to establish
3. The government may use the AFP to it is derived from that granted to Congress to
repel any threat to its security. declare war and to organize and maintain an
army. This is so because the right of the
Government to require compulsory military
Mandate of the AFP: to protect the people and service is a consequence of its duty to defend
the state. the State and is reciprocal with its duty to
defend the life, liberty, and property of the
In Jacobson v Masachussets: (Memorized
citizen. In the case of Jacobson vs.
by Atty. G.): The liberty secured by the
Page | 19
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Massachusetts (197 U.S., 11; 25 Sup. Ct. Rep., ISSUE: Whether or not the the National
385), it was said that, without violating the Defense Law is valid, under which the
Constitution, a person may be compelled by accused were sentenced.
force, if need be, against his will, against his
pecuniary interests, and even against his HELD:
religious or political convictions, to take his Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed their
place in the ranks of the army of his country, conviction, holding that the law in question
and risk the chance of being shot down in its was based on the afore-cited constitutional
defense. In the case of United States vs. Olson principle. The National Defense Law, in so far
(253 Fed., 233), it was also said that this is as it establishes compulsory military service,
not deprivation of property without due does not go against this constitutional
process of law, because, in its just sense, there provision but is, on the contrary, in faithful
is no right of property to an office or compliance therewith. The duty of the
employment. Government to defend the State cannot be
performed except through an army. To leave
The circumstance that these decisions refer to the organization of an army to the will of the
laws enacted by reason on the actual citizens would be to make this duty of the
existence of war does not make our case any Government excusable should there be no
different, inasmuch as, in the last analysis, sufficient men who volunteer to enlist therein.
what justifies compulsory military service is The right of the Government to require
the defense of the State, whether actual or compulsory military service is a consequence
whether in preparation to make it more of its duty to defend the State and is
effective, in case of need. reciprocal with its duty to defend the life,
liberty, and property of the citizen
PEOPLE VS. LAGMAN AND ZOSA

66 PHIL 13, 1938 Question: Does compulsory military service
requires presence of war?
FACTS:
Tranquilino Lagman and Primitivo de Sosa Answer: No. To make the army effective,
are charged with and convicted of refusal to people will render CIVIL SERVICES.
register for military training as required by
the above-mentioned statute. On appeal, Zosa Can a person refuse to register for military
argued that he was fatherless and had a training, as required by the National
mother and eight brothers to support, while Defense Act, on the reasoning that he is
Lagman alleged that he had a father to fatherless and had a mother and 8
support, had no military leanings, and did not brothers to support, or has no interest in
wish to kill or be killed; and both claimed that military training, or that it is contrary to
the statute was unconstitutional. his religious faith and political
convictions?

Page | 20
MENDIOLA, MANILA
No, the government can require compulsory there is need to defend the State. (Bernas
military services for the ff. reasons: Primer)
1. What justifies compulsory military Section 5. The maintenance of peace and

services is the defense of the State, order, the protection of life, liberty, and
whether actual or whether in property, and promotion of the general
preparation to make it more effective welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all
in case of need. the people of the blessings of democracy.
2. The duty of the Government to defend
What are essential for the enjoyment by
the State cannot be performed except
all the people of the blessings of
through an army. To leave the
democracy?
organization of an army to the will of
the citizen would be to make this duty 1. The maintenance of peace and order
of the Government excusable should 2. The protection of life, liberty, and
there be no sufficient men who property
volunteer for enlistment. 3. And the promotion of the general
welfare
From ALBANO: The right to bear arms is a statutory, not a

constitutional right. The license to carry a
What is posse commitatus? firearm is neither a property nor a property
right. Neither does it create a vested right.
It is the power of the State to require all able-
At a particular time after President
bodied citizens to perform civic duty to
Corazon C. Aquino was catapulted to
maintain peace and order.
power, former President Marcos wanted
How does the first sentence differ from its to come back invoking his freedom of
counterpart in the 1973 Constitution? movement and to return to his country.
President Aquino stood part on her
The 1973 and the 1935 versions spoke of the decision not to allow him and his family to
“defense” of the State being a prime duty of come back in the meantime. The issue
government. It therefore easily lent itself to raised before the Supreme Court was
interpretations which justified a national whether or not in the exercise of the
security state offensive to the people. The powers granted by the Constitution to the
present version places the emphasis on President, she may prohibit the Marcoses
service to and protection of the people. from returning to the Philippines? Explain
your answer.
The phrase “under conditions provided by
law” in the second sentence also emphasizes President Aquino was vested with the power
the primary of serving the interest of the to prohibit the Marcos family from coming
people and protecting their rights even when back. Under the Constitution, the prime duty
of the government is the maintenance of

Page | 21
MENDIOLA, MANILA
peace and order, protection of life, liberty and the armed forces, or to any penal
property exercise of rights of certain institution or government orphanage
individuals. The power involved is the or leprosarium
President’s residual power to protect the 3. Sec. 3(3), Art. XIV (optional religious
general welfare of the people. It is also instruction for public elementary and
viewed as a power implicit in the President’s high school students)
duty to take care that laws are faithfully 4. Sec. 4(2), Art. XIV (Filipino ownership
emergency, but also in times of peace. requirement for educational
(Marcos vs. Manglapus) institutions, except those established
by religious groups and mission
Section 6. The separation of Church and State boards.
shall be inviolable.
Question: Does separation between church
and state denies influence of religion on CASE DOCTRINES:
human affairs? No, religious freedom as a
constitutional mandate is not inhibition of AGLIPAY V RUIZ: THE CONSTITUTION
profound reverence for religion and is not GUARANTEES RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, AND
denial of its influence in human affairs. NOT MERE RELIGIOUS TOLERATION
(Aglipay v Ruiz)
DOCTRINE: The prohibition herein expressed
Reinforced By: is a direct corollary of the principle of
separation of church and state. Without the
1. Sec. 5, Art. III (Freedom of religion necessity of adverting to the historical
clause) background of this principle in our country, it
2. Sec. 2(5), Art. IX-C (religious sect is sufficient to say that our history, not to
cannot be registered as a political speak of the history of mankind, has taught us
party) that the union of church and state is
3. Sec. 5(2), Art. VI (no sectoral prejudicial to both, for ocassions might arise
representative from the religious when the estate will use the church, and the
sector) church the state, as a weapon in the
4. Sec. 29(2), Art. VI (prohibition against furtherance of their recognized this principle
appropriation for sectarian benefit. of separation of church and state in the early
stages of our constitutional development; it
was inserted in the Treaty of Paris between
Exceptions:
the United States and Spain of December 10,
1. Sec. 28(3), Art. VI (churches, 1898, reiterated in President McKinley's
parsonages, etc., actually, directly and Instructions of the Philippine Commission,
exclusively used for religious reaffirmed in the Philippine Bill of 1902 and
purposes shall be exempt from in the autonomy Act of August 29, 1916, and
taxation) finally embodied in the constitution of the
2. Sec. 29(2), Art. VI (prohibition against Philippines as the supreme expression of the
appropriation for sectarian benefit, Filipino people. It is almost trite to say now
except when priest, etc., is assigned to that in this country we enjoy both religious

Page | 22
MENDIOLA, MANILA
and civil freedom. All the officers of the AGLIPAY VS. RUIZ
Government, from the highest to the lowest, 64 PHIL 201
in taking their oath to support and defend the
constitution, bind themselves to recognize FACTS:
and respect the constitutional guarantee of The petitioner, Mons. Gregorio Aglipay,
religious freedom, with its inherent Supreme Head of the Philippine Independent
limitations and recognized implications. Church, seeks the issuance from this court of
a writ of prohibition to prevent the
It should be stated that what is guaranteed by respondent Director of Posts from issuing and
our Constitution is religious liberty, not mere selling postage stamps commemorative of the
religious toleration. Thirty-third International Eucharistic
Congress.
Religious freedom as a constitutional
mandate is not inhibition of profound In May, 1936, the Director of Posts announced
reverence for religion and is not denial of its in the dailies of Manila that he would order
influence in human affairs. Religion as a the issuance of postage stamps
profession of faith to an active power that commemorating the celebration in the City of
binds and elevates man to his Creator is Manila of the Thirty- third International
recognized. And, in so far as it instills into the Eucharistic Congress, organized by the
minds the purest principles of morality, its Roman Catholic Church. In spite of the protest
influence is deeply felt and highly appreciated. of the petitioner's attorney, the respondent
When the Filipino people, in the preamble of publicly announced having sent to the United
their Constitution, implored "the aid of Divine States the designs of the postage for printing
Providence, in order to establish a
government that shall embody their ideals, ISSUE: Is there a violation of principle of
conserve and develop the patrimony of the separation of church and state?
nation, promote the general welfare, and
secure to themselves and their posterity the HELD:
blessings of independence under a regime of In the case at bar, it appears that the
justice, liberty and democracy," they thereby respondent Director of Posts issued the
manifested reliance upon Him who guides the postage stamps in question under the
destinies of men and nations. provisions of Act. No. 4052 of the Philippine
Legislature. Act No. 4052 contemplates no
religious purpose in view. What it gives the
Director of Posts is the discretionary power
The elevating influence of religion in human to determine when the issuance of special
society is recognized here as elsewhere. postage stamps would be "advantageous to
the Government." Of course, the phrase
"advantageous to the Government" does not
authorize the violation of the Constitution. It
does not authorize the appropriation, use or
application of public money or property for

Page | 23
MENDIOLA, MANILA
the use, benefit or support of a particular sect in its activities simply because of incidental
or church. results, more or less religious in character, if
the purpose had in view is one which could
In the present case, however, the issuance of legitimately be undertaken by appropriate
the postage stamps in question by the legislation. The main purpose should not be
Director of Posts and the Secretary of Public frustrated by its subordination to mere
Works and Communications was not incidental results not contemplated. There is
inspired by any sectarian feeling to favor a no violation of the principle of separation of
particular church or religious church and state. The issuance and sale of the
denominations. The stamps were not issued stamps in question maybe said to be
and sold for the benefit of the Roman separably linked with an event of a religious
Catholic Church. Nor were money derived character, the resulting propaganda, if any,
from the sale of the stamps given to that received by the Catholic Church, was not the
church. aim and purpose of the government (to
promote tourism).
On the contrary, it appears from the letter of
the Director of Posts of June 5, 1936,
incorporated on page 2 of the petitioner's
complaint, that the only purpose in issuing THEISTIC VIEW
and selling the stamps was "to advertise the
Philippines and attract more tourists to this Question: What is the definition of religion in
country." The officials concerned merely took this particular case? Religion as a profession
advantage of an event considered of of faith to an active power that binds and
international importance "to give publicity to elevates man to his Creator is recognized.
the Philippines and its people". It is
significant to note that the stamps as actually
designed and printed, instead of showing a
Catholic Church chalice as originally planned, GARCES V ESTENZO DOCTRINE: The
contains a map of the Philippines and the wooden image was purchased in connection
location of the City of Manila, and an with the celebration of the barrio fiesta
inscription as follows: "Seat XXXIII honoring the patron saint, San Vicente Ferrer,
International Eucharistic Congress, Feb. 3-7, and not for the purpose of favoring any
1937." What is emphasized is not the religion nor interfering with religious matters
Eucharistic Congress itself but Manila, the or the religious beliefs of the barrio residents.
capital of the Philippines, as the seat of that One of the highlights of the fiesta was the
congress. It is obvious that while the issuance mass. Consequently, the image of the patron
and sale of the stamps in question may be saint had to be placed in the church when the
said to be inseparably linked with an event of mass was celebrated.
a religious character, the resulting
propaganda, if any, received by the Roman If there is nothing unconstitutional or illegal
Catholic Church, was not the aim and purpose in holding a fiesta and having a patron saint
of the Government. We are of the opinion that for the barrio, then any activity intended to
the Government should not be embarrassed
Page | 24
MENDIOLA, MANILA
facilitate the worship of the patron saint This provided for the acquisition of the image
(such as the acquisition and display of his of San Vicente Ferrer and the construction of
image) cannot be branded as illegal. a waiting shed. Funds for the said projects
will be obtained through the selling of tickets
We find that the momentous issues of and cash donations.
separation of church and state, freedom of
religion and the use of public money to favor
any sect or church are not involved at all in b. Resolution No. 6- The chairman or
this case even remotely or indirectly. lt is not hermano mayor of the fiesta would be the
a microcosmic test case on those issues. caretaker of the image of San Vicente Ferrer
and that the image would remain in his
This case is a petty quarrel over the custody residence for one year and until the election
of a saint's image. lt would never have arisen of his successor. The image would be made
if the parties had been more diplomatic and available to the Catholic Church during the
tactful and if Father Osmeña had taken the celebration of the saint’s feast day.
trouble of causing contributions to be
solicited from his own parishioners for the These resolutions have been ratified by 272
purchase of another image of San Vicente voters, and said projects were implemented.
Ferrer to be installed in his church. The image was temporarily placed in the altar
of the Catholic Church of the barangay.
There can be no question that the image in However, after a mass, Father Sergio Marilao
question belongs to the barangay council. Osmeña refused to return the image to the
Father Osmeña claim that it belongs to his barangay council, as it was the church’s
church is wrong. The barangay council, as property since church funds were used in its
owner of the image, has the right to acquisition.
determine who should have custody thereof.
Resolution No. 10 was passed for the
If it chooses to change its mind and decides to authorization of hiring a lawyer for the
give the image to the Catholic Church, that replevin case against the priest for the
action would not violate the Constitution recovery of the image. Resolution No. 12
because the image was acquired with private appointed Brgy. Captain Veloso as a
funds and is its private property. representative to the case. The priest, in his
answer assailed the constitutionality of the
said resolutions. The priest with Andres
Garces, a member of the Aglipayan Church,
contends that Sec. 8 Article IV1 and Sec 18(2)
GARCES vs ESTENZO
Article VIII) 2 of the constitution was violated.
FACTS: Two resolutions of the Barangay
Council of Valencia, Ormoc City were passed:
ISSUE: Whether or Not any freedom of
religion clause in the Constitution violated.
a. Resolution No. 5- Reviving the traditional
socio-religious celebration every fifth of April.

Page | 25
MENDIOLA, MANILA
discretionary and official functions. Rather, it

HELD: No. As said by the Court this case is a is for the members of religious
petty quarrel over the custody of the image. institutions/organizations to conform to just
The image was purchased in connection with church regulations. “Civil Courts will not
the celebration of the barrio fiesta and not for interfere in the internal affairs of a religious
the purpose of favoring any religion nor organization except for the protection of civil
interfering with religious matters or beliefs of or property rights. Those rights may be the
the barrio residents. Any activity intended to subject of litigation in a civil court, and the
facilitate the worship of the patron saint(such courts have jurisdiction to determine
as the acquisition) is not illegal. controverted claims to the title, use, or
possession of church property.”
Practically, the image was placed in a
layman’s custody so that it could easily be In the leading case ofFonacier v Court Of
made available to any family desiring to Appeals, the SC enunciated the doctrine that
borrow the image in connection with prayers in disputes involving religious institutions or
and novena. It was the council’s funds that organizations, there is one area which the
were used to buy the image, therefore it is court should not touch: doctrinal and
their property. Right of the determination of disciplinary differences.
custody is their right, and even if they decided
Courts may take cognizance to cases related
to give it to the Church, there is no violation of
to property rights of the church and its
the Constitution, since private funds were
members.
used. Not every government activity which
involves the expenditure of public funds and
which has some religious tint is violative of
the constitutional provisions regarding TARUC VS. DE LA CRUZ
separation of church and state, freedom of G.R. NO. 144801; MARCH 10, 2005
worship and banning the use of public money CORONA, J.:
or property.
FACTS:
Petitioners were lay members of the
Philippine Independent Church (PIC). On June
28, 1993, Due to petitioners’ adamant drive to
create dissension within the diocese by
TARUC V DELA CRUZ: JURISDICTION OF celebrating their own open mass without
THE COURTS OVER INTRAMURAL participation from the parish priest, Bishop
RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSIES DOCTRINE: de la Cruz declared petitioners
The expulsion/excommunication of members expelled/excommunicated from the
of a religious institution/organization is a Philippine Independent Church. The good
matter best left to the discretion of the Bishop did so as a last resort, as he first
officials, and the laws and canons, of said pleaded to the petitioners’ to cease from
institution/organization. It is not for the riling up the community against the diocese.
courts to exercise control over church Because of the order of
authorities in the performance of their

Page | 26
MENDIOLA, MANILA
expulsion/excommunication, petitioners filed ESTRADA vs ESCRITOR

a complaint for damages with preliminary AM P-02-1651, August 4, 2003
injunction against Bishop de la Cruz before
the Regional Trial Court. They contended that FACTS: Soledad Escritor is a court interpreter
their expulsion was illegal because it was since 1999 in the RTC of Las Pinas
done without trial thus violating their right to City. Alejandro Estrada, the complainant,
due process of law. wrote to Judge Jose F. Caoibes, presiding
judge of Branch 253, RTC of Las Pinas City,
ISSUE: requesting for an investigation of rumors that
Whether or not the courts have jurisdiction to Escritor has been living with Luciano Quilapio
hear a case involving the Jr., a man not her husband, and had
expulsion/excommunication of members of a eventually begotten a son. Escritor’s husband,
religious institution? who had lived with another woman, died a
year before she entered into the judiciary. On
HELD: the other hand, Quilapio is still legally
The Court rules that they do not have such married to another woman. Estrada is not
jurisdiction. The expulsion/excommunication related to either Escritor or Quilapio and is
of members of a religious not a resident of Las Pinas but of Bacoor,
institution/organization is a matter best left Cavite. According to the complainant,
to the discretion of the officials, and the laws respondent should not be allowed to remain
and canons, of said institution/organization. employed in the judiciary for it will appear as
It is not for the courts to exercise control over if the court allows such act.
church authorities in the performance of their
discretionary and official functions. Rather, it Escritor is a member of the religious sect
is for the members of religious known as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the
institutions/organizations to conform to just Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society where
church regulations. “Civil Courts will not her conjugal arrangement with Quilapio is in
interfere in the internal affairs of a conformity with their religious beliefs. After
religious organization except for the ten years of living together, she executed on
protection of civil or property rights. Those July 28, 1991 a “Declaration of Pledging
rights may be the subject of litigation in a civil Faithfulness” which was approved by the
court, and the courts have jurisdiction to congregation. Such declaration is effective
determine controverted claims to the title, when legal impediments render it impossible
use, or possession of church property.” for a couple to legalize their union. Gregorio,
Salazar, a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses
Obviously, there was no violation of a civil since 1985 and has been a presiding minister
rights in the present case. since 1991, testified and explained the import
of and procedures for executing the
declaration which was completely executed
by Escritor and Quilapio’s in Atimonan,
Quezon and was signed by three witnesses
ESTRADA v ESCRITOR: DOCTRINE: Non-
and recorded in Watch Tower Central
Theistic View
Office.
Page | 27
MENDIOLA, MANILA
the respondent’s position that her conjugal

ISSUE: Whether or not respondent should be arrangement is not immoral and punishable
found guilty of the administrative charge of as it is within the scope of free exercise
“gross and immoral conduct” and be protection. The Court could not prohibit and
penalized by the State for such conjugal punish her conduct where the Free Exercise
arrangement. Clause protects it, since this would be an
unconstitutional encroachment of her right to
HELD: religious freedom. Furthermore, the court
A distinction between public and secular cannot simply take a passing look at
morality and religious morality should be respondent’s claim of religious freedom but
kept in mind. The jurisdiction of the Court must also apply the “compelling state interest”
extends only to public and secular morality. test.
The Court states that our Constitution IN VIEW WHEREOF, the case is REMANDED
adheres the benevolent neutrality approach to the Office of the Court Administrator. The
that gives room for accommodation of Solicitor General is ordered to intervene in
religious exercises as required by the Free the case where it will be given the
Exercise Clause. This benevolent neutrality opportunity (a) to examine the sincerity and
could allow for accommodation of morality centrality of respondent's claimed religious
based on religion, provided it does not offend belief and practice; (b) to present evidence on
compelling state interests. the state's "compelling interest" to override
respondent's religious belief and practice;
and (c) to show that the means the state
The state’s interest is the preservation of the adopts in pursuing its interest is the least
integrity of the judiciary by maintaining restrictive to respondent's religious freedom.
among its ranks a high standard of morality The rehearing should be concluded thirty
and decency. “There is nothing in the OCA’s (30) days from the Office of the Court
(Office of the Court Administrator) Administrator's receipt of this Decision.
memorandum to the Court that demonstrates
how this interest is so compelling that it
should override respondent’s plea of religious NON-THEISTIC VIEW:
freedom. Indeed, it is inappropriate for the
Question: What is the definition of religion in
complainant, a private person, to present
this particular case?
evidence on the compelling interest of the
state. The burden of evidence should be Federal and state courts have expanded the
discharged by the proper agency of the definition of religion in Seeger to include
government which is the Office of the even non-theistic beliefs such as Taoism or
Solicitor General”. Zen Buddhism. It has been proposed that
basically, a creed must meet four criteria to
In order to properly settle the case at bar, it is qualify as religion under the First
essential that the government be given an Amendment. First, there must be belief in God
opportunity to demonstrate the compelling or some parallel belief that occupies a central
state interest it seeks to uphold in opposing
Page | 28
MENDIOLA, MANILA
place in the believers’ life. Second, the religion Characteristics of the Wall of Separation:
must involve a moral code transcending
individual belief, i.e., it cannot be purely The history of the religion clauses in the 1987
subjective. Third, a demonstrable sincerity in Constitution shows that these clauses were
belief is necessary, but the court must not largely adopted from the First Amendment of
inquire into the truth or reasonableness of the the U.S. Constitution. The religion clauses in
belief.Fourth, there must be some the First Amendment were contained in every
associational ties, although there is also a view organic Act of the Philippines under the
that religious beliefs held by a single person American regime. When the delegates of the
rather than being part of the teachings of any 1934 Constitutional Convention adopted a
kind of group or sect are entitled to the Bill of Rights in the 1935 Constitution, they
protection of the Free Exercise Clause. purposely retained the phraseology of the
religion clauses in the First Amendment as
Reason for Separation: The prohibition contained in the Jones Law in order to adopt
herein expressed is a direct corollary of the its historical background, nature, extent and
principle of separation of church and limitations. At that time, there were not too
state. Without the necessity of adverting to many religion clause cases in the United
the historical background of this principle in States as the U.S. Supreme Court decided an
our country, it is sufficient to say that our Establishment Clause issue only in the
history, not to speak of the history of 1947 Everson case. The Free Exercise Clause
mankind, has taught us that the union of cases were also scarce then.
church and state is prejudicial to both, for
occasions might arise when the state will Over the years, however, with the expanding
use the church, and the church the state, as reach of government regulation to a whole
a weapon in the furtherance of their gamut of human actions and the growing
respective ends and aims . . . plurality and activities of religions, the
number of religion clause cases in the U.S.
It is almost trite to say now that in this exponentially increased. With this increase
country we enjoy both religious and civil came an expansion of the interpretation of
freedom. All the officers of the Government, the religion clauses, at times reinforcing
from the highest to the lowest, in taking their prevailing case law, at other times modifying
oath to support and defend the Constitution, it, and still at other times creating
bind themselves to recognize and respect the contradictions so that two main streams of
constitutional guarantee of religious freedom, jurisprudence had become identifiable. The
with its inherent limitations and recognized first stream employs separation while the
implications. It should be stated that what is second employs benevolent neutrality in
guaranteed by our Constitution is religious interpreting the religious clauses. Alongside
liberty, not mere toleration. this change in the landscape of U.S. religion
clause jurisprudence, the Philippines
continued to adopt the 1935 Constitution
religion clauses in the 1973 Constitution and
later, the 1987 Constitution. Philippine
jurisprudence and commentaries on the

Page | 29
MENDIOLA, MANILA
religious clauses also continued to borrow Test to Determine Validity of

authorities from U.S. jurisprudence Governmental Regulation Touching on the
without articulating the stark distinction Wall of Separation
between the two streams of U.S.
jurisprudence. One might simply conclude This court also discussed the Lemon test in
that the Philippine Constitutions and that case, such that a regulation is
jurisprudence also inherited the disarray of constitutional when:
U.S. religion clause jurisprudence and the two
identifiable streams; thus, when a religion (1) it has a secular legislative purpose;
clause case comes before the Court,
(2) it neither advances nor inhibits religion;
a separationist approach or a benevolent
and
neutrality approach might be adopted and
each will have U.S. authorities to support (3) it does not foster an excessive
it. Or, one might conclude that as the history entanglement with religion.
of the First Amendment as narrated by the
Court in Everson supports
the separationist approach, Philippine
jurisprudence should also follow this Clearly, not all acts done by those who are
approach in light of the Philippine religion priests, bishops, ustadz, imams, or any other
clauses history. As a result, in a case where religious make such act immune from any
the party claims religious liberty in the face of secular regulation. The religious also have a
a general law that inadvertently burdens his secular existence. They exist within a society
religious exercise, he faces an almost that is regulated by law.
insurmountable wall in convincing the Court
that the wall of separation would not be Furthermore, the definition of an
breached if the Court grants him an "ecclesiastical affair" in Austria v. National
exemption. These conclusions, however, Labor Relations Commission333 cited by
are not and were never warranted by the petitioners finds no application in the present
1987, 1973 and 1935 Constitutions as case. The posting of the tarpaulin does not fall
shown by other provisions on religion in within the category of matters that are
all three constitutions. It is a cardinal rule in beyond the jurisdiction of civil courts as
constitutional construction that the enumerated in the Austria case such as
constitution must be interpreted as a whole "proceedings for excommunication,
and apparently conflicting provisions should ordinations of religious ministers,
be reconciled and harmonized in a manner administration of sacraments and other
that will give to all of them full force and activities with attached religious
effect. From this construction, it will be significance."
ascertained that the intent of the framers
was to adopt a benevolent neutrality
approach in interpreting the religious
clauses in the Philippine constitutions, and
the enforcement of this intent is the goal of
construing the constitution.
Page | 30
MENDIOLA, MANILA
From ALBANO: shall be allowed to be taught to their

children or wards without additional
State the constitutional provisions cost to the Government (Sec. 3[3], Art
evidencing the separation of church and XIV, 1987 Constitution).
State.
They are the following: What does the principle of separation

of church and State mean?
1. No law shall be made respecting an
establishment of religion, or It means that the State should not use its
prohibiting the free exercise thereof. money and coercive power to establish
The free exercise and enjoyment of religion. It should not support a particular
religious profession and worship, religion. The State is prohibited from
without discrimination or preference, interfering with purely ecclesiastical
shall forever be allowed. No religious affairs. The church is likewise prohibited
tests shall be required for the from meddling in purely secular affairs.
exercise of civil or political rights. But it does not mean that there is total or
(Sec. 5, Art II., Constitution); absolute separation. The better rule is
2. Charitable institutions, churches and symbiotic relations between the church
parsonages or convents appurtenant and State.
thereto, mosques, non-profit
cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, Lay member of the Philipppine
and improvements, actually, directly, Independent Church (PIC) in Socorro,
and exclusively used for religious, Surigao de Norte wanted Father
charitable, or educational purposes Florano to be transferred to another
shall be exempt from taxation (Sec. parish because his wife’s family belong
28 [3], Art. Vi, 1987 Constitution); to a political camp, but the bishop
3. No public money or property shall be found the reason too flimsy, hence, the
appropriated, applied, paid, or request was denied. In the meantime,
employed, directly or indirectly, for they arranged a mass to be celebrated
the use, benefit, or support of any sect, by Fr. Ambong during the town fiesta.
church, denomination, sectarian The bishop tried to dissuade them
institution, or system of religion, or of from doing so, but they proceeded
any priest, preacher, minister, or hence, they were expelled or
other religious teacher, or dignitary excommunicated from the PIC due to
as such, except when such priest, be disobedience to the duly constituted
preacher, minister or dignitary is authority in the church; inciting
assigned to the armed forces, or to dissension and division in the Church.
any penal institution, or government Due to their exclusion, they filed a
orphanage or leprosarium (Sec. 29[2], complaint for damages against the
Art. VI, 1987 Constitution); bishop. Do courts have the jurisdiction
4. At the option expressed in writing by to hear a case involving the
the parents or guardians, religion

Page | 31
MENDIOLA, MANILA
expulsion/excommunication of policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its

members of a religious organization? territory.
No, courts do not have jurisdiction.
The expulsion/excommunication of Question: Supposing a law was enacted

members of a religious reviving the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant,
institution/organization is a matter best would that violate the Constitution?
left to the discretion of the officials, and
the laws and canons, of said Answer: No, nuclear energy is not prohibited,
institution/organization. It is not for the only nuclear weapons.
courts to exercise control over church
authorities in the performance of their
discretionary and official functions. Question: Supposing the nuclear weapon is
Rather, it is for the members of religious for defense of the territory, would that violate
institution/organizations to conform to the constitution?
just church regulations. In the words of
Justice Samuel F. Miller: Answer: Yes, the Constitution provide that
the Philippines pursues a policy of freedom
“…all who unite themselves to an from nuclear weapons in its territory.
ecclesiastical body do so with an implied
consent to submit to the Church
government and they are bound to submit
to it.” (Watson vs. Jones; Taruc vs. What is the constitutional policy on
Bishop Dela Cruz) nuclear weapons?
The Constitution prescribes a policy of

freedom from nuclear weapons. The policy
STATE POLICIES includes the prohibition not only of the
possession, control, and manufacture of
Section 7. The State shall pursue an nuclear weapons but also nuclear arms tests.
independent foreign policy. In its relations
with other states, the paramount Exception to this policy may be made by the
consideration shall be national sovereignty, political departments; but it must be justified
territorial integrity, national interest, and the by the demands of the national interest.
right to self-determination. (“consistentwith the national interest.”) But
the policy does not prohibit the peaceful uses
Policy of the State with respect to foreign of nuclear energy. (Bernas Primer)
relations: in the case of Magallona v Ermita,
the right to innocent passage. What is the implication of this policy for
the presence of American troops or for any
Section 8. The Philippines, consistent with American military base that might be
the national interest, adopts and pursues a established in the Philippines?

Page | 32
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Any new agreement on bases or the presence which absolutely prohibited foreign
of troops, if ever there is one, must embody nationals from engaging in the retail trade
the basic policy of freedom from nuclear business. The new law allows them to do
weapons. Moreover, it would be well within so.
the power of government to demand ocular
inspection and removal of nuclear arms They mainly argued that RA 8762 violates
the mandate of the 1987 Constitution for
the State to develop a self-reliant and
independent national economy effectively
What are the two important policies controlled by Filipinos. They invoked the
mentioned in Sections 7 and 8? provisions of the Declaration of Principles
and State Policies, that the State shall
1. Independent foreign policy
promote a just and dynamic social order
2. Policy of freedom from nuclear
that will ensure the prosperity and
weapons in its territory
independence of the nation and free the
people from poverty through policies that
Section 9. The State shall promote a just and provide adequate social services, promote
dynamic social order that will ensure the full employment, a rising standard of
prosperity and independence of the nation living, and an improved quality of life for
and free the people from poverty through all. Rule on the contention. Explain.
policies that provide adequate social services,
The contention of the petitioners is not
promote full employment, a rising standard of
correct. As explained in Tañada v. Angara,
living, and an improved quality of life for all.
the provisions of Article II of the 1987
Why should we promote a just and Constitution, the declarations of principles
dynamic social order? and state policies, are not self-executing.
There must be laws to implement the same.
It is the foundation of a strong and Legislative failure to pursue such policies
prosperous nation. Poverty and injustice are cannot give rise to a cause of action in the
the root causes of the public discontent which courts. (Rep. Espina, et al v. Hon. Ronaldo
gives rise to chaos and disorder, and later, to Zamora, Jr.)
a revolution.
Does the Constitution prohibit the entry of
Saluspopuliestsupremalex: welfare of an foreign investments, etc., in the
individual yields to that of the community implementation of the constitutional
mandate to develop an independent and
self-reliant economy? Explain.
From ALBANO: No. The 1987 Constitution does not rule out
the entry of foreign investments, goods, and
Petitioners questioned the services. While it does not encourage their
constitutionality of RA 8762 otherwise unlimited entry into the country, it does not
known as Retail Trade Liberalization Act prohibit them either. In fact, it allows an
of 2000 which expressly repealed RA 1180

Page | 33
MENDIOLA, MANILA
exchange on the basis of equality and valid exercise of police power. (Ichong v.
reciprocity, frowning only on foreign Hernandez). The State had an interest in
competition that is unfair. The key, as in all preventing alien control of the retail trade
economies in the world, is to strike a balance and RA 1180 was reasonably related to that
between protecting local businesses and purpose. The law is not arbitrary.
allowing the entry of foreign investments and
services. To the extent that RA 8762, the Retail Trade
Liberalization Act, lessens the restraint on the
More importantly, Section 10, Article XII of foreigners’ right to property or to engage in
the 1987 Constitution gives Congress the an ordinarily lawful business, it cannot be
discretion to reserve to Filipinos certain areas said that the law amounts to a denial of the
of investments upon the recommendation of Filipinos’ right to property and to due process
the NEDA and when the national interest of law. Filipinos continue to have the right to
requires. Thus, Congress can determine what engage in the kinds of retail business to which
policy to pass and when to pass it depending the law in question has permitted the entry of
on the economic exigencies. It can enact laws foreign investors (Rep. Espina, et al v. Hon.
allowing the entry of foreigners into certain Ronaldo Zamora, Jr.)
industries not reserved by the Constitution to
Filipino citizens. In this case, Congress has
decided to open certain areas of the retail
It was contended that RA 8762 would
trade business to foreign investments instead
eventually lead to alien control of the
of reserving them exclusively to Filipino
retail trade business. Is the contention
citizens. The NEDA has not opposed such
correct? Why?
policy. (Rep. Espina et al v. Hon. Ronaldo
Zamora 2010) No. First, aliens can only engage in retail
trade business subject to certain categories;
What is the nature of the power of the
Second, only nationals from, or juridical
State to control and regulate trade?
entities formed or incorporated in countries
Explain.
which allow the entryof Filipino retailers
The control and regulation of trade in the shall be allowed to engage in retail trade
interest of the public welfare is of course an business; and third, qualified foreign retailers
exercise of the police power of the State. A shall not be allowed to engage in certain
person’s right to property, whether he is a retailing activities outside their accredited
Filipino citizen or foreign national, cannot be stores through the use of mobile or rolling
taken from him without due process of law. In stores or carts, the use of sales representative,
1954, Congress enacted the Retail Trade door-to-door selling, restaurants and sari-sari
Nationalism Act or RA 1180 that restricted stores and such other similar retailing
the retail business to Filipino citizens. In activities. (Rep. Espina, et al v. Hon. Ronaldo
denying the petition assailing the validity of Zamora, Jr.)
such Act for violation of the foreigner’s right
to substantive due process of law, the
Supreme Court held that the law constituted a

Page | 34
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Section 10. The State shall promote social adoption by the Government of measures
justice in all phases of national development. calculated to insure economic stability of all
the competent elements of society, through
What are the underlying principles of the maintenance of a proper economic and
Sections 9 and 10? social equilibrium in the interrelations of the
members of the community, constitutionally,
They derive from the premises that poverty
through the adoption of measures legally
and gross inequality are major problems
justifiable, or extra-constitutionally, through
besetting the nation and that these problems
the exercise of powers underlying the
assault the dignity of the human person.
existence of all governments on the time-
honored principle of
saluspopuliestsupremalex. Social justice,
What has been the special impact of the therefore, must be founded on the recognition
social justice provision in Philippines of the necessity of interdependence among
jurisprudence? divers and diverse units of a society and of
the protection that should be equally and
The provision has been chiefly instrumental evenly extended to all groups as a combined
in the socialization of the State’s attitude to force in our social and economic life,
property rights thus gradually eradicating the consistent with the fundamental and
vestiges of laissez faire in the Philippine paramount objective of the state of promoting
society. the health, comfort, and quiet of all persons,
and of bringing about "the greatest good to
Different Concepts of Social Justice: the greatest number."
1. Calalang v Williams – In Public Law
2. Almeda v CA – In Agrarian Law
CALALANG VS. WILLIAMS
3. Ondoy v Ignacio – In Labor Law
4. Salonga v Farrales – In Obligations 70 Phil. 726, 1940
and Contracts
FACTS: In pursuance of Commonwealth Act
548 which mandates the Director of Public
CASE DOCTRINES: Works, with the approval of the Secretary of
CALALANG v WILLIAMS – SOCIAL JUSTICE Public Works and Communications, shall
IN PUBLIC LAW promulgate the necessary rules and
DOCTRINE: SOCIAL JUSTICE. (Memorize.) — regulations to regulate and control the use of
Social justice is "neither communism, nor and traffic on such roads and streets to
despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy," but promote safe transit upon, and avoid
the humanization of laws and the equalization obstructions on, roads and streets designated
of social and economic forces by the State so as national roads, the Director of Public
that justice in its rational and objectively Works adopted the resolution of the National
secular conception may at least be Traffic Commission, prohibiting the passing of
approximated. Social justice means the animal drawn vehicles in certain streets in
promotion of the welfare of all the people, the Manila.

Page | 35
MENDIOLA, MANILA
The National Traffic Commission, in its The Mayor of Manila and the Acting Chief of
resolution of 17 July 1940, resolved to Police of Manila have enforced and caused to
recommend to the Director of Public Works be enforced the rules and regulations thus
and to the Secretary of Public Works and adopted.
Communications that animal-drawn vehicles
be prohibited from passing along Rosario Maximo Calalang, in his capacity as a private
Street extending from Plaza Calderon de la citizen and as a taxpayer of Manila, brought
Barca to Dasmariñas Street, from 7:30 a.m. to before the Supreme court the petition for a
12:30 p.m. and from 1:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.; writ of prohibition against A. D. Williams, as
and along Rizal Avenue extending from the Chairman of the National Traffic Commission;
railroad crossing at Antipolo Street to Vicente Fragante, as Director of Public Works;
Echague Street, from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., from a Sergio Bayan, as Acting Secretary of Public
period of one year from the date of the Works and Communications; Eulogio
opening of the Colgante Bridge to traffic. Rodriguez, as Mayor of the City of Manila; and
Juan Dominguez, as Acting Chief of Police of
The Chairman of the National Traffic Manila.
Commission recommended to the Director of
Public Works the adoption of the measure The National Traffic Commission, in its
proposed in the resolution, in pursuance of resolution of July 17, 1940, resolved to
the provisions of Commonwealth Act 548, recommend to the Director of Public Works
which authorizes said Director of Public and to the Secretary of Public Works and
Works, with the approval of the Secretary of Communications that animal-drawn vehicles
Public Works and Communications, to be prohibited from passing along Rosario
promulgate rules and regulations to regulate Street extending from Plaza Calderon de la
and control the use of and traffic on national Barca to Dasmariñas Street, from 7:30 a.m. to
roads. 12:30 p.m. and from 1:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.;
and along Rizal Avenue extending from the
The Director of Public Works, in his first railroad crossing at Antipolo Street to
endorsement to the Secretary of Public Works Echague Street, from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., from a
and Communications, recommended to the period of one year from the date of the
latter the approval of the recommendation opening of the Colgante Bridge to traffic; that
made by the Chairman of the National Traffic the Chairman of the National Traffic
Commission, with the modification. Commission, on July 18, 1940 recommended
to the Director of Public Works the adoption
The Secretary of Public Works and of the measure proposed in the resolution
Communications approved the aforementioned, in pursuance of the
recommendation that Rosario Street and provisions of Commonwealth Act No. 548
Rizal Avenue be closed to traffic of animal- which authorizes said Director of Public
drawn vehicles, between the points and Works, with the approval of the Secretary of
during the hours as indicated, for a period of Public Works and Communications, to
1 year from the date of the opening of the promulgate rules and regulations to regulate
Colgante Bridge to traffic. and control the use of and traffic on national
roads; that on August 2, 1940, the Director of
Page | 36
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Public Works, in his first recommended to the

latter the approval of the recommendation HELD: Yes. Said Act, by virtue of which the
made by the Chairman of the National Traffic rules and regulations complained of were
Commission as aforesaid, with the promulgated, aims to promote safe transit
modification that the closing of Rizal Avenue upon and avoid obstructions on national
to traffic to animal-drawn vehicles be limited roads, in the interest and convenience of the
to the portion thereof extending from the public. In enacting said law, therefore, the
railroad crossing at Antipolo Street to National Assembly was prompted by
Azcarraga Street; that on August 10, 1940, the considerations of public convenience and
Secretary of Public Works and welfare. It was inspired by a desire to relieve
Communications, in his second indorsement congestion of traffic. which is, to say the least,
addressed to the Director of Public Works, a menace to public safety. Public welfare, then,
approved the recommendation of the latter lies at the bottom of the enactment of said law,
that Rosario Street and Rizal Avenue be and the state in order to promote the general
closed to traffic of animal-drawn vehicles, welfare may interfere with personal liberty,
between the points and during the hours as with property, and with business and
above indicated, for a period of one year from occupations. Persons and property may be
the date of the opening of the Colgante Bridge subjected to all kinds of restraints and
to traffic; that the Mayor of Manila and the burdens, in order to secure the general
Acting Chief of Police of Manila have enforced comfort, health, and prosperity of the state
and caused to be enforced the rules and (U.S. vs. Gomez Jesus, 31 Phil., 218). To this
regulations thus adopted; that as a fundamental aim of our Government the
consequence of such enforcement, all animal- rights of the individual are subordinated.
drawn vehicles are not allowed to pass and Liberty is a blessing without which life is a
pick up passengers in the places above- misery, but liberty should not be made to
mentioned to the detriment not only of their prevail over authority because then society
owners but of the riding public as well. will fall into anarchy. Neither should
authority be made to prevail over liberty
The petitioner further contends that the rules because then the individual will fall into
and regulations promulgated by the slavery. The citizen should achieve the
respondents pursuant to the provisions of required balance of liberty and authority in
Commonwealth Act No. 548 constitute an his mind through education and personal
unlawful interference with legitimate discipline, so that there may be established
business or trade and abridge the right to the resultant equilibrium, which means peace
personal liberty and freedom of locomotion. and order and happiness for all. The moment
Commonwealth Act No. 548 was passed by greater authority is conferred upon the
the National Assembly in the exercise of the government, logically so much is withdrawn
paramount police power of the state. from the residuum of liberty which resides in
the people. The paradox lies in the fact that
ISSUE: Whether the rules & regulations the apparent curtailment of liberty is
promulgated pursuant to the provisions of precisely the very means of insuring its
Commonwealth Act No. 548 considered as preservation. Petitioner finally avers that the
constitutional? rules and regulations complained of infringe
Page | 37
MENDIOLA, MANILA
upon the constitutional precept regarding the governmental policy of recent date project
promotion of social justice to insure the well- emancipation of tenants from the bondage of
being and economic security of all the people. the soil and the transfer to them of the
The promotion of social justice, however, is to ownership of the land they till. This is
be achieved not through a mistaken sympathy Presidential Decree No. 27 of October 21,
towards any given group. 1972, ordaining that all tenant farmers of
private agricultural lands devoted to rice and
Social justice is "neither communism, nor corn under a system of sharecrop or lease
despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy," but tenancy whether classified as landed estates
the humanization of laws and the or not shall be deemed owner of a portion
equalization of social and economic forces constituting a family-size farm of five (5)
by the State so that justice in its rational hectares if not irrigated and three (3)
and objectively secular conception may at hectares if irrigated.
least be approximated. Social justice means
the promotion of the welfare of all the IN SHORT: GREATEST GOOD FOR THE
people, the adoption by the Government of GREATEST NUMBER.
measures calculated to insure economic
stability of all the competent elements of
ALMEDA VS. COURT OF APPEALS
society, through the maintenance of a
78 SCRA 194, 1977
proper economic and social equilibrium in
the interrelations of the members of the
FACTS: Petitioner Jose Almeda filed a notice
community, constitutionally, through the
of appeal which was disapproved by the trial
adoption of measures legally justifiable, or
court due to it being filed five (5) days late
extraconstitutionally, through the exercise
beyond the reglementary period and
of powers underlying the existence of all
subsequently denied of motion for
governments on the time-honored principle
reconsideration. Respondent court dismissed
of salus populi est suprema lex.
the petition contending that the requirement
regarding perfection of an appeal was not
only mandatory but jurisdictional such that
the petitioner’s failure to comply therewith
ALMEDA v CA: IN THE PROMOTION OF had the effect of rendering the judgment final.
SOCIAL JUSTICE, THE STATE MAY Subsequently, petitioner motions for
REGULATE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP – reconsideration and is denied. Also, it was
SOCIAL JUSTICE IN AGRARIAN LAW found that there was lack of merit in the
DOCTRINE: Property ownership is impressed petitioner’s reason for the late filing of the
with social function. Property use must not notice of appeal.
only be for the benefit of the owner but of
Respondent Gonzales is a share tenant of
society as well. The State, in the promotion of
Angeles et al., on land devoted to sugar cane
social justice, may regulate the acquisition,
and coconuts. The landowners sold the
ownership, use, enjoyment and disposition of
property to petitioners Almeda without
private property, and equitably diffuse
notifying respondent in writing of the sale.
property ownership and profits. One

Page | 38
MENDIOLA, MANILA
The sale was registered with the Register of Provided, That in order not to jeopardize
Deeds. Respondent thus sued for redemption international commitments, lands devoted to
before the CAR. Petitioners counter that long crops covered by marketing allotments shall
before the execution of the deed of sale, be made the subject of a separate
Glicerio Angeles and his nephew Cesar proclamation by the President upon
Angeles first offered the sale of the land to recommendation of the department head that
respondent but the latter said that he had no adequate provisions, such as the organization
money; that respondent, instead, went of cooperatives marketing agreement, or
personally to the house of petitioners and similar other workable arrangements, have
implored them to buy the land for fear that if been made to insure efficient management on
someone else would buy the land, he may not all matters requiring synchronization of the
be taken in as tenant; that respondent is a agricultural with the processing phases of
mere dummy of someone deeply interested in such crops . . ." Sugar is, of course, one crop
buying the land; that respondent made to covered by marketing allotments. In other
tender of payment or any valid consignation words, this section recognizes share tenancy
in court at the time he filed the complaint for in sugar lands until after a special
redemption. The Agrarian Court rendered proclamation is made, which proclamation
judgment authorizing respondent to redeem shall have the same effect of an executive
the land for P24,000.00, the said amount to be proclamation of the operation of the
deposited by him with the Clerk of Court Department of Agrarian Reform in any region
within 15 days from receipt of the decision. or locality; the share tenants in the lands
affected will become agricultural lessees at
On appeal, the CA affirmed the assailed the beginning of the agricultural year next
decision. Their motion for reconsideration succeeding the year in which the
was denied. Hence, the present petition for proclamation is made. But, there is nothing
review. readable or even discernible in the law
denying to tenants in sugar lands the right of
ISSUE: Is there a tenant's right of redemption pre-emption and redemption under the Code.
in sugar and coconut lands?
The exemption is purely limited to the
HELD: tenancy system; it does not exclude the other
Yes. Among those exempted from the rights conferred by the Code, such as the right
automatic conversion to agricultural of pre-emption and redemption. In the same
leasehold upon the effectivity of the manner, coconut lands are exempted from the
Agricultural Land Reform Code in 1963 or Code only with respect to the consideration
even after its amendments (Code of Agrarian and tenancy system prevailing, implying that
Reforms) are sugar lands. Section 4 thereof in other matters the right of preemption and
states: "Agricultural share tenancy redemption which does not refer to the
throughout the country, as herein defined, is consideration of the tenancy the provisions of
hereby declared contrary to public policy and the Code apply. Thus, Section 35 states:
shall be automatically converted to "Notwithstanding the provisions of the
agricultural leasehold upon the effectivity of preceding Sections, in the case of fishponds,
this section. . . . saltbeds and lands principally planted to
Page | 39
MENDIOLA, MANILA
citrus, coconuts, cacao, coffee, durian, and poor and unlettered, and the employer, who
other similar permanent trees at the time of has resources to secure able legal advice, the
the approval of this Code, the consideration, law has reason to demand from the latter
as well as the tenancy system prevailing, shall stricter compliance. Social justice in these
be governed by the provisions of Republic Act cases is not equality but protection.'
Numbered Eleven Hundred and Ninety-Nine,
as amended."
ONDOY VS. IGNACIO
It is to be noted that under the new
97 SCRA 611, 1980
Constitution, property ownership is
impressed with social function. Property
FACTS:
use must not only be for the benefit of the
Petitioner Estrella Ondoy filed a claim for
owner but of society as well. The State, in
compensation for the death of her son, Jose
the promotion of social justice, may
Ondoy, who drowned while in the employ of
"regulate the acquisition, ownership, use,
respondent Virgilio Ignacio. Respondent
enjoyment and disposition of private
moved to dismiss on the ground of lack of
property, and equitably diffuse property . . .
employer-employee relationship. However,
ownership and profits."
during the hearing of the case, respondent
submitted affidavits executed by the chief
One governmental policy of recent date
engineer and oiler of the fishing vessel that
projects the emancipation of tenants from the
the deceased, a fisherman, was in that ship,
bondage of the soil and the transfer to them
undeniably a member of the working force,
of the ownership of the land they till. This is
but after being invited by friends to a
Presidential Decree No. 27 of October 21,
drinking spree, left the vessel, and thereafter
1972, ordaining that all tenant farmers "of
was found dead. The referee summarily
private agricultural lands devoted to rice and
ignored the affidavit of the chief-mate of
corn under a system of sharecrop or lease
respondent employer to the effect "that
tenancy, whether classified as landed estates
sometime in October, 1968, while Jose Ondoy,
or not" shall be deemed "owner of a portion
my co-worker, was in the actual performance
constituting a family-size farm of five (5)
of his work with said fishing enterprises, he
hectares if not irrigated and there (3)
was drowned and died on October 22, 1968.
hectares if irrigated."
That the deceased died in line of Duty." The
hearing officer or referee dismissed the claim
ONDOY v IGNACIO: SOCIAL JUSTICE IS NOT for lack of merit. A motion for reconsideration
EQUALITY, BUT PROTECTION – SOCIAL was duly filed, but the then Secretary of Labor,
JUSTICE IN LABOR LAW DOCTRINE: denied such motion for reconsideration for
lack of merit. Hence this petition for review.
"To be more specific, the principle of social
justice is in this sphere strengthened and ISSUE: Whether or not the claim for
vitalized. A realistic view is that expressed compensation was validly dismissed.
in Agustin v. Workmen's Compensation
Commission: 'As between a laborer, usually

Page | 40
MENDIOLA, MANILA
HELD: SALONGA v FARRALES: SOCIAL JUSTICE

There is evidence, direct and categorical, to CANNOT NULLIFY THE LAW ON
the effect that the deceased was drowned OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS – SOCIAL
while "in the actual performance of his work" JUSTICE IN OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS
with the shipping enterprise of private
respondent. Even without such evidence, the DOCTRINE: Social justice cannot be invoked
petitioner could have relied on the to trample on the rights of property owners
presumption of compensability under the who under our Constitution and laws are also
Act once it is shown that the death or entitled to protection. The social justice
disability arose in the course of employment, consecrated in our constitution was not
with the burden of overthrowing it being cast intended to take away rights from a person
on the person or entity resisting the claim. and give them to another who is not entitled
This Court, in recognizing the right of thereto. Evidently, the plea for social justice
petitioner to the award, merely adheres to cannot nullify the law on obligations and
the interpretation uninterruptedly followed contracts, and is, therefore, beyond the power
by this Court resolving all doubts in favor of of the Court to grant.
the claimant. What was said in Victorias
Milling Co., Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation
Commission is not amiss: "There is need, it SALONGA VS. FARRALES
seems, even at this late date, for [private 105 SCRA 359, 1981
respondent] and other employers to be
reminded of the high estate accorded the FACTS:
Workmen's Compensation Act in the Defendant Farrales is the titled owner of a
constitutional scheme of social justice and parcel of residential land. Even prior to the
protection to labor." No other judicial attitude acquisition by defendant Farrales of the land
may be expected in the face of a clearly aforesaid, plaintiff Salonga was already in
expressed legislative determination which possession as lessee of some 156 square
antedated the constitutionally avowed meters thereof, on which she had erected a
concern for social justice and protection to house,
labor. It is easily understandable why the paying rentals thereon first to the original
judiciary frowns on resort to doctrines, which owners and later to defendant Farrales.
even if deceptively plausible, would result in
frustrating such a national policy." Farrales filed an ejectment case for non-
payment of rentals against plaintiff. Judgment
To be more specific, the principle of social was later rendered in favor of defendant
justice is in this sphere strengthened and Farrales and ordering the therein defendants,
vitalized. As between a laborer, usually poor including plaintiff herein and her husband, to
and unlettered, and the employer, who has vacate the portion occupied by them and to
resources to secure able legal advice, the pay rentals in arrears. Evidence showed that
law has reason to demand from the latter plaintiff offered to purchase from said
stricter compliance. Social justice in these plaintiff's order to purchase was just, fair and
cases is not equality but protection.” reasonable persistently refused such offer,

Page | 41
MENDIOLA, MANILA
and instead, insisted to execute the judgment ADDITIONAL UTOPIA NOTES:

rendered in the ejectment case. Plaintiff then
filed a complaint against defendant Farrales PRINCIPLES
praying the latter be ordered to sell to
plaintiff the parcel of land in question. A. Republic Republic is a representative
government run by the people and for the
ISSUE: Is the plaintiff entitled for specific people.
performance?
Republican state is a state wherein all
HELD: government authority emanates from the
No. If plaintiff's offer to purchase was, as people and is exercised by representatives
aforesaid persistently refused by defendant, it chosen by the people.
is obvious that no meeting of the minds took
place and, accordingly, no contract, either to B. Essential Features of Republicanism
sell or of sale, was ever perfected between
them. Since contracts are enforceable only The essence of republicanism is
from the moment of perfection, and there is representation and renovation. The
here no perfected contract at all, it goes citizenry selectsa corps of public
without saying that plaintiff has absolutely functionaries who derive their mandate from
nothing to enforce against defendant Farrales, the people and act on their behalf, serving for
and the fact that defendant Farrales a limited period only, after which they are
previously sold portions of the land to other replaced or retained at the option of their
lessees similarly situated as plaintiff herein, principal.
does not change the situation because, as to
C. Manifestations of Republicanism
said other lessees, a perfected contract
existed which is not the case with plaintiff.
1. Ours is a government of laws and not of
men. (Villavicencio v. Lukban, 39 Phil
It must be remembered that social justice
778)
cannot be invoked to trample on the rights
of property owners who under our
Constitution and laws are also entitled to 2. Rule of Majority (Plurality in elections)  
protection.
3. Accountability of public officials  
The social justice consecrated in our
constitution was not intended to take away 4. Bill of Rights  
rights from a person and give them to another
who is not entitled thereto. Evidently, the 5. Legislature cannot pass irrepealable laws  
plea for social justice cannot nullify the law
on obligations and contracts, and is, 6. Separation of powers  
therefore, beyond the power of the Court to
grant.

Page | 42
MENDIOLA, MANILA
D. “Democratic State” instrument of national policy...” (Read along

Preamble, Article II Secs. 7 &8; Article XVIII Sec.
In the view of the new Constitution, the 25)
Philippines is not only a representative or
republican state but also shares some aspects 1. Aggressive War
of direct democracy such as “initiative and
referendum”. The word democratic is also a The Philippines only renounces AGGRESSIVE
monument to the February Revolution which war as an instrument of national policy. It
re-won freedom through direct action of the does not renounce defensive war.
people.
2. Philippines Renounces Not Only War
E. Constitutional Authoritarianism
As member of United Nations, the Philippines
Constitutional authoritarianism as does not merely renounce war but adheres to
understood and practiced in the Marcos Article 2(4) of the UN charter which says: “ All
regime under the 1973 Constitution, was the Members shall refrain in their international
assumption of extraordinary powers by the relations from the threat or use of force
President, including legislative and judicial against the territorial integrity or political
and even constituent powers. independence of any state, or in any other
manner inconsistent with Purposes of the
Q: Is constitutional authoritarianism United Nations.”
compatible with a republican state?
3. Historical Development of the Policy
A: Yes if the Constitution upon which the Condemning or Outlawing War in the
Executive bases his assumption of power is a International Scene:
legitimate expression of the people’s will and
if the Executive who assumes power received 1. Covenant of the League of Nations-
his office through a valid election by the provided conditions for the right to go to war.
people.
2. Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928- also known
IV. Renunciation of War/ Incorporation as the General Treaty for the Renunciation of
Clause/ Policy of PEJ-FCA with All Nations War, ratified by 62 states, which forbade war
as “an instrument of national policy.”
Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as
an instrument of national policy, adopts the 3. Charter of the United Nations- Prohibits
generally accepted principles of international the threat or use of force against the
law as part of law of the land and adheres to territorial integrity or political independence
the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, of a State.
cooperation, and amity with all nations.
B. Incorporation Clause
A. Renunciation of War
“The Philippines...adopts the generally
“The Philippines renounces war as an accepted principles of international law as

Page | 43
MENDIOLA, MANILA
part of law of the land...” Philippine courts to settle domestic disputes

in much the same way that they would use
1. Acceptance of Dualist View the Civil Code or the Penal Code and other
laws passed by Congress.
Implicit in this provision is the acceptance of
the dualist view of legal systems, namely that
domestic law is distinct from international law.
Since dualism holds that international law C. Policy of PEJ-FCA with All Nations
and municipal law belong to different spheres,
international law becomes part of municipal “The Philippines...adheres to the policy of
law only if it is incorporated in to municipal peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation,
law. and amity with all nations.”
2 Doctrine of Incorporation (1997 Bar Q: Does the affirmation of amity will all
Question) Every state is, by reason of its nations mean automatic diplomatic
membership in the family of nations, bound recognition of all nations?
by the generally accepted principles of
international law, which are considered to A: No. Amity with all nations is an ideal to be
be automatically part of its own laws. This aimed at. Diplomatic recognition, however,
is the doctrine of incorporation. remains a matter of executive discretion.
3. International Law International Law  Section 3. Civilian Authority is, at all times

Traditional definition: It is a body of rules and supreme over the military. The Armed Forces
principles of action which are binding upon of the Philippines is the protector of the
civilized states in their relation to one people and the State. Its goal is to secure the
another. Restatement: The law which deals sovereignty of the State and integrity of the
with the conduct of states and of international national territory.
organizations and with their relations inter se,
as well as with some other relations with
persons, natural or juridical.
A. Civilian Authority
4. To What Elements of International Law
does the principle of incorporation apply? That civilian authority is at all times supreme
over the military is implicit in a republican
Since treaties become part of Philippine law system.
only by ratification, the principle of
incorporation applies only to customary law Still, it was felt advisable to expressly affirm
and to treaties which have become part of this principle in the Constitution to allay all
customary law. fears of a military take-over of our civilian
government.
5. Effect of Incorporation Clause
It was also fittingly declared that the
International law therefore can be used by President, who is a civilian official, shall be

Page | 44
MENDIOLA, MANILA
the commander-in-chief of all the armed Q: Is the provision an assertion of the political
forces of the Philippines. role of the military?
Q: Does this mean that civilian officials are A: No. The phrase “protector of the people”
superior to military officials? was not meant to be an assertion of the
political role of the military. The intent of the
A: Civilian officials are superior to military phrase “protector of the people” was rather to
official only when a law makes them so. make it as corrective to military abuses
experienced during martial rule.
Q: Does this mean that the military has no

B. Armed Forces of the Philippines political role?
1. Reasons [in the constitution] for the A: Bernas: The military exercise of political
existence of the armed forces power can be justified as a last resort—when
civilian authority has lost its legitimacy.
(1) As protector of the people and the State 
(This is dangerous.)
(2) To secure the sovereignty of the State and
the integrity of the national territory.
(3) They may be called to prevent or suppress 4. Bar Question (2003) 

lawless violence, invasion or rebellion.
Q: Is the PNP covered by the same mandate
(4) All Members of the armed forces shall under Article II, Section 3?
take an oath or affirmation to uphold and
defend the Constitution. A: No. This provision is specifically addressed
to the AFP and not to the PNP, because the
2. Composition latter is separate and distinct from the former.
(Record of the Constitutional Commission,
The Armed Forces of the Philippines shall be Volume V, p. 296; Manalo v. Sistoza, 312
composed of a citizen armed force which shall SCRA 239)
undergo military training and serve as may be
provided by law. (Article XVI, Section 4) Section 4. The prime duty of the government
is to serve and protect the people. The
3. On Politics Government may call upon the people to
defend the state and, in the fulfillment thereof,
The armed forces shall be insulated from all citizens may be required, under conditions
partisan politics. No member of the military provided by law, to render personal military
shall engage directly or indirectly in any or civil service.
partisan political activity, except to vote.
(Article XVI, Section 5) Section 5. The maintenance of peace and
order, the protection of life, liberty and

Page | 45
MENDIOLA, MANILA
property, and the promotion of general C. Separation of Church and State is

welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all Reinforced by:
the people of the blessings of democracy.
7. Freedom of Religion Clause (Article III,
Section 5 is not a self-executing provision. It Section 5)  
is merely a guideline for legislation.
(Kilosbayan v. Morato) 8. Religious sect cannot be registered as a
political party (Article IX-C, Section
Right to bear arms. The right to bear arms is 2(5))  
a statutory, not a constitutional right. The
license to carry a firearm is neither a property 9. No sectoral representatives from the
nor a property right. Neither does it create a religious sector. (Article VI, Section 5
vested right. Even if it were a property right, (2))  
it cannot be considered absolute as to be
placed beyond the reach of police power. The
10. Prohibition against appropriation
maintenance of peace and order, and the
against sectarian benefit. (Article VI,
protection of the people against violence are
29(2)).  
constitutional duties of the State, and the
right to bear arms is to be construed in
connection and in harmony with these D. Exceptions
constitutional duties. (Chavez v. Romulo,
2004) 1. Churches, parsonages, etc. actually, directly
and exclusively used for religious
Section 6. The separation of Church and State purposes shall be exempt from
shall be inviolable. taxation. (Article VI, Section 28(3)).  
Rationale 2. When priest, preacher, minister or

dignitary is assigned to the armed
“Strong fences make good neighbors.” The idea forces, or any penal institution or
is to delineate boundaries between the two government orphanage or
institutions and thus avoid encroachments by leprosarium, public money may be
one against the other because of a paid to them. (Article VI, Section
misunderstanding of the limits of their 29(2))  
respective exclusive jurisdictions.
3. Optional religious instruction for public
B. Who is Prohibited from Interfering elementary and high school students.
(Article XIV, Section 3(3)).  
Doctrine cuts both ways. It is not only the
State that is prohibited from interfering in 4. Filipino ownership requirement for
purely ecclesiastical affairs; the Church is education institutions, except those
likewise barred from meddling in purely established by religious groups and
secular matters. (Cruz) mission boards. (Article XIV, Section
4(2)).  

Page | 46
MENDIOLA, MANILA
ocular inspection and removal of nuclear

arms.
STATE POLICIES  
BreakTime: sing this song while coloring
Section 7. The State shall pursue an the snowman
independent foreign policy. In its relations
with other states the paramount Do You Want to Build a Snowman?
consideration shall be national sovereignty, (Frozen)
territorial integrity, national interest, and the “Elsa?”
right to self-determination.
Gusto monggumawangtaongnyebe?
The word “relations” covers the whole gamut Tara, tayo ay maglaro
of treaties and international agreements and
Di nakitangayonnakikita
other kinds of intercourse.
Lumabaskana
Section 8. The Philippines consistent with nang di ako nag-iisa
the national interest, adopts and pursues a
policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its
territory. Malapittayo noon, di ba?
Ngayonhindina
Scope of Policy
Sana’ysabihinangdahilan.
The policy includes the prohibition not only
Gusto monggumawangtaongniyebe?
of the possession, control, and manufacture of
nuclear weapons but also nuclear arms tests. Di namankailangangtaongnyebe.
B. Exception to the Policy

“Umaliskana, Anna.”
Exception to this policy may be made by the “Pasensyana.”
political department but it must be justified
by the demands of the national interest. Gusto monggumawangtaongnyebe?
O sabulwaga’ymaglaro?
The policy does not prohibit the peaceful use
Dahilwalanakongkasama
of nuclear energy.
kausapkonaangmgalarawansadingding
C. Implication of the Policy for the
“Jan kalang Joan”
Presence of American Troops
Mejoako’ynalulungkot
Any new agreement on bases or the presence
na nag-iisangnakatitigsaorasan
of the troops, if ever there is one, must
embody the basic policy of freedom from “Elsa?”
nuclear weapons. Moreover, it would be well Alamkonanariyanka

within the power of government to demand
Mgatao’ytanongkungnasanka

Page | 47
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Payonila’ytibayanangloob
not a life lived in fear that his person and
buksanmoang pinto, pagsamoko property may be unreasonably violated by a
powerful ruler. Rather, it is a life lived with
Tayongdalawanalamang
the assurance that the government he
ikaw at ako established and consented to, will protect the
Anoanggagawinko?
security of his person and propert. Xxx”
Gusto monggumawangtaongnyebe? Third, the right to security of person is a

guarantee of protection of one’s rights by the
government.
The right to security in this 3rd sense is a

corollary of the policy that the State
“guarantees full respect for human rights”
under Sec.11, Art. II of the 1987 Constitution.
As the government is the chief guarantor of
order and security, the Constitutional
guarantee of the rights to life, liberty and
security of person is rendered ineffective if
the government does not afford protection to
these rights especially when they are under
threat. Protection includes conducting
effective investigations, organization of the
government apparatus to extend protection
to victims of extralegal killings or enforced
disappearances (or threats thereof) and/or
anonatuwakanaman ba sapinagagawamo?
their families, and bringing offenders to the

bar of justice.
Sec. 11: The State values the dignity of
every human person and guarantees full The duty to investigate must be undertaken in
respect for human right. a serious manner and not as a mere formality
preordained to be ineffective. An
investigation must have an objective and be
assumed by the State as its own legal duty,
SECRETARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE vs.
not as step taken by private interests that
MANALO DOCTRINE
depends upon the initiative of the victim or
The right to security of person is a guarantee
his family or upon their offer of proof,
of protection of one’s rights by the
without an effective search for the truth by
government.
the government.
The right to security of a person is a
The right to security of person can exist
guarantee of the secure quality of this life, viz:
independently of the right to liberty. There
“The life to which each person has a right is
need not necessarily be a deprivation of
Page | 48
MENDIOLA, MANILA
liberty for the right to security of a person to against the herein suspects: Michael dela Cruz,
be invoked. Madning dela Cruz, Puti Dela Cruz, Pula Dela
Cruz, Randy Mendoza and Rudy Mendoza as
alleged members of the Citizen Armed Forces
SECRETARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE VS. Geographical Unit (CAFGU).
MANALO October 7, 2008
The abduction was perpetrated by armed
FACTS: men who were sufficiently identified by the
The case at bar involves the rights to life, petitioners (herein respondents) to be
liberty and security in the first petition for a military personnel and CAFGU auxiliaries.
writ of amparo filed before this Court. This Raymond recalled that the six armed men
case was originally a Petition for Prohibition, who barged into his house through the rear
Injunction, and Temporary Restraining Order door were military men based on their attire
to stop herein petitioners and/or their of fatigue pants and army boots, and the
officers and agents from depriving them of CAFGU auxiliaries, namely: Michael de la Cruz,
their right to liberty and other basic rights Madning de la Cruz, Puti de la Cruz and Pula
and enjoined them from causing the arrest of de la Cruz, all members of the CAFGU and
therein petitioners, or otherwise restricting, residents of Muzon, San Ildefonso, Bulacan,
curtailing, abridging, or depriving them of and the brothers Randy Mendoza and Rudy
their right to life, liberty, and other basic Mendoza, also CAFGU members, served as
rights as guaranteed under Article III, Section lookouts during the abduction. Raymond was
1 of the 1987 Constitution. sure that three of the six military men were
Ganata, who headed the abducting team,
While the August 23, 2007 Petition was Hilario, who drove the van, and George.
pending, the Rule on the Writ of Amparo took Subsequent incidents of their long captivity,
effect on October 24, 2007. Forthwith, therein as narrated by the petitioners, validated their
petitioners filed a Manifestation and Omnibus assertion of the participation of the elements
Motion to Treat Existing Petition as Amparo of the 7th Infantry Division, Philippine Army,
Petition. On October 25, 2007, the Court and their CAFGU auxiliaries. We are
resolved to treat the August 23, 2007 Petition convinced, too, that the reason for the
as a petition under the Amparo Rule. On abduction was the suspicion that the
December 26, 2007, the Court of Appeals petitioners were either members or
rendered a decision in favor of herein sympathizers of the NPA, considering that the
respondents. Hence, this appeal. This pertains abductors were looking for Ka Bestre, who
to the abduction of RAYMOND MANALO and turned out to be Rolando, the brother of
REYNALDO MANALO who were forcibly taken petitioners. The efforts exerted by the
from their respective homes in Brgy. Buhol na Military Command to look into the abduction
Mangga, San Ildefonso, Bulacan on 14 were, at best, merely superficial. The
February 2006 by unidentified armed men investigation of the Provost Marshall of the
and thereafter were forcibly disappeared. 7th Infantry Division focused on the one-
sided version of the CAFGU auxiliaries
After the said incident, relatives of the victims involved. This one-sidedness might be due to
filed a case for Abduction in the civil court the fact that the Provost Marshall could delve
Page | 49
MENDIOLA, MANILA
only into the participation of military the Philippines and are, thus, in a position
personnel, but even then the Provost Marshall to threaten respondents’ rights to life,
should have refrained from outrightly liberty and security.” Respondents claim
exculpating the CAFGU auxiliaries he that they are under threat of being once
perfunctorily investigate. again abducted, kept captive or even killed,
which constitute a direct violation of their
Gen. Palparan’s participation in the abduction right to security of person.
was also established. At the very least, he was
aware of the petitioners’ captivity at the Elaborating on the “right to security, in
hands of men in uniform assigned to his general,” respondents point out that this right
command. In fact, he or any other officer is “often associated with liberty;” it is also seen
tendered no controversion to the firm claim as an “expansion of rights based on the
of Raymond that he (Gen. Palparan) met them prohibition against torture and cruel and
in person in a safehouse in Bulacan and told unusual punishment.” Conceding that there is
them what he wanted them and their parents no right to security expressly mentioned in
to do or not to be doing. Gen. Palparan’s Article III of the 1987 Constitution, they submit
direct and personal role in the abduction that their rights “to be kept free from torture
might not have been shown but his and from incommunicado detention and
knowledge of the dire situation of the solitary detention places fall under the general
petitioners during their long captivity at the coverage of the right to security of person
hands of military personnel under his under the writ of Amparo.” They submit that
command bespoke of his indubitable the Court ought to give an expansive
command policy that unavoidably recognition of the right to security of person in
encouraged and not merely tolerated the view of the State Policy under Article II of the
abduction of civilians without due process of 1987 Constitution which enunciates that, “The
law and without probable cause. State values the dignity of every human person
and guarantees full respect for human rights.”
We now come to the right of the respondents to In sum, respondents assert that their cause of
the privilege of the writ of amparo. There is no action consists in the threat to their right to life
quarrel that the enforced disappearance of and liberty, and a violation of their right to
both respondents Raymond and Reynaldo security.
Manalo has now passed as they have escaped
from captivity and surfaced. But while ISSUE: Whether the Petition for issuance of
respondents admit that they are no longer Writ Amparo should be granted?
in detention and are physically free, they
assert that they are not “free in every sense HELD: Yes. While the right to life under
of the word” as their “movements continue Article III, Section 1[120] guarantees
to be restricted for fear that people they essentially the right to be alive- upon which
have named in their Judicial Affidavits and the enjoyment of all other rights is
testified against (in the case of Raymond) preconditioned - the right to security of
are still at large and have not been held person is a guarantee of the secure quality of
accountable in any way. These people are this life, viz: “The life to which each person
directly connected to the Armed Forces of has a right is not a life lived in fear that his
Page | 50
MENDIOLA, MANILA
person and property may be unreasonably provides for the right to security of person,
violated by a powerful ruler. Rather, it is a life viz:
lived with the assurance that the government
he established and consented to, will protect 1. Everyone has the right to liberty and
the security of his person and property. The security of person. No one shall be subjected
ideal of security in life and property… to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall
pervades the whole history of man. It touches be deprived of his liberty except on such
every aspect of man’s existence.” In a broad grounds and in accordance with such
sense, the right to security of person procedure as are established by law.
“emanates in a person’s legal and emphasis supplied) The Philippines is a
uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, signatory to both the UDHR and the ICCPR. In
his body, his health, and his reputation. It the context of Section 1 of the Amparo Rule,
includes the right to exist, and the right to “freedom from fear” is the right and any
enjoyment of life while existing, and it is threat to the rights to life, liberty or security
invaded not only by a deprivation of life but is the actionable wrong. Fear is a state of
also of those things which are necessary to mind, a reaction; threat is a stimulus, a cause
the enjoyment of life according to the nature, of action. Fear caused by the same stimulus
temperament, and lawful desires of the can range from being baseless to well-
individual.” A closer look at the right to founded as people react differently. The
security of person would yield various degree of fear can vary from one person to
permutations of the exercise of this right. another with the variation of the prolificacy of
their imagination, strength of character or
First, the right to security of person is past experience with the stimulus.
“freedom from fear.” In its “whereas” clauses,
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Thus, in the amparo context, it is more correct
(UDHR) enunciates that “a world in which to say that the “right to security” is actually
human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech the “freedom from threat.” Viewed in this
and belief and freedom from fear and want light, the “threatened with violation” Clause in
has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration the latter part of Section 1 of the Amparo Rule
of the common people.” emphasis supplied) is a form of violation of the right to security
Some scholars postulate that “freedom from mentioned in the earlier part of the provision.
fear” is not only an aspirational principle, but
essentially an individual international human Second, the right to security of person is a
right.[124] It is the “right to security of guarantee of bodily and psychological
person” as the word “security” itself means integrity or security. Article III, Section II of
“freedom from fear.” the 1987 Constitution guarantees that, as a
general rule, one’s body cannot be searched
Article 3 of the UDHR provides, viz: Everyone or invaded without a search warrant. Physical
has the right to life, liberty and security of injuries inflicted in the context of extralegal
person.[126] emphasis supplied) In killings and enforced disappearances
furtherance of this right declared in the UDHR, constitute more than a search or invasion of
Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on the body. It may constitute dismemberment,
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) also physical disabilities, and painful physical
Page | 51
MENDIOLA, MANILA
intrusion. As the degree of physical injury this case, the claimant, who was lawfully
increases, the danger to life itself escalates. detained, alleged that the state authorities
Notably, in criminal law, physical injuries had physically abused him in prison, thereby
constitute a crime against persons because violating his right to security of person.
they are an affront to the bodily integrity or Article 5(1) of the European Convention on
security of a person. Human Rights provides, viz: “Everyone has
Physical torture, force, and violence are a the right to liberty and security of person. No
severe invasion of bodily integrity. When one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the
employed to vitiate the free will such as to following cases and in accordance with a
force the victim to admit, reveal or fabricate procedure prescribed by law ...” (emphases
incriminating information, it constitutes an supplied) Article 3, on the other hand,
invasion of both bodily and psychological provides that “(n)o one shall be subjected to
integrity as the dignity of the human person torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment
includes the exercise of free will. Article III, or punishment.” Although the application
Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution more failed on the facts as the alleged ill-treatment
specifically proscribes bodily and was found baseless, the ECHR relied heavily
psychological invasion, viz: on the concept of security in holding, viz:
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat or ...the applicant did not bring his allegations to
intimidation, or any other means which the attention of domestic authorities at the
vitiate the free will shall be used against him time when they could reasonably have been
(any person under investigation for the expected to take measures in order to ensure
commission of an offense). Secret detention his security and to investigate the
places, solitary, incommunicado or other circumstances in question.
similar forms of detention are prohibited.
... the authorities failed to ensure his security
Parenthetically, under this provision, threat in custody or to comply with the procedural
and intimidation that vitiate the free will - obligation under Art.3 to conduct an effective
although not involving invasion of bodily investigation into his allegations.[131]
integrity - nevertheless constitute a violation (emphasis supplied). The U.N. Committee on
of the right to security in the sense of the Elimination of Discrimination against
“freedom from threat” as afore-discussed. Women has also made a statement that the
Article III, Section 12 guarantees freedom protection of the bodily integrity of
from dehumanizing abuses of persons under women may also be related to the right to
investigation for the commission of an offense. security and liberty, viz:
Victims of enforced disappearances who are
not even under such investigation should all …gender-based violence which impairs or
the more be protected from these nullifies the enjoyment by women of human
degradations. An overture to an rights and fundamental freedoms under
interpretation of the right to security of general international law or under specific
person as a right against torture was made by human rights conventions is discrimination
the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) within the meaning of article 1 of the
in the recent case of Popov v. Russia.[130] In Convention (on the Elimination of All Forms
Page | 52
MENDIOLA, MANILA
of Discrimination Against Women). These A: Amparo libertad for the protection of

rights and freedoms include . . . the right to personal freedom equivalent to the habeas
liberty and security of person. corpus writ;
Third, the right to security of person is a Amparo contra leyes for the judicial review
guarantee of protection of one’s rights by the of the constitutionality of statutes;
government. In the context of the writ of
amparo, this right is built into the guarantees Amparo casacion for the judicial review of
of the right to life and liberty under Article III, the constitutionality and legality of a judicial
Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution and the decision;
right to security of person (as freedom from
threat and guarantee of bodily and Amparo administrativo for the judicial
psychological integrity) under Article III, review of administrative actions;
Section 2. The right to security of person in
this third sense is a corollary of the policy Amparo agrario for the protection of
that the State “guarantees full respect for peasants’ rights derived from the agrarian
human rights” under Article II, Section 11 reform process.
of the 1987 Constitution. As the
government is the chief guarantor of order Nachura, 2015 ed.:
and security, the Constitutional guarantee An order for the eviction of squatters and the
of the rights to life, liberty and security of demolition of stalls, sari-sari stores and
person is rendered ineffective if carinderias of the private respondents
government does not afford protection to located at the People’s park at North Edsa
these rights especially when they are does not fall within the compartment of
under threat. Protection includes “human rights violations involving civil and
conducting effective investigations, political rights” intended by the Constitution.
organization of the government apparatus (Simon v. CHR, GR No. 100150, January 5,
to extend protection to victims of 1994)
extralegal killings or enforced
disappearances (or threats thereof) Sec. 12: The State recognizes the sanctity of
and/or their families, and bringing family life and shall protect and strengthen
offenders to the bar of justice. the family as a basic autonomous social
institution. It shall equally protect the life
of the mother and the life of the unborn
Gabriel: from conception. The natural and primary
Q: What is the 1st case of Writ of Amparo? right and duty of parents in the rearing of
A: Manalo the youth for civic efficiency and the
development of moral character shall
Q: From where did the writ of Amparo receive the support of the government.
originate?
A: Mexico IMBONG V. OCHOA
G.R. NO.204819, APRIL 8, 2014
Q: 5 purposes of the writ:
Page | 53
MENDIOLA, MANILA
womb”, Sec. 3.01(a) of the IRR would pave the

Doctrine: The intent of the framers of the way for the approval of contraceptives that
Constitution for protecting the life of the may harm or destroy the life of the unborn
unborn child was to prevent the legislature from conception/fertilization. This violates
from passing a law that would allow abortion. Sec. 12, Art. II, of the Constitution. For the
same reason, the definition of contraceptives
Facts: 14 petitions and 2 petitions-in- under Sec. 3.01(j) of the IRR, which also uses
intervention were filed in Court assailing the the term “primarily” must be struck down.
constitutionality of R.A. 10354, otherwise
known as the Responsible Parenthood and Sec. 7 of the RH Law which excludes parental
Reproductive Health Act of 2012, or the RH consent in cases where a minor undergoing a
Law, for short. procedure is already a parent or has had
miscarriage is anti-family and violates
Issue: Whether the law violates the right of Sec.12, Art.II (1987 Constitution). In
an unborn child as guaranteed under Sec. 12, addition, the portion of Sec.23(a)(ii) which
Art. II, of the Constitution. reads: “in the case of minors, the written
consent of parents or legal guardian or, in
Held: NO. their absence, persons exercising parental
authority or next-f-kin shall be required only
The framers of the Constitution intended for: in elective surgical procedures” is invalid, as it
“conception” to refer to the denies the right of parental authority in cases
moment of “fertilization”; where what is involved is “non-surgical
the protection of the unborn procedures”.
child upon fertilization.
The SC recognized 2 exceptions:
They did not intend to ban all contraceptives 1. A minor may receive information, as
for being unconstitutional; only those that kill opposed to procedures, about family
or destroy the fertilized ovum would be planning services. Parents are not
prohibited. Contraceptives that actually deprived of parental guidance and
prevent the union of the male sperm and the control over their minor child in this
female ovum, and those that similarly take situation and may assist her in
action before fertilization should be deemed deciding whether to accept or reject
non-abortive, and thus, constitutionally information received.
permissible. Nachura 2. In life-threatening procedures. The
life of the minor who has already
The RH Law actually prohibits abortion. suffered a miscarriage and that of the
spouse should not be put at grave risk
However, the authors of the IRR gravely simply because of the lack of consent.
abused their office when they redefined the Ibid.
meaning of abortifacient by using the term
“primarily”. Recognizing as abortifacient only Sec.12, Art.II, places more importance on the
those that “primarily induce abortion or the role of parents in the development of their
destruction of a fetus inside the mother’s children, with theuse of the term “primary”.
Page | 54
MENDIOLA, MANILA
The right of parents in the upbringing of the examination, the bail imposed was clearly
youth is superior to that of the State. Ibid. excessive. It was in the amount of P16,000.00,
the alleged robbery of a TV set being imputed
Gabriel: to petitioner. It was later ascertained that the
Q: When does life begin? petitioner is a seventeen year old minor
A: Life begins at fertilization. Medical sources entitled to the protection and benefits of the
also support the view that conception begins child and Youth Welfare Code.
at fertilization.
ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner’s
Q: meeting of sperm and egg, is that a human application for release should be granted.
life? HELD:
A: 46 chromosomes, which is origin in every Yes. As a minor, he could be provisionally
human being, hence, it is considered as released on recognizance in the discretion of
human life. But human life is different from a court. This Court should, whenever
civil personality. appropriate, give vitality and force to the
Youth and Welfare Code, which is an
implementation of this specific
constitutional mandate. "The State
VIRTUOSO VS. MUNICIPAL JUDGE recognizes the vital role of the youth in
82 SCRA 191, 1978 nation-building and shall promote their
Doctrine: A minor could be provisionally physical, intellectual, and social well-
released on recognizance, in keeping with the being."
constitutional mandate that the “State
recognizes the vital role of the youth in Another Digest:
nation-building and shall promote their
physical, intellectual, and social well-being.” Facts: Francisco Virtouso, Jr., a minor, 17 y/o,
was charged with robbery of a TV Set. He filed
an application for the writ of habeas corpus
VIRTUOSO V. MUNICIPAL JUDGE because respondent Municipal judge of
G.R. NO. L-47841, MARCH 21, 1978 Mariveles, Bataan, failed to meet the strict
standard required by the constitution to
FACTS: ascertain whether there was a probable cause
Petitioner Francisco Virtouso, Jr. filed an and alleged that the bail imposed was clearly
application for the writ of habeas corpus on excessive.
the ground that the preliminary examination
which led to the issuance of a warrant of It was ascertained that Virtouso is a 17y/o
arrest against him was a useless formality as minor entitled to the protection and benefits
respondent Municipal Judge failed to meet the of the Child and Youth Welfare Code, a
strict standard required by the Constitution youthful offender being defined therein as
to ascertain whether there was a probable “one who is over nine years but under 18
cause. He likewise alleged that aside from the years of age at the time of the commission of
constitutional infirmity that tainted the the offense.” As such, he could be
procedure followed in the preliminary
Page | 55
MENDIOLA, MANILA
provisionally released on recognizance in the

discretion of the court. Why do we say that the family is a basic
Autonomous social institution?
Issue: May petitioner Virtouso, Jr., being a
minor/youthful offender, be provisionally The principle of autonomy is learned and
released based on the constitutional mandate practiced at home before it is learned in
of Art. 2, Sec.12? school. It is a basic political unit of our
society. The father, as the head of the family is
Held: YES. the President of the home, and the mother, is
Pursuant to Sec.191 of P.D. No. 603, the court the Vice-President who takes over the
resolved that Virtouso, being a 17 year old governance in case of death or incapacity of
minor, should be released. Additionally, it her husband. The children and the household
held that whenever appropriate, courts are the members of the family, who are duty-
should give vitality and force to the Youth and bound to follow the rules at home.
Welfare Code, which is an implementation of
this specific constitutional mandate: “The The family is a social institution because it
State recognizes the vital role of the youth in forms part of the community. Without a
nation-building and shall promote their family or a group of families, the community
physical, intellectual, and social well-being.” has no one to depend on for any project it
wishes to carry out. The government in every
Gabriel: community is the agency or instrumentality
-Can the Congress amend the law and make it through which the wishes of the people are
the union between the 2 persons? made known and implemented. All the
-Concept of family may evolve and change. governments, taken together, form part of the
Republic of the Philippines.
-What is the principle of double effect?
-As long as no deliberate act in saving the What is the legal meaning and purpose of
life of the preferred. the protection guaranteed for the unborn?
First, it is NOT an assertion that the unborn is

NOTES: a LEGAL person. Second, this is not an
THREE (3) Responsibilities of the State in assertion that the life of the unborn is placed
connection with the constitutional exactly on the level of the life of a mother.
guarantee:
a.it shall protect and strengthen the family as When necessary to save the life of the mother,
a basic autonomous social institution. the life of the unborn may be sacrificed; but
b.it shall equally protect the life of the mother not when the purpose is merely to save the
and the life of the unborn from conception. other from emotional suffering, for which
c.the natural and primary right and duty of other remedies must be sought, or to spare a
the parents in rearing the youth for civic child from the life of poverty, which can be
efficiency and development of moral attended to by welfare institutions.
character shall receive the support of the
Government.
Page | 56
MENDIOLA, MANILA
What is protection made to begin from the consent of her natural parents for a U.S.
time of CONCEPTION? visa application. However, the
respondents refused to give it, so, they left
The overriding purpose in asserting that without the child. When they came back,
protection begins from the time of conception the couple refused to return Shirley to
is to prevent the State from adopting in a US them, neither did the couple allow them to
case Roe v. Wade which liberalizes abortion visit Shirley, prompting petitioners to file
laws up to 6th month of pregnancy by a petition for habeas corpus. After losing
allowing abortion anytime during the first 6th the case, they appealed to the Court of
months of pregnancy provided it can be done Appeals, which reversed the decision of
without danger to the mother. The the CFI, hence, this petition for review.
understanding that life begins at conception,
although the definition of conception can be a In the SC, the natural parents were
matter for science to specify. awarded their child, but when the
Albano: judgment was being executed, the child
Q: Primarily, whose right and duty is the manifested that she would kill herself if
rearing of the youth for civic efficiency she would be taken away from the
under the constitution? petitioners.
A: It is the natural and primary right and duty
of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic A: The manifestation of the child that she
efficiency and development of moral would kill herself or run away from home if
character. These shall receive support of the she should be taken away from the
government. Such duty is derived from the petitioners and forced to live with her natural
very nature of man, inherent in him as a parents, made using the hearings on the
moral and human personality. petitioner’s motion to set aside the writ of
execution and reiterated in her letters to the
The selection of means, methods, and member’s of the Court is a circumstance that
institutions that the parents might select in would make the execution of the judgment
educating the children cannot be interfered inequitable, unfair, and unjust, if not illegal.
with by the State so long as they are not Article 213 of the Family Code provides that
directly or indirectly condemnable as in all questions relating to the care, custody,
subversive or inimical to the interests of the education and property of a child, the latter’s
State. welfare is paramount. This means that the
best interest of the child can override
procedural rules and even the rights of the
Q: Shirley Salumbides was born of the parents to the custody of their children. Since,
couple Maria Lourdes Santos and in this case, the very life and existence of the
SixtoSalumbides. After her birth, she was minor is at stake and the child is in an age
given to the petitioners, Horacio Luna and when she can exercise an intelligent choice,
Liberty Hizon-Luna. The latter showered the courts can do no less than respect, enforce
the child with love and before September and give meaning and substance to that
1980, they decided to take her to the choice and uphold her interest and right to
United States, hence, they needed the
Page | 57
MENDIOLA, MANILA
live in an atmosphere conducive to her implementation of the provisions of Sec.13,

physical, moral and intellectual development. Art. II of the Constitution.
The threat may be proven empty, but she has
a right to a wholesome family life that will
provide her with care, love, and
understanding, guidance and counseling, and
moral and material security. But, what if the
threat is for real. (Luna v. CA. 137 SCRA 7)
Sec.14: The State recognizes the role of
Sec.13: The State recognizes the vital role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure
the youth in nation-building and shall the fundamental equality before the law of
promote and protect their physical, moral, women and men.
spiritual, intellectual and social well-being.
It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism The general idea underlying this principle is
and nationalism, and encourage their for the law to ignore sex where sex is not a
involvement in public and civic affairs.” relevant factor in determining rights and
duties.
Gabriel:
Youth-in-nation building Gabriel:
-women in nation-building
Q: In a criminal case against a 17-year old -VAWC- special protection to women
minor, the Municipal Judge of Mariveles, -Equality before the law does not mean
Bataan, issued a warrant of arrest, having identity or conformity of right
conducted the preliminary investigation. -merely directory, not self-executing.
The judge fixed the bail at P16,000.00. The
Court contending that there were
infirmities in the preliminary Nachura:
investigation and that the bail fixed was In Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Co.
excessive. The judge, however, lowered v. NLRC, G.R.No. 118978, May 23, 1997, the SC
the bail even before the SC could act on the held that petitioner’s policy of not accepting
case. or considering as disqualified from work any
woman worker who contracts marriage, runs
A: While the SC found no infirmities in the afoul of the test of, and the right against,
preliminary investigation, the Court, however, discrimination, which is guaranteed all
noted that the minor child was a youthful women workers under the Constitution.
offender and under the provisions of P.D. 603, While a requirement that a woman employee
sec.191 of the same, he should have been must remain unmarried maybe justified as a
released to the custody of his parents and “bona fide occupational qualification” where
counsel who were qualified to have custody the particular requirement of the job would
over him. He did not have to put bail. The demand the same, discrimination against
courts should give vitality and force to the married women cannot be adopted by the
Youth and Child Welfare Code, which is an employer as a general principle.

Page | 58
MENDIOLA, MANILA
properly pertains to the legislative or

Sec.15: The State shall protect and promote executive branches of the government.
the right to health of the people and instill
health consciousness among them. ISSUE: Should the complaint be given due
course?
Sec.16: The State shall protect and advance
the right of the people to a balanced and HELD: YES.
healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm The complaint focuses on one specific
and harmony of nature. fundamental right – the right to a balanced
and healthful ecology.
OPOSA VS. FACTORAN While the right to a balanced and healthful

DOCTRINE: The right to a balanced and ecology is to be found under the Declaration
healthful ecology need not [even] be written of Principles and State Policies and not under
in the Constitution for it is assumed, like the Bill of Rights, it does not follow that it is
other civil and political rights guaranteed in less important than any of the civil and
the Bill of Rights, to exist from the inception political rights enumerated in the latter. Such
of mankind and it is an issue of a right belongs to a different category of
transcendental importance with rights altogether for it concerns nothing less
intergenerational implications. Such right than self-preservation and self-
carries with it the correlative duty to refrain perpetuation – aptly and fittingly stressed by
from impairing the environment. the petitioners—the advancement of which
may even be said to predate all governments
and constitution. Xxx the day would not be
OPOSA V. FACTORAN, G.R. NO. 204819, too far when all else would be lost not only
APRIL 8, 2014 for the present generation, but also for those
to come --- generations which stand to inherit
FACTS: Petitioners are all minors duly nothing but parched earth incapable of
represented and joined by their respective sustaining life.
parents. They instituted the present
complaint, in behalf of their generation as Thus, the right of OPOSA, et al., (and all those
well as generations yet unborn, as a they represent) to a balanced and healthful
taxpayers’ class suit, alleging that they are all ecology is as clear as the DENR’s duty --- to
citizens of the Republic of the Philippines, protect and advance the said right.
taxpayers, and entitled to the full benefit, use
and enjoyment of the natural resource Another Digest:
treasure that is the country’s virgin tropical
forests. FACTS:
The petitioner, all minors and alleges that the
Sec. Factoran moved to dismiss the complaint plaintiffs "are all citizens of the Republic of
on the grounds that: 1) Oposa, et al., has no the Philippines, taxpayers, and entitled to the
cause of action against him and that 2) the full benefit, use and enjoyment of the natural
issue raised is a political question which resource treasure that is the country's virgin
Page | 59
MENDIOLA, MANILA
tropical rainforests, duly joined and unites with the right to health which is
represented by their parents instituted a provided for in SEC. 15 of Article 2.
complained as a taxpayers’ class suit and
prayed for the rendering of judgment While the right to a balanced and healthful
ordering defendant Factoran, then Secretary ecology is to be found under the Declaration of
of the DENR, his agents, representatives and Principles and State Policies and not under the
other persons acting in his behalf to cancel all Bill of Rights, it does not follow that it is less
existing timber license agreements in the important than any of the civil and political
country and to cease and desist form rights enumerated in the latter. Such a right
receiving, accepting, processing, renewing or belongs to a different category of rights
approving new timber license agreements. altogether for it concerns nothing less than
The defendant moved for the dismissal of the self-preservation and self-perpetuation -- aptly
complaint on two grounds: and fittingly stressed by the petitioners -- the
advancement of which may even be said to
1) lack of cause of action against him and predate all governments and constitutions. As
2) the issue raised was a political question a matter of fact, these basic rights need not
which properly pertains to the legislative or even be written in the Constitution for they are
executive branches. The trial court dismissed assumed to exist from the inception of
the complaint based on the aforementioned humankind. If they are now explicitly
grounds. Thus, the petitioners filed a special mentioned in the fundamental charter, it is
civil action for certiorari seeking to rescind because of the well-founded fear of its
and set aside. framers that unless the rights to a balanced
and healthful ecology and to health are
ISSUE: Whether or not the said petitioners mandated as state policies by the Constitution
have a cause of action to prevent the itself, thereby highlighting their continuing
misappropriation or impairment of the importance and imposing upon the state a
Philippine rainforests and have the defendant solemn obligation to preserve the first and
stop form receiving, processing and protect and advance the second, the day would
approving timber license agreements. not be too far when all else would be lost not
only for the present generation, but also for
HELD: those to come – generations which stand to
Yes. The petitioners have a cause of action. inherit nothing but parched earth
The complaint focuses on one specific incapable of sustaining life.
fundamental legal right-the right to a
balanced and healthful ecology which, for the The right to a balanced and healthful ecology
first time in our constitutional history, is carries with it the correlative duty to refrain
solemnly incorporated in the fundamental law. from impairing the environment. The said
Section 16, Article II of the 1987 Constitution right implies, among many other things, the
explicitly provides that the State shall protect judicious management and conservation of
and advance the right of the people to a the country's forests. E.O. No.192 and the
balanced and healthful ecology in accord with Administrative Code of 1987 have set the
the rhythm and harmony of nature. This right objectives which serve as the bases for policy
formulation and have defined the powers and
Page | 60
MENDIOLA, MANILA
functions of the DENR, the primary issued an Order, through which it asked the
government agency for the proper use and PNP to assist in prohibiting that entry of all
development of the countries natural garbage dump tracks into the dumpsite. This
resources. The right of the petitioners and all prompted Caloocan City Government to file a
they represent to a balanced and healthful complaint with the RTC.
ecology is as clear as the DENR’s duty to
protect and advance the said right. A denial or ISSUE: May the LLDA issue a Cease and Desist
violation of that right by the owner who has Order?
the correlative duty or obligation to respect
or protect the same gives rise to a cause of HELD: YES.
action. While it is a fundamental rule that an
administrative agency has only such powers
as are expressly granted to it by law, it is
LAGUNA LAKE DEVELOPMNENT likewise a settled rule that an administrative
AUTHORITY VS COURT OF APPEALS agency has also such powers as are
DOCTRINE: Pacta sunt servanda. The LLDA necessarily implied in the exercise of its
may validly issue an Order for the protection express powers.
of the environment and citizen’s health given
that the Philippies is a party to the Universal The immediate response to the demands of
Declaration of Human Rights and the Alma the “necessities of protecting vital public
Conference Declaration of 1978, which interests” gives vitality to the statement on
recognize health as a fundamental human ecology embodied in the Declaration of
right. Principles and State Policies or the 1987
Constitution.
Being constitutionally guaranteed, the right of

LAGUNA LAKE DEV’T AUTHORITY V. CA every person carries the correlative duty of
G.R. NO. 110120, MARCH 16, 1994 non-impairment.
FACTS: Task Force Camarin Dumpsite of Our

Lady of Lourdes Parish, Barangay Camarin, Another digest:
Caloocan City, filed a letter-complaint with
the Laguna Lake Development Authority FACTS:
(LLDA) seeking to stop the operation of an The Task Force Camarin Dumpsite of Our
open garbage dumpsite in the area due to its Lady of Lourdes Parish, Barangay Camarin,
harmful effects on the health of the residents Caloocan City, filed a letter-complaint with
and the possibility of pollution of the water the petitioner, seeking to stop the operation
content of the surrounding area. of the open garbage dumpsite in Tala Estate,
Barangay Camarin, Caloocan City due to its
After finding that the dumpsites were harmful effects on the health of the residents
maintained without the necessary certificate and the possibility of pollution of the water
and clearance, and that the water collected content of the surrounding area. The LLDA
were contaminated with bacteria, LLDA conducted an on-site investigation,
Page | 61
MENDIOLA, MANILA
monitoring and test sampling of the leachate City with due regard and adequate provisions
that seeps from said dumpsite to the nearby for environmental management and control,
creek which is a tributary of the Marilao River. preservation of the quality of human life and
The LLDA Legal and Technical personnel ecological systems, and the prevention of
found that the City Government of Caloocan undue ecological disturbances, deterioration
was maintaining an open dumpsite at the and pollution. Under RA 4850 it authorizes
Camarin area without first securing an LLDA to “make, alter or modify orders
Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) requiring the discontinuance of pollution.”
from the Environmental Management Bureau
(EMB) of the Department of Environment and Assuming arguendo that the authority to
Natural Resources, and clearance from LLDA issue a "cease and desist order" were not
as required under Republic Act No. 4850, 5 as expressly conferred by law, there is
amended by Presidential Decree No. 813 and jurisprudence enough to the effect that the
Executive Order No. 927 rule granting such authority need not
necessarily be express. While it is a
The LLDA issued a Cease and Desist Order fundamental rule that an administrative
ordering the City Government of Caloocan, agency has only such powers as are
Metropolitan Manila Authority, their expressly granted to it by law, it is likewise
contractors, and other entities, to completely a settled rule that an administrative agency
halt, stop and desist from dumping any form has also such powers as are necessarily
or kind of garbage and other waste matter at implied in the exercise of its express powers.
the In the exercise, therefore, of its express
Camarin dumpsite. However, the City powers under its charter as a regulatory and
Government of Caloocan filed with the RTC an quasi-judicial body with respect to pollution
action for the declaration of nullity of the cases in the Laguna Lake region, the
cease and desist order with prayer for the authority of the LLDA to issue a "cease and
issuance of a writ of injunction. LLDA then desist order" is, perforce, implied.
filed a motion of Dismiss on the ground that Otherwise, it may well be reduced to a
their order was merely subject to review of "toothless" paper agency.
the CA and not the RTC.
In this connection, it must be noted that in
ISSUE: Pollution Adjudication Board v. Court of
Whether or not the LLDA have the power and Appeals, et al., 27 the Court ruled that the
authority to issue a cease and desist order Pollution Adjudication Board (PAB) has the
power to issue an ex-parte cease and desist
HELD: order when there is prima facie evidence of
Yes. The LLDA, as a specialized administrative an establishment exceeding the allowable
agency, is specifically mandated under standards set by the anti-pollution laws of the
Republic Act No. 4850 and its amendatory country. The ponente, Associate Justice
laws to carry out and make effective the Florentino P. Feliciano, declared:
declared national policy of promoting and "Ex parte cease and desist orders are
accelerating the development and balanced permitted by law and regulations in
growth of the Laguna Lake including Caloocan situations like that here presented precisely
Page | 62
MENDIOLA, MANILA
because stopping the continuous discharge of It is to be borne in mind that the Philippines
pollutive and untreated effluents into the is party to the Universal Declaration of
rivers and other inland waters of the Human Rights and the Alma Conference
Philippines cannot be made to wait until Declaration of 1978 which recognize health
protracted litigation over the ultimate as a fundamental human right. The
correctness or propriety of such issuance, therefore, of the cease and desist
orders has run its full course, including order by the LLDA, as a practical matter of
multiple and sequential appeals such as those procedure under the circumstances of the
which Solar has taken, which of course may case, is a proper exercise of its power and
take several were enacted and promulgated authority under its charter and its
in the exercise of that pervasive, sovereign amendatory laws. Had the cease and desist
power to protect the safety, health, and order issued by the LLDA been complied
general welfare and comfort of the public, as with by the City Government of Caloocan as
well as the protection of plant and animal life, it did in the first instance, no further legal
commonly designated as the police power. It steps would have been necessary.
is a constitutional commonplace that the
ordinary requirements of procedural due The charter of LLDA, Republic Act No. 4850,
process yield to the necessities of protecting as amended, instead of conferring upon the
vital public interests like those here involved, LLDA the means of directly enforcing such
through the exercise of police power. . . ." orders, has provided under its Section 4 (d)
the power to institute "necessary legal
The immediate response to the demands of proceeding against any person who shall
"the necessities of protecting vital public commence to implement or continue
interests" gives vitality to the statement on implementation of any project, plan or
ecology embodied in the Declaration of program within the Laguna de Bay region
Principles and State Policies or the 1987 without previous clearance from the LLDA."
Constitution. Article II, Section 16 which
provides: Clearly, said provision was designed to invest
the LLDA with sufficiently broad powers in
"The State shall protect and advance the the regulation of all projects initiated in the
right of the people to a balanced and Laguna Lake region, whether by the
healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm government or the private sector, insofar as
and harmony of nature." the implementation of these projects is
concerned. It was meant to deal with cases
As a constitutionally guaranteed right of which might possibly arise where decisions
every person, it carries the correlative duty or orders issued pursuant to the exercise of
of non-impairment. This is but in such broad powers may not be obeyed,
consonance with the declared policy of the resulting in the thwarting of its laudable
state "to protect and promote the right to objective. To meet such contingencies, then
health of the people and instill health the writs of mandamus and injunction which
consciousness among them." are beyond the power of the LLDA to issue,
may be sought from the proper courts.

Page | 63
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Gabriel: to health are mandated as State policies by

-pactasuntservanda = good faith the Constitution itself, the day would not be
too far when all else would be lost not only
-Doctrine of necessary implication = grant of for the present generation, but also for the
express right carries with it other rights in future generations which stand to inherit
order to discharge it functions. nothing but parched earth incapable of
sustaining life. (Oposa v. Factoran)
-Does sec.16 need constitutional
conferment? Q: What does the right to a balanced and
-NO. they are inherent in every human healthful ecology imply? Explain.
being.
A: The right to a balanced and healthful
NOTES: ecology carries with it, the correlative duty to
-Does sec.16 provide for enforceable refrain from impairing the environment. It
rights? implies the judicious management and
-YES. This provision, as worded, recognizes conservation of the country’s forests, else the
an enforceable right. Hence, appeal to it has ecological, environmental balance would be
been recognized as conferring “standing” on irreversibly disrupted. It is what is known as
minors to challenge logging policies of the the inter-generational responsibility of the
government. (Oposav. Factoran) present generation to preserve the forests.
Albano:
Q: Is there a need to protect such right on Sec.17: The State shall give priority to
the protection of the people’s right to a education, science and technology, arts,
healthful and balanced ecology in the culture and sports, to foster patriotism and
Constitution? Why? nationalism, accelerate social progress,
and promote total human liberation and
A: None, because it concerns the right of self- development.
preservation and self-perpetuation, the
advancement of which predated all It was held that Sec.5, Art. XIV, which
governments, having assumed their existence provides for the highest budgetary priority to
from the inception of mankind. (Oposa v. education is merely directory; the hands of
Factoran) Congress cannot be so hamstrung as to
deprive it of the power to respond to the
imperatives of national interests and the
attainment of other state policies and
objectives. [Guingona v. Carague, G.R. No.
Q: Why did the constitutional commission 94571, April 22, 1991, Philconsa v. Enriquez,
provide for the same? supra] Nachura
A: This is due to the well-founded fear of the While it s true that this Court has upheld the
framers of the Constitution that unless the constitutional right of every citizen to select a
rights to a balanced and healthful ecology and
Page | 64
MENDIOLA, MANILA
profession or course of study subject to fair, that the hand of Congress is hamstrung as to
reasonable and equitable admission and deprive of the power to respond to the
academic requirements, the exercise of this imperatives of national interest and for the
right may be regulated pursuant to the police attainment of other State policies and
power of the State to safeguard health, objectives. It is not only a matter of honor and
morals, peace, education, order, safety and to the credit standing of the country to
general welfare. Thus, persons who desire to appropriate funds for debt servicing.
engage in the learned professions requiring (Guingona v. Carague, G.R. No. 94571, April 22,
scientific or technical knowledge may be 1991)
required to take an examination as a
prerequisite to engaging in their chosen
careers. This regulation assumes particular Sec.18: The State affirms labor as a primary
pertinence in the field of medicine, in order to social economic force. It shall protect the
protect the public from the potentially deadly rights of workers and promote their
effects of incompetence and ignorance. [PRC welfare.
v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 144681, June 21, 2004]
Ibid. -What is meant when labor is called a
primary social and economic force?
Gabriel:
-this provision is not self-executing. merely -It means that the human factor has primacy
standards in appropriating the funds. over non-human factors in production.
Albano: -What does protection to labor include?

Q: In what way has the State implemented
the policy of giving priority to education? -Protection to labor does not indicate
promotion of employment alone. Under the
A: Congress enacted R.A 6655 mandating free welfare and social justice provisions of the
elementary and high school education. Constitution, the promotion of full
employment, while desirable, CANNOT take a
Q: Senator Guingona questioned the backseat to the government’s constitutional
constitutionality of the law providing for duty to provide mechanisms for the
automatic appropriation of funds for debt protection of our workers, local or overseas.
servicing, stating among others that the In reference to the recurring problems faced
Congress shall assign the highest by our overseas workers, what concerns the
budgetary priority to education. Is the Constitution more paramount is that such an
contention correct? Why? employment be, above all, decent, just and
humane.
A: NO. While the Constitution mandates that
the Congress shall assign the highest It is bad enough that the country has to send
budgetary priority to education to attract and its sons and daughters to strange lands
retain its rightful shares of the best talents, because it cannot satisfy their employment
yet, the Philippines has to respect needs at home. Under these circumstances,
international commitments. It does not follow
Page | 65
MENDIOLA, MANILA
the Government is duty bound to provide President’s ratification of the international

them adequate protection, personally, and Agreement establishing the World Trade
economically, while away fro home. Organization (WTO). They argued that the
WTO Agreement violates the mandate of the
1987 Constitution to “develop a self-reliant
Sec.19: The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economy
and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos . . . (to) give
effectively controlled by Filipinos. preference to qualified Filipinos (and to)
promote the preferential use of Filipino labor,
domestic materials and locally produced
TANADA vs ANGARA DOCTRINE: goods.” Further, they contended that the
World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement “national treatment” and “parity provisions”
does not violate Sec.19, Art. II, nor Secs. 10 of the WTO Agreement “place nationals and
and 12, Art. XII, which require the pursuit of a products of member countries on the same
trade policy that “serves the eneral welfare footing as Filipinos and local products,” in
and utilizes all forms and arrangements of contravention of the “Filipino First” policy of
exchange on the basis of equality and our Constitution, and render meaningless the
reciprocity”. phrase “effectively controlled by Filipinos.”
The provisions of Art. II are not intended to

be self-executing principles ready for ISSUE: Does the 1987 Constitution prohibit
enforcement through the courts. They do not our country from participating in worldwide
embody judicially enforceable rights, but trade liberalization and economic
guidelines for legislation. The reasons for globalization and from integrating into a
denying cause of action to an alleged global economy that is liberalized,
infringement of broad constitutional deregulated and privatized?
principles are sourced from basic
HELD:NO, the 1987 Constitution DOES NOT
considerations of due process and lack of
prohibit our country from participating in
judicial authority to wade into the
worldwide trade liberalization and economic
unchartered ocean of social and economic
globalization and from integrating into a
policy. Nachura
global economy that is liberalized,
deregulated and privatized.
There are enough balancing provisions in the

Constitution to allow the Senate to ratify the
TANADA V. ANGARA Philippine concurrence in the WTO
G.R. NO. 118295, MAY 2, 1997 Agreement.
While the Constitution indeed mandates a

FACTS: Petitioners Senators Tañada, et al. bias in favor of Filipino goods, services, labor
questioned the constitutionality of the and enterprises, at the same time, it
concurrence by the Philippine Senate of the recognizes the need for business exchange

Page | 66
MENDIOLA, MANILA
with the rest of the world on the bases of unconstitutional as in fact they are rules of
equality and reciprocity and limits protection equality and reciprocity that apply to all WTO
of Filipino enterprises only against foreign members. Aside from envisioning a trade
competition and trade practices that are policy based on “equality and reciprocity,” the
unfair. In other words, the Constitution did fundamental law encourages industries that
not intend to pursue an isolationist policy. It are “competitive in both domestic and foreign
did not shut out foreign investments, goods markets,” thereby demonstrating a clear
and services in the development of the policy against a sheltered domestic trade
Philippine economy. While the Constitution environment, but one in favor of the gradual
does not encourage the unlimited entry of development of robust industries that can
foreign goods, services and investments into compete with the best in the foreign markets.
the country, it does not prohibit them either. Indeed, Filipino managers and Filipino
In fact, it allows an exchange on the basis of enterprises have shown capability and
equality and reciprocity, frowning only on tenacity to compete internationally. And
foreign competition that is given a free trade environment, Filipino
unfair. entrepreneurs and managers in Hongkong
have demonstrated the Filipino capacity to
The constitutional policy of a “self-reliant and grow and to prosper against the best offered
independent national economy” does not under a policy of laissez faire.
necessarily rule out the entry of foreign
investments, goods and services. It It is true, as alleged by petitioners, that broad
contemplates neither “economic seclusion” constitutional principles require the State to
nor “mendicancy in the international develop an independent national economy
community.” As explained by Constitutional effectively controlled by Filipinos; and to
Commissioner Bernardo Villegas, sponsor of protect and/or prefer Filipino labor,
this constitutional policy: products, domestic materials and locally
produced goods. But it is equally true that
Economic self-reliance is a primary objective of such principles — while serving as judicial
a developing country that is keenly aware of and legislative guides — are not in
overdependence on external assistance for themselves sources of causes of action.
even its most basic needs. It does not mean Moreover, there are other equally
autarky or economic seclusion; rather, it fundamental constitutional principles relied
means avoiding mendicancy in the upon by the Senate which mandate the
international community. Independence pursuit of a “trade policy that serves the
refers to the freedom from undue foreign general welfare and utilizes all forms and
control of the national economy, especially in arrangements of exchange on the basis of
such strategic industries as in the equality and reciprocity” and the promotion
development of natural resources and public of industries “which are competitive in both
utilities. domestic and foreign markets,” thereby
justifying its acceptance of said treaty. So too,
The WTO reliance on “most favored nation,”
the alleged impairment of sovereignty in the
“national treatment,” and “trade without
exercise of legislative and judicial powers is
discrimination” cannot be struck down as
balanced by the adoption of the generally

Page | 67
MENDIOLA, MANILA
accepted principles of international law as said industry should come under close
part of the law of the land and the adherence scrutiny, following the constitutional
of the Constitution to the policy of mandate on “the development of a self-reliant
cooperation and amity with all nations. and independent national economy
effectively controlled by Filipinos.”
That the Senate, after deliberation and voting,
voluntarily and overwhelmingly gave its
consent to the WTO Agreement thereby GARCIA V. BOARD OF INVESTMENTS
making it “a part of the law of the land” is a G.R. NO. 92024, NOVEMBER 9, 1990
legitimate exercise of its sovereign duty and
power. We find no “patent and gross” FACTS: Under P.D. No. 1803, 576 hectares of
arbitrariness or despotism “by reason of the public domain in Limay, Bataan were
passion or personal hostility” in such reserved for the Petrochemical Industrial
exercise. It is not impossible to surmise that Zone under the administration, management,
this Court, or at least some of its members, and ownership of the Philippine National Oil
may even agree with petitioners that it is Company (PNOC).
more advantageous to the national interest to
strike down Senate Resolution No. 97. But Bataan Petrochemical Corp. (BPC) was
that is not a legal reason to attribute grave formed by Taiwanese investors, who applied
abuse of discretion to the Senate and to with BOI for registration as a new domestic
nullify its decision. To do so would constitute petrochemicals producer. One of the terms
grave abuse in the exercise of our own and conditions for registration of the project
judicial power and duty. was the use of “naphtha cracker” and
“naphtha” as feedstock or fuel for its
What the Senate did was a valid exercise of its petrochemical plant.
authority. As to whether such exercise was
wise, beneficial or viable is outside the realm BPC was eventually issued a certificate of
of judicial inquiry and review. That is a registration, given pioneer status and
matter between the elected policy makers accorded fiscal and other incentives by BOI.
and the people. As to whether the nation
should join the worldwide march toward Later, however, the major investor in BPC
trade liberalization and economic advised the Trade Secretary of BPC’s desire to
globalization is a matter that our people amend its original registration certification by
should determine in electing their policy changing the job site from Limay, Bataan, to
makers. After all, the WTO Agreement allows Batangas and by changing the feedstock from
withdrawal of membership, should this be the naphtha only to naphtha and/or LPG. The
political desire of a member. reason for the transfer was the insurgency
and unstable labor situation, and the
GARCIA VS BOARD OF INVESTMENTS
presence in Batangas of a huge liquefied
DOCTRINE: A petrochemical industry is not
petroleum gas (LPG) depot owned by the
an ordinary investment opportunity. It is an
Philippine Shell Corporation. Petitioner
industry essential to the national interest.
Garcia opposed the proposal, but this did not
Hence, any venture with foreign investors in

Page | 68
MENDIOLA, MANILA
stop the BOI from approving the revision of naphtha only to naphtha and/or LPG for the
BPC’s registration. Thus, this petition. main reason that the final say is in the
investor all other circumstances to the
ISSUE: Did the BOI gravely abuse its contrary notwithstanding. No cogent
discretion in approving the transfer of the advantage to the government has been shown
petrochemical plant from Bataan to Batangas by this transfer. This is a repudiation of the
and authorizing the change of feedstock from independent policy of the government
naphtha only to naphtha and/or LPG? expressed in numerous laws and the
Constitution to run its own affairs the way it
HELD: YES. deems best for the national interest.
It is the duty of the State to “regulate and
exercise authority over foreign investments One can but remember the words of a great
within its national jurisdiction and in Filipino leader who in part said he would not
accordance with its national goals and mind having a government run like hell by
priorities.” Every provision of the Filipinos than one subservient to foreign
Constitution on the national economy and dictation. In this case, it is not even a foreign
patrimony is infused with the spirit of government but an ordinary investor whom
national interest. the BOI allows to dictate what the Filipinos
shall do with their heritage.
A petrochemical industry is not an ordinary
investment opportunity. It should not be Another Digest:
treated like a garment or embroidery firm, a
shoe-making venture, or even an assembler of GARCIA VS. BOARD OF INVESTMENTS
cars or manufacturer of computer chips, 191 SCRA 288, 1990
where the BOI reasoning maybe accorded
fuller faith and credit. The petrochemical FACTS:
industry is essential to the national interest. This is a petition to annul and set aside the
decision of the Board of Investments
In this particular BPC venture, not only has (BOI)/Department of Trade and Industry
the Government given unprecedented favors, (DTI) approving the transfer of the site of the
but through its regulatory agency, the BOI, it proposed petrochemical plant from Bataan to
surrenders even the power to make a Batangas and the shift of feedstock for that
company abide by its initial choice, a choice plant from naphtha only to naphtha and/or
free from any suspicion of unscrupulous liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). Under P.D. No.
machinations and a choice which is 1803 dated January 16, 1981, 576 hectares of
undoubtedly in the best interests of the the public domain located in Lamao, Limay,
Filipino people. Bataan were reserved for the Petrochemical
Industrial Zone under the administration,
The SC held and found that the BOI management, and ownership of the Philippine
committed a grave abuse of discretion in National Oil Company (PNOC). The Bataan
approving the transfer of the petrochemical Refining Corporation (BRC) is a wholly
plant from Bataan to Batangas and government owned corporation, located at
authorizing the change of feedstock from
Page | 69
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Bataan. It produces 60% of the national

output of naphtha. The petitioner vigorously opposed the
proposal and no less than President Aquino
Taiwanese investors in a petrochemical expressed her preference that the plant be
project formed the Bataan Petrochemical established in Bataan in a conference with the
Corporation (BPC) and applied with BOI for Taiwanese investors, the Secretary of
registration as a new domestic producer of National Defense and The Chief of Staff of the
petrochemicals. Its application specified Armed Forces. Despite speeches in the Senate
Bataan as the plant site. One of the terms and and House opposing the transfer of the
conditions for registration of the project was project to Batangas, BPC filed its request for
the use of "naphtha cracker" and "naphtha" as approval of the amendments. Its application
feedstock or fuel for its petrochemical plant. is as follows: "
The petrochemical plant was to be a joint (1) increasing the investment amount from
venture with PNOC. BPC was issued a US$220 million to US$320 million;
certificate of registration on February 24, (2) increasing the production capacity of its
1988 by BOI. BPC was given pioneer status naphtha cracker, polythylene plant and
and accorded fiscal and other incentives by polypropylene plant;
BOI, like, (3)changing the feedstock from naphtha only
to "naphtha and/or liquefied petroleum gas;"
(1) exemption from taxes on raw materials, and
(2) repatriation of the entire proceeds of (4) transferring the job site from Limay,
liquidation investments in currency originally Bataan, to Batangas. BOI states that it has
made and at the exchange rate obtaining at taken a public position preferring Bataan
the time of repatriation; and over Batangas as the site of the petrochemical
(3) remittance of earnings on investments. As complex, as this would provide a better
additional incentive, the House of distribution of industries around the Metro
Representatives approved a bill introduced Manila area. In advocating the choice of
by the petitioner eliminating the 48% ad Bataan as the project site for the
valorem tax on naphtha if and when it is used petrochemical complex, the BOI, however,
as raw materials in the petrochemical plant. made it clear in its view that the BOI or the
However, in February, 1989, A.T. Chong, government for that matter could only
chairman of USI Far East Corporation, the recommend as to where the project should be
major investor in BPC, personally delivered to located. The BOI recognizes and respects the
Trade Secretary Jose Concepcion a letter principle that the final choice is still with the
dated January 25, 1989 advising him of BPC's proponent who would in the final analysis
desire to amend the original registration provide the funding or risk capital for the
certification of its project by changing the job project.
site from Limay, Bataan, to Batangas. The
reason adduced for the transfer was the ISSUE:
insurgency and unstable labor situation, and Whether or not there was abuse of discretion
the presence in Batangas of a huge liquefied on the part of the Board of Investments for
petroleum gas (LPG) depot owned by the yielding to the wishes of the investor, the
Philippine Shell Corporation. national interest notwithstanding?
Page | 70
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Constitution to run its own affairs the way it

HELD: deems best for the national interest.`
YES. under Section 10, Article XII of the 1987
Constitution, it is the duty of the State to One can but remember the words of a great
"regulate and exercise authority over foreign Filipino leader who in part said he would
investments within its national jurisdiction not mind having a government run like hell
and in accordance with its national goals and by Filipinos than one subservient to foreign
priorities." The development of a self-reliant dictation. In this case, it is not even a foreign
and independent national economy government but an ordinary investor whom
effectively controlled by Filipinos is the BOI allows to dictate what we shall do
mandated in Section 19, Article II of the with our heritage.
Constitution. A petrochemical industry is not
an ordinary investment opportunity. It should
not be treated like a garment or embroidery Nachura:
firm, a shoe-making venture, or even an
assembler of cars or manufacturer of Although the constitution enshrines free
computer chips, where the BOI reasoning enterprise as a policy, it nevertheless
may be accorded fuller faith and credit. The reserves to the government the power to
petrochemical industry is essential to the intervene whenever necessary for the
national interest. promotion of the general welfare. Nachura
In this particular BPC venture, not only has
the Government given unprecedented Free enterprise does not call for the removal
favors, but through its regulatory agency, of protective regulations. It must be clearly
the BOI, it surrenders even the power to explained and proven by competent evidence
make a company abide by its initial choice, how such protective regulations would result
a choice free from any suspicion of in restraint of trade. Ibid.
unscrupulous machinations and a choice
which is undoubtedly in the best R.A. No. 8762(Retail Trade Liberalization Act
interests of the Filipino people. of 2000) is valid. While Sec. 19, Art.II,
requires the development of self-reliant and
The Court, therefore, holds and finds that the independent national economy effectively
BOI committed a grave abuse of discretion in controlled by Filipino entrepreneurs, it does
approving the transfer of the petrochemical not impose a policy of Filipino monopoly of
plant from Bataan to Batangas and the economic environment. Neither does the
authorizing the change of feedstock from lessening of restraints on foreigners’ right to
naphtha only to naphtha and/or LPG for the property or to engage in an ordinarily lawful
main reason that the final say is in the business amount to a denial of the Filipinos’
investor all other circumstances to the right to property and due process of law. Ibid.
contrary notwithstanding. No cogent
advantage to the government has been shown Gabriel:
by this transfer. This is a repudiation of the Q: Does independent foreign policy an
independent policy of the government international mendicancy in economic
expressed in numerous laws and the affairs?
Page | 71
MENDIOLA, MANILA
A: No. allowing the entry of foreigners into certain

industries not reserved by the Constitution to
Q: Does international independence mean Filipino citizens. In this case, Congress has
that we should refrain from having decided to open certain areas of the retail
community of interest? trade business to foreign investments instead
A: No. of reserving them exclusively to Filipino
citizens. The NEDA has not opposed such
Albano: policy. (Rep. Espina, et al. v. Hon. Zamora, Jr.
-The provisions of Art.II of the 1987 G.R.No. 143855 Septmeebr 21, 2010)
Constitution, the declaration of principles and
state policies, are not self-executing. There
must be laws to implement the same. Q:What is the nature of the power of the
Legislative failure to pursue such policies State to control and regulate trade?
cannot give rise to a cause of action in the
courts. (Tanada v. Angara) A: It is an exercise of police power of the
State. A person’s right to property, whether
Q: Does the Constitution prohibit the entry he is a Filipino citizen or foreign national,
of foreign investments, etc., in the cannot be taken from him without the due
implementation of the constitutional process of law.
mandate to develop an independent and
self-reliant economy? To the extent that R.A.8762, the Retail Trade
Liberalization Act, lessens the restraint on the
A: NO. The 1987 Constitution does not rule foreigners’ right to property or to engage in
out the entry of foreign investments, goods an ordinarily lawful business, it cannot be
and services. While it does not encourage said that the law amounts to a denial of the
their unlimited entry into the country, it does Filipinos’ right to property and to due process
not prohibit them either. In fact, it allows an of law. Filipinos continue to have the right to
exchange on the basis of equality and engage in the kinds of retail business to which
reciprocity, frowning only on foreign the law in question has permitted the entry of
competition that is unfair. The key, as in all foreign investors.
economies in the word, is to strike a balance
between preventing local businesses and Q:It was contended that RA8762 would
allowing the entry of foreign investments and eventually lead to alien control of the
services. retail trade business. Is this contention
correct? Why?
More importantly, section 10, Art.XII of the
1987 Constitution gives Congress the A: NO. First, aliens can only engage in retail
discretion to reserve to Filipinos certain areas trade business subject to certain categories;
of investments upon the recommendation of Second, only nationals from, or juridical
the NEDA and when the national interest entities formed or incorporated in countries
requires. Thus, Congress can determine what which allow the entry of Filipino retailers
policy to pass and when to pass it depending shall be allowed to engage in retail trade
on the economic exigencies. It can enact laws
Page | 72
MENDIOLA, MANILA
business; and Third, qualified foreign government, which shall amortize it to

retailers shall not be allowed to engage in the contractor.
certain retailing activities outside their
accredited stores through the use of mobile or Q: What is the Welfare State Concept of
rolling stores or carts, the use of sales Government? State its basis in the
representatives, door-to-door selling, Constitution.
restaurants and sari-sari stores and such
other similar retailing activities. A: Under this principle, every government
activity is an essential means of achieving the
Sec.20: The State recognizes the greatest good for the greatest number and the
indispensable role of the private sector, State is responsible for the general and social
encourages private enterprise, and welfare of the people.
provides incentives to needed investments.
Q: What is the principle of laissez faire?
Gabriel:
Q: Is it a laissez faire? A: It means let alone. It means that the
A: While ideal in a utilitarian state, it has not government should leave the economic and
been accorded respect in this State. social forces at work without any interference
on its part. It is the foundation of capitalism.
-public interest This provision has been rejected by the
Albano: Constitution because of the expanded
provisions on social justice.
Q: In what way has the State implemented
such constitutional provisions recognizing Q: In July 1988, the DOTC unveiled a multi-
the role of the private sector in the million maritime coastal communications
development of the economy? system project, designed to ensure safety
of lives at sea through the establishment of
A: Congress has enacted R.A. 6957. There are efficient communication facilities between
2 schemes under the law: coast stations and ship stations. It was set
1. A private contractor may avail of the out to provide ship-to-shore and shore-to-
build-operate-and transfer scheme in ship public correspondence, free of
which it finances, constructs, operates charge. In seeking to prevent the State
and maintains the infrastructure facility from engaging in this activity, the
and charges the users, appropriate tolls, petitioners invoked sec. 20, Art. II of the
fees, or rentals for a maximum period of Constitution. It was their contention that
50 years before turning over to the the act of the State amounted to taking of
government; and property without just compensation, as it
would amount to the taking of their
2. A contractor may also avail of the build- income as there were engaged in
operate-and-transfer scheme, in which providing marine radio communications.
the contractor finances, and constructs Is the contention of the petitioners
the facility and then turns it over to the proper?

Page | 73
MENDIOLA, MANILA
A: There is no merit in this petition. The duty of the dispossessed among us for a plot of
of the State is preeminently, “to serve the earth as their place in the sun.
people (Sec.4, Art. II), and order through
policies that provide and adequate social In these consolidated cases, the
services and improved quality of life for all.” constitutionality of several measures are
(Sec.9, Art.II). challenged, to wit: P.D. No. 27, E.O. Nos. 228
and 229, and R.A. No. 6657 (CARP Law).
The objectives of government are, among
other things, “a more equitable distribution of The CARP Law is challenged in so far as
opportunities, income and wealth and a Sec.18 thereof requires the owners of the
sustained increase in the amount of goods expropriated properties to accept just
and services produced by the nation for the compensation therefore in less than money.
benefit of the people.” (Sec.1, Art. XII)
ISSUE: Should Sec. 18 of the CARP Law be
Sec.21: The State shall promote upheld?
comprehensive rural development and
agrarian reform. HELD: YES.
The Court declared that the content and
manner of the just compensation provided for
ASSOCIATION OF SMAL LANDOWNERS IN in Sec. 18 of the CARP Law is not violative of
THE PHILS vs SEC OF DAR the Constitution.
DOCTRINE: The validity of a legal provision
on payment of just compensation through While it is admitted that a certain degree of
modes other than that of monetary may be pragmatism has influenced its decision on
upheld, especially when the invalidation this issue, the Court held that it is also nota
thereof would result in the nullification of an cloistered institution removed from the
entire program and killing the farmer’s hopes, realities and demands of society or oblivious
in derogation of the Constitutional mandate to the need for its enhancement.
on Land reform.
It expressed its acute anxiety, like that of the
rest of the Filipino people, to see the goal of
ASSOCIATION OF SMALL LANDOWNERS IN agrarian reform achieved at last after the
THE PHILS. V. SEC. OF DAR peasant masses during the previous
G.R. NO. 78742, JULY 14, 1989 disappointing decades.
FACTS: “Land for the Landless” is a slogan The Court took awareness of the fact that the
that underscores the acute imbalance in the invalidation of the said section will result in
distribution of this precious resource among the nullification of the entire program, killing
our people. Through the brooding centuries, the farmers’ hopes even as they approach
this slogan has become a battle-cry realization and resurrecting the spectre of
dramatizing the increasingly urgent demand discontent and dissent in the restless
countryside. In the Court’s view, that is not
the intention of the Constitution.
Page | 74
MENDIOLA, MANILA
ASSO. OF SMALL LANDOWNERS VS. SEC. OF

The CARP Law and other enactments also AGRARIAN REFORM
involved in these cases have been the subject 175 SCRA 343, 1989
of bitter attack from those who point to the FACTS:
shortcomings of these measures. To be sure, In ancient mythology, Antaeus was a terrible
these enactments are less than perfect. giant who blocked and challenged Hercules for
Indeed, they should be continuously his life on his way to Mycenae after performing
examined and rehoned, that they may be his eleventh labor. The two wrestled mightily
sharper instruments for the better protection and Hercules flung his adversary to the ground
of the farmer’s rights. But we have to start thinking him dead, but Antaeus rose even
somewhere. In the pursuit of agrarian reform, stronger to resume their struggle. This
we do not tread on familiar ground but grope happened several times to Hercules' increasing
on terrain fraught with pitfalls and expected amazement. Finally, as they continued
difficulties. The CARP Law is not a tried and grappling, it dawned on Hercules that Antaeus
tested project. To us Justice Holmes words, “it was the son of Gaea and could never die as long
is an experiment, as all life is an experiment,” as any part of his body was touching his
and so we learn as we venture forward, and, if Mother Earth. Thus forewarned, Hercules then
necessary, by our own mistakes. We cannot held Antaeus up in the air, beyond the reach of
expect perfection although we should strive the sustaining soil, and crushed him to death.
for it by all means. Meantime, we struggle as Mother Earth. The sustaining soil. The giver of
best as we can in freeing the farmer from the life, without whose invigorating touch even the
iron shackles that have unconscionably, and powerful Antaeus weakened and died.
for so long, fettered his soul to the soil.
The cases before us are not as fanciful as the
By the decision we reach today, all major legal foregoing tale. But they also tell of the
obstacles to the comprehensive agrarian elemental forces of life and death, of men and
reform program are removed, to clear the women who, like Antaeus, need the
way for the true freedom of the farmer. We sustaining strength of the precious earth to
may now glimpse the day he will be released stay alive. "Land for the Landless" is a slogan
not only from want but also from the that underscores the acute imbalance in the
exploitation and disdain of the past and from distribution of this precious resource among
his own feelings of inadequacy and our people. But it is more than a slogan.
helplessness. At last his servitude will be Through the brooding centuries, it has
ended forever. At last the farm on which he become a battlecry dramatizing the
toils will be his farm. It will be his portion of increasingly urgent demand of the
the Mother Earth that will give him not only dispossessed among us for a plot of earth as
deep despair, now can he see it in the fruition their place in the sun. Recognizing this need,
of his hopes for a more fulfilling future. Now the Constitution in 1935 mandated the policy
at last can he banish from his small plot of of social justice to "insure the well-being and
earth his securities and dark resentments and economic security of all the people,"
“rebuild in it the music and the dream.” especially the less privileged. In 1973, the
new Constitution affirmed this goal, adding
specifically that "the State shall regulate the
Page | 75
MENDIOLA, MANILA
acquisition, ownership, use, enjoyment and It must be noted that like taxation, the power
disposition of private property and equitably of eminent domain could be used as an
diffuse property ownership and profits.' implement of police power of the state. The
Significantly, there was also the specific expressed objective of the law was the
injunction to "formulate and implement an promotion of the welfare of the farmers,
agrarian reform program aimed at which came clearly under the police power of
emancipating the tenant from the bondage of the state. To achieve this purpose, the law
the soil." The Constitution of 1987 was not to provided for the expropriation of agricultural
be outdone. Besides echoing these sentiments, lands (subject to minimum retention limits
it also adopted one whole and separate for the landowner) to be distributed among
Article XIII on Social Justice and Human the peasantry. As the ponencia observed:
Rights, containing grandiose but undoubtedly
sincere provisions for the uplift of the The cases before us present no knotty
common people. These include a call in the complication insofar as the question of
following words for the adoption by the State compensable taking is concerned. To the
of an agrarian reform program. extent that the measures under challenge
merely prescribe retention limits for
The cases involved have been consolidated landowners, there is an exercise of the
because they concern common legal police power for the regulation of private
questions, including serious challenges to the property in accordance with the
constitutionality of RA 6657 otherwise Constitution. But where, to carry out such
known as the Comprehensive Agrarian regulation, it becomes necessary to deprive
Reform Law of 1988 and other such owners of whatever lands they may
supplementary to RA 6657 such as PD 27 own in excess of the maximum area allowed,
(providing for the compulsory acquisition of there is definitely a taking under the power
private lands for distribution among tenant- of eminent domain for which payment of
farmers and to specify maximum land just compensation is imperative. The taking
ownership in favor of the beneficiaries of PD contemplated is not a mere limitation of the
27) Pres. Proc. 131 (instituting CARP) and EO use of the land. What is required is the
229 (providing the mechanics of surrender of the title to and the physical
implementation of CARP) RA 6657 is the most possession of the said excess and all
recent legislation, signed into law by Pres. beneficial rights accruing tothe owner in
Aquino on June 10, 1988. favor of the farmer-beneficiary. This is
definitely an exercise not of the police power
ISSUE: WON RA 6657, PD 57, Proc. 31 & Eos but of the power of eminent domain.
228 & 229 considered as
valid and constitutional? It bears repeating that the measures
challenged in these petitions contemplate
HELD: more than a mere regulation of the use of
YES. The assailed laws are considered as a private lands under the police power. We
valid exercise of both police power and of deal here with an actual taking of private
eminent domain. The extent that it sets agricultural lands that has dispossessed
retention limits is an exercise of police power. the owners of their property and deprived
Page | 76
MENDIOLA, MANILA
them of all its beneficial use and enjoyment, present standards. Such amount is in fact not
to entitle even fully available at this time. We assume
them to the just compensation mandated by that the framers of the Constitution were
the Constitution. aware of this difficulty when they called for
agrarian reform as a top priority project of
The expropriation before us affects all private the government. It is a part of this assumption
agricultural lands whenever found and of that when they envisioned the expropriation
whatever kind as long as they are in excess of that would be needed, they also intended that
the maximum retention limits allowed their the just compensation would have to be paid
owners. This kind of expropriation is not in the orthodox way but a less
intended for the benefit not only of a conventional if more practical method. There
particular community or of a small segment can be no doubt that they were aware of the
of the population but of the entire Filipino financial limitations of the government and
nation, from all levels of our society, from the had no illusions that there would be enough
impoverished farmer to the land-glutted money to pay in cash and in full for the lands
owner. Its purpose does not cover only the they wanted to be distributed among the
whole territory of this country but goes farmers. We may therefore assume that their
beyond in time to the foreseeable future, intention was to allow such manner of
which it hopes to secure and edify with the payment as is now provided for by the CARP
vision and the sacrifice of the present Law, particularly the payment of the balance
generation of Filipinos. Generations yet to (if the owner cannot be paid fully with
come are as involved in this program as we money), or indeed of the entire amount of the
are today, although hopefully only as just compensation, with other things of value.
beneficiaries of a richer and more fulfilling We may also suppose that what they had in
life we will guarantee to them tomorrow mind was a similar scheme of payment as that
through our thoughtfulness today. prescribed in P.D. No. 27, which was the law
in force at the time they deliberated on the
And, finally, let it not be forgotten that it is no new Charter and with which they presumably
less than the Constitution itself that has agreed in principle. In relation thereto, the
ordained this revolution in the farms, calling just compensation to be made by the
for "a just distribution" among the farmers of Government in the form of financial
lands that have heretofore been the prison of instruments and not money is justified by the
their dreams but can now become the key at revolutionary character of the scheme and
least to their deliverance. the need to allow the government time to
raise the funds needed.
Such a program will involve not mere millions
of pesos. The cost will be tremendous. Gabriel:
Considering the vast areas of land subject to -landowner = story of Hercules (demigod)
expropriation under the laws before us, we -landtiller = Hatheus
estimate that hundreds of billions of pesos
will be needed, far more indeed than the -rural development; CA Reform
amount of P50 billion initially appropriated,
which is already staggering as it is by our

Page | 77
MENDIOLA, MANILA
-As long as this land owners have a land to till, On May 7, 1980, the martial law
they are powerful. But if you remove them administration filed a suit before the Manila
from the land, they become powerless. RTC against Tadeco, et al., for them to
surrender Hacienda Luisita to the then
-“As all life is experiment” Ministry of Agrarian Reform (MAR) so that
the land can be distributed to farmers at cost.
Responding, Tadeco alleged that Hacienda
HACIENDA LUISITA DOCTRINE: Following Luisita does not have tenants, besides which
the doctrine of necessary implication, it may sugar lands – of which the hacienda consisted
be stated that the conferment of express – are not covered by existing agrarian reform
power to approve a plan for stock legislations. The Manila RTC rendered
distribution of the agricultural land of judgment ordering Tadeco to surrender
corporate owners necessarily includes the Hacienda Luisita to the MAR. Therefrom,
power to revoke or recall the approval of the Tadeco appealed to the CA.
plan.
On March 17, 1988, during the administration
of President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino, the
HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. V. PRESIDENTIAL Office of the Solicitor General moved to
AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL withdraw the government’s case against
G.R. NO. 171101, JULY 5, 2011 Tadeco, et al. The CA dismissed the case,
subject to the PARC’s approval of Tadeco’s
FACTS: In 1958, the Spanish owners of proposed stock distribution plan (SDP) in
Compañia General de Tabacos de Filipinas favor of its farmworkers. [Under EO 229 and
(Tabacalera) sold Hacienda Luisita and the later RA 6657, Tadeco had the option of
Central Azucarera de Tarlac, the sugar mill of availing stock distribution as an alternative
the hacienda, to the Tarlac Development modality to actual land transfer to the
Corporation (Tadeco), then owned and farmworkers.] On August 23, 1988, Tadeco
controlled by the Jose Cojuangco Sr. Group. organized a spin-off corporation, herein
The Central Bank of the Philippines assisted petitioner HLI, as vehicle to facilitate stock
Tadeco in obtaining a dollar loan from acquisition by the farmworkers. For this
a US bank. Also, the GSIS extended a PhP5.911 purpose, Tadeco conveyed to HLI the
million loan in favor of Tadeco to pay the peso agricultural land portion (4,915.75 hectares)
price component of the sale, with the and other farm-related properties of
condition that “the lots comprising the Hacienda Luisita in exchange for HLI shares
Hacienda Luisita be subdivided by the of stock.
applicant-corporation and sold at cost to the
On May 9, 1989, some 93% of the then
tenants, should there be any, and whenever
farmworker-beneficiaries (FWBs)
conditions should exist warranting such action
complement of Hacienda Luisita signified in a
under the provisions of the Land Tenure Act.”
referendum their acceptance of the proposed
Tadeco however did not comply with this
HLI’s Stock Distribution Option Plan
condition.
(SODP). On May 11, 1989, the SDOA was
formally entered into by Tadeco, HLI, and the

Page | 78
MENDIOLA, MANILA
5,848 qualified FWBs. This attested to by then Such, was the state of things when two
DAR Secretary Philip Juico. The SDOA separate petitions reached the DAR in the
embodied the basis and mechanics of HLI’s latter part of 2003. The first was filed by the
SDP, which was eventually approved by the Supervisory Group of HLI (Supervisory
PARC after a follow-up referendum Group), praying for a renegotiation of the
conducted by the DAR on October 14, 1989, in SDOA, or, in the alternative, its revocation.
which 5,117 FWBs, out of 5,315 who The second petition, praying for the
participated, opted to receive shares in HLI. revocation and nullification of the SDOA and
the distribution of the lands in the hacienda,
On August 15, 1995, HLI applied for the was filed
conversion of 500 hectares of land of the by AlyansangmgaManggagawangBukidng
hacienda from agricultural to industrial use, Hacienda Luisita (AMBALA). The DAR then
pursuant to Sec. 65 of RA 6657. The DAR constituted a Special Task Force (STF) to
approved the application on August 14, 1996, attend to issues relating to the SDP of HLI.
subject to payment of three percent (3%) of After investigation and evaluation, the STF
the gross selling price to the FWBs and to found that HLI has not complied with its
HLI’s continued compliance with its obligations under RA 6657 despite the
undertakings under the SDP, among other implementation of the SDP. On December 22,
conditions. 2005, the PARC issued the assailed Resolution
No. 2005-32-01, recalling/revoking the SDO
On December 13, 1996, HLI, in exchange for
plan of Tadeco/HLI. It further resolved that
subscription of 12,000,000 shares of stocks of
the subject lands be forthwith placed under
Centennary Holdings, Inc. (Centennary),
the compulsory coverage or mandated land
ceded 300 hectares of the converted area to
acquisition scheme of the CARP.
the latter. Subsequently, Centennary sold the
entire 300 hectares for PhP750 million From the foregoing resolution, HLI sought
to Luisita Industrial Park Corporation reconsideration. Its motion notwithstanding,
(LIPCO), which used it in developing an HLI also filed a petition before the Supreme
industrial complex. From this area was carved Court in light of what it considers as the
out 2 parcels, for which 2 separate titles were DAR’s hasty placing of Hacienda Luisita under
issued in the name of LIPCO. Later, LIPCO CARP even before PARC could rule or even
transferred these 2 parcels to the Rizal read the motion for reconsideration. PARC
Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC) in would eventually deny HLI’s motion for
payment of LIPCO’s PhP431,695,732.10 loan reconsideration via Resolution No. 2006-34-
obligations to RCBC. LIPCO’s titles were 01 dated May 3, 2006.
cancelled and new ones were issued to RCBC.
Apart from the 500 hectares, another 80.51
hectares were later detached from Hacienda
Luisita and acquired by the government as ISSUE: (1) Does the PARC possess
part of the Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway jurisdiction to recall or revoke HLI’s SDP?
(SCTEX) complex. Thus, 4,335.75 hectares
(2) [Issue raised by intervenor FARM (group of
remained of the original 4,915 hectares
farmworkers)]Is Sec. 31 of RA 6657, which
Tadeco ceded to HLI.

Page | 79
MENDIOLA, MANILA
allows stock transfer in lieu of outright land land of corporate owners necessarily includes
transfer, unconstitutional? the power to revoke or recall the approval of
the plan. To deny PARC such revocatory
(3) Is the revocation of the HLI’s SDP valid? power would reduce it into a toothless agency
[Did PARC gravely abuse its discretion in of CARP, because the very same agency
revoking the subject SDP and placing the tasked to ensure compliance by the corporate
hacienda under CARP’s compulsory landowner with the approved SDP would be
acquisition and distribution scheme?] without authority to impose sanctions for
non-compliance with it.
(4) Should those portions of the converted
land within Hacienda Luisita that RCBC and (2) NO, Sec. 31 of RA 6657 is not
LIPCO acquired by purchase be excluded from unconstitutional. [The Court actually
the coverage of the assailed PARC resolution? refused to pass upon the constitutional
[Did the PARC gravely abuse its discretion question because it was not raised at the
when it included LIPCO’s and RCBC’s earliest opportunity and because the
respective properties that once formed part resolution thereof is not the lismota of the
of Hacienda Luisita under the CARP case. Moreover, the issue has been rendered
compulsory acquisition scheme via the moot and academic since SDO is no longer
assailed Notice of Coverage?] one of the modes of acquisition under RA
9700.]
HELD:(1) YES, the PARC has jurisdiction to
revoke HLI’s SDP under the doctrine of When the Court is called upon to exercise its
necessary implication. power of judicial review over, and pass upon
the constitutionality of, acts of the executive
Under Sec. 31 of RA 6657, as implemented by
or legislative departments, it does so only
DAO 10, the authority to approve the plan for
when the following essential requirements
stock distribution of the corporate
are first met, to wit: (1) there is an actual case
landowner belongs to PARC. Contrary to
or controversy; (2) that the constitutional
petitioner HLI’s posture, PARC also has the
question is raised at the earliest possible
power to revoke the SDP which it previously
opportunity by a proper party or one
approved. It may be, as urged, that RA 6657
with locus standi; and (3) the issue of
or other executive issuances on agrarian
constitutionality must be the very lismota of
reform do not explicitly vest the PARC with
the case.
the power to revoke/recall an approved SDP.
Such power or authority, however, is deemed Not all the foregoing requirements are
possessed by PARC under the principle of satisfied in the case at bar.
necessary implication, a basic postulate that
what is implied in a statute is as much a part While there is indeed an actual case or
of it as that which is expressed. controversy, intervenor FARM, composed of a
small minority of 27 farmers, has yet to
Following the doctrine of necessary explain its failure to challenge the
implication, it may be stated that the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657 as
conferment of express power to approve a early as November 21, 1989 when PARC
plan for stock distribution of the agricultural

Page | 80
MENDIOLA, MANILA
approved the SDP of Hacienda Luisita or at unyielding rule has been to avoid, whenever
least within a reasonable time thereafter, and plausible, an issue assailing the
why its members received benefits from the constitutionality of a statute or governmental
SDP without so much of a protest. It was only act. If some other grounds exist by which
on December 4, 2003 or 14 years after judgment can be made without touching the
approval of the SDP that said plan and constitutionality of a law, such recourse is
approving resolution were sought to be favored.
revoked, but not, to stress, by FARM or any of
its members, but by petitioner AMBALA. The lismota in this case, proceeding from the
Furthermore, the AMBALA petition did NOT basic positions originally taken by AMBALA
question the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA (to which the FARM members previously
6657, but concentrated on the purported belonged) and the Supervisory Group, is the
flaws and gaps in the subsequent alleged non-compliance by HLI with the
implementation of the SDP. Even the public conditions of the SDP to support a plea for its
respondents, as represented by the Solicitor revocation. And before the Court,
General, did not question the constitutionality the lismota is whether or not PARC acted in
of the provision. On the other hand, FARM, grave abuse of discretion when it ordered the
whose 27 members formerly belonged to recall of the SDP for such non-compliance and
AMBALA, raised the constitutionality of Sec. the fact that the SDP, as couched and
31 only on May 3, 2007 when it filed its implemented, offends certain constitutional
Supplemental Comment with the Court. Thus, and statutory provisions. To be sure, any of
it took FARM some eighteen (18) years from these key issues may be resolved without
November 21, 1989 before it challenged the plunging into the constitutionality of Sec. 31
constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657 which of RA 6657. Moreover, looking deeply into the
is quite too late in the day. The FARM underlying petitions of AMBALA, et al., it is
members slept on their rights and even not the said section per se that is invalid, but
accepted benefits from the SDP with nary a rather it is the alleged application of the said
complaint on the alleged unconstitutionality provision in the SDP that is flawed.
of Sec. 31 upon which the benefits were
It may be well to note at this juncture that
derived. The Court cannot now be goaded
Sec. 5 of RA 9700, amending Sec. 7 of RA
into resolving a constitutional issue that
6657, has all but superseded Sec. 31 of RA
FARM failed to assail after the lapse of a long
6657 vis-à-vis the stock distribution
period of time and the occurrence of
component of said Sec. 31. In its pertinent
numerous events and activities which
part, Sec. 5 of RA 9700 provides: “[T]hat after
resulted from the application of an alleged
June 30, 2009, the modes of acquisition shall
unconstitutional legal provision.
be limited to voluntary offer to sell and
The last but the most important requisite that compulsory acquisition.” Thus, for all intents
the constitutional issue must be the and purposes, the stock distribution scheme
very lismota of the case does not likewise under Sec. 31 of RA 6657 is no longer an
obtain. The lismota aspect is not present, the available option under existing law. The
constitutional issue tendered not being question of whether or not it is
critical to the resolution of the case. The unconstitutional should be a moot issue.

Page | 81
MENDIOLA, MANILA
(3) YES, the revocation of the HLI’s earlier, each original FWB is entitled to
SDP valid. [NO, the PARC did NOT gravely 18,804.32 HLI shares. The original FWBs got
abuse its discretion in revoking the subject less than the guaranteed 18,804.32 HLI
SDP and placing the hacienda under CARP’s shares per beneficiary, because the
compulsory acquisition and distribution acquisition and distribution of the HLI shares
scheme.] were based on “man days” or “number of days
worked” by the FWB in a year’s time. As
The revocation of the approval of the SDP is explained by HLI, a beneficiary needs to work
valid: (1) the mechanics and timelines of for at least 37 days in a fiscal year before he
HLI’s stock distribution violate DAO 10 or she becomes entitled to HLI shares. If it
because the minimum individual allocation of falls below 37 days, the FWB, unfortunately,
each original FWB of 18,804.32 shares was does not get any share at year end. The
diluted as a result of the use of “man days” number of HLI shares distributed varies
and the hiring of additional farmworkers; (2) depending on the number of days the FWBs
the 30-year timeframe for HLI-to-FWBs stock were allowed to work in one year. Worse,
transfer is contrary to what Sec. 11 of DAO 10 HLI hired farmworkers in addition to the
prescribes. original 6,296 FWBs, such that, as indicated in
the Compliance dated August 2, 2010
In our review and analysis of par. 3 of the
submitted by HLI to the Court, the total
SDOA on the mechanics and timelines of stock
number of farmworkers of HLI as of said date
distribution, We find that it violates two (2)
stood at 10,502. All these farmworkers,
provisions of DAO 10. Par. 3 of the SDOA
which include the original 6,296 FWBs, were
states:
given shares out of the 118,931,976.85 HLI
shares representing the 33.296% of the total
outstanding capital stock of HLI. Clearly, the
3. At the end of each fiscal year, for a period of minimum individual allocation of each
30 years, the SECOND PARTY [HLI] shall original FWB of 18,804.32 shares was diluted
arrange with the FIRST PARTY [TDC] the as a result of the use of “man days” and the
acquisition and distribution to the THIRD hiring of additional farmworkers.
PARTY [FWBs] on the basis of number of days
worked and at no cost to them of one- Going into another but related matter, par. 3
thirtieth (1/30) of 118,391,976.85 shares of of the SDOA expressly providing for a 30-year
the capital stock of the SECOND PARTY that timeframe for HLI-to-FWBs stock transfer is
are presently owned and held by the FIRST an arrangement contrary to what Sec. 11 of
PARTY, until such time as the entire block of DAO 10 prescribes. Said Sec. 11 provides for
118,391,976.85 shares shall have been the implementation of the approved stock
completely acquired and distributed to the distribution plan within three (3) months
THIRD PARTY. from receipt by the corporate landowner of
the approval of the plan by PARC. In fact,
[I]t is clear as day that the original 6,296 based on the said provision, the transfer of
FWBs, who were qualified beneficiaries at the the shares of stock in the names of the
time of the approval of the SDP, suffered from qualified FWBs should be recorded in the
watering down of shares. As determined stock and transfer books and must be

Page | 82
MENDIOLA, MANILA
submitted to the SEC within sixty (60) days [T]here are two (2) requirements before one
from implementation. may be considered a purchaser in good faith,
namely: (1) that the purchaser buys the
To the Court, there is a purpose, which is at property of another without notice that some
once discernible as it is practical, for the other person has a right to or interest in such
three-month threshold. Remove this timeline property; and (2) that the purchaser pays a
and the corporate landowner can veritably full and fair price for the property at the time
evade compliance with agrarian reform by of such purchase or before he or she has
simply deferring to absurd limits the notice of the claim of another.
implementation of the stock distribution
scheme. It can rightfully be said that both LIPCO and
RCBC are––based on the above requirements
Evidently, the land transfer beneficiaries are and with respect to the adverted transactions
given thirty (30) years within which to pay of the converted land in question––
the cost of the land thus awarded them to purchasers in good faith for value entitled to
make it less cumbersome for them to pay the the benefits arising from such status.
government. To be sure, the reason
underpinning the 30-year accommodation First, at the time LIPCO purchased the entire
does not apply to corporate landowners in three hundred (300) hectares of industrial
distributing shares of stock to the qualified land, there was no notice of any supposed
beneficiaries, as the shares may be issued in a defect in the title of its transferor,
much shorter period of time. Centennary, or that any other person has a
right to or interest in such property. In fact, at
Taking into account the above discussion, the the time LIPCO acquired said parcels of land,
revocation of the SDP by PARC should be only the following annotations appeared on
upheld [because of violations of] DAO 10. It the TCT in the name of Centennary: the
bears stressing that under Sec. 49 of RA 6657, Secretary’s Certificate in favor of
the PARC and the DAR have the power to TeresitaLopa, the Secretary’s Certificate in
issue rules and regulations, substantive or favor of ShintaroMurai, and the conversion of
procedural. Being a product of such rule- the property from agricultural to industrial
making power, DAO 10 has the force and and residential use.
effect of law and must be duly complied with.
The PARC is, therefore, correct in revoking The same is true with respect to RCBC. At the
the SDP. Consequently, the PARC Resolution time it acquired portions of Hacienda Luisita,
No. 89-12-2 dated November 21, l989 only the following general annotations
approving the HLI’s SDP is nullified and appeared on the TCTs of LIPCO: the Deed of
voided. Restrictions, limiting its use solely as an
industrial estate; the Secretary’s Certificate in
(4) YES, those portions of the converted land favor of Koji Komai and Kyosuke Hori; and
within Hacienda Luisita that RCBC and LIPCO the Real Estate Mortgage in favor of RCBC to
acquired by purchase should be excluded guarantee the payment of PhP 300 million.
from the coverage of the assailed PARC
resolution.

Page | 83
MENDIOLA, MANILA
To be sure, intervenor RCBC and LIPCO knew coverage. Ergo, RCBC and LIPCO acted in
that the lots they bought were subjected to good faith in acquiring the subject lots.
CARP coverage by means of a stock
distribution plan, as the DAR conversion And second, both LIPCO and RCBC purchased
order was annotated at the back of the titles portions of Hacienda Luisita for value.
of the lots they acquired. However, they are Undeniably, LIPCO acquired 300 hectares of
of the honest belief that the subject lots were land from Centennary for the amount of
validly converted to commercial or industrial PhP750 million pursuant to a Deed of Sale
purposes and for which said lots were taken dated July 30, 1998. On the other hand, in a
out of the CARP coverage subject of PARC Deed of Absolute Assignment dated
Resolution No. 89-12-2 and, hence, can be November 25, 2004, LIPCO conveyed
legally and validly acquired by them. After all, portions of Hacienda Luisita in favor of RCBC
Sec. 65 of RA 6657 explicitly allows by way of dacion en pago to pay for a loan of
conversion and disposition of agricultural PhP431,695,732.10.
lands previously covered by CARP land
In relying upon the above-mentioned
acquisition “after the lapse of five (5) years
approvals, proclamation and conversion
from its award when the land ceases to be
order, both RCBC and LIPCO cannot be
economically feasible and sound for
considered at fault for believing that certain
agricultural purposes or the locality has
portions of Hacienda Luisita are
become urbanized and the land will have a
industrial/commercial lands and are, thus,
greater economic value for residential,
outside the ambit of CARP. The PARC, and
commercial or industrial purposes.”
consequently DAR, gravely abused its
Moreover, DAR notified all the affected discretion when it placed LIPCO’s and
parties, more particularly the FWBs, and gave RCBC’s property which once formed part
them the opportunity to comment or oppose of Hacienda Luisita under the CARP
the proposed conversion. DAR, after going compulsory acquisition scheme via the
through the necessary processes, granted the assailed Notice of Coverage.
conversion of 500 hectares of Hacienda
[The Court went on to apply the operative
Luisita pursuant to its primary jurisdiction
fact doctrine to determine what should be
under Sec. 50 of RA 6657 to determine and
done in the aftermath of its disposition of the
adjudicate agrarian reform matters and its
above-enumerated issues:
original exclusive jurisdiction over all matters
involving the implementation of agrarian While We affirm the revocation of the SDP on
reform. The DAR conversion order became Hacienda Luisita subject of PARC Resolution
final and executory after none of the FWBs Nos. 2005-32-01 and 2006-34-01, the Court
interposed an appeal to the CA. In this factual cannot close its eyes to certain “operative
setting, RCBC and LIPCO purchased the lots in facts” that had occurred in the
question on their honest and well-founded interim. Pertinently, the “operative fact”
belief that the previous registered owners doctrine realizes that, in declaring
could legally sell and convey the lots though a law or executive action null and void, or, by
these were previously subject of CARP extension, no longer without force and effect,

Page | 84
MENDIOLA, MANILA
undue harshness and resulting unfairness These facts and circumstances tend to
must be avoided. This is as it should indicate that some, if not all, of the FWBs may
realistically be, since rights might have actually desire to continue as HLI
accrued in favor of natural or juridical shareholders. A matter best left to their own
persons and obligations justly incurred in the discretion.
meantime. The actual existence of a statute or
executive act is, prior to such a determination, Gabriel:
an operative fact and may have consequences Q: Does the Court allow collective ownership
which cannot justly be ignored; the past of the land?
cannot always be erased by a new judicial A: yes, actual distribution of shares in lieu of
declaration. land. People has the right to own the lands
directly and in common.
While the assailed PARC resolutions Q: Is there a constitutional basis in this?
effectively nullifying the Hacienda Luisita SDP A: yes, under sec.13- Social Justice
are upheld, the revocation must, by
application of the operative fact principle, Sec. 22: The State recognizes and promotes
give way to the right of the original 6,296 the rights of indigenous cultural
qualified FWBs to choose whether they want communities within the framework of
to remain as HLI stockholders or not. The national unity and development.
Court cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that
in 1989, 93% of the FWBs agreed to the SDOA What is the reason for section 22?
(or the MOA), which became the basis of the
SDP approved by PARC per its Resolution No. -There should be national unity and
89-12-2 dated November 21, 1989. development, not only in cities and urban
centers but also in the rural areas. The
From 1989 to 2005, the FWBs were said to indigenous cultural communities are, in fact,
have received from HLI salaries and cash the paces that deserve attention of the
benefits, hospital and medical benefits, 240- government, the same being the place where
square meter homelots, 3% of the gross trivial Filipinos lived since time immemorial.
produce from agricultural lands, and 3% of Their culture is a rich heritage. Their
the proceeds of the sale of the 500-hectare ancestral land should be preserved.
converted land and the 80.51-hectare lot sold
to SCTEX. HLI shares totaling 118,391,976.85 What does ANCESTRAL LANDS include?
were distributed as of April 22, 2005. On
August 6, 20l0, HLI and private respondents -For purposes of this Act, ancestral land of
submitted a Compromise Agreement, in each indigenous cultural community shall
which HLI gave the FWBs the option of include, but not limited to, lands in the actual,
acquiring a piece of agricultural land or continuous and open possession and
remain as HLI stockholders, and as a matter occupation of the community and its
of fact, most FWBs indicated their choice of members; provided that the Torrens System
remaining as stockholders. shall be respected. (sec.9(2), R.A. 6657)

Page | 85
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Sec. 23: The State shall encourage non- G.R. NO. 91649, MAY 14, 1991
governmental, community-based, or
sectoral organizations that promote the FACTS: In 1977, PAGCOR was given a
welfare of the nation. franchise to establish, operate and maintain
gambling casinos within the Philippines. Its
operation, which was originally conducted in
What is the reason for sec. 23? the well-known floating casino “Philippine
tourist,” was considered a success, proving to
-It serves to create or induce more be a potential source of revenue to fund
participation from the said organizations, infrastructure and socio-economic projects.
which, in turn, will help the government in As a result, P.D. 1869 was issued to enable the
finding out ways and means to improve them Government, through PAGCOR, to regulate
and their communities. and centralize all games of chance authorized
by existing franchise or permitted by law.
Sec. 24: The State recognizes the vital role Petitioner Basco, et al., filed this present
of communication and information in petition, seeking to annul the PAGCOR
nation-building. Charter --- PD 1869, because it has intruded
into the local government’s right to impose
local taxes and license fees in contravention
Sec. 25: The State shall ensure the of the constitutionally enshrined principle of
autonomy of local governments. local autonomy.
ISSUE: Is P.D. 1869 violative of the principle

BASCO VS PAGCOR DOCTRINE: of local autonomy?
Municipal corporations are mere creatures of
Congress, which has the power to create and HELD: NO. P.D. No. 1869 was enacted
abolish municipal corporations the power to pursuant to the policy of the government to
create and abolish municipal corporations “regulate and centralize thru an appropriate
due to its general legislative powers. institution all games of chance authorized by
Congress, therefore, has the power of control existing franchise or permitted by law”.
over local governments.
The PAGCOR was beneficial not just to the
And if Congress can grant a municipality the Government but to society in general. It is a
power to tax certain matters, it can also reliable source of much needed revenue for
provide for exemptions or even take back the the cash strapped Government. It provided
power. funds for social impact projects and subjected
gambling to “close scrutiny, regulation,
supervision and control of the government”.
With the creation of PAGCOR and the direct
intervention of government, the evil practices
BASCO V. PAGCOR and corruptions that go with gambling will be
minimized if not totally eradicated. Public
Page | 86
MENDIOLA, MANILA
welfare, then, lies at the bottom of the BASCO VS. PAGCOR

enactment of P.D. 1896. 197 SCRA 52, 1991
The City of Manila, being a mere Municipal FACTS: Petitioners seek to annul the
corporation, has no inherent right to impose Philippine Amusement and Gaming
taxes. Thus, the Charter or statute must Corporation (PAGCOR) Charter - PD 1869,
plainly show an intent to confer that power or because it is allegedly contrary to morals,
the municipality cannot assume it. Its power public policy and order. Petitioners also claim
to tax therefore must always yield to a that said PD has a "gambling objective" and
legislative act which is superior having been that Section 13 par 2 of the same PD which
passed upon by the state itself which has the exempts PAGCOR from paying any tax, any
inherent power to tax. kind of term income or otherwise as well as
fees, charges as levies of whatever nature
The Charter of the City of Manila is subject to whether national or local is violative of the
control by Congress. It should be stressed principles of local autonomy for it is a waiver
that municipal corporations are mere of the right of the City of Manila to impose
creatures of Congress, which has the power to taxes and legal fees.
create and abolish municipal corporations
due to its general legislative powers. ISSUE: Whether or not the local autonomy
Congress, therefore, has the power of control clause is violated by PD 1869
over local governments. And if Congress can
grant the City of Manila the power to tax
certain matters, it can also provide for HELD: The petitioner’s contentions are
exemptions or even take back the power. without merit for the following reasons:
Local governments have no power to tax 1. The City of Manila, being a mere Municipal
instrumentalities of the National Government. corporation hits no inherent right to impose
PAGCOR is a gocc with an original charter, PD taxes
1869. All of its shares of stocks are owned by
the National Government. 2. The Charter of the City of Manila is subject
to control by Congress. It should be stressed
PAGCOR has a dual role, to operate and to that "municipal corporations are mere
regulate gambling casinos. The latter role is creatures of Congress" which has the power
governmental, which places it in the category to "create and abolish municipal
of an agency or instrumentality of the corporations" due to its "general legislative
Government. Being an instrumentality of the powers". Congress, therefore, has the power
Government, PAGCOR should be and actually of control over Local governments. And if
is exempt from local taxes. Otherwise, its Congress can grant the City of Manila the
operation might be burdened, impeded or power to tax certain matters, it can also
subjected to control by a mere local provide for exemptions or even take back
government. the power.
Another Digest:
Page | 87
MENDIOLA, MANILA
3. The City of Manila's power to impose

license fees on gambling, has long been FACTS: Sultan AlimbusarLimbona is the
revoked. Only the National Government has elected speaker of the Regional Legislative
the power to issue "licenses or permits" for Assembly or BatasangPampook of Central
the operation of gambling. Necessarily, the Mindanao (Assembly for brevity), while Conte
power to demand or collect license fees which Mangelin, et al., are members therein.
is a consequence of the issuance of "licenses
or permits" is no longer vested in the City of Cong. Matalam, House of Representatives
Manila. Committee on Muslim Affairs Chair invited
Limbona in his capacity as speaker of the
Assembly to participate in consultation and
4. Local governments have no power to tax dialogue regarding the charting of the
instrumentalities of the National autonomous government of Muslim
Government. PAGCOR is a government Mindanao to be held in Manila.
owned or controlled corporation with an
original charter. Limbona sent a telegram to all the Assembly
members informing that “there will be no
5. The power of local government to session this November” in view of the
"impose taxes and fees" is always subject to invitation of Cong. Matalam. This
"limitations" which Congress may provide notwithstanding, the Assembly held session
by law. Since PD 1869 remains an "operative'' and declared the seat of the Speaker vacant,
law, its "exemption clause" remains as an thereby prompting Limbona to file this
exception to the exercise of the power of local petition, assailing the Acts of the Assembly.
governments to impose taxes and fees. It
cannot therefore be violative but rather is ISSUE: Are the so-called autonomous
consistent with the principle of local governments of Mindanao subject to the
autonomy. Besides, the principle of local jurisdiction of the national courts?
autonomy under the 1987 Constitution
simply means "decentralization". It does not HELD: YES.
make local governments sovereign within the The autonomous governments of Mindanao
slate or an - imperiurn in imperio. were organized in Regions IX and XII by P.D.
No.1618.
It requires the autonomous regional

LIMBONA VS MANGELIN governments to “undertake all internal
DOCTRINE: Autonomy under the 1987 administrative matters which are within the
Constitution simply means “decentralization,” jurisdiction and competence of the National
and does not make the local governments Government.”
sovereign within the State or an imperium in
imperio. There is decentralization of administration
when the central government delegates
LIMBONA V. MANGELIN administrative powers to political
G.R. NO. 80391, FEBRUARY 28, 1989 subdivisions in order to broaden the base of
Page | 88
MENDIOLA, MANILA
government power and in the process to local governments "more responsive and
make local government “more responsive and accountable," and "ensure their fullest
accountable,” and “ensure their fullest development as self-reliant communities and
development as self-reliant communities and make them more effective partners in the
make them more effective partners in the pursuit of national development and social
pursuit of national development and social progress." At the same time, it relieves the
progress.” central government of the burden of managing
It relieves the government of the burden of local affairs and enables it to concentrate on
managing local affairs and enables it to national concerns. The President exercises
concentrate on national concerns. "general supervision" over them, but only to
The President exercises “general supervision” "ensure that local affairs are administered
over them, but only to “ensure that local according to law." He has no control over their
affairs are administered according to law.” He acts in the sense that he can substitute their
has no control over their acts in the sense that judgments with his own. Decentralization of
he can substitute their judgments with his power, on the other hand, involves an
own. abdication of political power in the favor of
local governments units declared to be
Decentralization of power, on the other autonomous.
hand, involves an abdication of political
power in the favor of local government units In that case, the autonomous government is
declared to be autonomous. In that case, the free to chart its own destiny and shape its
autonomous government is free to chart its future with minimum intervention from
own destiny and shape its future with central authorities. An examination of the
minimum intervention from central very Presidential Decree creating the
authorities. autonomous governments of Mindanao
persuades us that they were never meant to
Under the said P.D., the autonomous exercise autonomy in the second sense, that is,
governments were never meant to exercise in which the central government commits an
autonomy in the second sense, that is, in act of self-immolation. Presidential Decree No.
which the government commits an act of self- 1618, in the first place, mandates that "the
immolation. The P.D. mandates that “the President shall have the power of general
President shall have the power of general supervision and control over Autonomous
supervision and control over Autonomous Regions." In the second place, the
Regions.” In the 2nd place, the Sangguniang Pampook, their legislative arm,
SangguniangPampookI, their legislative arm, is made to discharge chiefly administrative
is made to discharge chiefly administrative services.
services.
There is Decentralization of administration Gabriel:

when the central government delegates
administrative powers to political -Decentralization of power amounts to self-
subdivisions in order to broaden the base of immolation, since in that event, the
government power and in the process to make autonomous government becomes
Page | 89
MENDIOLA, MANILA
accountable not to the central authorities but LGU if he or she finds that the latter had
to its constituency. acted contrary to law. The President or any
of his alter egos, cannot interfere in local
NOTES: affairs as long as the concerned local
Ours is still a unitary form of government, not government unit acts within the parameters
a federal state. Being so, any form of of law and the Constitution. Any directive,
autonomy granted to loca governments will therefore, by the President or any of his alter
necessarily be limited and confined within the egos seeking to alter the wisdom of a law-
extent allowed by the central authority. conforming judgment on local affairs of an
LGU is a patent nullity, because it violates the
Nachura: principle of local autonomy, as well as the
Administrative autonomy may involve the doctrine of separation of powers of the
devolution of powers, but subject to executive and legislative departments in
limitations like following national policies or governing municipal corporations. [Judge
standards, and those provided by the Local Dadole v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No.
Government Code, as the structuring of local 125350, December 3, 2002]
governments and the allocationof powers,
responsibilites and resources among the Because the President exercises only the
different local government units and power of general supervision over LGUs, the
localofficials have been placed by the grant of additional compensation, like
Constitution in the hands of Congress. hospitalization and health care insurance
[League of Provinces of th Philippines v. benefits to local government officials and
DENR, G.R. No. 175368, April 11, 2013] employees doesnot require the approval of
the President for validity. [Province of
Congress retains control of the local Negros Occidental v. The Commissioners,
government units although in a significantly Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 182574,
reduced degree now under our previous September 28, 2010]
Constitutions. The power to create includes
the power to destroy. The power to grant still
includes the power to withhold or recall. The
national government is still the principal
LGUs, which cnnot defy its will or modify or
violate it. Ours is still a unitary for of Albano:
government, not a federal state. Being so, any Q: What is local autonomy?
form of autonomy granted to local
governments will necessarily be limited and A: It means giving the local government units
confined within the extent allowed by the not only more and greater powers but also
central authority. [Lina v. Pano, G.R. No. providing them with ampler means and
129093, August 30, 2001] resources in order to enable them to meet
their enlarged responsibilities.
On the President’s power of general
supervision, however, the President can only Q: What are the purposes of the guarantee
interfere in the affairs of the and activities of of local autonomy?
Page | 90
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Elections but the COMELEC refused to give

A: 1.To give LGU’s the initiative and widest due course to it.
participation in the administration of their
own affairs. Only the LGU and its people have Pamatong seeks to reverse COMELEC
knowledge of their own needs, problems, and resolutions which were allegedly rendered in
solutions to the same; violation of his right to “equal access to
2.Asaprt of the political education process of opportunities for public service” under
the people, the local government being the Sec.26, Art.II of the 1987 Constitution, by
smallest government unit; limiting the number of qualified candidates
3.To release the LGUs from the almost only to those who can afford to wage a
monolithic control of the national nationwide campaign and/or are nominated
government; and by political parties. In so doing, Pamatong
4.To make the LGUs become self-reliant further argues that the COMELEC indirectly
communities. amended the constitutional provisions on the
electoral process and limited the power of
sovereign people to choose their leaders.
Sec. 26: The State shall guarantee equal
access of opportunities for public service, ISSUE: Does the constitutional provision
and prohibit political dynasties as may be ensuring “equal access to opportunities for
defined by law. public office” mean that there is a
constitutional right to run for or hold public
office?
PAMATONG VS COMELEC DOCTRINE
DOCTRINE: Sec. 26, Art. II, does not bestow a HELD: NO.
right to seek the Presidency; it does not What is recognized is merely a privilege
contain a judicially enforceable constitutional subject to limitations imposed by law. Sec.26,
right and merely specifies a guideline for Art.II of the constitution neither bestows such
legislative action. The provision is not a right nor elevates the privilege to the level
intended to compel the State to enact positive of an enforceable right.
measures that would accommodate as many
as possible into public office. The privilege The original wording of Sec.2 had read, “The
may be subjected to limitations. One such State shall broaden opportunities to public
valid limitation is the provision of the office and prohibit public dynasties.” Chief
Omnibus Election Code on nuisance Justice HilarioDavide changed the word
candidates.[Nachura] “broaden” to the phrase “ensure equal access”
and the substitution of the word “office” to
“service”. He explained that if you broaden, it
PAMATONG V. COMELEC would necessarily mean that the government
G.R. NO. 161872, APRIL 13, 2004) would be mandated to create as many offices
as are possible to accommodate as many
FACTS: Petitioner Rev. Elly Velez Pamatong people as are also possible.
filed his COC for the 2004 Presidential

Page | 91
MENDIOLA, MANILA
As long as the limitations on “nuisance wording of the present Section 26, Article II
candidates” apply to everybody equally had read, “The State shal l broaden
without discrimination, however, the equal opportunities to public office and prohibit
access clause is not violated. Equality is not public dynasties.” Commissioner (now Chief
sacrificed as long as the burdens engendered Justice) Hilario Davide, Jr . successfully brought
by the limitations are meant to borne by forth an amendment that changed the word
anyone who is minded to file COC. In the case “broaden” to the phrase “ensure equal access,”
at bar, there is no showing that any person is and the substitution of the word “office” to
exempt from the limitations or the burdens “service.” He explained his proposal in this
which they create. wise:
Implicit in the petitioner’s invocation of the I changed the word “ broaden” to “ENSURE
constitutional provision ensuring “equal EQUAL ACCESS TO” because what is
access to opportunities for public office” is important would be equal access to the
the claim that there is a constitutional right to opportunity. If you broaden, it would
run for or hold public office and, particularly necessarily mean that the government would
in his case, to seek the presidency. There is be mandated to create as many offices as are
none. What is recognized is merely a possible to accommodate as many people as
privilege subject to limitations imposed by are also possible. That is the meaning of
law. Section 26, Article II of the Constitution broadening opportunities to public service. So,
neither bestows such a right nor elevates in order that we should not mandate the State
the privilege to the level of an enforceable to make the government the number one
right. employer and to limit offices only to what may
be necessary and expedient yet offering equal
There is nothing in the plain language of the opportunities to access to it, I change the word
provision which suggests such a thrust or “broaden.” e mphasis supplied)
justifies an interpretation of the sort. The
“equal access” provision is a subsumed part Obviously, the provision is not intended to
of Article II of the Constitution, entitled compel the State to enact positive measures
“Declaration of Principles and State Policies.” that would accommodate as many people
The provisions under the Article are generally as possible into public office. The approval
considered not self-executing, and there is no of the “Davide amendment” indicates the
plausible reason for according a different design of the framers to cast the provision
treatment to the “equal access” provision. Like as simply enunciatory of a desired policy
the rest of the policies enumerated in Article II, objective and not reflective of the
the provision does not contain any judicially imposition of a clear State burden. Moreover,
enforceable constitutional right but merely the provision as written leaves much to be
specifies a guideline for legislative or executive desired if it is to be regarded as the source of
action. The disregard of the provision does not positive rights. It is difficult to interpret the
give rise to any cause of action before the clause as operative in the absence of legislation
courts. An inquiry into the intent of the framers since its effective means and reach are not
produces the same determination that the properly defined. Broadly written, the myriad
provision is not self-executory. The original of claims that can be subsumed under this
Page | 92
MENDIOLA, MANILA
rubric appear to be entirely open-ended. Words -Does this provision mean that everyone
and phrases such as “equal access,” has a right to be a candidate for President?
“opportunities,” and “public service” are
susceptible to countless interpretations owing -NO. First, this provision is not self-
to their inherent impreciseness. Certainly, it executory. The provision does not contain any
was not the intention of the framers to inflict judicially enforceable constitutional right but
on the people an operative but amorphous merely specifies a guideline for legislative or
foundation from which innately unenforceable executive action.
rights may be sourced. Second, it is within the power oft eh State to
limit the number of qualified candidates only
As earlier noted, the privilege of equal access to those who can afford to wage a nationwide
to opportunities to public office may be campaign and/or nominated by political
subjected to limitations. Some valid parties. (Pamatong v. Comelec)
limitations specifically on the privilege to
seek elective office are found in the Nachura:
provisions[9] of the Omnibus Election Code
on “Nuisance Candidates” and COMELEC R.A. No.4421 was struck down as
Resolution No. 6452[10] dated December 10, unconstitutional for requiring all candidates
2002 outlining the instances wherein the for elective public office to post a surety bond
COMELEC may motu proprio refuse to give equivalent to one year’s salary of the position
due course to or cancel a Certificate of to which he is aspiring, subject to forfeiture if
Candidacy. he fails to get at least 10% of the votes cast
except if declared winner. These property
As long as the limitations apply to everybody qualifications, according to the Court, are
equally without discrimination, however, the inconsistent with the nature and essence of
equal access clause is not violated. Equality is the Republican system ordained in our
not sacrificed as long as the burdens Constitution and the principle of social justice
engendered by the limitations are meant to underlying the same.
be borne by any one who is minded to file a
certificate of candidacy. In the case at bar,
there is no showing that any person is exempt
from the limitations or the burdens which Sec. 27: The State shall maintain honesty
they create. and integrity in the public service and take
positive and effective measures against
graft and corruption.
NOTES:
-What is the purpose of this provision?
Sec. 28: Subject to reasonable conditions
-Its purpose is to give substance to the prescribed by law, the State adopts and
desire for equalization of political implements a policy of full public disclosure
opportunities. However the definition of of all its transactions involving public
“political dynasties” is left to the legislature. interest.

Page | 93
MENDIOLA, MANILA
recognized. Access to official records, and

to documents, and papers pertaining to
LEGASPI VS CSC DOCTRINE: While the official acts, transactions, or decisions, as
manner of examining public records may be well as to government research data used
subject to reasonable regulation by the as basis for policy development, shall be
government agency in custody thereof, the afforded the citizen, subject to such
duty to disclose the information of public limitations as may be provided by law.
concern, and to afford access to public
records cannot be discretionary on the part of These constitutional provisions are self-
said agencies. executing. They supply the rules by means of
which the right to information may be
enjoyed by guaranteeing the right and
LEGASPI V. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION mandating the duty to afford access to
G.R. NO. 72119, MAY 29, 1987 sources of information. Hence, the
fundamental right therein recognized may be
FACTS: Petitioner Valentin Legaspi filed this asserted by the people upon the ratification of
instant case against the Civil Service the constitution without need for any
Commission, which had earlier denied his ancillary act of the Legislature.
request for information on the civil service
eligibilities of certain persons employed as What maybe provided for by the Legislature
sanitarians in Cebu City Health Department. are reasonable conditions and limitations
upon the access to be afforded which must, of
These government employees had allegedly necessity, be consistent with the declared
represented themselves as civil service State policy of full public disclosure of all
eligible who passed the civil service transactions involving public interest.
examinations for sanitarians. However, whatever limitation may be
prescribed by the Legislature, the right and
Legaspi claims that his right to be informed is the duty under Art. III, Sec. 7, have become
guaranteed by the constitution, hence, the operative and enforceable by virtue of the
prayer for the issuance of the extraordinary adoption of the New Charter. Therefore, the
writ of mandamus to compel the CSC to right may be properly invoked in a
disclose said information. mandamus proceeding such as this one.
ISSUE: May Mandamus be issued in this case? The authority to regulate the manner
examining public records does not carry with
HELD: YES. it the power to prohibit. A distinction has to
The constitutional right to information on be made between the discretion to refuse
matters of public concern first gained outright the disclosure of or access to
recognition in the Bill of Rights of the 1973 particular information and the authority to
Constitution, which has been retained in the regulate the manner in which the access to
1987 Constitution. The new provision reads: particular information and the authority to
The right of the people to information on regulate the manner in which the access is to
matters of public concern shall be be afforded. The first is a limitation upon the
Page | 94
MENDIOLA, MANILA
availability of access to the information information sought is of public interest or

sought, which only the Legislature may public concern.
impose. The second pertains to the
government agency charged with the custody The civil service eligibility of a sanitarian
of public records. Its authority to regulate being of public concern, and in the absence of
access is to be exercised solely to the end that express limitations under the law upon access
damage to, or loss of, public records may e to the register of civil service eligible’s for
avoided, undue interference with the duties said position, the duty of the respondent
of said agencies maybe prevented, and more Commission to confirm or deny the civil
importantly, that the exercise of the same service eligibility of any person occupying the
constitutional right by other persons shall be position becomes imperative.
assured.
Thus, while the manner of examining public VALMONTE vs BELMONTE DOCTRINE: The
records may be subject to reasonable right to information is an essential premise of
regulation by the government agency in a meaningful right to speech and expression.
custody thereof, the duty to disclose the But this is not to say that the right to
information of public concern and to information is merely an adjunct of and
afford access to public records cannot be therefore restricted in application by the
discretionary on the part of said agencies. exercise of the freedoms of speech and of the
Otherwise, the enjoyment of the press. Far from it, the right to information
constitutional right may be rendered goes hand-in-hand with the constitutional
nugatory by any whimsical exercise of agency policies of full public service. It is meant to
discretion. The constitutional duty, not being enhance the widening role of the citizenry in
discretionary, its performance maybe governmental decision-making as well as in
compelled by a writ of mandamus in a checking abuse in government.
proper case.
Nonetheless, the constitutional guarantee to VALMONTE V. BELMONTE

information on matters of public concern is G.R. NO. 74930, FEBRUARY 13, 1989
not absolute. The law may exempt certain
types of information from public scrutiny, FACTS: As a lawyer, member of the media
such as those affecting national security. and plain citizen of Philippines, petitioner
Ricardo Valmonte requested GSIS Gen.
The availability of access to a particular Manager Feliciano Belmonte that Valmonte
public record must be circumscribed by the be furnished with the list of names of the
nature of the information sought, i.e., (a) BatasangPambansa opposition members, who
being of public concern or one that were able to secure a loan of P2million each
involves public interest, and (b) not being on guaranty of Mrs. Imelda Marcos.
exempted by law from the operation of the
constitutional guarantee. The threshold Said request was denied upon GSIS’ opinion
question is, therefore, whether or not the that a confidential relationship exists

Page | 95
MENDIOLA, MANILA
between GSIS and all those who borrow from open a continuing dialogue or process of
it. communication between the government and
the people. It is in the interest of the State
ISSUE: Is mandamus proper in the instant that the channels for free political discussion
case? be maintained to the end that the government
may perceive and be responsive to the
HELD: YES. people’s will. Yet, this open dialogue can be
An informed citizenry with access to the effective only to the extent that the citizenry
diverse currents in political, moral and is informed and thus able to formulate its will
artistic thought and data relative to them, and intelligently. Only when the participants in
the free exchange of ideas and discussion of the discussion are aware of the issues and
issues thereon, is vital to the democratic have access to information relating thereto
government envisioned in the constitution. can such bear fruit.
The cornerstone of this republican system of
government is delegation of power by the The right to information is an essential
people to the state. In this system, premise of a meaningful right to speech and
governmental agencies and institutions expression. But this is not to say that the right
operate within the limits of the authority to information is merelyan adjunct of and
conferred by the people. Denied access to therefore restricted in application by the
information on the inner workings of exercise of the freedoms of speech and of the
government, the citizenry can become prey to press. Far from it, the right to information
the whims and caprices of those to whom the goes hand-in-hand with the constitutional
power had been delegated. The postulate of policies of full public disclosure and honesty
public office as a public trust, institutionalized in the public service. It is meant to enhance
in the Constitution to protect the people from the widening role of the citizenry in
abuse of governmental power, would governmental decision-making as well as in
certainly be were empty words if access to checking abuse in government.
such information of public concern is denied,
except under limitations prescribed by Like all the constitutional guarantees, the
implementing legislation adopted pursuant to right to information is not absolute. The
the Constitution. people’s right to information is limited to
“matters of public concern,” and is further
Petitioners are practitioners in media. As “subject to such limitations as may be
such, they have both the right to gather and provided by law.” The State’s policy of full
the obligation to check the accuracy of disclosure is limited to “transactions
information they disseminate. For them, the involving public interest,” and is “subject to
freedom of the press and of speech is not only reasonable conditions prescribed by law.”
critical, but vital to the exercise of their
professions. The right of access to Hence, before mandamus may issue, it must
information ensures that these freedoms are be clear that the information sought is of
not rendered nugatory by the government’s “public interest” or “public concern” and is
monopolizing pertinent information. For an not exempted by law from the operation of
essential element of these freedoms is to keep the constitutional guarantee.
Page | 96
MENDIOLA, MANILA
the alleged borrowers make the information

The information sought by petitioners in this sought clearly a matter of public interest and
case is the truth of reports that certain concern.
Members of the BatasangPambansabelonging
to the opposition were able to secure “clean” Belmonte maintains that a confidential
loans from the GSIS immediately before the relationship exists between the GSIS and its
February 7. 1986 collection through the borrowers. It is argued that a policy of
intercession of the former First Lady, Mrs. confidentiality restricts the indiscriminate
Imelda Marcos. dissemination of information. Yet, he has
failed to cite any law granting the GSIS the
The GSIS is a trustee of contributions from the privilege of confidentiality as regards the
government and its employees and the documents subject of this petition. His
administrator of various insurance programs position is apparently based merely on
for the benefit of the latter. Undeniably, its considerations of policy. The judiciary does
funds assume a public character. not settle policy issues. The Court can only
declare what the law is, and not what the law
Considering the nature of the funds, the GSIS should be. Under our system of government,
is expected to manage its resources with policy issues are within the domain of
utmost prudence and in strict compliance political branches of the government, and of
with the pertinent laws or rules and the people themselves as the repository of all
regulations. Thus, one of the reasons that State power.
prompted the revision of the old GSIS Law
was the necessity “to preserve at all times the Another Digest:
actuarial solvency of the funds administered
by the system.” Consequently, as Belmonte LEGASPI VS. CIVIL SEVICE COMMISSION
himself admits, the GSIS “is not supposed to 150 SCRA 530, 1987
grant clean loans.”
FACTS:
It is therefore the legitimate concern of the The fundamental right of the people to
public to ensure that these funds are information on matters of public concern is
managed properly with the end in view of invoked in this special civil action for
maximizing the benefits that accrue to the Mandamus instituted by petitioner Valentin L.
insured government employees. Moreover, Legaspi against the Civil Service Commission.
the supposed borrowers were members of The respondent had earlier denied Legaspi's
the defunct BatasangPambansa who request for information on the civil service
themselves appropriated funds for the GSIS eligibilities of certain persons employed as
and were therefore expected to be the first to sanitarians in the Health Department of Cebu
see to it that the GSIS performed its tasks City. These government employees had
with the greatest degree of fidelity and that allegedly represented themselves as civil
its transactions were above board. service eligibles who passed the civil service
examinations for sanitarians.
In sum, the public nature of the loanable
funds of the GSIS and the public office held by
Page | 97
MENDIOLA, MANILA
ISSUE: Whether or not Legaspi should be informed, both the 1973 Constitution and
allowed such right the New Charter expressly mandate the
duty of the State and its agents to afford
access to official records, documents,
HELD: papers and in addition, government
The constitutional right to information on research data used as basis for policy
matters of public concern is recognized in the development, subject to such limitations as
Bill of Rights. These constitutional may be provided by law.
provisions are self-executing. They supply
the rules by means of which the right to The guarantee has been further enhanced in
information may be enjoyed by guaranteeing the New Constitution with the adoption of a
the right and mandating the duty to afford policy of full public disclosure, this time
access to sources of information. Hence, the "subject to reasonable conditions prescribed
fundamental right therein recognized may be by law," in Article II, Section 28 thereof, to
asserted by the people upon the ratification of wit: Subject to reasonable conditions
the constitution without need for any prescribed by law, the State adopts and
ancillary act of the Legislature. What may be implements a policy of full public disclosure
provided for by the Legislature are of all its transactions involving public interest.
reasonable conditions and limitations upon (Art. II, Sec. 28).
the access to be afforded which must, of
necessity, be consistent with the declared In the Tanada case, supra, the constitutional
State policy of full public disclosure of all guarantee was bolstered by what this Court
transactions involving public interest. For declared as an imperative duty of the
every right of the people recognized as government officials concerned to publish all
fundamental, there lies a corresponding important legislative acts and resolutions of a
duty on the part of those who govern, to public nature as well as all executive orders
respect and protect that right. That is the and proclamations of general applicability.
very essence of the Bill of Rights in a We granted Mandamus in said case, and in
constitutional regime. the process, We found occasion to expound
briefly on the nature of said duty:
Only governments operating under
fundamental rules defining the limits of their . . . That duty must be enforced if the
power so as to shield individual rights against Constitutional right of the people to be
its arbitrary exercise can properly claim to be informed on matters of public concern is to be
constitutional. Without a government's given substance and reality. The law itself
acceptance of the limitations imposed upon it makes a list of what should be published in
by the Constitution in order to uphold the Official Gazette. Such listing, to our mind,
individual liberties, without an leaves respondents with no discretion
acknowledgment on its part of those duties whatsoever as to what must be included or
exacted by the rights pertaining to the excluded from such publication. (Tanada v.
citizens, the Bill of Rights becomes a sophistry, Tuvera, supra, at 39) The absence of
and liberty, the ultimate illusion. In discretion on the part of government
recognizing the people's right to be agencies in allowing the examination of
Page | 98
MENDIOLA, MANILA
public records, specifically, the records in other persons entitled to make inspection
the Office of the Register of Deeds, is may be insured . . . (Subido vs. Ozaeta, 80 Phil.
emphasized in Subido vs. Ozaeta, supra: 383, 387).
Except, perhaps when it is clear that the
purpose of the examination is unlawful, or Applying the Subido ruling by analogy, We
sheer, idle curiosity, we do not believe it is recognized a similar authority in a municipal
the duty under the law of registration judge, to regulate the manner of inspection by
officers to concern themselves with the the public of criminal docket records in the
motives, reasons, and objects of the person case of Baldoza vs. Dimaano (Adm. Matter No.
seeking access to the records. It is not their 1120-MJ, May 5, 1976, 71 SCRA 14). Said
prerogative to see that the information administrative case was filed against the
which the records contain is not flaunted respondent judge for his alleged refusal to
before public gaze, or that scandal is not allow examination of the criminal docket
made of it. If it be wrong to publish the records in his sala. Upon a finding by the
contents of the records, it is the legislature Investigating Judge that the respondent had
and not the officials having custody thereof allowed the complainant to open and view the
which is called upon to devise a remedy. . . . subject records, We absolved the respondent.
(Subido v. Ozaeta, supra at 388). In effect, We have also held that the rules and
conditions imposed by him upon the manner
It is clear from the foregoing of examining the public records were
pronouncements of this Court that reasonable. In both the Subido and the
government agencies are without Baldoza cases,
discretion in refusing disclosure of, or
access to, information of public concern. We were emphatic in Our statement that the
This is not to lose sight of the reasonable authority to regulate the manner of
regulations which may be imposed by said examining public records does not carry with
agencies in custody of public records on the it the power to prohibit. A distinction has to
manner in which the right to information be made between the discretion to refuse
may be exercised by the public. In the outright the disclosure of or access to a
Subido case, We recognized the authority of particular information and the authority to
the Register of Deeds to regulate the manner regulate the manner in which the access is to
in which persons desiring to do so, may be afforded. The first is a limitation upon the
inspect, examine or copy records relating to availability of access to the information
registered lands. However, the regulations sought, which only the Legislature may
which the Register of Deeds may promulgate impose (Art. III, Sec. 6, 1987 Constitution).
are confined to:
The second pertains to the government
. . . prescribing the manner and hours of agency charged with the custody of public
examination to the end that damage to or loss records. Its authority to regulate access is to
of, the records may be avoided, that undue be exercised solely to the end that damage to,
interference with the duties of the custodian or loss of, public records may be avoided,
of the books and documents and other undue interference with the duties of said
employees may be prevented, that the right of agencies may be prevented, and more
Page | 99
MENDIOLA, MANILA
importantly, that the exercise of the same them a better perspective of the vital issues
constitutional right by other persons shall be confronting the nation.
assured (Subido vs. Ozaeta, supra).
But the constitutional guarantee to
Thus, while the manner of examining public information on matters of public concern is
records may be subject to reasonable not absolute. It does not open every door to
regulation by the government agency in any and all information. Under the
custody thereof, the duty to disclose the Constitution, access to official records,
information of public concern, and to afford papers, etc., are "subject to limitations as
access to public records cannot be may be provided by law" (Art. III, Sec. 7,
discretionary on the part of said agencies. second sentence). The law may therefore
Certainly, its performance cannot be made exempt certain types of information from
contingent upon the discretion of such public scrutiny, such as those affecting
agencies. Otherwise, the enjoyment of the national security. It follows that, in every case,
constitutional right may be rendered the availability of access to a particular public
nugatory by any whimsical exercise of record must be circumscribed by the nature
agency discretion. The constitutional duty, of the information sought, i.e.,
not being discretionary, its performance
may be compelled by a writ of Mandamus in (a) being of public concern or one that
a proper case. But what is a proper case for involves public interest, and,
Mandamus to issue? In the case before Us, the
public right to be enforced and the (b) not being exempted by law from the
concomitant duty of the State are operation of the constitutional guarantee. The
unequivocably set forth in the Constitution. threshold question is, therefore, whether or not
The decisive question on the propriety of the the information sought is of public interest or
issuance of the writ of Mandamus in this case public concern. This question is first
is, whether the information sought by the addressed to the government agency having
petitioner is within the ambit of the custody of the desired information. However,
constitutional guarantee. as already discussed, this does not give the
agency concerned any discretion to grant or
The incorporation in the Constitution of a deny access. In case of denial of access, the
guarantee of access to information of public government agency has the burden of
concern is a recognition of the essentiality of showing that the information requested is not
the free flow of ideas and information in a of public concern, or, if it is of public concern,
democracy (Baldoza v. Dimaano, Adm. Matter that the same has been exempted by law from
No. 1120-MJ, May 5, 1976, 17 SCRA 14). In the the operation of the guarantee. To hold
same way that free discussion enables otherwise will serve to dilute the
members of society to cope with the constitutional right. As aptly observed, ". . .
exigencies of their time (Thornhill vs. the government is in an advantageous
Alabama, 310 U.S. 88, 102 [1939]), access to position to marshall and interpret arguments
information of general interest aids the against release . . ." To safeguard the
people in democratic decision-making (87 constitutional right, every denial of access by
Harvard Law Review 1505 [1974] by giving the government agency concerned is subject
Page | 100
MENDIOLA, MANILA
to review by the courts, and in the proper technical, by competitive examination. (Art.
case, access may be compelled by a writ of IX, B, Sec. 2. [2]).
Mandamus.
Public office being a public trust, [Const.,
In determining whether or not a particular Art. XI, Sec: 1] it is the legitimate concern of
information is of public concern there is no citizens to ensure that government
rigid test which can be applied. " Public positions requiring civil service eligibility
concern" like "public interest" is a term that are occupied only by persons who are
eludes exact definition . Both terms embrace a eligibles. Public officers are at all times
broad spectrum of subjects which the public accountable to the people even as to their
may want to know , either 1 because these eligibilities for their respective positions.
directly affect their lives , or 2 simply But then, it is not enough that the
because such matters naturally arouse the information sought is of public interest. For
interest of an ordinary citizen. In the final Mandamus to lie in a given case, the
analysis, it is for the courts to determine in information must not be among the species
a case by case basis whether the matter at exempted by law from the operation of the
issue is of interest or importance, as it constitutional guarantee.
relates to or affects the public.
In the instant, case while refusing to confirm
The public concern invoked in the case of or deny the claims of eligibility, the
Tañada v. Tuvera, supra, was the need for respondent has failed to cite any provision in
adequate notice to the public of the various the Civil Service Law which would limit the
laws which are to regulate the actions and petitioner's right to know who are, and who
conduct of citizens. In Subido vs. Ozaeta, are not, civil service eligibles.
supra, the public concern deemed covered by
the statutory right was the knowledge of We take judicial notice of the fact that the
those real estate transactions which some names of those who pass the civil service
believed to have been registered in violation examinations, as in bar examinations and
of the Constitution. licensure examinations for various
professions, are released to the public. Hence,
The information sought by the petitioner in there is nothing secret about one's civil service
this case is the truth of the claim of certain eligibility, if actually possessed. Petitioner's
government employees that they are civil request is, therefore, neither unusual nor
service eligibles for the positions to which unreasonable. And when, as in this case, the
they were appointed. The Constitution government employees concerned claim to be
expressly declares as a State policy that: civil service eligibles, the public, through any
citizen, has a right to verify their professed
Appointments in the civil service shall be eligibilities from the Civil Service Commission.
made only according to merit and fitness to
be determined, as far as practicable, and The civil service eligibility of a sanitarian
except as to positions which are policy being of public concern, and in the absence
determining, primarily confidential or highly of express limitations under the law upon
access to the register of civil service
Page | 101
MENDIOLA, MANILA
eligibles for said position, the duty of the

respondent Commission to confirm or deny HELD:
the civil service eligibility of any person We find respondents' refusal to allow
occupying the position becomes imperative. petitioner to examine the records of
Mandamus, therefore lies. respondent MTRCB, pertaining to the
decisions of the review committee as well as
the individual voting slips of its members, as
violative of petitioner's constitutional right of
AQUINO VS SARMIENTO DOCTRINE: access to public records.
MTRCB’s very existence public in character; it
is an office created to serve public interest. May the decisions of respondent Board and
Hence, the public may not be denied access to the individual members concerned, arrived at
its record. in an official capacity, be considered private?
AQUINO-SARMIENTO V. MORATO Certainly not. As may be gleaned from the

G.R. NO. 92541, NOVEMBER 13, 1991 decree (PD 1986) creating the respondent
classification board, there is no doubt that its
FACTS: very existence is public in character; it is an
Petitioner, a member of respondent MTRCB, office created to serve public interest. it being
wrote its records officer requesting that she the case, respondents can Jay no valid claim
be allowed to examine the board's records to privacy. The right to privacy belongs to the
pertaining to the voting slips accomplished by individual acting in his private capacity and
the individual board members after a review not to a governmental agency or officers
of the movies and television productions. It is tasked with, and acting in, the discharge of
on the basis of said slips that films are either public duties.
banned, cut or classified accordingly.
Petitioner's request was denied by
respondent Morato on the ground that Another Digest:
whenever the members of the board sit in
judgment over a film, their decisions as AQUINO-SARMIENTO V. MORATO
reflected in the individual voting slips partake G.R. NO. 92541, NOVEMBER 13, 1991
the nature of conscience votes and as such,
are purely and completely private and FACTS: Petitioner Ma. Carmen Aquino-
personal. Petitioner counters that the records Sarmiento herself a member of Movie and
she wishes to examine are public in character Television Review and Classification Board
and other than providing for reasonable (MTRCB), wrote its records officer requesting
conditions regulating the manner and hours that she be allowed to examine the board’s
of examination, respondents have no records pertaining to the voting slips
authority to deny any citizen seeking accomplished by the individual board
examination of the board's records. members after a review of the movies and
television productions. It is on the basis of
ISSUE: Was the respondents’ denial of said slips that films are either banned, cut or
petitioner’s request proper? classified accordingly.
Page | 102
MENDIOLA, MANILA
with, and acting in, the discharge of public

Acting on said request, the records officer duties.
informed Sarmiento hat she has to secure
prior clearance from respondent Morato, as There can be no invasion of privacy in the
chairman of MTRCB, to gain access to the case at bar since what is sought to be divulged
records sought to be examined. is a product of action undertaken in the
course of performing official functions. To
Sarmiento’s request was eventually denied by declare otherwise would be to clothe every
Morato on the ground that whenever the public official with an impregnable mantle of
members of the board sit in judgment over a protection against public scrutiny for his or
film, their decisions as reflected in the her official acts.
individual voting slips partake the nature and Further, the decisions of the Board and the
conscience votes and personal. The individual individual voting slips accomplished by the
voting slips is the exclusive property of the members concerned are acts made pursuant
member concerned and anybody who wants to their official functions, and as such, are
access thereto, must first secure the members neither personal nor private in nature but
consent, otherwise, a request therefore may rather public in character. They are,
be legally denied. therefore, public records access to which is
guaranteed to the citizenry by no less than
SARMIENTO argues however, that the the fundamental law of the land. Being a
records she wishes to examine are public in public right, the exercise thereof cannot be
character and other than providing for made contingent on the discretion, nay, whim
reasonable conditions regulating the manner and caprice, of the agency charged with the
and hours of examination, Morato and custody of the official records sought to be
MTRCB have no authority to deny any citizen examined. The constitutional recognition of
seeking examination of the board’s records. the citizen’s right of access to official records
cannot be made dependent upon the consent
ISSUE: May the decisions of respondent of the members of the board concerned,
Board and the individual members otherwise, the said right would be rendered
concerned, arrived at in an official capacity, nugatory.
be considered private, hence beyond the
scope of the right of the people to The court is not unaware of R.A. 6713 )Code
information? of Conduct on Ethical Standards for Public
Officials and Employees) which provides,
HELD: NO. among others, certain exceptions as regards
As may be gleaned from the decree creating the availability of official records or
the MTRCB, there is no doubt that its very documents to the requesting public, e.g.,
existence is public in character; it is an office closed door Cabinet sessions and
created to serve public interest. It being the deliberations of this Court. Suffice it to state,
case, respondents can lay no valid claim to however, that the exceptions therein
privacy. The right to privacy belongs to the enumerated find no application in the case at
individual acting in his private capacity ad not bar. Sarmiento’s request is not concerned
to a governmental agency or officers tasked with the deliberations of the MTRCB but with
Page | 103
MENDIOLA, MANILA
its documents or records made after decision them specific duties for a specific
or order has been rendered. tenure. The lessons that we have
learned during the 21 years of martial
Neither will the examination involve rule teach us that graft and
disclosure of trade secrets or matters corruption, abuse of power and
pertaining to national security which would authority, and oppression of the rights
otherwise limit the right of access to official of the people, can cause chaos and
records. revolution.
Albano:
Gabriel:
-Feb.6. 1986= cut-off date, snap election Q: Is the right of the public on information
of matters of public concern absolute?
Why?
NOTES:
What are the 3 basic principles A: NO, because it is subject to reasonable
emphasized by section 27 and 28? conditions that maybe prescribed by law.
Trade secrets, confidential communications
1. PUBLIC OFFICE IS A PUBLIC TRUST. and financial information’s, or maters
Under this principle, public officials in involving national security may not just be
all ladders of our government should inquired into. If the purpose of the inquiry is
always remember that they were unlawful, or sheer or idle curiosity, then, the
merely entrusted by the people to right cannot be invoked.
perform duties and responsibilities of
their offices for a fixed period of time. The right to information or to know is
They were chosen to serve the people, limited to matters of public concern and is
not to cheat them. Their offices are limited by law. The policy of full disclosure is
not their own, nor can they be treated confined to transactions involving public
as private properties which they can interest and is subject to reasonable
manage or dispose of at their whim conditions prescribed by law.
and caprice.
Q: The Bataan Petro-chemical Corporation
2. OURS IS A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS changed its site from Bataan to Batangas.
AND NOT OF MEN. The law should be Congressman Garcia requested for a copy
applied equally without fear or favor. of its application but the BOI refused,
No one in this Republic, not even the contending that it is confidential. Rule on
President, is above the law. the contention of BOI. Cite your reasons.
3. TRANSPARENCY IN PUBLIC A: BOI is not correct. The confidentiality of

SERVICE. Because public officials are the application of Bataan Petro-Chemical
mere trustees of the people, they Corporation is not absolute. Garcia, as a
should observe loyalty and fidelity to representative of the people, has the
the people who have entrusted to constitutional right to have access to
Page | 104
MENDIOLA, MANILA
information on matters of public concern. The public disclosure and the people’s right to
confidentiality of the records of the BPCC’s know? Explain.
application is not absolute because they may
be disclosed upon the consent of the applicant A: NO. In Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance, 65
or on orders of a court of competent SCAD 352, G.R. No. 115455, Oct.30, 1995, it was
jurisdiction. The same is not absolute because said that the right of the people to know was
it is subject to limitations prescribed by law. full served because the Conference
Committee submitted a report showing the
Q: Emiliano Jurado wrote in his column changes made on the differing versions of the
about a decision of the SC regarding a case, House and the Senate.
which the Court allegedly decided. When
asked for his source, he could not state the Q: After the accreditation of party-list
same, especially since the decision has not organizations, the COMELEC refused to
yet been promulgated. When pressed for reveal the names of the nominees. It based
it, he invoked his right of information on its ruling under sec.7, RA7941 which
matters of public concern. Is his provides that the names of the party-list
contention proper? nominees shall not be shown on the
certified list of party-list groups. A petition
A: No, because the decisions of courts if not for mandamus was filed to compel the
yet released are confidential. People cannot COMELEC to reveal the names of the
inquire into them. nominees invoking the right to
information and free access to documents
Q: X, a member of the Board of Motion as guaranteed by the Constitution. Is the
Pictures wanted to know how other petition proper? Why?
members voted in a particular film. The
Chairman refused to reveal the result. X A: YES. The last sentence of Sec.7, RA7941
invoked her right to access on matters of reading: “The names of the party-list
public concern. Decide. nominees shall not be shown on the certified
list” is certainly not a justifying card for the
A: X is correct. The refusal of the Chairman is COMELEC to deny the requested disclosure.
violative of the people’s right to access on To us, the prohibition imposed on the
matters of public concern. The decisions of COMELEC under section 7 is limited in scope
the members are made pursuant to official and duration, meaning, that it extends only to
functions. The records are not private but certified list, which the same provision
public records where access is guaranteed. requires to be posted in the polling places on
(Aquino v. Morato, G.R. No.92541, Nov.13, election day. To stretch the coverage of the
1991) prohibition to the absolute is to read into the
law something that is not intended. As it
Q: The general rule is that when the bill is were, there is absolutely nothing in RA7941
being treated by the Conference that prohibits the COMELEC from disclosing
Committee, only the conferees in the or even publishing through mediums other
conference committee are present, is it not than the “Certified List” the names of the
violative of the constitutional policy of full party-list nominees. The COMELEC obviously
Page | 105
MENDIOLA, MANILA
misread the limited non-disclosure before the A: NO. Like all constitutional guarantees,
May 2007 elections. The interpretation thus however, the right to information and its
given by the COMELEC virtually tacks an companion right of access to official records
unconstitutional dimension on the last are not absolute. As articulated in Legaspi v.
sentence of Section 7 of RA7941. (Bantay CSC, 150 SCRA 530, the people’s right to know
Rep. Act 7941 v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 177271, is limited to “matters of public concern” and
May 4, 2007) is further subject to such limitation as maybe
provided by law. Similarly, the policy of full
Q: State the nature of the right of the disclosure is confined to transactions
people to information. Explain. involving “public interest” and is subject to
reasonable conditions prescribed by law. Too,
A: The right to information is a public right there is also the need of preserving a measure
where the real parties in interest are the of confidentiality on some matters, such as
public, or the citizens to be precise. And for military, trade, banking, and diplomatic
every right of the people recognized as secrets, or those affecting national
fundamental lies a corresponding duty on the security.(Chavez v. PCGG, G.R. No. 130716,
part of those who govern to respect and December 9, 1998, 299 SCRA 744).
protect that right. This is the essence of the
Bill of Rights in a constitutional
regime.(Legaspi v. CSC, 150SCRA530).
Without a government’s acceptance of the
limitations upon it by the Constitution in
ADDITIONAL: UTOPIA NOTES:
order to uphold individual liberties, without
an acknowledgment on its part of those XIII. Respect for Human Dignity
duties exacted by the rights pertaining to the
citizens, the Bill of Rights becomes a Section 11. The State values the dignity of
sophistry. every human person and guarantees full
respect for human rights.
By weight of evidence, any citizen can
challenge any attempt to obstruct the exercise The concretization of this provision is found
of his right to information and may seek its principally in the Bill of Rights and in the
enforcement by mandamus. (Tanada v. human rights provision of Article XIII.
Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27). And since every citizen
by the simple fact of his citizenship possesses Facts: Petitioners questioned the
the right to be informed, objections on ground constitutionality of PD 1869, which created
of locus standi are ordinarily unavailing. the PAGCOR and authorized it to operate
(Bantay Rep. Act 7941 v. COMELEC, G.R. No. gambling casinos, on the ground that it
177271, May 4, 2007) violated Sections 11, 12 and 13 of Article II of
the Constitution.
Q: Is the rule absolute? Explain. Held: These provisions are merely

statements of policies which are not self-

Page | 106
MENDIOLA, MANILA
executing. A law has to be passed to protection begins from the time of conception
implement them. (Basco v. PAGCOR, 197 is to prevent the State form adopting the
DCRA 52) doctrine in Roe v. Wade which liberalized
abortion laws up to the sixth month of
XIV. Family; Rearing the Youth pregnancy by allowing abortion any time
during the first six months of pregnancy
Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity provided it can be done without danger to the
of family life and shall protect and strengthen mother.
the family as a basic autonomous social
institution. It shall equally protect the life of D. Legal Meaning of the Protection
the mother and the life of the unborn from Guaranteed for the Unborn.
conception. The natural and primary right
and duty of parents in rearing of the youth for 1. This is not an assertion that the unborn is a
civic efficiency and the development of moral legal person.
character shall receive the support of the
government. 2. This is not an assertion that the life of the
unborn is placed exactly on the level of the
Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role life of the mother. (When necessary to save
of the youth in nation- building and shall the life of the mother, the life of the unborn
promote and protect their physical moral, may be sacrificed; but not when the purpose
spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It is merely to save the mother from emotional
shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and suffering, for which other remedies must be
nationalism, and encourage their involvement sought, or to spare the child from a life of
in public and civic affairs. poverty, which can be attended to by welfare
institutions.)
A. Family
E. Education
Family” means a stable heterosexual
relationship. The family is not a creature of In the matter of education, the primary and
the State. natural right belongs to the parents. The State
has a secondary and supportive role.
B. Effect of the Declaration of Family
Autonomy Foreign Language. The State cannot prohibit
the teaching of foreign language to children
It accepts the principle that the family is before they reach a certain age. Such
anterior to the State and not a creature of the restriction does violence both to the letter
State. It protects the family from and the spirit of the Constitution. (Meyer v.
instrumentalization by the State. Nebraska)
C. Purpose of Assertion of Protection of the Public School. The State cannot require
Unborn children to attend only public schools before
they reach a certain age. The child is not a
The purpose of the assertion that the mere creature of the State. Those who

Page | 107
MENDIOLA, MANILA
nurture him and direct his destiny have the discrimination, which is guaranteed all
right to recognize and prepare him. (Pierce v. women workers under the Constitution.
Society of Sisters) While a requirement that a woman employee
must remain unmarried may be justified as a
Religious Upbringing. The State cannot “bona fide qualification” where the particular
require children to continue schooling requirements of the job would demand the
beyond a certain age in the honest and same, discrimination against married women
sincere claim of parents that such schooling cannot be adopted by the employer as a
would be harmful to their religious general principle.
upbringing. Only those interests of the State
“of the highest order and those not otherwise XVI. Health
served can overbalance” the primary interest
of parents in the religious upbringing of their Section 15. The State shall protect and
children. (Wisconsin v. Yoder) promote the right to health of the people and
instill health consciousness among them.
ParensPatriae. However, as parenspatriae,
the State has the authority and duty to step in The provisions which directly or indirectly
where parents fail to or are unable to cope pertain to the duty of the State to protect and
with their duties to their children. promote the people’s right to health and well-
being are not self- executory. They await
XV. Women implementation by Congress.
Section 14. The State recognizes the role of XVII. Balance and Healthful Ecology
women in nation-building, and shall ensure
the fundamental equality before the law of Section 16. The State shall protect and
women and men. advance the right of the people to a balanced
and healthful ecology in accord with the
The provision is so worded as not to rhythm and harmony of nature.
automatically dislocate the Civil Code and the
civil law jurisprudence on the subject. What it Section 16 provides for enforceable rights.
does is to give impetus to the removal, Hence, appeal to it has been recognized as
through statutes, of existing inequalities. The conferring “standing” on minors to challenge
general idea is for the law to ignore sex where logging policies of the government. (Oposa v.
sex is not a relevant factor in determining Factoran)
rights and duties. Nor is the provision meant
to ignore customs and traditions. While the right to a balanced and healthful
ecology is to be found under the Declaration
In Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Co. v. of Principles and State Policies and not under
NLRC, 1997, the Supreme Court held that the the Bill of Rights, it does not follow that it is
petitioner’s policy of not accepting or less important than any of the civil and
considering as disqualified from work any political rights enumerated in the latter. Such
woman worker who contracts marriage , runs a right belongs to a different category of
afoul of the test of, and the right against rights for it concerns nothing less than self-

Page | 108
MENDIOLA, MANILA
preservation and self-perpetuation. These and, therefore, shall at least satisfy minimum
basic rights need not even be written in the standards with respect to curricula, teaching
Constitution for they are assumed to exist staff, physical plant and facilities and
from the inception of humankind. (Oposa v. administrative and management viability.
Factoran,1993)
While it is true that the Court has upheld the
On this basis too, the SC upheld the constitutional right of every citizen to select a
empowerment of the Laguna Lake profession or course of study subject to fair,
Development Authority (LLDA) to protect the reasonable and equitable admission and
inhabitants of the Laguna Lake Area from the academic requirements, the exercise of this
deleterious effects of pollutants coming from right may be regulated pursuant to the police
garbage dumping and the discharge of wastes power of the State to safeguard health, morals,
in the area as against the local autonomy peace, education, order, safety and general
claim of local governments in the area. (LLDA welfare.
v. CA, 1995)
Thus, persons who desire to engage in the
See Rule of Procedure on Environmental learned professions requiring scientific or
Cases. technical knowledge may be required to take
an examination as a prerequisite to engaging
See Writ of Kalikasan under Article VIII. in their chosen careers. This regulation
assumes particular pertinence in the field of
XVIII. Education, Science and Technology medicine, in order to protect the public from
the potentially deadly effects of incompetence
Section 17. The State shall give priority to and ignorance. (PRC v. De Guzman, 2004)
education, science and technology, arts,
culture and sports to foster patriotism,
nationalism, accelerate social progress, and
promote total human liberation and XIX. Labor
development.
Section 18. The State affirms labor as a
(See Article XIV, Section 2) primary social economic force. It shall protect
the rights of workers and promote their
This does not mean that the government is welfare.
not free to balance the demands of education
against other competing and urgent demands. “A primary social economic force” means that
(Guingona v. Carague) the human factor has primacy over non-
human factors of production.
In Philippine Merchant Marine School Inc. v.
CA, the Court said that the requirement that a Protection to labor does not indicate
school must first obtain government promotion of employment alone. Under the
authorization before operating is based on welfare and social justice provisions of the
the State policy that educational programs Constitution, the promotion of full
and/or operations shall be of good quality employment, while desirable, cannot take a

Page | 109
MENDIOLA, MANILA
backseat to the government’s constitutional 19 of Article II, nor Sections 10 and 12 of

duty to provide mechanisms for the Article XII, because said sections should be
protection of our workforce, local or overseas. read and understood in relation to Sections 1
(JMM Promotion and Management v. CA, and 3, Article XII, which requires the pursuit
260 SCRA 319) of a trade policy that “serves the general
welfare and utilizes all forms and
What concerns the Constitution more arrangements of exchange on the basis of
paramountly is employment be above all, equality and reciprocity.” (Tanada V.
decent, just and humane. It is bad enough that Angara)
the country has to send its sons and
daughters to strange lands, because it cannot
satisfy their employment needs at home.
Under these circumstances, the Government XXI. Private Sector and Private Enterprise
is duty bound to provide them adequate
protection, personally and economically, Section 20. The State recognizes the
while away from home. (Philippine indispensable role of the private sector,
Association of Service Exporters v. Drilon, encourages private enterprise, and provides
163 SCRA 386) incentives to needed investments.
XX. Self-Reliant and Independent Economy Section 20 is an acknowledgment of the

importance of private initiative in building
Section 19. The State shall develop a self- the nation. However, it is not a call for official
reliant and independent national economy abdication of duty to citizenry. (Marine Radio
effectively controlled by Filipinos. Communications Association v. Reyes)
This is a guide for interpreting provisions on Although the Constitution enshrines free
national economy and patrimony. Any doubt enterprise as a policy, it nevertheless
must be resolved in favor of self-reliance and reserves to the Government the power to
independence and in favor of Filipinos. intervene whenever necessary for the
promotion of the general welfare, as reflected
A petrochemical industry is not an ordinary in Sections 6 and 19 of Article XII.
investment opportunity, it is essential to
national interest. (The approval of the
transfer of the plant from Bataan to Batangas
and authorization of the change of feedstock
from naptha only to naptha and/or LPG do
not prove to be advantageous to the
government. This is a repudiation of the
independent policy of the government to run XXII. Comprehensive Rural Development
its own affairs the way it deems best for
national interest.) (Garcia v. BOI) Section 21. The State shall promote
comprehensive rural development and
The WTO agreement does not violate Section agrarian program.

Page | 110
MENDIOLA, MANILA
(See Article XIII, Sections 4-10) building.
Comprehensive rural development includes (See Article XVI, Sections 10-11; Article XVIII,
not only agrarian reform. It also encompasses Section 23)
a broad spectrum of social, economic, human,
cultural, political and even industrial The NTC is justified to require PLDT to enter
development. into an interconnection agreement with a
cellular mobile telephone system. The order
was issued in recognition of the vital role of
communications in nation-building and to
XXIII. Indigenous Cultural Communities ensure that all users of the public
telecommunications service have access to all
Section 22. The State recognizes and other users of service within the Philippines.
promotes the rights of indigenous cultural (PLDT v. NTC)
communities within the framework of
national unity and development.
(See Article VI Section 5(2); Article XII, Section XXVI. Local Autonomy
5; Article XIV, Section 17; See Cruz v. DENR)
Section 25. The State shall ensure the
Read Province of North Cotabato v. GRP autonomy of local governments.
(See Article X)
XXIV. Independent People’s Organizations; Local autonomy under the 1987 Constitution
Volunteerism simply means “decentralization” and does not
make the local governments sovereign within
Section 23. The State shall encourage non- the State or an imperium in imperio. (Basco v.
governmental, community-bases, or sectoral PAGCOR)
organizations that promote the welfare of the
nation. Decentralization of administration is merely a
delegation of administrative powers to the
(See Article XIII, Sections 15-16) local government unit in order to broaden the
base of governmental powers.
The provision recognizes the principle that Decentralization of power is abdication by the
volunteerism and participation of non- national government of governmental powers.
governmental organizations in national
development should be encouraged. Even as we recognize that the Constitution
guarantees autonomy to local government
XXV. Communication and Information units, the exercise of local autonomy remains
subject to the power of control by Congress
Section 24. The State recognizes the vital role and the power of general supervision by the
of communication and information in nation- President. (Judge Dadole v. Commission on

Page | 111
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Audit, 2002) (Article III, Section 7; Article VI Sections 12 and

20; Article VII, Section 20; Article XI, Section
17; Article XII, Section 21)
XXVII. Equal Access to Opportunities It is well established in jurisprudence that

neither the right to information nor the policy
Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal of full public disclosure is absolute, there
access to opportunities for public service, and being matters which, albeit of public concern
prohibit political dynasties as may be defined or public interest, are recognized as
by law. privileged in nature. (Akbayan v. Aquino,
2008)
(See Article VII, Section 13; Article XIII,
Sections 1- 2) Section 28 is self-executory. (Province of
North COtabato v. GRP)
Purpose. The thrust of the provision is to
impose on the state the obligation of Read JPEPA, NERI and NORTH COTABATO
guaranteeing equal access to public office. cases.
There is no constitutional right to run for or xxx

hold public office. What is recognized is
merely a privilege subject to limitations 1996 Bar Question
imposed by law. Section 26 of the
Constitution neither bestows such right nor A law was passed dividing the Philippines
elevates the privilege to the level of an into three regions (Luzon, Visayas and
enforceable right. (Pamatong v. COMELEC) Mindanao) each constituting an
independent state except on matters of
XXVIII. Public Service foreign relations, national defense and
national taxation, which are vested in the
Section 27. The State shall maintain honesty Central Government. Is the law valid?
and integrity in public service and take
positive and effective measures against graft The law dividing the Philippines into three
and corruption. regions each constituting an independent
state and vesting in a central government
(See Article IX-D; Article XI, Sections 4-15) matters of foreign relations, national defense
and national taxation is unconstitutional.
XXIV. Full Public Disclosure
11. It violates Article I, which guarantees
(1989 and 2000 Bar Question) the integrity of the national territory
of the Philippines because it divided
Section 28. Subject to reasonable conditions the Philippines into three states.  
prescribed by law, the State adopts and
implements a policy of full public disclosure
of all its transactions involving public interest. 12. It violates Section 1, Article II of the
Constitution which provides for the

Page | 112
MENDIOLA, MANILA
establishment of democratic and Libya in 2001, the outcome of which was the
republic states by replacing it with GRP-MILF Tripoli Agreement on Peace
three states organized as a (Tripoli Agreement 2001) containing the
confederation.   basic principles and agenda on the following
aspects of the negotiation: Security Aspect,
13. It violates Section 22, Article II of the Rehabilitation Aspect, and Ancestral Domain
Constitution, which, while recognizing Aspect. In 2005, several exploratory talks
and promoting the rights of were held between the parties in Kuala
indigenous cultural communities, Lumpur, eventually leading to the crafting of
provides for national unity and the draft MOA-ADin its final form, which was
development. set to be signed on August 5, 2008. Several
petitions were filed seeking, among others, to
restrain the signing of the MOA-AD. Petitions
14. It violates Section 15, Article X of the allege, among others, that the provisions of
Constitution, which, provides for the MOA-AD violate the Constitution.
autonomous regions in Muslim
Mindanao and in the cordilleras The MOA-AD mentions the “Bangsamoro
within the framework of national Juridical Entity” (BJE) to which it grants the
sovereignty as well as territorial authority and jurisdiction over the Ancestral
integrity of the Republic of the Domain and Ancestral Lands of the
Philippines.   Bangsamoro. The territory of the Bangsamoro
homeland is described as the land mass as
15. It violates the sovereignty of the well as the maritime, terrestrial, fluvial and
Republic of the Philippines.   alluvial domains, including the aerial domain
and the atmospheric space above it,
embracing the Mindanao- Sulu-Palawan
geographic region.
The Parties to the MOA-AD stipulate that:
5.
TheBJEshallhavejurisdictio
noverallnatural resources within its
“internal waters,” defined as
extending fifteen (15) kilometers
PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO V.
GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE from the coastline of the BJE area;  
PHILIPPINES
OCTOBER 14, 2008, GR 183591 6. The BJE shall also have
“territorial waters,” which shall
FACTS:Peace negotiations between the stretch beyond the BJE internal
GRPand MILFbegan in 1996. Formal peace waters up to the baselines of the
talks between the parties were held in Tripoli, Republic of the Philippines (RP) south
east and south west of mainland

Page | 113
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Mindanao;  135 Government of the meetings and events” like those of the
ASEAN and the specialized agencies of
Republic of the Philippines 136 Moro the UN.
Islamic Liberation Front: The MILF is
a rebel group which was established 10. The BJE is to be entitled to
in March 1984 when, under the participate in Philippine official
leadership of the late SalamatHashim, missions and delegations for the
it splintered from the Moro National negotiation of border agreements or
Liberation Front (MNLF) then headed protocols for environmental
by NurMisuari, on the ground, among protection and equitable sharing of
others, of what Salamat perceived to incomes and revenues involving the
be the manipulation of the MNLF bodies of water adjacent to or
away from an Islamic basis towards between the islands forming part of
Marxist-Maoist orientations.   137 the ancestral domain.
Memorandum of Agreement on
11. The MOA-AD further provides for the
Ancestral Domain  
sharing of minerals on the territorial
waters between the Central
7. Within these territorial waters, the
Government and the BJE, in favor of
BJE and the “Central Government”
the latter, through production sharing
(used interchangeably with RP) shall
and economic cooperation agreement.
exercise joint jurisdiction, authority
The activities which the Parties are
and management over all natural
allowed to conduct on the territorial
resources.
waters are enumerated, among which
8. The BJE is free to enter into any are the exploration and utilization of
natural resources, regulation of
economic cooperation and trade
shipping and fishing activities, and the
relations with foreign countries and
enforcement of police and safety
shall have the option to establish
trade missions in those countries. measures.
Such relationships and
12. The MOA-AD describes the
understandings, however, are not to
relationship of the Central
include aggression against the GRP.
Government and the BJE as
The BJE may also enter into
“associative,” characterized by
environmental cooperation
shared authority and responsibility.
agreements.
And it states that the structure of
governance is to be based on
9. Theexternal defense of the BJE is to
executive, legislative, judicial, and
remain the duty and obligation of the
administrative institutions with
Central Government. The Central
defined powers and functions in the
Government is also bound to “take
necessary steps to ensure the BJE’s Comprehensive Compact. The BJE is
granted the power to build, develop
participation in international
and maintain its own institutions

Page | 114
MENDIOLA, MANILA
inclusive of civil service, electoral, Constitution  

financial and banking, education,
legislation, legal, economic, police and 18. Article II, Section 22 of the
internal security force, judicial system Constitution must also be amended
and correctional institutions, the if the scheme envisioned in the
details of which shall be discussed in MOA-AD is to be effected.  
the negotiation of the comprehensive
compact. 19. TheMOA-
ADisalsoinconsistentwithR.A.No. 9054
13. Paragraph 1 on CONCEPTS AND (The Organic Act of the ARMM)  
PRINCIPLES of MOA- AD states:
1. It is the birthright of all Moros and all 20. The MOA-AD is also inconsistent
Indigenous peoples of Mindanao to identify with IPRA  
themselves and be accepted as
“Bangsamoros”. The Bangsamoro people 21. Even if the UN DRIP were
refers to those who are natives or original considered as part of the law of the
inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent land pursuant to Article II, Section
islands including Palawan and the Sulu 2 of the Constitution, it would not
archipelago at the time of conquest or suffice to uphold the validity of the
colonization of its descendants whether mixed MOA-AD so as to render its
or of full blood. Spouses and their descendants compliance with other laws
are classified as Bangsamoro. The freedom of unnecessary.  
choice of the Indigenous people shall be
respected.
The concept of association is not
recognized under the present
ISSUE :
Constitution.No province, city, or
Whether MOA-AD is constitutional. municipality, not even the ARMM, is
recognized under our laws as having an
HELD: “associative” relationship with the national
government. Indeed, the concept implies
Main Opinion, J. Carpio-Morales: powers that go beyond anything ever granted
by the Constitution to any local or regional
No. The MOA-AD is inconsistent with the government. It also implies the recognition of
Constitution and laws as presently worded: the associated entity as a state. The
Constitution, however, does not contemplate
16. The concept of association is not any state in this jurisdiction other than the
recognized under the present Philippine State, much less does it provide for
Constitution.   a transitory status that aims to prepare any
part of Philippine territory for independence.
17. The MOA-AD would not comply with
It is not merely an expanded version of the
Article X Section 20 of the

Page | 115
MENDIOLA, MANILA
ARMM, the status of its relationship with the relation to 2(d) and 2(e), the present
national government being fundamentally geographic area of the ARMM and, in addition,
different from that of the ARMM. Indeed, BJE the municipalities of Lanao del Norte which
is a state in all but name as it meets the voted for inclusion in the ARMM during the
criteria of a state laid down in the Montevideo 2001 plebiscite – Baloi, Munai, Nunungan,
Convention, namely, a permanent population, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tangkal– are
a defined territory, a government, and a automatically part of the BJE without need of
capacity to enter into relations with other another plebiscite, in contrast to the areas
states. under Categories A and B mentioned earlier
in the overview. That the present components
Even assuming arguendo that the MOA-AD of the ARMM and the above- mentioned
would not necessarily sever any portion of municipalities voted for inclusion therein in
Philippine territory, the spirit animating it – 2001, however, does not render another
which has betrayed itself by its use of the plebiscite unnecessary under the Constitution,
concept of association – runs counter to the precisely because what these areas voted for
national sovereignty and territorial integrity then was their inclusion in the ARMM, not the
of the Republic. BJE.
The defining concept underlying the Article II, Section 22 of the Constitution
relationship between the national must also be amended if the scheme
government and the BJE being itself contrary envisioned in the MOA-AD is to be effected.
to the present Constitution, it is not  That constitutional provision states: “The
surprising that many of the specific State recognizes and promotes the rights of
provisions of the MOA-AD on the formation indigenous cultural communities within the
and powers of the BJE are in conflict with the framework of national unity and
Constitution and the laws. development.” (Underscoring supplied) An
associative arrangement does not uphold
Article X, Section 18 of the Constitution national unity. While there may be a
provides that “[t]he creation of the semblance of unity because of the associative
autonomous region shall be effective when ties between the BJE and the national
approved by a majority of the votes cast by government, the act of placing a portion of
the constituent units in a plebiscite called for Philippine territory in a status which, in
the purpose, provided that only provinces, international practice, has generally been a
cities, and geographic areas voting favorably preparation for independence, is certainly not
in such plebiscite shall be included in the conducive to national unity.
autonomous region.”
The MOA-AD is also inconsistent with IPRA.
The BJE is more of a state than an
autonomous region. But even assuming that it IPRA,lays down the prevailing procedure for
is covered by the term “autonomous region” the delineation and recognition of ancestral
in the constitutional provision just quoted, domains. The MOA-AD’s manner of
the MOA-AD would still be in conflict with it. delineating the ancestral domain of the
Under paragraph 2(c) on TERRITORY in Bangsamoro people is a clear departure from

Page | 116
MENDIOLA, MANILA
that procedure. By paragraph 1 of the MOA-AD. Even the more specific

TERRITORY of the MOA-AD, Parties simply provisions of the UN DRIP are general in
agree that, subject to the delimitations in the scope, allowing for flexibility in its application
agreed Schedules, “[t]he Bangsamoro by the different States.
homeland and historic territory refer to the
land mass as well as the maritime, terrestrial, There is, for instance, no requirement in the
fluvial and alluvial domains, and the aerial UN DRIP that States now guarantee
domain, the atmospheric space above it, indigenous peoples their own police and
embracing the Mindanao- Sulu-Palawan internal security force. Indeed, Article 8
geographic region.” presupposes that it is the State which will
provide protection for indigenous peoples
International law has long recognized the against acts like the forced dispossession of
right to self- determination of “peoples,” their lands – a function that is normally
understood not merely as the entire performed by police officers. If the protection
population of a State but also a portion of a right so essential to indigenous people’s
thereof. The people’s right to self- identity is acknowledged to be the
determination should not, however, be responsibility of the State, then surely the
understood as extending to a unilateral right protection of rights less significant to them as
of secession. such peoples would also be the duty of States.
Nor is there in the UN DRIP an
In a historic development last September 13, acknowledgement of the right of indigenous
2007, the UN General Assembly adopted the peoples to the aerial domain and atmospheric
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of space. What it upholds, in Article 26 thereof,
Indigenous Peoples (UN DRIP) through is the right of indigenous peoples to the lands,
General Assembly Resolution 61/295 the territories and resources which they have
Philippines being included among those in traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise
favor, The Declaration clearly recognized the used or acquired. Moreover, the UN DRIP,
right of indigenous peoples to self- while upholding the right of indigenous
determination, encompassing the right to peoples to autonomy, does not obligate States
autonomy or self- government. Self- to grant indigenous peoples the near-
government, as used in international legal independent status of an associated state.
discourse pertaining to indigenous peoples,
has been understood as equivalent to Even if the UN DRIP were considered as part
“internal self- determination.” of the law of the land pursuant to Article II,
Section 2 of the Constitution, it would not
Assuming that the UN DRIP, like the Universal suffice to uphold the validity of the MOA-AD
Declaration on Human Rights, must now be so as to render its compliance with other laws
regarded as embodying customary unnecessary.
international law– still, the obligations
enumerated therein do not strictly require
the Republic to grant the Bangsamoro people,
through the instrumentality of the BJE, the Separate Opinion, J. Carpio:
particular rights and powers provided for in

Page | 117
MENDIOLA, MANILA
The incorporation of the Lumads, and their 28 recognizes the duty of officialdom to give
ancestral domains, into the Bangsamoro information even if nobody demands. The
violates the Constitutional and legislative effectivity of the policy of public disclosure
guarantees recognizing and protecting the need not await the passing of a statute.
Lumads’ distinct cultural identities as well as
their ancestral domains. The violation of
these guarantees makes the MOA-AD
patently unconstitutional. IPRA
The incorporation of the Lumads, and their The ICCs/IPs have, under the IPRA, the right
ancestral domains, into the Bangsamoro to participate fully at all levels of decision-
without the Lumads’ knowledge and consent making in matters which may affect their
also violates Article 8 of the United Nations rights, lives and destinies. The MOA-AD, an
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous instrument recognizing ancestral domain,
Peoples. The provisions of Article 8 were failed to justify its non-compliance with the
designed to prevent cultural genocide of clear-cut mechanisms ordained in IPRA,
indigenous peoples. This will happen if the which entails, among other things, the
Lumads are identified from birth as observance of the free and prior informed
Bangsamoros and their ancestral domains are consent of the ICCs/IPs. The IPRA does not
absorbed into the ancestral domain of the grant the Executive Department or any
Bangsamoros. government agency the power to delineate
and recognize an ancestral domain claim by
ISSUE: Did respondents violate constitutional mere agreement or compromise. In proceeding
and statutory provisions on public to make a sweeping declaration on ancestral
consultation and the right to information domain, without complying with the IPRA,
when they negotiated and later initialed the which is cited as one of the TOR of the MOA-
MOA-AD? AD, respondents clearly transcended the
boundaries of their authority. (J. Carpio-
HELD: Main Opinon, J. Carpio-Morales: YES. Morales)
As regards this issue, the respondents
violated the following legal provisions:   -
Article II, Section 28
PROVINCE OF NORTH COTOBATO VS. GRP
-Article III Section 7 -Executive Order No. 3 - PEACE PANEL GR No. 183591
Local Government Code -IPRA
FACTS:
The policy of full public disclosure When President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
enunciated in above-quoted Section 28 assumed office, the military offensive against
complements the right of access to the MILF was suspended and the government
information on matters of public concern sought a resumption of the peace talks. The
found in the Bill of Rights. The right to MILF, according to a leading MILF member,
information guarantees the right of the initially responded with deep reservation, but
people to demand information, while Section when President Arroyo asked the

Page | 118
MENDIOLA, MANILA
Government of Malaysia through Prime Meanwhile, then MILF Chairman Salamat

Minister Mahathir Mohammad to help Hashim passed away
convince the MILF to return to the negotiating on July 13, 2003 and he was replaced by Al
table, the MILF convened its Central Haj Murad, who was then the chief peace
Committee to seriously discuss the matter negotiator of the MILF. Murad’s position as
and, eventually, decided to meet with the GRP. chief peace negotiator was taken over by
Mohagher Iqbal.
The parties met in Kuala Lumpur on March 24,
2001, with the talks being facilitated by the In 2005, several exploratory talks were held
Malaysian government, the parties signing on between the parties in Kuala Lumpur,
the same date the Agreement on the General eventually leading to the crafting of the draft
Framework for the Resumption of Peace MOA-AD in its final form, which, as mentioned,
Talks Between the GRP and the MILF. The was set to be signed last August 5, 2008.
MILF thereafter suspended all its military Before the Court is what is perhaps the most
actions. Formal peace talks between the contentious “consensus” ever embodied in an
parties were held in Tripoli, Libya from June instrument – the MOA-AD which is assailed
20-22, 2001, the outcome of which was the principally by the present petitions bearing
GRP-MILF Tripoli Agreement on Peace docket numbers 183591, 183752, 183893,
(Tripoli Agreement 2001) containing the 183951 and 183962. Commonly impleaded as
basic principles and agenda on the following respondents are the GRP Peace Panel on
aspects of the negotiation: Security Aspect, Ancestral Domain and the Presidential
Rehabilitation Aspect, and Ancestral Domain Adviser on the Peace Process (PAPP)
Aspect. With regardto the Ancestral Domain Hermogenes Esperon, Jr. On July 23, 2008, the
Aspect, the parties in Tripoli Agreement 2001 Province of North Cotabato[and Vice-
simply agreed “that the same be discussed Governor Emmanuel Piñol filed a petition,
further by the Parties in their next meeting.” docketed as G.R. No. 183591, for Mandamus
and Prohibition with Prayer for the Issuance
A second round of peace talks was held in of Writ of Preliminary Injunction and
Cyberjaya, Malaysia on August 5-7, 2001 Temporary Restraining Order. Invoking the
which ended with the signing of the right to information on matters of public
Implementing Guidelines on the Security concern, petitioners seek to compel
Aspect of the Tripoli Agreement 2001 leading respondents to disclose and furnish them the
to a ceasefire status between the parties. This complete and official copies of the MOA-AD
was followed by the Implementing Guidelines including its attachments, and to prohibit the
on the Humanitarian Rehabilitation and slated signing of the MOA-AD, pending the
Development Aspects of the Tripoli disclosure of the contents of the MOA-AD and
Agreement 2001, which was signed on May 7, the holding of a public consultation thereon.
2002 at Putrajaya, Malaysia. Nonetheless,
there were many incidence of violence Supplementarily, petitioners pray that the
between government forces and the MILF MOA-AD be declared unconstitutional. This
from 2002 to 2003. initial petition was followed by several other
petitions by other parties. The Court ordered
the consolidation of the petitions.
Page | 119
MENDIOLA, MANILA
nation’s problems, nor a meaningful

ISSUE: democratic decision-making if they are
Whether there is a violation of the people’s denied access to information of general
right to information on matters of public interest. Information is needed to enable the
concern (1987 Constitution, Article III, Sec. 7) members of society to cope with the
under a state policy of full disclosure of all its exigencies of the times. As has been aptly
transactions involving public interest (1987 observed: “Maintaining the flow of such
Constitution, Article II, Sec. 28) including information depends on protection for both
public consultation under Republic Act No. its acquisition and its dissemination since, if
7160 (LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991? either process is interrupted, the flow
inevitably ceases.”
HELD:
YES. The right of the people to information on In the same way that free discussion enables
matters of public concern shall be recognized. members of society to cope with the
Access to official records, and to documents, exigencies of their time, access to information
and papers pertaining to official acts, of general interest aids the people in
transactions, or decisions, as well as to democratic decision-making by giving them a
government research data used as basis for better perspective of the vital issues
policy development, shall be afforded the confronting the nation, so that they may be
citizen, subject to such limitations as may be able to criticize and participate in the affairs
provided by law. As early as 1948, in Subido v. of the government in a responsible,
Ozaeta, the Court has recognized the reasonable and effective manner. It is by
statutory right to examine and inspect public ensuring an unfettered and uninhibited
records, a right which was eventually exchange of ideas among a well-informed the
accorded constitutional status. The right of people. The MOA-AD is a matter of public
access to public documents, as enshrined in concern
both the 1973 Constitution and the 1987
Constitution, has been recognized as a self- That the subject of the information sought
executory constitutional right. in the present cases is a matter of public
concern faces no serious challenge. In fact,
In the 1976 case of Baldoza v. Hon. Judge respondents admit that the MOA-AD is
Dimaano,the Court ruled that access to public indeed of public concern. In previous cases,
records is predicated on the right of the the Court found that the regularity of real
people to acquire information on matters of estate transactions entered in the Register
public concern since, undoubtedly, in a of Deeds, the need for adequate notice to
democracy, the pubic has a legitimate interest the public of the various laws, the civil
in matters of social and political significance. service eligibility of a public employee, the
proper management of GSIS funds allegedly
The incorporation of this right in the used to grant loans to public officials, the
Constitution is a recognition of the recovery of the Marcoses’ alleged ill-gotten
fundamental role of free exchange of wealth,[120] and the identity of party-list
information in a democracy. There can be no nominees, among others, are matters of
realistic perception by the public of the public concern. Undoubtedly, the MOA-AD
Page | 120
MENDIOLA, MANILA
subject of the present cases is of public 28, Article II of the Constitution. The policy of
concern, involving as it does the full public disclosure enunciated in above-
sovereignty and territorial integrity of the quoted Section 28 complements the right of
State, which directly affects the lives of the access to information on matters of public
public at large. Matters of public concern concern found in the Bill of Rights. The right
covered by the right to information include to information guarantees the right of the
steps and negotiations leading to the people to demand information, while Section
consummation of the contract. 28 recognizes the duty of officialdom to give
information even if nobody demands. The
In not distinguishing as to the executory policy of public disclosure establishes a
nature or commercial character of concrete ethical principle for the conduct of
agreements, the Court has categorically ruled public affairs in a genuinely open democracy,
that the right to information “contemplates with the people’s right to know as the
inclusion of negotiations leading to the centerpiece.
consummation of the transaction.” Certainly,
a consummated contract is not a requirement It is a mandate of the State to be accountable
for the exercise of the right to information. by following such policy. These provisions are
Otherwise, the people can never exercise the vital to the exercise of the freedom of
right if no contract is consummated, and if expression and essential to hold public
one is consummated, it may be too late for the officials at all times accountable to the people.
public to expose its defects. Whether Section 28 is self-executory, the
records of the deliberations of the
Requiring a consummated contract will Constitutional Commission so disclose.
keep the public in the dark until the
contract, which may be grossly
disadvantageous to the government or even
illegal, becomes fait accompli. This negates
the State policy of full transparency on
matters of public concern, a situation which
the framers of the Constitution could not
have intended. Such a requirement will
prevent the citizenry from participating in
the public discussion of any proposed
contract, effectively truncating a basic right
enshrined in the Bill of Rights. We can allow
neither an emasculation of a constitutional
right, nor a retreat by the State of its avowed
“policy of full disclosure of all its transactions
involving public interest.”
Intended as a “splendid symmetry” to the

right to information under the Bill of Rights is
the policy of public disclosure under Section
Page | 121

4 Art II Sec1-28 CHAP 4 7 - 8 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

4 Art II Sec1-28 CHAP 4 7 - 8 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2017

ART II. DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND ALBANO

NACHURA It is a government of the people, by the

Manifestations of Republicanism: What are some of the underlying

Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as Doctrine of Incorporation: by mere

Doctrine of Incorporation: By virtue of this Answer: No, because of the doctrine of

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

What is the basis of the doctrine of May generally accepted principles of

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

formulation in international law sees those a just and acceptable solution.

“Generally accepted principles of The initial factor for determining the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

CASE DOCTRINES:Kuroda v Jalandoni: BY been deliberately general and extensive in its

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

Convention because the Philippines is not a Agustin v Edu: INTERNATIONAL LAWS

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

Philippines * * * adopts the generally HELD:

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

of the police power of the State (Plaston vs. HELD:

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

government agency from importing rice and GONZALES VS. HECHANOVA

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

Republic Acts Nos. 2207 and 3452. Although

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

ISSUE: Question: Which on prevails if there is a

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

1. The installation of the President, the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

From ALBANO: Fourteenth Amendment, this court has said,

Section 4. The prime duty of the Government

PEOPLE VS. LAGMAN AND ZOSA

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

1. What justifies compulsory military Section 5. The maintenance of peace and

From ALBANO: The right to bear arms is a statutory, not a

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

discretionary and official functions. Rather, it

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

expulsion/excommunication, petitioners filed ESTRADA vs ESCRITOR

the respondent’s position that her conjugal

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

religious clauses also continued to borrow Test to Determine Validity of

From ALBANO: shall be allowed to be taught to their

They are the following: What does the principle of separation

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

expulsion/excommunication of policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its

No, courts do not have jurisdiction.

The expulsion/excommunication of Question: Supposing a law was enacted

The Constitution prescribes a policy of

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

Public Works, in his first recommended to the

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

HELD: SALONGA v FARRALES: SOCIAL JUSTICE

COFFEE NOTES 2017 | POLITICAL LAW COMPENDIUM

and instead, insisted to execute the judgment ADDITIONAL UTOPIA NOTES:

D. “Democratic State” instrument of national policy...” (Read along

3. International Law International Law  Section 3. Civilian Authority is, at all times

(3) They may be called to prevent or suppress 4. Bar Question (2003) 