Poli Review Gabby Notes

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW – Gabby Notes
2017
THE CONSTITUTION
Q: What is constitutional law? Q: What makes the constitution so

special that it can never be wrong?
A: That written instrument enacted by
direct action of the people by which the A: Because it is by the direct action of
fundamental powers of the government the people. It is immutable because it is
are established, limited and defined, and the direct action of the people unlike
by which those powers are distributed other governmental acts which are acts
among the several departments for their by the representatives of the people.
safe and useful exercise for the benefit
of the body politic. Q: In the case of Manila Prince vs
GSIS the SC enumerated three
Q: Can we say that all rights objectives of the constitution. What
emanate from the constitution? are these?
1. To prescribe the permanent
A: No, not all rights spring from the framework of a system of
constitution. There are rights that are government;
inherent to every human being. There 2. To assign to the several
are also rights that are independent from departments their respective
the constitution. powers and duties and;
3. To establish certain first principles
Q: What is the doctrine of on which the government is
constitutional supremacy as held by founded
the SC in Manila Prince Hotel vs
GSIS? Q: What are the different kinds of a
constitution?
A: It is a supreme law to which all other
1. WRITTEN OR UNWRITTEN
laws must conform and in accordance a. Written — one
with which all private rights must be whose precepts are
determined and all public authority embodied in one document
administered. Under the doctrine of or set of documents;
constitutional supremacy, if a law or b. Unwritten —
contract violates any norm of the consist of rules which have
constitution that law or contract whether not been integrated into a
promulgated by the legislative or by the single, concrete form but
executive branch or entered into by are scattered in various
private persons for private purposes is sources, such as statutes of
null and void and without any force and a fundamental character,
effect. judicial decisions,
commentaries of publicists,
customs and tradition, and
1
2017
certain common law Q: How about rigid and Flexible?
principles
A: A rigid constitution is one that can be
2. (CONVENTIONAL) OR
amended only by formal and difficult
EVOLVED (CUMULATIVE)
process. While flexible constitution is one
that can be changed by ordinary
3. RIGID OR FLEXIBLE
legislation.
a. Rigid- is one that
can be amended only Q: given that, what kind of
by a formal and constitution is the 1987
usually difficult constitution of the Ph?
process;
b. Flexible- one that A: The Philippine Constitution is a
can be changed by written, enacted and rigid type of
ordinary legislation. constitution.
Q: What is the difference Q: What are the essential qualities

between a written and of a good written constitution?
unwritten constitution? 1. It should be BROAD not just
because it provides for the
A: Written constitution are those one organization of the entire
whose precepts are embodied in one government and covers all
document or set of documents. In persons and things within
Unwritten constitution it consist of rules the territory of the State but
which have not been integrated into a because it must be
single, concrete form but are scattered comprehensive enough to
in various sources, such as statutes of a provide for every
fundamental character, judicial contingency.
decisions, commentaries of publicists, 2. It must be BRIEF- It must
customs and tradition, and certain confine itself to basic
common law principles principles to be
implemented with
Q: How about enacted and legislative details more
cumulative? adjustable to change and
A: Enacted (Conventional) — a easier to amend.
conventional constitution is enacted, 3. It must be DEFINITE- To prevent
formally struck off at a definite time and ambiguity in its provisions which
place following a conscious or deliberate could result in confusion and
effort taken by a constituent body or divisiveness among the people.
ruler. Cumulative constitution is the
Q: What are the essential parts of
result of political evolution not the constitution?
inaugurated at a specific time but a. Constitution of Liberty –
changing by accretion rather than by any The series of prescriptions
systematic method. setting forth the fundamental
2
2017
civil and political rights of the 3.) 1935 constitution Unicameral,
citizens and imposing Presidential -- May 14, 1935
limitations on the powers of changed to bicameral
government as a means of 4.) 1943 constitution a Japanese
securing the enjoyment of constitution during belligerent
those rights. occupation, a
b. Constitution of unicameral/presidential form of
Government – The series of government
provisions outlining the 5.) After the 1943 constitution, we
organization of the revert back to 1935 constitution by
government, enumerating its virtue of the issuance of Gen
powers, laying down certain McArthur. This was the 1973
rules relative to its constitution
administration, and defining 6.) Freedom constitution came
the electorate, about through proclamation
number 3. It is bicameral form of
c. Constitution of the government.
Sovereignty – The 7.)1987 – bicam, revision of 1935
provisions pointing out the
mode or procedure in Q: The freedom constitution
accordance with which formal was proclaimed by President
changes in the fundamental Aquino. The constitution as we
law may be brought. all know is a direct act of the
people. But in the case of the
freedom constitution, it is not
Q: Can we say that a by the people it is by the act of
fundamental law that does not a single person. Nonetheless it
contain all the three essential was considered as a
parts is not a constitution? fundamental constitution.
Why?
A: No it may still be considered as
constitution only that the A: President Aquino promulgated
constitution will be lacking of the freedom constitution, there is
essential parts. no other institution existing at that
time. There are no laws existing at
Q: How many constitution do the time except the word of the
we have so far? President. As a revolutionary
leader, she can make that
1.)Biak-na-bato constitution ;first declaration and that declaration
revolutionary constitution, it is a may have the force and effect of a
unicameral type of government fundamental law.
2.) Malolos constitution first
democratic constitution it is a Q: How long does the freedom
unicameral/parliamentary of constitution intended to take
government effect?
3
2017
A: one year March 25, 1986 to governor should be notified
March 24, 1987. first before he will be bound by
the new constitution?
Q: Did the freedom
constitution exhaust its one A: No it is not required that he be
year term? informed because it is provided in
the 1987 constitution that “this
A: No because it was submit to the constitution shall take effect
people for ratification on February immediately upon ratification of
2 1987. the people in a plebiscite called for
that purpose”
Q: When did the 1987
constitution take effect? Q: What is the danger sought
to be avoided by the SC in
A: According to the case, in de leon declaring that the date of the
vs Esguerra, it tooke effect on plebiscite must be the date of
February 2 1987. the proclamation of the
constitution?
Q: Not February 11 1987? Why
what happened in February 11 A: The danger sought to be
as distinguish from the avoided is the situation where the
plebiscite in February 2 1987? President can conveniently delay
the effectivity of the constitution.
A: There was a proclamation
declaring the result of February 2 Q: When there are doubts as
plebiscite and declaring the 1987 to whether the provision in the
constitution as duly ratified. constitution is self-executing
or non-self-executing,
Q: How did the SC rule in De according to the SC in Manila
Leon vs Esguerra regarding Prince Hotel, the doubt should
the effectivity of the 1987 be resolved in favor of what?
constitution?
A: In favor of Self-executing
A: the effectivity of the constitution character of the constitution
should be reckoned on the date of
ratification through a plebiscite. Q: What is the reason given by
the SC in adopting this rule?
Q: The respondent governor in
that case was not given notice A: To rule otherwise would give
of the ratification of the the congress the authority to
constitution. When he issued defeat a mandatory provision by its
that appointment letter, he refusal to provide for an
acted in good faith, can we say implementing law. One good
that due process requires that example is the provision against
4
2017
political dynasty which constitution must be
unfortunately the constitution interpreted as a whole
grants the power to congress to
define what is political dynasty Q: When is the impeachment
which means that unless and until proceedings initiated
the congress enacts a law defining according to the SC in the case
political dynasty, that provision of Francisco vs HOR?
remains in the cold reach of the
constitution. A: Upon the filing of the
impeachment complaint duly
A provision is self-executing when endorsed by a member of the
the nature and extent of the rights house of representative and
conferred and the liabilities transmitted to the committee on
imposed are fixed by the justice.
constitution itself. If it is a non self
executing provision there must be Q: Is a good constitution
an express indication in the should be permanent? It must
constitutional provision. be fixed and it should not
move at all?
Q: In the case of Francisco vs
House of Representatives the A: No. A constitution must be
court was tasked upon to stable but it cannot be standstill. A
interpret the word “Inititate” constitution that cannot change
the SC then laid down the cannot endure. Constitution must
principles of constitutional always open to a change.
construction which must be
applied in succession. What Q: The 1987 constitution only
are these principles? allows two kinds of changes.
What are these two changes
1. First, verba Legis that is allowed to be introduced by
wherever possible the fundamental law?
words used in the
constitution must be given A: Amendments and Revisions
their ordinary meaning
except where technical Amendment implies a change within the
terms are employed lines of the original instrument as will
2. Second, ratio legis est effect an improvement, or better carry
anima, that is, where there out the purpose for which it was framed.
is ambiguity the words of It is a piece-meal isolated change in the
the constitution should be constitution. Revision implies a change
interpreted in accordance that alters a basic principle in the
with the intent of its framers constitution or overhauls it in its entirety.
3. Finally, Ut magis valeat
quam pereat, that is, the
5
2017
Q: Since both changes are allowed,
is it still necessary to determine the Q: Applying these two test to the
character of change? Lambino group, can we say that the
A: Yes, it is necessary to determine the proposal is indeed amendment?
character of the proposed change A: The SC said that 105 provision of the
because different procedure applies and 1987 constitution will be affected by the
initiative by people can only propose proposal therefore under the
Quantitative test, the proposal is a
amendments.
Revision. Applying the Qualitative test,
the proposal is within the nature of
Q: In the case of Lambino vs Comelec revision also because there will be a
there are two proposed changes sought change in the governmental structure.
to be introduced by the Lambino group.
What are these two changes? So since the petition is in the nature of
A: Changing the government from revision under the two-part test, it
cannot be proposed through the system
presidency to parliamentary and
of initiative because what can be
Conversion of congress from bicameral to proposed under the system of initiative
unicameral congress. are Amendments.
Q: What is the two-part test that Q: True or False the congress can
was used by the SC to determine the amend or revise the constitution?
characteristics of this proposal A: False because the congress can only
propose amendments or revisions and
A: Quantitative and Qualitative test
they cannot amend or revise the
constitution all together.
Q: How is Quantitative test apply?
A: By asking whether or not the change Q: Amendment or revision involves
is extensive in number. The court will just two steps. These are?
count the number of provisions in the A: Proposal and Ratification
constitution affected by the proposal if While the congress may satisfy the first
substantial number of the provisions will step, the congress cannot satisfy the
second because the propose should be
be affected with the proposal the
ratify by the people.
proposed change is revision. Otherwise it
is amendment Q: In directly proposing
amendments or revisions to the
Q: In qualitative test? constitution is the congress
A: The court will look into the substantive discharging a general legislative
power?
effect of the proposal of the constitution
A: No it is exercising a constituent power
if the proposal will change the general
governmental structure that is in the
Q: Does this constituent power
nature of revision otherwise it is only require an express constitutional
amendment. provision?
6
2017
A: Yes as a constituent power the basis that the congress can either directly
of the exercise by the congress of the propose amendments or revision to
power to propose amendment or the constitution but they cannot do
revision springs from a constitutional
both because of the disjunctive
provision.
word “or” in between two
authorities. Did the SC sustain the
Q: What are the two modes of
proposing amendments or revision argument of the petitioner?
to the constitution under Sec. 1 Art. A: As a Constituent Assembly, Congress
17? May Directly Propose Amendments or
Amendment: Revisions AND at the same time, Calls a
1. The Congress, upon a vote of ¾ of Constitutional Convention. The term "or"
all its Members; or has, oftentimes, been held to mean
(Constituent Assembly) "and," or vice-versa, when the spirit or
2. A constitutional context of the law warrants it.
convention.
Revision: Q: What is the meaning of the term
1. The Congress, upon a vote of ¾ of ¾ of all the members of the
all its Members; or congress?
(Constituent Assembly)
2. A constitutional convention A: ¾ of all the members of the congress
To call a constitutional convention the is a fixed number it will not change even
required number is 2/3 if the composition of the house will
To directly propose amendment or change.
revision ¾
Q: Sec. 1 of Art 17 was copied from
In the case of Gonzales vs comelec. The Art. 15 of the 1935 constitution.
extent of authority of the congress in The distinction between the two
discharging its constituent power provisions is that Art. 15 of the
Gonzales was decided under 1935 1935 constitution is very specific it
constitution under 1935 constitution the provides that the congress in joint
congress can directly propose session assembly by a vote of ¾ of
amendments to the constitution. the all the members of the senate and
word revision does not appear with the ¾ of all the members of house of
constitution. do not be confused with representative voting separately
Occena which was decided under 1973 may propose amendments to the
constitution. under 1935 constitution constitution or call a constitutional
amendments includes revision is no convention. Art. 15 provides how
longer true in so far as 1987 constitution. the two house will meet, it also
provides the manner of voting in
Q: In the case of Gonzales vs directly proposing the constitution
Comelec, the petitioner contends voting separately. These phrases
7
2017
were not included I the 1987 delegates, apportionment of
constitution. Since the 1987 delegates per district. Can the
constitution did not copy all Art. 15 congress do that? (Imbong vs
of the constitution does it mean Comelec)
that our present constitution
intended a joint voting? A: Yes under the doctrine of necessary
implication, the grant of power to the
A: No in interpreting doubtful provisions congress acting a constituent body
we have to apply the principles provided carries with it a necessary implication of
under the case of Francisco vs HOR. If the power to provide the implementing
we will interpret Sec. 1 and sec 3 of Art. details.
17 to mean jointly, it will be contrary to
the bicameral system of congress where Q: What is the legal authority of the
one cannot act without the other. congress acting as a legislative
body to provide for implementing
Q: What are the two modes of details? (Imbong vs Comelec)
calling a constitutional convention?
A: It is inherent upon the congress acting
1. 2/3 vote of all the members of the as a legislative body. Since it is inherent,
congress; or it does not need any constitutional grant.
2. By a majority vote of all the
members of the congress with the Q: Can we say that the people
question of whether or not to call propose amendments to the
a convention to be resolved by constitution through a system of
the people in a plebiscite initiative under Art. 17 sec. 2
(facilitate the calling of the because there is an express
convention by allowing the people provision under the constitution?
to decide whether or not a
constitutional convention shall be A: Yes
called for)
Q: Under our system of
Note: A constituent assembly is a body government, to whom does the
that proposes amendments or revision of sovereignty reside?
the constitution
A: To the People
Q: Supposing a Congress acting as
Q: But you are saying they need an
a constituent body, calls a
express constitutional provision to
convention. Also in the same
propose a change to their own
capacity as a constituent assembly
fundamental law, meaning it is
provide for the implementing
contradicting they have that
details of the convention like the
uncontrollable supreme power as
qualification and the number of
8
2017
an attribute of sovereignty yet for since they have surrendered all their
them to propose a change or marbles but one, they limit their
amendment they need an express sovereignty. So again Sec. 2 of Art. 17 is
provision from the constitution more of a limitation than a grant of
because without that they do not power.
have authority. How can a
constitution grant a power that Q: What are the constitutional
already belongs to the people? requirements for a valid exercise of
initiative to propose amendments
Q: What is now the effect of Sec. 2 to the constitution?
of Art. 17?
1. Enabling legislation;
A: It seeks to limit the power of the 2. 12% of the registered voter must
people. It is not a grant of power but sign the petition and every district
more of a restriction or a limitation. It is must be represented by atleast
saying that people cannot exercise the 3% of the total number of that
power, you are limited to this extent legislative district
only.
Q: Is Sec. 2 Art. 17 a self-executing
To better understand it, in the beginning provision?
every individual is a repository of
sovereignty, every component or A: No it is not a self-executing provision.
element of the society is supreme. But The constitution specifically mandates
the people have learned that it will not the enactment of enabling law
work. There should be a higher power
that will control them among equals. Q: Do we have an enabling
Lets imagine that the people have their legislation now? Is RA 6735 in the
powers of sovereignty this is represented case of Santiago vs Comelec the
by marbles. 10 marbles which constitute enabling law?
their sovereignty, having learned that
A: Yes RA 6735 is a sufficient law to
there will be anarchy if they are not
enable the proposal of amendment of
governed by higher authority, they
the constitution.
agreed to form a constitution. That
constitution is a jar, so the people agree
Q: How soon can the People
to form a jar and they agree that it will
exercise this right from the
contain all their sovereign powers.
effectivity of the 1987 constitution?
Before they go to the jar and put all their
10 marbles, one of them ask if it is A: It may be exercise 5 years from
allowed to retain 1 marble, so the people effectivity of 1987 constitution and
have agreed to retain one power, that once every 5 years thereof
one marble is section 2 of Art. 17. So
9
2017
Q: What are the additional Q. Is there any other way that the
requirements provided in President can influence the
Lambino for a valid exercise of amendment or revision process
Initiative? aside from recommending to the
congress to make a proposal to
1. The people must author and thus change the constitution?
sign the entire proposal. No agent A. 1.The President recommends the
or representative can sign on their priority measures that the legislative
behalf. department may pass. Through the State
2. As an initiative upon a petition,
of the Nation Address, the president can
the proposal must be embodied in recommend the necessary changes to
a petition. the constitution.
Q: In the case of province of

Q: Can the petitioners sign for
cotobato did the SC allowed the
themselves and in behalf of
President to make changes to the
other? Fundamental law?
A: No because the petitioners must A: No the President cannot delegate a
directly author the proposal and power that she herself does not possess.
must personally sign the petition.
Q. Can the President likewise
Q: In the case of Gonzales, influence the people to exercise the
constituent power is not right of initiative to propose
inherent while in the case of amendments to the Constitution?
Sanidad vs Comelec the SC said A. Yes, and that is also the alternative of
that the power to propose the President. He or she may either go to
congress and recommend that the
amendments to the
congress will make the necessary
constitution is only adjunct to
proposal or influence the people to
the legislative power of the exercise the right of initiative.
national assembly. Can we say
that Sanidad is the new Q. Up to what extent may the
doctrine? Can we reconcile President influence the exercise of
Sanidad and Gonzales case? the right of initiative according to
A: Sanidad is only applicable to the the SC in the case of Lambino vs
factual circumstances during that Comelec?
time. It is a pro hac vice decision it A.
is not a stare decisis. Gonzales is
still controlling. Q. What issues involving the
amendment/revision process can
be elevated to the court of justice
POLITICAL LAW REVIEW LECTURE
for adjudication? (Sanidad vs.
1.2 Comelec)
10
2017
A. It depends on the controversy. If the
controversy involves the legality of a But if the proposal is to initiative under
particular act, it can be elevated to the Sec. 2, sixty (60) to ninety (90) days shall
court of justice for adjudication, but if it be counted from (b) the Certification by
involves propriety or wisdom even if it is the Comelec of the sufficiency of the
in relation to the amendment or revision petition.
process, it is a political question.
Q. What is the required vote for the
Q. Up to what extent may any convention to approve a proposal?
controversy or may any challenge A. A majority of the members of the
on the amendment or revision constitutional convention is required to
process be elevated to the court of approve a proposal.
justice for judicial review beyond
that, no more, even if there is a Q. What is the basis of the ruling of
defect in the steps undertaken by Supreme Court in Occena vs.
the congress? This was explained in Comelec that mere majority of the
the case of Sanidad vs Comelec. members of the convention is
A. Before the ratification of the proposal. enough to approve a proposal
Meaning, once the proposals are ratified whether it is a revision or
any challenge on the steps leading to amendment?
ratification are already cured. It must be A. Under a Democratic and Republican
made a priori, meaning prior to the nature of the State, we are governed by
ratification. Once the ratification is done the rule of the majority. It means that if
then the sovereign will of the people has there is a collective body, which is
corrected all the defects attendant in the required to vote on a particular question
amendment or revision process. This is and a constitution nor the law does
also the principle involve in the case of provide for the manner of voting, the
Javellana vs. Executive Secretary. default is always majority.
Q. How are the proposals ratified? Q. What is the required vote for the
A. people to ratify the proposal?
A. A majority.
Q. Is there a specific time when the
proposal should be submitted to the Q. Can we say that the constitution
people for the ratification? does not require majority of the
A. The proposal shall be submitted to the registered voters for the ratification
people not earlier than sixty (60) days of the proposal?
but not later than ninety (90) days from A. Constitution says majority of the votes
the day that they are supposed to be cast. The basis of the majority is not on
submitted to the people for ratification. the registered voters but on the actual
The sixty (60) to ninety (90) days shall voters.
be counted from (a) after approval by
congress acting as the constituent Q. May be a proposal is submitted to
assembly or a constitutional convention the people for the ratification
11
2017
simultaneously in a general when the submission should be
election? submitted.
A. Since the Constitution only says
election, without qualification, it could be Q. Can we say that the use of the
in a general or special. The mere fact that term “plebiscite” under Sec. 4 of Art.
the previous proposals were submitted in 17 does not refer to a day and it
a plebiscite in a special election goes in refers to a process?
to the wisdom of the congress. The A. Yes.
congress deemed it proper to submit
those proposals in a special election and, Q. Can we hold two processes in
now, there is Art. 1 and 3 were submitted one day as long as the processes are
simultaneously with the general election, separate, one general and one
again, that goes in to the wisdom of the special?
particular act not the legality, because A. Yes, as long as the processes are
the Constitution allows it to be submitted separate.
in an election without qualification.
So, proposals for the amendment Q. May proposals be ratified or
or revision of the constitution may be submitted to the people on a piece-
submitted to the people for the meal basis one after the other?
ratification simultaneously with the A. In Tolentino vs. Comelec, the
general election. Supreme Court applies the doctrine of
proper submission. The doctrine of
Q. Can we say now that under 1987 proper submission as initiated by the
Constitution submission of the Supreme Court in that case has two (2)
proposals for the ratification of the aspects. First, all the proposals shall be
people cannot be done submitted to the people all at once in
simultaneously with the general plebiscite or in an election called for that
election? purpose to give them a proper frame of
A. Yes because it must be through a mind. The second aspect of the doctrine
plebiscite, special election. of proper submission has already been
constitutionalized under the 1987
Q. Supposing that there is a general Constitution, because the second aspect
election within the period of sixty to of the doctrine of proper submission is
ninety days, is the congress cannot that the people must be given sufficient
submit the proposal together with time to study the proposal. The sufficient
the general election which time to allow people to study the
coincidentally falls within the sixty proposal is the sixty (60) to ninety (90)
(60) to ninety (90) days? days.
A. It is allowed. The use of the term
plebiscite does not refer to a day it refers Q. Who has the authority or power
to a process. The day were the to submit the proposal to the people
submission of the proposal in the for the ratification?
plebiscite is defined by the 60-90 day A. The proposal to the people for the
period. That is the definition of the day ratification rests on the congress as a
12
2017
legislative body, because the congress is A: A politically organized sovereign
the one empowered under the community independent of outside
Constitution to enact a law setting the control bound by the ties of nationhood
date of a special election. The Congress legally supreme within its authority
is the constitutional organ recognized or functioning through its government
authorized by the constitution to under the rule of law.
appropriate funds that may be used for
the special election. Since this power Q: How did Dr. Garner define state?
belongs to the congress, only the (commonly used definition of state)
congress can make the proper
submission. A: A community of persons, more or less
numerous, permanently occupying a
Q. Who set the date? definite position of territory independent
A. The congress. of external control and possessing a
government to which a great body if
Q. Who will provide the budget of
inhabitants render habitual obedience.
the plebiscite?
A. The congress. Is a state the same as nation?
Q. Supposing there are ten (10) A: No. a state is a legal and juristic
proposed changes to the concept, while nation is an ethnic or
constitution, all these ten proposed racial concept.
changes in the constitution will
Is a state synonymous to a foreign
submitted to the people for
country?
ratification in one day, in one
election, in one plebiscite, can the A: No.
people choose what proposal to
ratify and choose what proposal to According to CIR, in CIR vs Campos
reject? Rueda , since tangier morocco is a
A. If the proposals are in the nature of protectorate therefore it is not
amendment, which is in piece-meal or independent, it lacks an element to
isolated changes to the constitution, the be a state, how did the supreme
people can choose what proposal to court rule?
ratify and what proposal to reject.
If the proposed changes are in the form A: An international person maybe
of revision, it is required that the people considered as a foreign country even if it
accept it in a whole, because every part does not possess all the essential
is inter-related. elements of the state. The SC likewise
applied the rule on reciprocity.
CONCEPT OF THE STATE
What are the essential elements of
Q: What is a state (CIR vs Campos- a state
Rueda) ?
A: 1. People, 2. Territory, 3. Government,
4. Sovereignty
13
2017
Recognition by other states is not a pre- A: It is a particular organized assembly of
condition so that an entity can attain the individuals in which according the
status of a statehood. While it is ideal constitution the highest power exist
that the entity may be recognized by
Who may be considered as People
other international entities, it is not
comprising the Philippine State?
required. Apart from recognition, it is also
ideal for an international entity to have A: Any person who is in the Philippines.
attain a certain level of civilization but
Do we confer powers to non-
this is not indispensable.
citizens?
I. PEOPLE
A: No.
In terms of number is there a legal
II. TERRITORY
requirement as to number to qualify
as a People constituting a state? How can a territory be constituted?
A: It must be numerous enough to Does any fixed portion of the earth,
defend themselves and few enough to be inhabited by individuals, may be
easily administered constituted as territory?
Q: So can we say that 300 male No. The fixed portion of the earth must
Spartans can constitute a state be capable of human habitation. It must
because this 300 male Spartan can be able to sustain life.
defend a territory?
As to breadth and dimension is
A: No. The People must constitute both there legal requirement?
sexes to perpetuate themselves.
None. As long as it can accommodate its
How about Vatican City? People.
A: The case of Vatican city is an What is the National Territory of the
extraordinary case because the Philippines?
recognition of the Vatican City as a state
A: The national territory comprises the
was only through the bilateral treaty
Philippines Archipelago, with all the
between the holy see and Italy. Vatican
islands and waters embraced therein,
City is considered as an independent
and all other territories in which the
state by virtue of that treaty as a special
Philippines has sovereignty or
consideration in order to administer the
jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial,
political affairs of the Roman Catholic
fluvial and aerial domains, including its
Church.
territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil,
How did the SC define People in the insular shelves and other submarine
Sanidad Case? areas.
14
2017
The last sentence of Article 1 articulates 6. PD 1596 – covers our claim over
the Archipelagic Doctrine the Kalayaan Group of Islands
Q: The definition of territory Under Q. What are the 2 groups of
the 1935 consitution is very territories comprising the National
specific, the 1973 constitution also Territory of the philipines
contains a clause that specifically
A: First group : Philippine Archipelago
contitutionalizes our claim to Sabah
Second group: All other territories over
Bormeo Malaysia, so can we say
which the Philippines exercises
that the general definition of
sovereignty or jurisdiction.
national territory under the 1987
constitution serves as an
So all other territories to which the
abandonment of the territories
Philippines exercises either sovereignty
previously covered by the previous
or jurisdiction. So even if the territory is
constitution?
outside the Ph archipelago but the ph
A: No. the 1987 includes under territories exercises either sovereignty or
previously covered by the previous jurisdiction, that territory is covered by
constitutions the definition of National Territory under
Article 1.
What are the territories previously
defined under the previous
Q. The petitioners in Magallona vs
constitution but not specifically
Ermita are challenging the
included in the definition under the
constitutionality of the baseline law
1987 constitution but are deemed
RA9522 for being violative of the
covered by the general definition?
constitution. Because according to
1. Treaty of Paris – covers cession of the petitioners the entry into the
the Philippines Islands by spain to UNCLOS and the subsequent
the United States enactment of RA 9522 resulted in
2. Treaty between Spain and US at the loss of territories that
Washington – covers Cagayan, previously belong to the Philipines.
Sulu and Sibuto Did the Supreme Court agree?
3. Treaty between US and Great
A: No. UNCLOS 3 and RA 9522 are not
Britain – covers Turtle and
concerned with the loss or acquisition of
Mangsee Island
territory because under the traditional
4. Those contemplated under 1973
modes in international law, territories
Constitution – covers territory
can only be acquired or inversely loss
belonging to the Philippines by
through accretion, prescription, cession,
Historic Title
occupation not through entry into treaty
5. Under 1935 Constitution – Covers
not through enactment of loss. UNCLOS
the Batanes group of Islands
3 is only concerned with sea-use right.
15
2017
Q. Why do we need to enact that 2. Contiguous Zone: We have the
baseline Law? right to enforce customs laws, fiscal laws,
immigration laws, sanitation laws.
A: Because all member states of UNCLOS
3 are required to enact the respective 3. Exclusive Economic Zone: Right
local baselines 10 years from May 13, to exploit living and non-living resources
1999.
Q: According to the petitioners the
According to SC RA 9522 amended the use of Archipelagic water also
previous baseline Law in order to violates the constitution because
optimize and to take advantage of the the constitution call this body of
base points so that we can expand our water as internal water, by calling it
maritime zones. archipelagic water, we are now
subjecting our internal water to the
Q: What are the rules in drawing the
right of innocent passage. Did the
baseline under UNLOS 3?
SC agree?
Treaties are not static. We are not bound
A: No. it is merely a statutory tool or
to stay there forever. When we entered
mechanism and it does not change the
UNCLOS 3 that is the controlling treaty.
nature of the internal waters. The
If there is conflict between Treaty of
archipelagic state may pass a legislation
Paris and UNCLOS 3 it is the latter that
as to control those who pass through the
shall prevail because it is the more recent
archipelagic waters.
treaty that we entered into and we are
bound to comply with this treaty because III. GOVERNMENT
of the doctrine pacta sun servanda.
Q: What is a government as defined
Q: what are the different maritime in the case of NACOCO?
zones granted to member states of
UNCLOS 3? A: government refers to the institutions
or aggregate of institution by which an
A: 1. Territorial sea: 12 Nautical independent society makes and carries
miles seaward from the baseline; out those rules of action which are
2. Contiguous Zone: 12 Nautical necessary to enable men to live in a
miles from the tip of the Territorial Sea; social state, or which are imposed upon
the people forming that society by those
3. Exclusive Economic Zone: 200 who possess the power or authority of
Nautical miles from the baseline prescribing them
Q: What is the right of the Q: Is government the same as
archipelagic or coastal state over administration?
these belt of waters?
A: No. An administration are those in
A: 1. Territorial Sea: We have whose hand, the reign of the government
sovereignty over its territorial Sea. are for the time being.
16
2017
Q: What are the two functions of the 8. Preservation of the state
Government? against outside or external
encroachment and danger and
A: Contituent and Ministrant functions
promotion of international interest
Q: How do we define Constituent
Q: What are the ministrant
functions of the government?
functions?
A: these are functions which constitute
1. Public works
the very bonds of society and are
2. Public education
compulsory in nature
3. Public charity, health and
Q: how about the Ministrant safety regulations
functions? 4. Regulation of trade and
industry
A: these are functions undertaken only
by way of advancing the general interests Q: Can NACOCO a government
of society and are merely optional owned and control corporation
qualify as a public corporation to
Q: What are the constituent
benefit from the exception of
functions as enumerated by
payment of stenographic notes?
President Wilson?
A: No. Notwithstanding the fact that
A: 1. The keeping of order and
NACOCO is performing governmental
proving for the protection of persons and
function, it is not part of the definition of
property from violence and threat;
the government of the Republic of the
2. The fixing of legal relations Philippines because it has a personality
between man and wife and between separate and distinct from the
parents and children government.
3. The regulation of the holding, Q: What are the principles in

transmission and interchange of property determining whether or not the
and determination of its liabilities for debt government shall exercise these
or for crime optional/ ministrant functions?
4. Determination of contract rights 1. When the government should do

between individuals for the public welfare those things
which the private capital would
5. Definition and punishment of
not naturally undertake; and
crime
2. When by its very nature, the
6. Administration of justice in civil government is better equipped to
cases administer for the public welfare
than any private individual or
7. Determination of political
group of individuals
duties, privileges and relations of citizens
17
2017
Q: Do we still subscribe to the action in behalf of claimants who are too
traditional classification of the many or claimants who cannot protect
government? their rights. Even if the state does not
stand to be benefited or injured, as long
A: No. In the case of PVTA, the SC
as the purpose of the action is to benefit
categorically declare that we are no
its own people the government has a
longer using the classification of the
personality to initiate an action.
government because of the growing
complexity of the society. The state has Q: What are the different kinds of
to mandatorily render services which are defective government?
intended to promote the general welfare
A: de facto and de jure government.
of the state.
Q: What’s the difference between
Q: What is the manifestation in the
this two types of defective
1987 constitution that the
government?
traditional manifestation of the
functions of the government does A: De jure government is one that
not subscribe upon by the possess title but has no control. De facto
government? government on the other hand is one
that exercises control but lacking legal
A: Under Sec. 5 Art. 2 it provides that the
title. In short usurper.
maintenance of peace and order, the
protection of life liberty and property and Q. What are the instances when the
the promotion of the general welfare are government does not exercise
essential for the enjoyment by all the control?
people of the blessings if democracy.
A: 1. In case when it is withdrawn from
These are ministrant functions that are
it; or
embedded under our constitution.
2. Has not yet entered into its
Q: What do you mean by duty of the
execution. (Transitory
state as Parens Patriae?
government)
A: The state is the guarding of the
Q: In the case of Co kim Chan, the
People.
SC discuss the 3 kinds of de facto
Q: Did the SC in the case of government what are those?
Government of P.I, agree that the
1. De Facto proper- that which takes
government has no legal standing
possession or control of, or
to initiate an action in behalf of the
usurps, by force or by the voice of
beneficiaries of the earthquake
majority, the rightful legal
donation?
government and maintains itself
A: No. As the guardians of the people the against the will of the latter.
state has a legal standing to initiate an
18
2017
2. Independent Government- That and effect even during the belligerent
which is established by inhabitants occupation.
of a territory who rise in
The authority of the belligerent
insurrection against the parent
government to enact laws is limited only.
state.
As much as possible they should not
3. De Facto government of
disturb the general peace of the public.
Paramount force- That which is
They can only issue law to the extent that
established by the invading forces
it is necessary in the exigencies of the
of an enemy who occupy a
military service and to protect its armed
territory in the course of war.
forces. (Co Kim Cham)
Q: In the case of Co kim Chan, the
Q: The suspension of Political laws
issue is whether the Philippine
during belligerent occupation, is
Executive Commission government
this absolute?
is a de facto government of
paramount force, did the SC rule A: No. The law on treason remains in
that it is a gov’t of paramount force? effect. This is because the allegiance of
the citizens remain to the rightful legal
A: Yes. Notwithstanding the fact that it is
government.
civilian in nature, there are manifestation
that it is a government of paramount Q: Even during the belligerent
force. First, there is an active occupation, the citizen of the
participation of Japanese government occupied territory our bound to
and Second, there is obedience and in obey the laws of the belligerent
doing so they will not become government. Right?
wrongdoers. Thus even if they follow the
A: Yes.
orders of the de facto government they
will not be held criminally liable by the Q: What are the two manifestation
legitimate government. (subject to the that the Phil. Executive commission
exception as will be discussed later in the is a de facto government? (Co Kim
case of Laurel vs Misa) Cham)
Q: What happens to the laws of the 1. It is actively maintained by
rightful legal government during supported by military forces
belligerent occupations?
2. The citizens are bound to
A: Political laws are deemed suspended obey the laws of the
because the rightful legal government is belligerent government.
not in control. Municipal laws remain in and by rendering
effect because the purpose is to regulate obedience, they are not
the relationship between the people of wrongdoers. They will not
the state so these laws remain in force be prosecuted or convicted
19
2017
because they are justified processes may only mean legislative
too render obedience. processes or executive processes.
Q: Even in time of peace, a Filipino Q: how about based on substantive
citizen who commits acts ground? What is the reason for
constituting treason may be judicial decisions rendered by the
prosecuted and convicted. Meaning belligerent courts remain in effect
the law on treason is also extra after the cessation of belligerent
territorial. It may be violated by a occupation?
Filipino citizen who is in a foreign
A: the decisions have already created
country and who commits any of the
vested rights therefore they can no
acts constituting of such crime.
longer be disturbed even after the
Right? (Laurel vs Misa)
cessation of belligerent occupation
A: Yes. Because the allegiance is not
Q: after the cessation of the
suspended. Sovereignty is not suspended
belligerent occupation what
therefore the law on treason may be
happens to the laws enacted by the
violated by a Filipino citizen even during
belligerent government?
the belligerent occupation.
A: Only political laws of the belligerent
So even if the Philippines has no exercise
government will be revoked without any
and control in the affairs of a foreign
positive act from the rightful legal
state, if a filipino citizen commits an act
government.
of treason while on a foreign state, he
may still be prosecuted and convicted by Q: Supposing the belligerent
the PH government. government enacts municipal law,
will these municipal law be deemed
Q: Did the SC extend the definition
null and void upon reinstatement of
of processes to judicial decision so
the rightful legal government?
much so that after declaration
judicial decisions rendered by A: No. because these laws already
belligerent government cease to be created vested rights.
effective in the casae of Co Kim
*Under the doctrine of jus posliminium
Cham?
political laws of the government shall be
A: No. applying the doctrine nusiter deemed revived.
assusicis the word associated with other
*Even after the cessation of the
words must be interpreted within the
belligerent occupation, the municipal
context of the words to which it is
laws are not deemed automatically
associated. So the word processes was
revoked. There must be a positive act or
preced by the words laws and
an express declaration from the rightful
regulations. Laws referred to legislative,
legal government that the municipal laws
regulations referered to executive. So
20
2017
of the belligerent government are 4. Comprehensive
abrogated. 5. Imprescriptible
6. Indivisible
*Political laws need not be expressly
revoked. They are automatically Q: In the case of People vs Gozo the
abrogated upon cessation of the defendant allege that there is an
belligerent occupation. agreement between the US-RP
therefore the laws of the Philippines
Q: Why did the SC said that to allow
are not enforce in that are covered
transfer of allegiance, suspension of
by the agreement. Did the SC agree?
allegiance and the suspension of the
law on treason is a political suicide? A: No. What is granted only to the US
under the agreement is the right to
A: Because if they have allegiance to the
exercise preferential jurisdiction over
belligerent government, the belligerent
acts committed within that area and not
government will use the citizens of its
sovereignty. There is no transfer of
territory to rise against its own
sovereignty under that agreement.
government without incurring any
criminal liability. Q: What is Auto-limitation of
sovereignty?
Q: The suspension of political laws,
does it extend to combatants or A: The Philippines adheres to the
members of the armed forces in principles of international law as a
each side? limitation to the exercise of sovereignty.
A: Yes. They are still bound to obey all *Sovereignty may be considered as a
the political laws of the legitimate proper right of the state. As a property
government. Unlike civilians where right of the state, the state can enter into
political laws are suspended for them. contract with another state whereby it
agrees to share or restrict the exercise of
sovereignty.
IV. SOVEREIGNTY
Q: In criminal law we have learned
Q: What is sovereignty? that embassies are part or
extension of the territory to which
A: The supreme uncontrollable power of they represent. So if you are in US
the state to govern its citizens embassy, it means that you are in
Q: What are the characteristics of the US territory. Is that allowed?
sovereignty according to the case of That a part of the Philippines
People vs Gozo? territory may be given to another
state and may be called a territory
1. Inalienable of that state?
2. Permanent
3. Exclusive
21
2017
A: What is granted to the sending state provocation, there will be loss of time and
is primary jurisdiction. The host state energy. If people will not be restrained
may exercise jurisdiction when the from initiating action against the state,
sending state did not assume jurisdiction the state will end up just appearing in
or when the act is not one of those court to defend itself against multiple
included in the crime of jurisdiction to the lawsuit.
sending state. So it is not correct to say
The state cannot be sued without its
that Embassies are extensions of the
consent is not bases on any formal
sending state. They remain to be part of
conception but rather on a practical and
the PH territory, only that US government
logican ground that There can be no legal
is given preferential jurisdiction over acts
right against the authority which makes
committed inside that embassy.
the law on which the right depends.
*No inch of Philippine territory can be
Q: State and discuss the basis of the
impregnated by alien color.
Doctrine of State immunity from
STATE IMMUNITY suit.
Q: The 1935 constitution nor the A: It is based on the provisions of the

1973 constitution did not provide Constitution that the State may not be
for the constitutional guarantee on sued without its consent. The doctrine
state immunity and yet we already reflects nothing less than a recognition of
have decisions and case laws the sovereign character of the State and
recognizing the doctrine of state an express affirmation of the unwritten
immunity how is that possible? rule effectively insulating it from the
jurisdiction of courts. It is based on the
A: The principle on State immunity does very essence of sovereignty. Justice
not spring from any formal recognition by Holmes once said that a sovereign is
constitutional system. It is nothing more exempt from suit, not because of any
and nothing less than a recognition of the formal conception or obsolete theory,
sovereignty of the state. but on the logical and practical ground
Q: What is the legal basis of doctrine that there can be no legal right as
of state immunity according to against the authority that makes the law
justice holmes? on which the right depends. True, the
doctrine, not too infrequently, is
A: there can be no legal right against the derisively called “the royal prerogative of
authority which makes the law on which dishonesty” because it grants the
the right depends prerogative to defeat any legitimate
Q: what is the sociological basis of claim against it by simply invoking its
the non-suability of the state? non-suability. It has been explained in its
defense, however, that a continued
A: With the well-known propensity of the adherence to the doctrine of non-
people to go to court at the least
22
2017
suability cannot be deplored, for the loss Note: par in parem non habet
of governmental efficiency and the imperium (meaning, an equal has no
obstacle to the performance of its authority over an equal)
multifarious functions would be far
greater in severity than the Q: What do you call the process
inconvenience that may be caused done whenever a foreign state is
private parties, if such fundamental sued and pleads its immunity form
principle is to be abandoned and the suit? How is it done?
availability of judicial remedy is not to be A: It is called the process of suggestion.
accordingly restricted. In the Philippines, the practice is for the
Q: What is the basis of extending foreign government or the international
the principle to the foreign state? organization to first secure an executive
endorsement of its claim of sovereign or
A: under par in parem non habet diplomatic immunity. But how the
imperium, a foreign state cannot kneel to Philippine Foreign Affairs Office conveys
our local courts because as an equal, our its endorsement to the courts varies.
courts has no authority over them.
Q: What are the instances when an
Q: Can we say that the recognition action will be deemed to be a suit
of the doctrine of state immunity to against the state?
foreign state apply only when the
complainant is a Filipino citizen and 1. When the Republic is sued by
the defendant is a foreign state name;
which is granted a sovereign
2. When the suit is against an
status? But when the claimant is a
unincorporated government
citizen is a foreign country, suing agency;
before our courts, the doctrine of
state immunity will not apply? 3. When the suit is on its face
against a government officer but
A: Yes. Our courts have no jurisdiction
the case is such that ultimate
against foreign sovereigns because they
liability will belong not to the
are treated as equals with our sovereign
officer but to the government.
state.
It is only prima facie. It may be proven
Note: So the SC in Sanders applied the
otherwise
doctrine of sovereign immunity. The SC
directed our courts not to interfere Q: When the State files a suit, it
because it involves a foreign sovereign waives its right against immunity
even if the claimant is a citizen of that from suit. Is the rule absolute?
foreign state. Why?
A: As a rule, when the sate files a suit, it
becomes vulnerable to suits or
23
2017
counterclaims. But not if the State Q: In case of Sandoval, the suit on
intervenes in a suit not for the purpose its face is in the name of the
of resisting the claim precisely because government, why did the SC
of State immunity. entertain jurisdiction over the
controversy?
Q: In a complaint against the State,
the plaintiff failed to allege the A: because while the government is
existence of State’s consent. Is sued, the liability will not lie on the
there any effect of this omission? government but on the public officers in
their personal capacity.
A: Yes. The complaint must allege that
the State gave its consent to be sued, *We can also apply the principle in one
otherwise, it would be dismissed. This is of the instances when the suit is against
so because waiver of the immunity being the public officer but the ultimate liability
in derogation of sovereignty will not be falls on the state.
inferred lightly and must be construed
Q: In the case of Republic vs
strictissimi juris
Sandoval, an administrative order
Q: Can there be an instance when was issued which created the
the suit is against the republic and Citizen’s Mendiola Commission for
yet the doctrine of state immunity the purpose of conducting an
cannot be applied? Or can we say investigation for the disorders,
that whenever the suit is against death, and casualties that took
the republic, the doctrine of state place. Respondents then filed a
immunity will always apply? claim for damages against the
republic and the military officers.
A:
Did the SC held the republic liable?
Q: Supposing Juan Dela Cruz
A: No. The principle of State Immunity
brought a suit against the state to
from suit does not apply in this case, as
compel the performance of an act
when the relief demanded by the suit
mandated by the constitution. The
requires no affirmative official action on
petition is for mandamus to perform
the part of the state in its political
a ministerial act. Can the
capacity, even though the officers or
government invoke state immunity
agents who are made defendants claim
in order to repel the action?
to hold or act only by virtue of a title of
A: No. when the cause of action is to the state as its agents and servants.
perform an act required by law or to Whatever acts or utterances that then
restrain an act which is prohibited by President Aquino may have said or done,
constitution or by law, the doctrine of the same are not tantamount to the state
state immunity does not apply. having waived its immunity from suit.
24
2017
Q: In so far as suit against the state, compensation whenever the state
the SC in Holy See vs Rosario as well takes private property without
as in the case of US vs Guinto going through the process of
characterize the doctrine of state expropriation?
immunity as a Royal Prerogative of
A: the SC said that Doctrine of state
Dishonesty. Why is it called the
immunity cannot be applied in order to
Royal prerogative of dishonesty?
perpetrate injustice. Particularly so
A: Because by simply invoking state because it is the law that mandates the
immunity, the state can invade legal government to pay just compensation
obligations to individuals or entities. specifically under Sec. 9 of Art. 3 the
government cannot take private property
Q: In the case of Holy See vs without payment of just compensation.
Rosario, the Holy See was sued for
failure to comply with the condition *In essence the SC said in Amigable vs
to evict the squatters. It was Cuenca and Air Transport Office that had
contended, however, that it cannot the government followed the steps in
invoke immunity from suit since it expropriation proceedings, the claimants
entered into a commercial would not have a cause of action against
transaction. Did the SC agree? the government.
A: No. The Holy See is immune from suit Q: so state cannot be sued without
because the decision to transfer property giving its consent. How can the
was clothed with a governmental state give its consent to be sued?
character, as it did not do it for profit or
A: Express and Implied consent to be
gain. The mere entering into a contract
sued
by a foreign State with a private party
cannot be the determining factor Q: What are the kinds of express
whether it is engaged in business or not. consent to be sued?
If the foreign State is not engaged
A: through General Law and Special Law
regularly in business or trade, the
particular act or transaction must Q: What is the difference between
betested by its nature. If the act is in consent through general law and
pursuit of a sovereig activity, or an express consent through special
accident thereof, it is an act jure imperii, law?
especially when it is not undertaken for
A: General law applies to all cases that
gain or profit.
may fall under the requirements in that
Q: What was the ruling given by the law. While in special law it only pertains
SC in the case of Amigable in 1) Not to a particular individual or group of
applying the doctrine of state individuals to whom such special law is
immunity and 2) Making it the granted.
obligation of the state to pay just
25
2017
Q: Do we have a general law where 3083, same principle applies, we put in
the state give its consent to be Act 3083 it only makes express the
sued? implied principle.
A: Yes. Act 3083 whereby the state Implied waiver
expressly consent to be sued.
Q: What is the restrictive theory all
Q: how about special law? Do we about?
have a special law where the state
A: The state will be deemed to have
expressly gives its consent to be
impliedly waived its non-suability if it has
sued?
entered into a contract in its proprietary
A: Commonwealth Act number 2457 is an or private capacity
express consent to be sued through
Q: In determining whether the
special law which is applicable only to Mr.
transaction is commercial or
Meritt for his claims.
government do court go into the
Q: What causes of action does act nature of the transaction? Like in
3083 cover where the state has the case of holy See the transaction
expressly waive its immunity involve was sale of real property?
through general law?
A: it is the not the nature of the
A: Money claims involving liability arising transaction that is controlling but the
from contract express or implied. regularity of the transaction or the
objective or the purpose of the
Q: Does this act apply regardless of
transaction.
the nature of the functions being
discharged by the government in Q: in the case of Holy See vs Rosario
entering into that contract? the court said that there are two
Whether the government is conflicting theories of state
performing a jure imperii or jure immunity. What are these
gestioni, the suit will lie through act conflicting theories of state
3083? immunity?
A: No we have to determine whether the A: According to the Classical or absolute
contract was entered into in the exercise theory, a sovereign cannot be made a
of jure impreii or jure gestioni. Jure respondent in the courts of another
gestionii yes, suable. Jure impreii no, sovereign without its consent. On the
immunity applies. The cause of action is other hand, in restrictive theory, the
proprietary in character because of the immunity of the sovereign is recognized
clause “that can serve as civil liability only with regard to public acts or acts
between private parties” so the effect of jure imperii of a state, but not with
Act 3083 is that it only makes express regard to private acts or acts jure
what used to be implied. We remove Act gestionis
26
2017
Q: what are the instance of implied resort to modes of discovery in order to
waiver of State immunity? raise their defenses.
A: Whenever the state commences a Q: PCGG said that under the
litigation in order to claim affirmative doctrine of restrictive theory the
action and when the state enters into a state is deemed to have impliedly
business contract. waived its immunity when the state
enters into a commercial
NOTE: in jure imperii there is no waiver
transaction, can the PCGG apply the
of immunity and no implied consent may
same principle in the initiation of
be derived therefrom.
complaint? That if it applies to
Q: The case of US vs Ruiz involves a contracts, that also applies to
contract for the repair of wharves. initiation of litigation and as such
Is this function, of entering into implied waiver of immunity shall
such contract may be considered as only result when a state commences
jure imprii or jure gestioni? a litigation in the pursuit of its
commercial transaction and not
A: Jure imperii. the projects are an
when it initiates a governmental
integral part of the naval base which is
function. Did the SC agree?
devoted to the defense of both the US
and the Philippines, undisputed a A: No. when the state commences a
function of the government of the litigation, it is deemed to have impliedly
highest order, they are not utilized for waived its immunity without
nor dedicated to commercial or business qualification. So whether it is initiated
purposes. in its governmental or proprietary
functions, implied waiver results. This is
Note: The correct test for the application in compliance with the principle of justice
of State immunity is not the conclusion and fairness because if we will apply the
of a contract by a State but the legal doctrine the restrictive theory only in
nature of the act actions filed in commercial capacity of
the state, there will be an instance when
Q: Did the SC agree that officers of
the government will file an action against
PCGG in the case of Republic vs
individual but the individual cannot
Sandiganbayan, cannot be
answer because that will be considered
compelled to divulge information
as a suit against the state.
through modes of discovery
because they enjoy state immunity? *in raising defenses (by the private
party), it may also setup counterclaims.
A: No. although the charter of PCGG
These counterclaims are not covered by
insulates them from legal actions, PCGG
state immunity because they should be
is the one who initiated the action thus,
allowed to setup their defenses upto the
it is deemed to have impliedly waived its
immunity therefore the defendants may
27
2017
extent that they will raise counterclaims Q: Whenever the state gives its
against the government consent to be sued, is it an
automatic admission of liability?
Q: So the defendant can raise
counterclaims against the state. All A: No. The state only gives the plaintiff
kinds of counterclaims? the right to prove his cause of action
Supposing the government filed a Q: What’s the difference between
complaint against the supplier who suability and liability?
is selling firearms to the
A: Yes. Suability depends on the consent
government, the government filed
of the State to be sued, liability on the
an action against the supplier
applicable law and the established facts.
because the items it delivered to the
The circumstance that a State is suable
government were faulty. So the
does not necessarily mean that it is liable,
government is claiming damages
on the other hand, it can never be held
against the supplier amounting to 5
liable if it does not
Million. The defendant setup his
defense that the government is Q: which means that the question of
liable to the supplier for the suability can be determined by
firearms already delivered consent? Express of implied?
amounting to 10 million. The
A: Yes.
supplier said that by offsetting, the
government still owes him 5 Million. Q: While the question of liability?
Is the counterclaim valid?
A: depends on the established evidence
A: No. the claim is for another item thus
*So even if the state consents to be sued,
in essence that is a permissive
the state can still deny liability. It is still
counterclaim. Only compulsory
incumbent upon the plaintiff that liability
counterclaims can be set up by
lies on the state whenever the state gives
defendant sued by the state. permissive
its consent to be sued.
counterclaims are considered as separate
actions, being separate actions, it is not Suits against Public officials
where the state has impliedly waive its
Q: Are acts of public officials within
immunity. It requires another waiver of
the scope of State Immunity?
immunity.
A: Yes
Note: Implied waiver of immunity can
only apply to the cause of action initiated Q: Is this absolute?
by the government. if the cause of action
A: No. Acts committed by public officials
is the firearms, any counterclaim setup
outside the scope of their authority will
by the defendant will only be upto that
not give rise to the concept of state
cause of action. Other cause of action will
immunity. Ordinarily the officer or
be covered by State immunity.
28
2017
employee committing the tort is Q: Whenever the state gives its
personally liable therefor, and may be consent to be sued, the consent
sued as any other citizen and held operates until what part of the
answerable for whatever injury or proceedings?
damage results from his tortious act.
A: it will operate at all stages of
Note: It is a general rule that an officer- proceedings anterior to the execution
executive, administrative quasi-judicial, stage. Once the court renders a
ministerial, or otherwise who acts outside judgement, the court loses jurisdiction
the scope of his jurisdiction and without over the issue.
authorization of law may thereby render
Q: What is the reason why a
himself amenable to personal liability in a
favorable judgement in an action
civil suit. If he exceeds the power
against the government where the
conferred on him by law, he cannot
government has consented to be
shelter himself by the plea that he is a
sued cannot be executed by the
public agent acting under color of his
same trial court that rendered the
office, and not personally. (Festejo vs
decision? In other words why does
Fernando)
the trial court loses jurisdiction
Q: What are the exceptions when a after judgement?
public officer may be sued without
A: Because public funds can only be used
the prior consent of the state?
for which it is specifically appropriated.
(Sanders vs Veridiano)
Funds can only be used for a specific
1. To compel him to do an act purpose to which it is appropriated.
required by law Without appropriation, public funds
2. To restrain him from enforcing an cannot be used for any purpose even if
act claimed to be unconstitutional the purpose is public.
3. To compel the payment of
*The government has to enact a law
damages from an already
appropriating funds specifically to answer
appropriated assurance fund or
liability. Without any law setting aside a
refund tax over-payments from a
fund to satisfy the liability, the public
fund already available for the
funds cannot be touched by the court.
purpose
4. To secure a judgement that the *there must be a separate consent to
officer impleaded may satisfy by comply with the order of the trial court.
himself without the state having to
do a positive act to assist him *It is only the congress or the local
5. Where the government itself has legislative body to set aside funds to
violated its own laws because the satisfy judgement.
doctrine of state immunity cannot Q: Supposing the government has
be used to perpetrate injustice. already appropriated funds to cover
29
2017
the award of the trial court. Can the independent of the state. In can further
court issue a writ of execution? Or classified as those created under the
can the court refuse and say that it special law and under the general law.
already lose its jurisdiction Unincorporated government agency has
therefore it cannot issue a writ of no juridical personality separate and
execution? distinct from the government.
A: The court may issue a writ of Q: How to determine the suability of
execution, the court will not lose its this incorporated governmental
jurisdiction because there is already a agency?
fund appropriated to satisfy any award.
A: If the charter provides that the agency
(City of Caloocan)
can sue and be sued, the suit will lie.
Q: Supposing a complaint was filed
*2 personalities of LGU: they can engage
by A against B and incidentally, B is
in governmental and proprietary
an employee of DOJ and the cause
functions.
of action of A is that B did not pay
his loan. A was able to obtain a *The question of suability can be
favorable judgement and A knows answered through their legislative
that B has a benefit which is due to charter
be released one month after the
Q: If the charter of the LGU is silent,
finality of the decision. Can the
how can we determine if that LGU is
court issue a writ of execution to
entitled to immunity or suable?
attach or garnish the benefit?
A: inquire into the function based on the
A: No. Because the benefit is still
purpose for which it was created. If:
considered as public funds. Unless and
until it is given to B, the funds belong to 1. Proprietary: if the purpose is to
the DOJ, the same is not subject to obtain or earn profit: SUABLE
garnishment. 2. Governmental: if the purpose is
for the benefit of public welfare:
Agencies of the government
NOT SUABLE
Q: What are the classifications of
Q: How do we determine the
government agencies for the
suability of this Unincorporated
application of doctrine of state
governmental agency?
immunity?
1. If it performs governmental
1. Incorporated
functions: not suable without the
2. Unincorporated
consent of the state (Sanders vs
Q: What is the difference? Veridiano)
2. If it performs proprietary
A: Incorporated government agency are
functions: Suable (Civil
those that possess a juridical personality
Aeronautics vs CA) except when
30
2017
the proprietary functions are 4. The rule on the immunity of public
indispensable in the discharge of funds from seizure or
its governmental functions. (Mobil garnishment does not apply
Phil. Vs Customs Arraste) where the funds sought to be
levied under execution are
Note: Even if it exercises proprietary
already allocated by law
functions, if such is incidental to its
specifically for the satisfaction of
primary governmental functions, an
the money judgment against the
unincorporated still cannot be sued
government. In such a case, the
without its consent.
monetary judgment may be
RULES ON MUNICIPAL legally enforced by judicial
CORPORATIONS: processes. (City of Caloocan vs
Judge Allarde)
1. Municipal corporations are suable
because their charters grant them Q: Is mandamus applicable to
the competence to sue and be congress?
sued. Nevertheless, they are
generally not liable for torts A: No. because it will violate the
committed by them in the separation of powers.
discharge of governmental Article 2. PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
functions and can be held
answerable only if it can be shown Q: What is the title of Art. 2 of the
that they were acting in a constitution?
proprietary capacity. (Municipality A: Declaration of Principles and State
of Fernandez vs Firme) Policy
2. Municipal funds in possession of
municipal and provincial Q: Art. 2 of the constitution is
treasurers are public funds divided into two parts. Section 1-6
exempt from execution. are the principles and 7-28 are the
(Municipality of San Miguel vs policies. What is the difference
Fernandez) between principles and policies?
3. In the absence of appropriate
A: State policies are those not binding
ordinance, the remedy to enforce
but mere guidelines for the state to act
the liability of the municipal
upon.
corporation is through
MANDAMUS to compel the Q: So sec. 1-6 are binding and
enactment and approval of the become obligatory upon the
necessary appropriation ordinance ratification of the 1987 constitution
and the corresponding while Secs. 7-28 are not self-
disbursement. (Municipality of executing and are mere guidelines
Makati vs CA) and require an implementing
regulations?
31
2017
A: Generally they are non self-executing Q: In Villavicencio vs. Lucban, can
provision with the exception provided for we say that under our democratic
under sec 15,16 and 28. system, the best or good intention
can justify an otherwise
So regardless whether it is section 1-6 or
unauthorized act?
7-28, Art. 2 is generally not a self
executing provision. According to the SC A: No. Although the intention is
in the case of Tanada vs Tuvera, Art. 2 of commendable, the means employed is
the 1987 constitution is regarded as the unlawful because it violated the rights of
general creed of the nation. These are the women and there is no express
just guidelines for the congress in authority to undertake such act.
enacting laws and the courts in
Q: Section 2 Art. 2 declares three
interpreting laws of the constitution.
principles. And these are?
Q: What does Sec. 1 of Art. 2
1. The PH renounces war as an
declare?
instrument of national policy
A: The Philippines is a republican state, 2. Adopts generally accepted
sovereignty resides in the people and all principles of international law as
government authority emanates from part of the law of the land
them. 3. It’s governed by principles of
equality, freedom, justice,
Q: What are the essential features
cooperation and amity with all
of a democratic and republican
nations
state?
Q: Supposing sec 2 of Art 2 does not
A: Representation and Renovation
expressly declare the principle of
Under the concept of renovation, this renunciation of war as an
feature does not allow permanent instrument of national policy. Does
legislation as well as permanent that mean that the PH can now
governmental acts. These governmental engage in aggressive war with other
acts are subject to changes by future states?
government officers.
A: No. because under the second
Q: What are the manifestations of principle, the PH adopts the generally
this two features of democratic and accepted principles of international law
republican state? as part of the law of the land which
means that by incorporation, the PH
1. Ours is a rule of law and not of
accepts the principles of international law
men
which includes renunciation of war.
2. Accountability of public officers
3. Rule of majority Q: there are two modes of localizing
4. Bill of rights international law. What are the two
5. Separation of powers
32
2017
ways of extending international law 2. General principles of law
as part of our legal system recognized by civilized nations
1. Incorporation Q: In the case of Kuroda vs.
2. Transformation Jalandoni, did the SC agree that just
because the PH is not a signatory to
Q: What is the difference between
the Hague convention and a belated
the two modes?
member of the Geneva convention,
A: Under transformation, international the PH cannot extend the principles
law is transformed to a domestic law mandated by the two convention?
through a constitutional mechanism such
A: No. Even if the PH is not a signatory,
as local legislation. In incorporation the
this international conventions deal with
international law is part of the domestic
generally accepted principles of
law upon constitutional declaration.
international law, they are deemed to be
Q: Why is there a need to go through part of the law of the land under the
transformation when by mere doctrine of incorporation.
declaration alone (incorporation),
Q: In the case of Agustin vs. Edu did
an international law can become a
the SC sustain the validity of the
part of our local law without any
letter of instruction issued by the
positive act on the part of the
President?
government.
A: No
A:
Q: What happens if there is conflict
Q: What kind of international law
between the local law and
automatically becomes part of the
international law?
law of the land through
incorporation? A: As a rule the municipal law shall
prevail
A: Generally accepted principles of
international law Q: Why? What was the reason given
by the SC in the case of Ichong vs
Q: What is a generally accepted
Hernandez in sustaining the validity
principles of international law?
of municipal law over international
A: Norms which are binding and law?
recognized by all civilized nations.
A: Police power cannot be invalidated by
Q: what are the two aspects of a treaty
generally accepted principles of
Q: Is that absolute? That the
international law?
municipal law shall always prevail?
1. International customary rules
A: No because if the conflict is presented
to international courts, the international
33
2017
law will prevail. If the conflict is Q: If there is conflict between a
presented before the municipal courts, treaty and the Rules of court
the municipal law will prevail. promulgated by the SC the treaty
will prevail following the hierarchy
Q: In all circumstances?
of law?
A: No because there are other legal
A: No the Rules of court shall prevail.
principles that has to be considered by
the international tribunals. Same as when Q: In the case of In re Garcia, did the
it comes to municipal courts. court followed the hierarchy of
laws?
Note: If we will give a sweeping
statement and the controversy is raised A: No because it is founded under the
in the international tribunal, then there constitution itself.
will come an instance when the ph will
Q: What is the principle under Sec.
enter into a treaty with another state and
3?
after getting all the benefit of that treaty,
the government will enact a law A: Civilian Authority is at all times
prohibiting compliance with that supreme over the military
international commitment.
Q: What is the manifestation that
Q: Supposing the conflict is not under our constitution, civilian
between a treaty and municipal law authority is supreme over the
but between an executive military under the constitution?
agreement and a municipal law.
1. Commander in chief clause under
Which will prevail? This is the case
Art. 7 Section 18
in Gonzales vs Henchova regarding
2. The requirement that the AFP
the importation of rice, Did the SC
members are duty bound to
upheld the doctrine of lex pesteriori
defend the constitution uncer Sec.
derogate?
5 Art. 16
A: No because the conflict is not between
Q: Can we say that this
two international laws. The conflict is
constitutional principle only applies
between a municipal law and executive
in times of peace? So during war
agreement hence the doctrine was not
military authority rules over
applied. The law shall prevail regardless
civilian?
whether the executive agreement is a
more recent enactment. A: No the constitution states that at all
times, even in extraordinary times, the
Q: Lex posterior derogat priori what
civilian authority remains the same.
does it mean?
Q: What is the objective of the
A: The more recent law shall supersede
Armed forces of the Ph under the
the later law
constitution?
34
2017
A: Protect the people and the state government may call upon its citizens to
render this services.
Q: May members of Armed forces
participate in military adventurism Q: What is the reason why the
in order to comply with it obligation existence of war is no need before
as protector of the people and the the government may call upon its
state? citizens to render the services?
A: No. A: If the government has to wait for a
war, it will be too late. The term defend
Q: Can the military armed forces,
under sec. 4 means actual or
who believed that the orders of the
preparatory.
President are unlawful, break the
chain of command because they Q: Supposing the word “personal
believe that the orders is service” is not there in the
unconstitutional and they are constitution, what is the
invoking their duty to protect the implication?
people and the state from such
A: the services must be rendered by the
unlawful order?
citizens themselves and not by
A: representation.
Q: What is the prime duty of the Q: In the case of People vs Lagman,
government in Sec. 4? the National Defense Act is
unconstitutional because it goes
A: Protect and serve the people and the
against their religion. Did the SC
state
sustain the invocation of religion
Q: And what may the government freedom in order to be exempt from
do in compliance with this duty? the National Defense Act?
1. The government may call upon A: No because it is provided that all

the people to defend the state citizen may be called upon to defend the
2. The government may require state. To leave the organization of an
citizens, under the conditions of army to the will of the citizens would be
law, to render personal, military or to make this duty of the government
civil service excusable should there be no sufficient
3. The government may use the AFP men who volunteer to enlist therein.
to repel any threat to its security
Note: Sec. 5 of Art. 2 is a manifestation
Q: The government may call upon that we indeed abandoned the traditional
the people to render services only in classification of the functions of the
case of war? Is that correct? government
A: Regardless whether there is war or Q: Section 6 is?
threat or war or none at all, the
35
2017
A: The separation of Church and State Q: Does the separation mean that
the state does not recognized the
Q: What is the meaning of the
influence of religion in shaping
meaning church under Sec. 6 of Art.
human affairs (Aglipay vs Ruiz)?
2?
A: No. The wall of separation is not an
A: Church means Religion
inhibition of the profound reverence for
Q: What is Religion? religion. It is not a denial of its influence
in human affairs.
A: it is a profession of faith to an active
power that binds and elevates man to his Q: What is the wisdom behind this
creator (Aglipay vs Ruiz) separation of state and church as
stated in the case of Estrada vs
Q: Separation of state connotes lack
Escritor? Can we not just merge
of support, so the government
them to create an even more
cannot enact legislations for
powerful institution?
appropriation of funds to support
religion. Since communism and A: The Union will be destructive to both
Taoism are not centered to a belief institutions. The wall of separation is
of a supreme human being, the intended to preserve the integrity and
congress can appropriate funds in dignity of these two great institutions.
order to build temples as symbols Because when together, one may use the
because they are not religion within influences of the other to further their
the context, so the separation does respective interest.
not apply to them?
Q: The constitution mandates the
A: wall of separation. What kind of
wall is mandated by the constitution
Q: In the case of Estrada vs Escritor
to be constructed between these
a system of belief may be
two institutions to maintain the
considered as religion as long as
separation according to the SC in
four elements are present. Which
the case of Estrada vs Escritor?
are?
1. Separationist wall of separation
1. Belief in God or atleast some
a. Strict separationist - where
parallel belief that occupies a
there is an absolute
central place in the believers life
impregnable wall of
2. It must involve a moral code
separation between the
transcending individual belief
church and the state;
3. There must be a demonstrable
b. Strict neutrality - all
sincerity
governmental acts are
4. There must be some
applicable without
associational ties
discrimination hence
36
2017
religion cannot be a basis Q: Applying that in the case of
of exemption. Escritor, is the marriage is
2. Benevolent neutrality wall of considered immoral?
separation
Q: What is the objective of the wall
Q: Now we determine if it may be
of separation under the
covered by mandatory laws,
separationist wall of separation
concluding that the arrangement is
based on the jefersonian concept?
immoral can we now impose
A: Under the Jefersonian concept, the administrative and criminal
separation is intended to protect the sanctions because the act is
state from the church. The church is a immoral?
more powerful institution in as much as
A: Not automatic because we apply this
there should be a wall to protect the state
law of separation called benevolent
from the encroachment of the church
neutrality which allows accommodation.
Q: How about under the Benevolent
Note: In determining whether
neutrality?
religious practice is exempted from
A: The status of the institution was the coverage of a general law, we
reversed. The church is the subordinate have to answer the three questions
institution that’s why there should be a under the compelling interest test.
wall to protect the weaker one from the If we answer the three in the
stronger one. Also known as the wall of affirmative, the mandatory
accommodation. governmental act should be applied
to the religious arrangement.
Q: What kind of wall of separation is
consistent with our constitution? Q: What are the three questions?
A: Benevolent Neutrality 1. Whether the statute or
governmental act created a
Q: in determining the propriety of
burden over a religious practice or
the extra marital arrangement in
freedom; (Does administrative
the case of Estrada vs Escritor, what
code and the RPC created burden
standard should be used according
over the arrangement of marriage
to the SC? Should we use secular or
in the case of Estrada vs escritor?)
governmental standard of morality
YES
or religious or ecclesiastical
2. Is there a sufficient compelling
standard of morality?
state interest involved- YES
A: Secular or governmental standard. 3. Did the government in achieving
What applies to one religion must apply its compelling interest used the
to all. least intrusive means so that the
religious freedom is not
37
2017
encroached to achieve the 1. Does it inhibit or support religion
governmental interest. – YES 2. There must be some secular
legislative purpose
In order to impose the mandatory law,
3. The act should not foster
the three questions must be answered
excessive entanglement with
yes.
religion
Q: What are the kinds of Benevolent
Q: Under the principle of separation,
Neutrality?
it mandates that one cannot
1. Mandatory benevolent neutrality – interfere with the activities of the
absolute accommodation based other. Does it mean that whenever
on religious freedom there is controversy, the court of
2. Permissive benevolent neutrality – justice cannot adjudicate?
based on some policies (e.g.
A: Generally Yes. In taruc vs Dela Cruz ,
victoriano vs elezano workers
the court said that it cannot assume
association)
jurisdiction over the issue because these
Q: In order to strengthen the wall of are matters which are best address to the
separation the constitution religious authorities because these are
disallows the use of public funds or purely disciplinary in character. One
property for the use of religious exception is provided in one case where
institution. Does that mean that any the court said that it can assume
use of public funds for activity that jurisdiction when the controversy
has some religious color is involves civil rights and property rights.
prohibited by the constitution?
Q: In case of Fonacier which was
A: No in the case of Aglipay and Galces cited in the case of Taruc, the court
the SC said that it does necessarily follow assumed jurisdiction over the
that when a particular governmental acts controversy when it also involves
has some color of religion, it comes expulsion of members. Why?
within the constitutional proscription. If
A: Because the question there are 1.
the color of religion is only incidental to
Whether they were validly ex
the purported governmental act, then it
communicated, 2. Who is the newly
does no come into the ambit of the
designated officers of the church and 3.
constitutional prohibition
Are they compelled or bound to render
Q: In determining the validity of the accounting and to return properties
use of public funds or property for under their administration. Which means
some religious activity, the test to that the resolution of the third issue
be applied is the lemon test as principally depend on the resolution of
discussed in the case of Estrada vs the two. So to determine whether
Escritor. What is this test? petitioner can elect their officers, the
court has to determine whether they
38
2017
were expelled or remain as members of Q: What are the important policies
the church. So if they are no longer under Sec. 7 and 8 of Art. 2?
members, they can no longer elect. If
1. Independent foreign policy
they are no longer members they shall
2. Policy of freedom from nuclear
render and accounting and return the
weapons in its territory
properties. So meaning the issue are
related so the court has to determine the Q: Several months ago there was an
exclusion of the members so that it can inquiry as to the revival of the
adjudicate on the property rights involve. bataan nuclear powerplant as the
source of energy. Assuming that the
Q: Does independent foreign policy
move to revive the bataan
under Sec. 7 Art. 2 allow the Ph to
powerplant prospered. Will that not
enter into multilateral treaties with
violate the provision under Sec. 8
other states? Or it is an isolation
Art. 2?
approach? Does it require the Ph to
be isolated from the world? A: No it will not violate because what the
constitution prohibits is the existence of
A: Sec. 7 Art. 2 allow the Ph to enter into
nuclear weapons and not the nuclear
treaties. The constitution does not
power as a source of energy.
provide isolation of the Ph to other
foreign state. Q: The meaning of social justice
varies depending on the
Q: In Tanada vs Angara, the
circumstance of the case. What are
petitioners assailed the treaty the different Concepts of Social
entered into by the Ph. One of the Justice?
issues raised there is the policy on
independent and self-reliant 1. Calalang v Williams – In
national economy as well as the Political Law
independent foreign policy. 2. Almeda v CA – In Agrarian Law
According to petitioners our entry to 3. Ondoy v Ignacio – In Labor Law
treaties violate the independent 4. Salonga v Farrales – In
foreign policy of the constitution did Obligations and Contracts
the SC agree?
A: No the constitutional policy of a self- Q: What is social justice within the
reliant and independent national context of political law?
economy does not necessarily rule out A: Under Calalang vs. Williams Social
the entry of foreign investments, goods justice is "neither communism, nor
and services. It contemplates neither despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy,”
economic seclusion not mendicancy in but the humanization of laws and the
the international community. equalization of social and economic
forces by the State so that justice in its
rational and objectively secular
39
2017
conception may at least be these cases is not equality but
approximated. Social justice means the protection.” Those who have less in life
promotion of the welfare of all the shall have more in law.
people, the adoption by the Government
Q: in short?
of measures calculated to insure
economic stability of all the competent A: It is not about equality but protection
elements of society, through the
Q: How about in civil law? What is
maintenance of a proper economic and
the concept of social justice in civil
social equilibrium in the interrelations of
law particularly in obligations and
the members of the community,
contracts?
constitutionally, through the adoption of
measures legally justifiable, or extra- A: in the absence of any contractual
constitutionally, through the exercise of commitment or obligation, Social justice
powers underlying the existence of all cannot be invoked to trample on the
governments on the time honored rights of property owners who under our
principle of saluspopuliestsupremalex. Constitution and laws are also entitled to
protection.
Q: In short? Social justice means?
A: The greater good for the greater Q: In the case of secretary of
number national defense vs. Manalo, the
petitioner contends that there is no
Q: What is the obligation of the right to security separate and
owner in the exercise of his distinct from the right to liberty as
property right according to the well as the right against
Supreme Court in the case of unreasonable search and seizure.
Almeda vs. CA? Did the Supreme Court agree that
there is no right to security apart
A: Property use must not only be for the from the right to liberty?
benefit of the owner but of society as A: No the SC did not agree. Under the
well. Property owners cannot exercise universal declaration of human rights
absolute dominion over their property. and civil and political rights, it states that
Q: in labor legislation, social justice the right to security is also equivalent to
the right to be free from fear and threat
is not about equality according to
and intimidation.
the SC in the case of ondoy vs.
Ignacio right? So in labor laws,
Q: Is there any constitutional policy
social justice is?
that allows the extension of this
A: As between a laborer, usually poor human rights declare under this
and unlettered, and the employer, who international conventions?
has resources to secure able legal advice, A: Yes under sec. 11 of Art. 2 the
the law has reason to demand from the guarantee of full respect to human life.
latter stricter compliance. Social justice in
40
2017
Q: The SC discuss the 5 types of woman. Moreover, our laws and statues
amparo cases. What are these? are evolving in order to cater to the
1. Amparo libertad the protection of needs of the society.
personal freedom equivalent to the
habeas; the equivalent remedy under Q: But can we not say that in
the Philippines is the writ of Habeas interpreting provisions of the
Corpus for constitution, the contemporary and
2. Amparo contra leyes for the applicable situation at the time of
judicial review of the constitutionality the ratification of the constitution
of statutes; should be considered. So when the
3. Amparo casacion for the judicial Constitutional commission was
review of the constitutionality and drafted, what they have in mind
was a regular marriage a union
legality of a judicial decision;
between a man and a wife. So can
4. Amparo administrativo for the
we not say that since that is the
judicial review of administrative
contemporaneous condition
actions;
existing at the time of ratification of
5. Amparo agrario for the protection the constitution, that provision
of peasants’ rights derived from the should be interpreted accordingly.
agrarian reform process.
Q: What are the constitutional A: No because we only resort to
policies enunciated under Sec. 12 of interpretation when the law is
Art. 2? ambiguous. In this case the law is clear.
If the framers of the constitution intends
1. The sanctity of family as the basic that the marriage shall be between a
institution man and a woman, they would have
2. Protection of the mother and the include so. Moreover, our laws are
unborn dynamic and changing and should not be
3. The support of the government in confined with the situations.
the promotion of moral character
of the youth Q: How did the SC as to the
importance of marriage in human
Q: supposing a law is enacted life in the US case of Obergefell vs
redefining marriage as the union Hodges?
between two persons amending for A: there are 4 reasons why marriage is
that purpose Art. 1 of the Family important
code. Will that be consistent with 1. The personal choice of marriage is
the constitutional policy inherent in the concept of
recognizing the sanctity of family individual autonomy
life? 2. The choice of marriage supports a
A: It will be consistent because the two person union unlike any other
constitution does not provide that the 3. It safeguards children and family
marriage shall be between a man and a
41
2017
4. It constitutes social bedrock of Q: Basis?
the community
A: Under sec. 12 the state shall also
Q: Can the congress enact a law protect the life of the mother and the
allowing divorce without violating unborn child from conception
the constitutional policy Q: When does the constitutional
recognizing the sanctity of family protection to the child start?
life as basic autonomous social
institution? A: It starts from the fertilization of the
egg
A: No because it will violate the
constitutional policy. The constitutional Q: Did the SC say that conception is
obstacle for enacting a law allowing implantation not fertilization? In
divorce is section 12 of Art. 2 as well as the case of Imbong vs. Ochoa?
Art. 15 of the constitution in so far as A: No conception is the meeting of the
family is concerned egg and sperm to form a fertilize zygote.
Q: But in both constitutional That is the start of the constitutional
provision there is no specific protection. From that moment, the
prohibition on the concept of fertilized zygote already enjoys the
divorce. These are general policies constitutional protection from any harm.
protecting the sanctity of family life. Any deliberate act to harm that fertilized
Can we say that the constitution do zygote would be unconstitutional any
not expressly nor impliedly prohibit governmental act to harm that fertilized
divorce? egg will be violative of the constitution.
A: Even though there is no express or Q: Why did not the constitutional

implied proscription it will destroy the commission used the word
family in such a way that it will destroy fertilization rather than conception
the sanctity of family life to avoid any controversy?
Q: But can we not say that to stay in A: Because fertilization is a technical

a marriage where two people does term, and because in any event,
not want to stay anymore will be conception means fertilization.
more destructive and will also be Q: Another issue resolved in the
more disadvantageous on the case of Imbong vs Ochoa is the
family? beginning of life. So according to
A: No because the constitution adhere to the SC, we have to determine when
the protection of family life. does life begin. What did the SC
said? When does life begin?
Q: How about abortion? Does the
constitution allow abortion? A: life begins from the moment the egg
meets the sperm
A: No.
42
2017
Q: What is a scientific or medical A: Yes so long as in trying to save the life
manifestation that from the of the preferred one, the other one dies
meeting of the egg and the sperm to without deliberate intent, that is covered
form a fertilized zygote, there is by double effect principle.
already life?
Q: What is provided under the
A: because this fertilized egg takes double effect principle? Which was
nutrients and this zygote grows. So since extended to political law in Imbong
there is activity, that is the manifestation vs Ochoa?
that there is life
A: So long as there is no deliberate act in
Q: If there is life at that moment, terminating the life of one, the
what kind of life is that? Is that constitutional protection is not violated.
human life? If they will deliberately terminate the life
of one in saving another, that is
A: because that zygote has cells contain
murder/infanticide as the case may be.
46 chromosomes, it is exclusive to
human beings therefore that fertilized Q: Can the congress define what is
egg is a human being because of this abortifacient?
medical proof. In that regard,
A: No the congress has no discretion to
constitutional protection starts at that
define abortifacient
moment.
Q: What are the kinds of
Q: Supposing there is an incident
abortifacient as defined in the case
where the doctors can only save one
of Imbong vs Ochoa?
life, because the mother has a
medical condition that will not allow 1. One that induces abortion
both of them to survive. So the 2. It destroy the fetus in the mother’s
doctor talk to the husband that they womb
cannot save both the wife and the 3. Prevents the implantation of the
child. We can only save one and we fertilized ovum in reaching the
can choose which one to save, the mother’s womb
husband said that doctor I love my
Q: Sec. 13 and 14 is the policy on the
wife very much, then the doctor said
recognition of youth and women.
that we will do all our efforts to save
Currently we have a law affording
your wife. The husband said sorry
special protection for the children
doctor you are getting me wrong, do
and women such as the VAWC law.
all your efforts to save my child. So
Supposing a group of abused
can the doctor in saving the child,
husband filed a petition questioning
deliberately terminate the life of the
the constitutionality of the VAWC
mother?
law on the ground that it violates
the constitution because the VAWC
43
2017
law grants special protection while Q: In the case of LLDA, the issue is
the constitution only guarantees full the authority of the LLDA to issue
equality not special protection cease and desist order to prevent
would that be sustained by the the dumping of garbage, despite the
court? Can we say that since VAWC fact that the charter does not
does not support equality, can we expressly grant this power. Did the
say that VAWC is unconstitutional SC sustain the authority of LLDA to
because that’s not equality? issue that order?
A: No VAWC is not unconstitutional. A: Yes LLDA may validly issue the order
Equality as provided under the for the protection of the environment and
constitution does not call for uniform or the citizen’s health. The guarantee of a
universal equality. It does not call for balance and healthful ecology carries
uniform application of law. What is only with it a correlative obligation on the part
required is that the law must be applied of the government of non-impairment.
equally among equals. Since the two The government agency tasked with the
groups, men and women are viewed as protection of the environment must
unequal group, the law tends to protect ensure the protection, preservation, and
one in order to level the playing filed. promotion of the environment which
includes the power to issue this
Q: What is the reason given by the
processes in order to esstoped the
SC in Oposa vs Factoran in
further harm to the environment.
concluding that the rights under
sec. 15 and 16 of Art. 2 are equal to Q: supposing the congress enact the
and even greater than those general appropriations act and the
granted under the bill of rights? government gives highest budget
allocation to the payment of loan
A: Because these rights are assumed to
obligations and the budget for
exist from the inception of mankind like
education is only second. Will that
other civil and political rights guaranteed
not constitute a violation in the
under the constitution.
constitutional policy giving priority
Q: Did the petitioners in this case to education, science and
have a legal standing because the technology and the provision in the
case concerns a petition in behalf of constitution for the education to get
the persons who are yet to be born? the highest budget priority?
A: Yes because environmental cases are A: No it will not violate the constitution
extraordinary cases. The right being because the constitutional provision
invoked by the petitioners is a natural giving the department of education the
right and the cause of action is based on highest budget priority is only directory
intergeneration activities and and not mandatory. It will not deprive the
intergeneration justice. congress of its discretion in determining
44
2017
where to put the money. And secondly, A: No because while bataan
highest budgetary priority does not mean petrochemical industry is a private
highest budgetary allocation. So as long enterprise, the government can regulate
as the state gives priority to education the activities of this private enterprise.
even though it is lower that is allowed by They remain to be subject to
the constitution. governmental regulation especially
because the industry involved is a
Q: Again the case of Tanada vs
petrochemical industry to which other
Angara the petitioners challenged
local manufactures and local raw material
the entry of the PH to the GAPP and
depend on.
WTO agreement based on this
constitutional policy. Did the SC Q: What is the relevance of the story
sustain the petition? of Hercules who battled Anteus in
the case of Association of Small land
A: No because the constitution does not
owners vs. Secretary of agrarian
prohibit the country from participating in
reform. Because in that story,
the worldwide trade liberalization and
everytime Hercules throw Anteus to
economic globalization. Also, because
the ground, Anteus became even
independent and self-reliant national
stronger so what Hercules did is he
economy does not prohibit competition.
held Anteus up in the air and
It does not prohibit the opening of local
crushed him to death. What is the
markets to foreign goods the best of the
relevance of that story in the case of
world that can compete with the best of
Association of Small landowner vs
the PH. What is prohibited is over
Secretary of Agrarian Reform?
dependence on foreign assistance.
A: Hercules represents the landowner,
The primary objective of the
very strong arrogant and powerful.
constitutional policy under Sec. Sec. 19 is
Antheus represents the landtilles, so
for the benefit of the consumer.
humble, look terrible and presumed
Q: The case of Garcia vs BOI, weak. But like in the story, even the
involves the transfer of the site of mighty and powerful landowners cannot
petro chemical plant from bataan to defeat these land workers as long as
batangas. BOI contends that the these landworkers have soil to till. So as
business judgment relative to the long as the feet of these workers are
operation of private enterprises are planted on the ground they are invincible
beyond the control of the but if we remove them from the land,
government. According to the BOI it then they will become vulnerable and
is within the management they may die like Antheus in the story.
prerogative to choose where they
Q: In the case of Association of
want to operate. Did the SC agree?
Agrarian Reform vs Secretary of
Agrariam Reform, the petitioners
45
2017
contend that the comprehensive A: Yes because of the word
agrarian reform has never been “collectively”. The constitution said that
tested and on that score it is the state shall undertake a
unconstitutional. Did the SC agree? comprehensive agrarian reform program
whereby the farmers and regular
A: No although the Comprehensive
farmworkers may own directly or
Agrarian Reform Law is experimental, the
collectively the lands that they till. The
purpose of the law is to provide for a
use of the land collectively allows the
sustainable employment for the farmer
ownership in common and this ownership
by giving them conditions which under
in common may be represented by share.
the law are granted to them.
Shares of stock.
Q: Did the SC sustain the validity of
But since RA 6657 was already amended.
the law despite the fact that it
So under existing law, only actual
allows a revolutionary form of
distribution is allowed
payment? Because it is the
government that pays just Q: Prior to 1987 constitution, the
compensation to the landowner and applicable principle in so far as
the farmworker will pay the agrarian reform is land for the
government for this benefit. So the landless. It is still applicable to
Bonds are issued by the government today? Under the 1987
in favor of landowners instead of constitution?
cash. So did the SC agree to this
A: Now it is land for the farmers because
form of payment?
the only beneficiary are those that are
A: Yes it sustained the law because the tilling the land.
comprehensive agrarian reform law is not
Q: What is the meaning of
an ordinary exercise of the power of
autonomy under the constitutional
eminent domain. Because it involves
policy of Sec. 25 Art. 2
millions of hectares and in that regard it
cannot be contemplated if the A: it means giving the local government
government has enough funds to pay units not only more or greater power
just compensation.
Q: Can the congress impair the local
Q: The respondents challenged the autonomy of the local government
validity of the two modes of units by exempting entities from the
distribution, actual and stock option coverage of power of taxation?
distribution. Did the SC allow the
A: Yes. The court said in Basco vs. Pagcor
distribution of stocks instead of
that city of manila, like other municipal
actual distribution of land? Does the
corporation are subject to the control by
constitution allow that kind of
the congress
distribution?
46
2017
Q: What does decentralization A: Agreement of two unequal states the
mean? associate and the principal where the
associate attaches to the principal for
A: the delegation of powers to the local
some protection but the associate
government unit. But such delegation
maintains its independent international
does not amount to abdication of power
personality.
of the congress. This LGUs remain under
the control of the congress. Q: In the case of pamatong vs
comelec the imposition of
Q: What are the two kinds of
decentralization according to disqualification for those who do
Limbona vs. Mangelin? not have sufficient fund to run a
nationwide campaign and those
1. Decentralization of administration who do not belong to any political
2. Decentralization of power party constitutes additional
Q: What are the difference between requirement or qualification in
the two? violation of Sec. 26 Art. 2. Did the SC
agree that such constitute an
A: In decentralization of administration,
impairment of the constitutional
happens when the central government
delegates administrative powers to policy?
political subdivisions in order to broaden A: No. As long as the limitations on
the base of governmental power. “nuisance candidates” apply to
In decentralization of power, it involves everybody equally without
the abdication of political power in favor discrimination, the equal access clause is
of the local government units declared to not violated. Equality is not sacrificed as
be autonomous. The LGU ceases to be long as the burdens engendered by the
accountable to the government but to its limitations are meant to borne by anyone
people. who is minded to file COC. In the case at
bar, there is no showing that any person
Q: What kind of decentralization is is exempt from the limitations or the
envisioned under the constitution? burdens which they create. What is
A: Decentralization of administration recognized under the phrase “equal
access to opportunities for public office”
Q: Does the local autonomy allow is merely a privilege subject to limitations
associative principle? imposed by law. Section 26, Article II of
A: No it is not allowed because the the Constitution neither bestows such a
concept of association under traditional right nor elevates the privilege to the
international law has a specific meaning. level of an enforceable right.
Q: What is associative principle? Q: Is sec. 26 Art. 2 a self-executing

provision?
A: No.
47
2017
the original draft? Which means the
Q: What is the proof according to state shall broaden the opportunity
the SC that Sec.26 requires an for public office?
enabling provision? A: If they approve it, that would compel
A: The latter part of Sec. 26 said “as may the government to create as many offices
be defined by law” which means that for as there are suitors for public service. So
the policy against political dynasty to be as it is worded now, the word broaden is
operative, there must be an enabling now equal access and public office is now
legislation. public service.
Q: But there is no such similar Q: Sec. 7 Art. 7 and Sec 28 of Art. 2,

clause in so far as the guarantee to according to the respondent in
equal access to opportunities for Legaspi vs CSC, is a non self-
public service? executing provision because of the
A: Yes there is none but the provisions phrase “as may be defined by law”
under the Article are generally so since there is such phrase there
considered not self-executing, and there is a need for an enabling legislation
is no plausible reason for according a to make this constitutional
different treatment to the “equal access” guarantees operative. Did the SC
provision. Like the rest of the policies agree?
enumerated in Article II, the provision A: No the SC did not agree. These
does not contain any judicially constitutional provisions are
enforceable constitutional right but selfexecuting. They supply the rules by
merely specifies a guideline for legislative means of which the right to information
or executive action. The disregard of the may be enjoyed by guaranteeing the
provision does not give rise to any cause right and mandating the duty to afford
access to sources of information. The
of action before the courts. An inquiry
duty to disclose the information of public
into the intent of the framers produces
concern, and to afford access to public
the same determination that the
records cannot be discretionary on the
provision is not self-executory.
part of said agencies.
Q: How was Sec 26 originally Q: So what does the phrase “as may
drafted? be prescribed by law” refer to?
A: It provides that the state shall broaden A: It refers to reasonable conditions and
the opportunity for public service. limitations upon the access to be
afforded which must, of necessity, be
Q: What is the implication According consistent with the declared State policy
to commissioner Davide if the
constitutional commission retain
48
2017
of full public disclosure of all transactions arouse the interest of the individuals as
involving public interest. distinguish from mere curiosity.
Q: In the case of Province of Q: In the case of Legaspi vs csc the

Cotabato, the right to information information sought was?
under Sec. 7 of Art. 3 and full public A: The civil service eligibilities if the
disclosure under Sec. 28 Art. 2 are in sanitarians in Cebu
splendid symmetry. Why did the Q: Is it one of public interest or
Supreme Court said that they public concern?
complement each other? A: Yes because the performance of the
A: Sec. 7 grants the right to information services of the public officers will affect
while the other guarantees or imposes an the lives of the petitioner. Therefore it is
obligation on the government that once one of public interest because the
the people exercise the right to information sought affect the lives of the
information, the government will disclose person invoking the information.
such information. Sec. 7 becomes
operative only when somebody invokes Q: In the case of Legaspi vs CSC, did
the right, while sec. 28 of Art. 2 is the SC agree that the custodian can
operative even if no on invokes the withhold or outrightly prohibit the
information. information maintain by them?
Q: Before Sec. 28 maybe applied, A: No they can only regulate the means
there are two questions that must to access the information but they cannot
be answered according to the SC in include the prohibition on right to
the case of Legaspi vs CSC. What are information.
the two questions that must first be
answered in order that the Q: May the custodian of public
guarantee of full disclosure records issue a regulation allowing
becomes operative? only inspection of certified true
1. Is the information of public copies of the documents maintained
interest or public concern by them?
2. Whether there is a law prohibiting A: To prevent damage or loss of record
disclosure of the information or document
So if a researcher wants to study the life
Q: When is an information or of Rizal he cannot demand the National
transaction imbued with public Library to give the original manuscript to
interest or concern? him. The National Historical Commission
A: When the information or transaction will just show a faithful reproduction of
directly affects the life of an individual or the original.
it is of such nature that generally it will
49
2017
Q: May the custodian issue a Q: In the case of Chavez vs PCGG
regulation allowing the inspection the SC enumerated 4 classes of
of records contained by them from 8 information which maybe validly
am to 12 noon? withheld from public disclosure
A: Yes so as not to unduly interfere with because of the nature of these
the official functions of the custodian information. What are those?
1. National Security matters and
Q: May the custodian mandate that intelligence information
the inspection shall be limited to (under international customary
one hour per person? law, these kind of information are
A: Yes to allow other people who are property of the state which the
equally entitled to exercise the right of state may withhold from being
information. inspected by the individual.)
2. Banking transactions and
Q: Custodians cannot prohibit, they Trade Secrets even if there is no
can only regulate. Only the congress bank secrecy of law, the nature of
can prohibit. So does that mean this transaction demand that they
whenever there is no law should be private and confidential
prohibiting or restricting the 3. Criminal matters
disclosure of information, the right 4. Other confidential matters
to information is absolute? (executive sessions in both house
A: No even if there is no law prohibiting of the congress, close door
the disclosure, the government can cabinet meetings, in the judiciary
validly withhold the disclosure of – the internal deliberations of the
information. SC)
Q: When? Q: Does the right to public

A: If it endangers national security; information extend to GOCCs?
A: Yes in the case of Valmonte vs
NOTE: So the first thing you need to Belmote, the SC ruled that the disposition
identify is whether the information is or the use of the funds of gsis being a
imbued with public interest, if yes, gocc whose contributions come
whether there is a law that prohibits the employees of the government is one of
disclosure, if none, then the right to public interest or public concern.
public disclosure becomes operative.
Except if the information belongs to Q: The request of the petitioner is
classes of information that may be validly that they be given a list of the
withheld from public disclosure. members of the batasang pambansa
belonging to political law LABAN
50
2017
who are able to secure clean loans A: the term “transaction” includes any
through the intercession or transaction even the steps leading the
marginal loans of first lady Imelda consummation of the transaction.
Marcos. Is that a valid demand in
the exercise of the right of public Q: What was the reason given by
disclosure? the SC why the people need not wait
A: The exercise of the right to before they people can exercise the
information, an individual may only be right to information or before they
given access to the information but he can demand the guarantee of full
cannot demand for abstracts or public disclosure?
summaries. A: Because it may be too late, because
the people may no longer voice out their
Q: In the case of Sarmiento vs opinion in the transaction in the hope
Morato the respondent contends that the transaction may be remedied.
that the voting slips of the members
of the MTRCB is private and INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE
confidential in character and as
Q: What are the three inherent
such they cannot be disclosed
powers of the state?
without the consent of the one who
executed the voting slip did the SC 1. Police power
agree that this document is private 2. Eminent domain
and confidential? 3. Taxation
A: No they cannot be considered as Q: What is POLICE POWER?
private and personal in character
A: It is the power of the State to
because the decision of the MTRCB is
regulate liberty, and property for the
public in character. It is covered by the
promotion of General Welfare.
guaranteed of full public disclosure.
Q: What is POWER OF EMINENT
Q: Does the term “transaction” DOMAIN?
under Sec. 28 of Art. 2 as well as A: It is the power of the State to
under Sec. 7 Art. 3 refer to forcibly acquire private property, upon
consummated transaction? payment of just compensation, for
some
intended
51
2017
for public use. Taxation is intended for a PUBLIC
USE OR PURPOSE is therefore
Q: And what is POWER OF
WHOLESOME.
TAXATION?
A: It is the power to demand from the
members of society their proportionate Q: What is the meaning of Police
share or contribution in the power in the case of PASEI vs
maintenance of the government. DRILON?
Q: What are the similarities A: The power of the state to promote

between there inherent powers? public welfare by regulating or
restraining the use of liberty or private
1. They are INHERENT in the State
property
2. They are methods by which
STATE INTERFERES WITH Q: What are the two elements of
PRIVATE police power?
RIGHTS.
1. The imposition of restraint upon
3. They all presuppose an liberty or property
EQUIVALENT COMPENSATION for 2. In order to foster common good
the private rights interfered with.
Q: In the case of PASEI vs Drilon,
4. They are EXERCISED primarily BY the SC said that police power is not
THE LEGISLATURE. capable of exact definition. Why?
A: In order to underscore its all-
Q: And what are the differences? comprehensive embrace.
1. The Police power REGULATES Note: The police power of the State is a
both LIBERTY and PROPERTY. power coextensive with self-protection,
The Power of Eminent Domain and it is not inaptly termed the 'law of
and the Power of Taxation affect overwhelming necessity.'
only PROPERTY RIGHTS.
2. The Police Power and Power of Q: What are the legal principles
Taxation may be EXERCISED which constitute the basis of this
ONLY BY THE GOVERNMENT. The constitutional power?
Power of Eminent Domain may be 1. salus populi estsuprema lex ( Let
EXERCISED BY SOME PRIVATE
the good of the people be the
ENTITIES.
supreme law)
3. The property taken in the exercise
2. ic uteretu et alienum non laedas
of Police Power is DESTROYED
(subordination of private rights
because it is NOXIOUS or
to the common good or common
INTENDED FOR A NOXIOUS
PURPOSE. The property taken welfare)
under the Power of Eminent
Domain and the Power of
52
2017
Q: The SC said in PASEI vs Drilon particular class, require the interference
that police power constitutes an of the State
implied limitation to the bill of
Q: While lawful means require
rights. Why?
that?
A: Because even the Bill of rights does A: The means employed are reasonably
not purport to be an absolute guaranty necessary to the attainment of the
of individual rights and liberties. Even object sought to be accomplished and
liberty itself is not an unrestricted not unduly oppressive upon individuals.
license to act according to one’s will.
Q: What is the lawful subject of
Q: The Supreme Court said that Police power in general?
there can be no absolute power
A: The Lawful subject of police power is
and yet there could be no absolute
anything that affects public interest.
liberty. Why?
Q: Is right to travel in the case of
A: Because there can be no absolute
PASEI vs Drilon, a lawful exercise
power, whoever exercises it, for that
of police power?
would be tyranny. Yet there can neither
be absolute liberty, for that would mean A: Yes it is within the scope of police
license and anarchy. power
Q: What is the scope of police Q: Can this exercise of Police power
power? be delegated?
A: The Police power of the state is far A: Yes while it is inherent in congress,
reaching in scope. It is co extensive with this power may be delegated under a
self-protection and preservation and as valid delegation.
such it is the most positive existent and
Q: Exercise of a lawful business? Is
illimitable.
this a lawful subject of Police
Q: The SC in the case of Lozano vs power?
Martinez said that in the exercise
A: Yes
of the police power of the state, it
must comply with two tests, which Q: In the case of Ichong vs
are: Hernandez the issue here is the
validity of the Retail trade Act
1. Lawful subject
which regulate retail trade and
2. Lawful means
localize the retail trade. Why is it a
Q: How does lawful subject valid governmental act?
applies?
A: Because it is a vital industry. There is
A: the interests of the public generally, a high risk if it would rest to the hands
as distinguished from those of a of alien retailers.
53
2017
Q: How about commercial two tests in order be considered as
documents like check according to a valid exercise of police power?
the case of Lozano?
A: No both must be complied with.
A: Yes because it is considered as
Q: In the case of Ynot, under EO
substitutes for money and for the
626 only 7 year old male carabao
government not to regulate these
may be slaughtered, only 11 year
commercial documents would have the
old carabao may be slaughtered.
effect of impairing the dignity of banking
EO 626 A, has the same objective
transaction
as that of EO 626 which have
Q: How about choice of profession? already been sustained by the SC,
Is it within the valid subject of EO 626 A should also be considered
Police Power according to the case as a valid exercise of police power.
of Department of Education Did the SC agree?
Cullture and Sports vs. San Diego ?
A: No. Under EO 626 A there is no
A: Yes
rational connection between the object
Q: Why? What is the reason given of the law and the means employed.
by the SC in sustaining the validity The objective of the law is to prevent
of the 3 flunk rule under the NMAT the indiscriminate slaughtering of
Test? Carabaos and the means employed by
EO 626 A is the prohibition of
A: Yes. It is the responsibility of the
transportation of Carabaos and
state to ensure that the medical
Carabeefs from one province to another.
profession will not be infiltrated with
There is no nexus between the two
incompetents to whom the patients and
since for the carabao to stay in one
ward entrust their lives. A person cannot
province does not increase in protection
insist on being a physician if he will be a
because it can be slaughtered in that
menace to his patient. If a person who
province easily as in any other province.
wants to be a lawyer may be proved
In the same manner, the transfer of the
better to be a plumber, he should be so
carabao does not increase the risk of
advised. Of course he cannot be
slaughter.
compelled to be a plumber and yet he
cannot force his entry into the bar. Q: The state has police power,
eminent domain and power of
Q: The SC compared a lawyer to a
taxation. Do these powers leave in
plumber. Is there any connection at
different planets?
all? Or is that a random
comparison? A: In the old rule, once an inherent
power is exercised, the other two
Q: Is it enough that a government
inherent power cannot be exercised.
act must comply with one of these
Under prevailing principle now allows
54
2017
the comingling or the exercise of these police power only allows regulation
3 inherent power simultaneously. but not taking?
Q: In the case of Lutz vs Araneta, A: No. Properties may also be taken in
the petitioner challenged the exercise of police power.
commonwealth act 567 which
Q: Currently we have a law which
imposes taxes on production of
prohibits the possession of illegal
sugar on the ground that it violates
substances and anyone found to be
the principle on uniformity of
in possession of these substances
taxation?
may face criminal sanction. Is that
A: There is no violation of uniformity of regulation or is that taking?
taxation, because taxation was used as
A: Properties may not only be regulated
an implement of police power.
but may also be taken in the exercise of
Therefore the principle of uniformity is
police power. The only difference is that
not applicable. The true test that is
only properties intended for noxious
applicable is the test for the valid
purpose may be taken under police
exercise of police power.
power.
Q: When can we say that a tax
Q: In the case of Quezon city vs
measure is enacted by the state in
Ericta, the LGU imposed a
the exercise of its police power
compulsory donation of 6% of total
using its power of taxation as an
area of every memorial park in the
implement and when can we say
City to be used for the burial of the
that it is only an exercise of power
pauper residents. It intends to
of taxation?
exercise its police power for the
A: If the objective of a tax measure is to compulsory donation. Did the SC
regulate an activity or a taxable article, allow it?
it is in exercise of police power, using
A: No it is not in the exercise of Police
only the power of taxation as an
Power. The taking of private property is
implement. If the objective is to raise
for public use, it amounts to taking in
revenue, the tax measure is enacted in
the exercise of Eminent Domain.
the discharge of exclusive and pure
power of taxation. Q: What is the purpose of taking in
Police Power?
Q: In the case of Quezon City vs
Ericta, the SC said that while A: The purpose is for regulation and for
property may be regulated to a the property to be destroyed.
certain extent, if it goes too far, it
Q: In the case of Manila Memorial
will be recognized as taking. Does
Park vs. DSWD, this involves the
that mean that the exercise of
grant of discount to senior citizen,
prior to its amendment, any
55
2017
discount extended by a private owner a just compensation to be
enterprise to Senior citizen will be ascertained according to law.
considered as tax credit. So
Q: Under Sec 9 of Art. 3 private
meaning when the private
property should not be used
enterprise extended 20 pesos
without just compensation. Can we
discount to senior citizen, that 20
say that this is the basis of the
pesos discount will be deducted
exercise of power of eminent
from their tax due, but when the
domain?
law was amended the discount was
A: No because the basis is necessity.
only treated as deductible expense
Which means that Sec. 9 Art.3 is not the
prior to tax which means that the
foundation nor the basis of exercise of
private enterprise will not recover
eminent domain but only a limitation on
everything, it can only recover upto
the exercise of the power of eminent
32%. 68% extended will not be
domain.
recovered anymore so the
petitioner contend that there is
Q: The power of Eminent is the
undue taking without payment of
highest and most exact idea of
compensation. Did the SC agree?
property remaining in the
A: No the SC said that there was no government. What does it mean?
taking involve. The regulation is in the A: Because under this power, all
exercise of police power. The court held properties are reserved to the
that while the Constitution protects government. That whenever these
property rights, the petitioners must private properties will be needed by the
accept the realities of business and the government at some future time, the
State, in the exercise of police power, government may take these properties
can intervene in the operations of a for public use upon payment of just
business which may result in an compensation.
impairment of property rights in the
process. Q: is the power of eminent domain
and expropriation the same?
EMINENT DOMAIN
A: No. Eminent Domain is an inherent
Q: What is this power all about? power, while Expropriation is the
exercise of eminent domain.
A: It is the right, authority or
power of the State as sovereign, Q: How do we exercise this power?
or of those to whom the power
A: By filing a petition
has been lawfully delegated to
take private property for public Q: What are the requisites in
use upon observance of due exercising the power of eminent
process of law and paying for the domain?
56
2017
1. The property taken must be private Q: What property may be
property; expropriated?
2. The taking must be within
constitutional sense; A: Private property only
3. The taking must be for public use Q: Does that mean that properties
4. Just compensation must be paid; registered in the name of the
5. There must be due process of law. republic are no longer valid subject
of the exercise of the power of
Q: Is the question of necessity eminent domain?
justiceable or political question? A: No, properties registered in the
A: It depends. If exercised by name of the republic may also be
Congress, it is a political question. If expropriated. The ultimate requirement
exercised by a delegate under is that it must specifically alleged in the
specific delegation, it is also a petition that such property is registered
political question. If it is exercised in the name of the republic.
by a delegate under general Q: How can it happen? Where the
delegation it becomes a justiciable property subject to the
question expropriation of the government
Q: In the case of City of Manila vs may be expropriated by the
Chinese community of Manila, the government?
petitioner contends that the A: In cases where the government
expropriation cases, there are only owns the property but the said property
two issue, one is the authority of is in the possession or its interest
expropriation and second that belongs to a private person as in the
amount of just compensation. That case of lease. Where the government
once the authority to expropriate enters in a contract of lease with a
is established, the only remaining private person for 10 years and on the
question is the amount of just 5th year the government needed such
compensation. Did the SC agree? property. The government cannot just
A: When the power is exercised by the violate the contract so it must buy out
delegate, the courts of justice may the contract in the form of the power of
determine aside from the basis of eminent domain.
authority, the proper exercise by the Q: How about property already
delegate, whether it complies with the devoted for public purpose? Can it
delegation. So it also includes the be expropriated?
question of necessity or propriety for
the exercise of the power of Eminent A: No. according to the case of City of
Domain. Manila vs Chinese Community, property
already devoted for public use cannot
57
2017
be expropriated by Municipal A: Yes. The statement of Justice Cruz
Corporation under a general delegation. that money cannot be the subject of
expropriation only applies to money of
Q: How about if it is the congress
legal tender.
who exercise it?
Q: What kind of services can be
A: If it is the congress who is the
expropriated? This is the only kind
expropriator or it is exercise by a
of services which may be
delegate under a specific delegation,
expropriated according to the SC in
the property already devoted for public
the case of Republic vs PLDT?
use may be the subject of
expropriation. A: Public Utility services
(Transportation, light, power,
Q: What kind of private properties
telecommunications and the like)
may be expropriated?
Q: How about size? Does size
A: Real, personal, Tangible or
matter?
intangible. Any private party capable of
human dominion. A: No according to the case of
Sumulong vs. guerero the size of the
Q: How about services?
property does not matter. The SC
A: In the case of Republic vs PLDT the applied the number of persons to be
SC allowed the expropriation of the benefited in determining the valid
services of PLDT. It may be considered exercise of power of eminent domain.
as private property therefore may be a
Q: Does taking in eminent domain
subject of expropriation upon payment
requires transfer of the title of the
of just compensation.
property to the expropriator?
Q: Are there any exception to the
A: No it is enough that the owner is
rule that any property may be
prevented from benefitting from the
expropriated?
property
A: Yes chose of action and money. In
Q: Does it require transfer of
so far as choses of action, these have
possession?
not yet ripen into a right but a mere
expectancy. In so far as money, it is not A: No as long as the owner is deprived
subject to expropriation because it will of the beneficial use of the property.
result to an absurd situation where the
Q: In the case of People vs Fajardo,
government will take money and the
was there taking in eminent
just compensation will be in the form of
domain?
money.
A: Yes there was taking in the concept
Q: So this includes US dollar?
of Eminent Domain because the
Because it is considered as money?
property taken was wholesome and not
58
2017
noxious. The accused remain to be the property for a term of one year),
owner and in possession of the property we have June 30 1956 (Heirs of
but he cannot devote it to any the owner refused to renew the
reasonable purpose. contract), June 26 1959 (the
government case for
Q: The SC said that the accused’s
expropriation), August 10 1959
position is worse than a person
(The court issued the writ of
totally deprived of his property.
possession in favor of the
Why?
government). When was there
A: Because Fajardo still has the burden taking under these circumstances?
of paying property taxes yet he cannot
A: On July 1, 1947, the second element
use or benefit from the property.
and fifth element were not present.
Q: In the case of Castelvi the SC These elements are present on June 26
enumerated the elements of taking of 1959 when the government initiated
in eminent domain. These are? the expropriation proceedings.
1. The expropriator must enter a When the government disposes a

private property. property owner from his landholding
2. The entrance into private that will not be considered as a valid
property must be for more than exercise of expropriation. Any taking
a momentary period. prior to the filing of petition for
"Momentary" means, "lasting expropriation is unconstitutional.
but a moment; of but a
Q: how should doubts be resolved
moment's duration"
whenever there are doubts in
3. The entry into the property
expropriation?
should be under warrant or color
of legal authority. A: It should be resolved against the
4. The property must be devoted to expropriator and in favor the property
a public use or otherwise owner.
informally appropriated or
Q: In the case of PPI vs Comelec
injuriously affected.
the SC said that there was taking.
5. The utilization of the property for
In this case all newspaper
public use must be in such a way
publishers are required to give the
as to oust the owner and deprive
comelec space free of charge. In
him of all beneficial enjoyment of
Telebap, an almost identical case,
the property.
all television and radio stations are
Q: In republic vs Castelvi there are required to give comelec free
several dates which are being space without any consideration.
considered as the date of taking SC said in PPI that the regulation
July 1 1947 (when the lease of the or act of the comelec is
59
2017
unconstitutional because that considered and not the incidental
amounts to taking without just consequences.
compensation. While in telebap the
Q: In the case of Manosca vs CA
SC said that it is a valid regulation.
the petitioner is painting religious
Why is there a difference? Why is it
color to the acquisition of birth site
that when it comes to newspaper,
of Felix Manalo, the founder of
there is taking while when it
Iglesia ni Cristo. The property was
comes to Television or Radio
sought to be expropriated for the
stations, there is no taking?
construction of the marker
A: In PPI there was taking, in Telebap because they recognized the
there was no taking because in the contribution of Felix Manalo in the
latter, the act only constitute regulation. Ph culture. Will the fact that a
The newspapers are owned by the certain religious organization will
publishers and as such it amount to benefit more, make the
taking of private property. In so far as expropriation unconstitutional.
radio and television station, they do not
A: No because the primary objective of
own the airwaves, the airwaves remain
expropriation in this case is the
to be the properties of the government
influence that Felix Manalo has
hence may be regulated by the
contributed to the shaping of Ph
government.
culture.
Q: Is public use in eminent domain
Q: What is just compensation in
the same as use by the public?
Eminent domain?
A: In the case of Sumulong vs
A: Just compensation means the value
Guerrero, the traditional concept of
of the property at the time of the
public use in eminent domain has
taking. It means a fair and full
already evolved. While traditionally,
equivalent for the loss sustained. All the
public use means those that are
facts as to the condition of the property
available to the public like roads, public
and its surroundings, its improvements
plaza, the SC said the expanded
and capabilities, should be considered.
concept of public use provides that as
long as the purpose of the taking is Q: Can we say that just
public, then the power of eminent compensation is equivalent to the
domain comes into play. So even fair market value of the property
indirect advantage enjoyed by the taken?
public, is considered now as for public
A: No it is just one of the aspect which
use. Also In the case of Manosca vs CA
should be considered in arriving just
the court said that in determining
compensation.
whether the taking is for public use, it is
the primary objective that should be
60
2017
Q: According to the SC in determining just compensation in
Sumulong vs Guerrero, the factors eminent domain cases which could
in determining just compensation either be the zone valuation of the
include? property or the assessed value for
tax purposes whoever is lower. Is
1. Potential use of the property
that a correct determination of just
2. Condition of the property
compensation? This is the issue in
3. Improvements introduced in the
the case of EPZA vs Dulay (only
property
that the determination was made
4. Assessed value of the property
by the President).
for tax purposes (Case of EPZA)
A: No. in the case of EPZA vs Dulay,
Q: If the property is partially
P.D. No. 1533, which eliminates the
expropriated, aside from these
court's discretion to appoint
factors, what are other factors
commissioners pursuant to Rule 67 of
which must be considered by the
the Rules of Court, is unconstitutional
court?
and void. The method of ascertaining
A: Consequential benefits and just compensation under the aforecited
consequential damages. decrees constitutes impermissible
encroachment on judicial prerogatives.
Q: What do we do with this
consequential benefit or Q: In the case of Sumulong vs
consequential damages? Guerrero the petitioner contends
that just compensation should be
A: The commissioners shall assess the
the assessed value for tax
consequential damages to the property
purposes. Applying the principle of
not taken and deduct from such
estoppel where a party derives
consequential damages the
benefit from a statement he cannot
consequential benefits to be derived by
at a certain date disown the
the owner from the public use or
statement. In applying the
purpose of the property taken. But in
principle the property owners
no case shall the consequential benefits
derive benefit through the
assessed exceed the consequential
assessment value is very low, so if
damages assessed, or the owner be
they are very low, they will only
deprived of the actual value of his
pay low tax. But when the
property so taken.
government need their property
Q: Who determines just for public use, they are saying the
compensation? valuation is low. So estoppel. Did
the SC agree?
A: The courts
A: No the just compensation means the
Q: Supposing the congress enact a actual, full and fair equivalent of the
law providing the manner of
61
2017
property at the time of the taking. The if the just compensation was not
assessment value for tax purposes were made?
only based on generalities, properties
A: Yes under the new rule, if the
were classified in general characteristic.
government failed to pay within 5
They do not reflect the true condition of
years, it has to return the physical
the property for tax assessment
possession of the property to the
purposes therefore it cannot apply in
private owner
expropriation.
Note: Notwithstanding the ruling in
Q: What are the actions that may
Republic vs. Lim, the general rule
be done by the courts on the
remains that non-payment of just
reports of the commissioner?
compensation regardless of the number
1. Accept in toto of years that have passed shall not
2. Reject in toto entitle the property owner to recover
3. Partially accept, partial reject physical possession. The remedy of the
4. Recommit to other owner is to demand payment if just
commissioners compensation together with penalties,
interest.
Q: How may commissioners can be
appointed? Republic vs Lim is only an exception to
the general rule because of its special
A: Atleast 3
factual circumstances. 57 years have
Q: Supposing the court believes passed yet the government failed to
that the presiding judge is the best pay the just compensation and more
appraiser in the world. He does not importantly the land was expropriated
need the assistance of the but after 57 years only few
commissioner. May he dispensed infrastructures were introduced.
with the appointment of the
Q: Supposing the government
commissioners?
expropriated Juan dela cruz. The
A: No because under the rules of court, purpose was to construct a road.
reception of evidence for the The expropriation court which
establishment of just compensation is became final and order the
delegated to the commissioner. government to pay just
compensation which it paid. After
Q: Who owns the property prior to
57 years the government never
the full payment of just
constructed the road.
compensation?
A: No because the government paid it
A: Property owner
in full. The government therefore can
Q: Can the property owner recover exercise full dominion over it. We will
physical possession of the property only apply Republic vs Lim if there is no
62
2017
transfer of title yet and there is nothing Q: Can the Local legislative council
in the order that limits the use of the delegate to power of expropriation
property. to the vice mayor or appoint any
other local officer?
Q: What are the requirements for
the valid exercise of eminent A: No because when it comes to
domain by LGUs? exercise eminent domain by the
congress, the congress has a lot of
(1) An ordinance is enacted by
options, the congress can exercise it,
the local legislative council
delegate it but when it comes to LGU
authorizing the local chief
the exercise is restrictive. It can only be
executive, in behalf of the
LGU, to exercise the power done by the LGU enacting an ordinance
of eminent domain or and delegating such power to the
pursue expropriation mayor and to nobody else and the
proceedings over a delegation must be specific.
particular private property. Q: Why is there such a difference?
(2) The power of eminent

domain is exercised for
Q: What is taxation?
public use, purpose or
welfare, or for the benefit of A: Taxation is an enforced proportional
the poor and the landless. contributions from persons and
property, levied by the state by virtue
(3) There is payment of just of its sovereignty for the support of the
compensation, as required government and for all its public needs
under Section 9, Article III
of the Constitution, and Q: What is the principle governing
other pertinent laws. Power of Taxation?
A: Lifeblood doctrine.
(4) A valid and definite offer
has been previously made Q: Aside from taxes, the
to the owner of the government also levies money in
property sought to be the form of fees. What is the
expropriated, but said offer difference between fees such as
was not accepted. license fees to taxation?
A: License fee is a police measure while

Taxes is a revenue measure. The
Q: Is resolution not enough to Amount collected for a license fee is
authorize expropriation? limited to the cost of permit and
A: No it is not enough Ordinance is not reasonable police regulation while
synonymous to resolution.
63
2017
Amount of tax may be unlimited so long less, earn more. We cannot adopt this
as it is not confiscatory. kind of system of taxation
Q: Chief Justice Marshall said that Q: In the case of Sison vs Ancheta

the power to tax includes the the issue here is the different
power to destroy. While Justice treatment of net income taxation
Holmes said it does not include and compensation income
power to destroy as long as this taxation. In so far as net income
court sits. Can we say that these taxation, they are allowed to
are conflicting statement that only deduct expenses while in
one may stand? compensation income, they are
taxed based on gross income
A: No it is not irreconcilable. The
without deductible expense. Is
statement of Justice Marshall means
there a violation of uniformity and
that the imposition of taxes while they
equity of taxation?
are not inimical, they are intended to
regulate or to discourage while the A: No there is no violation. Uniformity
statement of Justice Holmes refers to does not mean that all taxable articles
the the exercise of police power using must be treated similarly. Uniformity in
the power of taxation as an implement. taxation allows classification and it is
satisfied as long as taxable articles at
Q: What are the principles of
the same class are taxed at the same
taxation under sec. 28 of Art. 6?
rate. In so far as professionals earning
A: The power of taxation must be income, these professionals incur
uniform and equitable and the congress overhead expenses, these expenses are
shall evolve a progressive system of allowed to be deducted under net
taxation income taxation system while
compensation income earners do not
Q: What does Uniformity and
incur overhead expenses, it is
Equity means?
appropriate that they should not be
A: Uniformity or Equality means that all allowed deductible expenses. Because
taxable articles and property of the of this difference, the SC allowed
same kind shall taxed on the same rate. distinction or classification.
Equity of taxation means that the tax
Q: Does the new concept of public
imposed shall be in proportion to the
use in Eminent domain applicable
ability to pay or the value of the
in Taxation? That any advantage
property.
direct or indirect is for public
Q: What is the basis of regressive purpose?
system of taxation?
A: No, It is the essential character of
A: It encourage productivity among the direct object of the expenditure
individuals. If a taxpayer wants to pay which must determine its validity as
64
2017
justifying a tax, and not the magnitude Q: Is charitable institution
of the interest to be affected nor the property?
degree to which the general advantage
A: No it is not a property. This goes to
of the community, and thus the public
show the imperfection of the
welfare, may be ultimately benefited by
constitution. When it should have been
their promotion said the SC in the case
properties of the institution not the
of Pascual vs. Secretary of Public institution itself.
Works.
Q: What kind to tax exemption does
Q: Is double taxation allowed? Art. 6 Sec. 28 (3) refer to?
A: Yes unless it is duly oppressive and A: Real property tax and not Excise tax
violates equal protection of laws said the SC in the case of Lladoc vs
Q: What is double taxation? Commissioner.
A: Double taxation means taxing the Q: What does the phrase Actual,
same article or property or person twice Direct and Exclusive mean?
when it should be taxed only once by the A: It means the land, building and
same jurisdiction for the same purpose. improvement must be used solely for
Q: How do we construe tax religious, charitable and educational
exemption? purposes. This includes incidental use.
A: Strictly against the taxpayer and Q: In the case of Abra College, did
liberally in favor of the taxing authority. the SC sustain the assessment of
the assessor? because in that case
Q: What is the required vote in the it involves a two-storey building,
congress for the grant of tax the second floor being used by the
exemption? director of the school for residential
purpose while the first floor is being
A: Majority vote
leased to a marketing corporation.
Q: Under the constitution what
A: No the SC did not sustain the
properties are exempt from
assessment because the second floor’s
taxation?
use, as residence of the director, is
A: Under Art. 6 Sec. 28 (3) charitable incidental to education. On the other
institutions, churches and parsonages or hand the first floor, not being
covenants appurtenant thereto, considered as incidental to the purpose
mosques, non-profit cemeteries and all of education should be liable for real
land building and improvements actually property tax.
directly and exclusively used for
religious, charitable or educational Q: Does ownership vest exemption
purposes. under par. 3 sec. 28 of Art. 6?
65
2017
A: No it does not. Ownership of the of reason, obedience to the dictates of
property is irrelevant. justice.
Q: In one case a property was Justice Isagani Cruz- Due process
assessed property tax. Incidentally is a guaranty against any
the owner is the Roman Catholic arbitrariness on the part of the
Church. In order to refute, the government, whether committed
Roman Catholic Church presented by the legislative, the executive,
its title on the property and then or the judiciary.
assessor exonerated the church. Is
the assessor correct? Q: What is the similar concept
of due process under the
A: No because ownership alone is not magna carta libertatum
sufficient, it must be established that particularly under clause 39?
the Church actually directly and
exclusively use the property for A: It says that no free man shall
religious purposes. be taken or imprisoned or
disseized or outlawed or in any
Art. III BILL OF RIGHTS manner destroyed nor shall we go
Q: What does Art. 3 Sec. 1 provide? upon him or send upon him
except by the lawful judgement of
A: No person shall be deprived of life, his peers or by the law of the
liberty or property without due process land.
of law, nor shall any person be denied
the equal protection of the law Q: What is the essence of due
process?
Q: What is due process?
A: The essence of due process is
A: Justice Felix Frankfurter would go no distilled in the immortal cry of
farther than to define due process as Themistocles to Alcibiades "Strike
nothing more and nothing less than"the but hear me first!"
embodiment of the sporting idea of fair
play." Q: Did the constitution specifically
define due process?
Daniel Webster described almost two
hundred years ago in the famous A: No
Dartmouth College Case, as "the law
Q: Why did the Constitution did not
which hears before it condemns, which
give an exact definition according
proceeds upon inquiry and renders
to the case of Ynot vs IAC?
judgment only after trial."
A: The concept of due process was not
Justice Enrique M. Fernando defined it
given exact definition for resiliency.
as the responsiveness to the supremacy
Flexibility is the best virtue of due
66
2017
process that why it was kept power, there must be notice and
ambiguous. hearing. If it is exercising its
legislative power there is no
Q: What are the two minimum requirement of notice and hearing.
requirements of Due process?
A: Notice and hearing Q: In the case of Philcomsat,
Philcomsat is required to lower
or reduce its rate. The basis of
Q: In the case of Phil Posphate the
the order is because Philcomsat
issue is the certification election
is earning too much. The order
case. During the election was issued by NTC without
certification proceeding both the notice and hearing. Is this a
union and management agree to valid exercise of rulemaking
submit position paper, reply and power?
memoranda. When the MedArbiter A: No because the NTC is exercising
issued a resolution, the petitioner quasi-judicial power in rate fixing
invoked due process because the therefore notice and hearing is
MedArbiter did not conduct required.
hearing proceedings. Is the Due
process of Law violated? Q: When can we say that the
A:No PHILPHOS agreed to file its rulemaking power is in the
position paper with the  discharge of quasi legislative or
administrative on one hand and
MediatorArbiter and to
quasi-judicial on the other?
consider the case submitted for
A: The distinguishing factor
decision on the basis of the position
depends on the persons affected. In
papers filed by the parties, there
quasi- legislative the regulation
was  sufficient compliance with the
applies to all. In quasi-judicial it
requirement of due process, as 
applies to a specific person.
petitioner was afforded reasonable As to effect of the order, in quasi
opportunity to present its side. legislative the implementation of the
order must be prospective. If it is
Q: One of the functions of quasi-judicial it may be immediate
administrative agencies is the and retroactive.
issuance of rules and
regulations pertaining to rate
Q: What is the effect or
fixing. In the exercise of rate
consequence of violation of due
fixing power, are administrative
agencies required to comply process?
with the minimum A: It depends.
requirements of notice and
hearing? 1. If it is substantive aspect, the law
A: It depends. If the administrative will be unconstitutional
agency is exercising quasi-judicial
67
2017
2. If it is procedural, the ruling of A: Yes there is violation of procedural
the tribunal, court or committee due process because the subject of
will be invalid preliminary investigation in this case is
not against the congressman but
Q: When is there a violation of
against his driver.
substantive and when is there a
violation of procedural due Note: So when a procedure is mandated
process? by the constitution, by law or by rules of
court, compliance with this procedure is
A: In substantive aspect the courts will
an essential element of compliance of
look into the intrinsic validity of the law.
due process regardless of the source of
The first step is to determine what
the procedure.
power was exercised by the state in
enacting the law. Police power, eminent Q: What are the essential elements
domain or power of taxation. Just like in of criminal due process according
the case of Ynot vs IAC, where the state to the SC in Alonte vs Javellana?
exercised police power in enacting the
1. That the court or tribunal
law, the courts will determine whether
trying the case is properly
the law complied with the valid test for
clothed with judicial power
the exercise of police power (lawful
to hear and determine the
subject; lawful means). So in that case,
matter before it;
the test were not complied with, the law
2. That jurisdiction is lawfully
is intrinsically invalid and therefore it
acquired by it over the
constitutes a violation on the
person of the accused;
substantive aspect of due process. The
3. That the accused is given
same will be applied in case of the other
an opportunity to be heard;
inherent powers of the state.
and
In procedural aspect, it will depend on 4. That judgment is rendered
whether the process is administrative only upon lawful hearing.
due process, criminal and civil due
Q: Did the SC agree that there
process, and school or administrative
was a violation of the right to
due process. The courts will determine
be heard in the case of Alonte
whether the steps required by law have
vs. Javella? Because in this
been followed.
case the hearing was
Q: In the case of Aniag vs Comelec, conducted only to ascertained
the congressman was included as the voluntariness of the
petitioner as an accused. Was there affidavit of desistance.
a violation of procedural due
A: Yes there was a violation of
process?
due process because what the
accused waived is the right to be
68
2017
heard in so far as the Q: What is the required standard in
voluntariness and due execution administrative proceedings?
of affidavit of desistance. The
A: Substantial Evidence
waiver of the right to be heard in
one issue does not extend to all Q: In the case of Ateneo de Manila
other issues particularly the issue vs Capulong the SC enumerated the
on their innocence or guilt. requisites for administrative school
proceedings which are?
Q: How do courts acquire
jurisdiction over the subject matter (1) The students must be informed in
of the controversy? writing of the nature and cause of any
accusation against them;
A: By Law
(2) That they shall have the right to
Q: How do courts acquire answer the charges against them with
jurisdiction over the person of the the assistance of counsel, if desired;
accused? (3) They shall be informed of the
evidence against them;
A: By voluntary surrender or Arrest
(4) They shall have the right to adduce
Q: What are the cardinal primary evidence in their own behalf; and
rights in Administrative proceeding (5) The evidence must be duly
according to the SC in Ang Tibay vs considered by the investigating
CIR? committee or official designated by the
school authorities to hear and decide
the right to a hearing, which includes
the case."
the right to present one's cause and
submit evidence in support thereof;  Q: Is right to cross examination
essential in school administrative
1. The tribunal must consider the
proceedings?
evidence presented;
2. The decision must have A: No it is not an essential requisite. It
something to support itself; is enough that the students were
3. The evidence must be informed of the evidence against them
substantial; and and they have the right to refute the
4. The decision must be based on evidence but they are not required to
the evidence presented at the confront the witness because school
hearing; or at least contained in
administrative proceedings are not
the record and disclosed to the
criminal proceedings therefore the right
parties affected;
to confront witness is not part of school
5. The decision must be based on
investigation proceedings.
the evidence presented at the
hearing; or at least contained in
the record and disclosed to the
parties affected;
69
2017
Q: What is the relation of right to Q: What is the difference between
due process and void for vague void for vagueness and
principle? overbreadth doctrine?
A: A law or government act suffers from A: In overbreadth the law is clear and
the defect of vagueness if it lacks people understands the law but because
comprehensible standards that men of of the comprehensive scope of the law it
common intelligence must necessarily encroaches or interferes with protected
guess at its meaning and differ as to its liberties. In void for vagueness the law
application. Since the law is so vague, a is not clear. Overbreadth and void for
person does not know what the law is vagueness are ground for facially
all about therefore he does not know challenging the constitutionality of the
what to prevent. It constitutes violation law.
to the right of due process because the Q: What is facial challenge mean?
vagueness of the law amount to lack of As distinguish from “As applied”
notice of what conduct to prevent. challenge?
Q: In the case of Southern A: Facial challenge means the law is on
Hemisphere vs Anti-terrorism its face is invalid. The requisite of
Council, a law which is void for proper party is dispensed with because
being vague violates the it can be raised by any person because
constitution for two reason, what of the chilling effect of the law. As
are these reasons? applied challenge on the other can only
be raised by party to whom the law was
1. It violates due process clause;
declared unconstitutional.
2. It gives law enforcement officers
unbridled discretion in carrying Q: Does the facial challenge in
out this provision and thereby penal statute apply?
arbitrarily flexing its government
A: No because if penal laws may be
muscle.
challenged under the facial challenge
Q: What is overbreadth doctrine? the state may not be able to enforced
its penal laws since everytime there is a
A: A facial challenge of the statute when
law enacted, it will be challenged by one
a governmental purpose may not be
even if he is not being injured. Only in
achieved by means which sweep
free speech cases, religious freedom
unnecessarily broadly and thereby
cases and other fundamental right may
invade the area of protected freedoms.
be the subject of facial challenge.
Which means that even the act is
subject ot state regulation it cannot be Q: Is equal protection the same as
done in such a way that it will invade due process? Meaning it is also
protected areas of liberty. ambiguous and as vague as the
concept of due process?
70
2017
A: No it is more cleared and particular protection clause according to
than due process People vs Vera?
Q: What does equal protection of 1. Undue favor and class or
the law mean? individual privilege
2. Unjust or illegal discrimination or
A: All persons and things similarly
hostile discrimination.
situated shall be treated alike both as to
the rights conferred and as to liability Q: What is classification?
imposed. It only requires equality
A: It is the grouping of persons or
among equals.
things similar in certain particulars but
Q: Does equal protection of the law different from others in the same
requires identity of rights or particulars. The same trait that binds
universal equality between persons them is the same trait that sets them
or things? apart from others. To be valid, the
classification must be reasonable
Q: In the case of Villegas, 50 pesos
regulation without regard to Q: What are the requisites of a
employment, for all aliens whether reasonable classification?
he be rich or poor. Does it violate
1. The classification must rest on
equal protection clause?
substantial conditions which
A: Yes the failure of the law to make for real differences
recognize the classification constitute a 2. Classification must be germane to
violation of the equal protection clause. the purpose of the law
3. Must apply not only be limited to
Q: In the case of People vs Vera,
existing conditions
section 11 provides that the
4. Must apply equally to all
probation law shall apply to a
members of the particular class
province where the council has
appropriated funds for the salary of Q: May citizenship be considered as
the probation officer. Is that basis for substantial distinction?
discriminatory?
A: Yes in the case of Ichong vs
A: The provision itself is not Hernandez the SC said that there is
discriminatory but it allows substantial distinction between alien
discrimination. There is no difference retailers and Filipino retailers specifically
between a law that unjustly because alien retailers does not owe
discriminates and the law that allows absolute allegiance to the Ph unlike
discrimination. Both violate the equal Filipino retailers. The interest of aliens
protection clause. are different from the interest of Filipino
retailers
Q: What are the two acts that are
prohibited under the Equal
71
2017
Q: Petitioners also contend that Q: When can the rule on Stare
retail trade act is unconstitutional Decisis be applied according to
because it allows American citizen Justice Fernando in the case of
to engage in retail trade like any PASEI vs Drilon?
other Filipinos but all other aliens
A: When the classification is based on
cannot. Did the SC agree to single
distinction that make real differences
out American national from the rest
such as age,sex or civilization, the
of the aliens will constitute undue
better rule is to recognize their validity
favor?
only if the young the women or the
A: Ichong was decided under the 1935 cultural minority are single out for a
constitution. During that time there is a favorable treatment.
parity treaty where it provides that
Q: Is judicial inquiry applicable in
Americans have the same privilege as
equal protection cases? That before
the Filipinos in the exploitation of
the courts may assume jurisdiction,
natural resources of the law. That
there must be an actual case of
distinguishes the American nationals
controversy, must be raised by the
from all other aliens under the 1935
proper party and must be raised at
constitution.
the earliest possible time and the
Q: Is age a substantial distinction lis morta of the controversy?
that can be a basis of a reasonable
A: No it is not required that there be
classification? Dumlao vs comelec
actual controversy because of the third
A: Yes
requisite of classification
Q: Is sex a reasonable distinction
Q: In the case of Biraogo vs PTC
that could be a basis for reasonable
can we not say that Arroyo
classification as in the case of
administration is a class of its own
PASEI vs Drilon?
therefore E.O. 1 is a valid law?
A: Yes
A: No, the arroyo administration is just a
Q: Under the doctrine of stare class or member of a class of
decisis judicial decision should be administration. To single out the arroyo
considered as judicial precedents. administration constitute unjust
Does that apply to equal protection discrimination.
cases? Or can we say that the
Q: In the case of Almonte vs
reasonableness of classification in
Vasquez the SC sustained the
one case cannot be used as judicial
classification of private individuals
precedents to future cases
and public officers. Can we further
A: Yes stare decisis cannot be applied. sub classify police officer from
other public officer? Did the SC
agree in this sub classification
72
2017
according to the case of Himagan Q: In the case of Biraogo vs PTC,
vs People? According to solicitor the general,
the insufficiency of the law does
A: Yes because there is still
not call for its unconstitutionality.
substantial classification. The
The remedy according to the
reason why members of
the PNP are treated differently Solicitor General is remedial
from the other classes of persons legislation. He invoked the
charged criminally or principle of under inclusiveness
administratively insofar as the where the failure of the law to
application of the rule on address all evil does not make the
preventive suspension is concerned law unconstitutional. Did the SC
is that policemen carry weapons apply the under inclusiveness
and the badge of the law which principle?
can be used to harass or intimidate
witnesses against them, as A: No because this principle applies only
succinctly brought out in the when the insufficiency of the law is not
legislative discussions. deliberate or through in advertence.
When the insufficiency of the law was
Q: Classification of public
intentional, the principle will not apply.
officer according to
assumption of office? Elective Q: What is section 2 Art. 3?
public officer and appointive
public officer is it allowed? A: The right of the People to to secure
in their persons, houses, papers and
A: Yes as provided in the case of effects against unreasonable searches
Quinto vs Comelec. Substantial and seizures of whatever nature and for
distinctions clearly exist between any purpose shall be inviolable, and no
elective officials and appointive search warrant or warrant of arrest shall
officials. The former occupy their
issue except upon probable cause to be
office by virtue of the mandate of
determined personally by a judge, after
the electorate. They are elected to
examination under oath or affirmation of
an office for a definite term and
may be removed therefrom only the complainant and the witnesses he
upon stringent conditions. On the may produce, particularly describing the
other hand, appointive officials place to be searched or the persons or
hold their office by virtue of their things to be seized.
designation thereto by an
Q: Does the constitution prohibit all
appointing authority. Some
kinds of search and seizure?
appointive officials hold their office
in a permanent capacity and are A: No only unreasonable search and
entitled to security of tenure while seizure
others serve at the pleasure of the
appointing authority. Q: In determination of
reasonableness of the search and
73
2017
seizure, what are the factors that A: Only against the government and
may be considered in the case of agencies of the government tasked with
Alvarez vs CIR? the enforcement of the law. In the
absence of governmental interference,
1. Purpose of the search
the liberties guaranteed by the
2. Object sought to be seized
constitution cannot be invoked against
3. Existence of absence of probable
the government.
cause
4. Circumstances in which the Q: What are the types of warrant
seizure was made that may be issued by the judge
under Art. 3 Sec. 2?
Q: What is the nature of the
constitutional right against A: Search warrant and Warrant of Arrest
unlawful search and seizure?
Q: What is a search warrant?
A: It is personal
A: An order in writing issued in the
Q: In one case the petitioners name of the Philippines signed by the
challenge the validity of all 42 judge and directed to a peace officer
search warrants. Is that allowed? commanding him to search for personal
property described therein and bring it
A: No it is not allowed because the
before the court.
corporation has a separate and distinct
personality from its officers, it should be Q: What kind of personal property
the corporation that should assail the may be seized by virtue of
validity of the search warrant because it warrant?
was the corporation’s right which was
1. Subject of offense
violated.
2. Stolen or embezzled and its fruits
Q: But a corporation is only a legal 3. Used of intended to be used for
fiction. It cannot act on its own, it the commission of the offense.
acts through its officers. Why didn’t
Q: For how long is a search warrant
the SC recognize their authority as
valid?
officers of the corporation?
A: 10 days counted from its issuance
A: Because they failed to produce a
written authority in the form of board Q: What is the nature of search
resolution or secretary certificate warrant proceeding?
attesting to their authority.
A: Sui generis proceedings the purpose
Q: In the case of People vs Marti of which is not for prosecution of
the issue in this case is can the offense but as a mode of discovery
constitutional guarantee against
Q: What are the requisites of a
search and seizure be invoked
valid warrant?
against any person?
74
2017
1. It must be based on probable warrant was invalid. The the court
cause sustained the petitioner?
2. Determined personally by the
A: No because it does not necessarily
judge
follow because search warrant and
3. The examination must be under
warrant of arrest are based on different
oath or affirmation of the
probabilities
complainant and witnesses
4. Must particularly describe the Q: What are the different
persons or things to be seized or probabilities in warrant of arrest
the place to be searched. and search warrant?
First requisite: A: In search warrant the probable cause
refer to that probability that the things
Q: What is probable cause?
sought to be seized are in relation to the
A: Refers to such facts and offense and will be found in the place
circumstances antecedent to the sought to be searched.
issuance of the warrant that are in
In warrant of arrest the probabilities are
themselves sufficient to induce a
that the crime has been committed and
cautious man to rely upon them and act
the person sought to be arrested may
in pursuance thereof.
be probably guilty thereof.
Q: As applied to search warrant
Q: What are the conditions in order
what does probable cause mean?
that warrant of arrest may be
A: Such facts and circumstances which issued during preliminary
would lead a reasonably discreet and investigation in Mantaring vs Judge
prudent man to believe that an offense Roman
has been committed and that the
A: If the preliminary investigation was
objects sought in connection with the
conducted by an METC judge and the 3
offense are in the place sought to be
requisites are present.
searched.
1. Has examined under oath or
Q: In the case of Mantaring vs
affirmation the complainant and
Judge Roman the petitioner
the witness by searching
contends that the issuance of
questions and answer
warrant is unconstitutional
2. If the examining judge is satisfied
because he was not named in the
that probable cause exist
previous search warrant. According
3. If there is a need to place the
to the petitioner, it was only
respondent under custody in
Mantaring Jr. who was named in
order not to frustrate the end of
the search warrant, but in the
justice.
warrant of Arrest Mantaring Sr.
was included. Therefore the
75
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: According to the Supreme Court in is the liability the inviting officer.

the case of People v. Judge Ayson
citing Miranda v. Arizona, custodial G: What are the right of a person under
investigation means any questioning custodial investigation according to the
Supreme Court in the case of People v.
initiated by law enforcement officer
Ayson?
after a person has been taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his A: 1.Right to remain silent and to have
freedom of movement in any competent and independent counsel
significant way preferably of his own choice
2)Right to be informed of his
Q: WHEN DOES CUSTODIAL rights
INVESTIGATION BEGIN? 3)Not to be subjected to violence,
force, threat or intimidation or any
A: from the moment the person is taken
means which vitiates the free will shall
into custody, custodial investigation be used against him. Secret detention
begins even if no questioning is yet places, solitary in communicado, or
elicited from him. other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
So custodial investigation begins when a 4)To have evidence obtained in
person is taken into custody and the law the violation of these rights excluded as
enforcement officer starts to ask evidence. ( The right not to admit any
question in relation to a crime of which evidence in violation of his
the person being interrogated is a constitutional rights)
suspect so custodial investigation begins
when the questioning ceases to be a Q: Under the Constitution are the
general inquiry in an unsolved crime, rights of a person under custodial
and starts to focus on a particular investigation waivable?
individual as a suspect. A: Right to remain silent. After the
warnings have been given, such
Q: And under Republic Act 7438 what opportunity afforded him, the
is included in the custodial individual may knowingly and
investigation intelligently waive these rights and
agree to answer or make a statement.
A: under that it includes the practice of
issuing invitation to a person who is Q:While the constitution expressly
investigated in connection with a provides that these rights can not be
offense on which is a suspect, of which waived except in writing and signed in
is suspected that committed the crime it the presence of a counsel this
CACAPIT/LIMBO/MODESTO/RAMOS
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
constitutional provision does not apply was being offered in evidence during
to all rights of a person under custodial the trial but the opposing counsel did
investigation. What rights under not object to the presentation of that
custodial investigation may be waived extrajudicial confession. Will that
as long as it is in writing and signed in constitute an implied waiver of the
the presence of a counsel? rights during the custodial
investigation?
A: : extrajudicial confession.. A: Even if the defense counsel failed to
object to the presentation of an
Q: Extrajudicial confessions obtained extrajudicial confession. it can not
during custodial investigation may be constitute as an implied waiver. Because
admitted in evidence if there is a valid in People vs Andan it is incumbent
waiver. The rights of a person under upon the prosection to prove that the
custodial investigation that may be rights in the custodial investigation
waived which may result in the were respected and duly complied with.
inadmissibility of evidence obtained In default of the eveidence showing
including the extrajudicial confession that this extrajudicial confession were
during the custodial investigation are? obtained in accordance with the
A: The right to remain silent, the right to constitution the court may disregard the
counsel evidence even if the defense did not
object
Q: How about the right to be informed
Q: Custodial Investigation begins
A: Can not be waived when the investigation ceases to be a
general inquiry in an unsolved crime
Q: Rights against to violence, force, and starts to focus on a particular
threat or intimidation or any means individual as a suspect. Is police line
which vitiates the free will up part of the custodial investigation.
A: Can not be waived A: it depends.if there is no investigation
on the part of the police line up, the
Q: The right to have evidence obtained police line up is not considered part of
in the violation of these rights the custodial investigation.
excluded as evidence.
A: It cannot be waived G: This is in reference of People vs
Macam and Gamboa vs Cruz. Gamboa
Q: Supposing during custodial vs cruz, the Supreme Court said the
investigation the person subjected to police line up in that case is not yet
this proceedings was tortured which part of the custodial investigation.
resulted in his confession and the While in the case of people vs macam
extrajudicial confession of the accused
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
the supreme court said the Q: so public prosecutors are law

uncounseled identification in the enforcement officers who can conduct
hospital constitute part of the custodial a custodial investigation?
investigation. So therefore, any A: they are the PNP, police
identification without being accorded
of these rights under section 12 will be Q: Under RA 7438, who are the people
rendered inadmissible in evidence considered as investigating officers
which is synonymous with a law
G: How about audit investigation of enforcement officer within the context
state reports, are these part of custodial of section 12 art 3
investigation A:police
A: it was held by the Supreme Court
that Audit investigation is not part of G: yes, for example police NBI, who are
Custodial Investigation because it does the investigating officers under the law
not involve law enforcers and he is not or considered as investigating officers
yet taken in custody under an who are the law enforcement officers
administrative proceeding. who may conduct custodial
A: A person under normal audit investigation
investigation is not under custodial G: Public officers who have the power
investigation, because an audit and duty to arrest, investigate any
examiner can hardly be deemed to be violation of law
the law enforcement officer
contemplated in the rule [Navallo v. G: Under the constitution any
Sandiganbayan, 234 SCRA 175]. Because confession or admission obtained
the Court Administrator is not a law during custodial investigation it is
enforcement officer, an investigation required that the rights of a person
conducted by him does not constitute under custodial investigation have
custodial investigation within the been complied with but under RA7438
contemplation of the constitutional there are additional requirements for
guarantee [Office of the Court the inadmissibility of extrajudicial
Administrator v. Sumilang, 271 SCRA confession or admissions during
316]. custodial investigation. Would it not
be an unconstitutional law because it
Q: who is a law enforcement officer expands the coverage of section 12
under the context of section 12 article article 3?
3? A:it is not unconstitutional because it is
A: People who has the power to favorable to the accused
prosecute
Q: So the imposition of additional
impositions does not violate the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
constitution. What are the additional admission obtained during custodial

conditions under RA7438 for the investigation has to be in writing
admissibility of confessions obtained A: it must be in writing
during custodial investigation. Because
under the constitution any confessions Q: Custodial investigation must be in
obtained under custodial investigation writing, the extrajudicial confession or
are admissible as long as the accused is admission obtained from CI must be
informed of his right to remain silent in writing and signed by the person
and to have counsel, he is not subjected to CI and assisted Any a
subjected to torture or violence or counsel. If the person waived his right
intimidation, and any violation to a counsel before whom should he
obtained in violation of these right are sign his extrajudicial confession?
inadmissible as evidence. But under A: Any of the parents, brothers and
the law those are not enough for the sisters, spouse, municipal mayor,
admissibility of confessions obtained municipal judge, school district
under custodial investigation because supervisor, the priest or minister trusted
the law provides if any of the and chosen by him.
requisites under the law are not
complied with even if the rights under LAWYERS DISQUALIFIED TO ACT AS
the constitution were followed, the ASSISTING COUNSEL DURING CI and
confession or admission remain ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION
inadmissible as evidence. Does the law
require that the investigation report Q: under the law who may be
should be in writing appointed as assisting counsel
S:yes A: any lawyer except those who are
Q: yes. So this means that if the interested in the outcome of the case.
custodial investigation report is not in For example if the complainant is a
writing, any confession or admission lawyer he cannot be appointed as an
obtained during custodial investigation assisting counsel during the
is inadmissible in evidence. investigation
G: does the law require that the Q: may a public prosecutor be

extrajudial confession itself shall be in appointed as an assisting counsel?
writing? A: No. because he is a lawyer who is
A: No. charge with the obligation of the
conduct of preliminary investigation
Q: which means all confession or
and prosecution of offenses
admission during CI is inadmissible
in evidence? Because it is not required
under the law that the confession or
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
G: why does the constitution afford Q: how did the Supreme court address
these rights to a person under CI? the issue of high risk of using
A: In people vs Andan the objective of compulsion, moral ascendancy,
the rights under Sec.12 Art. 3 is to influence by employers on the
preclude or prohibit in comminicado employee in order to extract
interrogation of individuals in a police confession. It is true that admin
dominated atmosphere where proceedings are not proceedings
potentiality for compulsion, physical or conducted by law enforcement officers
psychological, is apparent. because the Lawyer in an
administrative investigation is not a
G: In a custodial investigation a law law enforcement officer but the
enforcement officer is not an interested supreme court recognized the legality
party so in a custodial investigation the that during the administrative
law enforcement officer is just investigation the employer will
performing his official function which overbear on the employee and employ
means he is not personally interested coercion, moral ascendancy in order to
in the outcome of the investigation extract confession. So how does the
legality addressed in the constitution?
G: In an investigation between an
employer and employee the A:any confession or admission during
investigator is the lawyer and administrative investigation obatained
definitely the employer is very much by coercion or moral ascendancy or
interested in the outcome of the influence maybe considered as
investigation so which means that if
inadmissible not because of violation of
there is a risk during CI that the law
enforcement officer while Sec 12 Art3 of the constitution because
disinterested may employ compulsion, the said section does not apply to this
coercion the risks are greater when it type of proceedings but under the
comes to administrative investigation general principles of the Civil Law ,
because now the investigator is Vitiated Consent. So the supreme court
financially interested in the outcome of
the investigation said in Peple vs Judge Ayson that
vitiated consent can not produce any
Q: because of that can we extend the evidence
rights under sec 12 art 3to persons
facing administrative investigations? EXCLUSIONARY RULE, DERIVATIVE
A: NO. the bill of rights does not apply
EVIDENCE,FRUIT OF POISONOUS
in the said proceedings
TREE
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: Supposing the rights in the of People vs. Alicando cited Justice

constitution were violated, under the Frankfurter in the case of US vs
constitution any confession or Cardone, not only the admission or
admission obtained during custodial
confession obtained in violation of the
investigation will be inadmissible in
evidence for any purpose. In the case constitution be considered as null and
of People vs Alicando, the Supreme void and inadmissible in evidence but
Court said that not only admission or all derivative evidence however far
confession obtained during the removed from the primary source. The
custodial investigation be considered
fruit of poisonous tree does not only
as inadmissible in evidence, what else
is declared inadmissible in evidence? deal with the fruit because when we say
fruit, fruit is a derivative evidence once
A: any derivative evidence obtained removed from a primary source because
from the illegally tainted confession or the primary source, the confession or
admission are also considered as admission is the tree and the fruit which
inadmissible in evidence. So the
is the secondary evidence is once
confession or admission obtained
during custodial investigation in removed from the primary source but
violation of the constitutional rights of the fruit of poisonous tree extends to all
the person under custodial investigation evidence however removed from the
are declared inadmissible in evidence primary source. Which means that if the
under the exclusionary rule particularly confession or admission of the accused
uner the 3rd paragraph of section 12 resulted in the discovery of a secondary
article 3 and par.2 section3 article 3
evidence, that secondary evidence is
Q: how about the derivative or inadmissible in evidence. If the
secondary evidence obtained from this discovery of the secondary evidence
confession or admission, what is the leads to another derivative evidence
legal basis for declaring this derivative that derivative evidence is still
evidence inadmissible in evidence
considered inadmissible in evidence.
A: they are inadmissible under the
concept of the fruit of the poisonous tree
ACQUITTAL, INDEPENDENT
EVIDENCE
Q: what is this all about? Q: can we now say that whenever the
A: Anything that is obtained from an rights of a person under CI have been
illegal source is also inadmissible in violated the accused is entitled to no
evidence. The supreme court in the case less than an acquittal?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
evidence the uncounselled confession

A: No.even if the rights of the person of the accused to the mayor in Andan
were violated during CI resulting to the who is also a law enforcement officer,
inadmissibility of evidence of any and to the police officer in duty in the
confession or admission or any case of people vs dy. So why did the
derivative evidence if the prosecution SC admit these in evidence
wwas able to present independent A: the accused admitted or made those
evidence that may establish the guilt of confession spontaneously and
the accused beyond reasonable doubt voluntarily not solicited through
the accused may still be convicted. This questioning, without any influence of
is shown in the case of Ho Wai Pang vs the police or of the investigating officer.
People. In Ho wai Pang vs People, the In the case where the accused admitted
Chinese accused were not accorded the to the mayor , he admitted it when he is
right under sec 12 art 3, there was no in a private room or office of the police
interpreter and there was no counsel chief. He was not forced and the mayor
during the investigation but the SC did not ask if he was involved in the
considered independent evidence, crime. In people vs andan the sc said the
independent from confession or rights of sec 12 art 3 are guaranteed to
admission, like the testimony of the preclude the slightest use of coercion of
immigration officer who has searched the state as to result in him admitting
the luggage of the accused. Similarly in something is false but not to prevent
the case of people vs macam again the him from freely and voluntarily telling
identification of the hospital was the truth.
considered as inadmissible in evidence
but the SC said that during trial the In Ppl vs DY, the inadmissibility of
witnesses were able to identify them in evidence passed to form test. The first
court so which means that there are form is the determination whether the
other independent evidence that were confession is part of the investigation.
presented by the prosecution to The SC said that it is not part of the CI
establish the guilt of the accused beyond because no questioning was elicited
reasonable doubt from the accused so it is a voluntary
sponateous act it is not part of the CI.
Q: in the case of people vs Dy and The second form is in order to hurdle
People vs Andan the SC admitted in the rule against hearsay. Off course the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
accused admit his guilt but the mayor or A: Bail is a security given for the release
PO did not know the truth of his of a person in custody of law, furnished
confession so therefore under the by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his
hearsay rule they are disqualified even appearance before any court as required
though dy admitted he killed a tourist under the conditions hereinafter
the Police officer in duty was not there, specified. Bail may be given in the form
he does not know, he has no personal of corporate surety, property bond,
knowledge of the fact of the incident. cash deposit, or recognizance. (Sec 21
Generally under the hearsay rule the rule 114)
testimony of the police in duty can not
be offered in evidence Q: what is the purpose of bail based on
manotoc vs CA?
Q: did the SC allowed the testimony of A: to temporarily release the person.in
the mayor and of the police officer on Basco vs Rapatalo a person is detained
duty despite the fact that they do not by the state so that in order to ensure
have personal knowledge as to the that he appears before the proper court
incident being the subject matter of the at the scheduled time and place to
controversy answer the charges brought against him
A: Yes under the principle of res gestae. and her. The accused has interest in the
It may in a sense be also regarded as presence of the accused in the trial even
part of the res gestae. The rule is that, though the accused has an interest to be
any person, otherwise competent as a provisionally free during the pendency
witness, who heard the confession, is of the trial. So there are two conflicting
competent to testify as to the substance interest. Bail is the moderating
of what he heard if he heard and mechanism in order to balance the
understood all of it. An oral confession interest of the state, to ensure that the
need not be repeated verbatim, but in accused will appear during the trial and
such a case it must be given in the interest of the accused, to be at
substance. This is an exception of the liberty during the pendency of the trial
hearsay rule. while his guilt is not yet established
beyond reasonable doubt.
BAIL Section 13 In Manotoc vs CA, the objective of bail
Q: What is bail? is to relieve the accused from
imprisonment and on the state to the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
burden of keeping him and as well as to shall remain in force at all stages of the
maintain the jurisdiction of the court case until promulgation of the judgment
over the accused as if he is in custody of of the RTC, irrespective of whether the
the proper officer of the court to receive case was originally filed in or appealed
any lawful order may be given to him to it;
Second, The accused shall appear before
Q:Generally bail is only allowed or the proper court whenever required
required in criminal cases and in favor Third,The failure of the accused to
of the accused. May bail be required appear at the trial without justification
from a person who is not a party to a and despite due process shall be
case? deemed a waiver of his right to be
A: Yes.bail may be required to material present thereat. In such case, the trail
witness under rule 119. It is required in may proceed in absentia.
order to guarantee that the material Fourth,Bondsman shall surrender the
witness will appear in the trial and if the accused to the court for execution for
material witness does not post bail he final judgment
will be detained prior to or while
waiting for the trial in the case Q: what happen if the accused failed to
appear despite duty and without just
Q: what are the different kinds of bail? cause
A: Bail as matter of right and Bail as a A: His right during trial is waived and
matter of discretion the case will be tried in trial trial in
abscencia
Q: What are the 4 forms of bail
A: Cash deposits, Recognizance, G: under sec 4 rule 114, when is bail a
property bond and corporate surety( matter of right
bonding company that guarantees the A: All persons in custody shall be
appearance of an acussed) admitted to bail as a matter of right,
with sufficient sureties, or released on
Q: what are the four mandatory recognizance as prescribed by law or
conditions in the all kinds of bail this Rule;
A: a)Before or after conviction by the MTC
First, Undertaking shall be effective (offenses punishable 6 years or below)
upon approval, and unless cancelled,
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
b)Before conviction of the RTC of an discretion to determine the weight of

offense not punishable by death, evidence of guilt. If the evidence of guilt
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. is strong, the discretion ceases, the court
need to deny it. Its its not a matter of
Q: is there any circumstance that bail is right nor discretion. Similarly,after
a matter of right? hearing and the court exercise its
A: offense not punishable by death, discretion, the court determines that the
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment evidence of guilt is weak the discretion
when evidence of guilt is not strong cease. The court has no choice but to
grant it because bails becomes a matter
Q:when is bail matter of discretion of right
A: Upon conviction by the Regional
Trial Court of an offense not Q:In the case of Basco vs Rapatalo,
punishable by death, reclusion what are the four fold application of
perpetua, or life imprisonment, the court whenever the application of
admission to bail is discretionary. bail is filed before the court
The application for bail may be filed A: In Basco v. Rapatalo, the Supreme
and acted upon by the trial court Court laid down the four fold duties of
despite the filing of a notice of the court;
appeal, provided it has not 1)Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of
transmitted the original record to the the application for bail or require him to
appellate court. However, if the submit his recommendation
decision of the trial court conviction 2)Conduct a hearing for the application
the accused changed the nature of the for bail regardless of whether or not the
offense from non-bailable to bailable, prosecution refuses to present evidence
the application for bail can only be filed to show that the guilt of the accused is
with and resolved by the appellate strong for the purpose of enabling the
court. (Section 5 Rule 114) court to exercise its sound discretion
3)Decide whether the evidence of the
Q: is there other instance when bail is guilt of the accused is strong based on
matterof discretion the summary of evidence of the
A:when the offense charged is prosecution.
punishable by RP, Life imprisonment or 4)If the guilt of the accused is not strong,
death . the court will exercise its discharge the accused upon the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
approval of the bail bond otherwise b)Nature and circumstances of the

deny the application for bail. offense
c)Penalty for the offense charged
Q:Are these applicable onle to bail as d)Character and reputation of the
matter of discretion? accused
A: yes. The four fold application does e)Age and health of the accused
not apply when bail is matter of right. f)Weight of the evidence against the
But there is a need to conduct a hearing accused
when bail is matter of right and if the g)Probability of the accused appearing
purpose of conducting a hearing is to at the trial
determine the evidence of guilt and h)Forfeiture of the bail
proper amount of bail i)The fact that the accused was a fugitive
from justice when arrested
G: in bail as a right, the purpose of j)Pendency of other cases where the
hearing is accused is on bail
A: to know the reasonable amount of these factors are not exclusive, other
bail. that is the only issue in a hearing factors may be considered by the court
when bail is a matter of right. But in
practice upon the issuance of a warrant G:in determining the nature of bail
of arrest there is already a whether it is a matter of right or
recommended amount of bail. The discretion what is the penalty
accused may file a motion in order to determinative of the nature of bail
reduce the amount of bail, and that is
time when a hearing for the A: First, all persons are entitled to bail
determination of the reasonable amount except when the offense is punishable
of bail shall be established by the court. by RP, LI or death
Second , bail becomes a matter of
G: What are the factors that the court discretion when offense charged is
should consider in determining the punishable by RP, LI, or death when the
amount of bail under sec9 rule 114? penalty imposed is imprisonment
A: exceeding six years provided that the
a)Financial ability of the accused to give following circumstances are present.
bail Which means if any of those
circumstances mentioned in par 2 of sec
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
5 rule 114 is present bail is neither a (d) That the circumstances of his case
matter of right or discretion indicate the probability of flight if
Iit is inappropriate to say bailable or non released on bail; or
bailable offenses because all offenses a (e) That there is undue risk that he may
re bailabale, what is non bailable is the commit another crime during the
accused because if the accused is pendency of the appeal.
charged with rp, li or death and if the
evidence of guilt is strong he cant be Q: in the case of Rapatalo, bail is
admitted to bail matter of right or discretion, and the
nature of bail is determined by the
G: As stated in Sec. 5 rule 114 of the penalty for the offense charged. At
rules of Court, bail is a matter of what time should the penalty for the
discretion when the penalty for the offense should be determined in order
crime charged is less than reclusion to establish whether bail is a matter of
perpetua but the penalty imposed by right or discretion
the trial court is imprisonment A:Deterrmined by the law providing for
exceeding six (6) years, the accused the penalty for the offense charged at
shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be the time of the application or pendency
cancelled upon a showing by the for the application of bail.
prosecution, with notice to the accused,
of the following or other similar Q: In Ppl vs Judge Donato, at the time
circumstances? of the commission of the offense
A: charged the penalty provided by law is
(a) That he is a recidivist, quasi- RP to Death. During the pendency for
recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has the application for bail was reduced to
committed the crime aggravated by the prision mayor so what is now the
circumstance of reiteration; character of bail?
(b) That he has previously escaped from A: Upon the issuance of the executive
legal confinement, evaded sentence, or order, bail becomes a matter of right
violated the conditions of his bail because the nature of bail shall be
without valid justification; determined by the nature of the offense
(c) That he committed the offense while charged at the time of pendency for the
under probation, parole, or conditional application for bail
pardon;
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: supposing that at the time of the reveals distorted notion as to the true
commission of the offense charged the nature and conditions does violence to
penalty is PM. At the time for the the well established rule of law that bail
pendency for the application for bail it is not a matter of right and requires
was increased to RP. So now it hearing where the accused is charged
becomes a matter of discretion because
the applicable penalty the penalty Q: what are the substantive basis of
provided for by the law at the time of this?
pendency of the application for bail. In A: right to be heard. Right of the
the example given, bail becomes a prosecution the opportunity to prepare
matter of discretion? in order to establish the weight of
A:it is the lower penalty. The penalty evidence.
for the offense charged at the time for
application for bail is the applicable law Q: do members of afp can exercise the
because it is the lower penalty. right to bail?
A: No, in the case of Commendador v.
Q:is right to bail a waivable right? De Villa the right to speedy trial is given
A: yes more emphasis in the military where the
right to bail does not exist because of the
Q: should it be in writing and signed unique structure of the military should
in the presence of a counsel? be enough reason to exempt military
A: no required formality mean from the constitutional coverage
on the right to bail. Right to bail to
Q:are motions for application for bail members of AFP are not accorded to
required to comply with 3 day motion them because of their pecuniary
rule?
structure, they carry firearms and
A: Yes. In Baylon v. Judge Sison the
operate within the government
Supreme court ruled that the reason
therefore they cannot demand for the
given by the respondent judge that the
same right as any private citizen entitled
non observance of the three day motion
to.
rule is justified because of the urgent
In Commendador v. De Villa, the
motion for the petition for bail and time
accused herein are under court martial
is of the essence is untenable. Such
proceedings. Right to bail are not
raciconation, which espouses and
entitled if the offense is administrative
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
or under court martial but when it is a 2)The requesting State will accord due
criminal in nature they can post bail. process to the accused
3)The proceedings are sui generis
Q: PNP has the right to bail and carry 4)Compliance shall be in good faith
also firearms. is there a reasonable 5)There is underlying risk of flight
distinction between AFP and PNP?
A: PNP are compared to civilians Q: What are the issues in an
extrajudicial proceedings
Q: are members of AFP not entitled to A: 1.whether the request complies with
bail the general rule? the extradition treaty
A: no it’s the exception. Members of afp 2. whether the person is extraditable
like any other person are entitled to bail
except when they are charged before Q: What does speedy trial mean?
general court of martial. Because they
A: Means a trial conducted according to
are not criminal and judicial
the law of criminal procedure and the
proceedings but executive proceedings.
rules and regulations, free from
It is not appealble before general court
vexatious, capricious and oppressive
but to the president
delays. (People v. Tee)
Q: the right to bail may may be denied Q: What are the factors to be weighed
depending on the penalty of the by the court as to determine whether
offense charged and evidence of guilt, the right has been violated? (LRCEP)
is the right to bail available in non People v. Tee
criminal proceedings like extradition?
A: No. The extradition proceedings do A: 1)Length of the delay
not determine the guilt or innocence of
2)Reason for the delay Failure to
the accused. The court only determines
present the material witness in the trial
if there is an extradition treaty or the
case is extraditable. 3)The conduct of prosecution and
accused The prosecution exerted all
Q: What are the 5 postulates of efforts to produce the witness. Defense
extradition proceedings did not make any move to invoke the
A:1)Extradition is a major instrument constitutional right of the accused to a
for suppression of crime speedy trial
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
4)Efforts exerted by the A: 1)The proceedings are attended

defendant to assert his right by vexatious, capricious and oppressive
delays
5)Prejudice and damage caused
to the accused 2)When unjustified
postponements are asked for and
Q: Applying these factors, can we say
granted/secured
that there was a violation to right to
speedy trial in People v. Tee? 3)When without cause or
justifiable motive of long period of time
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that
is allowed to elapse without the party
although the absences of prosecution
having his case tried (People v. Tee)
witness Abratique totaled to 20 hearing
days, there is no showing whatsoever Q: In order for these 3 to constitute
that prosecution capriciously caused violation, what is the qualifier?
Abratique’s absences as to vex or
A: The delay must be attributable to the
oppress appellant and deny him his
prosecution.
rights. Under the rules, appellant could
have moved the trial court to require the Q: What is the remedy if there is
witness to post bail to ensure that the violation of his right to speedy trial?
latter would testify when required.
Appellant could have moved to have A: petition for certiorari/mandamus;
Abratique found in contempt and duly writ of habeas corpus if he is detained
sanctioned. Appellant did neither. It is a Q: Why does the constitution
bit too late in the day for the appellant guarantee that the accused should be
to invoke now his right to speedy trial. tried for the least amount of time?
A: so that the accused if he be innocent

be released from anxiety
Q: Are appeals covered under the right

Q: Speedy trial is a relative concept
to speedy trial?
and the right to speedy trial can be
violated when? A: Proceedings anterior to trial and trial
itself.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: Right under Sec.14 is the right to Q: What does impartial trial mean?
speedy trial. Can we say that this right
A: Hearing before an impartial and
is only applicable during trial?
disinterested tribunal and that every
A: No. The Supreme Court in the case of litigant is entitled nothing less than the
Flores v. People citing Justice Laurel, cold neutrality of an impartial judge.
“An accused is entitled to a trial at the
Q: In Mateo Jr. v. Villaluz, described a
earliest opportunity. He cannot be
cold, neutral and impartial judge. Who
oppressed by delaying the
is an impartial judge?
commencement of trial for an
unreasonable length of time. If the A: A cerebral man deliberately holds in
proceedings pending trial are deferred, check the tag and pull of purely
the trial itself is necessarily delayed. personal preferences and prejudices
which he shares with the rest of his
Q: How about on appeal?
fellow mortals.
A: No. Right to speedy trial applies to
Q: Judge has two obligations in
the proceedings anterior to the trial.
promulgating judgement?
Delay in the appeal is covered by a
different constitutional guarantee A: (1)Duty to render just decision and
covered by Sec.16 Art.3. (2) must do it free from any suspicion of
partiality/ prejudice. Judge must be
Q: In the case of Conde v. Rivera, for a
impartial and appear impartial.
period of one year she was required to
a dance attendance to the Court. Why? Q: is it enough that the trial judge
impartial? Supposing the judge is
A: She is required to attend at the trial
indeed impartial and renders decision
whether the trial is postponed. The
based on evidence. Is that enough?
Supreme Court dismissed the case
What if he is seen socializing with one
because of the violation of the right to
of the party in a case he is handling
speedy trial of the accused.
after work?
Q: In this case the accused was made to
A: No it is not enough. The judge or
dance attendance in court?
justice of Courts must appear to be
A: Like cha-cha made back and forth in impartial. Even if they penned their
attending court hearings decision based on evidence they must
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
have semblance of impartiality. They Mere possibility of influence is not

cannot just associate with any parties in enough, the accused must show
the case because it will bring a probable cause that judgment is
semblance of partiality. impaired.
Q: In our judicial system, are trial court Q: Mateo Jr. v. Vilalauz, the
judges required to leap lie hermits respondent judge is the one who
detached with world? Because in the attested to the affidavit of one of the
case of People v. Teehankee, the witnesses. But when the witness is
accused contends that his right to presented, he reacted and said that he
impartial trial is violated because of was forced to sign the affidavit. After
the pervasive publicity of the case. the claim made by the witness, the
defendant immediately filed for an
A: In People v. Teehankee, the
inhibition of the respondent judge.
Supreme Court ruled that pervasive According the defense they cannot
publicity is not per se prejudicial to the longer expect an impartial and cold
right of an accused to fair trial. The mere neutrality on the presiding judge.
fact that the trial of appellant was given Why?
a day to day, gavel to gavel, coverage
does not by itself prove that the A: The Supreme Court ruled that
publicity so permeated the mind of a having the extrajudicial statement was
trial judge and impaired his attested before him, such repudiation
impartiality. Our idea of a fair and was hardly flattering to the judge. His
impartial judge is not that of a hermit sense of fairness under the
who is out of touch with the world. We circumstances could easily be blunted.
have not installed the jury system The absence of the requisite of due
whose members are overly protected process element is thus noticeable.
from publicity lest they lose their
impartiality. Our judges are learned in
law and trained to disregard off court
evidence and on camera performances
Q: What is the purpose of this
of parties in litigation. Their mere
constitutional guarantee of public trial
exposure to publications and publicity
according to the case of Garcia v.
stunts do not per se fatally infect their
Domingo?
impartiality.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
A: Justice Laurel: Trial should be in is no showing that the public was

public in order to offset any danger of excluded. It is to be admitted that the
conducting it in an illegal or unjust size of the room allotted by the Judge
manner. would reduce the number of those who
could be present. Such a fact though is
Atty. Gabriel: Necessary to prevent
not indicative of any transgression of
abuses that may be committed by the
this right. Courtrooms are not of
court to the prejudice of the defendant.
uniform dimensions. Some are smaller
Q: In the case of Garcia v. Domingo, than others. Moreover as what Justice
this right to due process in order to Black opined, it suffices to satisfy the
offset any danger of conducting it in an requirement of a trial being public if the
illegal or unjust manner. The right to accused could have his friends, relatives
public trial in order to ship the accused and counsel present, no matter what
form the arbitrariness of the judge, offense he may be charged.
how can it protect the accused form
arbitrariness?
Q: Is trial by publicity the same as
A: Based on experience. Public officers
public trial?
are more prudent when the trial is
witnessed by the public. A: No. Aquino case-absolute ban on
recording, trial is not for entertainment.
Q: Right to public trial is a right that
belongs to the accused. Can an accused Estrada case-was allowed for
waive it? Meaning can he exclude the documentation ONLY
public from the witnessing his trial?
Ampatuan case- pro hac vice,
A: Prosecution can invoke the right to allowed live video streaming by reason
public trial by the virtue of the due of extraordinary circumstance of the
process clause. case.
Q: Would the proceedings in the Atty. Gabriel: In the case of In re:
chamber of the judge considered as Petition for radio and television
public trial?
coverage of multiple murder case
A: No. The Supreme Court in the case against Maguindanao Governor Zaldy
of Garcia v. Domingo, ruled that there Ampatuan, the Supreme Court
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
discussed the evolution on the right of evidence to be produced during the trial
impartial trial on the one hand and right is offensive to decency or public morals.
to information on the other hand. From He may also, on motion of the accused,
the outright denial in the case of Aquino exclude the public from the trial, except
to the filming for the purposes of court personnel and the counsel of the
recording in the case of Estrada and to a parties
restricted and to regulated public airing
Q: What is right to confrontation?
in the case of Maguindanao massacre,
but note as well in the decision of the SC A: Right of the accused to see the
in the case of In re: Petition for radio witness face to face
and television coverage of multiple
murder case against Maguindanao Q: What are the two reasons as
Governor Zaldy Ampatuan was mentioned in the case of US v. Javier
why the courts cannot allow the
modified in its resolution because in its
affidavit of a deceased who is not cross
decision it allowed the TV and radio
examined as admissible in evidence?
coverage of the trial under restrictive
and more prohibitive procedure. But in A: 1)To allow the accused to exercise
its resolution modified its , by denying his right to cross examination of the
live TV and radio coverage and witness
allowing only live streaming from an
extension in the premises of the court 2)A tribunal may have before it
because of the balancing interest of the the deportment and appearance of the
accused and the people. Note as well witness while testifying
and the resolution and decision of the Q: Substantively these are the two
SC in the Maguindanao case is a pro hac reasons why the affidavit cannot be
vice case meaning it cannot be admitted without presenting the
considered as judicial precedent under affiant as a witness. Procedurally, what
the doctrine of stare decisis. Applicable is the basis of the exclusion? An ex
in that particular case only. parte cannot be presented as evidence
because?
Atty. Gabriel : Waiver of public trial
Section 21. Exclusion of the public. — A: Intended to prevent the conviction of
The judge may, motu proprio, exclude the accused upon deposition or ex parte
the public from the courtroom if the affidavits.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: Supposing the accused are tried A: (1) The admissibility of “dying

separately on the same criminal declarations;” and (2) trial in absentia
information on the same acts or under Section 14(2)
omissions. Supposing A B C tried on
the same criminal information may the Q: Supposing A was presented a s a
testimony of a witness in the case of A witness during his testimony he
who was a exhaustively cross produced the affidavit of B in order to
examined by the accused can be used prove that he is telling the truth. Can
as a witness to other cases without the defense object to that evidence?
presenting the witness in the other A: Yes. The affidavit would be
case. D was presented as a witness in considered as a hearsay evidence. Atty.
the case of A can D be presented as a
Gabriel: Procedurally, ex parte affidavits
witness in the case of B and C without
cannot be admitted because on the rule
presenting as witness in B and C’s
of hearsay evidence.
case?
Q: What are the two compulsory
Atty. Gabriel: No. It would deprive the
processes available to the accused?
court to observe the deportment of the
Section 14, Article 3
witness during the trial. If we say
automatically that the second court will A: 1)Subpoena ad testificandum
admit the evidence of the witness who is Person is required by the court to testify
presented in another case would not
2)Subpoena duces tecum
that be a deprivation of the right of the
Required by the court for the
second court to determine whether the
production of books, records, things or
witness is lying or telling the truth?
documents therein specified
Even if the parties are the same if the
court trying the parties are not the same Q: May a subpoena ad testificandum
the right to confrontation requires that be issued by the court without issuing
the witness presented in one case be subpoena duces tecum?
presented in the other case.
A: Yes. Subpoena duces tecum cannot
be issued by the court without subpoena
ad testificandum but subpoena ad
Q: Is there an exemption to the rule in
testificandum can be issued without
Talino v. Sandiganbayan
Subpoena duces tecum. It is not enough
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
that the documents which is the subject testificandum would serve no purpose
of subpoena duces tecum to just bring it but to further the delay of the
before the court. It must be testified and proceedings in pending criminal cases.
authenticated by the custodian. In that It is not relevant since it is only used for
regard, the complete term for subpoena fishing expediton.
duces tecum ad testificandum
2)Such books must be reasonably
Atty. Gabriel: did not pass because it described by the parties to be readily
cannot be used as to determine the guilt identified (Test of definiteness) In Roco
or innocence of the accused. The v. Contreras, the Supreme Court ruled
petitioner used this only to fish for that the books and documents that the
evidence. petitioner requested to be subpoenaed
are designated and described in his
Q: What are the two tests in order to
request with definiteness and readily
determine the propriety of the issuance
identifiable.
of subpoena duces tecum?
Q: Sec. 14 Art.3 enumerates the rights
A: 1)The books and documents or
of the accused expect for one which is?
other things required must appear
prima facie relevant to the issue subject A: The provision on trial by absentia.
of the controversy (Test of relevancy) This right favors the prosecution so that
When are they relevant? An evidence is the trial won’t be delayed.
relevant when it establishes the guilt or
Q: What are the three requirements so
innocence of the accused.
that trial in absentia may proceed?
Like in the case of Roco v. Contreras (BP
A: 1) There has been an arraignment
22 case), the Supreme Court ruled that
the production of book of account, 2) That the accused had been
ledgers and documents requested by the notified
petitioner are not indispensable to prove
his defense of payment. We do not find 3) That he fails to appear and his
any justifiable reason and petitioner has failure to do so is unjustified
not shown any, why this court must
have to disbelieve the factual findings of
the appellate court. Thus the issuance of
subpoena duces tecum subpoena ad
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
bail after he had been arraigned just

before the retaking of evidence
Q: What is the consequence of trial in
commenced, one who jumps bail can
absentia?
never offer a justifiable reason for his
A: The accused waived his right to non appearance during trial.
appear in the trial. He cannot present Accordingly, after the trial in absentia,
evidence. He cannot be present in the court can render judgment in the
person or in counsel. He loses his legal case and the promulgation may be made
standing. by simply recording the judgment in the
criminal docket with a copy thereof
Q: The presence of the accused is served upon his counsel provided that
needed during arraignment the
the notice requiring him to be present at
presence of the accused is mandatory
the promulgation is served through his
during trial and during the
bondsmen or warden and counsel.
promulgation. Does that mean that the
court cannot during trial during trial in Atty. Gabriel: Only during the
absentia if the purpose of the trial is to arraignment, the presence of the
identify the accused? accused is not waivable but only to the
two instances it is waivable.
A: During trial, the accused can
expressly waive his appearance through Q: When is the Presence of the Accused
his counsel by making a manifestation, Mandatory
that whenever a witness is to be
presented to identify the accused, the A: 1. During arraignment and plea
defense is admitting that the accused (Rules of Court, Rule 116, Sec. 1).
will be identified by the witness. In that 2. During trial, for identification,
regard to be dispense with the unless the accused has already
appearance of the accused in stipulated on his identity during the
identification purposes. On the third pre-trial and that he is the one who will
instance, during the promulgation of the be identified by the witnesses as the
judgment, it is the issue in the case of accused in the criminal case; or
People v. Valeriano, whether the court
can promulgate a decision when the 3. During promulgation of
accused flee from justice. The Supreme sentence, unless for a light offense
Court ruled that the accused jumped (Rules of Court, Rule 120, Sec. 6). Upon
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
the termination of a trial in absentia, the of the person's liberty, used as a

court has the duty to rule upon the protection against illegal imprisonment.
evidence presented in court. The court
Q: May the writ of habeas corpus be
need not wait for the time until the
suspended? The writ itself?
accused who escaped from custody
finally decides to appear in court to A: Only the privilege only.
present his evidence and cross-examine
the witnesses against him. To allow the Q: What is the difference on the
suspension of the privilege writ of
delay of proceedings for this purpose is
habeas corpus and writ of habeas
to render ineffective the constitutional
corpus?
provision on trial in absentia (People v.
Mapalao) A: Writ of Habeas Corpus- application
for habeas corpus is filed and the court
Q: May an accused tried in absentia be
finds the petition in proper form, it will
convicted in absentia likewise appeal
issue the writ as a matter of course,
in absentia?
ordering the production of the person
A: This is one the issue in the case of allegedly detained and requiring the
People v. Mapalao, the Supreme court respondent to justify the detention. A
ruled that the accused while at large, high prerogative writ, a writ of inquiry-
cannot seek relief from the court as he is seeks to determine the validity or
deemed to have waived his right and legality of the detention.
has no standing in court. Upon
promulgation of the judgment, he failed Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus-
to appear without justifiable cause where the return of the respondent
although his bondsmen and counsel shows that the person in custody is
were given notice, he is therefore being held for a crime covered by the
waived his right to appeal. proclamation suspending the privilege
and in a place where it is effective will
Q: What is Habeas Corpus (“you have the court dismiss the petition. Is the
the body”) Section 15, article 3? order for the release of the person.
A: An order requiring a person to be Q: Only the privilege of the writ of

brought before a judge or court, habeas corpus may be suspended and
especially for investigation of a restraint not the writ. Who may suspend the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
What are the valid grounds of the Q: How can you question the
suspension? suspension of the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus? Lansang case
A: The president and the grounds are in
cases of invasion when public safety A: in an appropriate proceeding, sub
requires it and in cases of rebellion judice.
when public safety requires it.
Q: When does it promulgate its
Encompasses the meaning under the decision challenging such suspension?
revised penal code? Statutorily defined
A: 30 days after questioning
offenses - Lagman case
Q: Quantum of evidence?
Q: How about imminent threat of
rebellion or invasion? Is this a valid A: probable cause.
ground of suspension?
Q: Does it consider the subsequent
A: Yes, in the case of Lansang v. Garcia events in determining the sufficiency
interpreting the 1935 Constitution. of factual basis for the suspension of
Under 1987 Constitution, mere threat of privilege of writ of habeas corpus and
rebellion is not a valid ground. proclamation of martial law?
Q: What are the two instances wherein A: Courts of justice can only limit its
writ of habeas corpus can be issued or factual gaze at the time of actual
available? proclamation
A: 1) In cases of illegal detention in In contrast with power of Congress

order to test the validity of detention. power to revoke or extend, it may
Reckoning period: as of the filing for the consider any evidence before or after
petition of the writ of habeas corpus at such proclamation.
the earliest time and if there are
Q: Can the courts defer any action
supervening events that will supersede
challenging such petition until the
the petition of the writ of habeas corpus
congress acted according to the
and bar his release from custody.
constitution? Should the court wait on
2) Speedy trial the action of congress to revoke or
extend before it assumes jurisdiction?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
A: No remedies are separate and A: Rebellion or offenses inherent in or

independent. directly connected with invasion.
Q: What are the constitutional Q: Under Sec. 15 art.3 constitution

limitations in the suspension of the provides that the privilege of writ
privilege of the writ? habeas corpus shall not be suspended
except in cases of invasion or rebellion
A: He may for a period not exceeding
when the public safety requires it. The
sixty days suspend to privilege and only use of term invasion and rebellion are
the Congress can extend it. Upon the they taken within the context of
suspension of the privilege his duty is to criminal law?
submit a report within 48 hours from
the suspension in person or in writing. A: Yes new ruling in Lagman
Q: Prior to the 1987 Constitution, Q: For how long a person may be

whether the Supreme Court can review suspected to have committed an
the sufficiency of the factual offense of rebellion or offenses
circumstances in the suspension. Can inherent in or directly connected with
the Supreme Court review? invasion be detained?
A: In the case of Lansang v. Garcia, the A: Person thus arrested or detained

Supreme Court ruled that Art. 7 vest the shall be judicially charged within 3 days
executive the power to suspend, but not of otherwise he shall be released.
absolute, it goes hand in hand with the
Atty. Gabriel: Supposing A was
system of checks and balances under
arrested for being a suspected rebel at
which the Executive is supreme as
the time that he was arrested the
regards to the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
privilege but only if and when he acts
was suspended. On the 3rd day of his
within the sphere allotted to him by the
arrest, police officers who arrested him
Basic law, authority to determine
filed a criminal complaint before a
whether he has so acted is vested in the
public prosecutor for preliminary
Judicial Department. Check only and
investigation, would that suffice to bar
not to supplant.
the 3 day period in order to be said that
Q: What are the offenses covered by the detention of A is justified?
the suspension of the privilege?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
A: A must be judicially charged. Mere most benign to the least benign. (Can
filing criminal complaint before a public be used although not in succession)
prosecutor for preliminary investigation
A: 1)Calling out power
is not sufficient to bar the running of the
3 day period. It can only be interrupted 2)Suspension of the privilege of
by filing criminal information before the the writ Habeas Corpus
court.
3)Declaration of martial law Sec.
Q: Consequence in the petition for bail 18 only enumerates the power
of a person who filed a petition for wherein the President may call
habeas corpus? martial law or suspend the
privilege in invasion when public
A: This is the issue in the case of
safety requires it and in cases of
Jackson v. Macalino, wherein the
rebellion when public safety
Supreme Court ruled that by offering of
requires it.
the petitioner to post bail bond, the
petitioner thereby admitted that he was Can the President exercise or proclaim
under custody of CID and voluntarily martial law without the presence of
accepted the jurisdiction of CID. rebellion, invasion or lawless violence?
Q: Can the court continue to hear the A: Even if there is no actual rebellion,
petition of writ of habeas corpus after invasion or lawless violence the
the petitioner filed for bail? President may exercise his calling out
A: If the accused applied for bail, it is an power in order to avert or to stop it
expressed admission or recognition of from happening.
the validity of his detention and would Q: What happens to the person who
render the petition for habeas corpus post bail in suspension of the privilege
moot and academic. of habeas corpus? Can he still exercise
the right to bail? What is the purpose
Q: Sec.18 Art. 7 enumerate the powers
for the suspension?
of the President. Supreme Court in the
Sanlakas case said that the A: The purpose is to quash or stop
enumeration in Sec.18 Art.7 was rebellion or invasion.
deliberately made from an order, to the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Atty. Gabriel: Let’s assume that the the accused and ultimately retain the
penalty for rebellion is reclusion liberty of the person. Aside from the
temporal. Supposing after the President writ of habeas corpus there are other
suspended the privilege, all the high prerogative writ that produce the
members of a group were arrested being same effect like writ of amparo. Five
suspected rebels. Supposing there are types of writ of amparo as enumerated
100 rebels can they post bail? As we said in the case of Secretary of defense v.
earlier right to bail is a matter of right if Manalo
the penalty of the offense is lower than A: 1)amparo libertad for the
reclusion perpetua regardless of the protection of personal freedom,
weight of the evidence of guilt? equivalent to the habeas corpus writ;
Remember, right to post bail shall not be
impaired in the suspension of the (2) amparo contra leyesfor the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. judicial review of the constitutionality of
statutes;
A: This is the issue in the case of In re:
The issuance of the writ of habeas (3) amparo casacion for the
corpus for Dr. Aurora Parong, et.al. judicial review of the
Ponce Enrile, wherein the Supreme constitutionality and legality of a
Court ruled that transcends in the judicial decision;
importance that if these person would
(4) amparo administrativo for the
be given the right to bail, after they are
released, they may rejoin the rebels and
actions; and
continue their furtherance of invasion or
rebellious activities. The constitutional (5) amparo agrario for the
guarantee provided in Sec.13, does not protection of peasants’ rights derived
apply in offenses of rebellion or offenses from the agrarian reform process
inherent or directly connected with
invasion. They cannot post bail as a *Out of these amparo cases one is
matter of right, regardless of the penalty equivalent to habeas corpus and it is
and the weight of evidence of guilt. amparo libertad.
Q: We said earlier that the purpose of Q: Supposing that the privilege was
the writ of habeas corpus is to test the suspended by the President can it be
validity of the arrest and detention of
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
vailidly obtained through this writ of vexatious, capricious and oppressive

amparo? delays caused by prosecution the
accused may claim the right to speedy
A: No. although the constitution
trial. If the right claimed is speedy
provides only for the suspension of the
disposition of cases, the only objective is
writ of habeas corpus, all similar writs
to expedite the disposition the case.
are also suspended because if it is
allowed then the provision in the Q: Supposing the trial is attended with
constitution would be useless. vexatious, capricious and oppressive
delays at the instance of the accused.
Q: Speedy disposition of cases covers
What right may be invoked by the
proceedings previous to trial or those
prosecution?
after trial?
A: Sec. 16. Right to speedy trial and
A: speedy disposition applies to all
speedy disposition operates during the
stages of the trial.
trial but the person invoking should be
Q:Which means that there are two different.
rights operating during the trial stage,
Q: What is right against self
the right to speedy trial and right to
incrimination?
speedy disposition of cases. Both of
which prohibits any unreasonable A: No person shall be compelled to be a
delay. How can we identify which witness against himself
operates?
Q: What is the common law basis of
A: Right to speedy trial applies to trial this right?
proper and proceedings anterior to the
trial. Right to speedy disposition applies A: nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare (no
to all stages of the criminal proceedings. man is bound to accuse himself) It is
The latter covers criminal considered as a revolt against as a
administrative, civil, quasi judicial thumbscrew and a rock (inquisitorial
proceedings while the former covers devices applied in order to extract a
only criminal proceedings. Prosecution confession in the defendant)
is not entitled in speedy trial while in Q: According to the Supreme Court in
speedy disposition the prosecution and the case of Chavez v. Court of Appeals,
the accused. If the trial is attended by this constitutional guarantee is
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
founded upon the broad basis of accused to kill the victim. Can the
public policy and humanity. Why? prosecution compel the accused to
produce as such?
A: Public policy because the witness is
placed in the strongest temptation to A: No. It means that the constitutional
commit perjury and humanity because guarantee does not cover only
to extract a confession of truth by a kind testimonial evidence but also object and
of duress every species and degree of documentary evidence.
which the law abhors.
Q: What are the documentary evidence
Q: So this constitutional guarantee that the accused must produce even
according to Supreme Court in the case against his will? Supposing the person
of Chavez v. Court of Appeals is not is charged with tax evasion can he be
only intended to protect the guilty and compelled to produce income tax
imprudent but the innocent and return?
foresighted. What does it mean?
A: Even if he will be incriminated he is
A: required to produce such documents.
This are reportorial documents which
Q: Substance of this guarantee?
are required for every tax payers
A: Stated in the case of US v. Tan Teng therefore this documents are needed to
citing Justice Holmes, the prohibition of be filed to government agencies are not
the use of physical or moral compulsion covered by constitutional guarantee of
to extort communications from him, not right against self incrimination.
an exclusion of his body as evidence,
Q: Can the Court compel the accused to
when it may be material.
write the fiscal’s dictation for the
Q: Does that mean an accused may be purpose of comparison allowed?
compelled under pain of contempt tom
A: No. Writing is something more than
produce evidence as long as it is not
moving the body, or the hands, or the
testimonial in character without
fingers; writing is not purely a
violating the constitutional guarantee
mechanical act, because it requires the
on right against self incrimination?
application of intelligence and attention.
Supposing the accused is charged with
In Beltran v. Samson, the Supreme
homicide. The prosecution moved for
Court rule that privilege is not limited to
the production of the knife used by the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
testimony, but extends to all giving or A: A witness can be compelled to testify

furnishing of evidence. The against his will and can invoke only
constitutional inhibition is directed not such right when an incriminating
merely to giving of oral testimony but question is asked.
embraces as well as the furnishing of
Q: Is the right against self
evidence by other means than by the
incrimination available during
word of mouth, the divulging in short of
preliminary investigation before the
any fact which the accused has a right to
public prosecutor?
hold secret.
A: Yes. In Beltran v. Samson the
Q: In the case of Chavez v. Court of
Supreme Court ruled that if the
Appeals prosecution believes that they
prosecutor will be allowed to compel
can call the accused as witness and the
the respondent to produce incriminating
court believes the prosecution. Did the
evidence which later on be introduced
Supreme Court agree?
as evidence in trial proper itself, then
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that this constitutional guarantee will be a
the court may not extract from a meaningless protection. Q: How about
defendant’s own lips and against his in administrative proceedings? Is this
will an admission of his guilt. Nor a constitutional guarantee available?
court as much as resort to compulsory
A: Yes. In the case of Pascual v. Board
disclosure, directly or indirectly of facts
of Medical Examiners , the Supreme
usable against him as confession of the
Court ruled this right does not apply to
crime or the tendency of which is to
all administrative proceedings and
prove the commission of a crime.
similar proceedings. Applies to
Because it is his right to forego
Administrative and civil proceedings
testimony, to remain silent, unless he
but with qualification, constitutional
chooses to take the witness stand with
guarantee applies with administrative
undiluted, unfettered exercise of his free
and civil proceedings which are penal in
genuine will.
character or where there is an attached
Q: What is the extent of the penalty. *Constitutional guarantee does
constitutional protection as to the not apply in all proceedings. Rule 25,
witness? rules of court (Modes of discovery)
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: In cases where a constitutional issue because it restricts the full liberty an

is involved it is always a balancing of individual. In order to attain his belief,
interest of the state and an individual. he is urging people to arms against
Insofar as issues involving right government. Can that person be
against self incrimination it is a prosecuted to inciting rebellion?
conflicting interest of the state to
A: If such belief would be allowed then
penalize the violation of laws. It is the
interest of the accused to keep to it would disturb the peace and would be
himself an information that may detrimental to the public and to the
incriminate him. Does that meaning State.
given this conflicting interest, there is Q: What are two aspects of involuntary
no way the state can compel a person to servitude?
incriminate himself?
A: 1)Compulsion to perform or
A: No, by granting immunity of the work in consideration of debt against
State to the person. his will
Q: What are the two kinds of immunity
2)concept of slavery
statutes granted to a witness?
A: Like in the case of Caunca v. Salazar
A: 1)Transactional immunity – a
it is a case wherein a habeas corpus was
witness can no longer be prosecuted for
filed by a house helper who was being
any offense whatsoever arising out of
detained and required to render
the act or transaction
domestic services in payment for the
2)Used and derivative use money advanced for her transportation
immunity – A witness is only assured from the province. Is this allowed?
that his or her particular testimony and
A: No. A person cannot be compelled to
evidence derived from it will not be
work against his will in payment of a
used against him or her in a subsequent
debt.
prosecution
Q: Under the constitution, this right is
Q: Under Sec. 18 Art. 3 is a
not absolute. The exceptions are?
constitutional guarantee is more
specific in political beliefs and A: 1)punishment of a crime whereof
aspirations. Supposing a person the party shall have been duly convicted
believes that all governments are evil
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
2)render service to defend the recommendation that the imprisonment

state imposed be lowered.
3)Return to work order in Q: Is death penalty or death by lethal

assumption jurisdiction cases injection a cruel punishment?
4)Naval enlistment A: No. The Supreme Court ruled in the

case of Echagaray v. Secretary of Justice
5)Posse comitatus – command to
is that the cruelty against which the
help them find some criminals
Constitution protects a convicted man is
6)Patria potestas cruelty inherent in the method of
punishment not necessary the suffering
Q: What are the prohibited involved in any method employed to
punishments? extinguish life humanely.
A: Excessive fines, cruel, degrading, Q: Does the constitution prohibit
inhuman punishment unusual punishment?
Q: Does the constitution prohibit A: No. It may impose new punishment
excessive punishment? as long as long it is not cruel, degrading,
A: This is the issue in the case of People inhuman.
v. Estoista, wherein the Supreme Court Q: Does the 1987 constitution prohibit
ruled that the excessiveness of the death penalty?
penalty shall not refer to the duration
but to the method or mechanism of A: Only a limitation on the imposition of
imposing the penalty. Not the term but death penalty
the method. Excessive penalty is not
prohibited.
Q: What is the obligation of the court

whenever the court feels that the
penalty imposed by law is excessive?
Q: In the cases of People v. Valeriano
A: The Court can give the copy of the and People v. Mapalo, we have learned
decision be furnished to the President, that a person who without justifiable
thru the Secretary of Justice, with the reason fails to appear during trial may
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
be tried in absentia. What if the of financial violence and violation of

accused is convicted of a crime with a this law can make the person
penalty of death? Does it mean that he imprisoned. Is the law
waived his right to appeal? unconstitutional?
A: No it is not waivable. The Supreme A: No. In the case of Lozano v.

Court will have an automatic review of Martinez, the Supreme Court ruled that
the judgment. the debt intended to be covered by the
constitutional guarantee are liabilities
Atty. Gabriel : The role of the trial court
arising from ex contractu. Since this is
only acts as a commissioner and all
an obligation arising from law, the
judgment of trial court are merely
failure of the father to pay financial
recommendations. Which needs the
obligation may result in imprisonment.
approval of the Supreme court in order
to attain the character of finality.
Q: Why does the constitution protects a

faulting debtor by guaranteeing him
that he will not be subjected to
imprisonment? Q: In the case of Lozano v. Martinez
A: This provision is one of the social petitioner contends that B.P.22 is
unconstitutional because it imposes
justice provisions. The inability of the
the penalty of imprisonment of the
person to pay is due to his dismal
failure of the drawer to pay the face
contractual condition. In short the
value of the check. Did the Supreme
Constitution presumes good faith in
Court agree?
part of the debtor.
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that it
Q: What does debt mean?
is not the non payment of an obligation
A: Civil obligation arising from contract, which the law punishes. The law is not
expressed or implied. intended or designed to coerce a debtor
to pay his debt. The thrust of the law is
Q: Under R.A. 9262, a man is under to
to prohibit, under pain of penal
support his wife and children. If he
sanctions, the making of worthless
fails to provide support to his family,
checks and putting them in circulation
the man can be convicted for violation
the law punishes the act not as an
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
offense against property but an offense from same obligation which is the
against public order. contract?
Q: Supposing A is the drawer and B is A: It is already an obligation arising

the payee. A issued a check in payment from law which is BP 22. Supposing A
for services rendered by B. At the time and B again, A is expecting a money
a issued the check, he already knows from a business partner and issued the
that his checking account is closed and check expecting that it will be funded
when B will present the check for when it becomes due. Unfortunately,
encashment, A knows that it will the money did not arrive. So when B
bounce or dishonored. B deposited the deposited the check, it was dishonored.
check; the drawee bank dishonored the At the time A receives the notice of
check. Under BP22 the payee has the dishonor; he exhausted all efforts to
obligation to notify the drawer that his make the face value of the check but
check bounce and the drawer is given 5 unfortunately failed to produce as such.
days to make good of the face value of Is he criminally liable?
the check, otherwise he becomes
criminally liable. So in the example A: Yes. The obligation now is arising
given, supposing b notified A that his from law, which is not protected by this
check bounced, and A pays the check constitutional guarantee.
within 5 days, is he criminally liable?
Q: What is a poll tax?
A: If A does not issue a check he may
A: it is the specific sum levied upon any
not be criminally liable under an
person belonging to a certain class
obligation based on contract. Since he
without regard to property or
issues the check, he is subjected to the
occupation.
rules of bp 22, he has to make sure that
it is sufficiently funded on the date of Who are citizens of the Philippines?
due otherwise he runs the risk of being
imprisoned. ❖ Those who are citizens of the
Philippines at the time of the
Q: Under the law, the drawer has 5 adoption of the 1987 constitution
days form notice of dishonor to pay the ❖ Those whose fathers or mothers
check. Is the obligation of the drawer are citizens of the Philippines
to pay the face value of the check arises ❖ Those born before January 17,
1973, of Filipino mothers, who
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
elect Philippine citizenship upon type of acquiring citizenship which is by

reaching the age of majority. repatriation but this is available only to
❖ Those who are naturalized in specific individuals, to those filipino
accordance with law citizens who have lost their Filipino
The first group of Filipino citizens under citizenship.
Art. 4 refers to those who have been
By birth
considered by competent authority as
citizens of the Philippines before the Principles of acquiring citizenship by
adoption of the 1987 constitution. This is birth
a recognition of the doctrine of res
❖ Jus soli – citizenship of the place
judicata under the 1987 constitution
of burth will be conferred upon
because once a person has been declared the person born in that
and considered as Filipino citizen before jurisdiction
the adoption of the 1987 constitution, ❖ Jus sanguinis – citizenship of the
under the first group of Art. 4 sec 1 they parent is transmitted to the child
are considered as citizens of the
What principle was applied under the
Philippines. So under the 1973, 1943,
1987 constitution?
1935 and even the organic laws before
the 1935 constitution they are Jus sanguinis.
considered citizens of the Philippines.
Is that absolute or is there any exception
There are three traditional modes of to that?
acquiring citizenship. What are these?
Yes. Foundlings. This is just establishes
❖ By birth a presumptive citizenship.
❖ Naturalization
❖ By marriage (derivative According to the case of Poe
naturalization) llamansares vs comelec as well as David
vs. Senate electoral tribunal, under
Under sec. 15 of CA 473 the wife of the
international code particularly under
naturalized Filipino or an alien woman
the international covenant on civil and
who is married to a Filipino citizen who
political rights and under the
herself maybe lawfully naturalized is
international covenant on human rights,
considered as a Filipino citizen. Also
children whose parents are known shall
under CA 473 we have included another
be considered as citizen of the place
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
where they are born or found. But this is According to some legal scholars, April
just a presumptive conferment of 11, 1899 and July 1902. April 11, 1899 is
citizenship which means that the cutoff to be considered as a filipino
notwithstanding the fact that the citizen. To be considered as a filipino
parents are unknown, may still be citizen the person must be a Spanish
considered as an alien if the child has subject as of that date.
the features of alien. The only reason
What is the status of the child born
why the SC recognized the citizenship
after April 11, 1899 until July 1902
of Senator Poe is because of the
which is the effectivity of the
concurrence of several factors, one was
Philippine bill 1902?
the fact that she was found in the
Philippines, and based on statistical Jus soli was applicable. Any child born
records, it is almost an absolute from April 11, 1899 until July 1902
certainty that a child born in the regardless of alien parentage is a
Philippines at the time of the Filipino citizen.
presumptive birth of Senator Poe is of
How about under the 1935
Filipino parents 99.899999. The fact of
constitution? Was the Jus soli principle
being a 1) foundling in the Philippines,
applied?
2) statistical data and more importantly
the 3) physical features which are Yes. Under the second group of the 1935
consistent with the features of Filipino constitution, children born in the
citizen. So in order to confer Filipino Philippines of alien parents who before
citizenship whose parents are unknown the adoption of the constitution has
and who are presumptively born in the been elected to public office. Which
Philippines the three conditions must means that this is a modified jus soli
concur. But again this is an exception principle because for a person to be
rather than the general rule. The general considered as citizen of the Philippines,
rule is citizenship by birth can only be he must be born in the Philippines but
conferred under the 1987 constitution by there is also a qualification he must have
birth. been elected to public office before the
adoption of the 1935 constitution. which
Under the previous constitutions have
means place of birth and the election to
we ever applied the Jus soli principle
public office determines the citizenship
in the Philippines?
of the Philippines.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
How do we call this principle on can transmit their Filipino citizenship

Second paragraph of section 4 of the without any qualification
1935 constitution?
We go to the third group, in the case of
Caram principle Tecson vs Comlec the SC discuss the
evolution of children belonging to the
Why caram principle?
third group. What is the difference of
Because Caram is a delegate of the 1935 the treatment of this group of children
constitution representing Iloilo. He was under the 1935, 1973 and 1987
born in the Philippines. His parents are constitution? (Filipino mother + Alien
Syrians who are subject to persecution father)
and in order to evade persecution they
1935: Children born of Filipino mother
migrated to the Philippines where Dr.
of legitimate issue are considered as not
Caram, was born. During the 1935
Filipino citizen. A child must elect
constitutional convention, he ran and he
Filipino citizenship upon reaching the
was elected.
age of majority (21)
Why do the constitutional convention
need to provide for specific provision in
regardless of filiation legitimate or
order to accommodate one person?
illegitimate will automatically become a
Because it was intended to cure the filipino citizen at birth
anomaly at that time. Because there
1987: The 1987 treats the child the same
would be an anomaly where the
as 1973 but it does not only confer
constitution which is the fundamental
Filipino citizenship over a child of
law of the land was written by the
filipino mother but it also bent
convention with the member who is not
backward by making those who elect
a Filipino citizen.
Filipino citizenship during the 1935
Under the second group of Filipino constitution as natural-born Filipino
citizen for a child to become a Filipino citizen. In order to equalize the playing
citizen, is it required that both parents field.
are Filipino citizens?
Supposing the child was born on
No because the provision use the word January 16, 1973 his mother is filipino
“or” which means either of the parents citizen, the father is Chinese citizen.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
What is the status of the child during Supposing the child was born of Filipino
his minority? This is before the 1973 Father, the mother was American. The
constitution. child was born during the 1935
constitution and the child was
Not Filipino citizen. He can only
illegitimate. Under that example, the
become Filipino citizen when he elects
child is American because the mother is
Filipino citizenship at the time he reach
an American and the child is
the age of majority.
illegitimate. FPJ is an American?
Are all children born before January
FPJ is a Filipino citizen we cannot apply
17, 1973 of Filipino mothers alien
the principle in Republic vs Lim because
fathers require to elect filipino
under the 1935 constitution there is no
citizenship upon reaching the age of
qualification as to children born of
majority in order to become Filipino
citizens? Filipino mother the constitution only
say of “Filipino mother” nothing more.
No under Republic vs Lim, children The constitution always presumes that
born of Filipino mothers, Alien Fathers the term Filipino mother, the
during the 1935 constitution who are presumption is of legitimate issue. In
illegitimate, are Filipino Citizens at birth the case of FPJ the SC said there is no
hence they do not need to elect Filipino qualification legitimate or illegitimate.
citizenship. Which means that only This only shows how are constitutions is
legitimate children of Filipino mothers, so accommodating.
Alien Fathers during the 1935
constitution need to elect Filipino Is there a procedure in electing Filipino
citizenship?
citizenship to become Filipino.
CA 625 which provides three conditions
What is wisdom behind this principle?
for a valid election of Filipino
Because the illegitimate child is under citizenship
the exclusive parental authority of the
mother and the presumption is it is the ❖ Made in writing and Sworn
before the officer authorized to
mother who will provide for the
administer oaths
support of the child. They are Filipino
❖ Register in the nearest civil
citizens from birth.
registry
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
❖ Oath of allegiance to support and is no need to comply with formal

defend the laws of the election.
Philippines
Formal election is required to those who
Is there any other way of electing are not yet citizen of the Philippines,
Philippine citizenship?
petitioner Ching was never a Filipino
In the case of Ong vs HRET there is citizenship.
informal election of citizenship such as
Respondent Ong was only exempted to
what Ong did the performance of comply with the formal requirements
deliberate activities which indicate but there is still a need to elect
election of filipino citizenship which is although informally. Why? Why did
no less binding than that of the formal the SC still need to determine whether
requirements hence no need to comply respondent Ong has informally elected
with CA 625. Filipino citizenship when he was
already a Filipino citizen when he was
But in the case of In re: Ching the facts
still a minor?
are almost the same as that of Ong vs
HRET, he performed deliberate If respondent Ong did not informally
activities such as passing the bar, run elect Filipino citizenship, the status of
for office and wa in fact elected. the child is only naturalized citizen, the
However the SC said that Respondent informal election of the respondent Ong
Ching is not a filipino citizens because was needed in order to convert his
he belatedly file his affidavit. Can we status as a natural born citizen. Because
not say that Petitioner ching should be
under par. 3 sec. 1 of Art. 4 those who
considered also as filipino citizen as
elect Philippine citizenship are natural
that of Ong? Why the difference?
born citizens.
Because the father of respondent Ong
When should the election be made
was naturalized while Ong was still 9
during the 1935 constitution? when the
years old and under sec 15 of CA 473
mother is Filipino and the father is
respondent Ong who was residing at
alien?
the Philippines at the time of the
naturalization of the father, Ong is Within reasonable time upon reaching
considered as Filipino citizenship by the age of 21.
derivative naturalization. Hence there
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
How did the SC interpret reasonable Who may be naturalized Filipino

time? Is 7 years in the case of Cuenco vs citizens under CA 473?
Sec of justice reasonable?
• Resided in the Ph for a period of
No it is unreasonable more so in the not less than 10 years
case of Ching 14 years. - Supposing A is a Chinese
citizen who has been residing
Supposing the child was born of in the Philippines for 9 years
filipino mother Chinese father under and 15 days. On his 9th year
the 1935 constitution and upon and 16th day, he went to
reaching the age of 21 the person china. When he return to the
declared that he is electing filipino Ph can he complete the
citizenship, he subscribed oath of remaining 15 days in order to
allegiance but he only registered the be qualified to apply for
documents 30 years after attaining the naturalization? Residence
age 21, is that still a valid election? should be interpreted to mean
Because if 7 and 14 years is not domicile which means a
reasonable, more so 30 years? person must have domicile in
the Ph. Hence, he may still
In Cabiling vs Fernandez the petitioner continue the9th yr and 16th
was allowed to complete the process day when he returned here in
eventhough the third condition, the the Philippines.
registration of the affidavit, was not
complied with. Registration is not the A. The period of not less than
operative fact for the election and 10 years can be shorten to 5
because in the meantime, the petitioner years when a person has have
performed activities which are established a new industry or
constitutive of notice that they are must introduce an invention
electing Filipino citizenship. in the Philippines
B. Must be honorably held
We go to Sec. 3 of Art. 4 what are the office
modes of acquiring Philippine C. Having been born in the
citizenship other than birth? Philippines
D. Supposing the wife is a
• Naturalization
citizen of the Philippines
• Direct act of congress
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
E. When he is a teacher atleast ❖ Convicted of a crime

3 years involving moral turpitude
❖ Own real estate in the Philippines ❖ Suffering from mental
worth not less than 5,000 pesos or alienation or incurable
must have some known lucrative contagious disease
trade, profession or lawful ❖ Who during the period of
occupation their residence in the
❖ Not less than 21 years of age on Philippines have not mingled
the date of the hearing of the socially with the Filipinos or
petition who have not evinced a
❖ Good moral character; believes in sincere desire to learn and
the principles underlying the embrace the customs,
constitution traditions and ideals of the
❖ Enrolled his minor children of Filipinos
school age in any of the public or ❖ Citizens or subjects of nation
private schools recognized by the of whom the Philippines is at
government was during the period of
❖ Speak and write English or such war
Spanish and any principal ❖ Citizens or subjects of a
languages foreign country whose laws
do not grant Filipinos the
Disqualifications right to become naturalized
❖ Those opposed to organized citizens or subject thereof
government or affiliated with It is not required that the citizen does
any associations or group of not possess all the qualifications so long
persons who uphold and as he does not labor in any of the
teach doctrines opposing all
disqualification
organized governments
❖ Defending or teaching the Before the filing of the petition is there
necessity or propriety of a process mandated to allow the filing
violence, personal assault or of petition?
assassination for the success
or predominance of their 1 year before the filing of the actual
ideas petition the petitioner must file a
❖ Polygamist or believers of declaration or manifestation of his
polygamy
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
intention to become a Filipino citizen ❖ Not been convicted of any

before the OSG offense or violation of rules
❖ Not committed an act prejudicial
to the interest of the nation or
contrary to government-
Did the SC agree in People vs Dela
announced policies
Rosa that the requirements under CA
473 are just procedural matters and Born in the Philippines and have
therefore can be relaxed? received their primary and secondary
education in public
No because this requirements are
jurisdictional which divest the court of What is the condition for the wife and
any jurisdiction in the absence of the minor children of the naturalized
compliance with the requirements citizen may also be deemed a Filipino
including the required allegations citizen without performing any act?
provided for by law This is the issue in the case of Moy Ya
Lim Yao
When does the decision granting the
decree of naturalization final? The phrase who might herself be
lawfully naturalized does not require
The date of finality is after 30 days from that the wife to possess all the
receipt of the OSG granting the decree. qualification the only important
The 2 year period refers to executory condition is that the wife does not suffer
manner of the order of naturalization. It any of the disqualification.
is counted from the time the decision
became final. What is the rule on the minor children
born in the Philippines at the time of
Why does the law required 2 years the naturalization of the father?
before the decree of naturalization may
be executed? They shall be deemed citizens of the
Philippines
❖ The court must satisfy that the
petitioner did not leave the Minor children born outside the
Philippines Philippines, residing outside the
❖ Dedicated himself continuously Philippines?
to a noble profession or calling
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Citizen of the Philippines provided they Philippine armed forces in time

start residing in the Philippines during of war
their minority What is the effect of RA 9225 to the
Supposing during the minority they mode of losing citizenship? Did it
started to reside in the Philippines? repealed CA 63?
Citizens of the Philippines It did not. It only modified CA 63 to the

extent that only naturalized Filipino
Minor children born after the citizen may lose its Filipino citizenship
naturalization of the father who is upon naturalization to the foreign
residing outside the Philippines country. Because natural born citizens
will not lose their Filipino citizenship by
Filipino citizen provided upon reaching
subsequent naturalization in the foreign
the age of majority he must register in
country as long as they comply with the
the consulate office where he is residing
requirement of RA 9225.
otherwise he will lose his status as
Filipino citizen. What is the condition under RA 9225
for a natural born citizen who is
What are the modes of losing Filipino
naturalized in a foreign country may
citizenship?
be acquired or retain his Filipino
❖ By naturalization in the foreign citizenship?
country
By taking the oath of allegiance and
❖ By accepting commission in or
rendering services to the armed have that oath of allegiance registered in
forces of the foreign state the civil registry or consulate office of
provided that there is consent by the Philippines where he is residing.
the Philippines
Don’t be confused with RA 8725 which
❖ By express renunciation of
was applied in the Frivaldo case. This is
citizenship
❖ Subscribing to an oath of another repatriation law
allegiance There are two operative acts under RA
❖ By cancellation of the certificate
9225. Retention and Reacquisition.
of naturalization
When does it apply?
❖ By having declared by competent
authority a deserter of the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Retention, Filipino citizenship never What is the character of repatriation

lost their citizenship. Which means it laws according to the case of Altajeros
will be applied to those who are vs Comelec?
naturalized in the foreign country after
Remedial in character. Retroactive in
the effectivity of RA 9225
application
Reacquisition, applies to those who
In the case of Frivaldo the SC said once
were naturalized in the foreign country
citizenship was lost it cannot easily be
before the effectivity of RA 9225.
acquired. The person must show that he
Because before the effectivity of RA
has complied with any of the modes of
9225, a natural born citizen who is
reacquiring Filipino citizenship. Either
naturalized in the foreign country will
by repatriation under CA 63, by
automatically lose his Filipino
naturalization/ direct act of congress, or
citizenship. In order to reacquire it they
by repatriation. The automatic exercise
have to subscribe to oath and register it
of activities reserved for the Filipino
and then they have considered to have
citizens does not automatically revert or
reacquired it.
result in the reacquisition of Filipino
Supposing A is a natural born citizen, citizenship.
in January 2010 he was naturalized in
In Labo vs Comelec, the SC said the
the US and in January 2016 he
subsequent declaration of nullity of his
subscribed to oath of allegiance to
marriage does not automatically revert
support and defend the Philippines
him back to his Filipino citizenship.
and he had it registered. What is the
status of A from January 2010, to Once it was lost even if the basis for
December 2015 before he subscribed to losing it was considered as null and
the oath of allegiance? Supposing in void, by the adopting state, that does
January 2013 A purchase a real not concern the Philippines. He has to
property in the Philippines, is that a reacquire Filipino citizenship either by
valid purchase? naturalization, direct act of congress of
repatriation.
The oath of allegiance that he subscribed
will retroact from the time that he was The application of res judicata does not
naturalized in the US as if he never lost apply to naturalization cases.
it. Citizenship of the Filipinos is always
open to attack. Res judicata in
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
citizenship may only be applied when It reverts back to the status of the
the latter is the 1) lis morta of the Filipino citizen.
controversy,2) when the case is with the
Supposing a law disqualifies dual
active participation of the OSG or when
citizen. Is that law constitutional? This
3) the citizenship was approved by the
was the issue in Manzano vs Mercado
SC.
The SC said dual citizen under the Local
In Yu vs Defensor Santiago, the
government code means dual
petitioner was naturalized in the
allegiance.
philippines after which he used his
portugese passport. So what is the effect The SC said dual citizenship is possible
of the use of it to his naturalized Filipino in two scenarios
citizen status? While renunciation is a
mode for losing citizenship must be 1. When a child is born to a Filipino
categorical and express, the acts of the parent in a country which applies
Jus Soli
petitioner, taken together constitute a
2. When a Filipino woman is
renunciation of Filipino citizenship.
married to an alien whose laws
Does that mean use of foreign passport made the Filipino woman only a
constitute loss of Filipino citizenship? In citizen of the husband state
the case of Maquiling this was the issue. 3. When a child is born to a Filipino
mother alien father whose laws
The SC said that does not affect his
make the child also a Filipino
Filipino citizenship, the use of US
citizen.
passport is only deemed a withdrawal
of his affidavit of renunciation of his In an electoral protest A challenges B
American citizenship. The use of US and present B’s American passport to
passport only means he regains his prove B is not a Filipino citizen. This the
american citizenship in the eyes of the case of Aznar vs Comelec. SC said that
ph law. So at that time he again resume proof that respondent Osmena is an
as a dual citizen. But it did not result to American citizen does not mean that he
loss of Filipino citizenship. is not a Filipino citizen. Particularly
because he is born of Filipino parents.
What is the effect of the repatriation?
This was ruled in the case of Tecson vs The final act for naturalization is the
HRET? taking of the oath of allegiance. Under
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
RA 9225 a natural born citizen who is separation of power does not obtain
naturalized in a foreign state may retain from constitutional provision but it
or reacquire his Philippine citizenship flows from the specific distribution of
provided he take his oath of allegiance powers. Once the powers of the
to the Philippines. Remember when a constitution are distributed, the
Filipino became naturalized in America corollary effect is separation.
he take his oath of allegiance. When he
Judicial supremacy is not an arrogation
reacquire his Filipino citizenship under
of the supremacy of the SC but the
RA 9225 he also take an oath of
supremacy of the constitution. The
allegiance in the Philippines. Dual
constitution however cannot assume
Allegiance? 9225 unconstitutional?
jurisdiction at all time. There must be a
It is not unconstitutional. In the eyes of justiciable controversy.
the ph law, the most recent oath of
In the case of Casibang vs Aquino,
allegiance is the only recognized
during the pendency of the electoral
allegiance that is why a natural born
protest, the 1973 constitution became
citizen who is naturalized in the foreign
effective. Under the 1973 constitution all
state is required to take an oath of
incumbent public officer shall remain in
allegiance for his Filipino citizenship
office so theory of the respondent is that
because otherwise the only allegiance
since the constitution says that all shall
that the philippines will recognize is the
remain in office and he is the incumbent
foreign allegiance.
of an office, the electoral protest now
Separation of Powers becomes a political question. SC said no,
what was affected was the term to hold
What is separation of powers
office and not the right to hold office. In
In Angara vs Electoral commission order that a public officer may be
under this principle each department entitled to that indefinite term of office
has exclusive cognizance of matter he must first show that he has a right to
within its own jurisdiction. hold that office.
Is there any specific constitutional In the case of Tanada vs Cuenco, Daza

provision that requires the adoption of vs Singson what was in issue in this
this fundamental principle? The SC said cases is the discretion of the congress in
in Angara vs Electoral tribunal that: the appointing members to the electoral
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
tribunal and the commission on discretion which must be so gross and

appointments. Is this purely political so patent.
question? Not all because in the case of
There are two instances when
Pimentel the SC said that the power to
Separation of powers is violated said the
choose and elect members of the
SC in the case of Ochoa
commission on appointments or the
electoral commission representing the 1. When one department unduly
house rest on the house itself not on the interferes with the exercise of the
political party. The political parties can powers belonging to the other
only nominate members of the electoral department
tribunal or commission on 2. When one department assumes
appointments and the appointing the power belonging to another
authority still rest in the house. Is that a department
purely political question? No. if the Delegation of Powers
controversy involves the legality of the
act, that remains to be a justiciable The constitution allows delegation of
controversy. executive, legislative and judicial power
What is the effect of the expanded Delegation to administrative agencies

jurisdiction of the SC to the political What may be delegated is how the law
question concept? Did it do away with should be applied. The rule making
the doctrine of political question? power of the administrative agencies are
Because under the expanded considered as subordinate legislation.
jurisdiction of the SC the courts also
have the jurisdiction to determine Two test for valid delegation of
whether there is grave abuse of legislative power according to the case
discretion. No it did not totally abrogate of Eastern Shipping
the concept of political question because ❖ Completeness test the law must
in exercising its expanded judicial be complete in all its terms and
power, the SC will not determine conditions when it leaves the
whether the other 2 agencies have congress so that when it reaches
discretion, the courts will determined the delegate, the delegate has
whether they have abused their nothing to do but to implement
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
it. (Us. Vs Ang Tang Ho, Pelaez These are only applicable to delegation
vs Auditor General) to administrative agencies. They do not
❖ Sufficient standard test the law apply to other delegation of legislative
delegating the legislative power. So if the delegation is emergency
authority to administrative power, we do not apply the tests, we
agency must provide for
apply Sec. 23. If the delegation is tariff
limitations and guidelines to
power, we apply sec. 28. If what is
prevent the delegation from
delegated is initiative and referendum,
running riot or to contain it from
we apply Sec. 32. For local governments
the banks to prevent it from
overflowing. (Ynot vs IAC) apply Art. 10.
SC said in Pelaez vs Auditor that the Tariff powers

delegation must comply with both.
There must be a law passed by the
What are policies and standards that congress delegating the authority.
may be considered as sufficient
The congress authorizes the president to
according to the SC in the case of
increase the VAT from 10-12% upon the
Eastern Shipping?
determination of the president of the
There are several. Public interest, public existences of several factual
convenience and public welfare, circumstances. In the case of ABAKADA
national security, simplicity, efficiency, guro vs Ermita the petitioner contends
economy. what the law allows to delegate is the
tariff powers, VAT is not a Trariff power
Can we nowvsay that in some future
it is a revenue tax. Is that an
laws, when this are the same standards,
impermissible delegation? There are
can we say that the future law has
two kinds of rulemaking power that
complied with the sufficient standard
may be exercised by the delegate.
test?
1. Supplementary rules- those that
The SC said in Eastern Shipping, no.
fill in the gaps and those which
The sufficiency of the standard can only provides for implementing detail
be determined within the factual 2. Contingent regulation- the
circumstances of the law. We cannot determination or power to
apply the principle of stare decisis. determine the existence of
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
emergency in accordance with industries. So according to the petitioner

which the law may be applied that is not a valid exercise of the
In the case of ABAKADA guro what delegated tariff powers because it did
was delegated to the president is not the not inure to the benefit of the local
power to fix the tax but the power to industries. So the SC said, that tariff is
determine whether the standards essentially a tax, tariff is a tax on
enumerated are existing in order that imported products. So since tariff is
the tax may be increased from 10-12%. essentially a tax, the purpose of a tax is
This is the contingent power. not only limited to regulation. Mainly,
taxes like tariff are imposed in order to
Atty. Gabriel: we have not yet discussed raised revenue. So which means, that
Garcia vs. executive secretary, anyway the president can also exercise the
the only issue in this case is they stand delegated tariff powers in order to raise
the powers of the president under the revenue, not only to protect local
tariffs and customs code. So remember industries. And the SC noted, that uh
that we said earlier that for the tariff there are 2 formal agencies of the
code to be validly delegated to the government whose main task is to
president, there must be a law perform or raise revenue, these are
delegating that authority and uh, there BOC, which exercise tariff powers and
is currently a law that allows the mainly the BIR which implements
President to fix tariff rates, and this is revenue taxes. So since the BOC is under
the customs and tariffs code. But the the executive department and exercises
problem in this case was that the delegated tariff as well or not tariff
petitioner contends that the authority of powers but implements rather, the
the president to exercise tariff powers is tariffs enacted by the Congress, the
only limited to protect local industries, president can also exercise this
so the petitioner contends that the delegated power to raise revenue.
president cannot exercise tariff powers
for other reason aside from protecting So we go to emergency powers, under
local industry. So remember in this case sec 23 of art 6, the constitution
what the president did was to increase authorizes the congress to delegate
the tariff rates for petroleum products, emergency powers. And there are only 2
so definitely the increase of tariff rate, or grounds for valid delegation of
petroleum products would affect local emergency powers. The 2 grounds are:
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
in times of war, 2nd in times of national national emergceny. So what are the
emergency. So again the congress limitations for the valid delegations of
cannot delegate emergency powers to emergceny powers: there must be a law
the president for any other reason authorizing the president to exercise the
except for existence of war and in emergceny power, 2nd the delegation
instance of national emergency. Under must be for a limited period. The
the 1st par. Of sec 23 the constitution delegation must provide limitations for
provides for the requirement in order the exercise of these powers and the
that the Congress can delegate power must be only to carry out powers
emergency powers to the president in necessary to declared national policy. So
times of war, one is that a congress must these are the conditions, these are the
declare the existence of a state of war, requirements for a valid exercise of
and what is the voting requirement for emergency powers to the president.
the congress to declare for the existence Under the 1935 constitution, the
of a state of war, 2/3 of the members of delegation of emergency powers of the
both houses in joint session assembled president is not as specific as the 1987
voting separately. Supposing threre is constitution, but notwithstanding this
indeed a war but the congress failed to specific limitation, on the delegation of
mustered the required 2/3 vote, can the emergceny powers under the 1935
congress still delegate emergency constitution as early as in the case of
powers because of war, although it araneta vs dinglasan, Rodriguez vs
failed to declare, the existence of the gella, the SC has already ruled that
state of war, answer is: YES, because delegation of emergency powers to the
war is also a national emergency. So president is only for a limited period. SC
again, in the case of Rodriguez ve gella, likewise ruled that delegation of
the SC said may include manmade and emerfceny powers to the president even
natural disaster. So it may include under the 1935 constitution, is a self
rebellion. With more reason that it limiting power, is like the tape in
includes war. So even if the congress mission impossible that ethan hope
failed to declare a state of war because always receives this and it self destructs
of the deficiency in number, he can still in a specific time. So that’s the same
use war as a basis for declaration or principle or concept of the delegation of
delegation of the national emergceny, emergency powers. Upon the
and the congress will treat war as a happening of an event, the delegated
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
emergency power is automatically president can now continue the

deemed extinguished. Under the 1935 emergency power, so the position of the
constitution, the SC said in araneta vs respondent was while the congress was
dinglasan, it looks to the extent of the still in session the emergency powers
emergency powers under CA 671 or suspended, when the congress adjourns,
emergency powers act, so remember reactivated. The SC said, NO. it
that CA 671 was passed by the congress specified the event that extinguishes the
upon the request of president quezon delegated emergency power. SC said,
and the reason why president quezon once the congress deems in regular
requested emergency powers was session, the delegated emergency
because manila was already attacked by powers are automatically extinguished.
the Japanese and there was already an So this is the event that dissolves the
anticipated inability on the part of the emergceny powers, note that this is
congress to meet in regular session in under the 1935 constitution. The SC
January 1942, so that’s the reason why explained why regular why not special
the congress paseed CA 671 authorizing session because before the congress met
the president to exercise the emergency in regular session on may 25, 1956, there
powers during the existence of war. The were already previous special sessions.
question is, up to what time can the So the SC said regular session should
president exercises emergency powers. mark the end of the delegated
So remember that president quezon and emergency powers because in special
the successors still continued to session, the congress is not fully
discharge emergceny powers. 1st the discharging its legislative power. It is
president who exercise emergency only addressing the specific subject
powers after quezon said that it was matter referred to it by the President. So
withdrawn by the congress by the when the congress meets in regular
enactment of law, the emergency session, it is already in its full discharge
powers shall subsist. The previous of legislative power, therefore the
president likewise contends that, delegated emergency powers
assuming for the sake of argument that automatically cease. Now we stand
during the regular session of congress, it behind this is the SC, as said araneta, to
can now discharge legislative power, avoid a situation that there are 2
once the congress recesses or holds functioning legislative bodies. One the
recess mandatory adjournment, the congress the other contradicting each
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
other, So the SC said this is not far fetch emergency powers are deemed
because in several occasions in araneta, withdrawn under the 1987 constitution?
the SC noted that the president vetoed a Answer: NO. Because now the
bill passed by the congress and while constitution specifically identifies the
the congress is in adjournment, the event which will terminate
president issues an EO of the same automatically the delegation of
subject matter which is different from emergency powers. The constitution
the bill of the congress. So the SC said, says in the last par. Of 2nd par of section
in order to avoid a situation where we 23, unless sooner withdrawn by
have 2 existing legislative bodies, once resolution of the Congress, such powers
the congress resumes its regular session, shall cease upon the next adjournment
the delegated emergency powers are thereof. Which means that it is not the
deemed withrdrawn. So this is an convening of the regular session that
implication, again we are discussing extinguishes the delegated powers but
araneta under the 1935 constitution. The the adjournment. Which implies that
ruling here impliedly limits the even the congress is in regular session, it
authority of the congress the delegated can delegate emergency powers. Only
emergency powers if the congress that, once it adjourns, that delegated
cannot meet in regular session, necause powers is deemed automatically
that is the wisdom. The SC said that withdrawn. That is now under the 1987
when the congress is in its full discharge constitution. Can we say that delegation
of its legislative power, automatically of powers is co-extensive with the
the delegated emergency powers are existence of war which is the basis of the
deemed withdrawn. Which means that delegation of powers or national
when the congress are in regular emergency, so can we say that
session, the implication of that ruling is delegation in so far as the period in
that the congress cannot delegate exercise of the emergency power is co-
emergency powers because the congress extensive with the existence of war or
are in its full exercise of its legislative national emergency? Answer? So can
power, that is the implication, and that we say that the president may exercise
is under the 1935 constitution. So can we the delegated emergency powers as long
still apply the principle in araneta vs as there is war? As long as there is
dinglasan that once the congress meets national emergency? So inversely, can
in regular session, the delegated we say that once there is no more war
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
there is no more delegated emergency specific delegation is for a specific

power? Supposing the war subsist for 10 period, like in the example given, 6
yrs, does that mean that the president months but on the 3rd month there is no
can exercise delegated emergency more national emergency, the president
powers for the period of 10 yrs and on can still exercise the remaining period.
the other hand, supposing the One good example, although this is also
delegation was for specific period, say an emergency power but not flowing
for example, 6 months, but on the 3rd under section 23 but under section 18 of
month, the president was already able art 7 is the martial law power of the
to address the national emergency, president. Remember that the congress
which is the purpose of the delegation. extends the power of the president to
Does that mean that the president can exercise his military powers in
no longer exercise the remaining period Mindanao until dec 31, 2017 there is no
of that delegation? Answer? So is the more insurgency, can the president still
exercise of delegated powers co- exercise his martial law power in
extensive with the national emergency marawi? YES he can. Even if there is no
or war? Answer: NO. War or national more insurgency, because the delegation
emergency does not create delegated is for specific period the president can
emergency power. The immolator is the exercise that delegated power even if
war even if there is national emergency, there is no more contingency. SAME
the congress may opt not to delegate PRINCIPLE in emergency powers, even
emergency powers. The congress may if there is no more national emergency
opt to directly discharge legislative as long as the delegation is specific, the
powers including emergency powers. delegation says 6 months, then the
Which means that once the congress President can exercise it for 6 months.
delegate emergency powers, that Unless the congress withdraws it before
delegation is limited, is not co-extensive the 6month. So there are 2 modes of
with the national emergency or war extinguishing the delegation emergency
because if the congress delegate powers, by express resolution of
emergency powers even if there is still congress OR upon the next adjournment
war, once the congress adjourns, that of congress. So under the 1987
delegated emergency powers are constitution, can the congress delegate
deemed withdrawn. Even if the national emergency powers for more than 1 yr?
emergency on the other hand if the can the congress delegate emergency
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
powers to the president for a period public officer, and that power can be
longer that 1 yr? answer: NO. Because recovered without the consent of the
under sec. 15 of article 6, the congress is delegate. Which means that if it cannot
mandated by the constitution to adjourn be withdrawn, without the consent of
on a year to year basis; it is required to the delegate, it amounts to an
adjourn 30 days before the opening of abdication. The SC also compared
its regular session. Which means that deleagation of emergency powers under
even if the delegation is for a period of 2 the constitution to the president to the
years, once the congress adjourns for a civil law concept of agency. How these 2
period on a year to year basis, that arrangement similar, the SC said that in
delegation is deemed withdrawn creating an agency, the agent is not
automatically. Which means, less than 1 compelled to accept the authority.
yr. so, is it required that there must be a Which means that in order to create an
law in order to expressly withdraw the agency, the agent must consent.
delegated emergency powers? NO. law Similarly, delegation of emergency
is not required. Even in the 1935 powers to the president is like the
constitution even if there is no specific agency, the president cannot be
constitutional provision, the SC is in the compelled to accept because the
position that mere resolution of delegation needs the approval of the
congress is enough to withdraw the president because it can only be made
delegated emergency power. Because by the enactment of a law. If the
the SC in araneta vs dinglasan, as well president approves that law, then that is
as in Rodriguez vs gella, distinguished an acceptance of the delegation.
delegation from abdication. SC said Similarly, in a civil law concept of
congress can only delegate, congress agency, the principal is not required to
cannot abdicate legislative powers. remain in the agency perpetually. The
What is the distinction bet. Delegation principal at anytime can dissolve the
and abdication? SC said that there is agency, even without the consent of the
only a thin line between delegation and agent. Similarly, in the delegation of
abdication, both allows the conferment emergency of powers while the congress
of authority to another person. But what needs the president to create the agency,
distinguishes, SC said in araneta citing the congress does not need the president
corwill that there can only be delegation to dissolve it. So that is the similarity
if a power can be conferred to another between agency and emergency powers
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
to the president. National emergency power), anything which is inherently

means that the magnitude of the legislative, anything which is
emergency is such that it will affect the necessarily implied the grant of
country as a whole. And grant of legislative power to the president, may
emergency powers can be localized. An be exercised by the congress even if
emergency power to the president is a there is no express constitutional
justiciable question. provision confirming this power.
Is it true that the legislative power of

the congress is without limit because in
Article 6, legislative power – is the
the case of govt. vs. springer, pimintel
power to enact, to make, to amend, to
vs comelec the SC noted a statement,
revise, and to repeal laws. To whom it is
they said someone has said that the
conferred? Upon the congress of the
powers to the legislative dept of govt,
Philippines and under sec 1 of art 6 the
like the boundaries of the ocean are
congress of the Philippines is divided
unlimited. But the SC said, in
into 2 houses, this is the basis of the
constitutional govts however as well as
bicameral system of congress. Since it is
govts acting under a delegated
the constitution that directs the congress
authority, the powers of each of the
to be divided into 2 houses, the congress
department are limited and confined
cannot just convert it into 1 by mere
within the 4 walls or corners of the
legislative action. There must be
constitution or charter. And each
revision of the constitution in order to
department can only exercise powers
confer the congress into a unicameral
which are necessarily implied from the
congress. Does that mean that the
given power. Then the SC concluded by
congress can only exercise powers
saying that the Constitution therefore is
which are expressly conferred under the
the shore of the legislative authority
Constitution? Answer: NO. apply the
against which the waves of legislative
principle in the case of marcos vs
enactments may dash but over which it
manglapuz, the residual powers to the
cannot leap. So it is the constitution
president. The grant of the legislative
itself that provides for the limitation
powers to the president under the
both substantive and procedural. So the
Constitution carries with it ex rae
limitations and the exercise of legislative
necesitae (all other powers which are
powers of the congress are provided for
necessary, implied from the given
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
under sections 23, 24, 25, 26 up to qualification of voters not to the

section 32. So these are the limitations composition and manner of election. So
on the exercise of legislative power of it cannot be modified by mere
legislative act. It can only be modified
congress
by a change to the constitution, a formal
Section 2, composition of the senate, change of the constitution.
how many senators? 24. Manner of
election? At large. By whom? Qualified Section3 provides for the qualifications
voters. Sec 2 tells us 3 things: of the senators, No person shall be a
composition of the senate; the manner of Senator unless he is a natural-born
election; and who may vote for the citizen of the Philippines and, on the
senators. Remember that you have day of the election, is at least thirty-five
learned in your statcon that if a sentence years of age, able to read and write, a
is divided into several parts, separated registered voter, and a resident of the
by commas and one of the parts of this Philippines for not less than two years
sentence is qualifier, the qualifier will immediately preceding the day of the
apply to the phrase preceding or election. Age qualification must be
immediately subsequent to it. Section 2 possessed day before the election.
of art 6 is divided only into 2 parts and Residence requirement must be possess
the 2 parts are separated by a comma, at the day before the election. How
the consti says: The Senate shall be about citizenship qualification? Because
composed of twenty-four Senators who under constitution, the senator must be
shall be elected at large by the qualified a natural born Filipino citizen. When
voters of the Philippines, as may be should the person possess that
provided by law. The qualifier is “as qualification to be qualified as senator?
may be provided by law” does that Upon birth? But is it possible that a
mean that it applies to the entire phrase person is a natural born Filipino citizen
before it? So may a law be passed at one time and then at a subsequent
providing for a different composition? time he is not a natural born citizen and
Say for example 30, may a law be passed then at some other future time he again
for a different manner of election, say becomes a natural born Filipino citizen.
for example regional? May a law be So its possible, right? Through
passed providing for the qualification of repatriation as we discussed earlier.
voters? To all the question, YES to the Which means that A who is a natural
last, NO to the previous. Which means born Filipino citizen may not be a
that this is one of the instance a rule of natural born at this year but in another
statcon will yield to the spirit or year may again becomes a natural born
substance of the law. So the as may be Filipino citizen. This was answered by
provided by law can only apply to the the SC in the 1996 frivaldo vc comelec,
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
because note in the qualification, except the case of citizenship, as long as the
for age and residencey requirement natural born Filipino citizen status was
qualifications, there is no specific regained by a candidate at noon 30th of
provision under section 3 and 6 of art 6 june, next following their election, he is
when the person should possess the qualified to become a senator.
other qualifications. Citizenship; Can the congress enact a law providing
literacy; registered voter. So SC said in for another or adding a qualifications
the case of frivaldo, that if the under section 3 as well as section of
constitution does not provide for the article 6? SC said in Pimentel, NO. the
time period when the qualification enumeration of qualifications under sec
should be posess, that qualification 3 and 6 of article 6 is exclusive. Which
should be possessed at the start of the means the congress cannot expand, it
term of office of the public officer. Again cannot restrict the qualification. Because
in the 1996 frivaldo case, the application remember in Pimentel vs COMELEC,
for repatriation was filed before the year what was being assailed was the
of election. Which means that when additional qualification for the public
filed the COC, he is not yet repatriated. officer under RA 9165 which requires
And when he was elected and that before assuming public office, he
proclaimed. He was not yet repatriated must submit a certificate of drug non-
and on the day itself at the start of the dependence. So he must show that he is
term of office of the petitioner, as not a drug dependent. SC said that this
elected governor, the application was is an additional qualification since it
approved. SC said petitioner is qualified expands the qualifications of senators
because he possesses the qualification and members of the House of
on the day he is upon to discharge the Representatives, this is unconstitutional.
functions of the office. Secondly, SC said Under the constitution, to become a
that the repatriation retroacted to the senator, a person must be able to read
day on the filing of the application. and write, is there a degree of literacy to
Again do not be confused as to the the constitution? NO. it does not require
frivaldo vs COMELEC as to the a certain degree. Meaning, college
retroactivity date of repatriation because graduate, HS or elementary graduate.
the repatriation applied in this case is As long as the person is able to read and
PD 725. 9225 the repatriation law would write, he is qualified to be a senator.
retroact to the event that may have Supposing the person can only read and
produced the cause for the losing of the write in Chinese, is he qualified? NO.
Filipino citizenship. So in the example the qualification has purposes for a
earlier given, it will retroact to the day specific objective. It means that ABLE to
that the natural born Filipino citizen READ and WRITE in the official
was naturalized in a foreign country. In language used in the Philippines.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Otherwise, that qualification would continuity for the service of the full term
become absurd. It would become for which he was elected, only means
useless. Because the public officer voluntary renunciation among others.
cannot discharge the official function. Which means that the enumeration is
Term of office? 12 years. Term limit? 2 not exclusive. The statement voluntary
consecutive terms. Which means that a renunciation does not exclude
senator can as many terms as he selected involuntary renunciation. It is as if the
as long as it is not beyond 2 consecutive constitution is just saying, including
terms. Supposing the term of office of among other. Because it would be
senate and HOR start at noon 30th day of absurd if we interpret it otherwise. -
June. Can it be moved to a different 40:09
date? YES. Because constitution says,
otherwise may be provided for by law,
which means that a l aw may be passed
providing for a different date of
commencement. Supposing on the
second term of senator A, he resign.
Would he be allow to run for the
immediately succeeding election
because he was not able to complete 2
successive terms? Answer: NO. because
the constitution says, voluntary
renunciation will not interrupt the
continuity of the service of the full term
for which he was elect. Which means
that even if a senator resigns on his
second term, he will still be disqualified
in the next succeeding election. He was
to wait for another 3 yrs. Supposing the
senator on his 2nd term did not resigned
but was expelled? Does that mean that
since the constitution only says
voluntary renunciation, definitely
expulsion is not a voluntary
renunciation, it will not interrupt the
running of the 2 successive term limit?
Answer: NO. because the provision in
the constitution which says voluntary
renunciation shall not interrupt
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: According to the Supreme Court in is the liability the inviting officer.

the case of People v. Judge Ayson
citing Miranda v. Arizona, custodial G: What are the right of a person under
investigation means any questioning custodial investigation according to the
Supreme Court in the case of People v.
initiated by law enforcement officer
Ayson?
after a person has been taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his A: 1.Right to remain silent and to have
freedom of movement in any competent and independent counsel
significant way preferably of his own choice
2)Right to be informed of his
Q: WHEN DOES CUSTODIAL rights
INVESTIGATION BEGIN? 3)Not to be subjected to violence,
force, threat or intimidation or any
A: from the moment the person is taken
means which vitiates the free will shall
into custody, custodial investigation be used against him. Secret detention
begins even if no questioning is yet places, solitary in communicado, or
elicited from him. other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
So custodial investigation begins when a 4)To have evidence obtained in
person is taken into custody and the law the violation of these rights excluded as
enforcement officer starts to ask evidence. ( The right not to admit any
question in relation to a crime of which evidence in violation of his
the person being interrogated is a constitutional rights)
suspect so custodial investigation begins
when the questioning ceases to be a Q: Under the Constitution are the
general inquiry in an unsolved crime, rights of a person under custodial
and starts to focus on a particular investigation waivable?
individual as a suspect. A: Right to remain silent. After the
warnings have been given, such
Q: And under Republic Act 7438 what opportunity afforded him, the
is included in the custodial individual may knowingly and
investigation intelligently waive these rights and
agree to answer or make a statement.
A: under that it includes the practice of
issuing invitation to a person who is Q:While the constitution expressly
investigated in connection with a provides that these rights can not be
offense on which is a suspect, of which waived except in writing and signed in
is suspected that committed the crime it the presence of a counsel this
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
constitutional provision does not apply was being offered in evidence during
to all rights of a person under custodial the trial but the opposing counsel did
investigation. What rights under not object to the presentation of that
custodial investigation may be waived extrajudicial confession. Will that
as long as it is in writing and signed in constitute an implied waiver of the
the presence of a counsel? rights during the custodial
investigation?
A: : extrajudicial confession.. A: Even if the defense counsel failed to
object to the presentation of an
Q: Extrajudicial confessions obtained extrajudicial confession. it can not
during custodial investigation may be constitute as an implied waiver. Because
admitted in evidence if there is a valid in People vs Andan it is incumbent
waiver. The rights of a person under upon the prosection to prove that the
custodial investigation that may be rights in the custodial investigation
waived which may result in the were respected and duly complied with.
inadmissibility of evidence obtained In default of the eveidence showing
including the extrajudicial confession that this extrajudicial confession were
during the custodial investigation are? obtained in accordance with the
A: The right to remain silent, the right to constitution the court may disregard the
counsel evidence even if the defense did not
object
Q: How about the right to be informed
Q: Custodial Investigation begins
A: Can not be waived when the investigation ceases to be a
general inquiry in an unsolved crime
Q: Rights against to violence, force, and starts to focus on a particular
threat or intimidation or any means individual as a suspect. Is police line
which vitiates the free will up part of the custodial investigation.
A: Can not be waived A: it depends.if there is no investigation
on the part of the police line up, the
Q: The right to have evidence obtained police line up is not considered part of
in the violation of these rights the custodial investigation.
excluded as evidence.
A: It cannot be waived G: This is in reference of People vs
Macam and Gamboa vs Cruz. Gamboa
Q: Supposing during custodial vs cruz, the Supreme Court said the
investigation the person subjected to police line up in that case is not yet
this proceedings was tortured which part of the custodial investigation.
resulted in his confession and the While in the case of people vs macam
extrajudicial confession of the accused
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
the supreme court said the Q: so public prosecutors are law

uncounseled identification in the enforcement officers who can conduct
hospital constitute part of the custodial a custodial investigation?
investigation. So therefore, any A: they are the PNP, police
identification without being accorded
of these rights under section 12 will be Q: Under RA 7438, who are the people
rendered inadmissible in evidence considered as investigating officers
which is synonymous with a law
G: How about audit investigation of enforcement officer within the context
state reports, are these part of custodial of section 12 art 3
investigation A:police
A: it was held by the Supreme Court
that Audit investigation is not part of G: yes, for example police NBI, who are
Custodial Investigation because it does the investigating officers under the law
not involve law enforcers and he is not or considered as investigating officers
yet taken in custody under an who are the law enforcement officers
administrative proceeding. who may conduct custodial
A: A person under normal audit investigation
investigation is not under custodial G: Public officers who have the power
investigation, because an audit and duty to arrest, investigate any
examiner can hardly be deemed to be violation of law
the law enforcement officer
contemplated in the rule [Navallo v. G: Under the constitution any
Sandiganbayan, 234 SCRA 175]. Because confession or admission obtained
the Court Administrator is not a law during custodial investigation it is
enforcement officer, an investigation required that the rights of a person
conducted by him does not constitute under custodial investigation have
custodial investigation within the been complied with but under RA7438
contemplation of the constitutional there are additional requirements for
guarantee [Office of the Court the inadmissibility of extrajudicial
Administrator v. Sumilang, 271 SCRA confession or admissions during
316]. custodial investigation. Would it not
be an unconstitutional law because it
Q: who is a law enforcement officer expands the coverage of section 12
under the context of section 12 article article 3?
3? A:it is not unconstitutional because it is
A: People who has the power to favorable to the accused
prosecute
Q: So the imposition of additional
impositions does not violate the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
constitution. What are the additional admission obtained during custodial

conditions under RA7438 for the investigation has to be in writing
admissibility of confessions obtained A: it must be in writing
during custodial investigation. Because
under the constitution any confessions Q: Custodial investigation must be in
obtained under custodial investigation writing, the extrajudicial confession or
are admissible as long as the accused is admission obtained from CI must be
informed of his right to remain silent in writing and signed by the person
and to have counsel, he is not subjected to CI and assisted Any a
subjected to torture or violence or counsel. If the person waived his right
intimidation, and any violation to a counsel before whom should he
obtained in violation of these right are sign his extrajudicial confession?
inadmissible as evidence. But under A: Any of the parents, brothers and
the law those are not enough for the sisters, spouse, municipal mayor,
admissibility of confessions obtained municipal judge, school district
under custodial investigation because supervisor, the priest or minister trusted
the law provides if any of the and chosen by him.
requisites under the law are not
complied with even if the rights under LAWYERS DISQUALIFIED TO ACT AS
the constitution were followed, the ASSISTING COUNSEL DURING CI and
confession or admission remain ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION
inadmissible as evidence. Does the law
require that the investigation report Q: under the law who may be
should be in writing appointed as assisting counsel
S:yes A: any lawyer except those who are
Q: yes. So this means that if the interested in the outcome of the case.
custodial investigation report is not in For example if the complainant is a
writing, any confession or admission lawyer he cannot be appointed as an
obtained during custodial investigation assisting counsel during the
is inadmissible in evidence. investigation
G: does the law require that the Q: may a public prosecutor be

extrajudial confession itself shall be in appointed as an assisting counsel?
writing? A: No. because he is a lawyer who is
A: No. charge with the obligation of the
conduct of preliminary investigation
Q: which means all confession or
and prosecution of offenses
admission during CI is inadmissible
in evidence? Because it is not required
under the law that the confession or
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
G: why does the constitution afford Q: how did the Supreme court address
these rights to a person under CI? the issue of high risk of using
A: In people vs Andan the objective of compulsion, moral ascendancy,
the rights under Sec.12 Art. 3 is to influence by employers on the
preclude or prohibit in comminicado employee in order to extract
interrogation of individuals in a police confession. It is true that admin
dominated atmosphere where proceedings are not proceedings
potentiality for compulsion, physical or conducted by law enforcement officers
psychological, is apparent. because the Lawyer in an
administrative investigation is not a
G: In a custodial investigation a law law enforcement officer but the
enforcement officer is not an interested supreme court recognized the legality
party so in a custodial investigation the that during the administrative
law enforcement officer is just investigation the employer will
performing his official function which overbear on the employee and employ
means he is not personally interested coercion, moral ascendancy in order to
in the outcome of the investigation extract confession. So how does the
legality addressed in the constitution?
G: In an investigation between an
employer and employee the A:any confession or admission during
investigator is the lawyer and administrative investigation obatained
definitely the employer is very much by coercion or moral ascendancy or
interested in the outcome of the influence maybe considered as
investigation so which means that if
inadmissible not because of violation of
there is a risk during CI that the law
enforcement officer while Sec 12 Art3 of the constitution because
disinterested may employ compulsion, the said section does not apply to this
coercion the risks are greater when it type of proceedings but under the
comes to administrative investigation general principles of the Civil Law ,
because now the investigator is Vitiated Consent. So the supreme court
financially interested in the outcome of
the investigation said in Peple vs Judge Ayson that
vitiated consent can not produce any
Q: because of that can we extend the evidence
rights under sec 12 art 3to persons
facing administrative investigations? EXCLUSIONARY RULE, DERIVATIVE
A: NO. the bill of rights does not apply
EVIDENCE,FRUIT OF POISONOUS
in the said proceedings
TREE
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: Supposing the rights in the of People vs. Alicando cited Justice

constitution were violated, under the Frankfurter in the case of US vs
constitution any confession or Cardone, not only the admission or
admission obtained during custodial
confession obtained in violation of the
investigation will be inadmissible in
evidence for any purpose. In the case constitution be considered as null and
of People vs Alicando, the Supreme void and inadmissible in evidence but
Court said that not only admission or all derivative evidence however far
confession obtained during the removed from the primary source. The
custodial investigation be considered
fruit of poisonous tree does not only
as inadmissible in evidence, what else
is declared inadmissible in evidence? deal with the fruit because when we say
fruit, fruit is a derivative evidence once
A: any derivative evidence obtained removed from a primary source because
from the illegally tainted confession or the primary source, the confession or
admission are also considered as admission is the tree and the fruit which
inadmissible in evidence. So the
is the secondary evidence is once
confession or admission obtained
during custodial investigation in removed from the primary source but
violation of the constitutional rights of the fruit of poisonous tree extends to all
the person under custodial investigation evidence however removed from the
are declared inadmissible in evidence primary source. Which means that if the
under the exclusionary rule particularly confession or admission of the accused
uner the 3rd paragraph of section 12 resulted in the discovery of a secondary
article 3 and par.2 section3 article 3
evidence, that secondary evidence is
Q: how about the derivative or inadmissible in evidence. If the
secondary evidence obtained from this discovery of the secondary evidence
confession or admission, what is the leads to another derivative evidence
legal basis for declaring this derivative that derivative evidence is still
evidence inadmissible in evidence
considered inadmissible in evidence.
A: they are inadmissible under the
concept of the fruit of the poisonous tree
ACQUITTAL, INDEPENDENT
EVIDENCE
Q: what is this all about? Q: can we now say that whenever the
A: Anything that is obtained from an rights of a person under CI have been
illegal source is also inadmissible in violated the accused is entitled to no
evidence. The supreme court in the case less than an acquittal?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
evidence the uncounselled confession

A: No.even if the rights of the person of the accused to the mayor in Andan
were violated during CI resulting to the who is also a law enforcement officer,
inadmissibility of evidence of any and to the police officer in duty in the
confession or admission or any case of people vs dy. So why did the
derivative evidence if the prosecution SC admit these in evidence
wwas able to present independent A: the accused admitted or made those
evidence that may establish the guilt of confession spontaneously and
the accused beyond reasonable doubt voluntarily not solicited through
the accused may still be convicted. This questioning, without any influence of
is shown in the case of Ho Wai Pang vs the police or of the investigating officer.
People. In Ho wai Pang vs People, the In the case where the accused admitted
Chinese accused were not accorded the to the mayor , he admitted it when he is
right under sec 12 art 3, there was no in a private room or office of the police
interpreter and there was no counsel chief. He was not forced and the mayor
during the investigation but the SC did not ask if he was involved in the
considered independent evidence, crime. In people vs andan the sc said the
independent from confession or rights of sec 12 art 3 are guaranteed to
admission, like the testimony of the preclude the slightest use of coercion of
immigration officer who has searched the state as to result in him admitting
the luggage of the accused. Similarly in something is false but not to prevent
the case of people vs macam again the him from freely and voluntarily telling
identification of the hospital was the truth.
considered as inadmissible in evidence
but the SC said that during trial the In Ppl vs DY, the inadmissibility of
witnesses were able to identify them in evidence passed to form test. The first
court so which means that there are form is the determination whether the
other independent evidence that were confession is part of the investigation.
presented by the prosecution to The SC said that it is not part of the CI
establish the guilt of the accused beyond because no questioning was elicited
reasonable doubt from the accused so it is a voluntary
sponateous act it is not part of the CI.
Q: in the case of people vs Dy and The second form is in order to hurdle
People vs Andan the SC admitted in the rule against hearsay. Off course the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
accused admit his guilt but the mayor or A: Bail is a security given for the release
PO did not know the truth of his of a person in custody of law, furnished
confession so therefore under the by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his
hearsay rule they are disqualified even appearance before any court as required
though dy admitted he killed a tourist under the conditions hereinafter
the Police officer in duty was not there, specified. Bail may be given in the form
he does not know, he has no personal of corporate surety, property bond,
knowledge of the fact of the incident. cash deposit, or recognizance. (Sec 21
Generally under the hearsay rule the rule 114)
testimony of the police in duty can not
be offered in evidence Q: what is the purpose of bail based on
manotoc vs CA?
Q: did the SC allowed the testimony of A: to temporarily release the person.in
the mayor and of the police officer on Basco vs Rapatalo a person is detained
duty despite the fact that they do not by the state so that in order to ensure
have personal knowledge as to the that he appears before the proper court
incident being the subject matter of the at the scheduled time and place to
controversy answer the charges brought against him
A: Yes under the principle of res gestae. and her. The accused has interest in the
It may in a sense be also regarded as presence of the accused in the trial even
part of the res gestae. The rule is that, though the accused has an interest to be
any person, otherwise competent as a provisionally free during the pendency
witness, who heard the confession, is of the trial. So there are two conflicting
competent to testify as to the substance interest. Bail is the moderating
of what he heard if he heard and mechanism in order to balance the
understood all of it. An oral confession interest of the state, to ensure that the
need not be repeated verbatim, but in accused will appear during the trial and
such a case it must be given in the interest of the accused, to be at
substance. This is an exception of the liberty during the pendency of the trial
hearsay rule. while his guilt is not yet established
beyond reasonable doubt.
BAIL Section 13 In Manotoc vs CA, the objective of bail
Q: What is bail? is to relieve the accused from
imprisonment and on the state to the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
burden of keeping him and as well as to shall remain in force at all stages of the
maintain the jurisdiction of the court case until promulgation of the judgment
over the accused as if he is in custody of of the RTC, irrespective of whether the
the proper officer of the court to receive case was originally filed in or appealed
any lawful order may be given to him to it;
Second, The accused shall appear before
Q:Generally bail is only allowed or the proper court whenever required
required in criminal cases and in favor Third,The failure of the accused to
of the accused. May bail be required appear at the trial without justification
from a person who is not a party to a and despite due process shall be
case? deemed a waiver of his right to be
A: Yes.bail may be required to material present thereat. In such case, the trail
witness under rule 119. It is required in may proceed in absentia.
order to guarantee that the material Fourth,Bondsman shall surrender the
witness will appear in the trial and if the accused to the court for execution for
material witness does not post bail he final judgment
will be detained prior to or while
waiting for the trial in the case Q: what happen if the accused failed to
appear despite duty and without just
Q: what are the different kinds of bail? cause
A: Bail as matter of right and Bail as a A: His right during trial is waived and
matter of discretion the case will be tried in trial trial in
abscencia
Q: What are the 4 forms of bail
A: Cash deposits, Recognizance, G: under sec 4 rule 114, when is bail a
property bond and corporate surety( matter of right
bonding company that guarantees the A: All persons in custody shall be
appearance of an acussed) admitted to bail as a matter of right,
with sufficient sureties, or released on
Q: what are the four mandatory recognizance as prescribed by law or
conditions in the all kinds of bail this Rule;
A: a)Before or after conviction by the MTC
First, Undertaking shall be effective (offenses punishable 6 years or below)
upon approval, and unless cancelled,
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
b)Before conviction of the RTC of an discretion to determine the weight of

offense not punishable by death, evidence of guilt. If the evidence of guilt
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. is strong, the discretion ceases, the court
need to deny it. Its its not a matter of
Q: is there any circumstance that bail is right nor discretion. Similarly,after
a matter of right? hearing and the court exercise its
A: offense not punishable by death, discretion, the court determines that the
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment evidence of guilt is weak the discretion
when evidence of guilt is not strong cease. The court has no choice but to
grant it because bails becomes a matter
Q:when is bail matter of discretion of right
A: Upon conviction by the Regional
Trial Court of an offense not Q:In the case of Basco vs Rapatalo,
punishable by death, reclusion what are the four fold application of
perpetua, or life imprisonment, the court whenever the application of
admission to bail is discretionary. bail is filed before the court
The application for bail may be filed A: In Basco v. Rapatalo, the Supreme
and acted upon by the trial court Court laid down the four fold duties of
despite the filing of a notice of the court;
appeal, provided it has not 1)Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of
transmitted the original record to the the application for bail or require him to
appellate court. However, if the submit his recommendation
decision of the trial court conviction 2)Conduct a hearing for the application
the accused changed the nature of the for bail regardless of whether or not the
offense from non-bailable to bailable, prosecution refuses to present evidence
the application for bail can only be filed to show that the guilt of the accused is
with and resolved by the appellate strong for the purpose of enabling the
court. (Section 5 Rule 114) court to exercise its sound discretion
3)Decide whether the evidence of the
Q: is there other instance when bail is guilt of the accused is strong based on
matterof discretion the summary of evidence of the
A:when the offense charged is prosecution.
punishable by RP, Life imprisonment or 4)If the guilt of the accused is not strong,
death . the court will exercise its discharge the accused upon the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
approval of the bail bond otherwise b)Nature and circumstances of the

deny the application for bail. offense
c)Penalty for the offense charged
Q:Are these applicable onle to bail as d)Character and reputation of the
matter of discretion? accused
A: yes. The four fold application does e)Age and health of the accused
not apply when bail is matter of right. f)Weight of the evidence against the
But there is a need to conduct a hearing accused
when bail is matter of right and if the g)Probability of the accused appearing
purpose of conducting a hearing is to at the trial
determine the evidence of guilt and h)Forfeiture of the bail
proper amount of bail i)The fact that the accused was a fugitive
from justice when arrested
G: in bail as a right, the purpose of j)Pendency of other cases where the
hearing is accused is on bail
A: to know the reasonable amount of these factors are not exclusive, other
bail. that is the only issue in a hearing factors may be considered by the court
when bail is a matter of right. But in
practice upon the issuance of a warrant G:in determining the nature of bail
of arrest there is already a whether it is a matter of right or
recommended amount of bail. The discretion what is the penalty
accused may file a motion in order to determinative of the nature of bail
reduce the amount of bail, and that is
time when a hearing for the A: First, all persons are entitled to bail
determination of the reasonable amount except when the offense is punishable
of bail shall be established by the court. by RP, LI or death
Second , bail becomes a matter of
G: What are the factors that the court discretion when offense charged is
should consider in determining the punishable by RP, LI, or death when the
amount of bail under sec9 rule 114? penalty imposed is imprisonment
A: exceeding six years provided that the
a)Financial ability of the accused to give following circumstances are present.
bail Which means if any of those
circumstances mentioned in par 2 of sec
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
5 rule 114 is present bail is neither a (d) That the circumstances of his case
matter of right or discretion indicate the probability of flight if
Iit is inappropriate to say bailable or non released on bail; or
bailable offenses because all offenses a (e) That there is undue risk that he may
re bailabale, what is non bailable is the commit another crime during the
accused because if the accused is pendency of the appeal.
charged with rp, li or death and if the
evidence of guilt is strong he cant be Q: in the case of Rapatalo, bail is
admitted to bail matter of right or discretion, and the
nature of bail is determined by the
G: As stated in Sec. 5 rule 114 of the penalty for the offense charged. At
rules of Court, bail is a matter of what time should the penalty for the
discretion when the penalty for the offense should be determined in order
crime charged is less than reclusion to establish whether bail is a matter of
perpetua but the penalty imposed by right or discretion
the trial court is imprisonment A:Deterrmined by the law providing for
exceeding six (6) years, the accused the penalty for the offense charged at
shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be the time of the application or pendency
cancelled upon a showing by the for the application of bail.
prosecution, with notice to the accused,
of the following or other similar Q: In Ppl vs Judge Donato, at the time
circumstances? of the commission of the offense
A: charged the penalty provided by law is
(a) That he is a recidivist, quasi- RP to Death. During the pendency for
recidivist, or habitual delinquent, or has the application for bail was reduced to
committed the crime aggravated by the prision mayor so what is now the
circumstance of reiteration; character of bail?
(b) That he has previously escaped from A: Upon the issuance of the executive
legal confinement, evaded sentence, or order, bail becomes a matter of right
violated the conditions of his bail because the nature of bail shall be
without valid justification; determined by the nature of the offense
(c) That he committed the offense while charged at the time of pendency for the
under probation, parole, or conditional application for bail
pardon;
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: supposing that at the time of the reveals distorted notion as to the true
commission of the offense charged the nature and conditions does violence to
penalty is PM. At the time for the the well established rule of law that bail
pendency for the application for bail it is not a matter of right and requires
was increased to RP. So now it hearing where the accused is charged
becomes a matter of discretion because
the applicable penalty the penalty Q: what are the substantive basis of
provided for by the law at the time of this?
pendency of the application for bail. In A: right to be heard. Right of the
the example given, bail becomes a prosecution the opportunity to prepare
matter of discretion? in order to establish the weight of
A:it is the lower penalty. The penalty evidence.
for the offense charged at the time for
application for bail is the applicable law Q: do members of afp can exercise the
because it is the lower penalty. right to bail?
A: No, in the case of Commendador v.
Q:is right to bail a waivable right? De Villa the right to speedy trial is given
A: yes more emphasis in the military where the
right to bail does not exist because of the
Q: should it be in writing and signed unique structure of the military should
in the presence of a counsel? be enough reason to exempt military
A: no required formality mean from the constitutional coverage
on the right to bail. Right to bail to
Q:are motions for application for bail members of AFP are not accorded to
required to comply with 3 day motion them because of their pecuniary
rule?
structure, they carry firearms and
A: Yes. In Baylon v. Judge Sison the
operate within the government
Supreme court ruled that the reason
therefore they cannot demand for the
given by the respondent judge that the
same right as any private citizen entitled
non observance of the three day motion
to.
rule is justified because of the urgent
In Commendador v. De Villa, the
motion for the petition for bail and time
accused herein are under court martial
is of the essence is untenable. Such
proceedings. Right to bail are not
raciconation, which espouses and
entitled if the offense is administrative
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
or under court martial but when it is a 2)The requesting State will accord due
criminal in nature they can post bail. process to the accused
3)The proceedings are sui generis
Q: PNP has the right to bail and carry 4)Compliance shall be in good faith
also firearms. is there a reasonable 5)There is underlying risk of flight
distinction between AFP and PNP?
A: PNP are compared to civilians Q: What are the issues in an
extrajudicial proceedings
Q: are members of AFP not entitled to A: 1.whether the request complies with
bail the general rule? the extradition treaty
A: no it’s the exception. Members of afp 2. whether the person is extraditable
like any other person are entitled to bail
except when they are charged before Q: What does speedy trial mean?
general court of martial. Because they
A: Means a trial conducted according to
are not criminal and judicial
the law of criminal procedure and the
proceedings but executive proceedings.
rules and regulations, free from
It is not appealble before general court
vexatious, capricious and oppressive
but to the president
delays. (People v. Tee)
Q: the right to bail may may be denied Q: What are the factors to be weighed
depending on the penalty of the by the court as to determine whether
offense charged and evidence of guilt, the right has been violated? (LRCEP)
is the right to bail available in non People v. Tee
criminal proceedings like extradition?
A: No. The extradition proceedings do A: 1)Length of the delay
not determine the guilt or innocence of
2)Reason for the delay Failure to
the accused. The court only determines
present the material witness in the trial
if there is an extradition treaty or the
case is extraditable. 3)The conduct of prosecution and
accused The prosecution exerted all
Q: What are the 5 postulates of efforts to produce the witness. Defense
extradition proceedings did not make any move to invoke the
A:1)Extradition is a major instrument constitutional right of the accused to a
for suppression of crime speedy trial
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
4)Efforts exerted by the A: 1)The proceedings are attended

defendant to assert his right by vexatious, capricious and oppressive
delays
5)Prejudice and damage caused
to the accused 2)When unjustified
postponements are asked for and
Q: Applying these factors, can we say
granted/secured
that there was a violation to right to
speedy trial in People v. Tee? 3)When without cause or
justifiable motive of long period of time
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that
is allowed to elapse without the party
although the absences of prosecution
having his case tried (People v. Tee)
witness Abratique totaled to 20 hearing
days, there is no showing whatsoever Q: In order for these 3 to constitute
that prosecution capriciously caused violation, what is the qualifier?
Abratique’s absences as to vex or
A: The delay must be attributable to the
oppress appellant and deny him his
prosecution.
rights. Under the rules, appellant could
have moved the trial court to require the Q: What is the remedy if there is
witness to post bail to ensure that the violation of his right to speedy trial?
latter would testify when required.
Appellant could have moved to have A: petition for certiorari/mandamus;
Abratique found in contempt and duly writ of habeas corpus if he is detained
sanctioned. Appellant did neither. It is a Q: Why does the constitution
bit too late in the day for the appellant guarantee that the accused should be
to invoke now his right to speedy trial. tried for the least amount of time?
A: so that the accused if he be innocent

be released from anxiety
Q: Are appeals covered under the right

Q: Speedy trial is a relative concept
to speedy trial?
and the right to speedy trial can be
violated when? A: Proceedings anterior to trial and trial
itself.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: Right under Sec.14 is the right to Q: What does impartial trial mean?
speedy trial. Can we say that this right
A: Hearing before an impartial and
is only applicable during trial?
disinterested tribunal and that every
A: No. The Supreme Court in the case of litigant is entitled nothing less than the
Flores v. People citing Justice Laurel, cold neutrality of an impartial judge.
“An accused is entitled to a trial at the
Q: In Mateo Jr. v. Villaluz, described a
earliest opportunity. He cannot be
cold, neutral and impartial judge. Who
oppressed by delaying the
is an impartial judge?
commencement of trial for an
unreasonable length of time. If the A: A cerebral man deliberately holds in
proceedings pending trial are deferred, check the tag and pull of purely
the trial itself is necessarily delayed. personal preferences and prejudices
which he shares with the rest of his
Q: How about on appeal?
fellow mortals.
A: No. Right to speedy trial applies to
Q: Judge has two obligations in
the proceedings anterior to the trial.
promulgating judgement?
Delay in the appeal is covered by a
different constitutional guarantee A: (1)Duty to render just decision and
covered by Sec.16 Art.3. (2) must do it free from any suspicion of
partiality/ prejudice. Judge must be
Q: In the case of Conde v. Rivera, for a
impartial and appear impartial.
period of one year she was required to
a dance attendance to the Court. Why? Q: is it enough that the trial judge
impartial? Supposing the judge is
A: She is required to attend at the trial
indeed impartial and renders decision
whether the trial is postponed. The
based on evidence. Is that enough?
Supreme Court dismissed the case
What if he is seen socializing with one
because of the violation of the right to
of the party in a case he is handling
speedy trial of the accused.
after work?
Q: In this case the accused was made to
A: No it is not enough. The judge or
dance attendance in court?
justice of Courts must appear to be
A: Like cha-cha made back and forth in impartial. Even if they penned their
attending court hearings decision based on evidence they must
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
have semblance of impartiality. They Mere possibility of influence is not

cannot just associate with any parties in enough, the accused must show
the case because it will bring a probable cause that judgment is
semblance of partiality. impaired.
Q: In our judicial system, are trial court Q: Mateo Jr. v. Vilalauz, the
judges required to leap lie hermits respondent judge is the one who
detached with world? Because in the attested to the affidavit of one of the
case of People v. Teehankee, the witnesses. But when the witness is
accused contends that his right to presented, he reacted and said that he
impartial trial is violated because of was forced to sign the affidavit. After
the pervasive publicity of the case. the claim made by the witness, the
defendant immediately filed for an
A: In People v. Teehankee, the
inhibition of the respondent judge.
Supreme Court ruled that pervasive According the defense they cannot
publicity is not per se prejudicial to the longer expect an impartial and cold
right of an accused to fair trial. The mere neutrality on the presiding judge.
fact that the trial of appellant was given Why?
a day to day, gavel to gavel, coverage
does not by itself prove that the A: The Supreme Court ruled that
publicity so permeated the mind of a having the extrajudicial statement was
trial judge and impaired his attested before him, such repudiation
impartiality. Our idea of a fair and was hardly flattering to the judge. His
impartial judge is not that of a hermit sense of fairness under the
who is out of touch with the world. We circumstances could easily be blunted.
have not installed the jury system The absence of the requisite of due
whose members are overly protected process element is thus noticeable.
from publicity lest they lose their
impartiality. Our judges are learned in
law and trained to disregard off court
evidence and on camera performances
Q: What is the purpose of this
of parties in litigation. Their mere
constitutional guarantee of public trial
exposure to publications and publicity
according to the case of Garcia v.
stunts do not per se fatally infect their
Domingo?
impartiality.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
A: Justice Laurel: Trial should be in is no showing that the public was

public in order to offset any danger of excluded. It is to be admitted that the
conducting it in an illegal or unjust size of the room allotted by the Judge
manner. would reduce the number of those who
could be present. Such a fact though is
Atty. Gabriel: Necessary to prevent
not indicative of any transgression of
abuses that may be committed by the
this right. Courtrooms are not of
court to the prejudice of the defendant.
uniform dimensions. Some are smaller
Q: In the case of Garcia v. Domingo, than others. Moreover as what Justice
this right to due process in order to Black opined, it suffices to satisfy the
offset any danger of conducting it in an requirement of a trial being public if the
illegal or unjust manner. The right to accused could have his friends, relatives
public trial in order to ship the accused and counsel present, no matter what
form the arbitrariness of the judge, offense he may be charged.
how can it protect the accused form
arbitrariness?
Q: Is trial by publicity the same as
A: Based on experience. Public officers
public trial?
are more prudent when the trial is
witnessed by the public. A: No. Aquino case-absolute ban on
recording, trial is not for entertainment.
Q: Right to public trial is a right that
belongs to the accused. Can an accused Estrada case-was allowed for
waive it? Meaning can he exclude the documentation ONLY
public from the witnessing his trial?
Ampatuan case- pro hac vice,
A: Prosecution can invoke the right to allowed live video streaming by reason
public trial by the virtue of the due of extraordinary circumstance of the
process clause. case.
Q: Would the proceedings in the Atty. Gabriel: In the case of In re:
chamber of the judge considered as Petition for radio and television
public trial?
coverage of multiple murder case
A: No. The Supreme Court in the case against Maguindanao Governor Zaldy
of Garcia v. Domingo, ruled that there Ampatuan, the Supreme Court
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
discussed the evolution on the right of evidence to be produced during the trial
impartial trial on the one hand and right is offensive to decency or public morals.
to information on the other hand. From He may also, on motion of the accused,
the outright denial in the case of Aquino exclude the public from the trial, except
to the filming for the purposes of court personnel and the counsel of the
recording in the case of Estrada and to a parties
restricted and to regulated public airing
Q: What is right to confrontation?
in the case of Maguindanao massacre,
but note as well in the decision of the SC A: Right of the accused to see the
in the case of In re: Petition for radio witness face to face
and television coverage of multiple
murder case against Maguindanao Q: What are the two reasons as
Governor Zaldy Ampatuan was mentioned in the case of US v. Javier
why the courts cannot allow the
modified in its resolution because in its
affidavit of a deceased who is not cross
decision it allowed the TV and radio
examined as admissible in evidence?
coverage of the trial under restrictive
and more prohibitive procedure. But in A: 1)To allow the accused to exercise
its resolution modified its , by denying his right to cross examination of the
live TV and radio coverage and witness
allowing only live streaming from an
extension in the premises of the court 2)A tribunal may have before it
because of the balancing interest of the the deportment and appearance of the
accused and the people. Note as well witness while testifying
and the resolution and decision of the Q: Substantively these are the two
SC in the Maguindanao case is a pro hac reasons why the affidavit cannot be
vice case meaning it cannot be admitted without presenting the
considered as judicial precedent under affiant as a witness. Procedurally, what
the doctrine of stare decisis. Applicable is the basis of the exclusion? An ex
in that particular case only. parte cannot be presented as evidence
because?
Atty. Gabriel : Waiver of public trial
Section 21. Exclusion of the public. — A: Intended to prevent the conviction of
The judge may, motu proprio, exclude the accused upon deposition or ex parte
the public from the courtroom if the affidavits.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: Supposing the accused are tried A: (1) The admissibility of “dying

separately on the same criminal declarations;” and (2) trial in absentia
information on the same acts or under Section 14(2)
omissions. Supposing A B C tried on
the same criminal information may the Q: Supposing A was presented a s a
testimony of a witness in the case of A witness during his testimony he
who was a exhaustively cross produced the affidavit of B in order to
examined by the accused can be used prove that he is telling the truth. Can
as a witness to other cases without the defense object to that evidence?
presenting the witness in the other A: Yes. The affidavit would be
case. D was presented as a witness in considered as a hearsay evidence. Atty.
the case of A can D be presented as a
Gabriel: Procedurally, ex parte affidavits
witness in the case of B and C without
cannot be admitted because on the rule
presenting as witness in B and C’s
of hearsay evidence.
case?
Q: What are the two compulsory
Atty. Gabriel: No. It would deprive the
processes available to the accused?
court to observe the deportment of the
Section 14, Article 3
witness during the trial. If we say
automatically that the second court will A: 1)Subpoena ad testificandum
admit the evidence of the witness who is Person is required by the court to testify
presented in another case would not
2)Subpoena duces tecum
that be a deprivation of the right of the
Required by the court for the
second court to determine whether the
production of books, records, things or
witness is lying or telling the truth?
documents therein specified
Even if the parties are the same if the
court trying the parties are not the same Q: May a subpoena ad testificandum
the right to confrontation requires that be issued by the court without issuing
the witness presented in one case be subpoena duces tecum?
presented in the other case.
A: Yes. Subpoena duces tecum cannot
be issued by the court without subpoena
ad testificandum but subpoena ad
Q: Is there an exemption to the rule in
testificandum can be issued without
Talino v. Sandiganbayan
Subpoena duces tecum. It is not enough
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
that the documents which is the subject testificandum would serve no purpose
of subpoena duces tecum to just bring it but to further the delay of the
before the court. It must be testified and proceedings in pending criminal cases.
authenticated by the custodian. In that It is not relevant since it is only used for
regard, the complete term for subpoena fishing expediton.
duces tecum ad testificandum
2)Such books must be reasonably
Atty. Gabriel: did not pass because it described by the parties to be readily
cannot be used as to determine the guilt identified (Test of definiteness) In Roco
or innocence of the accused. The v. Contreras, the Supreme Court ruled
petitioner used this only to fish for that the books and documents that the
evidence. petitioner requested to be subpoenaed
are designated and described in his
Q: What are the two tests in order to
request with definiteness and readily
determine the propriety of the issuance
identifiable.
of subpoena duces tecum?
Q: Sec. 14 Art.3 enumerates the rights
A: 1)The books and documents or
of the accused expect for one which is?
other things required must appear
prima facie relevant to the issue subject A: The provision on trial by absentia.
of the controversy (Test of relevancy) This right favors the prosecution so that
When are they relevant? An evidence is the trial won’t be delayed.
relevant when it establishes the guilt or
Q: What are the three requirements so
innocence of the accused.
that trial in absentia may proceed?
Like in the case of Roco v. Contreras (BP
A: 1) There has been an arraignment
22 case), the Supreme Court ruled that
the production of book of account, 2) That the accused had been
ledgers and documents requested by the notified
petitioner are not indispensable to prove
his defense of payment. We do not find 3) That he fails to appear and his
any justifiable reason and petitioner has failure to do so is unjustified
not shown any, why this court must
have to disbelieve the factual findings of
the appellate court. Thus the issuance of
subpoena duces tecum subpoena ad
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
bail after he had been arraigned just

before the retaking of evidence
Q: What is the consequence of trial in
commenced, one who jumps bail can
absentia?
never offer a justifiable reason for his
A: The accused waived his right to non appearance during trial.
appear in the trial. He cannot present Accordingly, after the trial in absentia,
evidence. He cannot be present in the court can render judgment in the
person or in counsel. He loses his legal case and the promulgation may be made
standing. by simply recording the judgment in the
criminal docket with a copy thereof
Q: The presence of the accused is served upon his counsel provided that
needed during arraignment the
the notice requiring him to be present at
presence of the accused is mandatory
the promulgation is served through his
during trial and during the
bondsmen or warden and counsel.
promulgation. Does that mean that the
court cannot during trial during trial in Atty. Gabriel: Only during the
absentia if the purpose of the trial is to arraignment, the presence of the
identify the accused? accused is not waivable but only to the
two instances it is waivable.
A: During trial, the accused can
expressly waive his appearance through Q: When is the Presence of the Accused
his counsel by making a manifestation, Mandatory
that whenever a witness is to be
presented to identify the accused, the A: 1. During arraignment and plea
defense is admitting that the accused (Rules of Court, Rule 116, Sec. 1).
will be identified by the witness. In that 2. During trial, for identification,
regard to be dispense with the unless the accused has already
appearance of the accused in stipulated on his identity during the
identification purposes. On the third pre-trial and that he is the one who will
instance, during the promulgation of the be identified by the witnesses as the
judgment, it is the issue in the case of accused in the criminal case; or
People v. Valeriano, whether the court
can promulgate a decision when the 3. During promulgation of
accused flee from justice. The Supreme sentence, unless for a light offense
Court ruled that the accused jumped (Rules of Court, Rule 120, Sec. 6). Upon
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
the termination of a trial in absentia, the of the person's liberty, used as a

court has the duty to rule upon the protection against illegal imprisonment.
evidence presented in court. The court
Q: May the writ of habeas corpus be
need not wait for the time until the
suspended? The writ itself?
accused who escaped from custody
finally decides to appear in court to A: Only the privilege only.
present his evidence and cross-examine
the witnesses against him. To allow the Q: What is the difference on the
suspension of the privilege writ of
delay of proceedings for this purpose is
habeas corpus and writ of habeas
to render ineffective the constitutional
corpus?
provision on trial in absentia (People v.
Mapalao) A: Writ of Habeas Corpus- application
for habeas corpus is filed and the court
Q: May an accused tried in absentia be
finds the petition in proper form, it will
convicted in absentia likewise appeal
issue the writ as a matter of course,
in absentia?
ordering the production of the person
A: This is one the issue in the case of allegedly detained and requiring the
People v. Mapalao, the Supreme court respondent to justify the detention. A
ruled that the accused while at large, high prerogative writ, a writ of inquiry-
cannot seek relief from the court as he is seeks to determine the validity or
deemed to have waived his right and legality of the detention.
has no standing in court. Upon
promulgation of the judgment, he failed Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus-
to appear without justifiable cause where the return of the respondent
although his bondsmen and counsel shows that the person in custody is
were given notice, he is therefore being held for a crime covered by the
waived his right to appeal. proclamation suspending the privilege
and in a place where it is effective will
Q: What is Habeas Corpus (“you have the court dismiss the petition. Is the
the body”) Section 15, article 3? order for the release of the person.
A: An order requiring a person to be Q: Only the privilege of the writ of

brought before a judge or court, habeas corpus may be suspended and
especially for investigation of a restraint not the writ. Who may suspend the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
What are the valid grounds of the Q: How can you question the
suspension? suspension of the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus? Lansang case
A: The president and the grounds are in
cases of invasion when public safety A: in an appropriate proceeding, sub
requires it and in cases of rebellion judice.
when public safety requires it.
Q: When does it promulgate its
Encompasses the meaning under the decision challenging such suspension?
revised penal code? Statutorily defined
A: 30 days after questioning
offenses - Lagman case
Q: Quantum of evidence?
Q: How about imminent threat of
rebellion or invasion? Is this a valid A: probable cause.
ground of suspension?
Q: Does it consider the subsequent
A: Yes, in the case of Lansang v. Garcia events in determining the sufficiency
interpreting the 1935 Constitution. of factual basis for the suspension of
Under 1987 Constitution, mere threat of privilege of writ of habeas corpus and
rebellion is not a valid ground. proclamation of martial law?
Q: What are the two instances wherein A: Courts of justice can only limit its
writ of habeas corpus can be issued or factual gaze at the time of actual
available? proclamation
A: 1) In cases of illegal detention in In contrast with power of Congress

order to test the validity of detention. power to revoke or extend, it may
Reckoning period: as of the filing for the consider any evidence before or after
petition of the writ of habeas corpus at such proclamation.
the earliest time and if there are
Q: Can the courts defer any action
supervening events that will supersede
challenging such petition until the
the petition of the writ of habeas corpus
congress acted according to the
and bar his release from custody.
constitution? Should the court wait on
2) Speedy trial the action of congress to revoke or
extend before it assumes jurisdiction?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
A: No remedies are separate and A: Rebellion or offenses inherent in or

independent. directly connected with invasion.
Q: What are the constitutional Q: Under Sec. 15 art.3 constitution

limitations in the suspension of the provides that the privilege of writ
privilege of the writ? habeas corpus shall not be suspended
except in cases of invasion or rebellion
A: He may for a period not exceeding
when the public safety requires it. The
sixty days suspend to privilege and only use of term invasion and rebellion are
the Congress can extend it. Upon the they taken within the context of
suspension of the privilege his duty is to criminal law?
submit a report within 48 hours from
the suspension in person or in writing. A: Yes new ruling in Lagman
Q: Prior to the 1987 Constitution, Q: For how long a person may be

whether the Supreme Court can review suspected to have committed an
the sufficiency of the factual offense of rebellion or offenses
circumstances in the suspension. Can inherent in or directly connected with
the Supreme Court review? invasion be detained?
A: In the case of Lansang v. Garcia, the A: Person thus arrested or detained

Supreme Court ruled that Art. 7 vest the shall be judicially charged within 3 days
executive the power to suspend, but not of otherwise he shall be released.
absolute, it goes hand in hand with the
Atty. Gabriel: Supposing A was
system of checks and balances under
arrested for being a suspected rebel at
which the Executive is supreme as
the time that he was arrested the
regards to the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
privilege but only if and when he acts
was suspended. On the 3rd day of his
within the sphere allotted to him by the
arrest, police officers who arrested him
Basic law, authority to determine
filed a criminal complaint before a
whether he has so acted is vested in the
public prosecutor for preliminary
Judicial Department. Check only and
investigation, would that suffice to bar
not to supplant.
the 3 day period in order to be said that
Q: What are the offenses covered by the detention of A is justified?
the suspension of the privilege?
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
A: A must be judicially charged. Mere most benign to the least benign. (Can
filing criminal complaint before a public be used although not in succession)
prosecutor for preliminary investigation
A: 1)Calling out power
is not sufficient to bar the running of the
3 day period. It can only be interrupted 2)Suspension of the privilege of
by filing criminal information before the the writ Habeas Corpus
court.
3)Declaration of martial law Sec.
Q: Consequence in the petition for bail 18 only enumerates the power
of a person who filed a petition for wherein the President may call
habeas corpus? martial law or suspend the
privilege in invasion when public
A: This is the issue in the case of
safety requires it and in cases of
Jackson v. Macalino, wherein the
rebellion when public safety
Supreme Court ruled that by offering of
requires it.
the petitioner to post bail bond, the
petitioner thereby admitted that he was Can the President exercise or proclaim
under custody of CID and voluntarily martial law without the presence of
accepted the jurisdiction of CID. rebellion, invasion or lawless violence?
Q: Can the court continue to hear the A: Even if there is no actual rebellion,
petition of writ of habeas corpus after invasion or lawless violence the
the petitioner filed for bail? President may exercise his calling out
A: If the accused applied for bail, it is an power in order to avert or to stop it
expressed admission or recognition of from happening.
the validity of his detention and would Q: What happens to the person who
render the petition for habeas corpus post bail in suspension of the privilege
moot and academic. of habeas corpus? Can he still exercise
the right to bail? What is the purpose
Q: Sec.18 Art. 7 enumerate the powers
for the suspension?
of the President. Supreme Court in the
Sanlakas case said that the A: The purpose is to quash or stop
enumeration in Sec.18 Art.7 was rebellion or invasion.
deliberately made from an order, to the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Atty. Gabriel: Let’s assume that the the accused and ultimately retain the
penalty for rebellion is reclusion liberty of the person. Aside from the
temporal. Supposing after the President writ of habeas corpus there are other
suspended the privilege, all the high prerogative writ that produce the
members of a group were arrested being same effect like writ of amparo. Five
suspected rebels. Supposing there are types of writ of amparo as enumerated
100 rebels can they post bail? As we said in the case of Secretary of defense v.
earlier right to bail is a matter of right if Manalo
the penalty of the offense is lower than A: 1)amparo libertad for the
reclusion perpetua regardless of the protection of personal freedom,
weight of the evidence of guilt? equivalent to the habeas corpus writ;
Remember, right to post bail shall not be
impaired in the suspension of the (2) amparo contra leyesfor the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. judicial review of the constitutionality of
statutes;
A: This is the issue in the case of In re:
The issuance of the writ of habeas (3) amparo casacion for the
corpus for Dr. Aurora Parong, et.al. judicial review of the
Ponce Enrile, wherein the Supreme constitutionality and legality of a
Court ruled that transcends in the judicial decision;
importance that if these person would
(4) amparo administrativo for the
be given the right to bail, after they are
released, they may rejoin the rebels and
actions; and
continue their furtherance of invasion or
rebellious activities. The constitutional (5) amparo agrario for the
guarantee provided in Sec.13, does not protection of peasants’ rights derived
apply in offenses of rebellion or offenses from the agrarian reform process
inherent or directly connected with
invasion. They cannot post bail as a *Out of these amparo cases one is
matter of right, regardless of the penalty equivalent to habeas corpus and it is
and the weight of evidence of guilt. amparo libertad.
Q: We said earlier that the purpose of Q: Supposing that the privilege was
the writ of habeas corpus is to test the suspended by the President can it be
validity of the arrest and detention of
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
vailidly obtained through this writ of vexatious, capricious and oppressive

amparo? delays caused by prosecution the
accused may claim the right to speedy
A: No. although the constitution
trial. If the right claimed is speedy
provides only for the suspension of the
disposition of cases, the only objective is
writ of habeas corpus, all similar writs
to expedite the disposition the case.
are also suspended because if it is
allowed then the provision in the Q: Supposing the trial is attended with
constitution would be useless. vexatious, capricious and oppressive
delays at the instance of the accused.
Q: Speedy disposition of cases covers
What right may be invoked by the
proceedings previous to trial or those
prosecution?
after trial?
A: Sec. 16. Right to speedy trial and
A: speedy disposition applies to all
speedy disposition operates during the
stages of the trial.
trial but the person invoking should be
Q:Which means that there are two different.
rights operating during the trial stage,
Q: What is right against self
the right to speedy trial and right to
incrimination?
speedy disposition of cases. Both of
which prohibits any unreasonable A: No person shall be compelled to be a
delay. How can we identify which witness against himself
operates?
Q: What is the common law basis of
A: Right to speedy trial applies to trial this right?
proper and proceedings anterior to the
trial. Right to speedy disposition applies A: nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare (no
to all stages of the criminal proceedings. man is bound to accuse himself) It is
The latter covers criminal considered as a revolt against as a
administrative, civil, quasi judicial thumbscrew and a rock (inquisitorial
proceedings while the former covers devices applied in order to extract a
only criminal proceedings. Prosecution confession in the defendant)
is not entitled in speedy trial while in Q: According to the Supreme Court in
speedy disposition the prosecution and the case of Chavez v. Court of Appeals,
the accused. If the trial is attended by this constitutional guarantee is
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
founded upon the broad basis of accused to kill the victim. Can the
public policy and humanity. Why? prosecution compel the accused to
produce as such?
A: Public policy because the witness is
placed in the strongest temptation to A: No. It means that the constitutional
commit perjury and humanity because guarantee does not cover only
to extract a confession of truth by a kind testimonial evidence but also object and
of duress every species and degree of documentary evidence.
which the law abhors.
Q: What are the documentary evidence
Q: So this constitutional guarantee that the accused must produce even
according to Supreme Court in the case against his will? Supposing the person
of Chavez v. Court of Appeals is not is charged with tax evasion can he be
only intended to protect the guilty and compelled to produce income tax
imprudent but the innocent and return?
foresighted. What does it mean?
A: Even if he will be incriminated he is
A: required to produce such documents.
This are reportorial documents which
Q: Substance of this guarantee?
are required for every tax payers
A: Stated in the case of US v. Tan Teng therefore this documents are needed to
citing Justice Holmes, the prohibition of be filed to government agencies are not
the use of physical or moral compulsion covered by constitutional guarantee of
to extort communications from him, not right against self incrimination.
an exclusion of his body as evidence,
Q: Can the Court compel the accused to
when it may be material.
write the fiscal’s dictation for the
Q: Does that mean an accused may be purpose of comparison allowed?
compelled under pain of contempt tom
A: No. Writing is something more than
produce evidence as long as it is not
moving the body, or the hands, or the
testimonial in character without
fingers; writing is not purely a
violating the constitutional guarantee
mechanical act, because it requires the
on right against self incrimination?
application of intelligence and attention.
Supposing the accused is charged with
In Beltran v. Samson, the Supreme
homicide. The prosecution moved for
Court rule that privilege is not limited to
the production of the knife used by the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
testimony, but extends to all giving or A: A witness can be compelled to testify

furnishing of evidence. The against his will and can invoke only
constitutional inhibition is directed not such right when an incriminating
merely to giving of oral testimony but question is asked.
embraces as well as the furnishing of
Q: Is the right against self
evidence by other means than by the
incrimination available during
word of mouth, the divulging in short of
preliminary investigation before the
any fact which the accused has a right to
public prosecutor?
hold secret.
A: Yes. In Beltran v. Samson the
Q: In the case of Chavez v. Court of
Supreme Court ruled that if the
Appeals prosecution believes that they
prosecutor will be allowed to compel
can call the accused as witness and the
the respondent to produce incriminating
court believes the prosecution. Did the
evidence which later on be introduced
Supreme Court agree?
as evidence in trial proper itself, then
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that this constitutional guarantee will be a
the court may not extract from a meaningless protection. Q: How about
defendant’s own lips and against his in administrative proceedings? Is this
will an admission of his guilt. Nor a constitutional guarantee available?
court as much as resort to compulsory
A: Yes. In the case of Pascual v. Board
disclosure, directly or indirectly of facts
of Medical Examiners , the Supreme
usable against him as confession of the
Court ruled this right does not apply to
crime or the tendency of which is to
all administrative proceedings and
prove the commission of a crime.
similar proceedings. Applies to
Because it is his right to forego
Administrative and civil proceedings
testimony, to remain silent, unless he
but with qualification, constitutional
chooses to take the witness stand with
guarantee applies with administrative
undiluted, unfettered exercise of his free
and civil proceedings which are penal in
genuine will.
character or where there is an attached
Q: What is the extent of the penalty. *Constitutional guarantee does
constitutional protection as to the not apply in all proceedings. Rule 25,
witness? rules of court (Modes of discovery)
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Q: In cases where a constitutional issue because it restricts the full liberty an

is involved it is always a balancing of individual. In order to attain his belief,
interest of the state and an individual. he is urging people to arms against
Insofar as issues involving right government. Can that person be
against self incrimination it is a prosecuted to inciting rebellion?
conflicting interest of the state to
A: If such belief would be allowed then
penalize the violation of laws. It is the
interest of the accused to keep to it would disturb the peace and would be
himself an information that may detrimental to the public and to the
incriminate him. Does that meaning State.
given this conflicting interest, there is Q: What are two aspects of involuntary
no way the state can compel a person to servitude?
incriminate himself?
A: 1)Compulsion to perform or
A: No, by granting immunity of the work in consideration of debt against
State to the person. his will
Q: What are the two kinds of immunity
2)concept of slavery
statutes granted to a witness?
A: Like in the case of Caunca v. Salazar
A: 1)Transactional immunity – a
it is a case wherein a habeas corpus was
witness can no longer be prosecuted for
filed by a house helper who was being
any offense whatsoever arising out of
detained and required to render
the act or transaction
domestic services in payment for the
2)Used and derivative use money advanced for her transportation
immunity – A witness is only assured from the province. Is this allowed?
that his or her particular testimony and
A: No. A person cannot be compelled to
evidence derived from it will not be
work against his will in payment of a
used against him or her in a subsequent
debt.
prosecution
Q: Under the constitution, this right is
Q: Under Sec. 18 Art. 3 is a
not absolute. The exceptions are?
constitutional guarantee is more
specific in political beliefs and A: 1)punishment of a crime whereof
aspirations. Supposing a person the party shall have been duly convicted
believes that all governments are evil
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
2)render service to defend the recommendation that the imprisonment

state imposed be lowered.
3)Return to work order in Q: Is death penalty or death by lethal

assumption jurisdiction cases injection a cruel punishment?
4)Naval enlistment A: No. The Supreme Court ruled in the

case of Echagaray v. Secretary of Justice
5)Posse comitatus – command to
is that the cruelty against which the
help them find some criminals
Constitution protects a convicted man is
6)Patria potestas cruelty inherent in the method of
punishment not necessary the suffering
Q: What are the prohibited involved in any method employed to
punishments? extinguish life humanely.
A: Excessive fines, cruel, degrading, Q: Does the constitution prohibit
inhuman punishment unusual punishment?
Q: Does the constitution prohibit A: No. It may impose new punishment
excessive punishment? as long as long it is not cruel, degrading,
A: This is the issue in the case of People inhuman.
v. Estoista, wherein the Supreme Court Q: Does the 1987 constitution prohibit
ruled that the excessiveness of the death penalty?
penalty shall not refer to the duration
but to the method or mechanism of A: Only a limitation on the imposition of
imposing the penalty. Not the term but death penalty
the method. Excessive penalty is not
prohibited.
Q: What is the obligation of the court

whenever the court feels that the
penalty imposed by law is excessive?
Q: In the cases of People v. Valeriano
A: The Court can give the copy of the and People v. Mapalo, we have learned
decision be furnished to the President, that a person who without justifiable
thru the Secretary of Justice, with the reason fails to appear during trial may
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
be tried in absentia. What if the of financial violence and violation of

accused is convicted of a crime with a this law can make the person
penalty of death? Does it mean that he imprisoned. Is the law
waived his right to appeal? unconstitutional?
A: No it is not waivable. The Supreme A: No. In the case of Lozano v.

Court will have an automatic review of Martinez, the Supreme Court ruled that
the judgment. the debt intended to be covered by the
constitutional guarantee are liabilities
Atty. Gabriel : The role of the trial court
arising from ex contractu. Since this is
only acts as a commissioner and all
an obligation arising from law, the
judgment of trial court are merely
failure of the father to pay financial
recommendations. Which needs the
obligation may result in imprisonment.
approval of the Supreme court in order
to attain the character of finality.
Q: Why does the constitution protects a

faulting debtor by guaranteeing him
that he will not be subjected to
imprisonment? Q: In the case of Lozano v. Martinez
A: This provision is one of the social petitioner contends that B.P.22 is
unconstitutional because it imposes
justice provisions. The inability of the
the penalty of imprisonment of the
person to pay is due to his dismal
failure of the drawer to pay the face
contractual condition. In short the
value of the check. Did the Supreme
Constitution presumes good faith in
Court agree?
part of the debtor.
A: No. The Supreme Court ruled that it
Q: What does debt mean?
is not the non payment of an obligation
A: Civil obligation arising from contract, which the law punishes. The law is not
expressed or implied. intended or designed to coerce a debtor
to pay his debt. The thrust of the law is
Q: Under R.A. 9262, a man is under to
to prohibit, under pain of penal
support his wife and children. If he
sanctions, the making of worthless
fails to provide support to his family,
checks and putting them in circulation
the man can be convicted for violation
the law punishes the act not as an
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
offense against property but an offense from same obligation which is the
against public order. contract?
Q: Supposing A is the drawer and B is A: It is already an obligation arising

the payee. A issued a check in payment from law which is BP 22. Supposing A
for services rendered by B. At the time and B again, A is expecting a money
a issued the check, he already knows from a business partner and issued the
that his checking account is closed and check expecting that it will be funded
when B will present the check for when it becomes due. Unfortunately,
encashment, A knows that it will the money did not arrive. So when B
bounce or dishonored. B deposited the deposited the check, it was dishonored.
check; the drawee bank dishonored the At the time A receives the notice of
check. Under BP22 the payee has the dishonor; he exhausted all efforts to
obligation to notify the drawer that his make the face value of the check but
check bounce and the drawer is given 5 unfortunately failed to produce as such.
days to make good of the face value of Is he criminally liable?
the check, otherwise he becomes
criminally liable. So in the example A: Yes. The obligation now is arising
given, supposing b notified A that his from law, which is not protected by this
check bounced, and A pays the check constitutional guarantee.
within 5 days, is he criminally liable?
Q: What is a poll tax?
A: If A does not issue a check he may
A: it is the specific sum levied upon any
not be criminally liable under an
person belonging to a certain class
obligation based on contract. Since he
without regard to property or
issues the check, he is subjected to the
occupation.
rules of bp 22, he has to make sure that
it is sufficiently funded on the date of Who are citizens of the Philippines?
due otherwise he runs the risk of being
imprisoned. ❖ Those who are citizens of the
Philippines at the time of the
Q: Under the law, the drawer has 5 adoption of the 1987 constitution
days form notice of dishonor to pay the ❖ Those whose fathers or mothers
check. Is the obligation of the drawer are citizens of the Philippines
to pay the face value of the check arises ❖ Those born before January 17,
1973, of Filipino mothers, who
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
elect Philippine citizenship upon type of acquiring citizenship which is by

reaching the age of majority. repatriation but this is available only to
❖ Those who are naturalized in specific individuals, to those filipino
accordance with law citizens who have lost their Filipino
The first group of Filipino citizens under citizenship.
Art. 4 refers to those who have been
By birth
considered by competent authority as
citizens of the Philippines before the Principles of acquiring citizenship by
adoption of the 1987 constitution. This is birth
a recognition of the doctrine of res
❖ Jus soli – citizenship of the place
judicata under the 1987 constitution
of burth will be conferred upon
because once a person has been declared the person born in that
and considered as Filipino citizen before jurisdiction
the adoption of the 1987 constitution, ❖ Jus sanguinis – citizenship of the
under the first group of Art. 4 sec 1 they parent is transmitted to the child
are considered as citizens of the
What principle was applied under the
Philippines. So under the 1973, 1943,
1987 constitution?
1935 and even the organic laws before
the 1935 constitution they are Jus sanguinis.
considered citizens of the Philippines.
Is that absolute or is there any exception
There are three traditional modes of to that?
acquiring citizenship. What are these?
Yes. Foundlings. This is just establishes
❖ By birth a presumptive citizenship.
❖ Naturalization
❖ By marriage (derivative According to the case of Poe
naturalization) llamansares vs comelec as well as David
vs. Senate electoral tribunal, under
Under sec. 15 of CA 473 the wife of the
international code particularly under
naturalized Filipino or an alien woman
the international covenant on civil and
who is married to a Filipino citizen who
political rights and under the
herself maybe lawfully naturalized is
international covenant on human rights,
considered as a Filipino citizen. Also
children whose parents are known shall
under CA 473 we have included another
be considered as citizen of the place
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
where they are born or found. But this is According to some legal scholars, April
just a presumptive conferment of 11, 1899 and July 1902. April 11, 1899 is
citizenship which means that the cutoff to be considered as a filipino
notwithstanding the fact that the citizen. To be considered as a filipino
parents are unknown, may still be citizen the person must be a Spanish
considered as an alien if the child has subject as of that date.
the features of alien. The only reason
What is the status of the child born
why the SC recognized the citizenship
after April 11, 1899 until July 1902
of Senator Poe is because of the
which is the effectivity of the
concurrence of several factors, one was
Philippine bill 1902?
the fact that she was found in the
Philippines, and based on statistical Jus soli was applicable. Any child born
records, it is almost an absolute from April 11, 1899 until July 1902
certainty that a child born in the regardless of alien parentage is a
Philippines at the time of the Filipino citizen.
presumptive birth of Senator Poe is of
How about under the 1935
Filipino parents 99.899999. The fact of
constitution? Was the Jus soli principle
being a 1) foundling in the Philippines,
applied?
2) statistical data and more importantly
the 3) physical features which are Yes. Under the second group of the 1935
consistent with the features of Filipino constitution, children born in the
citizen. So in order to confer Filipino Philippines of alien parents who before
citizenship whose parents are unknown the adoption of the constitution has
and who are presumptively born in the been elected to public office. Which
Philippines the three conditions must means that this is a modified jus soli
concur. But again this is an exception principle because for a person to be
rather than the general rule. The general considered as citizen of the Philippines,
rule is citizenship by birth can only be he must be born in the Philippines but
conferred under the 1987 constitution by there is also a qualification he must have
birth. been elected to public office before the
adoption of the 1935 constitution. which
Under the previous constitutions have
means place of birth and the election to
we ever applied the Jus soli principle
public office determines the citizenship
in the Philippines?
of the Philippines.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
How do we call this principle on can transmit their Filipino citizenship

Second paragraph of section 4 of the without any qualification
1935 constitution?
We go to the third group, in the case of
Caram principle Tecson vs Comlec the SC discuss the
evolution of children belonging to the
Why caram principle?
third group. What is the difference of
Because Caram is a delegate of the 1935 the treatment of this group of children
constitution representing Iloilo. He was under the 1935, 1973 and 1987
born in the Philippines. His parents are constitution? (Filipino mother + Alien
Syrians who are subject to persecution father)
and in order to evade persecution they
migrated to the Philippines where Dr.
of legitimate issue are considered as not
Caram, was born. During the 1935
Filipino citizen. A child must elect
constitutional convention, he ran and he
Filipino citizenship upon reaching the
was elected.
age of majority (21)
Why do the constitutional convention
need to provide for specific provision in
regardless of filiation legitimate or
order to accommodate one person?
illegitimate will automatically become a
Because it was intended to cure the filipino citizen at birth
anomaly at that time. Because there
1987: The 1987 treats the child the same
would be an anomaly where the
as 1973 but it does not only confer
constitution which is the fundamental
Filipino citizenship over a child of
law of the land was written by the
filipino mother but it also bent
convention with the member who is not
backward by making those who elect
a Filipino citizen.
Filipino citizenship during the 1935
Under the second group of Filipino constitution as natural-born Filipino
citizen for a child to become a Filipino citizen. In order to equalize the playing
citizen, is it required that both parents field.
are Filipino citizens?
Supposing the child was born on
No because the provision use the word January 16, 1973 his mother is filipino
“or” which means either of the parents citizen, the father is Chinese citizen.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
What is the status of the child during Supposing the child was born of Filipino
his minority? This is before the 1973 Father, the mother was American. The
constitution. child was born during the 1935
constitution and the child was
Not Filipino citizen. He can only
illegitimate. Under that example, the
become Filipino citizen when he elects
child is American because the mother is
Filipino citizenship at the time he reach
an American and the child is
the age of majority.
illegitimate. FPJ is an American?
Are all children born before January
FPJ is a Filipino citizen we cannot apply
17, 1973 of Filipino mothers alien
the principle in Republic vs Lim because
fathers require to elect filipino
under the 1935 constitution there is no
citizenship upon reaching the age of
qualification as to children born of
majority in order to become Filipino
citizens? Filipino mother the constitution only
say of “Filipino mother” nothing more.
No under Republic vs Lim, children The constitution always presumes that
born of Filipino mothers, Alien Fathers the term Filipino mother, the
during the 1935 constitution who are presumption is of legitimate issue. In
illegitimate, are Filipino Citizens at birth the case of FPJ the SC said there is no
hence they do not need to elect Filipino qualification legitimate or illegitimate.
citizenship. Which means that only This only shows how are constitutions is
legitimate children of Filipino mothers, so accommodating.
Alien Fathers during the 1935
constitution need to elect Filipino Is there a procedure in electing Filipino
citizenship?
citizenship to become Filipino.
CA 625 which provides three conditions
What is wisdom behind this principle?
for a valid election of Filipino
Because the illegitimate child is under citizenship
the exclusive parental authority of the
mother and the presumption is it is the ❖ Made in writing and Sworn
before the officer authorized to
mother who will provide for the
administer oaths
support of the child. They are Filipino
❖ Register in the nearest civil
citizens from birth.
registry
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
❖ Oath of allegiance to support and is no need to comply with formal

defend the laws of the election.
Philippines
Formal election is required to those who
Is there any other way of electing are not yet citizen of the Philippines,
Philippine citizenship?
petitioner Ching was never a Filipino
In the case of Ong vs HRET there is citizenship.
informal election of citizenship such as
Respondent Ong was only exempted to
what Ong did the performance of comply with the formal requirements
deliberate activities which indicate but there is still a need to elect
election of filipino citizenship which is although informally. Why? Why did
no less binding than that of the formal the SC still need to determine whether
requirements hence no need to comply respondent Ong has informally elected
with CA 625. Filipino citizenship when he was
already a Filipino citizen when he was
But in the case of In re: Ching the facts
still a minor?
are almost the same as that of Ong vs
HRET, he performed deliberate If respondent Ong did not informally
activities such as passing the bar, run elect Filipino citizenship, the status of
for office and wa in fact elected. the child is only naturalized citizen, the
However the SC said that Respondent informal election of the respondent Ong
Ching is not a filipino citizens because was needed in order to convert his
he belatedly file his affidavit. Can we status as a natural born citizen. Because
not say that Petitioner ching should be
under par. 3 sec. 1 of Art. 4 those who
considered also as filipino citizen as
elect Philippine citizenship are natural
that of Ong? Why the difference?
born citizens.
Because the father of respondent Ong
When should the election be made
was naturalized while Ong was still 9
during the 1935 constitution? when the
years old and under sec 15 of CA 473
mother is Filipino and the father is
respondent Ong who was residing at
alien?
the Philippines at the time of the
naturalization of the father, Ong is Within reasonable time upon reaching
considered as Filipino citizenship by the age of 21.
derivative naturalization. Hence there
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
How did the SC interpret reasonable Who may be naturalized Filipino

time? Is 7 years in the case of Cuenco vs citizens under CA 473?
Sec of justice reasonable?
• Resided in the Ph for a period of
No it is unreasonable more so in the not less than 10 years
case of Ching 14 years. - Supposing A is a Chinese
citizen who has been residing
Supposing the child was born of in the Philippines for 9 years
filipino mother Chinese father under and 15 days. On his 9th year
the 1935 constitution and upon and 16th day, he went to
reaching the age of 21 the person china. When he return to the
declared that he is electing filipino Ph can he complete the
citizenship, he subscribed oath of remaining 15 days in order to
allegiance but he only registered the be qualified to apply for
documents 30 years after attaining the naturalization? Residence
age 21, is that still a valid election? should be interpreted to mean
Because if 7 and 14 years is not domicile which means a
reasonable, more so 30 years? person must have domicile in
the Ph. Hence, he may still
In Cabiling vs Fernandez the petitioner continue the9th yr and 16th
was allowed to complete the process day when he returned here in
eventhough the third condition, the the Philippines.
registration of the affidavit, was not
complied with. Registration is not the A. The period of not less than
operative fact for the election and 10 years can be shorten to 5
because in the meantime, the petitioner years when a person has have
performed activities which are established a new industry or
constitutive of notice that they are must introduce an invention
electing Filipino citizenship. in the Philippines
B. Must be honorably held
We go to Sec. 3 of Art. 4 what are the office
modes of acquiring Philippine C. Having been born in the
citizenship other than birth? Philippines
D. Supposing the wife is a
• Naturalization
citizen of the Philippines
• Direct act of congress
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
E. When he is a teacher atleast ❖ Convicted of a crime

3 years involving moral turpitude
❖ Own real estate in the Philippines ❖ Suffering from mental
worth not less than 5,000 pesos or alienation or incurable
must have some known lucrative contagious disease
trade, profession or lawful ❖ Who during the period of
occupation their residence in the
❖ Not less than 21 years of age on Philippines have not mingled
the date of the hearing of the socially with the Filipinos or
petition who have not evinced a
❖ Good moral character; believes in sincere desire to learn and
the principles underlying the embrace the customs,
constitution traditions and ideals of the
❖ Enrolled his minor children of Filipinos
school age in any of the public or ❖ Citizens or subjects of nation
private schools recognized by the of whom the Philippines is at
government was during the period of
❖ Speak and write English or such war
Spanish and any principal ❖ Citizens or subjects of a
languages foreign country whose laws
do not grant Filipinos the
Disqualifications right to become naturalized
❖ Those opposed to organized citizens or subject thereof
government or affiliated with It is not required that the citizen does
any associations or group of not possess all the qualifications so long
persons who uphold and as he does not labor in any of the
teach doctrines opposing all
disqualification
organized governments
❖ Defending or teaching the Before the filing of the petition is there
necessity or propriety of a process mandated to allow the filing
violence, personal assault or of petition?
assassination for the success
or predominance of their 1 year before the filing of the actual
ideas petition the petitioner must file a
❖ Polygamist or believers of declaration or manifestation of his
polygamy
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
intention to become a Filipino citizen ❖ Not been convicted of any

before the OSG offense or violation of rules
❖ Not committed an act prejudicial
to the interest of the nation or
contrary to government-
Did the SC agree in People vs Dela
announced policies
Rosa that the requirements under CA
473 are just procedural matters and Born in the Philippines and have
therefore can be relaxed? received their primary and secondary
education in public
No because this requirements are
jurisdictional which divest the court of What is the condition for the wife and
any jurisdiction in the absence of the minor children of the naturalized
compliance with the requirements citizen may also be deemed a Filipino
including the required allegations citizen without performing any act?
provided for by law This is the issue in the case of Moy Ya
Lim Yao
When does the decision granting the
decree of naturalization final? The phrase who might herself be
lawfully naturalized does not require
The date of finality is after 30 days from that the wife to possess all the
receipt of the OSG granting the decree. qualification the only important
The 2 year period refers to executory condition is that the wife does not suffer
manner of the order of naturalization. It any of the disqualification.
is counted from the time the decision
became final. What is the rule on the minor children
born in the Philippines at the time of
Why does the law required 2 years the naturalization of the father?
before the decree of naturalization may
be executed? They shall be deemed citizens of the
Philippines
❖ The court must satisfy that the
petitioner did not leave the Minor children born outside the
Philippines Philippines, residing outside the
❖ Dedicated himself continuously Philippines?
to a noble profession or calling
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Citizen of the Philippines provided they Philippine armed forces in time

start residing in the Philippines during of war
their minority What is the effect of RA 9225 to the
Supposing during the minority they mode of losing citizenship? Did it
started to reside in the Philippines? repealed CA 63?
Citizens of the Philippines It did not. It only modified CA 63 to the

extent that only naturalized Filipino
Minor children born after the citizen may lose its Filipino citizenship
naturalization of the father who is upon naturalization to the foreign
residing outside the Philippines country. Because natural born citizens
will not lose their Filipino citizenship by
Filipino citizen provided upon reaching
subsequent naturalization in the foreign
the age of majority he must register in
country as long as they comply with the
the consulate office where he is residing
requirement of RA 9225.
otherwise he will lose his status as
Filipino citizen. What is the condition under RA 9225
for a natural born citizen who is
What are the modes of losing Filipino
naturalized in a foreign country may
citizenship?
be acquired or retain his Filipino
❖ By naturalization in the foreign citizenship?
country
By taking the oath of allegiance and
❖ By accepting commission in or
rendering services to the armed have that oath of allegiance registered in
forces of the foreign state the civil registry or consulate office of
provided that there is consent by the Philippines where he is residing.
the Philippines
Don’t be confused with RA 8725 which
❖ By express renunciation of
was applied in the Frivaldo case. This is
citizenship
❖ Subscribing to an oath of another repatriation law
allegiance There are two operative acts under RA
❖ By cancellation of the certificate
9225. Retention and Reacquisition.
of naturalization
When does it apply?
❖ By having declared by competent
authority a deserter of the
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Retention, Filipino citizenship never What is the character of repatriation

lost their citizenship. Which means it laws according to the case of Altajeros
will be applied to those who are vs Comelec?
naturalized in the foreign country after
Remedial in character. Retroactive in
the effectivity of RA 9225
application
Reacquisition, applies to those who
In the case of Frivaldo the SC said once
were naturalized in the foreign country
citizenship was lost it cannot easily be
before the effectivity of RA 9225.
acquired. The person must show that he
Because before the effectivity of RA
has complied with any of the modes of
9225, a natural born citizen who is
reacquiring Filipino citizenship. Either
naturalized in the foreign country will
by repatriation under CA 63, by
automatically lose his Filipino
naturalization/ direct act of congress, or
citizenship. In order to reacquire it they
by repatriation. The automatic exercise
have to subscribe to oath and register it
of activities reserved for the Filipino
and then they have considered to have
citizens does not automatically revert or
reacquired it.
result in the reacquisition of Filipino
Supposing A is a natural born citizen, citizenship.
in January 2010 he was naturalized in
In Labo vs Comelec, the SC said the
the US and in January 2016 he
subsequent declaration of nullity of his
subscribed to oath of allegiance to
marriage does not automatically revert
support and defend the Philippines
him back to his Filipino citizenship.
and he had it registered. What is the
status of A from January 2010, to Once it was lost even if the basis for
December 2015 before he subscribed to losing it was considered as null and
the oath of allegiance? Supposing in void, by the adopting state, that does
January 2013 A purchase a real not concern the Philippines. He has to
property in the Philippines, is that a reacquire Filipino citizenship either by
valid purchase? naturalization, direct act of congress of
repatriation.
The oath of allegiance that he subscribed
will retroact from the time that he was The application of res judicata does not
naturalized in the US as if he never lost apply to naturalization cases.
it. Citizenship of the Filipinos is always
open to attack. Res judicata in
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
citizenship may only be applied when It reverts back to the status of the
the latter is the 1) lis morta of the Filipino citizen.
controversy,2) when the case is with the
Supposing a law disqualifies dual
active participation of the OSG or when
citizen. Is that law constitutional? This
3) the citizenship was approved by the
was the issue in Manzano vs Mercado
SC.
The SC said dual citizen under the Local
In Yu vs Defensor Santiago, the
government code means dual
petitioner was naturalized in the
allegiance.
philippines after which he used his
portugese passport. So what is the effect The SC said dual citizenship is possible
of the use of it to his naturalized Filipino in two scenarios
citizen status? While renunciation is a
mode for losing citizenship must be 1. When a child is born to a Filipino
categorical and express, the acts of the parent in a country which applies
Jus Soli
petitioner, taken together constitute a
2. When a Filipino woman is
renunciation of Filipino citizenship.
married to an alien whose laws
Does that mean use of foreign passport made the Filipino woman only a
constitute loss of Filipino citizenship? In citizen of the husband state
the case of Maquiling this was the issue. 3. When a child is born to a Filipino
mother alien father whose laws
The SC said that does not affect his
make the child also a Filipino
Filipino citizenship, the use of US
citizen.
passport is only deemed a withdrawal
of his affidavit of renunciation of his In an electoral protest A challenges B
American citizenship. The use of US and present B’s American passport to
passport only means he regains his prove B is not a Filipino citizen. This the
american citizenship in the eyes of the case of Aznar vs Comelec. SC said that
ph law. So at that time he again resume proof that respondent Osmena is an
as a dual citizen. But it did not result to American citizen does not mean that he
loss of Filipino citizenship. is not a Filipino citizen. Particularly
because he is born of Filipino parents.
What is the effect of the repatriation?
This was ruled in the case of Tecson vs The final act for naturalization is the
HRET? taking of the oath of allegiance. Under
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
RA 9225 a natural born citizen who is separation of power does not obtain
naturalized in a foreign state may retain from constitutional provision but it
or reacquire his Philippine citizenship flows from the specific distribution of
provided he take his oath of allegiance powers. Once the powers of the
to the Philippines. Remember when a constitution are distributed, the
Filipino became naturalized in America corollary effect is separation.
he take his oath of allegiance. When he
Judicial supremacy is not an arrogation
reacquire his Filipino citizenship under
of the supremacy of the SC but the
RA 9225 he also take an oath of
supremacy of the constitution. The
allegiance in the Philippines. Dual
constitution however cannot assume
Allegiance? 9225 unconstitutional?
jurisdiction at all time. There must be a
It is not unconstitutional. In the eyes of justiciable controversy.
the ph law, the most recent oath of
In the case of Casibang vs Aquino,
allegiance is the only recognized
during the pendency of the electoral
allegiance that is why a natural born
protest, the 1973 constitution became
citizen who is naturalized in the foreign
effective. Under the 1973 constitution all
state is required to take an oath of
incumbent public officer shall remain in
allegiance for his Filipino citizenship
office so theory of the respondent is that
because otherwise the only allegiance
since the constitution says that all shall
that the philippines will recognize is the
remain in office and he is the incumbent
foreign allegiance.
of an office, the electoral protest now
Separation of Powers becomes a political question. SC said no,
what was affected was the term to hold
What is separation of powers
office and not the right to hold office. In
In Angara vs Electoral commission order that a public officer may be
under this principle each department entitled to that indefinite term of office
has exclusive cognizance of matter he must first show that he has a right to
within its own jurisdiction. hold that office.
Is there any specific constitutional In the case of Tanada vs Cuenco, Daza

provision that requires the adoption of vs Singson what was in issue in this
this fundamental principle? The SC said cases is the discretion of the congress in
in Angara vs Electoral tribunal that: the appointing members to the electoral
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
tribunal and the commission on discretion which must be so gross and

appointments. Is this purely political so patent.
question? Not all because in the case of
There are two instances when
Pimentel the SC said that the power to
Separation of powers is violated said the
choose and elect members of the
SC in the case of Ochoa
commission on appointments or the
electoral commission representing the 1. When one department unduly
house rest on the house itself not on the interferes with the exercise of the
political party. The political parties can powers belonging to the other
only nominate members of the electoral department
tribunal or commission on 2. When one department assumes
appointments and the appointing the power belonging to another
authority still rest in the house. Is that a department
purely political question? No. if the Delegation of Powers
controversy involves the legality of the
act, that remains to be a justiciable The constitution allows delegation of
controversy. executive, legislative and judicial power
What is the effect of the expanded Delegation to administrative agencies

jurisdiction of the SC to the political What may be delegated is how the law
question concept? Did it do away with should be applied. The rule making
the doctrine of political question? power of the administrative agencies are
Because under the expanded considered as subordinate legislation.
jurisdiction of the SC the courts also
have the jurisdiction to determine Two test for valid delegation of
whether there is grave abuse of legislative power according to the case
discretion. No it did not totally abrogate of Eastern Shipping
the concept of political question because ❖ Completeness test the law must
in exercising its expanded judicial be complete in all its terms and
power, the SC will not determine conditions when it leaves the
whether the other 2 agencies have congress so that when it reaches
discretion, the courts will determined the delegate, the delegate has
whether they have abused their nothing to do but to implement
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
it. (Us. Vs Ang Tang Ho, Pelaez These are only applicable to delegation
vs Auditor General) to administrative agencies. They do not
❖ Sufficient standard test the law apply to other delegation of legislative
delegating the legislative power. So if the delegation is emergency
authority to administrative power, we do not apply the tests, we
agency must provide for
apply Sec. 23. If the delegation is tariff
limitations and guidelines to
power, we apply sec. 28. If what is
prevent the delegation from
delegated is initiative and referendum,
running riot or to contain it from
we apply Sec. 32. For local governments
the banks to prevent it from
overflowing. (Ynot vs IAC) apply Art. 10.
SC said in Pelaez vs Auditor that the Tariff powers

delegation must comply with both.
There must be a law passed by the
What are policies and standards that congress delegating the authority.
may be considered as sufficient
The congress authorizes the president to
according to the SC in the case of
increase the VAT from 10-12% upon the
Eastern Shipping?
determination of the president of the
There are several. Public interest, public existences of several factual
convenience and public welfare, circumstances. In the case of ABAKADA
national security, simplicity, efficiency, guro vs Ermita the petitioner contends
economy. what the law allows to delegate is the
tariff powers, VAT is not a Trariff power
Can we nowvsay that in some future
it is a revenue tax. Is that an
laws, when this are the same standards,
impermissible delegation? There are
can we say that the future law has
two kinds of rulemaking power that
complied with the sufficient standard
may be exercised by the delegate.
test?
1. Supplementary rules- those that
The SC said in Eastern Shipping, no.
fill in the gaps and those which
The sufficiency of the standard can only provides for implementing detail
be determined within the factual 2. Contingent regulation- the
circumstances of the law. We cannot determination or power to
apply the principle of stare decisis. determine the existence of
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
emergency in accordance with industries. So according to the petitioner

which the law may be applied that is not a valid exercise of the
In the case of ABAKADA guro what delegated tariff powers because it did
was delegated to the president is not the not inure to the benefit of the local
power to fix the tax but the power to industries. So the SC said, that tariff is
determine whether the standards essentially a tax, tariff is a tax on
enumerated are existing in order that imported products. So since tariff is
the tax may be increased from 10-12%. essentially a tax, the purpose of a tax is
This is the contingent power. not only limited to regulation. Mainly,
taxes like tariff are imposed in order to
Atty. Gabriel: we have not yet discussed raised revenue. So which means, that
Garcia vs. executive secretary, anyway the president can also exercise the
the only issue in this case is they stand delegated tariff powers in order to raise
the powers of the president under the revenue, not only to protect local
tariffs and customs code. So remember industries. And the SC noted, that uh
that we said earlier that for the tariff there are 2 formal agencies of the
code to be validly delegated to the government whose main task is to
president, there must be a law perform or raise revenue, these are
delegating that authority and uh, there BOC, which exercise tariff powers and
is currently a law that allows the mainly the BIR which implements
President to fix tariff rates, and this is revenue taxes. So since the BOC is under
the customs and tariffs code. But the the executive department and exercises
problem in this case was that the delegated tariff as well or not tariff
petitioner contends that the authority of powers but implements rather, the
the president to exercise tariff powers is tariffs enacted by the Congress, the
only limited to protect local industries, president can also exercise this
so the petitioner contends that the delegated power to raise revenue.
president cannot exercise tariff powers
for other reason aside from protecting So we go to emergency powers, under
local industry. So remember in this case sec 23 of art 6, the constitution
what the president did was to increase authorizes the congress to delegate
the tariff rates for petroleum products, emergency powers. And there are only 2
so definitely the increase of tariff rate, or grounds for valid delegation of
petroleum products would affect local emergency powers. The 2 grounds are:
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
in times of war, 2nd in times of national national emergceny. So what are the
emergency. So again the congress limitations for the valid delegations of
cannot delegate emergency powers to emergceny powers: there must be a law
the president for any other reason authorizing the president to exercise the
except for existence of war and in emergceny power, 2nd the delegation
instance of national emergency. Under must be for a limited period. The
the 1st par. Of sec 23 the constitution delegation must provide limitations for
provides for the requirement in order the exercise of these powers and the
that the Congress can delegate power must be only to carry out powers
emergency powers to the president in necessary to declared national policy. So
times of war, one is that a congress must these are the conditions, these are the
declare the existence of a state of war, requirements for a valid exercise of
and what is the voting requirement for emergency powers to the president.
the congress to declare for the existence Under the 1935 constitution, the
of a state of war, 2/3 of the members of delegation of emergency powers of the
both houses in joint session assembled president is not as specific as the 1987
voting separately. Supposing threre is constitution, but notwithstanding this
indeed a war but the congress failed to specific limitation, on the delegation of
mustered the required 2/3 vote, can the emergceny powers under the 1935
congress still delegate emergency constitution as early as in the case of
powers because of war, although it araneta vs dinglasan, Rodriguez vs
failed to declare, the existence of the gella, the SC has already ruled that
state of war, answer is: YES, because delegation of emergency powers to the
war is also a national emergency. So president is only for a limited period. SC
again, in the case of Rodriguez ve gella, likewise ruled that delegation of
the SC said may include manmade and emerfceny powers to the president even
natural disaster. So it may include under the 1935 constitution, is a self
rebellion. With more reason that it limiting power, is like the tape in
includes war. So even if the congress mission impossible that ethan hope
failed to declare a state of war because always receives this and it self destructs
of the deficiency in number, he can still in a specific time. So that’s the same
use war as a basis for declaration or principle or concept of the delegation of
delegation of the national emergceny, emergency powers. Upon the
and the congress will treat war as a happening of an event, the delegated
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
emergency power is automatically president can now continue the

deemed extinguished. Under the 1935 emergency power, so the position of the
constitution, the SC said in araneta vs respondent was while the congress was
dinglasan, it looks to the extent of the still in session the emergency powers
emergency powers under CA 671 or suspended, when the congress adjourns,
emergency powers act, so remember reactivated. The SC said, NO. it
that CA 671 was passed by the congress specified the event that extinguishes the
upon the request of president quezon delegated emergency power. SC said,
and the reason why president quezon once the congress deems in regular
requested emergency powers was session, the delegated emergency
because manila was already attacked by powers are automatically extinguished.
the Japanese and there was already an So this is the event that dissolves the
anticipated inability on the part of the emergceny powers, note that this is
congress to meet in regular session in under the 1935 constitution. The SC
January 1942, so that’s the reason why explained why regular why not special
the congress paseed CA 671 authorizing session because before the congress met
the president to exercise the emergency in regular session on may 25, 1956, there
powers during the existence of war. The were already previous special sessions.
question is, up to what time can the So the SC said regular session should
president exercises emergency powers. mark the end of the delegated
So remember that president quezon and emergency powers because in special
the successors still continued to session, the congress is not fully
discharge emergceny powers. 1st the discharging its legislative power. It is
president who exercise emergency only addressing the specific subject
powers after quezon said that it was matter referred to it by the President. So
withdrawn by the congress by the when the congress meets in regular
enactment of law, the emergency session, it is already in its full discharge
powers shall subsist. The previous of legislative power, therefore the
president likewise contends that, delegated emergency powers
assuming for the sake of argument that automatically cease. Now we stand
during the regular session of congress, it behind this is the SC, as said araneta, to
can now discharge legislative power, avoid a situation that there are 2
once the congress recesses or holds functioning legislative bodies. One the
recess mandatory adjournment, the congress the other contradicting each
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
other, So the SC said this is not far fetch emergency powers are deemed
because in several occasions in araneta, withdrawn under the 1987 constitution?
the SC noted that the president vetoed a Answer: NO. Because now the
bill passed by the congress and while constitution specifically identifies the
the congress is in adjournment, the event which will terminate
president issues an EO of the same automatically the delegation of
subject matter which is different from emergency powers. The constitution
the bill of the congress. So the SC said, says in the last par. Of 2nd par of section
in order to avoid a situation where we 23, unless sooner withdrawn by
have 2 existing legislative bodies, once resolution of the Congress, such powers
the congress resumes its regular session, shall cease upon the next adjournment
the delegated emergency powers are thereof. Which means that it is not the
deemed withrdrawn. So this is an convening of the regular session that
implication, again we are discussing extinguishes the delegated powers but
araneta under the 1935 constitution. The the adjournment. Which implies that
ruling here impliedly limits the even the congress is in regular session, it
authority of the congress the delegated can delegate emergency powers. Only
emergency powers if the congress that, once it adjourns, that delegated
cannot meet in regular session, necause powers is deemed automatically
that is the wisdom. The SC said that withdrawn. That is now under the 1987
when the congress is in its full discharge constitution. Can we say that delegation
of its legislative power, automatically of powers is co-extensive with the
the delegated emergency powers are existence of war which is the basis of the
deemed withdrawn. Which means that delegation of powers or national
when the congress are in regular emergency, so can we say that
session, the implication of that ruling is delegation in so far as the period in
that the congress cannot delegate exercise of the emergency power is co-
emergency powers because the congress extensive with the existence of war or
are in its full exercise of its legislative national emergency? Answer? So can
power, that is the implication, and that we say that the president may exercise
is under the 1935 constitution. So can we the delegated emergency powers as long
still apply the principle in araneta vs as there is war? As long as there is
dinglasan that once the congress meets national emergency? So inversely, can
in regular session, the delegated we say that once there is no more war
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
there is no more delegated emergency specific delegation is for a specific

power? Supposing the war subsist for 10 period, like in the example given, 6
yrs, does that mean that the president months but on the 3rd month there is no
can exercise delegated emergency more national emergency, the president
powers for the period of 10 yrs and on can still exercise the remaining period.
the other hand, supposing the One good example, although this is also
delegation was for specific period, say an emergency power but not flowing
for example, 6 months, but on the 3rd under section 23 but under section 18 of
month, the president was already able art 7 is the martial law power of the
to address the national emergency, president. Remember that the congress
which is the purpose of the delegation. extends the power of the president to
Does that mean that the president can exercise his military powers in
no longer exercise the remaining period Mindanao until dec 31, 2017 there is no
of that delegation? Answer? So is the more insurgency, can the president still
exercise of delegated powers co- exercise his martial law power in
extensive with the national emergency marawi? YES he can. Even if there is no
or war? Answer: NO. War or national more insurgency, because the delegation
emergency does not create delegated is for specific period the president can
emergency power. The immolator is the exercise that delegated power even if
war even if there is national emergency, there is no more contingency. SAME
the congress may opt not to delegate PRINCIPLE in emergency powers, even
emergency powers. The congress may if there is no more national emergency
opt to directly discharge legislative as long as the delegation is specific, the
powers including emergency powers. delegation says 6 months, then the
Which means that once the congress President can exercise it for 6 months.
delegate emergency powers, that Unless the congress withdraws it before
delegation is limited, is not co-extensive the 6month. So there are 2 modes of
with the national emergency or war extinguishing the delegation emergency
because if the congress delegate powers, by express resolution of
emergency powers even if there is still congress OR upon the next adjournment
war, once the congress adjourns, that of congress. So under the 1987
delegated emergency powers are constitution, can the congress delegate
deemed withdrawn. Even if the national emergency powers for more than 1 yr?
emergency on the other hand if the can the congress delegate emergency
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
powers to the president for a period public officer, and that power can be
longer that 1 yr? answer: NO. Because recovered without the consent of the
under sec. 15 of article 6, the congress is delegate. Which means that if it cannot
mandated by the constitution to adjourn be withdrawn, without the consent of
on a year to year basis; it is required to the delegate, it amounts to an
adjourn 30 days before the opening of abdication. The SC also compared
its regular session. Which means that deleagation of emergency powers under
even if the delegation is for a period of 2 the constitution to the president to the
years, once the congress adjourns for a civil law concept of agency. How these 2
period on a year to year basis, that arrangement similar, the SC said that in
delegation is deemed withdrawn creating an agency, the agent is not
automatically. Which means, less than 1 compelled to accept the authority.
yr. so, is it required that there must be a Which means that in order to create an
law in order to expressly withdraw the agency, the agent must consent.
delegated emergency powers? NO. law Similarly, delegation of emergency
is not required. Even in the 1935 powers to the president is like the
constitution even if there is no specific agency, the president cannot be
constitutional provision, the SC is in the compelled to accept because the
position that mere resolution of delegation needs the approval of the
congress is enough to withdraw the president because it can only be made
delegated emergency power. Because by the enactment of a law. If the
the SC in araneta vs dinglasan, as well president approves that law, then that is
as in Rodriguez vs gella, distinguished an acceptance of the delegation.
delegation from abdication. SC said Similarly, in a civil law concept of
congress can only delegate, congress agency, the principal is not required to
cannot abdicate legislative powers. remain in the agency perpetually. The
What is the distinction bet. Delegation principal at anytime can dissolve the
and abdication? SC said that there is agency, even without the consent of the
only a thin line between delegation and agent. Similarly, in the delegation of
abdication, both allows the conferment emergency of powers while the congress
of authority to another person. But what needs the president to create the agency,
distinguishes, SC said in araneta citing the congress does not need the president
corwill that there can only be delegation to dissolve it. So that is the similarity
if a power can be conferred to another between agency and emergency powers
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
to the president. National emergency power), anything which is inherently

means that the magnitude of the legislative, anything which is
emergency is such that it will affect the necessarily implied the grant of
country as a whole. And grant of legislative power to the president, may
emergency powers can be localized. An be exercised by the congress even if
emergency power to the president is a there is no express constitutional
justiciable question. provision confirming this power.
Is it true that the legislative power of

the congress is without limit because in
Article 6, legislative power – is the
the case of govt. vs. springer, pimintel
power to enact, to make, to amend, to
vs comelec the SC noted a statement,
revise, and to repeal laws. To whom it is
they said someone has said that the
conferred? Upon the congress of the
powers to the legislative dept of govt,
Philippines and under sec 1 of art 6 the
like the boundaries of the ocean are
congress of the Philippines is divided
unlimited. But the SC said, in
into 2 houses, this is the basis of the
constitutional govts however as well as
bicameral system of congress. Since it is
govts acting under a delegated
the constitution that directs the congress
authority, the powers of each of the
to be divided into 2 houses, the congress
department are limited and confined
cannot just convert it into 1 by mere
within the 4 walls or corners of the
legislative action. There must be
constitution or charter. And each
revision of the constitution in order to
department can only exercise powers
confer the congress into a unicameral
which are necessarily implied from the
congress. Does that mean that the
given power. Then the SC concluded by
congress can only exercise powers
saying that the Constitution therefore is
which are expressly conferred under the
the shore of the legislative authority
Constitution? Answer: NO. apply the
against which the waves of legislative
principle in the case of marcos vs
enactments may dash but over which it
manglapuz, the residual powers to the
cannot leap. So it is the constitution
president. The grant of the legislative
itself that provides for the limitation
powers to the president under the
both substantive and procedural. So the
Constitution carries with it ex rae
limitations and the exercise of legislative
necesitae (all other powers which are
powers of the congress are provided for
necessary, implied from the given
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
under sections 23, 24, 25, 26 up to qualification of voters not to the

section 32. So these are the limitations composition and manner of election. So
on the exercise of legislative power of it cannot be modified by mere
legislative act. It can only be modified
congress
by a change to the constitution, a formal
Section 2, composition of the senate, change of the constitution.
how many senators? 24. Manner of
election? At large. By whom? Qualified Section3 provides for the qualifications
voters. Sec 2 tells us 3 things: of the senators, No person shall be a
composition of the senate; the manner of Senator unless he is a natural-born
election; and who may vote for the citizen of the Philippines and, on the
senators. Remember that you have day of the election, is at least thirty-five
learned in your statcon that if a sentence years of age, able to read and write, a
is divided into several parts, separated registered voter, and a resident of the
by commas and one of the parts of this Philippines for not less than two years
sentence is qualifier, the qualifier will immediately preceding the day of the
apply to the phrase preceding or election. Age qualification must be
immediately subsequent to it. Section 2 possessed day before the election.
of art 6 is divided only into 2 parts and Residence requirement must be possess
the 2 parts are separated by a comma, at the day before the election. How
the consti says: The Senate shall be about citizenship qualification? Because
composed of twenty-four Senators who under constitution, the senator must be
shall be elected at large by the qualified a natural born Filipino citizen. When
voters of the Philippines, as may be should the person possess that
provided by law. The qualifier is “as qualification to be qualified as senator?
may be provided by law” does that Upon birth? But is it possible that a
mean that it applies to the entire phrase person is a natural born Filipino citizen
before it? So may a law be passed at one time and then at a subsequent
providing for a different composition? time he is not a natural born citizen and
Say for example 30, may a law be passed then at some other future time he again
for a different manner of election, say becomes a natural born Filipino citizen.
for example regional? May a law be So its possible, right? Through
passed providing for the qualification of repatriation as we discussed earlier.
voters? To all the question, YES to the Which means that A who is a natural
last, NO to the previous. Which means born Filipino citizen may not be a
that this is one of the instance a rule of natural born at this year but in another
statcon will yield to the spirit or year may again becomes a natural born
substance of the law. So the as may be Filipino citizen. This was answered by
provided by law can only apply to the the SC in the 1996 frivaldo vc comelec,
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
because note in the qualification, except the case of citizenship, as long as the
for age and residencey requirement natural born Filipino citizen status was
qualifications, there is no specific regained by a candidate at noon 30th of
provision under section 3 and 6 of art 6 june, next following their election, he is
when the person should possess the qualified to become a senator.
other qualifications. Citizenship; Can the congress enact a law providing
literacy; registered voter. So SC said in for another or adding a qualifications
the case of frivaldo, that if the under section 3 as well as section of
constitution does not provide for the article 6? SC said in Pimentel, NO. the
time period when the qualification enumeration of qualifications under sec
should be posess, that qualification 3 and 6 of article 6 is exclusive. Which
should be possessed at the start of the means the congress cannot expand, it
term of office of the public officer. Again cannot restrict the qualification. Because
in the 1996 frivaldo case, the application remember in Pimentel vs COMELEC,
for repatriation was filed before the year what was being assailed was the
of election. Which means that when additional qualification for the public
filed the COC, he is not yet repatriated. officer under RA 9165 which requires
And when he was elected and that before assuming public office, he
proclaimed. He was not yet repatriated must submit a certificate of drug non-
and on the day itself at the start of the dependence. So he must show that he is
term of office of the petitioner, as not a drug dependent. SC said that this
elected governor, the application was is an additional qualification since it
approved. SC said petitioner is qualified expands the qualifications of senators
because he possesses the qualification and members of the House of
on the day he is upon to discharge the Representatives, this is unconstitutional.
functions of the office. Secondly, SC said Under the constitution, to become a
that the repatriation retroacted to the senator, a person must be able to read
day on the filing of the application. and write, is there a degree of literacy to
Again do not be confused as to the the constitution? NO. it does not require
frivaldo vs COMELEC as to the a certain degree. Meaning, college
retroactivity date of repatriation because graduate, HS or elementary graduate.
the repatriation applied in this case is As long as the person is able to read and
PD 725. 9225 the repatriation law would write, he is qualified to be a senator.
retroact to the event that may have Supposing the person can only read and
produced the cause for the losing of the write in Chinese, is he qualified? NO.
Filipino citizenship. So in the example the qualification has purposes for a
earlier given, it will retroact to the day specific objective. It means that ABLE to
that the natural born Filipino citizen READ and WRITE in the official
was naturalized in a foreign country. In language used in the Philippines.
GABBY NOTES 2017
FINALS
Otherwise, that qualification would continuity for the service of the full term
become absurd. It would become for which he was elected, only means
useless. Because the public officer voluntary renunciation among others.
cannot discharge the official function. Which means that the enumeration is
Term of office? 12 years. Term limit? 2 not exclusive. The statement voluntary
consecutive terms. Which means that a renunciation does not exclude
senator can as many terms as he selected involuntary renunciation. It is as if the
as long as it is not beyond 2 consecutive constitution is just saying, including
terms. Supposing the term of office of among other. Because it would be
senate and HOR start at noon 30th day of absurd if we interpret it otherwise. -
June. Can it be moved to a different 40:09
date? YES. Because constitution says,
otherwise may be provided for by law,
which means that a l aw may be passed
providing for a different date of
commencement. Supposing on the
second term of senator A, he resign.
Would he be allow to run for the
immediately succeeding election
because he was not able to complete 2
successive terms? Answer: NO. because
the constitution says, voluntary
renunciation will not interrupt the
continuity of the service of the full term
for which he was elect. Which means
that even if a senator resigns on his
second term, he will still be disqualified
in the next succeeding election. He was
to wait for another 3 yrs. Supposing the
senator on his 2nd term did not resigned
but was expelled? Does that mean that
since the constitution only says
voluntary renunciation, definitely
expulsion is not a voluntary
renunciation, it will not interrupt the
running of the 2 successive term limit?
Answer: NO. because the provision in
the constitution which says voluntary
renunciation shall not interrupt

Poli Review Gabby Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Poli Review Gabby Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW – Gabby Notes

Q: What is constitutional law? Q: What makes the constitution so

Q: What is the difference Q: What are the essential qualities

Q: In the case of province of

3. The regulation of the holding, Q: What are the principles in

4. Determination of contract rights 1. When the government should do

Q: The 1935 constitution nor the A: It is based on the provisions of the

1. The government may call upon A: No because it is provided that all

A: Even though there is no express or Q: Why did not the constitutional

Q: But can we not say that to stay in A: Because fertilization is a technical

Q: What is associative principle? Q: Is sec. 26 Art. 2 a self-executing

Q: But there is no such similar Q: Sec. 7 Art. 7 and Sec 28 of Art. 2,

Q: In the case of Province of Q: In the case of Legaspi vs csc the

Q: When? Q: Does the right to public

Q: What are the similarities A: The power of the state to promote

1. The expropriator must enter a When the government disposes a

(2) The power of eminent

A: License fee is a police measure while

Q: Chief Justice Marshall said that Q: In the case of Sison vs Ancheta

Q: According to the Supreme Court in is the liability the inviting officer.

the supreme court said the Q: so public prosecutors are law

constitution. What are the additional admission obtained during custodial

G: does the law require that the Q: may a public prosecutor be

Q: Supposing the rights in the of People vs. Alicando cited Justice

evidence the uncounselled confession

b)Before conviction of the RTC of an discretion to determine the weight of

approval of the bail bond otherwise b)Nature and circumstances of the

4)Efforts exerted by the A: 1)The proceedings are attended

A: so that the accused if he be innocent

Q: Are appeals covered under the right

have semblance of impartiality. They Mere possibility of influence is not

A: Justice Laurel: Trial should be in is no showing that the public was

Q: Supposing the accused are tried A: (1) The admissibility of “dying

bail after he had been arraigned just

the termination of a trial in absentia, the of the person's liberty, used as a

A: An order requiring a person to be Q: Only the privilege of the writ of

A: 1) In cases of illegal detention in In contrast with power of Congress

A: No remedies are separate and A: Rebellion or offenses inherent in or

Q: What are the constitutional Q: Under Sec. 15 art.3 constitution

Q: Prior to the 1987 Constitution, Q: For how long a person may be

A: In the case of Lansang v. Garcia, the A: Person thus arrested or detained

vailidly obtained through this writ of vexatious, capricious and oppressive

testimony, but extends to all giving or A: A witness can be compelled to testify

Q: In cases where a constitutional issue because it restricts the full liberty an

2)render service to defend the recommendation that the imprisonment

3)Return to work order in Q: Is death penalty or death by lethal

4)Naval enlistment A: No. The Supreme Court ruled in the

Q: What is the obligation of the court

be tried in absentia. What if the of financial violence and violation of

A: No it is not waivable. The Supreme A: No. In the case of Lozano v.

Q: Why does the constitution protects a

Q: Supposing A is the drawer and B is A: It is already an obligation arising

elect Philippine citizenship upon type of acquiring citizenship which is by

How do we call this principle on can transmit their Filipino citizenship

❖ Oath of allegiance to support and is no need to comply with formal

How did the SC interpret reasonable Who may be naturalized Filipino

E. When he is a teacher atleast ❖ Convicted of a crime

intention to become a Filipino citizen ❖ Not been convicted of any

Citizen of the Philippines provided they Philippine armed forces in time

Citizens of the Philippines It did not. It only modified CA 63 to the

Retention, Filipino citizenship never What is the character of repatriation

Is there any specific constitutional In the case of Tanada vs Cuenco, Daza