1
Political Law Updates
Political Law is a branch of public law which deals with the organization and
operation of the State and defines the relations of the State with the inhabitants
of its territory.
Constitutional Law is the study of the maintenance of the proper balance
between the authority as represented by the inherent powers of the State and
liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
- Constitution is the body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the
powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised. It is the written instrument
enacted by direct action of the people by which the fundamental powers
of the government are established, limited and defined, and by which the
powers are distributed among the several departments for their safe and
useful exercise for the benefit of the body politic.
▪ its purpose is to prescribe the permanent framework of a system of
government, to assign to the several departments their respective powers
and duties and to establish certain first principles on which the
government is founded.
▪ Written constitution is one whose precepts are embodied in one
document or set of documents; while an unwritten constitution consists
of rules which have not been integrated into a single, concrete form but
are scattered in various sources, such as statutes of a fundamental
character, judicial decisions commentaries of publicists, customs and
traditions and certain common law principles.
▪ Conventional constitution is enacted, formally struck off at a definite
time and place following a conscious or deliberate effort taken by a
constituent body or ruler; while a cumulative constitution is the result
of political evolution, not inaugurated at any specific time, but changing
by accretion rather than by any systematic method.
▪ Essential parts of a good written Constitution:
1. Constitution of Liberty. The series of prescriptions setting forth the
fundamental civil and political rights of the citizens and imposing on
the powers of government as a means of securing the enjoyment of
those rights, e.g., Art. III
2. Constitution of Government. The series of provisions outlining the
organization of the government, enumerating its powers, laying down
certain rules relative to its administration, and defining the electorate,
e.g., Arts. VI. VII, VIII and IX.
3. Constitution of Sovereignty. The provisions pointing out the mode
or procedure in accordance with which formal changes in the
fundamental law may be brought, e.g., Art. XVII.
- The words used in the Constitution must be given their ordinary meaning
except where technical terms are employed. As the Constitution is not
primarily a lawyer’s document, it being essential for the rule of law to obtain
that it should ever be present in the people’s consciousness, its language
as much as possible should be understood in the sense they have a
common use.
Where there is ambiguity, Ratio Legis Et Anima. The words of the
Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of the
framers. And, it has to be interpreted as a whole.
The SC held that while it is permissible to consult the debates and
proceedings of the constitutional convention in order to arrive at the reason
and purpose of the resulting Constitution, resort thereto may be had only
when other guides fail as said proceedings are powerless to vary the terms
of the Constitution when meaning is clear.
▪ The proceedings of the Constitutional Convention are less conclusive on
the proper construction of the fundamental law than are legislative
proceedings of the proper construction of a statute, for in the latter case
it is the intent of the legislature the courts seek, while in the former, courts
seek to arrive at the intent of the people through discussions and
deliberations of their representatives.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ In case of doubt, the provisions should be considered self-executing;
mandatory rather than directory and prospective rather than retroactive.
➢ Self-executing provision. A provision which lays down a general
principle is usually not self-executing. A provision which is complete
in itself and becomes operative without the aid of supplementary or
enabling legislation, or that which supplies a sufficient rule by means
of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected is self-
executing.
o A constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent
of the right conferred and the liability imposed are fixed by the
Constitution itself, so that they can be determined by an
examination and construction of its terms and there is no language
indicating that the subject is referred to the legislature for action.
o The provisions in Art. II does not contain any judicially enforceable
constitutional right, but merely specifies a guideline for legislative
or executive action
• Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy states that if a law or a contract
violates any norm of the Constitution, that law or contract, whether
promulgated by the legislative or executive branch of Government or
entered into by private persons for private purposes, is null and void, and
without any force and effect. Since the Constitution is the fundamental and
supreme law of the land, it is deemed written in every statute and every
contract.
- The distinctions between Amendment and Revision are the followings:
As to change. Revision broadly implies a change that alters a basic
principle in the Constitution. Amendment broadly refers to a change that
adds, reduces, deletes, without altering the basic principles involved. **
As to provision. Revision affects several provisions of the Constitution;
while amendment affects only specific provision being changed.
▪ Constituent Assembly – the Constitution may be amended or revised
by the vote of at least 3/4 of all the members of Congress, acting as a
Constituent Assembly. Any amendment or revision under this provision
shall be valid upon ratification by a majority if the votes cast in a plebiscite
which shall be held not earlier than 60 days or later than 90 days after
the approval of the amendment or revision.
▪ Constitutional Convention – which may be called into existence either
by a 2/3 vote of all the members of Congress or (if such vote is not
obtained) by a majority vote of all the members of Congress with the
question of whether or not to call a Convention to be resolved by the
people in a plebiscite.
▪ People’s Initiative; requisite: a petition of at least 12% of the total
number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be
represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein.
➢ Initiative is the power of the people to propose amendments to the
Constitution or to propose and enact legislation through an election
called for the purpose.
Indirect initiative is exercise of initiative by the people through a
proposition sent to Congress or the local legislative body for action.
o There are three systems of initiative, namely: 1) Initiative on the
Constitution which refers to a petition proposing amendments to
the Constitution, 2) Initiative on Statutes which refers to a petition
proposing to enact a national legislation, 3) Initiative on Local
 2
Political Law Updates
legislation which refers to a petition proposing to enact a regional,
provincial, city, municipal or barangay law, resolution or ordinance.
➢ As to procedure, the essence of amendments directly proposed by
the people through initiative upon a petition is that the entire proposal
on its face is a petition of the people.
➢ As to elements: 1) the people must author and sign the entire
proposal; no agent or representative can sign in their behalf, 2) as an
initiative upon a petition, the proposal must be embodied in the
petition. **
o The failure to comply with the abovementioned requirements was
fatal to the validity of the initiative petition.
2. Constitutional question must be raised by the proper party – one who
➢ As to limitation, no amendment shall be authorized within five years
following the ratification of Constitution nor more often than once
every 5 years thereafter. Likewise, a people’s initiative can only
propose amendments to the Constitution.
➢ Limitation on local initiative: 1) the power of local initiative shall not
be exercised more than once a year, 2) initiative shall extend only to
subjects or matters which are within the legal powers of the local
legislative bodies to enact, 3) if at any time before the initiative is held,
the local legislative body shall adopt in toto the proposition presented,
the initiative shall be cancelled.
▪ Referendum is the power of the electorate to approve or reject legislation
through an election called for the purpose.
➢ There are two classes, namely: 1) Referendum on Statutes which
refer to a petition to approve or reject an act or law, or part thereof,
passed by Congress; and 2) Referendum on Local laws which refer
to a petition to approve or reject a law, resolution, or ordinance
enacted by regional assemblies and local legislative bodies.
▪ Prohibited measures for Initiative and Referendum – no petition more
than one subject shall be submitted to the electorate; and Statutes
involving emergency measures, the enactment of which is specifically
vested in Congress by the Constitution, cannot be subject to referendum
until 90 days after their effectivity.
Administrative Law is that branch of public law which fixes the organization of
government, determines the competence of the administrative authorities who
execute the law, indicates to the individual remedies for the violation of his
rights.
Judicial Review – the power of the courts to test the validity of executive and
legislative acts in light of their conformity with the Constitution. CPED
- The expanded judicial review refers to the power of the Court to
determine whether or not there has been grave abused of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government.
1. Actual case or controversy – an existing case or controversy appropriate
or ripe for determination.
- It is a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims which
can be resolved on the basis of existing law and jurisprudence.
- A request for an advisory opinion is not an actual case or controversy
but an action for declaratory relief is proper for judicial determination.
- The issues raised in the case must not be moot and academic, or
because of subsequent developments, have become moot and
academic. Otherwise, courts decline jurisdiction over such case on the
ground of mootness.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a
justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events.
- It was held that a proposed bill is not subject to judicial review, because
it creates no rights and imposes o duties enforceable by the courts.
Likewise, a case will not prosper when it was premised on may
contingent events the happening of which was uncertain and was
posed a hypothetical issue which had not yet ripened into an actual
case or controversy.
- An actual case or controversy means an existing case or controversy
appropriate or ripe for determination, not conjectural or anticipatory.
has sustained or is in imminent danger of sustaining an injury as a result
of the act complained of.
- Locus Standi is defined as a right of appearance in a court of justice
on a given question.
• Direct Injury Test – a person who impugns the validity of a statute
must have personal and substantial interest (PSI) in the case such that
he has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result.
▪ The interest means a material interest, an interest in issue affected
by the challenged official act, as distinguished from mere interest in
the question involved, or mere incidental interest.
- Rule on standing is a matter of procedure, it can be relaxed for
nontraditional plaintiffs, if any of the followings is present: 1) when the
public interest so requires; 2) when the matter is of transcendental
importance or overreaching significance to the society; or, 3) when the
proceeding involves paramount interest or assertion of public right.
PTA
- Petitioners may be accorded standing to sue provided that the ff.
requirements are met:
1. It involves constitutional issues;
2. For taxpayers, there must be claim of illegal disbursement of
public funds or that the tax measure is unconstitutional.
▪ The taxpayers may question contracts entered into by the
national government or by GOCC allegedly in contravention of
law.
▪ The taxpayer is allowed to sue when there is a claim of illegal
disbursement of public funds or if public money is being
deflected to any improper purpose or when petitioners see to
restrain respondent from wasting public funds through the
enforcement of an invalid or unconstitutional law.
3. For voters, there must be showing of obvious interest in the
validity of the election law in question or it involves violation of right
of suffrage.
4. For legislators, there must be a claim that the official action
complained of encroaches on their prerogatives as legislators; they
are only allowed to question the validity of any official action when
it infringes on their prerogatives as members of the congress.
5. For issues involving transcendental importance which must be
settled early.
- Jurisprudence provides that locus standi is not required when the
action was filed to prevent a chilling effect on the exercise of the right
to freedom of expression and overbreadth.
 3
Political Law Updates
• Class suit – when the subject matter of the controversy is one of
common or general interest to many persons so numerous that it is
impracticable to join all as parties, a number of them which the court
finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully protect
the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all.
▪ The SC held that the petitioner minors, not only ordinary citizens have
legal standing to sue for the enforcement of environmental rights,
they can do so in representation of their own and future generations.
▪ The SC held the petitioners had locus standi, recognizing the public
right of citizens to a balanced and healthful ecology.
▪ A petitioner had no locus standi if he failed to show any direct and
personal interest and there was no indication that they have
sustained or are in imminent danger of sustaining some direct injury
as a result of its implementation and they admitted that they do not
seek any affirmative relief nor impute any improper or improvident act
against the respondents. Thus, he does not have any legal standing
to file the instant suit.
▪ Courts will not touch an issue involving the validity of a law unless
there has been a governmental act accomplished or performed
that has a direct adverse effect on the legal right of the person
contesting its legality.
• Citizen suit – any Filipino citizen in representation of others, including
those minors or generations yet unborn, may file an action to enforce
rights or obligations under environmental laws (rules of procedure for
environmental cases).
▪ The SC held that access to citizen’s suit have been granted on the
narrowest of grounds: when they raise issues of transcendental
importance calling for urgent resolution.
➢ The court may take cognizance, in the exercise of its discretion,
despite of lack of legal standing of the petitioner when the issue
involved shows paramount importance and the constitutional
significance of the issues raised in the petition.
➢ It is necessary that the subject matter is a matter of public
concern and imbued with public interest or it is of paramount
public interest and of transcendental importance in order to justify
the relaxing the rule on legal standing. **
▪ It does not require that a petitioner be directly affected by an
environmental disaster.
▪ Stewards may be allowed to file an action under Rule 65 to enforce
environmental laws not in representation of marine mammals but in
their own right by way of citizen suit which allows any Filipino citizen,
as steward of nature to bring suit to enforce environment laws.
• Doctrine of Parens Patriae – parent of the people; the government
may act as guardian of the rights of people who may be disadvantaged
or are suffering from disability or misfortune.
3. The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible
opportunity – to raise it in pleadings before a competent court that can
resolve the same.
- The SC held that the earliest opportunity to raise constitutional issue is
to raise it in the pleadings before a competent court that can resolve
the same and if it is not raised in the pleadings, such cannot be
considered at the trial and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
In criminal cases, the question can be raised at any time at the
discretion of the court. In civil cases, the question can be raised at any
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
stage of the proceedings if necessary for the determination of the case
itself, and every case, except when there is estoppel, it can be raised
at any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court.
4. The decision on the constitutional question must be determinative of the
case itself.
- The constitutional issue must be the lis mota (cause of action or suit)
of the case.
- The petitioner who claims the unconstitutionality of a law has the
burden of showing first that the case cannot be resolved unless the
constitutional question that he raised is decided.
- Every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality and to
justify its nullification, there must be a clear and unequivocal breach of
the Constitution and not one that is doubtful, speculative or
argumentative.
- The power is inherent in the judicial department by virtue of the doctrine
of separation of powers.
- The judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and
enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
branch or instrumentality of Government.
- The power to judicial review includes the power of review over justiciable
issues in impeachment proceedings.
- The SC held that RTCs have jurisdiction to resolve the constitutionality of
a statute, this authority being embraced in the general definition of the
judicial power to determine what are valid and binding laws by the criterion
of their conformity with the fundamental law.
▪ The SC held that family and ordinary courts (RTC) have authority and
jurisdiction to consider the constitutionality of a statute; notice to the OSG
is mandatory.
▪ The purpose of the mandatory notice to the OSG is to enable the Solicitor
General to decide whether or not his intervention in the action is
necessary. To deny the SG such notice would tantamount to depriving
him and the government he represents of his day in court.
Judicial Question arises when there is a conflict of legal rights.
- Issues raised must not be moot and academic – ceases to present a
justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events; court is not
empowered to decide moot questions or abstract propositions.
Exceptions to the moot and academic principles: VEGRI
1. There is a grave violation of the constitution.
2. There is an exceptional character of the situation and paramount
public interest is involved;
3. The constitutional issues raised require formulation of controlling
principles to guide the bench, the bar and the public;
4. The case is capable of repetition yet evasive of review
5. The case is a matter of public concern and imbued with public
interest.
▪ The SC held that despite the mootness of the case but capable of
repetition yet evading review, the Court may still decide the case if the
life of the controversy is too short to be fully litigated prior to its termination
and there is reasonable expectation that the plaintiff will again be
subjected to the same problem. **
Political Question:
 4
Political Law Updates
- It is to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity, or in regard
to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or
executive branch of the government.
▪ It is concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not legality, of a
particular measure.
- It is outside the pale of judicial review; connotes question of policy and it
is decided by the people (congress) in their sovereign capacity. Issues
are dependent upon the wisdom of the executive or legislative department
and not on the legality.
- The conduct of the foreign relations of our government is committed by
the constitution to the executive and legislative (the political) departments
of the government, and the propriety of what may be done in the exercise
of this political power is not subject to judicial inquiry or decision.
▪ The question of whether the Philippine government should espouse
claims of its nationals against a foreign government is a foreign relations
matter, the authority for which is committed by the Constitution to the
executive and legislative and the propriety of what may be done in the
exercise of this political power is not subject to judicial inquiry or decision.
**
▪ The intrinsic constitutionality of the Pork Barrel System is not an issue
dependent upon the wisdom of the political branches of government, but
rather a legal one which the Constitution itself has commanded the Court
to act upon.
Judicial legislation refers to encroachment by the judiciary upon the function
of the legislature by making law rather than declaring, construing or enforcing
the law.
- Execution of a judicial decision is an integral part of the court’s adjudication
function.
Constitutionality of a law:
- Once a law has been declared unconstitutional, it remains
unconstitutional unless circumstances have so changed as to warrant a
reverse conclusion.
• Facial challenge – it is an established rule that a party can question the
validity of a statute only if, as applied to him, it is unconstitutional; it
operates only in the area of freedom of expression.
- The SC ruled that a facial challenge is one that is launched to assail the
validity of statutes concerning not only protected speech, but also all
other rights in the First Amendment. These include religious freedom,
freedom of the press and the right of the people to peaceably assemble
and petition the Government for redress of grievances. ***
Overbreadth doctrine permits a party to challenge the validity of a statute
even though, as applied to him, it is not unconstitutional, but it might be if
applied to others not before the Court whose activities are constitutionally
protected.
- The overbreadth doctrine is an analytical tool developed for testing on
their face statutes in free speech cases, not for testing the validity of a
law that reflects legitimate state interest in maintaining comprehensive
control over harmful, constitutionally unprotected conduct.
- A facial challenge on the ground of overbreadth is the most difficult
challenge to mount successfully since the challenger must establish that
there can be no instance when the assailed law may be valid.
• Doctrine of void-for-vagueness – the law is facially invalid if men of
common intelligence must necessarily guess its meaning and differ as to
its application.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- The SC held that the vagueness doctrine merely requires a reasonable
degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld, not absolute precision or
mathematical exactitude.
• Doctrine of operative fact – as a general rule, the nullification of an
unconstitutional law or act carries with it the illegality of its effects; the
actions and programs done prior to the declaration of unconstitutionality are
valid and enforceable; it has a prospective effect.
- The SC held that a public officer who implemented an unconstitutional
law prior to the declaration of unconstitutionality cannot be held liable.
- The doctrine applies to acts and consequences that resulted from the
reliance not only on a law or executive act which is quasi-legislative in
nature, but also decisions or orders of the executive branch which were
latter nullified.
▪ Prior to the nullification or recall of such decision, it may have produced
acts and consequences in conformity to an in reliance of said decision,
which must be respected.
▪ The Court declared that the doctrine does may not be applied to
authors, implementors and proponents of the DAP, if it should be found
in the appropriate tribunals that they did not act in good faith.
• Doctrine of necessary implication means that the statute is understood
by implication to contain all such provisions as may be necessary to
effectuate its object and purpose, or to make effective eights, powers,
privileges or jurisdiction which it grants, including all such collateral and
subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically inferred from its
terms.
Territory
State is a community of persons, more or less numerous, permanently
occupying a definite portion of territory, independent of external, control, and
possessing a government to which a great body of inhabitants render habitual
obedience.
- State is a legal or juristic concept, while nation is an ethnic or racial
concept.
- National territory comprises the Philippine Archipelago, with all the islands
and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial
and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the sea bed, the subsoil, the
insular shelves and other submarine areas.
Archipelagic Doctrine refers to the waters around, between and
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines. (W-ABC-IA)
▪ It is meant that the islands and waters of the Philippine archipelago are
unified in sovereignty, together with all the territories over which the
Philippines has sovereignty and jurisdiction.
▪ The internal waters of the Philippines is subject to State sovereignty and
it is not open to international navigation except with the express
consent of the Coastal State.
▪ Archipelagic State means a State constituted wholly by one or more
archipelagos and may include other islands.
▪ Archipelago means a group of islands including parts o islands
interconnecting waters and other natural features which are so closely
interrelated that such islands waters and other natural features form an
intrinsic geographic, economic and political entity, or which historically
have been regarded as such.
 5
Political Law Updates
▪ Territorial Sea is the portion of the open sea adjacent to the shores of a
State over which that State exercises jurisdiction. Every State has the
right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea to a limit not exceeding
12 nautical miles, measured from the baseline.
1. The Territorial Sea is 12 nautical miles from the baselines. An
Archipelagic State may draw straight archipelagic baselines
(SAB) joining the outermost islands and drying reefs of the
archipelago, but the drawing of the baselines should not depart to
any appreciable extent from the general configuration of the
archipelago save for 3 percent of the total number of the baselines.
2. The Contiguous Zone is a zone contiguous to the territorial sea and
the maximum limit is 24 NM from the baselines of the territorial sea.
It confers jurisdiction to prevent infringements of customs, fiscal,
immigration and sanitary regulations.
3. The Economic Exclusive Zone extends no farther than 200 NM
from the baselines of the territorial sea. The Coastal State has
sovereign rights for the purpose of exploiting, conserving and
managing the natural resources of the waters superjacent to the sea-
bed and its sub-soil, and economic exploitation and exploration, such
as the production of energy. (ECM NRW)
4. The Continental Shelf gives the Coastal State rights to explore and
exploit the resources of the shelf by operation of law. (EE RS)
➢ Territorial sea – 12 nautical miles (NM) from the baseline;
contiguous zone – 24 NM; economic zone – 200 NM.
▪ An archipelago is a group of islands, including parts of islands,
interconnecting waters and other natural features which are closely
interrelated in such islands, waters and other natural features, form an
intrinsic geographical, economic and political entity, or which historically
have been regarded as such.
▪ Straight Baseline Method is an imaginary straight lines are drawn
joining the outermost points of the outermost islands of the
archipelago enclosing an area the ratio of which should not be more than
9:1 (water to land), provided that the drawing of baselines shall not depart
to any appreciable extent, from the general configuration of the
archipelago.
➢ The waters within the baselines shall be considered internal water;
while the breadth of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the
exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf shall be measured
from the baselines.
- Territorial jurisdiction – Penal laws and those of public security and safety
shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine territory, subject
to the principle of public international law and to treaty stipulations
(Art. 14, NCC). In short, it is the power of the state over the persons or
things within its territory;
▪ The premises occupied by the US Embassy do not constitute territory of
the US but of the Philippines. Crimes committed within the US Embassy
are subject to the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines (Bar 2009).
▪ Yogyakarta Principle is a document about human rights in the areas of
sexual orientation and gender identity, published as the outcome of an
international meeting of human rights groups in Yogyakarta, Indonesia in
November 2006. The principles are a set of precepts intended to apply
the standards of international human rights law to address the abuse of
human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people.
▪ Ergo Omnes (in relation to everyone) in international law has been used
as a legal term describing obligations owned by States towards the
community of States as a whole.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
Jus Congens (compelling law) refers to norms that command
peremptory authority, superseding conflicting treaties and custom.
- Personal jurisdiction – Laws relating to family rights and duties, to the
status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of
the Philippines even though living in abroad (Art. 15, NCC). It refers to the
power of the state over its national, which may be exercised by the State
even if the individual is outside the territory of the State.
- Extraterritorial jurisdiction refers to the power exercised by the state
beyond its territory in the following cases:
1. Assertion of its personal jurisdiction over its nationals abroad or the
exercise of its rights to punish certain offenses committed outside of its
territory against its national interests even if the offenders are NRA;
2. By virtue of its relations with other State or territories, as when it
establishes a colonial protectorate or occupies enemy territory in the
course of war;
3. When the local State waives its jurisdiction over persons and things
within its territory, as when a foreign army stationed therein remains
under the jurisdiction of the sending state;
4. By the principle of extraterritoriality, as illustrated by the immunities of
the head of State in a foreign country
5. The exercise of jurisdiction by the State in the high seas over its vessels
over pirates in the exercise of the right to visit and search and under
the doctrine of hot pursuit
6. The exercise of limited jurisdiction over the contiguous zone and the
patrimonial sea, to prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal or
immigration.
As to the criminal aspect. The provisions of RPC shall be enforced not only
within the Philippines, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and
maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airplane;
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine
Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippines;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these
islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding
number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in
the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law
of nations
Executive Agreement (EA) may be distinguished from Treaty as follow:
- EA is similar to a treaty except that the EA 1) does not require legislative
concurrence; 2) It is less formal; and, 3) It deals with a narrower range of
subject matter. LWN
▪ The Constitution does not intend treaty or international agreement to
include executive agreement which is excluded from the Senate’s
authority of concurring over treaties.
▪ The SC distinguished treaties from executive agreements, thus: 1)
international agreements which involve political issues or changes of
national policy and those involving international arrangements of a
permanent character take the form of a treaty; while international
agreements involving adjustment details carrying out well established
national policies and traditions and involving arrangements of a more or
less temporary nature take the form of executive agreements, and 2)
treaties, formal documents require ratification, while executive
agreements become binding through executive action. **
▪ The SC held that the President has the sole power to ratify treaties. The
Senate may be able to exercise its authority of concurrence only if the
 6
Political Law Updates
President transmits the instrument of ratification by which he accepts the
terms agreed on by his diplomatic negotiators of the proposed treaty in
question, together with the text of the proposed treaty, with the request
addressed to the Senate President to ratify such proposed treaty as
requested by the President.
- To be considered as an EA, the requisites are: 1) The agreement must be
between the States; 2) It must be written; and, 3) It must be governed by
international law. SWI
- Executive Agreements allowing a Foreign State to establish its embassy
and consular offices within Manila is valid and without need of submitting
it to the Senate for ratification since an executive agreement is not a treaty
and does not need the concurrence by the Senate in its ratification.
However, no foreign bases, armies or facilities shall be allowed in the
Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and,
when Congress requires, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the
people in a national referendum held for that purpose, and recognized
as a treaty by the other contracting State. FMBAF ***
- Pursuant to the US State Department Foreign Affairs Manual, executive
agreements are: 1) agreements which are made pursuant to or in
accordance with existing legislation or a treaty, 2) agreements which are
made subject to congressional approval or implementation, or 3)
agreements which are made under and in accordance with the President’s
constitutional power.
- Madrid protocol is an executive agreement. Thus, no senate concurrence
is required.
▪ International agreements involve political issues or changes of national
policy and those involving international arrangements of a permanent
character take the form of a treaty – formal documents require ratification.
▪ International agreements involving adjustment of details carrying out well
established national policies and traditions and involving arrangements
of more or less temporary nature take the form of an executive agreement
– it becomes binding through executive action.
- Pacta Sunt Servanda means that every treaty in force is binding upon the
States who are parties to it, and States must perform their obligation in good
faith.
Res Sic Stantibus means that a fundamental change of circumstances,
which occurred with regard to those existing at the time of the conclusion
of a treaty and which was not foreseen by the parties may not be invoked
for withdrawing from a treaty unless their existence constituted an essential
basis of the consent of the parties and their effect is to radically transform
the extent of the obligations still to be performed.
-
United Nations, as well as its organs and specialized agencies, are beyond
the jurisdiction of local courts and local administration.
- the SC held upheld the diplomatic immunity of private respondent as
established by the letter of the DFA recognizing and confirming such
immunity in accordance with the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and
Immunities of the UN of which the Philippines is a signatory.
UNCLOS
- UN Convention on the law of the sea (UNCLOS) – is a multilateral treaty
that seeks to balance State Sovereignty (mare clausum) and the principle
of freedom of the high seas (mare liberum).
- The passing of the law in compliance of UNCLOS has nothing to do with
acquisition or loss of property. It merely regulates sea-use rights over
maritime zones, contiguous zones, exclusive economic zones and
continental shelves which delimits. ***
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- The UNCLOS gives the Coastal State sovereign rights in varying degrees
over the different zones of the sea which are: 1) internal waters, 2) territorial
sea, 3) contiguous zone, 4) exclusive economic zone, and 5) high seas.
Likewise, it gives the Coastal State jurisdiction over foreign vessels
depending on where the vessel is located.
▪ The SC held that insofar as to the internal waters and territorial sea is
concerned, the Coastal State exercises sovereignty, subject to the
UNCLOS and other rules of international law. Such sovereignty extends
to the air space over the territorial sea as well as to its bed and subsoil.
- RA 9552 is statutory tool to demarcate (define) the country’s maritime
zone and continental shelf under UNCLOS III. It does not repeal RA 5446
which the Philippines claim sovereignty the use of the Framework of
Regime of Islands to determine the maritime zone of the
International Law of the Sea is a body of treaty rules and customary norms
governing the uses of the sea, exploitation of its resources and the exercises
of jurisdiction over maritime regimes.
- Warships continue to enjoy sovereign immunity but subject to arts 30 and
31 of UNCLOS, non-compliance by warships with the laws and regulations
of the coastal state, and responsibility of the flag State for damages
caused by a warship or other government ship operated for non-
commercial purposes. (NCP)
▪ If the country of a foreign warship is not a signatory or State Party of
UNLCOS, it cannot raise the defense that it is not bound by the UNCLOS
since Art. 32 of UNCLOS has the normative status of a customary
norm of international law; thus, it is binding on all stages.**
▪ Warships or Official vessel of the President of a country, wherever
they are, are extensions of their country and its sovereignty.
▪ Armed forces of a foreign country are immuned from local suit as they
represent the sovereignty of the sending State, unless there is an
agreement to assume criminal jurisdiction over their conduct while in the
Philippines.
▪ Merchant ship of Philippine Nationality in high seas, where no country
has jurisdiction, the Philippines has jurisdiction over crimes committed in
the Philippine vessel.
▪ The SC held that a foreign warship’s unauthorized entry into the internal
waters of the Philippines with resulting damage to marine resources is
bears the international responsibility even if the said foreign state is
not a member of the UNCLOS.
▪ The SC ruled that the waiver of State immunity under the VFA pertains
only to criminal jurisdiction and not to special civil actions such as the
present petition.
- Right of innocent passage – the archipelagic state enjoys sovereign
rights over all waters enclosed by the baselines, described as archipelagic
waters; all states enjoy the right of innocent passage through archipelagic
waters.
However, the archipelagic state may temporarily suspend the right of
innocent passage in specified areas, without discrimination, when deemed
essential for the protection of national security.
- As a rule, open seas are res communes and beyond the jurisdiction and
sovereign rights of the states. However, a state may exercise jurisdiction
even on high seas over its own vessels and under the doctrine of hot
pursuit.
 7
Political Law Updates
- Diplomatic negotiations are privileged in order to encourage a frank
exchange of explanatory ideas between the parties by shielding the
negotiations from public view (Bar 2009).
▪ It is also a remedy available to persons aggrieved by an act of a person
who enjoys diplomatic immunity.
- Association, under international law, is a formal arrangement between a
non-self-governing territory and an independent state whereby such
territory becomes an associated state with internal self-government, but the
independent state is responsible for foreign relations and defense.
▪ For an association to be lawful, it must comply with the general conditions
prescribed by the UN: 1) the population must consent to the association;
and 2) the association must promote the development and well-being of
the dependent state (the non-self-governing territory). It is subject to un
approval.
- China’s nine-dash line is a claim of historic right to the waters of the South
China Sea, it is invalid. None of the features in the Spratly Islands
generates an Exclusive Economic Zone, nor can the Spratly Islands
generate an EEZ collectively as a unit. China violated the Philippines’
sovereign rights in its EEZ and it has aggravated and extended the
disputes through its dredging, artificial island-building and construction
activities.
▪ Low-tide elevation creates no territorial sea, EEZ or continental shelf
and cannot be claimed as territory in its own right. It is legally part of the
seabed and its only real effect on the maritime regime is that, if it lies
within the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of another feature, it can be
considered the baseline from which the rock or island’s entitlements are
measured.
▪ Rock, which is distinguished from an island by not being able to sustain
independent human habitation or economic life, generates a territorial
sea but no EEZ or continental shelf.
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
- It provides for immunity to the members of diplomatic missions.
- Only diplomatic agents (heads of missions and members of the diplomatic
staff, excluding the members of the administrative, technical and service
staff of the mission) are vested with blanket diplomatic immunity from
civil and criminal suits provided he acted in the performance of diplomatic
duty.
▪ The main yardstick (test) in ascertaining whether a person is a 1)
diplomat entitled to immunity is the determination of 2) whether or not he
performs duties of diplomatic nature.
▪ A State cannot be sued in the courts of a foreign State, thus suing a
representative of a State is suing the State itself.
▪ The Doctrine of immunity from suit will not apply and may not be
invoked where the public official is being sued in his private capacity as
an ordinary citizen.
▪ A PO may be liable in his personal private capacity for whatever damage
he may have caused by his act done with malice and in bad faith or
beyond the scope of his authority and jurisdiction.
Act of state
- The power to deport aliens is an act of state, an act done by or under the
authority of the sovereign power; it is a police measure against
undesirable aliens whose continued presence in the country is found to be
injurious to the public good and the domestic tranquility if the people.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
Government
- The functions of government have been classified into governmental or
constituent which are mandatory for the Government to perform because
they constitute the very bonds of society, such as the maintenance of peace
and order, regulation of property and property rights, the administration of
justice, etc.; and proprietary or ministrant, which are functions intended to
promote the welfare, progress and prosperity of the people, and which are
merely optional for Government to perform.
The governmental or constituent function involves the exercise of
sovereignty and it is compulsory, while the proprietary or ministrant is only
optional.
- Dominium refers to the capacity to own or acquire property, including lands
held by the State in its proprietary capacity; while imperium is the authority
possessed by the State embraced in the concept of sovereignty.
- Kinds of de facto government: 1) That which takes possession or control
of, or usurps, by force or by the voice of the majority, the rightful legal
government and maintains itself against the will of the latter, 2) that which
is established by the inhabitants of a territory who rise in insurrection
against the parent state, and 3) that which is established by the invading
forces of an enemy who occupy a territory in the course of war.
- The effects of change in sovereignty is that political laws are abrogated,
while the municipal laws remain in force. On the other hand, there is no
change in sovereignty in case of belligerent occupation.
- The distinction of Presidential government from Parliamentary
government is that:
In Presidential Government, there is separation of executive and
legislative; the executive power is vested in the President, but the legislative
power is vested in Congress.
In Parliamentary Government – there is fusion of both executive and
legislative powers in Parliament; in actual the executive power is vested in
prime minister (PM).
- The distinction of Unitary government from Federal government is that:
Unitary Government is a single, centralized government, exercising
powers over both the internal and external affairs of the state.
Federal Government consists of autonomous state (local) government
units merged into a single state, with the national exercising a limited
degree of power over the domestic affairs but generally full direction of the
external affairs of the state.
State Immunity from Suit
Against the State:
- General rule: the state cannot be sued without its consent, unless it gives
its consent, express or implied (doctrine of royal prerogative of
dishonesty). Exception, whenever a property is taken for public use.
▪ There must be consent, express consent – act of legislative body; special
consent – embodied in a statute; or implied consent – when the state
commences litigation or enters into business litigation, the State
descended to the level of the citizen.
➢ Not all contracts entered into by the government operate as a waiver
of its non-suability. If the contract is executed in the exercise of its
sovereign function, it cannot be sued. On the other hand, if the
contract is executed in its proprietary function, it can be sued.
 8
Political Law Updates
o The SC held that contracts entered into by a sovereign state in
connection with the establishment of a diplomatic mission,
including contracts for the upkeep or maintenance of air
conditioning units, generator sets, electrical facilities and other
facilities used for governmental functions, are contracts in jure
imprerii.
* The fact that the contract contains a provision that any legal
action arising out of the agreement shall be settled according to
the laws of the Philippines and by a specified court of the
Philippines does not necessarily mean a waiver of the state’s
sovereign immunity from suit. **
o The SC held that even if, in the exercising the power of eminent
domain, the State exercises a power jus imperii, as distinguished
from its proprietary right of jus gestionis, where property has been
taken without just compensation being paid, the defense of
immunity from suit cannot be set up in an action for payment by
the owner. **
o The SC held that by entering into a compromise agreement with
a private individual, the Republic stripped itself of its immunity and
placed itself in the same level as its adversary. When the State
enters into a contract through its officers or agents, in furtherance
of a legitimate aim and purpose and pursuant to constitutional
legislative authority, whereby mutual or reciprocal benefits
accrue and rights and obligations arise therefrom, the State may
be sued even without its express consent, precisely because by
entering into a contract, the sovereign descends to the level of the
citizen.
➢ An unincorporated government agency without any separate
juridical personality of its own enjoys from suit because it is invested
with an inherent power of sovereignty.
➢ When the State commences litigation, the State becomes vulnerable
to a counterclaim. Intervention by the State in an ongoing case
would constitute commencement of litigation, except when the State
intervenes not for the purpose of asking for any affirmative relief, but
only for the purpose of resisting the claim precisely because of
immunity from suit.
▪ In order that suit may lie against the State, there must be consent, either
express or implied. Where no consent is shown, State Immunity from Suit
may be invoked as a defense by the courts sua sponte at any stage of
the proceedings, because waiver of immunity, being in derogation of
sovereignty, will not be inferred lightly and must be construed in
strictissimi juris.
▪ The State immunity from suit may be invoked as long as the suit really
affects the property, rights or interests of the State and not merely those
of the officers nominally made party defendants.
➢ The promotion of public welfare and the protection of the inhabitants
near the public forest are property rights and interest of the State.
➢ When an action is brought against any Internal Revenue Officer to
recover damages for an act done in the performance of official duty,
any judgment damages or costs recovered in such action, if the same
is paid by the person sued, shall be repaid or reimbursed to him.
▪ The State’s diplomatic agents, including to a certain extent, are exempt
from the jurisdiction of local courts and administrative tribunals.
▪ A foreign agent operating with the Philippine territory, can be cloaked
with immunity from suit but only as long as it can be established that he
is acting within the directives of the sending State. ***
➢ The cloak of protection is removed the moment the foreign agent is
sued in his individual capacity, as when he is sought to be made liable
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
for whatever damage he may have caused by his act done with
malice or in bad faith or beyond the scope of his authority or
jurisdiction.
▪ The principle is based on the sovereign functions of the State and as a
sovereign State, it is exempt from suit based on the logical and practical
ground that there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes
the law on which the right depends.
▪ The state immunity from the suit may be invoked as long as the suit really
affects the property, rights or interest of the state and not merely those of
the officers nominally made party defendants.
▪ The doctrine of state immunity extends its protective mantle also to
complaints filed against state officials for acts done in the discharge and
performance of their duties.
The public officials can be held personally accountable for acts claimed
to have been performed in connection with official duties where they have
acted ultra vires or where there is showing of bad faith.
Against Government Agencies:
- An incorporated agency possesses a juridical personality independent of
the State. If its charter provides that the agency can sue or be sued, then
suit will lie, including one for tort. The provisions in the charter constitutes
express consent on the part of the State to be sued.
▪ Municipal Corporations are agencies of the State when they are
engaged in government functions and, therefore, should enjoy the
sovereign immunity from suit. However, they are subject to suit even in
performance of such function because their respective charter provide
that they can sue and be sued.
➢ A government-owned controlled corporation may be sued as the suit
is not a suit against the State, because it has a separate juridical
personality.
➢ the SC held that the National Irrigation Administration is a
government agency with a juridical personality separate and distinct
from the government, it is a corporate body performing proprietary
functions. Thus, the NIA may be held liable for damages caused by
the negligent act of its driver who was not a special agent.
▪ When an agency of government not performing a governmental or
sovereign function, but instead involved in the management and
maintenance of an activity not the exclusive prerogative of the State in its
sovereign capacity, it cannot invoke State immunity from suit.
▪ The SC ruled that funds belonging to government corporation with
charter that are deposited with a bank are not exempt from garnishment
since the government enters into commercial business, it abandons its
sovereign capacity and is to be treated like any other corporation. **
➢ Before execution may proceed against it, a claim for payment of
the judgment award (monetary claim) must first be filed with the
Commission on Audit since COA has the primary jurisdiction to
examine, audit and settle (EAS) all debts and claims of any sort due
from or owing the Government or any of its subdivision, agencies and
instrumentalities, including GOCC and their subsidiaries.
➢ The garnishment of a government entity (with charter) funds to satisfy
the RTC judgment awards of actual and moral damages, including
attorney’s fees is validly made if there is a special appropriation by
Congress to cover the liability as the appropriation by Congress is
required before the judgment rendered by the Court would be
satisfied.
➢ The SC ruled that funds of a municipality with charter are public in
character and may not be garnished unless there is a corresponding
 9
Political Law Updates
appropriation ordinance duly passed by the concerned Sanggunian
as required by law.
o When there is no appropriation ordinance passed due to the failure
or refusal of the municipality without justifiable reason, the remedy
of the claimant is avail mandamus in order to compel the
enactment and approval of the necessary appropriation ordinance
and the corresponding disbursement of municipal funds to satisfy
the money judgment.
- An unincorporated agency has no juridical personality independent of the
Government.
▪ If it is performing governmental function, no suit can be filed unless with
its consent.
➢ The SC held that the BOC, being an unincorporated agency without
a separate juridical personality, enjoys immunity from suit. It is
invested with an inherent power of sovereignty. Likewise, the
Customs Arraste Service is merely an adjunct of the BOC and a suit
against it will not prosper if it is performing governmental functions.
▪ If it is performing proprietary function, suit will lie against it because the
State descends to the level of a private individual and therefore it is
vulnerable to suit.
▪ To determine suability, it must inquire first into the principal functions of
the agency.
1. As a rule, the act of the agency is the act of the principal; there must
be consent from the principal.
2. Engaged in governmental functions; including the exercise of
proprietary functions incidental to primary governmental functions –
immune from suit.
3. Engaged in proprietary functions - the state descends to the level of
a private individual; not immune from suit.
Against Public Officers:
- The doctrine of Immunity is also extended to public officials who performed
their duties within the scope of their authority.
Exceptions to the rule, officers may be sued without prior consent of the
state:
1. Compel him to do an act required by law;
2. To restrain him from enforcing act claimed to be unconstitutional;
3. To compel the payment of damages from an already appropriated
assurance fund;
4. To secure a judgment that officer impleaded may satisfy by himself
without the state having to do positive act to assist him; and
5. The government has violated its own laws because the doctrine of
State Immunity cannot be used to perpetrate an injustice.
- The unauthorized acts of government officials are not acts of state;
thus, the public officer may be sued and held personally liable in damages.
▪ Where the public officer has committed ultra vires act or where there is
a showing of bad faith, malice or gross negligence, the officer can be
personally accountable.
▪ Where the public official is sued in his personal capacity, the doctrine of
State Immunity will not apply, even if the acts complained of were
committed while the public official was occupying a public position.
▪ The SC ruled that the public officer who exceeds the power conferred on
him by law cannot hide behind the plea of sovereign immunity and must
bear the liability personally.
Against Foreign State:
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- Immunity is enjoyed by other state and its diplomatic agents;
- Par in parem non habet imperium – head of the state is inviolable, enjoys
immunity;
- foreign agents can be cloaked with immunity as long as he is acting within
the directives of the sending state.
However, waiver of state immunity under vfa pertains only to criminal
jurisdiction and not to special civil action.
- A contract entered by a foreign agent in sovereign function is extended
enjoys diplomatic immunity from suit.
Fundamental Power of State
General Principles:
- The inherent powers of the State: 1) police power, 2) power of eminent
domain and 3) power of taxation.
- Limitations: Generally, bill of rights, although in some cases the exercise
of the power prevails over specific constitutional guarantees. The courts
may annul the improvident exercise of police power.
- Similarities:
1. Inherent in the state, exercised even without need of express
constitutional grant;
2. Necessary and indispensable; state cannot be effective with them;
3. Methods by which state interferes with private property;
4. Presuppose equivalent compensation; and
5. Exercised primarily by the legislature.
- Distinctions of the inherent powers of the State:
As to scope. Police power regulates both liberty and property; eminent
domain and taxation affect only property.
As to who exercises. Police power and taxation are exercised only by
government; eminent domain may be exercised by private entities;
As to property taken. Property taken in police power is usually noxious or
intend for noxious purpose and may thus be destroyed; while in eminent
domain and taxation, the property is wholesome and devoted to public use
or purpose.
As to compensation. Compensation in police power is the intangible,
altruistic feeling that the individual has contributed to the public good; in
eminent domain, it is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken; while
in taxation, it is the protection given and / or public improvements instituted
by government for taxes paid.
Police Power is the power of promoting public welfare by restraining and
regulating the use and enjoyment of liberty and property.
- It is the most pervasive, the least limitable and the most demanding of the
three powers. The justification is found in the legal maxims “salus populi
est suprema lex and sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas.”
▪ It cannot be bargained away through the medium of a treaty or contract
and taxing power and eminent domain may be used to implement the
police power. Eminent domain may be used to implement to attain the
police objective.
▪ A law enacted in the exercise of police power to regulate or govern certain
activities or transactions could be given retroactive effect and may
reasonably impair vested rights or contracts.
 10
Political Law Updates
➢ Police power legislation is applicable not only to future contracts, but
equally to those already in existence. Non-impairment of contracts or
vested rights clauses will have to yield to the superior and legitimate
exercise by the State of the police power.
➢ There is no violation of the non-impairment clause because the
decree is a valid exercise of the police power and police power
prevails over contract.
▪ The right of workers to security of tenure is guaranteed by the
Constitution, its exercise may be reasonably regulated pursuant to the
police power of the State to safeguard health, morals, peace, education,
order safety and the general welfare of the people.
▪ A license to operate a motor vehicle is not a property right, but a privilege
granted by the State, which may be suspended or revoked by the State
in the exercise of its police power, in the interest of public safety and
welfare, subject to the procedural due process requirements.
▪ The SC held that property rights must bow to the primacy of police
power because property rights, though sheltered by the due process
clause, must yield to the general welfare.
- The power is inherently vested in the Legislature. However, Congress may
validly delegate this power to the President, to administrative bodies and to
lawmaking bodies of local government unit. Local government units
exercise the power under the general welfare clause.
▪ While police power may be validly delegated to the President by law, it
does not authorize the President or any other administrative body, to take
over the internal management of a cooperative.
▪ The mandate to the newspaper of general circulation in every province
or city to provide free print space of not less than 1/2 page as COMELEC
space was held to be invalid exercise of police power as there being no
showing of the existence of national emergency or imperious public
necessity for the taking of print space, nor that the resolution was the only
reasonable and calibrated response to such necessity.
The QC ordinance which required commercial cemetery owners to
reserve 6% of burial lots for the paupers in the City was held to be invalid
exercise of the police power, but was, instead, an exercise of the power
of eminent domain which would make the City liable to pay the owners
just compensation.
▪ The regulation by local legislature of land use in their respective
territorial jurisdiction through zoning and reclassification is an exercise
of the police power.
▪ The MMDA is not authorize to enact ordinance, approve resolutions and
appropriate funds for the general welfare of the inhabitants of Metro
Manila as there is no provision in RA 7924. Thus, it does not have the
power to confiscate and suspend or revoke driver’s license without need
of any other legislative enactment, but it is vests with duty to enforce
existing traffic rules and regulations.
- The proper exercise of the police power requires compliance with the
following requisites:
1. The interests of the public generally require the interference by the
State
2. The means employed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of
the object sought and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.
▪ The SC ruled that an ordinance aimed at relieving traffic congestion
meets the first standard, but declaring bus terminals as nuisance per
se and ordering their closure or relocation contravenes the second
standard.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC declared that for municipal ordinances to be valid, they: 1)
must not contravene the Constitution, 2) must not be unfair or
oppressive, 3) must not be partial or discriminatory, 4) must not
prohibit, but regulate trade, 5) must not be unreasonable, and 6) must
be general in application and consistent with public policy.
➢ The authority of a municipality to issue a zoning classification is an
exercise of the police power, not the power of eminent domain.
➢ The SC declared that Ordinance No. 8187 is invalid and
unconstitutional on the basis of the best interest of the public as
guide, the Court noted that the Pandacan oil depot remains a
terrorist target even if the contents have been lessened. Based on
the hierarchy of constitutionally protected rights, the right to life
enjoys precedence to the right to property. Life is irreplaceable,
property is not.
- Valid delegation: 1) It can be delegated by congress by law to the president
or government administrative agency, and 2) It can be exercised by the
LGU under the general welfare clause.
- Limitations of Municipal Ordinance: 1) Express grant by law; 2) Exercised
within territorial jurisdiction; 3) Must not be contrary to law; and it must not
violate the Due process clause and equal protection clause.
- All rights and freedoms guaranteed by the charter, their existence may be
regulated pursuant to police power of the state to safeguard health, morals,
peace, education, order, safety and general welfare of the people.
Eminent Domain
- Constitutional basis and limitation: no private property for public use shall be
taken without payment of just compensation.
▪ The acquisition of an easement of a right of way falls within the purview
of the power of eminent domain.
➢ An action for right of way filed by an electric power company for the
construction of transmission lines falls within the scope of the power
of eminent domain and where the right of way perpetually deprives
the defendants of their proprietary rights, then there is taking which
entitles defendants to payment of just compensation. **
▪ The power of eminent domain normally results in the taking of
appropriation of title to, and possession of, the expropriated properly.
▪ Jurisdiction over a complaint for eminent domain is with the RTC and
while the value of the property to expropriated is estimated in monetary
terms – for the court is duty bound to determine the amount of just
compensation to be paid for the property – it is merely incidental to the
expropriation suit.
➢ The RTC which has jurisdiction over the expropriation suit can
determine in the same proceeding the issue of ownership of the land
sought to be condemned.
➢ The finding of ownership in an expropriation proceeding should not
be construed as final and binding on the parties. By filing an action
for expropriation, the comdemnor merely serves notice that it is taking
title to, and possession of, the property, and that the defendant is
asserting title to or interested in the property, not to prove right to
possess but to prove a right to compensation for taking.
➢ The defendant in an expropriation case who has objections to the
taking of his property is now required to file an answer, and in it raise
 11
Political Law Updates
all his available defenses against the allegations in the complaint for
eminent domain.
▪ The Congress and by delegation, the President, administrative bodies,
LGUs and even private enterprises performing public services may
exercise the power of eminent domain.
➢ LGUs have no inherent power of eminent domain, they can exercise
the power only when expressly authorized by the Legislature. Sec. 19
of the LGC confers such power to local governments but the power is
not absolute and it is subject to statutory requirements.
➢ Eminent domain cases are strictly construed against the expropriator
as an exception to the general rule is that the State cannot be put in
estoppel or laches by the mistakes or errors of its officials or agents.
▪ The foundation of the right to exercise eminent domain is genuine
necessity and that necessity must be of public character. Government
may not capriciously or arbitrarily choose which private property should be
expropriated.
▪ All private property capable of ownership may be expropriated, including
services, except money.
➢ Private property already devoted to public use cannot be expropriated
by a delegate of legislature acting under a general grant of authority.
▪ The term taking includes trespass without actual eviction of the owner,
material impairment of the value of the property or prevention of the
ordinary uses for which the property was intended.
➢ Elements of taking: 1) the expropriator must enter a private property;
2) the entry must be for more than a momentary period or indefinite
or permanent; 3) entry must be under warrant or color of authority; 4)
property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally
appropriated injuriously affected; and, 5) the use of the property for
public use removed from the owner and deprived him of beneficial
enjoyment of the property. EMAPD
o The taking must be used for public use which is for public need or
public exigency or public interest or public benefit or public
convenience.
* The SC ruled that the Sangguniang Panlalawigan has no authority
to disapprove the ordinance enacted by the Sangguniang Bayan
for the expropriation of a private property for public use or purpose.
* The SC ruled that irrespective whether the property would benefit
only the few from the expropriation, it does not necessarily diminish
the essence and character of public use.
o To legalize the possession, the Republic must acquire the property
from the defendant by instituting expropriation proceedings or
through negotiated sale.
o Possessory taking occurs when the government confiscates or
physically occupies property.
o Regulatory taking occurs when the government’s regulations leave
no reasonable economically viable use of the property.
➢ The Court said that the exercise of the power of eminent domain does
not always result in the taking or appropriation of title to the
expropriated property; it may only result in the imposition of a burden
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
upon the owner of the condemned property, without loss of title or
possession.
o The defendant is entitled to payment of just compensation even there
is no actual taking of his property as long as the condemnor has
burdened or deprived the defendant of his proprietary rights of his
property.
➢ The Court ruled that the owner should be compensated for the
monetary equivalent of the land if the easement is intended to
perpetually or indefinitely deprive of his proprietary rights through
the imposition of conditions that affect the ordinary use, free enjoyment
and disposal of the property.
▪ It is well settled that the market value of the property is “that sum of money
which a person, desirous but not compelled to by, and an owner, willing
but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price to be given and
received therefor.”
➢ Just compensation means not only the correct amount to be paid to
the owner of the land but also payment with reasonable time.
o The FMV of the expropriated property is determined by its character
and its price at the time of taking. It is settled rule that the nature
and character of the land at the time of taking is the principal
criterion for determining how much just compensation should be
given to the land owner.
o These are the following factors to be considered: 1) current market
value of like properties, 2) tax value of the condemned property, 3)
its size, shape and location; the aforementioned must be supported
by documentary evidence.
o The ascertainment of what constitutes just compensation for property
taken in eminent domain cases is a judicial prerogative.
* Legislative enactments, as well as executive issuances, fixing or
providing the methods of computing just compensation are not
binding on the courts and are treated as mere guidelines
ascertaining the amount of just compensation.
* While the appointment of the Commissioners is made by the Court
for the determination of just compensation, the Court is not bound
by the commissioners’ findings. The Court may substitute its own
estimate of the value of the property only for valid reasons.
o The following parties are entitled to the payment of just
compensation, and not limited to the owner, who have lawful
interest in the property to be condemned: a mortgagee, a lessee and
a vendee in possession under an executory contract.
o As to the form of payment, the Court declared that the deposit of
compensation must be in cash or in land bank bonds and not in any
other form, including a trust account.
* The Court ruled that only cash and bonds, as valid modes of
satisfying the government’s obligation to pay just compensation.
* Parties are allowed to deviate traditional mode of payment other
than cash as long as there must be payment of just compensation
before the title to the expropriated property is transferred.
* The value of the property or compensation is determined as of the
date of the filing of the complaint for eminent domain or at the time
of the actual taking of the property, whichever comes first. ***
 12
Political Law Updates
ꞝ When eminent domain is exercised by a local government unit,
the amount to be paid for the expropriated property shall be
determined by the proper court, based on the FMV value at the
time of the taking of the property.
ꞝ It was held that the value of the property shall be ascertained as
of the date it was actually taken, because it is as of that time that
the real measure of the owner’s loss may be fairly adjudged.
ꞝ The SC ruled that if property is taken for public use before
compensation is deposited with the Court having jurisdiction over
the case, the final compensation must include interest on its just
value to be computed from the time the property is taken to the
time when the compensation is actually paid or deposited with
the Court.
- Interest is to be imposed only in case of delay in the payment
of just compensation to the owner of the property expropriated.
- The imposition of the 12% interest per annum was in the nature
of damages for delay in payment which, in effect, makes the
obligation on the part of government one of forbearance and
such imposition would be until June 30, 2013.
Thereafter, or beginning July 1, 2013, until fully paid, the
interest shall be at the rate of 6% per annum in line with the
amendment by the BSP.
On the other hand, when the government, expropriating agency,
before the taking of the property, deposits an amount
representing the zonal value of the property being taken, there is
deemed to be no forbearance and the owner is not entitled to
the 12% interest per annum.
* The just compensation must be paid within a reasonable time
from the time the land is taken from the owner. If not, the State
must pay the landowner interest, by way of damages, from the
time the land is taken from the owner.
* The title of the property shall not pass until after payment of the just
compensation except in agrarian reforms.
o Capital gains tax on the sale of real property in expropriation cases
is to be paid by the seller, not the government. Each of the parties to
the transaction shall be liable for documentary stamp tax due, unless
there is an agreement to the contrary.
o The SC ruled that the non-payment of just compensation in an
expropriation proceeding does not entitle the private landowners to
recover possession of expropriated lots, but only to demand payment
of the FMB of the property. ***
* The SC ruled that where the government fails to pay just
compensation within 5 years from the finality of the judgment in
the expropriation proceedings, the owners concerned shall have
the right to recover possession of their property. **
* An action to claim for payment of just compensation is
imprescriptible.
➢ Consequential damages are awarded if, as a result of the
expropriation, the remaining property of the owner suffers from
impairment or decrease in value.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
o No consequential damages should be awarded if the entire property,
and not merely a portion, is being expropriated.
➢ In agrarian reform cases, just compensation should be the full and fair
equivalent of the property taken from the owner, the equivalent being
real, substantial, full and ample.
➢ The tax credit given to commercial establishments for the discount
enjoyed by senior citizens pursuant to RA 7432 is a form of just
compensation for private property taken by the State for public use,
since the privilege enjoyed by senior citizens does not come directly
from the State, but from the private establishments concerned.
➢ The Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) is not merely a nominal party
in the determination of just compensation but an indispensable
participant in such proceedings. As such, LBP possesses the legal
personality to institute a petition for determination of just
compensation.
- Notice is part of the constitutional right to due process of law. It informs the
landowner of the State’s intention to acquire a private land upon payment of
just compensation, and gives him the opportunity to present evidence that his
land is not covered or otherwise excused from the agrarian reform law.
- The issuance of the writ of possession becomes ministerial upon the 1)
filing of a complaint for expropriation sufficient in form and substance, and
2) upon deposit made by the government of the amount equivalent to the
assessed value of the property sought to be expropriated per current tax
declaration.
▪ The determination of whether the taking of the property is for a public
purpose is not a condition precedent before the court may issue a writ of
possession.
▪ A hearing will have to be held to determine whether or not the expropriator
complied with the requirements of RA 7279.
- The SC ruled that the property owner’s right to repurchase the property
depends upon the character of the title acquired by the expropriator and if the
land is expropriated for a particular purpose with the condition that when that
purpose is ended or abandoned, the property shall revert to the former
owner, then the former owner can re-acquire the property.
- The State may, in the interest of national interest or defense, establish and
operate vital industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to
public ownership utilities and other private enterprises to be operated by the
Government.
In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the
State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by
it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately owned public
utility or business affected with public interest.
▪ It is the welfare and interest of the public which is the paramount
consideration in determining whether or not to temporarily take over a
particular business.
▪ The temporary takeover by the government extends only to the operation
of the business and not to the ownership thereof. As such, the government
is not required to compensate the private entity-owner of the said business
as there is no transfer of ownership, whether permanent or temporary.
 13
Political Law Updates
- Expropriation proceedings may be resorted to only when the other modes
of acquisition have been exhausted. Compliance with these requirements
must be deemed mandatory because they are the only
- Eminent Domain may be distinguished from Police Power in the following
manner:
1. As to nature. Police power is the power of the State to promote public
welfare by restraining and regulating the use of liberty and property. The
power of eminent domain is the inherent right of the State to condemn
private property to public use upon payment of just compensation.
2. As to payment of just compensation. In police power, property
condemned which is usually noxious (harmful) or intended for noxious
purpose, no compensation is paid. Unlike in eminent domain, just
compensation is required.
3. As to purpose. Police power subjects the property rights of the individual
to restrain and burdens in order to secure the general comfort, health and
prosperity of the State. Eminent domain restricts the use of the private
property, but none of the property interests in the bundle of rights which
constitute ownership is appropriated for use by or for the benefit of the
public.
4. As to objective. The exercise of police power over a property is impaired
by regulation or the use of the property is merely regulated, prohibited or
restricted in order to promote public welfare. The exercise of power of
eminent domain, the property interests of a private individual are
appropriated and applied to some public purpose and thus, payment of
just compensation is necessary.
- Requisite for issuance of writ of possession: 1) filing of the complaint for
expropriation; and 2) upon deposit made by the government of the amount
equivalent to the assessed value of the property sought to be expropriated
per current tax declaration.
- Purpose: To condemn property for public use or purpose upon payment of
just compensation in order to promote public welfare.
- The taking of private property for public use, to be compensable, need not be
an actual physical taking or appropriation.
▪ If the nature of an easement practically deprives the owners of its normal
beneficial use, full compensation is warranted.
▪ It is neither necessary that the owners be wholly deprived of the use of his
property, nor material whether the property is removed from the
possession of the owner.
▪ The taking of a private land is always conditioned on its continued devotion
to its public purpose. Once the purpose is terminated or peremptory
abandoned, then the former owner may seek its reversion subject of course
to the return of the just compensation received.
- Limitations:
▪ LGUs have no inherent power of eminent domain; they can exercise
the power only when expressly authorized by the legislature; there
must be an enabling law delegated to LGUs by the national legislation.
▪ No court except the SC could issue an injunction against the
infrastructure project of the government.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The aim of such prohibition is prevent delay in the implementation or
execution of the government infrastructure projects to the detriment of
the greater goods.
Power of Taxation – it t can only be exercised by the congress, except when it
is delegated by it.
Limitations:
1. Public purpose;
2. Uniformity;
3. Territoriality;
4. Due process and equal protection clauses;
5. Constitutionally exempt properties cannot be taxed; and,
6. Assessment and collection of certain kind of taxes, notice and opportunity
for hearing.
Characteristics of taxation:
1. Prospective
2. May be exercised jointly with police power
3. Attribute to sovereignty
4. Legislative in nature
5. Unlimited in scope
6. Subservient to non-impairment clause
7. Imprescriptible
- The taxing power may be used as an implement of police power.
Principles and State Policies
Preamble
- It does not confer rights nor impose duties.
- It indicates authorship of the Constitution; enumerates the primary aims and
aspirations of the framers and serves as an aid in the construction of the
Constitution.
Separation of Powers:
- The SC ruled that the purpose of the separation of powers is to prevent
concentration of authority in one person or group of persons that might lead
to an irreversible error or abuse in its exercise to the detriment of republican
institutions. To secure action, to forestall overaction, to prevent despotism
and to obtain efficiency.
▪ Each branch is considered separate, co-equal, coordinate and supreme
within its own sphere under the legal and political reality of one overarching
Constitution that governs one government and one nation for whose benefit
all the three separate branches must act with unity.
▪ Principle of Comity which is the practice of observing interdepartmental
courtesy in undertaking their assigned constitutional duties for the
harmonious working of government.
• Principle of Blending of Powers arises when powers are not confined
exclusively within one department, but are assigned to or shared by several
departments, e.g., enactment of general appropriation law.
• Principle of Checks and Balances allows one department to resist
encroachments upon its prerogatives or to rectify mistakes or excesses
committed by the other departments, e.g., veto power of the President as
check on improvident legislation, etc.
• Doctrine of Necessary Implication is the grant of an express power carries
with it all other powers that may be reasonably inferred from it.
 14
Political Law Updates
Delegation of powers
• Potestas delegate non potest delegare is based on the ethical principle
that delegated power constitutes not only a right but a duty to be performed
by the delegate through the instrumentality of his own judgment and not
through the intervening mind of another.
Exceptions to the principle of non-delegations of powers:
1. When the constitution expressly permits it;
2. Delegation of powers to LGUs;
3. Delegation of powers to fill in details
4. Delegation of powers to administrative agencies to provide certain
standards;
5. Delegation of powers to the people at large; and
6. Delegation of powers to the president in the field of foreign or international
relations.
- The SC ruled that while PAGCOR is allowed under its charter to enter into
operator’s and/or management contracts, it is not allowed to relinquish or
share its franchise, much less grant a veritable franchise to another entity.
PAGCOR cannot delegate its power, inasmuch as there is nothing in the
charter show that it has been expressly authorized to do so.
- The SC ruled that BPO issued by the Punong Barangay or any Brgy. Kgwd.
merely orders the perpetrator to desist from causing physical harm to the
woman or her child, and threatening to cause the woman or her child
physical harm and such function of the PB is purely executive in nature,
consistent with his duty under the LGC to enforce all laws and ordinances
and to maintain public order in the barangay.
- Tests for valid delegation: (both of the following tests are to be complied
with)
1. Completeness Test – the law must be complete in all its essential
terms and conditions when it leaves the legislature so that there will be
nothing left for the delegate to do when it reaches him except to enforce
it.
2. Sufficient standard test – it is intended to map out the boundaries of
the delegate’s authority by defining the legislative policy and indicating
the circumstances under which it is to be pursued and effected.
▪ It is intended to prevent a total transference of legislative power
from the legislature to the delegate and the standard is usually
indicated in the law delegating legislative power. **
▪ The legislative standard need not be expressed, it may be gathered
or implied; neither should it always found in the law challenged,
because it may be found in other statutes on the same subject.
• Delegation to the President:
1. Tariff Powers to the President - the Congress may, by law, authorize
the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations
and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas,
tonnage and wharfage dues and other duties or imposts within the
framework of the national development program of the Government.
2. Emergency Powers to the President – the Congress may, by law,
authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to restrictions as
it may provide, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a
declared national policy, unless sooner withdrawn by resolution of the
Congress, such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof.
• Delegation to the People:
- The SC ruled that courts have sustained the delegation of legislative power
to the people at large.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Referendum is the power of the electorate to approve or reject
legislation through an election called for the purpose. Referendum on
statutes which refers to a petition to approve or reject an act or law, or
part thereof, passed by Congress; and referendum on local law which
refers to a petition to approve or reject a law, resolution or ordinance
enacted by regional assemblies and local legislative bodies.
▪ Plebiscite is the electoral process by which an initiative on the
Constitution is approved or rejected by the people.
• Delegation to the Local Government Units:
- The SC ruled that the legislation by local governments is not regarded as a
transfer of general legislative power, but rather as the grant of the authority
to prescribe local regulations, according to immemorial practice, subject to
the interposition of the superior in cases of necessity.
• Delegation to Administrative Bodies:
- The SC held that the power of subordinate legislation by the
administrative body is valid as long as it conforms to the sufficient and valid
standard of fair and equitable employment practices.
- The power of subordinate legislation – must comply with sufficient standard
test.
The Incorporation Clause
• Doctrine of Incorporation
- The SC ruled that by virtue of this clause, the Courts have applied the rules
of international law in a number of cases even if such rules had not
previously been subject of statutory enactments, because these generally
accepted international principles of international are automatically part of
our laws.
- The phrase “generally accepted principles of international law” refers
to norms of general or customary international law which are binding on all
states.
- International law can become part of the sphere of domestic law either: by
transmission or by incorporation.
1. Transformation method requires that an international law principle
transformed into domestic law through constitutional mechanism, such
as local legislation.
2. Incorporation method applies by mere constitutional declaration;
international law is deemed to have the force of a domestic law.
▪ The doctrine of incorporation is applied whenever municipal tribunals
or local courts are confronted with situations in which there appears to
be a conflict between a rule of international law and the provisions of
the constitution or statute of the local state. **
➢ Where the conflict is irreconcilable and a choice has to be made
between a rule of international law and municipal law,
jurisprudence dictates that municipal law should be upheld by the
municipal courts on the basis that courts are organs of municipal
law and are accordingly bound by it in all circumstances. **
➢ The doctrine of incorporation dictates that rules of international law
are given equal standing with, and are not superior to, national
legislative enactments.
The Right to Bear Arms is a statutory, not constitutional right. The license to
carry firearm is neither a property nor a property right. Neither does it create a
vested right
 15
Political Law Updates
The Independent foreign policy and nuclear-free Philippines
- The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with
other states, the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty,
territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination.
The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a
policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.
Family and Youth
- The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally
protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.
▪ The framers of the Constitution intended conception to refer to the moment
of fertilization and the protection of the unborn child upon fertilization.
▪ The Court did not intend to ban all contraceptives for being unconstitutional,
only those that kill or destroy or destroy the fertilized ovum would be
prohibited.
▪ The RH Law recognizes that the fertilized ovum already has life and that
the State has a bounden duty to protect it.
Promotion of health and Ecology
- The SC ruled that the petitioners minors had a legal standing to institute the
suit and had a valid cause of action in questioning the continued grant of
Timber Licensure Agreements (TLAs) for commercial logging purposes,
because the cause focuses on a fundamental right: the right to a balanced
and healthful ecology need not be written in the Constitution for it is assumed
to exist from the inception of mankind and it is an issue of transcendental
importance with intergenerational implications.
- The environmental compliance certificate can be challenged through a
Writ of Kalikasan as long as the party can provide a causal link or
reasonable connection between the defects or irregularities in the issuance
of the ECC and the actual or threatened violation of the constitutional right to
a healthful and balanced ecology of a magnitude that prejudices the life,
health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.
▪ As to the claim that the issuance of the ECC violated the IPRA Law and the
Local Government Code, and that the LDA likewise violated the IPRA,
these are not within the coverage of the writ of kalikasan, because no
reason connection can be made to an actual or threatened violation of the
right to a healthful and balanced ecology of the magnitude contemplated in
the Rules. However, because of the exceptional character of the case,
the Court will resolve the issues in this writ of Kalikasan case. **
Priority to education, science, technology, etc.
- The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts,
culture and sports, to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social
progress, and promote total human liberation and development.
▪ The Court ruled that the highest budgetary priority to education is
merely directory since the hands of Congress cannot be so hamstrung
as to deprive it of the power to respond to the imperatives of national
interest and the attainment of the other State policies and objectives. **
▪ While it is true that this Court has upheld the constitutional right of every
citizen to select a profession or course of study subject to fair, reasonable
and equitable admission and academic requirements, the exercise of this
right may be regulated pursuant to the police power of the State to
safeguard health, morals, peace, education, order, safety and general
welfare.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ This regulation assumes particular pertinence in the field of medicine,
in order to protect the public from the potentially deadly effects of
incompetence and ignorance.
Protection to Labor
- The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the
rights of workers and promote welfare.
▪ The SC held that RA 7277 (Magna Carta for Disabled Persons) mandates
that qualified disabled persons be granted the same terms and
conditions of employment as qualified able-bodied employees; thus, once
they have attained the status of regular workers, they should be accorded
all the benefits granted by law, written or verbal contracts to the contrary.
This treatment is rooted not merely in charity or accommodation, but in
justice for all. **
Self-reliant and Independent economic order
- The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economy
effectively controlled by Filipinos.
▪ The Court ruled that Art. II is not intended to be self-executing principles
ready for enforcement through the courts. They do not embody judicially
enforcement rights, but guidelines for legislation. The reason for denying
cause of action to an alleged infringement of broad constitutional principles
are sourced from basic considerations of due process and lack of judicial
authority to wade into the unchartered ocean of social and economic policy-
making.
▪ The Court held that the Constitution enshrines free enterprise as policy, it
nevertheless reserves to the Government the power to intervene
whenever necessary for the promotion of the general welfare.
▪ RA No. 8762 (Retail Trade Liberalization Act of 2000) is valid as the SC
held that Sec. 19, Art. II does not impose a policy of Filipino monopoly
of the economic environment. Neither does the lessening of restraints on
foreigners’ right to property or to engage in an ordinarily lawful business
amount to a denial of the Filipinos’ right to property and to due process of
law.
Autonomy of Local Governments
- The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.
▪ The principle of local autonomy under the 1987 Constitution simply
means decentralization; it does not make the local governments
sovereign within the State or an imperium in imperio.
▪ The constitutional guarantee of local autonomy refers to the administrative
autonomy of local government units or cast in more technical language, the
decentralization of government authority. It does not make local
governments sovereign within the State.
▪ The distinction between decentralization of administration and
decentralization of power is as follows:
The decentralization of power is abdication by the national government of
governmental powers. On the other hand, decentralization of administration
is a delegation of administrative powers to the local government unit in
order to broaden the base of governmental powers.
▪ The Congress retains control of the LGU and its power to create includes
the power to destroy. The power to grant includes the power to withhold or
recall.
➢ Local autonomy grants local governments the power to streamline and
reorganize. The Court ruled that streamlining of organization for a
more efficient system must pass the test of good faith.
 16
Political Law Updates
➢ The exercise of local autonomy remains subject to the power of control
by Congress and the power of general supervision by the President.
▪ The SC ruled that the President or any of his alter ego, cannot interfere in
local affairs as long as the concerned local government unit acts within the
parameters of the law and the Constitution.
➢ Any directive by the President or any of his alter egos seeking to alter
the wisdom of a law-conforming judgment on local affairs of a LGU is a
patent nullity, because it violates the principle of executive and
legislative departments in governing municipal corporation.
➢ The President exercises only the power of general supervision over
LGUs, the grant of additional compensation to local government
officials and employees does not require the approval of the President
for validity. **
Equal access of opportunities for public service:
- The State shall guarantee equal access of opportunities for public service
and prohibit dynasties as may be defined by law.
▪ The SC that this provision does not bestow a right to seek the Presidency;
it does not contain a judicially enforceable constitutional right and merely
specifies a guideline for legislative action. The provision is not intended to
compel the State to enact positive measures that would accommodate as
many as possible into public office.
▪ The SC struck down as unconstitutional RA No. 4421 that required all
candidates for elective public office to post a surety bond equivalent to one
year’s salary of the position to which he is aspiring as these property
qualifications are inconsistent with the nature and essence of the
Republican system ordained in the Constitution and the principles of social
justice underlying the same.
Bill of Rights
- The Bill of Rights is designed to preserve the ideals of liberty, equality and
security against assaults of opportunism, the expediency of the passing hour,
the erosion of small encroachments and the scorn and derision of those who
have no patience with general principles.
- During the adoption of the freedom constitution, a person could not invoke
any exclusionary right under the bill of rights, because there was neither a
constitution nor a bill of rights at the time. However, the protection accorded
to individuals under the international convention on civil and political rights
and the universal declaration of human rights remained in effect during the
interregnum.
1. Due process – it is based on the principle that hears before it
condemns, which proceeds upon the inquiry and renders judgment only
after trial.
- A mining license that contravenes a mandatory provision of law under
which it is granted is void. Being a mere privilege, a license does not
vest absolute rights in the holder. Thus, without offending the due
process and the non-impairment clauses of the Constitution, it can be
revoked by the State in the public interest.
▪ Mere privileges, such as the license to operate a cockpit, are not
property rights and are revocable at will to operate a cockpit, are not
property rights and are revocable at will.
- The mandatory suspension from office of a public official pending
criminal prosecution for violation of RA 3019 cannot amount to
deprivation of property without due process of law.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
A. Substantive due process requisites: IPME
1. The interests of the public generally require the interference by
the state;
2. The means employed are reasonably necessary for the
attainment of the object sought and not unduly oppressive upon
individuals.
B. Procedural due process requisites: IJOR
1. An impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to
hear and determine the matter before it;
- The SC ruled that a public officer who decided the case should
not be the same person to decide it on appeal because he
cannot be an impartial judge.
- A judge is given reasonable leeway or prerogative in directing
questions to witnesses in order to elicit relevant facts as it is
expedient to allow the judge to question a witness so that his
judgment may rest upon a full and clear understanding of the
facts.
- When the judge remarked that the testimonies of two
witnesses were incredible, that another witness was totally
confused and appeared to be mentally imbalanced, and that
two witnesses were liars, his comments were just honest
observations intended to warn the witnesses to be candid to
the Court. He merely wanted to ascertain the veracity of their
contradictory statements.
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the
defendant and over the property which is the subject matter of
the proceeding;
3. The defendant must be given the opportunity to be heard;
- Due process is satisfied as long as the party is accorded the
opportunity to be heard. If it is not availed of, it is deemed
waived or forfeited without violating the constitutional
guarantee.
- The unreasonable delay in the termination of the of the
preliminary investigation by the Tanodbayan violated the
guarantee of due process.
- In BP 22 cases, it is essential for the maker or the drawer to
be notified of the dishonor of the check, so that he can pay the
value thereof, or make arrangements for its payment within the
period prescribed by law. Absent such notice of dishonor, the
maker or the drawer cannot be convicted of violation of BP 22,
as there would be a violation of procedural due process.
- The NLRC and the Law are authorized to decide a case on the
basis of position papers and documents submitted; the holding
of an adversarial trial depends on the discretion of the LA and
the parties cannot demand it as a matter of right. ***
- The SC declared that “to be heard” does not only mean verbal
arguments in court. One may be heard also through
pleadings. Where opportunity to be heard, either through oral
arguments or pleadings, is accorded, there is no denial of
procedural due process.
 17
Political Law Updates
- The SC held that upon a receipt of a petition for extradition
and its supporting documents, the judge must study them and
make, as soon as possible, a prima facie finding whether they
are sufficient in form and substance, whether they comply with
the Extradition Treaty, and whether the person is extraditable.
▪ If the finding is possible, the petition may be dismissed at the
discretion of the judge.
If there is a finding, the judge must immediately issue a
warrant for the arrest of the extraditee, who is at the same
time summoned to answer the petition and to appear at the
scheduled summary hearings.
4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing
▪ The SC held that pursuant to the principles set forth in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the principles
contained are recognized as customarily binding upon the
members of the international community, if bail can be
granted in deportation cases, considering that the
Declaration applies to deportation cases, there is no reason
why it cannot be invoked in the extradition cases since both
are administrative proceedings where the innocence or guilt
of the person detained is not the issue. **
➢ The potential extraditee must prove by clear and
convincing evidence that he is not a flight risk and will
abide with all the orders and processes of the extradition
court for entitlement of bail.
- Prior notice and hearing, as elements of due process of law,
are only required in judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding, not
when the government agency is engaged in the performance
of quasi-legislative.
▪ A person who is not impleaded in a complaint cannot be
bound by the decision rendered therein, for no man shall be
affected by a proceeding in which he is stranger.
▪ Respondents cannot claim that they were denied due
process during the NBI investigation. The function of the NBI
are merely investigatory and informational in nature. The
NBI has no judicial or quasi-judicial power and is incapable
of granting any relief to any party, it cannot even determine
probable cause.
There are cases in which notice and hearing may be
dispensed without violating due process, such as follows: 1)
cancellation of the passport of a person sought for the
commission of a crime, 2) the preventive suspension of a civil
servant facing administrative charges, 3) distraint of property
for tax delinquency; 4) the padlocking of restaurants found
unsanitary or of theaters showing obscene movies, and 5)
abatement of nuisance per se.
▪ There is also no violation of due process in the ex parte
issuance of TPO since the victim of violence against women
and children may already have suffered harrowing
experiences at the hands of her tormentor and possibly
even death or writ of preliminary injunction because the time
in which the hearing will take could be enough to enable the
defendant to abscond or dispose of the property. ***
- The filing of a motion for reconsideration cures the defect of
absence of a hearing.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC held that petitioner was not denied due process
because he subsequently filed a MR which the COMELEC
considered and acted upon, albeit unfavorably.
- The essence of due process in administrative proceedings is
an opportunity to explain one’s side or an opportunity to seek
reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.
- Prior notice and hearing, as elements of due process of law,
are only required in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, not
when the government agency is engaged in the performance
of legislative or administrative functions. **
- No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing
therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is
based.
▪ Due process demands that the parties to a litigation be
informed how the case was decided with an explanation of
the factual and legal reasons that led to the conclusions of
the court.
▪ The Courts should be liberal in settling aside orders of
default, because judgments of default are frowned upon
except in cases where it clearly appears that the reopening
of the cases is intended for delay. Where the order of default
is immovable, there is a violation of due process.
- Publication is imperative to the validity of laws, presidential
decrees and executive orders, administrative rules and
regulations, and is an indispensable part of due process.
- The right to appeal is not natural right nor a part of due process;
it is merely a statutory privilege, and may be exercised only
in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law.
▪ The constitutional requirement of due process may be
satisfied notwithstanding the denial of the right to appeal,
because the essence of due process is simply the
opportunity to be heard and to present evidence in support
of one’s case.
▪ The Court ruled that there was no denial of due process
where the court denied the appeal due to the negligence of
the accused and of his counsel. An appellant must strictly
comply with the rules inasmuch as appeal is purely a
statutory right.
▪ It is settled that the right to preliminary investigation is not
a constitutional right, but is merely a right conferred by
statute.
➢ The right to preliminary investigation is not merely
formal or technical; to deny it to the petitioner would
deprive him the full measure of his right to due process.
➢ While the right to have a preliminary investigation before
trial is statutory rather than constitutional, it is a
substantive right and a component of due process in the
administration of criminal justice. **
➢ A preliminary investigation is held before an accused is
place on trial to secure the innocent against hasty,
 18
Political Law Updates
malicious and oppressive prosecution and to protect him
from trouble and anxiety of a public trial. It is also
intended to protect the State from having to conduct
useless and expensive trials.
➢ The absence preliminary investigation does not impair
the validity of the information or otherwise render the
same defective. The denial of the motion for
reinvestigation cannot likewise invalidate the
information or oust the court of its jurisdiction.
➢ The right to be informed of the complaint and to be given
the opportunity of the complaint and to be given the
opportunity to raise one’s defenses does not apply to
preliminary investigation. Preliminary investigation is
merely procedural and it may be dispensed without
violating the right of the accused o due process.
➢ The lack of preliminary investigation is not a ground for a
motion to quash, but the case must be suspended with
respect to the petitioner even if the case is already
undergoing trial.
➢ The right to preliminary investigation is waived when the
accused fails to invoke it before or at the time of entering
a plea during arraignment.
➢ The preliminary investigation conducted by the DOJ is
merely inquisitorial; it is not a trial on the merits, and its
sole purpose is to determine whether a crime has been
committed and whether the respondent therein is
probably guilty of the crime.
2. Equal protection
➢ The preliminary investigation is not a quasi-judicial
proceeding since the prosecutor in a preliminary
investigation does not determine the guilt or innocence
of the respondent.
➢ A preliminary investigation is essentially an inquiry to
determine whether 1) a crime has been committed, and
2) whether there is a probable cause that the accused is
guilty thereof.
➢ The SC held that the policy of non-inference with
executive discretion in the determination of probable
cause. It held that a public prosecutor is afforded a wide
latitude of discretion in the conduct of preliminary
investigation.
* Where there is an unmistakable showing grave
abuse of discretion amounting to excess of jurisdiction
on the part of the public prosecutor. Such grave abuse
of discretion will then justify judicial intrusion into the
precincts of the executive. **
* The SC ruled that there is no law or rule that requires
the Ombudsman to furnish a respondent with copies of
the counter-affidavits of his co-respondents. Likewise,
the constitution due process requirements mandated in
Ang Tibay v. CIR, are not applicable to preliminary
investigations which are creations of statutory law
giving rise to mere statutory rights.
➢ The aggrieved party is entitled to the dismissal of the
complaint in case there is unreasonable delay in
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
termination of preliminary investigation by the
Tanodbayan violated the due process clause. But where
the delay is due to the complexity of the issues involved
or s caused by the petitioner’s own act, not by the
inaction of the prosecution.
- The Court, in Ang Tibay v. CIR, enumerated the requisites of
administrative due process, as follows: 1) the right to a
hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and
submit evidence to support it, 2) the tribunal must consider the
evidence in support thereof, 3) the decision must have
something to support itself, 4) the evidence must be
substantial, 5) the decision must be rendered on the evidence
presented at the hearing or least contained in the record and
disclosed to the parties, 6) the tribunal or any of its judges must
act on its or his own independent consideration of the facts
and the law of the controversy, and not simply accept the views
of a subordinate in arriving at a decision, and 7) the board or
body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision
in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding will know
the various issues involved, and the reasons for the decision.
- Due process in quasi-judicial proceedings before the
COMELEC requires notice and hearing. The proclamation of
a winning candidate cannot be annulled if he has not been
notified of any motion to set aside his proclamation.
- Administrative investigations are themselves inquiries
conducted only to determine whether there are facts that merit
disciplinary measures against erring public officers and
employees.
- All persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as
to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed. Natural and juridical
persons are entitled to this guarantee,
- Requisites for valid classification: 1) substantial distinctions which
make for real difference; 2) germane to the purpose of the law; 3) not
limited to existing conditions only; and, 4) must apply equally to all
members of same class. **
▪ Non-compliance with the conditions abovementioned would
constitute class legislation.
▪ The SC upheld the constitutionality of RA 7496 limiting the allowable
deductions from gross income of single proprietorships and
professionals. It was held that uniformity of taxation does not prohibit
classification, provided the requirements of valid classification are
complied with.
▪ The Constitution places the civil rights of aliens on an equal footing
with those of citizens, but their political rights do not enjoy the same
protection.
As to substantial distinctions which make for real differences.
➢ The SC ruled that Filipino female domestics working abroad were
in a class by themselves, because of the special risks to which
their class was exposed.
➢ The SC upheld the validity of the Retail Trade Nationalization
Law despite the objection that it violated the equal protection
 19
Political Law Updates
clause, because there exist real and actual, positive and
fundamental differences between an alien and a national.
➢ The SC upheld Sec. 6 of the RA 10125 (Cybercrime
Prevention Act), finding substantial distinctions between crimes
committed with the use of information and communication
technologies and those without the technology. Besides, the
power to fix penal laws exclusively belongs to Congress.
➢ The SC held that there is no reasonable distinction between the
services rendered by foreign hires and local hires as to justify
the disparity in salaries paid to these teachers.
➢ The SC declared that RA 9262 (VAWC) does not violate the
equal protection clause since there is a valid substantial
distinction between women and men as to the unequal power
relationship, the fact that women are more likely than men to be
victims of violence and the widespread gender bias and
prejudice against women. ***
▪ The grant of authority to the Brgy. Chairman to issue a
Barangay Protection Order is purely executive function
pursuant to his duty to enforce all the laws and ordinance and
to maintain public order. ***
➢ The SC held partly validity of Sec. 36 of RA 9165 as to persons
to undergo drug testing:
1. The drug testing of students of secondary and tertiary school
is valid. Deterring their use of drugs by random drug testing
is as important as enhancing efficient enforcement.
2. Random drug testing of officers and employees of public
and private officers is justifiable. Their expectation of privacy
in office is reduced. The drug tests and results are kept
confidential. Random drug testing is an effective way of
deterring drug use and is reasonable.
Likewise, POE are required by the Constitution to be
accountable at all times to the people and to serve them with
utmost responsibility and efficiency.
3. The mandatory testing of all persons charged before the
prosecutor’s office of a criminal offense punishable with
imprisonment of at least 6 years and 1 day is void. They are
randomly picked and are not beyond suspicion. They do not
consent to the procedure or waive their right to privacy.
As to germane to the purpose of the law – the distinctions which are
the bases for the classification should have a reasonable relation to
the purpose of the law.
➢ The Court ruled the unconstitutionality of Sec. 35 of RA 7354
which withdrew franking privileges formerly granted to the
judiciary, but remained with the executive and legislative
departments, was declared unconstitutional, because the three
branches of government are similarly situated.
- A classification based on valid and reasonable standards does not
violate the equal protection clause.
- Three (3) levels of test that may be applied in equal protection clause:
1. Strict scrutiny test – for laws dealing with freedom of minds or
restricting the political process.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
2. Rational basis standard – for the review of economic legislation
3. Heightened or intermediate scrutiny – for evaluating
classification based on gender or legitimacy.
3. Searches and Seizure
- The right to privacy or the right to be let alone, was institutionalized in
the 1987 Constitution as a facet of the right protected by the guarantee
against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Court ruled that the
right to privacy exists independently of its identification with liberty; it is
in itself fully deserving of constitutional protection.
▪ Pursuant to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which
mandates that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with
his privacy and everyone has the right to protection against such
interference or attacks.
- The Court held that zones of privacy are recognized and protected in
our laws and within these zones, any form of intrusion is impermissible
unless excused by law and in accordance with customary legal
process.
- The distinction of decisional privacy and informational privacy is as
follows:
Decisional privacy involves the right to independence in making
certain important decisions; while informational privacy refers to the
interest in avoiding disclosure of the personal matters.
▪ Informational privacy has two aspects: 1) the right not to have private
information disclosed, and 2) the right to live freely without
surveillance and intrusion.
In determining entitlements to the right, the Court has laid down a
two-fold tests. The first is a subjective test, where one claiming the
right must have an actual or legitimate expectation of privacy over a
certain matter. The second test is an objective test, where his
expectation of privacy must be one society is prepared to accept as
objectively reasonable.
- The protection guaranteed by Sec. 2, Art. III is available to persons,
including aliens, whether accused of a crime or not. Artificial persons
are also entitled to the guarantee, although they may be required to
open their books of accounts for examination by the State in the
exercise of police and taxing powers.
▪ The right is personal and it can be invoked only by the person
entitled to it. As such, the right may be waived, either expressly or
impliedly, but the waiver must be made by the person whose right is
invaded, not by one wo is not duly authorized to effect such waiver.
- The right applies as a distraint directed only against the government
and its agencies tasked with the enforcement of the law. The
protection cannot extend to acts committed by private individuals so
as to bring them within the ambit of alleged unlawful intrusion by the
government.
▪ The SC said that the Bill of Rights does not protect citizens from
unreasonable searches and seizures by private individuals.
Accordingly, the exclusionary rule may not be invoked.
- Objections to the warrant of arrest must be made before the accused
enters his plea. Failure to do constitutes a waiver of his right against
unlawful restraint of liberty.
 20
Political Law Updates
▪ The filing of charges and the issuance of the warrant of arrest against
a person invalidly detained will cure the defect of that detention, or
at least deny him the right to be released.
▪ The conspicuous illegality of the arrest cannot affect the jurisdiction
of the trial court, because even in instances not allowed by law, a
warrantless arrest is not a jurisdictional defect, and any objection
thereto is waived when the person arrested submits to arraignment
without any objection.
- Sec. 12, Chapter V of A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC, which authorized the
RTCs of Manila and Quezon City to issue search warrants in special
criminal cases, when the following requirements are complied with:
1. The cases involve heinous crimes, such as murder;
2. The application is made by, among others, the PNP;
3. The Executive Judge or when he is on official leave or not physical
present, the Vice-Executive Judge, issues the warrant, if justified.
These warrants may be served in places outside the territorial
jurisdiction of these RTCs.
- Where a search warrant is issued by one court and the criminal action
based on the results of the search is afterwards commenced in another
court, it is not the rule that a motion to quash the warrant or to retrieve
things thereunder seized may be filed only with the issuing court. Such
motion may be filed for the first time in either the issuing court or that in
which the criminal action is pending.
- When the warrant is shown to be defective, even after the same had
already been implemented, all evidence obtained from the search shall
be inadmissible in evidence. **
- Only a judge may validly issue a warrant. The Constitution grants the
authority to issue a warrant of arrest or a search warrant only to a judge
upon fulfillment of certain basic constitutional requirements. **
▪ The SC ruled that the Sec. of Labor and Employment has no
authority to issue orders of arrest, search and seizures because the
Labor Secretary is not a judge.
The SC ruled that the PCGG has no authority to direct the respondent
to submit all bank documents which the PCGG representative might
find necessary and relevant to the investigation since such directives
was in the nature of a search and warrant and the PCGG is not a
judge.
The SC ruled that Sec. 19, RA 10175 (Cybercrime Law) is held
unconstitutional and the DOJ Sec. has no authority to issue an order
to restrict or block access to such computer data and placed it
under its control and disposition since only the judge can issue such
order and the DOJ Secretary is not a judge. Likewise, Sec. 19
operates an impermissible restriction on freedom of expression.
▪ The SC ruled that orders of arrest may be issued by administrative
authorities, but only for the purpose of carrying out a final finding
of a violation of law, e.g., an order of deportation or an order of
contempt, but not for the sole purpose of investigation or
prosecution. **
➢ The SC ruled that a warrant of arrest issued by the Commissioner
of Immigration for the purpose of investigation is null and void
for being unconstitutional. *
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ The SC held that the requirements of probable cause is to be
determined only by a judge does not extend to deportation
cases which are not criminal but purely administrative in nature.
- Requisites of valid warrant: 1) there must be probable cause, 2)
determination of probable cause, 3) After examination, under oath or
affirmation, of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
1. There must be probable cause;
▪ For an Arrest, the probable cause is such facts and
circumstances antecedent to the issuance of the warrant that, in
themselves, are sufficient to induce a cautious man to rely on
them and act in pursuance thereof.
For a Search, the probable cause is defined as such facts and
circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and
prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and
that the objects sought in connection with the offense are in the
place sought to be searched.
2. Determination of probable cause personally by a judge;
▪ The issuance of a warrant of arrest is not a ministerial function
of the judge. While he could rely on the findings of the fiscal, he
is not bound thereby. Thus, the determination of probable cause
depends to a large extent upon the finding or opinion of the judge
who conducted the required examination of the applicant and the
witness.
➢ In the issuance of a warrant of arrest, it is sufficient that the
judge personally determines the existence of the probable
cause and it is not necessary that he should personally
examine the complainant and his witnesses.
➢ Hearing is not necessary for the determination of the
existence of the probable cause for the issuance of a warrant
of arrest. The judge should evaluate the report and
supporting documents submitted by the prosecutor or require
the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid
him in determining whether probable cause exists.
▪ There are two kinds of determination of probable cause:
executive and judicial.
1. The executive determination of probable cause concerns
itself with whether there is enough evidence to support
information being filed.
➢ The determination of probable cause during a
preliminary investigation is judicially recognized as an
executive function and is made by the prosecutor.
➢ The primary objective of a preliminary investigation is
to free a respondent from the inconvenience, expense,
ignominy and stress of defending himself in the course of
a formal trial, until the reasonable probability of his guilt
has been passed upon in a more or less summary
proceeding by a competent officer designated for the
purpose.
➢ It was held that courts must respect the discretion of the
prosecutor in his findings and determination of probable
cause in preliminary investigation. When the prosecutor
is not convinced that he has the quantum of evidence at
 21
Political Law Updates
hand to support the averments, he is under no obligation
to file the criminal information.
2. The judicial determination of probable cause determines
whether a warrant of arrest should be issued. While it is
within the trial court's discretion to make an independent
assessment of the evidence on hand, it is only for the
purpose of determining whether a warrant of arrest should be
issued.
➢ The judge does not act as an appellate court of the
prosecutor and has no capacity to review the
prosecutor’s determination of probable cause; rather the
judge makes a determination of probable cause
independent of the prosecutor’s finding.
➢ The determination of probable cause for the issuance of
a warrant of arrest is within the exclusive province of the
judge.
➢ In the cases when it is the judge who himself conducts
the preliminary investigation, for him to issue a
warrant of arrest, the investigating judge must: 1) have
examined, under oath and in writing, the complainant
and his witnesses, 2) be satisfied that there is probable
cause, 3) that there is a need place the respondent
under immediate custody in order to frustrate the ends of
justice. ***
Issuance of a search warrant, the judge must
personally examine in the form of searching questions
and answers, in writing and under oath, the complaints
and any witnesses he may produce on facts personal
known to them, and attach to the record their sworn
statements together any affidavits submitted.
* A search warrant is, in no sense, of a criminal action or
the commencement of a prosecution. The proceeding
is not one against any person, but solely for the
discovery and to get possession of personal property.
* Where the trial judge not only asked searching
questions but leading questions, as well, the same was
not considered improper, because the complainant
and the witnesses were reticent and had to be made to
explain.
▪ Where a search warrant was issued for the seizure of shabu and
drug paraphernalia, but probable cause was to exist only with
respect to the shabu, the warrant cannot be invalidated in too; it
is still valid with respect to the shabu.
3. After examination, under oath or affirmation, of the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce;
▪ The personal examination must not be merely routinary or pro
forma, but must be probing and exhaustive. The purpose of this
rule is to satisfy the examining magistrate as to the existence of
probable cause.
▪ The evidence offered by the complainant and his witnesses should
be based on their own personal knowledge and not on mere
information or belief.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ It was held that mere affidavits of the complainant and his
witnesses were not enough to sustain the issuance of a search
warrant.
➢ The judge must strictly comply with the constitutional and
statutory requirements for the issuance of a search warrant,
including the need to personally examine the applicant and the
witnesses through searching questions.
* The requirement is primarily meant to enable the law
enforcers serving the warrant to 1) readily identify the
properties to be seized and thus prevent from seizing the
wrong items; and 2) leave said peace officers from with no
discretion regarding the articles to be seized and thus
prevent unreasonable searches and seizures.
* It is aimed at preventing violations of security of persons and
property, and unlawful invasions of the sanctity of the home
and giving remedy against such usurpation when attempted.
▪ General warrants are proscribed and unconstitutional.
➢ The Constitution seeks to avoid search warrants of broad and
general characterization or sweeping descriptions which will
authorize police officers to undertake a fishing expedition to
seize and confiscate any and all kinds of evidence or articles
relating to an offense.
A warrant of arrest is said to particularly describe the person
to be seized if it contains the name/s of the person/s to be
arrested.
A search warrant may be said to particularly describe the
things to be seized when the description there is as specific as
the circumstances will ordinarily allow or when the description
expresses a conclusion of fact, not of law, by which the warrant
officer may be guided in making the search and seizure; or
when the things described are limited to those which bear direct
relation to the offense for which the warrant is being used.
* The SC held that the failure to specify detailed descriptions
in the warrant does not necessarily make the warrant a
general warrant. Likewise, the description of the property to
be seized need not be technically accurate nor necessarily
precise, and its nature will necessarily vary according to
whether the identity of the property or its character, is a
matter of concern.
* A search warrant is severable. The SC held that the general
description of most of the documents in the warrant, if there
are others particularly described, will not invalidate he entire
warrant. Those items which are not particularly described
may simply be cut off without destroying the whole warrant.
* Only the articles particularly describe in the warrant may
be seized.
o The SC held that the search warrant has no authority for
the police officers to seize the firearm which was not
mentioned, much less described with particularity, in the
warrant. **
▪ The place to be searched should be particularly described. The
description of the place to be searched is sufficient if the officer with
the warrant can, with reasonable effort, ascertain and identify the
 22
Political Law Updates
place intended, and distinguish if from other places in the
community. EAI
➢ The Constitution requires search warrant to particularly
describe not only the place to be searched but also the persons
to be searched.
➢ The place to be searched, as described in the warrant, cannot
be amplified or modified by the peace officers’ own personal
knowledge of the premises or the evidence which they
adduced in support of their application for a warrant.
Otherwise, there would be an infringement of guarantee.
▪ It is not necessary that the property to be searched or seized should
be owned by the person against whom the warrant is issued; it is
sufficient that the property is within his control or possession.
▪ Sec. 7, Rule 126, ROC, requires that no search of a house, room
or any of the premises shall be made except in the presence of the
lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family, or in the
absence of the latter, in the presence of two witnesses of sufficient
age and discretion, residing in the same locality.
- Warrantless Arrest: A peace officer or a private person may effect an
arrest without a warrant:
1. When the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
committing or is attempting to commit an offense in his presence
▪ Rebellion is a continuing offense. Accordingly, a rebel may be
arrested at any time, with or without a warrant, as he is deemed
to be in the act of committing the offense at any time of day or
night.
▪ It was held that when a police officer sees the offense, although
at a distance, or hears the disturbances created thereby, and
proceeds at once to the scene thereof, he may effect an arrest
without a warrant. The offense is deemed committed in the
presence of or within the view of the officers.
▪ A buy-bust operation is a valid in flagrante arrest. The
subsequent search of the person arrested and of the premises
within his immediate control is valid as an incident to a lawful
arrest.
➢ The well-entrenched principle is that the accused commits
the crime of illegal sale if drugs as soon as he consummates
the sale transaction, whether payment precedes or follows
delivery of the drug sold.
➢ For a successful prosecution for the sale of illegal drugs after
a buy-bust operation what is important is the fact that the
poseur-buyer received the goods from the accused-appellant
and the same was presented in court as evidence.
* There is no rule of law that requires that there must be
simultaneous exchange of the marked money and the
prohibited drug between the poseur-buyer and the pusher.
Likewise, there is no rule that requires the police to use
only marked money in buy-bust operations. The failure to
use the marked money or to present it in evidence is not
material since the sale cannot be essentially disproved by
the absence thereof. **
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
* Chain of custody refers to the duly recorded authorized
stages of transfer of custody of dangerous drugs, from
seizure of confiscating to receipt in the forensic laboratory
for examination to safekeeping to presentation in court for
destruction. DRAST CDD
o Marking after seizure is the starting point in the custodial
chain, thus it is vital that the seized contraband be
immediately marked, because succeeding handlers of
the specimen will use the marking as reference.
✓ The absence of the markings creates an uncertainty
and the lack of certainty on a crucial element of the
crime warrants the reversal of the judgment of
conviction.
o The non-compliance of the requirements of the chain of
custody tantamount to failure in establishing the identity
of the corpus delicti.
However, the non-compliance of the chain of custody
requirements, under justifiable grounds, as long as the
integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are
properly preserved by the apprehending
officers/team, shall not render void and invalid such
seizure and custody over said items.
o The prosecution must be able to account for each link
in the chain of custody over the dangerous drug, from the
moment it was seized from the accused up to the time it
was presented in court as proof of the corpus delicti.
▪ Reliable information alone, absent any overt act indicative of a
felonious enterprise in the presence and within the view of the
arresting officers, is not sufficient to constitute probable cause to
justify the arrest. It is necessary that two requisites concur:
1) The person to be arrested must execute an overt act
indicating that he had just committed, is actually committing,
or is attempting to commit a crime, and
2) Such over act is done in the presence or within the view of
the arresting officer.
▪ The accused while holding a bag on board a tricycle cannot be
said to be committing, attempting to commit or to have committed
a crime and thus, it will not constitute probable cause to effect an
in flagrante arrest.
However, if the accused failed to assert his constitutional right
prior to arraignment and by entering a plea of not guilty and
participating actively in the trial, they were deemed to have
waived his right to raise the issue of the illegality of the arrest.
2. When an offense had just been committed and there is probable
cause to believe, based on his personal knowledge of facts or of
other circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed
the offense.
▪ The two stringent requirements must be complied with, namely:
1) an offense had just been committed, and 2) the person making
the arrest has probable cause to believe, on his personal
knowledge of facts or other circumstances, that the person to be
arrested had committed it.
 23
Political Law Updates
▪ The SC held that the reasonable suspicion must be founded on
probable cause, coupled with good faith on the part of the peace
officer making the arrest.
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped
from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final
judgement or temporarily confirmed while his case is pending, or
has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to
another.
4. When the right is voluntarily waived, then the illegality of the arrest
may no longer be invoked to effect the release of the person
arrested.
▪ Appellent is estopped from questioning the illegality of his arrest
when he voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the
court by entering a plea of not guilty and by participating in the
trial.
▪ The waiver is limited to the illegal arrest. It does not extend to the
search made as an incident thereto, or to the subsequent seizure
of evidence allegedly found during the search. Any evidence
obtained in violation of the constitutional provision is legally
inadmissible in evidence under the exclusionary rule
▪ The application for, or omission to, bail, shall not bar the accused
from challenging the validity of his arrest, provided that he raises
the challenge before entering his plea.
▪ The consequent filing of charges and the issuance of a warrant
of arrest against a person invalidly detained will cure the defect
of such detention or, at least, deny him the right to be released.
- Warrantless Searches
1. When the right is voluntarily waived.
▪ Requisites for a valid waiver of warrantless searches: 1) A right
must exist; 2) Person involved had knowledge, actual or
constructive, of the existence of such right; 3) The said person
had an actual intention to relinquish the right.
▪ Consent to a search is not to be lightly inferred, but must be
shown by clear and convincing evidence. It is the State that has
the burden of proving, clear and convincing evidence that the
necessary consent was obtained and that it was voluntarily and
freely given.
▪ The right was deemed waived because the accused did not
object to the admissibility of the evidence during the trial, and the
submissive stance after the discovery of the bag and the absence
of any protest which thus confirmed their acquiescence.
2. Searches of passengers at airport.
▪ Holders of airline ticket refusing to be searched shall not be
allowed to board the aircraft, which shall constitute a part of the
contract between the passenger and the air carrier.
▪ It was held that the when the accused checked in his luggage
as a passenger of a plane, he agreed to the inspection of his
luggage in accordance with customs laws and regulations, and
thus waived any objection to a warrantless search.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC upheld the validity of searches conducted on passengers
attempting to board a n aircraft whose carry-on baggage, as well
themselves are made to pass through metal detectors. Given the
minimal intrusiveness, the gravity of the safety interests
involved and the reduced privacy expectations associated with
airline travel, these searches are reasonable.
▪ The SC ruled that the accused did not waive his constitutional
rights when he allowed the police officers to search his bags. The
implied acquiescence to the search, if there was any, could not
have been more than passive conformity given under intimidating
or coercive circumstances and is, thus, considered no consent at
all within the purview of the constitutional guarantee.
▪ The Court held that the constitutional right against unreasonable
searches and seizures, being a personal one, cannot be waived
by anyone except the person whose rights are invaded, or one
who is authorized to do so in his behalf.
3. Stop and frisk searches
▪ Stop and frisk searches are necessary for law enforcement, that
is, law enforcers should be given the legal arsenal to prevent the
commission of offenses. However, this should be balanced with
the need to protect the privacy of citizens.
▪ It is the police officer who should observe facts that would lead
to a reasonable degree of suspicion of a person. The police
officer who should observe facts that would lead to a reasonable
degree of suspicion of a person.
▪ The SC held that for a stop-and-frisk situation, the police officer
should properly introduce himself and make initial inquiries,
approach and restrain a person who manifests unusual and
suspicious conduct, in order to check the latter’s outer clothing
for possibly concealed weapons. ***
➢ The apprehending police officer must have a genuine
reason, in accordance with the police officer’s experience
and the surrounding conditions, to warrant the belief that the
person to be held has weapons or contraband concealed
about him.
➢ The search and seizure should precede the arrest for the
principle to apply.
▪ The SC held that there was no valid search if the behavior or
conduct of the petitioner which could have elicited suspicion on
the basis that his eyes were moving fast. ***
➢ The arrest and consequent search of the accused, simply
because he was acting suspiciously was held invalid.
4. Search and seizure incidental to a lawful arrest
▪ A person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous
weapons or anything which may be used as proof of the
commission of an offense, without a search warrant.
▪ Requisite: as a rule, the arrest must precede the search; the
process cannot be reversed. Nevertheless, a search
substantially contemporaneous with an arrest can precede the
arrest if the police have probable cause to make the arrest at
the outset of the search.
 24
Political Law Updates
▪ The purpose of allowing a warrantless search and seizure as an
incident to a lawful arrest is to protect the arresting officer from
being harmed by the person arrested who might be armed with
a concealed weapon, and to prevent the latter from destroying
evidence within reach.
➢ It is a reasonable exercise of the State’s police power to
protect 1) law enforcers from injury that may be inflicted on
them by a person they have lawfully arrested; and 2)
evidence from being destroyed by the person arrested.
➢ The search must, however, be contemporaneous to the
arrest and made within a permissible area of search.
▪ The SC held that in a search and seizure as an incident to a lawful
arrest, it is necessary for probable cause to be present, and
probable cause must be based reasonable ground of suspicion
or belief that a crime has been committed or is about to be
committed.
▪ The SC held that a warrantless search and seizure can be made
without necessarily being preceded by an arrest provided that the
said search is effected on the basis of probable cause. ***
➢ The Court upheld the validity the when the matter presented
urgency such as when the informer pointed to the accused
as the one who was carrying marijuana, the police officers,
faced with such on-the-spot information, had to act quickly.
▪ The SC held that while a contemporaneous search of a person
arrested may be effected for dangerous weapons or proofs or
implements used in the commission of the crime and which
search may extend to the area within his immediate control
where he might gain possession of a weapon or evidence he can
destroy; a valid arrest must precede a search.
➢ The warrantless search and seizure as an incident to a
lawful arrest may extend beyond the person of the one
arrested to include the premises or surroundings under his
immediate control. **
5. Search of vessels and airport
▪ A search warrant may readily be obtained when the search is
made in a store, dwelling house, or other immobile structure.
But it is impracticable to obtain a warrant when the search is
conducted on a mobile ship, or an aircraft or in other motor
vehicles, since they can quickly be moved out of the locality or
jurisdiction where the warrant must be sought.
▪ A fishing vessel found to be violating fishery laws may be
seized without a warrant on two grounds: 1) because they are
usually equipped with powerful motors that enable them to elude
pursuit, and 2) because the seizure would be an incident to a
lawful arrest.
6. Search of moving vehicles
▪ A warrantless search of a motor vehicle is justified on the ground
that it is not practicable to secure a warrant because the vehicle
can be moved quickly out of the locality or jurisdiction in which
the warrant may be sought.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Military or police checkpoints are not illegal per se so long as
it is required by the exigencies of public order and conducted in
a way least intrusive to motorist.
Checkpoint search may either be a mere routinary inspection,
or it may involve an extensive search.
➢ Routinary inspection is permissible when it is limited to
mere visual search, where the occupants are not subjected
to a physical or body search.
➢ Extensive inspection would be constitutionally permissible
only if the officers conducting the search had reasonable or
probable cause to believe, before the search, that either the
motorist is a law offender or they will find the instrumentality
or evidence pertaining to a crime in the vehicle to be
searched. ***
▪ The SC held that search warrant is not practicable because the
vehicle can be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction
with impunity in which the warrant must be sought.
7. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the
enforcement of fire, sanitary and bldg. regulations
▪ It is basically an exercise of the police power of the State and
would not require a search warrant. This refers to a routine
inspection which, however, must be conducted during
reasonable hour.
8. Prohibited articles are in plain view
▪ Elements of a valid seizure based on the plain view doctrine,
as follows: 1) a prior valid intrusion based on the valid
warrantless arrest in which the police are legally present in the
pursuit of their official duties, 2) the evidence was inadvertently
discovered by the police who have the right to be where they
are, 3) the evidence must be immediately apparent, and 4)
“plain view” justified the seizure of the evidence without any
further search. ***
▪ The plain view doctrine is usually applied where the police officer
is not searching for evidence against the accused, but
nonetheless inadvertently comes upon an incriminating object.
➢ An object is in plain view if the object itself is plainly
exposed to sight. **
➢ The SC held that the plain view doctrine may not be used to
launch unbridled searches and indiscriminate seizures, nor
to extend to a general exploratory search made solely to find
evidence of defender’s guilt.
➢ The doctrine is not an exception to the warrant. It merely
serves to supplement the prior justification.
➢ Immediate apparent test requires merely that the seizure
be presumptively reasonable assuming that there is probable
cause to associate the property with criminal activity, that a
nexus between the viewed object and criminal activity.
▪ The doctrine allows the seizure of personalty even without a
warrant as long as the area of search is within the immediate
control of the arrested person and the object of the seizure is
open to the eye.
 25
Political Law Updates
9. Exclusionary Rule
▪ Objections to the legality of the search warrant and to the
admissibility of the evidence obtained thereby are deemed
waived when not raised during the trial.
▪ Even if the accused were illegally arrested, such arrest does
not invest eye-witness accounts with constitutional infirmity as
fruits of the poisonous tree.
▪ The money which was not indicated in the warrant, and thus,
illegally seized, was ordered returned. For the retention of the
money, the approval of the court which issued the warrant is
necessary.
4. Privacy of Communication and Correspondence
- The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable
except upon lawful order of the court or when public safety or order
requires otherwise as prescribed by law. Any evidence obtained in
violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any
purpose in any proceeding.
- The SC ruled that RA 4200 clearly makes it illegal for any person, not
authorized by all the parties to any private communication, to secretly
record such communications by means of a tape recorder. The law
does not make any distinction.
- The Bill of Rights does not protect the citizens from unreasonable
searches and seizures made by private individuals.
5. Freedom of expression
- No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression
or the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and
petition the government for redress of grievances.
- Freedom of speech and freedom of the press may be identified with the
liberty to discuss publicly and truthfully any matter of public interest
without censorship and punishment.
- There should be no prior restraint on communication of views or
subsequent liability, unless there is a clear and present danger of
substantive evil that congress has a right to prevent.
- Freedom from censorship or prior restraint:
▪ The COMELEC prohibition against the use of taped jingles in the
mobile units used in the campaign was held to be unconstitutional,
as it was in the nature of censorship.
▪ The Court annulled the COMELEC prohibition against radio
commentators or newspaper columnists from commenting on the
issues involved in the scheduled plebiscite on the organic law as an
unconstitutional restraint on freedom of expression.
▪ The distinction between Content-neutral regulations and Content-
based restraint or censorship is as follow:
Content-neutral regulations refer merely concerned with the
incidents of the speech or one that merely controls the time, place,
or manner and under well- defined standards. On the other hand,
Content-based restraint or censorship refer to the restriction
based on the subject matter of the utterance of the speech.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ Content-based regulation bears a heavy presumption of
invalidity and the Court has used the clear and present danger
rule as a measure. Under this rule, the evil consequences sought
to be prevented must be substantive, extremely serious and the
degree of imminence extremely high. The government has the
burden of overcoming the presumed unconstitutionality. ***
ESEDIH
* Clear and Present Danger Rule applies when the words used
in such circumstances and of such a nature as to create a clear
and present danger that they will about the substantive evils
that the State has the right to prevent it.
* Regulations of election paraphernalia will still be
constitutionally valid if it reaches into speech of person who are
not candidate or who do not speak as members of a political
party if they are not candidates, only if what is regulated is
declarative speech that, taken as a whole, has for its principal
object the endorsement of a candidate only.
➢ Content-neutral regulation
* The regulation should be 1) provided by law, 2) reasonable,
3) narrowly tailored to meet the objective of enhancing the
opportunity of all candidates to be heard and considering the
primacy of the guarantee of free expression, 4) demonstrably
the least restrictive means to achieve the object. The regulation
must only be with respect to the time, place and manner of the
rendition of the message.
* The SC invalidated Sec. 4[c](3) of Cybercrime Law which
penalizes the transmission of unsolicited commercial
electronic communications which seek to advertise, sell or offer
for sale products and services etc. It is declared
unconstitutional on the basis that 1) the government has
presented no basis for holding that unsolicited electronic ads
reduce the efficiency of computers, 2) people, before the arrival
of computers, have already been receiving unsolicited ads by
mail, these have never been outlawed; and the recipient has
the option to delete or not to read them, 3) to prohibit the
transmission of unsolicited ads would deny a person the right
to read his emails, even unsolicited commercial ads; and the
State cannot rob him of this right without violating his
constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression. **
o Likewise, the SC ruled Sec. 4[4](c) as valid and constitutional
which penalizes online libel with respect to the original
author of the post; it declared as void and unconstitutional
the same provision as applied to others who simply receive
the post and react to it. **
* The Court upheld the validity of the law which prohibited,
except during the prescribed election period, the making of
speeches, announcements or commentaries for or against the
election of any party or candidate for public office.
* The SC upheld the validity of Sec. 11(c) of RA 6646, as a
legitimate exercise of the police power of the State to regulate
the media of communication and information for the purpose of
ensuring equal opportunity, time, and space for political
campaigns.
* The COMELEC’s resolution prohibiting the posting of decals
and stickers in mobile units like cars and other moving vehicles
 26
Political Law Updates
was declared unconstitutional for infringement of freedom of
expression. Furthermore, the restriction was so broad as to
include even the citizen’s privately owned vehicles, equivalent
to deprivation of property without due process of law.
Posting of election campaign materials on vehicles used
for public transport or on transport terminals is not only a form
of political expression, but also an act of ownership and it has
nothing to do with the franchise or permit to operate the PUV
or transport terminal
* The act of respondents in seeking to restrain the petitioners
from posting the tarpaulin in their own property is an
impermissible encroachment on the right to property. **
* The SC held that the right to privacy of a public figure depicted
in a movie is not violated since a public figure’s right to privacy
is narrower than that of an ordinary person. **
* The SC upheld the authority of the Board of Review for Motion
Pictures and Television (BRMPT) to review the petitioner’s
television program if there is a showing that the television
program would create a clear and danger of an evil which the
State has the right to prevent.
* The SC held that there is no law prohibiting the holding and the
reporting of exit polls. The freedom of speech and of the press
should be upheld when what is sought to be curtailed is the
dissemination of information meant to add meaning to the
equally vital right of suffrage.
* Wearing of t-shirts with grievance inscriptions by government
employees does not violate the reasonable office rules and
regulations.
➢ O’ Brien test – a government regulation is valid if:
1. It is within the constitutional power of government;
2. It furthers an important or substantial government interest;
3. The governmental interest is unrelated to the suppression of
free expression; and,
4. The incidental restriction on the freedom is no greater than is
essential to the furtherance of that interest.
o The SC declared Sec. 5.4, RA 9006 as invalid because 1)
it imposes a prior restraint on freedom of expression; 2)
it is direct and total suppression of a category of expression
even though such expression is only for a limited period of
time; and 3) the government interest sought to be
promoted can be achieved by means other than the
suppression of freedom of expression.
➢ Overbreadth doctrine – which prohibits government from
achieving its purpose by means that sweep unnecessarily
broadly, reaching constitutionally protected as well as
unprotected activity.
* The purpose essence of overbreadth is that the government
has gone too far; its legitimate interest can be satisfied without
reaching so broadly into the area of protected freedom.
* The SC that a Statute or regulation is void for overbreadth
when it offends the constitutional principle that a government
purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject
to State regulation may not be achieved by means that seep
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected
freedoms.
➢ Heckler’s veto – it involves situation in which the government
attempts to ban protected speech because it might provoke a
violent response.
➢ Dangerous Tendency Rule – if the words uttered create a
dangerous tendency of an evil which the right to prevent, then
such words are punishable. It is sufficient if the natural tendency
and the probable effect of the utterance were to ring about the
substantive evil that the legislative body seeks to prevent.
➢ Balancing Tendency Rule – when particular conduct is
regulated in the interest of public order, and the regulation results
in an indirect, conditional, or partial abridgement of speech, the
duty of courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests
demands the greater protection under the particular
circumstances presented.
➢ Compelling state interest test – it is proper where the conduct
is involved for the whole gamut (scope) of human conduct has
different effects on the state’s interest. A test that would protect
the interest of the state in preventing a substantive evil.
- Freedom from subsequent punishment
▪ Libel is committed when there is a public and malicious imputation
of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstances tending to cause the
dishonor, discredit or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or
to blacken the memory of the who is dead.
➢ Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, but
this presumption of malice does not exist in the following
instances:
1. A private communication made by any person to another in
the performance of any legal, moral or social duty;
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any
comments or remarks of any judicial, legislative or other
official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of
any statement, report or speech delivered in said
proceedings, or any act performed by public officers in the
exercise of their functions.
➢ The SC ruled that the public has the right to be informed on the
mental, moral and physical fitness of candidates for public office.
However, the rule applies only to fair comment on matters of
public interest, fair comment being that which is true, or if false,
expresses the real opinion of the author is based upon
reasonable degree of care and on reasonable grounds.
* The principle does not grant an absolute license to authors or
writers to destroy the persons of candidates for public office
by exposing the latter to public contempt or ridicule by providing
the general public with publications tainted with express or
actual malice.
➢ Libel is not a protected speech; there is no freedom to unjustly
destroy the reputation of a decent woman by publicly claiming
that she is a prostitute.
 27
Political Law Updates
▪ No one will be subject to prosecution for the sale or exposure of
obscene materials unless there materials depict or describe
patently offensive hard core sexual conduct.
➢ What remain clear is that obscenity is an issue proper for
judicial determination and should be treated on a case-to-case
basis and on the judge’s sound discretion.**
▪ The standard to be employed in judging the harmful effects of the
statements would be those for the average child, not those for the
average adult. The ratings and regulation of television broadcast take
into account the protection of the child, and it is from the child’s
narrow viewpoint that the utterances must be considered. **
▪ The Court ruled that a publication that tends to impede, embarrass
or obstruct the court and constitutes a clear and present danger to
the administration of justice is not protected by the guarantee of press
freedom and is punishable by contempt.
➢ It is not necessary to show that the publication actually obstructs
the administration of justice; it is enough that it tends to do so.
▪ The constitutional right to freedom of speech cannot be used as
a shield for contemptuous act against the Court. The defamatory
statements in the latter impaired the public confidence in the integrity
of the judiciary and not just of the ponente in the case.
➢ A criticism after a case has been disposed of can no longer
influence the Court, and on that ground it does not constitute
contempt. But an insult hurled against the Court, even after a
case is decided, can under no circumstance be justified and
would tend necessarily to undermine (weaken / destabilize) the
confidence of the people in the honesty and integrity of its
members and it constitutes contempt. ***
➢ Freedom of the press is subordinate to the decision, authority,
integrity and independence of the judiciary and the proper
administration of justice. (S-DAII-PA)
- Assembly and Petition – the right to assemble is not subject to prior
restraint. It may not be conditioned upon the prior issuance of a permit
or authorization from governmental authorities. However, the right must
be exercised in such a way as will not prejudice the public welfare.
▪ If the assembly is to be held in a public place, a permit for the use of
such place, and not for the assembly itself, may be validly required.
But the power of local officials in this regard is merely one of
regulation, not prohibition.
➢ Denial of the permit may be justified only upon clear and
convincing evidence that the public assembly will create a clear
and present danger to public order, safety, convenience, morals
or health.
▪ A permit to hold a public assembly shall not be necessary where
the meeting is to be held in a private place, in the campus of
government owned or operated educational institution, or in a
freedom park.
▪ Employees in the public service may not engage in strikes or in
concerted and unauthorized stoppage of work; that the right of
government employees to organize is limited to the formation of
unions or associations, without including the right to strike.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ The suspension / dismissal of the public school teachers, who
staged a strike to dramatize their grievances, was held valid as
they were not being penalized for their exercise of the right to
peaceful assembly and petition, but because of their
successive, unauthorized and unilateral absences which
produced adverse effects upon their students. **
▪ The right to free assembly and petition prevails over economic
rights. However, the SC ruled that the education of the youth
occupies a preferred position over or equated with the freedom of
assembly and petition.
6. Freedom of religion
A. Non-Establishment Clause – 1) Separation of Church and of State,
2) Religious Sect or Denomination cannot be registered as a political
party, 3) no sectoral representative from the religious sector 4)
prohibition against the use of public money or property for the benefit
of any religion, or of any minister or ecclesiastical.
Exceptions: 1) exemption from RPT of properties ADE for religious
purposes; 2) citizenship requirement of ownership of educational
institutions, except those established by religious group or mission
boards, 3) optional religious instruction in public elementary and
high schools.
- The State cannot set up a church, nor pass laws which aid one
religion, aid all religion, or prefer one religion over another, nor
force nor influence a person to go to or remain away from church
against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any
religion, etc.
- The SC held that where a civil right depends upon the same matter
pertaining to ecclesiastical affairs, the civil tribunal tries the civil
right and nothing more. Likewise, where the dispute involves the
property rights of the religious group, or the relations of the
members where property rights are involved, the civil courts may
assume jurisdiction.
▪ Ecclesiastical affairs as one that concerns doctrine, creed or form
of worship of the church, or the adoption and enforcement within
a religious association of needful laws and regulations for the
government of the membership, and the power of excluding
from such association those deemed unworthy of membership.
▪ Ecclesiastical affair involves the relationship between the
church and its members and relates to matters of faith, religious
doctrines, worship and governance of the congregation.
➢ The State cannot meddle in the proceedings for
excommunication, ordination of religious ministers,
administration of sacraments, and other activities to which is
attached religious significance.
➢ The SC declared that the expulsion / excommunication of
members of a religious institution / organization is a matter
best left to the discretion of the officials, and the laws and
cannons of such organization / institution.
B. Freedom of Religious Profession and Worship:
- The SC upheld the right of the petitioners, public school students,
to refuse to salute the Philippine Flag on account of their
religious scruples / principles.
 28
Political Law Updates
- The constitution guarantee of free exercise of religious
profession and worship carries with it the right to disseminate
religious information, and any restraint of such right can be
justified only on the ground that there is a clear and present danger
of an evil which the State has the right to prevent.
▪ The SC recognized the right to proselytize / preach / evangelize
as part of religious freedom, and invalidated the application of a
City Ordinance imposing license fees on the sale of
merchandise to sale of religious tracts.
- The SC declared that the exercise of religious profession and
worship can be regulated by the State when it will bring about a
clear and present danger of an evil which the State has the right
to prevent.
• Benevolent neutrality recognizes that government must pursue
its secular goals and interests, but at the same time, strive to
uphold religious liberty to greatest extent possible within flexible
constitutional limits.
▪ Benevolent neutrality could allow for accommodation of morality
based on religion, provided it does not offend compelling state
interest.
▪ Compelling state interest test: 1) right of religion of the
respondent has been burdened; and, 2) ascertain the
respondent’s sincerity in his religious belief.
▪ Accomodation is a recognition of the reality that some
governmental measures may not be imposed on a certain portion
of the population for the reason that these measures are contrary
to their religious beliefs.
▪ The SC held that a public official who cohabits with a married
man and both of whom are members of a religious sect that
allows members of the congregation to enter marital relations
under a Declaration of Pleading Faithfulness does not violate
the Revised Administrative Code for disgraceful and immoral
conduct as there is no compelling state interest that justifies
inhibiting the free exercise of religious beliefs and the means
used by the government to achieve its legitimate objective is not
the least intrusive means. ****
▪
▪ The SC held that the COMELEC’s order to remove the tarpaulin
did not violate freedom of religion as the enumeration of
candidates on the face of the tarpaulin precludes any doubt as to
its nature as speech with political consequences and not
religious speech.
▪ The State regulations imposed on solicitations for religious
purposes do not constitute an abridgement of freedom of religion;
but solicitations for religious purposes are not covered by PD
1564 (Solicitation Permit Law) which requires a prior permit from
DSDW in solicitations for charitable or public welfare purposes.
▪ The State sponsored procurement of contraceptives does not
violate religious freedom as the State may pursue its legitimate
secular objectives without being dictated upon by any one
religion. To allow religious sects to dictate policy or restrict other
groups would violate the non-establishment clause. ***
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ The State can enhance its population control program
through the RH Law even if the promotion of contraceptive
use is contrary to the religious beliefs of petitioners.
➢ In life threatening cases, the life of the mother should be
given preference considering that a referral by a medical
practitioner would amount to a denial of service resulting in
an unnecessary and grave danger to the life of the mother.
• Lemon test – regulation is constitutional when: SAF***
1. It has a secular legislative purpose;
2. It neither advances nor inhibits religion; and,
3. It does not foster an excessive entanglement with religion.
7. Liberty of Abode and of Travel – the liberty of abode and changing the
same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except
upon lawful order of the Court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired
except in the interest of national security, public safety or public health,
as may be provided by law.
- The SC sustained the refusal of the government to allow the petitioner’s
return to the Philippines, on the ground that it would endanger national
security.
- The Constitution itself allows restriction, provided that such restrictions
are in the interest of national security, public safety or public health, as
may be provided by law.
- The hold-departure order (HDO) is an exercise of the court’s inherent
power to preserve and maintain the effectiveness of its jurisdiction over
the case and over the person of the accused.
- The person’s right to travel is subject to the usual constraints imposed
by the very necessity of safeguarding the system of justice. Whether
the accused should be permitted to leave the country for humanitarian
reasons is a matter addressed to the court’s discretion.
8. Right to Information
- The right to information does not extend to matters recognized as
privileged information rooted in separation of powers, nor to
information on military and diplomatic secrets, information affecting
national security, and information on investigations of crimes by law
enforcement agencies before the prosecution of the accused.
- The manner of examining public records may be subject to
reasonable regulation by the government agency in custody thereof,
the duty to disclose the information of public concern, and to afford
access to public records, cannot be discretionary on the part of said
agencies.
- The SC held that the constitutional guarantee of freedom of the press
and the right to public information, on the one hand, and the
fundamental rights of the accused, on the other hand, along with the
constitutional power of a court to control its proceedings in ensuring a
fair and impartial trial race against another, jurisprudence tells us that
the right of the accused must be preferred to win.
▪ The Court ordered the audio-visual recording of the trial for
documentary purposes, not for live or real time broadcast.
- The right of people to know is limited to matters of public concern and
is further subject to such limitation as may be provided by law. Likewise,
it does not cover national security matters and intelligence
 29
Political Law Updates
information, trade secrets and banking transactions and criminal
matter.
▪ Excluded from the coverage of the constitutional guarantee are
diplomatic correspondence, closed-door cabinet meeting and
executive sessions of either House of congress, as well as the
internal deliberation of the SC.
- The right of the people to information on matters of public concern
generally prevails over the right to the privacy of ordinary financial
transactions.
- Right to information does not extend to matters acknowledged as
privileged information under the separation of powers, which include
presidential conversations, correspondences or discussions during
closed door meetings.
- Requisites before the right to information may be compelled by Writ of
Mandamus: 1) information sought must be in relation to matter of
public concern or public interest; and, 2) it must not be exempt by law
from the operation of the constitutional guarantee. **
- Government contracts entered by the government in the exercise of
its proprietary or commercial capacity are accessible to the public.
The right to information under the constitution does not exclude
contracts of public interest and are not privileged.
9. Right to form associations
- The right to form or join unions or associations, includes the right not
to join, or if one is already a member, to disaffiliate from the
association.
- The members of the civil service may not declare a strike to enforce
economic demands and the right to strike is only available to
associations in the private sectors and not to members of the civil
service.
- The SC held that the right to association was not violated when political
parties were prohibited from participating in the barangay elections in
order to insure the non-partisanship of candidates; political neutrality
is needed to discharge the duties of barangay officials.
- The SC upheld the validity of RA 3350, allowing workers to dissociate
from or not to join labor union despite a closed shop agreement, if they
are members of any religious sect which prohibits affiliation of their
members in any such labor organization.
- The SC held that compulsory membership of a lawyer in the IBP does
not violate the constitutional guarantee.
10. Non-impairment clause
- There is substantial impairment when the law changes the terms of
a legal contact between the parties, either in time or mode of
performance, or imposes new conditions, or dispenses with those
expressed, or authorizes for its satisfaction something different from
that provided in its terms.
- The purpose of the non-impairment clause is to safeguard the integrity
of contracts against unwarranted interference by the State. As a rule,
contracts should not be tampered with by subsequent laws which would
change or modify the rights and obligations of the parties.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ There is impairment if a subsequent law changes the terms of a
contract between the parties, imposes new conditions, dispenses
with those agreed upon or withdraws remedies for the enforcement
of the rights of the parties.
- Public welfare is superior to private rights.
▪ The municipal zoning ordinance is a police measure and prevails
over a restriction contained in the titled to property.
▪ BP was sustained as not violative of the non-impairment clause, and
even if it were, the law was a police measure and therefore superior
to contracts.
- Timber licenses, permits and license agreements are principal
instruments by which the State regulates the utilization and
disposition of forest resources to the end that public welfare is
promoted. They not do vest a permanent or irrevocable right to the
particular concession area and the forest products herein and they may
be amended, modified, replaced or rescinded by the Chief Executive
when national interests so require.
11. Free Access to the Courts – this is a social justice provision,
implemented by the Rules of Court provision allowing pauper suits.
12. Miranda Doctrine
- Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall
have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have a
competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the
person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with
one. These right cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence
of counsel.
▪ Rights are available only during custodial investigation or any
questioning initiated by law enforcement officer after a person has
been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of
action in any significant way. **
➢ Custodial investigation shall include the practice of issuing an
invitation to a person who is investigated in connection with an
offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to
the liability of the inviting officer for any violation of law. **
➢ The right to counsel accrues only after an investigation ceases
to be a general inquiry into an unsolved crime and commences
an interrogation aimed at a particular subject who has been
taken into custody and to whom the police would now propound
questions.
➢ It was held that when out-of-court identification was conducted
by the police, the accused was already under custodial
investigation.
➢ A person under normal audit investigation is not under
custodial investigation, because an audit examiner can hardly be
deemed to be the law enforcement officer contemplated in the
rule.
▪ The rule begins to operate at once as soon as the investigation cases
to be a general inquiry into an unsolved crime, and direction is then
aimed upon a particular suspect who has been taken into custody
and to whom the police would then direct interrogatory questions
which tend to elicit incriminating statements.
 30
Political Law Updates
▪ The Miranda Rights apply only from the moment the investigating
officer begins to ask questions for the purpose of eliciting
admissions, confessions or any information from the accused.
▪ The MR does not apply to spontaneous statement, not elicited
through questioning by the authorities but given in an ordinary
manner whereby the suspect orally admitted having committed the
offense. Likewise, it does not apply to admissions or confessions
made by a suspect before he was place under custodial investigation
. to consider the effects and consequences of any waiver he might
- Police Line-up is not considered a part of any custodial inquest,
because it is conducted before that stage of investigation is reached.
▪ In a police line-up, the process has not yet shifted from the
investigatory to the accusatory stage, and it is usually the witness
or the complainant who is interrogated and who gives a statement in
the course of the line-up.
▪ When the accused is brought to the police station only to be identified
by a witness, he is not yet under custodial investigation.
▪ The right to counsel is not required in a police line-up as it is not part
of the custodial inquest. Likewise, the said right can neither be
invoked when the suspect is given a paraffin test as he is not yet
under custodial investigation. **
- The counter-affidavit submitted by the respondent during preliminary
investigation is admissible in evidence, because preliminary
investigation is not part of custodial investigation.
- When a arrested person signs a booking sheet and an arrest report at
the police station, he does not admit the commission of an offense nor
confess to any incriminating circumstance. The booking sheet is simply
a police report and it has no probative value as an extrajudicial
statement of the person being detained.
- Spontaneous statements, or those not elicited through questioning
by law enforcement officers, but given in an ordinary manner where
the appellant verbally admits to having committed the offense, are
admissible.
- The right to counsel is intended to preclude the slightest coercion
as would lead the accused to admit something false.
▪ The SC held that the right to counsel attaches upon the start of the
investigation when the investigating officer starts to ask questions to
elicit information and / or confessions or admissions from the
respondent.
▪ The counsel should be able to explain the nature of the questions by
conferring with his client and halting the investigation should the need
to arise. The duty of the lawyer includes ensuring that the suspect
under custodial investigation is aware that the right of an accused to
remain silent may be invoked at any time.
▪ The right to counsel does not mean that the accused must personally
hire his own counsel. The constitutional requirement is satisfied
when a counsel is engaged by anyone acting on behalf of the person
under investigation, or appointed by the court upon petition by said
person or by someone on his behalf.
▪ The right to counsel still applies to in certain pre-trial proceedings
that are considered critical stages in the criminal process. Custodial
interrogation before or after charges have filed, and non-custodial
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
interrogation after the accused has been formally charged, are
considered critical pre-trial stages in the criminal process.
- The right to be informed carries with it the correlative obligation on
the part of the investigator to explain, and contemplates effective
communication which results in the subject understanding what is
conveyed.
▪ The Court said that the right to be informed should allow the suspect
make of his rights.
- Rights cannot be waived except in writing and signed by the person in
the presence of his counsel.
▪ Extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested, detained or
under custodial investigation shall be in writing and signed by such
person in the presence of his counsel or in the latter’s absence, upon
a valid waiver, and in the presence of any of the parents, older
brothers and sisters, his spouse, the mayor, the judge, priest or
minister of the gospel as chosen by him; otherwise, such extrajudicial
confession shall be inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding.
- The SC held that the voluntary but uncounseled confession of the
accused to the Mayor and to the media was admissible in evidence if
it was the accused who freely, spontaneously and voluntarily sought
the Mayor for a private meeting, and the Mayor did not know that the
accused was going to confess his guilt. ***
▪ Constitutional procedures on custodial investigation do not
apply to the spontaneous statements not elicited through
questioning by the authorities, but given in an ordinary manner
whereby the accused orally admitted having committed the crime.
▪ The SC held that confession made by the accused in a taped radio
interview was held admissible in evidence, as it was not shown that
said reporter was acting for the police or that the interview was
conducted under the circumstances where it is apparent that the
suspect confessed to the killing out of fear.
▪ An amicable settlement does not partake of the nature of an
extrajudicial confession or admission, but is a contract between the
parties within the parameters of their mutually recognized and
admitted rights and obligations.
▪ Extra-judicial confession of guilt during custodial investigation is
valid when 1) it is in writing, 2) it was made with the assistance of
competent and independent counsel, 3) it must be voluntary and 4) it
must be expressed.
- The right to remain silent and the right to counsel may be waived, but
not the right to be informed of these rights. **
▪ The person arrested who validly waived his rights is not barred to
invoke his right to remain silent and counsel at any time of the
process, regardless of whether he may have answered some
questions or volunteered some statements.
• Under the principle of the fruit of the poisonous tree, once the primary
source is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any secondary or
derivative evidence (the fruit) derived from it is also inadmissible.
▪ The rule is based on the principle that evidence illegally obtained by
the State should not be used to gain other evidence, because the
 31
Political Law Updates
originally illegally obtained evidence taints all evidence subsequently
obtained.
➢ The receipt of seized property signed by the accused without the
assistance of counsel and with the accused not having been
informed of his constitutional rights is totally inadmissible in
evidence.
- The declaration of the accused acknowledging guilt made to the police
desk officer after the crime was committed may be given in evidence
against him by the police officer to whom the admission was made part
of the res gestae.
- Constitutional due process requirements mandated in Ang Tibay are
not applicable to preliminary investigation which are creations of
statutory law giving rise to mere statutory rights.
13. Right to Bail
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in the custody of law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any
court as required under certain specified conditions. The right to bail
emanates from the right to be presumed innocent.
- Its purpose is to obtain the provisional liberty of a person charged with
an offense until conviction while at the same time securing his appearance
at the trial.
- It is a constitutional right, and it is personal in nature and therefore,
waivable.
- It springs from the presumption of innocence accorded every accused
upon whom should not be inflicted incarceration at the outset since after
the trial he would be entitled to acquittal, unless his guilt be established
beyond reasonable doubt.
- A person deprived of his liberty by virtue of his arrest or voluntary surrender
may apply for bail as soon as he is deprived of his liberty, even before a
complaint or information is filed against him.
▪ Any person under detention, even if no formal charges have been filed,
can invoke the right to bail.
- The grant of bail should not be conditioned upon the prior arraignment
of the accused. In cases where bail is authorized, bail should be granted
before arraignment, otherwise the accused will be precluded from filing a
motion to quash which is done before arraignment.
- All prisoners whether under preventive detention or serving final
sentence cannot practice their profession nor engage in any business or
occupation, or hold office, elective or appointive, while in detention.
- The grant or denial of bail to a person charged with an offense
punishable by at least reclusion perpetua is made dependent on whether
or not the evidence of guilt is strong.
▪ The test is not whether the evidence establishes guilt beyond
reasonable doubt but rather whether it shows evident guilt or great
presumption of guilt.
- The rule considers bail as applicable only to a person in custody of the
law and does not cover a person who is in the enjoyment of his physical
liberty.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Custody of law is required before the court can act on an application
for bail, but is not required for the adjudication of other reliefs sought
by the defendant.
▪ As bail is intended to obtain or secure one’s provisional liberty, the
same cannot be posted before custody over him is acquired by the
judicial authorities, either by his lawful arrest or voluntary surrender.
▪ The accused who is confined in a hospital may be deemed to be in the
custody of the law if he clearly communicates his submission to the
court while confined in a hospital. **
- The principle that the accused is precluded from questioning the legality
of the arrest after arraignment is true only if he 1) voluntarily enters his
plea and 2) participates during trial, without previously invoking his
objections thereto.
• Bail in military – the right to bail is not available in the military, as an
exception to the general rule embodied in the Bill of Rights.
- The right to a speedy trial is given more emphasis in the military where
the right to bail does not exist.
- The right to bail has not been recognized and is not available to the
military, as an exception to the Bill of Rights.
- The denial of the right to bail to the military does not violate the b
because there is substantial distinction between military and citizen.
• Bail in extradition proceedings – Bail is not a matter of right in extradition
cases.
- An extradition proceeding being sui generis, the standard of proof
required in granting or denying bail can neither be the proof beyond
reasonable doubt in criminal cases nor the standard of proof of
preponderance of evidence in civil cases.
- It follows that the constitutional provision on bail will not apply to a case
of extradition where the presumption of innocence is not an issue.
Extradition proceedings are separate and distinct from the trial for the
offenses for which he is charged.
- Bail may be applied and granted as an exception, only upon clear and
convincing evidence showing 1) that, once granted bail, the applicant
will not be a flight risk or a danger to the community; and 2) that there
exist special, humanitarian and compelling circumstances including, as
a matter of reciprocity, those cited by the highest court in the requesting
state when it grants provisional liberty in extradition cases therein.
- The SC held that if bail can be granted in deportation cases, considering
that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to deportation
cases, there is no reason why cannot be invoked in extradition cases.
- Extradition is basically an executive, not judicial, responsibility arising
from the presidential power to conduct foreign relations.
• Bail in deportation proceedings – Aliens in deportation proceedings, as a
rule, have no inherent right to bail.
- Any alien under arrest in deportation may be released under bond or
under such other conditions as may be imposed by the Commissioner of
Immigration.
 32
Political Law Updates
- The Commissioner of Immigration has the power and discretion to grant
bail in deportation proceedings, but does not grant aliens the right to be
released on bail.
▪ the grant of bail is merely permissive and not mandatory or obligatory
on the part of the Commissioner. The exercise of the power is
discretionary.
▪ The determination as to the propriety of allowing an alien, subject to
deportation under the Immigration Act, to be released temporarily on
bail, as well as the conditions, falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of
the Commissioner, and not with the courts as the courts do not
administer immigration laws.
• Effects of failure to appear at the trial:
1. The failure of the accused to appear at the trial without justification
despite due notice shall be deemed a waiver of his right to be present
and the trial may proceed in absentia.
2. The bondsman may arrest the accused for the purpose of surrendering
the accused. The bondsman may also cause the accused to be arrested
by a police officer or any other person of suitable age and discretion upon
written authority endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking.
• Duration of the bail
1. The undertaking under the bail shall be effective upon approval, and
unless cancelled, shall remain in force at all stages of the case until
promulgation of judgment of the RTC, irrespective whether the case
was originally filed in or appealed to it.
2. The bail bond posted by the accused can only be used during the 15-
day period to appeal and not during the entire period of appeal. For the
accused to continue his provisional liberty on the same bail bond,
consent of the bondsman is necessary.
• Bail is not required in the following cases:
1. Bail is not required when the law or the Rules of Court so provide;
2. When a person has been in custody for a period equal or more than the
possible maximum imprisonment prescribed for the offense charged, he
shall be released immediately, without prejudice to the continuation of the
trial or the proceedings on appeal; Also, if the maximum penalty to which
the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after
30 days of preventive imprisonment.
3. In cases filed with the MTC for an offense punishable by imprisonment of
less than 4 yrs., 2 months and 1 day, and the judge is satisfied that there
is no necessity for placing the accused under custody, he may issue
summons instead of a warrant of arrest. Since no arrest was made, bail
is not required.
4. If a person is charged with a violation of a municipal or city ordinance, the
prescribed penalty for which is not higher than 6-month imprisonment
and/or fine of P2000.00.
• Bail is not allowed in the following cases:
1. A person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall not be admitted to bail when
evidence of guilt is strong regardless of the stage of the criminal
prosecution;
2. Bail shall not be allowed after a judgment of conviction has become final;
3. Bail shall not be allowed after the accused has commenced to serve
sentence.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
• Bail is a matter of right – as a rule, all persons in custody shall be admitted
to bail as a matter of right:
1. Before and after conviction by the MTC
2. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment (DRL); or,
- The remedy of the petitioner from the order of the trial court denying a
petition for bail is to file a petition for certiorari if the trial court
committed jurisdictional issue (GAD).
• Bail is a matter of discretion –
1. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense punishable by DRL
2. After conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by DRL;
3. If the decision of the RTC convicting the accused changed the nature of
the offense from non-bailable to bailable, application for bail can be filed
with and resolved by the appellate court.
- Notice of hearing applies in all cases whether bail is a matter of right
or discretion to determine existence of strong evidence or the lack of it.
The prosecution has the burden of showing that the evidence of guilt is
strong.
- Bail hearing is mandatory in order to give the prosecution reasonable
opportunity to oppose the application by proving that the evidence of
guilt is strong.
▪ The SC held that in the application for bail of a person charged with
a capital offense punishable by DRL, a hearing, whether summary
or otherwise in the discretion of the court, must actually conducted to
determine whether or not evidence of guilt against the accused is
strong.
▪ The hearing on a petition for bail need not at all times precede
arraignment, because the rule is that a person deprived of his liberty
by virtue of his arrest or voluntary surrender may apply for bail as
soon as he is deprived of his liberty, even before a complaint or
information is filed against him.
▪ The assessment of the evidence presented during a bail hearing is
intended for the purpose of granting or denying an application for the
provisional release of the accused.
▪ The evidence presented during the bail hearing shall be considered
automatically reproduced at the trial. However, any witness during
the bail hearing may, upon motion of either party, be recalled by the
court for additional examination except if such witness is dead,
outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.
▪ If the court imposed a penalty of imprisonment exceeding 6 years but
not more than 20 years, the accused shall be denied bail, or his bail
previously granted shall be cancelled, upon showing by the
prosecution, with notice to the accused of any the circumstances
enumerated in Sec. 5, Rule 114.
- the court is not authorized to deny or cancel the bail ex parte.
- The resolution of the RTC denying or cancelling the bail may be
reviewed by the appellate court motu propio or on motion of any party
after notice to the adverse party in either case.
▪ The SC ruled that if an accused who is charged with a crime
punishable by reclusion perpetua is convicted by the trial court and
sentenced to suffer such penalty, bail is neither a matter of right on
 33
Political Law Updates
the part of the accused nor a matter of discretion on the part of the
court, an application for bail must be denied.
- In an application for bail pending appeal by an appellant sentenced by
the trial court to a penalty of imprisonment for more than 6 years, the
discretionary nature of the grant of bail pending appeal does not mean
that bail should automatically be granted absent any of the
circumstances mentioned in the 3rd par. of Sec. 5, Rule 114 of the Rules
of Court.
- An application for bail pending appeal may be denied even if the bail-
negating circumstances in the 3rd par. are absent.
14. Rights of the Accused
1. Criminal Due Process
- Requisites of due process in criminal cases are as follows: 1) the
accused has heard in a court of competent jurisdiction, 2) the
accused is proceeded against under the orderly processes of law,
3) the accused has been given notice and the opportunity to be
heard, and 4) the judgment rendered was within the authority of a
constitutional law.
- The SC held that the unreasonable delay in the termination of the
preliminary investigation by the Tanodbayan violated the due
process clause. In such event, the aggrieve party is entitled to the
dismissal of the complaint.
▪ If the delay is due to the complexity of the issue involved in the
continuing investigation conducted, there is no violation of the
due process.
▪ If the delay was caused by petitioner’s own acts and not by the
inaction of the prosecution, there is no violation of the
petitioner’s right to due process of law or of his right to speedy
dispositions of the case.
- The SC held that if the questions propounded by the court are
merely for clarification, to clear up dubious points and elicit relevant
evidence, such questioning will not constitute bias.
▪ Judges have much interest as counsel in the orderly and
expeditious presentation of evidence and have the duty to ask
questions that would elicit the facts on the issue involved, clearly
ambiguous remarks by witnesses, and address the points
overlooked by counsel.
- The re-opening of a case without giving the accused the
opportunity to introduce controverting evidence is an error and a
denial of due process of law.
- The Court enumerated the stringent constitutional standards
impelled by the due process clause whenever the accused pleads
guilty to a capital offense:
1. The court must conduct a searching inquiry into the
voluntariness of the plea and the full comprehension of the
consequences thereof;
2. The prosecution shall be required to present evidence of guilt
of the accused and the precise degree of the of his culpability;
and,
3. The accused must be asked if he desires to present evidence
on his behalf and allow him to do so if he so desires.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The procedure is mandatory, and a judge who fails to observe
with fealty the said rule commits grave abuse of discretion.
2. Presumption of Innocence
- Every circumstance favoring the innocence of the accused must be
taken into account. The proof against him must survive the test of
reason; the strongest suspicion must not be permitted to sway
judgment.
- The SC held that the acquittal of the accused is inevitable
(predictable) if inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of
two or more explanations, one consistent with the innocence of the
accused and the other consistent with his guilt, then the evidence
does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient to
support a conviction.
- The presumption of regularity of official duty cannot prevail over the
constitutional presumption of innocence.
▪ The constitutional presumption will not apply as long as there is
some logical connection between the fact proved and the
ultimate fact presumed, and the inference of one fact from proof
of another shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary
mandate.
▪ In order that this constitutional presumption may be overcome in
a prosecution for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the following
elements must be proven: 1) that the transaction or sale took
place, 2) that the corpus delicti or the illicit drug was presented in
evidence, and 3) that the buyer and seller are identified.
➢ The seizure and custody of the drugs remain valid despite
failure to comply with the chain of custody procedure, if 1)
the non-compliance is attended by justifiable grounds, and
2) the integrity and evidentiary of the seized items are
properly preserved.
▪ The prima facie presumption of accountability does not
shatter the presumption of innocence which the petitioner enjoys,
because even if the prima arises, certain facts still have to be
proved, and the Sandiganbayan must be satisfied that the
petitioner is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
▪ The equipoise rule applies where the evidence adduced by the
parties are evenly balanced, in which case the constitutional
presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the
accused.
▪ The right to presumption of innocence can be invoked only by an
individual accused of a criminal offense; a corporate entity has
no personality to invoke the same.
3. Right to be heard by himself and counsel
- The right to counsel proceeds from the fundamental principle of
due process which basically means that a person must be heard
before being condemned.
▪ The accused is accorded legal assistance extended by counsel
who commits himself to the cause of the defense and acts
accordingly. Tt means an efficient and truly decisive legal
assistance, and not simply perfunctory representation.
 34
Political Law Updates
▪ The SC said that a PAO lawyer is considered an independent
counsel within he contemplation of the Constitution since he is
not a special counsel, public or private prosecutor, counsel of the
police, or a municipal attorney whose interest is admittedly
adverse to that of the accused.
▪ The right to counsel during the trial is not subject to waiver and
such right to be represented by counsel during the trial is
absolute, the option of the accused to hire one of his own choice
is limited.
▪ Failure of the record to disclose affirmatively that the trial court
advised the accused of his right to counsel is not sufficient ground
to reverse conviction.
- The client is bound by the mistakes of his lawyer, except when the
negligence or incompetence of counsel is deemed so gross as to
have prejudiced the constitutional right of the accused to be heard.
- The SC held that petitioners invited for inquiry as resource speaker
in a legislative investigation conducted by any of the Houses of
Congress does not have the constitutional right to counsel.
4. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him
- The SC said that the reasons for this guarantee are: 1) to furnish
the accused with such a description of the charge against him as
will enable him to prepare for his defense, 2) to avail himself of his
conviction or acquittal for perfection against a further prosecution
for the same cause; and 3) to inform the Court of the facts alleged,
so that it may decide whether they are sufficient in law to support
a conviction.
▪ The conviction of the accused who was a deaf-mute was
reversed by the SC because no one who knew how to
communicate with the accused was utilized by the trial court
during the entire proceedings.
▪ To arraign the accused while he is in a state of insanity will
violate the right of the accused to be informed of the nature and
cause of the accusation against him.
- In order that the constitutional right of the accused to be informed
of the nature and cause of the accusation against him may not be
violated, the information must set forth facts and circumstances
that have a bearing on the culpability and liability of the accused,
so that the accused can prepare for and undertake his defense.
▪ Every element of the offense must be alleged in the complaint
or information, because the accused is presumed to have no
independent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense
charged.
▪ It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the
precise time when the offense was committed, except when
time is a material ingredient of the offense.
5. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial
▪ Due process requires that the acts or omissions constitutive of
the offense must be stated in the information to fully apprise the
accused of the charged against him.
▪ The accused can be convicted only of the crime alleged or
necessarily included in the allegations in the information.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Void for Vagueness Rule – the accused is denied the right to
be informed of the charge against him, and to due process as
well, where the statute itself is couched in such indefinite
language that it is not possible for men of ordinary intelligence to
determine therefrom what acts or omissions are punished.
▪ The failure to object the multiple offenses alleged in the criminal
information during the arraignment is deemed a waiver of the
right.
➢ The SC ruled that the accused may be convicted of as many
offenses charged in the information and proved during the
trial, where he fails to object to such duplicitous information
during the arraignment.
▪ Political offense doctrine – common crimes penetrated in
furtherance of a political offense, are divested of their character
as common offenses and assume the political complexion of the
main crime of which they are mere ingredients, and
consequently, cannot be punished separately from the political
offense, complexed with the same, to justify the imposition of a
grave penalty.
➢ When the killing is committed in furtherance of rebellion, the
killing is not homicide or murder. Rather, the killing assumes
the political complexion of rebellion as its mere ingredient
and must be prosecuted and punished as rebellion alone.
➢ The SC said that the burden of demonstrating political
motivation must be discharged by the defense; proof
showing political motivation is adduced during trial where the
accused s assured an opportunity to present evidence.
- Right to be heard, includes: 1) Right to be present at trial; 2) Right
to counsel; 3) Right to impartial judge 4) Right of confrontation; 5)
Right to compulsory process to secure the attendance of the
witness.
- Pre-arraignment duties of the trial judge or (4 fold duties):
1. To inform the accused that he has the right to have his own
counsel before being arraigned;
2. After giving such information, to ask accused whether he
desires the aid of counsel;
3. If he desires to procure the services of counsel, the court must
grant him reasonable time to do so; and,
4. If he so desires to have counsel but is unable to employ one,
the court must assign counsel de oficio to defend him.
▪ Right to counsel applies only to admissions made in a criminal
investigation but not those made in an administrative
investigation.
▪ The constitutional right of an accused to confront the witness
against him does not apply in preliminary investigations, nor
will the absence of a preliminary investigation be an infringement
of his right to confront the witnesses against him.
- Speedy trial refers to a trial free from vexatious, capricious and
oppressive delays, but justice and fairness, not speed, are the
objectives.
 35
Political Law Updates
▪ The right to speedy trial is relative, subject to reasonable delays
and postponements arising from illness, medical attention, body
operations, etc.
▪ What offends the right are unjustified postponements which
prolong trial for an unreasonable length of time.
▪ The right to speedy trial is violated only when the proceeding is
attended by vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays, or
when unjustified postponements of the trial are asked for and
secured, or when without cause or justifiable motive, a long
period of time is allowed to elapse without the party having his
case tried. VCOD
▪ The different interests of the defendant which the right to speedy
trial are designed to protect are: 1) to prevent oppressive pre-
trial incarceration, 2) to minimize anxiety and concern of the
accused; and 3) to limit the possibility that the defense will be
impaired.
- Impartial trial
▪ The accused is entitled to the cold neutrality of an impartial
judge.
➢ The cold neutrality of an impartial judge is designed to
preserve the integrity of the judiciary and to gain and
maintain the people’s faith in the institutions they have
erected when they adopted our Constitution.
6. Habeas Corpus
▪ Impartiality of the judge cannot be assailed on the ground that he
propounded clarificatory questions to the accused and thus, trial
judges must be accorded a reasonable leeway in asking
questions as may be essential to elicit relevant facts and to bring
out the truth.
- Public Trial is intended to prevent possible abuses which may be
committed against the accused.
▪ A public trial aims to ensure that accused is fairly dealt with and
would not be unjustly condemned and that his rights are not
compromised in secret conclaves of long ago.
▪ Public trial is not synonymous with publicized trial; it only implies
that the court doors must be open to those who wish to come, sit
in the available seats.
- Right to meet the witnesses face to face
▪ The testimony of a witness who has not submitted himself to
cross-examination is not admissible in evidence.
▪ The SC ruled that the failure to present as witness the poseur-
buyer in a prosecution for illegal sale of marijuana is not fatal
to the prosecution’s case, because what is required is merely
proof of the consummation of the sale transaction.
- Right to Compulsory Process is to secure the attendance of
witnesses and the production of evidence.
▪ A subpoena is a process directed to a person requiring him to
attend and to testify at the hearing or trial of an action or at any
investigation conducted under the laws of the Philippines, or for
the taking of his deposition.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC declared as the requisites for compelling the attendance
of witnesses and the production of evidence, as follows: 1) the
evidence is really material, 2) the accused is not guilty of neglect
in previously obtaining the production of such evidence, 3) the
evidence will be available at the time desired, and 4) no similar
evidence can be obtained.
- Trial in absentia; requisites: 1) the accused has already been
arraigned; 2) he has been duly notified of the trial; and, 3) His
failure to appear is unjustifiable.
▪ This is intended to obviate the situation where the judicial process
could be subverted by the accused jumping bail to frustrate the
promulgation of judgment.
▪ The reason allowing trial in absentia is to speed up the disposition
of the case.
▪ The presence of the accused is mandatory during: 1)
arraignment and plea; 2) during trial, for identification; and, 3).
promulgation, unless for a light offense wherein the accused
may appear by counsel or a representative. ATP
➢ The accused on bail who fails to present himself during
promulgation of judgment loses his standing in court, unless
he surrenders or submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
court, he is deemed to have waived his right to seek relief
from the Court, including the right to appeal his conviction.
A. Writ of Habeas Corpus is the proper remedy for a person who
is being detained or restrained of his liberty unlawfully.
▪ It is a writ issued by a court directed to a person detaining
another, commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner
at a designated time and place, with the day and cause of his
caption and detention, to do, to submit to, and to receive
whatever the Court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in
his behalf.
▪ Suspension of the privilege does not suspend the right to bail.
▪ It can be availed in the following judicial proceedings: 1)
deprivation of constitutional right resulting in the restraint of
the person, 2) court has no jurisdiction to impose the
sentence, or 3) an excessive penalty has been imposed, since
such sentence is void as to the excess.
▪ Its ultimate purpose is to relieve a person from unlawful
restraint and restores the liberty of an individual subjected from
such physical restraint.
▪ Even if the detention is, at its inception, illegal, supervening
events, such as the issuance of a judicial process, may prevent
the discharge of the detained person.
▪ Habeas Corpus lies only where the restraint of a person’s
liberty has been judicially adjudged to be illegal or unlawful.
B. Writ of Amparo is a remedy available to any person whose life,
liberty, or security is violated or threatened with violation by an
unlawful act or omission of POE or of a private individual or entity.
 36
Political Law Updates
▪ To be validly issued by the court, it must allege the factual and
legal basis of the right sought to be protected.
▪ It shall not be issued when applied for as substitute for the
appeal or certiorari process, or when it will inordinately interfere
with these process.
▪ The SC held that a petition for a writ of amparo is an improper
remedy to regain parental authority and custody over a minor
child who was legally put up for adoption
C. Writ of Habeas Data is a remedy available to any person whose
right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened
by unlawful act or omission of a POE or a private individual or
entity engaged in gathering, collecting or storing data or
information regarding the person, family, home and
correspondence of the aggrieved party.
▪ The rule requires that the petition must sufficiently allege the
manner in which the right to privacy is violated or threatened
with violation, and how much violation or threat affects the right
to life, liberty or security of the aggrieved party.
▪ The SC held that the forwarding of the information by the PNP
to the Zenarosa Commission was not an unlawful act that
violates or threatens to violate the right to privacy in life, liberty
or security.
▪ The SC said that the petitioners have no reasonable
expectation of privacy that would warrant the issuance of a writ
of habeas data when their daughters shared the incriminating
pictures with their facebook friends. ***
D. Writ of Kalikasan is a remedy available to any person whose
constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated
or threatened with violation by any unlawful act or omission of
POE or private individual or entity, involving environmental
damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces. LHP
E. Writ of Continuing Mandamus is a remedy available when any
agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof
unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law
specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or
station in connection with the enforcement or violation of an
environmental law, rule or regulation or a right therein, or
unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of such
right, and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy
in the ordinary course of law.
▪ The Court ruled that the cleaning and rehabilitation of Manila
Bay can be compelled by mandamus. The government
agencies’ task to perform their duties as defined by law, on the
one hand, and how they are to carry out such duties, on the
other, are two different concepts.
▪ The Court is behooves to place the heads of the departments,
agencies, bureaus and offices under them on continuing notice
about, and to enjoin them to perform, their mandates and duties
towards cleaning up the Manila Bay and preserving the quality
of its water to its ideal level, in accordance with the
Environmental Code, the Philippine Clear Water Act and all
related laws.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The writ of continuing mandamus issued in the Decision
means that until the government agencies concerned have
shown full compliance with the Court orders, the Court
exercises continuing jurisdiction over government agencies
which has mandate over the cleaning up the Manila Bay until
full execution of the judgment. ***
15. Speedy Disposition of Cases
- The right to speedy disposition of cases applies not only to criminal
cases but extends also in all cases, including civil, and administrative
cases, and in all proceedings, including judicial and quasi-judicial
hearings.
- This constitutional privilege applies not only during the trail stage but
also when the case has already been submitted for decision.
- In ascertaining whether the right to speedy disposition of cases has
been violated, the following factors must be considered: 1) the length
of delay, 2) the reasons for delay, 3) the assertion or failure to assert
the such right by accused and the prejudice caused by the delay.
- The SC ruled that the failure of the Ombudsman to resolve a complaint
that has been pending for 6 years is clearly violative of this mandate
and the public officer’s right. In such event, the aggrieved party is
entitled to the dismissal of the complaint.
16. Right against Self-Incrimination
- No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
▪ Only natural person can invoke such privilege.
- The right is available not only in criminal prosecutions but also in all
other government proceedings, including civil actions and
administrative or legislative investigations.
▪ In a criminal prosecution, the accused may not be compelled to take
the witness stand, on the reasonable assumption that the purpose
of the interrogation will be to incriminate him.
- The right against self-incrimination is simply against the legal process
of extracting from the lips of the accused an admission of his guilt. It
does not apply where the evidence sought to be excluded is not an
incriminating statement but an object evidence.
▪ What is actually proscribed is the use of physical or moral
compulsion to extort communication from the accused-appellant
and not the inclusion of his body in evidence when it may be material.
***
▪ A person may be compelled to submit to fingerprinting,
photographing and paraffin testing, as there is no testimonial
compulsion involved.
➢ Substance emitted from the body of the accused may be
received in evidence.
▪ The prohibition extends to the compulsion for the production of
documents, papers and chattels that may be used as evidence
against the witness, except where the State has the right to inspect
the same such as the books of accounts of corporations, under the
police or taxing power.
 37
Political Law Updates
▪ It was held that where the subpoena duces tecum is directed to
government officials required to produce official documents /
public records which are in their possession or custody, then there
is no violation of the right against self-incrimination.
▪ The privilege also protects the accused against any attempt to
compel him to furnish a specimen of his handwriting in connection
with a prosecution for falsification since writing is not purely
mechanical act but it requires the application of intelligence and
attention.
- The right of self-incrimination may be waived, either directly or by a
failure to invoke it, provided the waiver is certain and unequivocal and
intelligently made. Thus, the accused who takes the witness stand
voluntarily and offers testimony in his behalf may be cross-examined
and asked incriminating questions on any matter he testified to on direct
examination.
- It prohibits the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort
communication from the witness, not an inclusion of his body in
evidence, when it may be material.
17. Involuntary Servitude
- The SC ruled that the requirement under Sec. 17 of the RH Law for
private and non-government health care service providers to render 48
hours of pro bono RH services does not amount to involuntary
servitude, on the following reasons:
1. The practice of medicine is undeniably imbued with public
interest that it is both the power and duty of the State to control
and regulate it in order to protect and promote the public welfare.
2. Sec. 17 only encourages private and non-government RH service
providers to render pro bono service. Except for Philhealth
accreditation, no penalty is imposed should they do otherwise.
3. Religious objectors are exempt from Sec. 17, as long as their
religious belief do not allow them to render the service, pro bono or
otherwise.
18. Prohibited Punishment
- Mere severity does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment. To
violate the constitutional guarantee, the penalty must be flagrantly and
plainly oppressive, wholly disproportionate to the nature of the
offense as to shock the moral sense of the community.
▪ Settled is the rule that a punishment authorized by statute is not cruel
or degrading unless it is flagrantly and plainly oppressive or wholly
disproportionate to the nature of the offense.
▪ What the law sought to avert was the proliferation of estafa cases
committed by means of bouncing checks.
▪ Death Penalty is not a cruel or unusual punishment. It is an exercise
of the State’s power to secure society against the threatened and
actual evil.
➢ The SC held that the issue of death penalty is a question which
should be addressed to the legislature, because the Courts are
not the proper venue for a protracted debate on the morality and
the propriety of capital punishment.
➢ The SC said that the suspension of the execution of the death
sentence is indisputably an exercise of judicial power, as an
essential aspect of jurisdiction. It is not a usurpation of the
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
presidential power of reprieve, although its effect is the same, the
temporary suspension of the execution of the death convict.
19. Non-Imprisonment for Debt
- The SC annulled the warrant where a judge issued a warrant of arrest
on the strength of a criminal complaint charging the accused with
willful non-payment of debt.
- While the debtor cannot be imprisoned for failure to pay his debt, he
can be validly punished in a criminal action if he contracted his debt
through fraud, as his responsibility arises not from the contract of loan,
but from the commission of the crime.
- The SC ruled that BP 115 (Trust Receipts Law) is valid exercise of
the police power and does not violate the non-imprisonment for debt
clause, because the law does not seek to enforce a loan, but to punish
dishonesty and abuse of confidence in the handling of money or
goods to the prejudice of another. Violation of trust receipt agreement
is punishable by estafa which is not an offense against property, but
against public order.
20. Double Jeopardy – the constitutional provision against double jeopardy
guarantees that the state shall not be permitted to make repeated
attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense.
- It is also called res judicata in prison grey – the right against double
jeopardy prohibits the prosecution for a crime of which he has been
previously convicted or acquitted.
- it prohibits refers to the identity of elements in the two offenses.
▪ Double jeopardy does not attach in preliminary investigation.
▪ Prosecution for the same act is not proscribed, what is forbidden is
prosecution for the same offense.
▪ The mere filing of two informations or complaints charging the same
offense does not yet afford the accused in those cases the occasion
to complain that he is being placed in jeopardy twice for the same
offense as the accused has not yet been convicted or acquitted in the
first case, or the same has been terminated without his consent.
- As a rule, an acquittal rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction
after trial on the merits is immediately final and cannot be appealed on
the ground of double jeopardy.
▪ The promulgation of only one part of the decision, the modified civil
indemnity liability, is not a bar to the promulgation of the other part,
the imposition of the criminal accountability, and does not constitute
a violation of the proscription against double jeopardy.
- The accused may appeal from a judgment of conviction but when the
accused appeals from the sentence of the trial court, he waives his right
to the constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy and throws the
whole case open to review by the appellate court.
- Requisites: 1) a first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second;
2) the first jeopardy must be validly terminated; and 3) the second
jeopardy must be for the same offense includes or is necessarily
included in the offense charged in the first information, or is an attempt
to commit the same or a frustration thereof. ATO ***
▪ In determining when the first jeopardy may be said to have attached,
it is necessary to prove the following elements: (C JIPS)
 38
Political Law Updates
1. The accused has been convicted or acquitted, or the case
against him was dismissed or terminated without his express
consent;
2. That the conviction, acquittal or dismissal (CAD) was made by a
court of competent jurisdiction;
3. There is a valid complaint or information or other formal
charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction.
4. The accused has pleaded to the charge; and,
5. The subsequent prosecution is for an offense which is the
same as the former complaint or information.
➢ Reckless imprudence under Art. 365 is a single quasi-
offense by itself and not merely means to commit the other
crimes, such that conviction or acquittal of such quasi-
offense, regardless of its various resulting acts.
* In reckless imprudence cases under Art. 365, RPC, it is a
single quasi-offense by itself and not merely a means to
commit other crimes. Conviction or acquittal of such quasi-
offenses bars subsequent prosecution for the same quasi-
offense, regardless of its various resulting acts.
➢ The grant of a demurrer to evidence is equivalent to an
acquittal, and any further prosecution of the accused would
violate the constitutional proscription against double
jeopardy.
➢ A decision of an acquittal is final and executory, except in
the following cases: GDP
1. The court committed grave abuse of discretion;
2. The prosecution was denied of due process;
3. The issue involves pure question of law;
4. If the accused has waived or is estopped from invoking
his right against double jeopardy;
5. There is a finding of mistrial or the trial was a sham.
* As an exception to the rule, when the trial court acted with
grave abuse of discretion or when there was mistrial,
the OSG can assail the said judgment in a petition for
certiorari establishing that the State was deprived of a fair
opportunity to prosecute and prove its case.
* Any acquittal or conviction before a court having no
jurisdiction would not violate the principle of double
jeopardy since it failed to attach in the first place.
* There is no double jeopardy where the accused was
sentenced on plea-bargaining approved by the court but
without the consent of the fiscal.
* Double jeopardy will not attach where the criminal case
was mistakenly dismissed by the Court during a hearing
hat had already been earlier cancelled and removed from
the court calendar for that day.
* Doctrine of supervening event – the accused may still be
prosecuted for another offense if a subsequent
development changes the character of the first indictment
under which he may have already been charged or
convicted. **
* The SC ruled that the amended decision of acquittal, on
the ground that she overlooked the testimony of an
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
eyewitness, is null and void for violating the right against
double jeopardy. **
- The rule against double jeopardy does not apply under Sec. 7, Rule
117, the conviction of the accused shall not be a bar to another
prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense
charged in the former complaint or information.
- The rule on double jeopardy does not apply to administrative cases.
As double jeopardy attaches only: (ICAP-cad) 1) upon valid
indictment, 2) before a competent court, 3) after arraignment, 4)
when a valid plea has been entered, and 5) when the defendant was
acquitted or convicted or the case was dismissed or otherwise
terminated without the express consent of the accused.
- The discharge of an accused to be a state witness shall amount to an
acquittal and shall be a bar to a future prosecution for the same offense,
unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in
accordance with his sworn statement constituting the basis for his
discharge.
- Provisional dismissal of a criminal action does not terminate a
criminal case.
▪ Under the first paragraph of Sec. 8, Rule 177, the following requisites
should concur: 1) there must be express consent of the accused
and 2) there must be notice to the offended party.
▪ The non-compliance of the above rule, the dismissal will not trigger
the operation of the time-bar rule under the second par. of Sec. 8,
Rule 117.
▪ The prosecution has to revive the case if it desires to prevent the
provisional dismissal becoming permanent and the revival of the
case being time-barred.
▪ The time-bar under the new rule does not reduce the periods under
Art. 90 of the RPC. It is but a limitation of the right of the State to
revive a criminal case against the accused after the information had
been filed but subsequently provisionally dismissed with the express
consent of the accused. The State may revive a criminal case
beyond the 1-year or 2-year periods provided that there is a justifiable
necessity for the delay.
▪ The following requirements are conditions sine qua non for the
application of the time-bar rule:
1. The prosecution with the express conformity of the accused or
the accused moves for a provisional dismissal of the case or both
the prosecution and the accused move for PD of the case;
2. The offended party is notified of the motion for PD of the case;
3. The court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing
the case provisionally;
4. The public prosecutor is served with a copy of the order of PD of
the case.
21. Ex Post Facto Law and Bill of Attainder
- Ex Post Facto law is a penal law which is given retroactive application
to the prejudiced of the accused.
▪ No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law
prior to its commission.
 39
Political Law Updates
Exception: Penal law can be given retroactive application if it is 1)
favorable to the accused and 2) the accused is not a habitual
delinquent. (RAFH) **
▪ the treaty is neither a piece of criminal legislation nor a criminal
procedural statute.
▪ The suspension is not a form of penalty but merely preventive. It is
not a penalty because it is not imposed after and as a consequence
of hearing.
▪ Examples of ex post fact law:
1. Makes an act punishable as a crime when such act was not an
offense when committed;
2. While not creating new offenses, aggregates the seriousness of
a crime;
3. Prescribes greater punishment for a crime already committed;
4. Alters the rules of evidence so as to make it substantially easier
to convict a defendant;
5. Alters, in relation to the offense or its consequences, the situation
of a person to his disadvantage.
- Bill of Attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without
judicial trial.
▪ it offends against due process clause and it is an encroachment of
judicial function by the legislative.
▪ The SC held that the Anti-Subversion Act is not a bill of attainder,
because it does not specify the Communist Party of the Philippines
or the members thereof for the purpose of punishment
Citizenship
- Membership in a political community is personal and more or less
permanent in character.
▪ Nationality is membership in any class or form of political community.
Nationality does not necessarily include the right or privilege or exercising
civil or political rights.
- Modes of acquiring citizenship
▪ By Birth:
1. Jus Sanguinis – all inhabitants of the islands who were Spanish
subjects on April 11, 1899, and residing in the islands who did not
declare their intention of preserving Spanish nationality between said
date and October 11, 1900, were declared citizens of the Philippines.
2. Jus Soli – those declared as Filipino citizens by the courts are
recognized as such today, not because of the application of the jus
soli doctrine, but principally because of the doctrine of res judicata.
➢ Dual citizenship arises when as a result of the concurrent
application of two different laws of 2 or more state. A person is
simultaneously considered a nation by those state and
involuntary.
Dual allegiance arises when a person simultaneously owes by
some positive act, voluntary act, loyalty to two or more states.
➢ Policy against dual allegiance: dual allegiance of citizens is
inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt by law.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ The SC dual citizenship as a disqualification must refer to
citizens with dual allegiance. Consequently, persons with mere
dual citizenship do not fall under the disqualification.
➢ For candidates with dual citizenship, it is enough that they elect
Philippine citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of
candidacy (COC) to terminate their status as person with dual
citizenship. It operates as an effective renunciation of foreign
citizenship and it applies to a dual citizen acquired it both by jus
sanguinis and jus soli.
* The filing of COC suffices to renounce foreign citizenship,
effectively removing any disqualification as dual citizenship.
* The abovementioned rule does not apply to one who, after
having reacquired Philippine citizenship under RA 9225 runs
for public office. It is necessary for candidate for public office
must state in clear and unequivocal terms that he is renouncing
all foreign citizenship.
➢ The SC upheld RA 9225 and the Court said that the intent of the
legislature is to do away with the provision in CA 63 which takes
away Philippine citizenship from natural-born Filipinos who
become naturalized citizens of other countries. It allows dual
citizenship; but on its face, it does not recognize dual allegiance.
▪ Ra 9225 “citizenship retention and reacquisition act of 2003” –
a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, who have lost their
Philippine citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizen
of a foreign country, can re-acquire or retain his Philippine
citizenship under the conditions of the law.
▪ It does not provide for residency requirement for reacquisition
or retention of the Philippine citizenship.
➢ Attack on citizenship may be made only through a direct, not a
collateral proceeding.
➢ The SC held that the issuance by the Bureau of Immigration
and Deportation (BID) of the certificate of registration as Filipino
never attained finality, judicial review of the BID decision is
permitted if the court believes that there is substantial evidence
supporting the claim of citizenship
➢ The SC held that children born during the 1935 Constitution
confers Filipino citizenship to all persons whose fathers are
Filipino citizens regardless of whether such children are
legitimate or illegitimate.
➢ The exercise of the right of suffrage and participation in election
exercise constitute a positive act of election of Philippine
citizenship.
➢ Those who are born of a foreign and Filipino parents are given
within 3 years from reaching the age of majority, except when
there is a justifiable reason for the delay
* The right to elect Philippine citizenship is an inchoate right
during the age of minority of an alien child born to a Filipino
mother and an alien father. *
➢ It is settled that naturalization laws should be rigidly enforced and
strictly construed in favor of the government and against the
applicant.
➢ Dual citizens by naturalization are required to take not only the
oath of allegiance to the republic of the Philippines, but also to
personally renounce foreign citizenship in order to qualify as a
candidate for public office.
 40
Political Law Updates
➢ Former Filipino who reacquires Philippine citizenship by taking
oath of allegiance under RA 9225, to state in clear and
unequivocal terms that he is renouncing all foreign citizenship,
failing which he is disqualified from running for elective public
office.
➢ The doctrine of res judicata does not apply to question of
citizenship, except if the following conditions are present:
1. When a person’s citizenship is resolved by a court or
administrative body as a material use in the controversy,
after a full blown hearing;
2. With the active participation of the solicitor general or his
representative; and,
3. The finding on his citizenship is affirmed by the sc.
▪ Naturalization – the act of formally adopting a foreigner into the political
body of a nation by clothing him or her with the privileges of a citizen.
Modes of Naturalization
1. Direct – citizenship is acquired by: 1) individual, through judicial or
administrative proceedings, 2) special act of legislature, 3) collective
change of nationality, as a result of cession or subjugation, 4) in some
cases, adopting of orphan minors as nationals of the State where
they are born.
2. Derivative – citizenship is conferred on 1) wife of naturalized
husband, 2) minor children of naturalized person or 3) alien woman
upon marriage to a national.
• Doctrine of indelible allegiance – an individual may be compelled by
municipal law to retain the original nationality even if he has already
renounced or forfeited it under the laws of the second state whose
nationality he has acquired.
* Petition for judicial declaration of Philippine citizenship may be
distinguished from judicial naturalization under CA 473, as amended
in the following manner:
In petition for judicial declaration of Philippine citizenship, the
petitioner believes he is a Filipino and asks a court to declare or
confirm his status as a Philippine citizen. On the other hand, judicial
naturalization under CA 473, as amended, the petitioner
acknowledges that he is an alien, and seeks judicial approval to
acquire the privilege of becoming a Philippine citizen based on the
requirements under CA 473.
➢ Publication is a jurisdiction requirement. Non-compliance is fatal for
it impairs the very root or foundation of the authority to decide the
case, regardless of whether the one to blame is the clerk of court or
their petitioner or his counsel.
➢ The SC the alien wife of a naturalized Filipino need not go through
the formal process of naturalization in order to acquire Philippine
citizenship. All she has to do is to file before the BID a petition for
the cancellation of her Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR).
* She does not have to prove that she possesses all the
qualifications for naturalization; she only has to show that she does
not labor under any of the disqualification.
* Upon the grant of the petition for cancellation of the ACR, she may
then take the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines
and thus, become a citizen of the Philippines.
- Loss and Reacquisition of Philippine Citizenship
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC held that a Filipino-American, or any dual citizen cannot run for
elective public office in the Philippines unless he personally swears to
a renunciation of all foreign citizenship at the time of filing of the
certificate of candidacy.
➢ The mere filing of a COC is not sufficient. Sec. 5(2), RA 9225
categorically requires the individual to state in clear and unequivocal
terms that he is renouncing all foreign citizenship, failing which, he is
disqualified from running for an elective position.
➢ Dual citizens by naturalization are required to take not only the oath
of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, but also to personally
renounce foreign citizenship in order to qualify as a candidate for
public office.
- Those intending to practice their profession in the Philippines shall apply
with the proper authority for a license or permit to engaged in such practice.
- The SC held that where ostentation (display) of Portuguese passport and
signing of commercial documents as a Portuguese were construed as a
renunciation of Philippine citizenship
- The act of repatriation allows a person to recover or return to original status
before he lost his Philippine citizenship.
▪ Repatriation is effected by taking the necessary 1) oath of allegiance to
the republic of the Philippines and 2) registration in the proper a) civil
registry and in the b) bureau of immigration and deportation.
▪ The effect of granting the application for repatriation, it retroacts to the
date of the filing of his application for repatriation.
Right of suffrage
- The exercise of the right of suffrage and participation in election exercises
constitute a positive act of election of Philippine citizenship.
Instances where vote of congress are required:
Instances Votes required
by each house
1. Suspension or expulsion of members of congress *2/3
for disorderly behavior (HR / Senate)
2. Declaration of state of war 2/3
3. Overriding the veto power of the pres. 2/3
4. Confirmation of constitutional appointment made Majority vote
by the president.
5. Grant of tax exemption Majority vote
6. Revocation, suspension or extension of martial Majority vote
law
7. Nomination of vp, among members of congress Majority vote
made by pres.
8. Written declaration made by the majority of all 2/3
members of the cabinet that the president is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his
office
9. Treaty stipulation (senate only) 2/3
10. Impeachment HR prosecuting 1/3
Senate tribunal 2/3
Legislative Department
- The purpose of the principle of checks and balances:
1. to prevent encroachment of departmental powers as expressed in the
constitution;
2. to retain impulsive, hasty and improvident action of one branch, except
where discretionary power has been delegated to it by the constitution.
 41
Political Law Updates

- Apportionment of legislative district:
▪ 1) each city with not less than 250,000 inhabitants shall be entitled to at
least 1 representative, 2) each province, irrespective of number of
inhabitants, is entitled to at least 1 representative.
➢ The SC held that a province is entitled to at least a representative,
with nothing mentioned about population, a City must first meet a
population of 250,000 in order to be similarly entitled.
➢ A majority of the members of sectoral parties or organizations that
represent the marginalized and under-represented must belong to
the marginalized and under-represented sector they represent.
▪ The SC ruled that moral disapproval, without more, is not a sufficient
government interest to justify exclusion of homosexuals from
participation in the party-list system. The LGBT is a sector that can be
represented in the party-list system even if it is not specifically
enumerated in law.

▪ Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, ▪ Any elected party-list representative who changes his political party or
compact and adjacent territory as this is intended to prevent sectoral affiliation during his term of office shall forfeit his seat, provided
gerrymandering. that if he changes his political party or sectoral affiliation within 6 months
before an election, he shall not be eligible for nomination as party-list
Powers of congress: representatives under his new party or organization. **

1. General / plenary legislative power; ▪ There is no basis in law and established jurisprudence to insist that
2. Power of taxation and eminent domain; groups seeking registration under the party-list system still need to
3. Power to conduct legislative investigation; comply with the track record requirements.
4. War powers;
5. Power to call a special election for President and V. President; - The COMELEC may, motu propio, cancel, after due notice and hearing,
6. Power to judge president’s physical fitness to discharge the functions of the the registration of any party-list organization, if it violates or fails to comply
presidency; with laws, rules or regulations relating to elections.
7. Power to revoke or extend suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus or declaration of war; ▪ It was held that the power of the COMELEC not only to register political
8. Power to concur in presidential amnesties, with the concurrence of all parties but also to cancel their registration emanates from no less than
members of congress; Sec. 2 (5), Art. IX-C of the Constitution.
9. Power to suspend or expel members of the congress, with the concurrence
of at least 2/3 pf all its members. ▪ COMELEC has jurisdiction over intra-corporate controversies among
10. Power to concur treaties or international agreements, concurrence of at party-list members.
least 2/3 of all members of the senate
11. Power to confirm certain appointments made by the president; - Parameters to determine a party-list for entitlement of a seat in the House
12. Power of impeachment; of Representatives: ***
13. power to propose amendments or revision to the constitution.
1. The parties, organizations and coalitions shall be ranked from to the
lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the election;
- Congress can no longer enact a law governing rules and procedure for the 2. The parties, organizations and coalitions receiving at least 2% of the
courts. total votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one
guaranteed seat each;
- The power to increase the allowable membership in the House of 3. Those garnering sufficient number of votes according to the ranking in
Representatives and to reapportion legislative districts is vested paragraph 1 shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their
exclusively in Congress. total number of votes until additional seats are allocated; and,
4. Each party, organization or coalition shall be entitled to not more than
▪ The SC ruled reapportionment of legislative districts may be made 3 seats.
through a special law.
- Party-list representatives are proclaimed by the COMELEC based on the
Party-list System list of names submitted by the respective parties, organizations or coalitions
to the COMELEC according to their ranking in the list.
- The party-list representatives shall constitute 20% of the total number of
the members of the house of representatives is mandatory, after the parties Elections: 1) Regular – on the second Monday of May, unless otherwise
receiving at 2% of the total votes cast for the party list system have been provided by law; 2) Special – to fill vacancy, but elected member shall serve
allocated among the parties by the proportional percentage of the votes only for the unexpired portion of the term.
received by each party as against the total arty list votes.
Privileges:
- A party-list need not represent any marginalized and underrepresented
sectors of society; it is enough that its principal advocacy pertains to the - Members of the Congress shall, in all offenses by not more than 6 years of
special interests of its sectors. imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while Congress is in session.

- Political parties can participate in party-list elections provided 1) They
register under the party-list system and 2) do not field candidates in
legislative district elections.
▪ Political parties that fields candidates in legislative district elections can
participate in party-list elections only through its sectoral wing that can
separately register under the party-list system.
➢ The sectoral wing is by itself an independent sectoral party, and is
linked to a political party through a coalition.
- Presumption of innocence does not necessarily carry with it the full
▪ Membership in Congress does not exempt an accused from the statutes
and rules which apply to validly incarcerated persons.
▪ Members of the Congress are entitled to privilege of speech and of
debate.
▪ The SC held that suspension imposed under Sec. 5 of the Plunder Law
is not a penalty but a preventive measure, and the doctrine of
separation of powers is not violated.
enjoyment of civil and political rights.

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
 42
Political Law Updates
Disqualifications:
- The SC ruled that immigration to the US by virtue of the acquisition of a
green card constitutes abandonment of domicile in the Philippines.
- No members of the Congress may hold any office in the government during
his term without forfeiting his seat.
▪ Forfeiture of the seat in congress shall be automatic upon member’s
assumption of such other office deemed incompatible with his seat in
congress.
▪ No forfeiture shall take place if the member of the congress holds the
other government office in an ex officio capacity.
▪ Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) is not a government
subdivision, agency or instrumentality (GSAI) and it is regulated by
international humanitarian law and treated as an auxiliary of the State.
It possesses a sui generis status, being neither private nor public in
nature – no prohibition against Sen. Richard Gordon concurrently holding
the position of chairman of PNRC.
Joint Sessions
- Voting separately – 1) choosing the President, 2) determine President’s
disability, 3) confirming nomination of the Vice President, 4) declaring the
existence of a State of War, 5) proposing constitutional amendments.
- Voting jointly – 1) to revoke or extend proclamation suspending the privilege
of the writ of habeas corpus or placing the Philippines under martial law.
- Neither house during the sessions of the Congress shall without the
consent of the other, adjourn for more than 3 days, nor to any other place
than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.
Quorum – a majority of each House, but smaller number may adjourn from
day to day and may compel the attendance of absent Members in such manner
and under such penalties as such House may determine.
- The SC held that the basis in determining the existence of quorum in the
Senate shall be the total number of Senators who are in the country and
within the coercive jurisdiction of the Senate. ***
Disciplinary of members - House may punish its members for disorderly
behavior, and with the concurrence of 2/3 of all its members, suspend for not
more than 60 days or expels.
- The SC said that the determination of the acts which constitute disorderly
behavior is within the full discretionary authority of the House concerned,
and the Court will not review such determination, the same being a political
question.
Legislative Journal and the Congressional Record
• Enrolled bill theory – is one introduced and finally passed by both houses,
authenticated by the proper officers of each, and approved by the
president.
- The enrolled bill is conclusive upon the courts as regards the tenor of the
measure passed by Congress and approved by the President. Court is
bound under the doctrine of separation of powers by the contents of a
duly authenticated measure of the legislature.
- Enrolled bill prevails over journals entry, except as to matters which,
under the Constitution must be entered in the journal.
• Doctrine of void for vagueness – a statute or act suffers from the defect
of vagueness when it lacks comprehensible standards that men of common
intelligence must guess as its meaning differ as to its application.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
Electoral Tribunals (ET)
- ET was created as a non-partisan court. It must be independent of
Congress and devoid of partisan influence and consideration.
▪ Disloyalty to the party and breach of party discipline are not valid grounds
for expulsion of a member.
▪ HRET members enjoy security of tenure and their membership may not
be terminated except from a just cause such as the expiration of
congressional term, death, resignation from the political party, formal
affiliation with another political party, or removal for other valid causes.
- The ET is independent of the House of Representative / Senate of
Congress and its decision may be reviewed by the SC only upon showing
of grave abuse of discretion in a petition for certiorari filed under Rule 65
of the Rules of Court.
- The SC held that only if the House fails to comply with the directive of the
Constitution on proportional representation of political parties in the
HRET and Commission on Appointments can the party-list representatives
seek recourse from the Court through judicial review.
- HRET or set is the sole judge in all cases relating to elections, returns and
qualifications of its respective members; it acquires jurisdiction if the
following conditions are present (ERQ):
▪ The winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken oath and assumed
office as a member of the house (POA).
▪ Absence of any of the conditions means that the COMELEC still has
jurisdiction over the same ERQ.
▪ The SC held that the jurisdiction of HRET does not carry with it the
authority to delve / examine into the legality of the judgment of the
naturalization of respondent’s father. To rule otherwise would be an
impermissible collateral attack on the citizenship of respondent’s father.
Commission on Appointments
- It is composed of the Senate President, as Ex Officio Chairman, 12
Senators and 12 members of the House of Representatives, elected by
each House on the basis of proportional representation from the
political parties registered therein. The Chairman shall not vote except in
case of a tie.
- It is an independent institution from the two houses of Congress and the
Commission shall act on all appointments submitted to it within 30 session
days of congress from their submission.
Powers of Congress
- It was held that the title is not required to be an index of the contents of the
bill. It is sufficient compliance if the title expresses the general subject,
and all the provision of the Statute are germane to that subject.
▪ It was held that the creation of an additional legislative district need not
be expressly stated in the title of the bill.
• One-Title, One- Subject Rule expresses the principle that the title of the
law must not be so uncertain that the average person reading it would not
be informed of the purpose of the enactment or put on inquiry as to its
contents, or which is misleading, either in referring to or indicating one
subject where another or different one is really embraced in the act, or in
omitting any expression or indication of the real subject or scope of the act.
 43
Political Law Updates
▪ The rule does not require Congress to employ in the title of the enactment
language of such precision as to mirror, fully index or catalogue all the
contents and minute details therein.
▪ The rule is sufficiently complied with if the title is comprehensive enough
as to include the general object which the statute seeks to effect.
▪ The bill may contain any number of provisions as long as they are not
inconsistent with or foreign to the general subject, may be considered
in furtherance of such subject for the method and means of carrying out
the general subject.
- Appropriation, revenue, or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public
debt, bills of local application and private bills shall originate exclusively
in the House of Representatives, because the bill may undergo such
extensive changes in the Senate that the result may be a rewriting of the
whole.
▪ The Constitution does not prohibit the filing in the Senate of a substitute
bill in anticipation of its receipt of the bill from the House, so long as
action by the Senate as a body is withheld pending receipt of the House
Bill / as long as the Senate does not act thereupon until it receives the
House Bill. **
▪ The SC held that a legislative act will not be declared invalid for non-
compliance with the internal rules of the House since Parliamentary
Rules are merely procedural, and with their observance courts have no
concern and they may be waived or disregarded by the legislative body.
▪ It is within the power of the Bicameral Conference Committee (BCC)
to include in its report an entirely new provision that is not found either in
the House bill or in the Senate bill.
➢ If the Committee can propose an amendment consisting of one or
two provisions, there is no reason why it cannot propose several
provisions, so long as the amendment is germane to the subject of
the bills before the Committee.
▪ Partial Veto, as a rule, is invalid. It is allowed only for the particular items
in an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill.
Legislative Veto is a Congressional Veto is a means whereby the
legislative can block or modify administrative action taken under a
statute. It is a form of legislative control in the implementation of
particular executive action.
▪ When the President fails to act upon the bill for thirty days from receipt
thereof, the bill shall become a law as if he had signed it.
- The spending power “power of the purse” belongs to Congress, subject
only to the veto power of the President.
▪ While it is the President who proposes the budget, still, the final say on
the matter of appropriation is lodge in Congress.
▪ The SC held that the power of appropriation carries with it the power to
specify the project or activity to be funded under the appropriation law.
- No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an
appropriation made by law.
▪ The existence of appropriation and the availability of funds are
indispensable requisites to, or conditions sine qua non for, the execution
of government contracts.
➢ General Appropriation Law (GAL) is passed annually, intended to
provide for the financial operations of the entire government during
one fiscal period.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
Special Appropriation Law (SAL) designed for a specific purpose.
➢ Limitations on appropriation measures: 1) appropriation must be
devoted to a public purpose and 2) the sum authorized to be
released must be determinable, or at least determinable.
Limitations on special measures: 1) must specify the public
purpose for which the sum is intended, 2) must be supported by funds
actually available as certified to by the National Treasurer, or to be
raised by a corresponding revenue proposal included therein.
➢ Constitutional Rules on GAL:
1. Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by
the President for the operation of the Government as specified in
the budget.
2. The form, content, and manner of preparation of the budget shall
be prescribed by law.
3. No provision or enactment shall be embraced unless it relates
specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such
provision or enactment shall be limited in its operation to the
appropriation to which it relates as this is intended to prevent
riders, or irrelevant provisions included in the bill to ensure its
approval.
4. Procedure for approving appropriations for Congress shall strictly
follow the procedure for approving appropriations for other
departments and agencies as to prevent sub rosa appropriation
by Congress.
▪ No special appropriation bill shall be approved unless it specifies the
purpose for which it is intended and supported by funds actually available
as certified by the national treasurer.
▪ The SC said that DAP did not violate the constitutional provision. DAP
was merely a program of the Executive and is not a fund nor is it an
appropriation. It is a program for prioritizing government spending.
➢ The programs, activities, projects under DAP remain valid under the
Operative Fact Doctrine. As a general rule, the nullification of an
unconstitutional law carries with it the illegality of its effect. However,
in cases where nullification of the effects will result in inequity and
injustice, the operative fact doctrine may apply. **
▪ The SC held that 2013 PDAF Article cannot properly be deemed as a
legal appropriation because it contains post enactment measures
(PEM) which effectively create a system of intermediate appropriations.
These intermediate appropriations are the actual appropriations meant
for enforcement and since they are made by individual legislators after
the GAA is passed, they occur outside the law.
➢ The SC held that 2013 PDAF violates the principle of separation of
powers as there is an informal practice through which the legislators
have effectively intruded into the proper phases of budget
execution, must be deemed as acts of grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
➢ Likewise, the 2013 PDAF violates the principle of non-delegability
of legislative power as the individual legislators are given a lump-
sum fund from which they are able to dictate the fund, specific
project and beneficiary that they themselves determine.
➢ Moreover, the 2013 PDAF impairs the exercise of the prerogative of
item-veto of the President which violates the system of checks and
balances.
➢ The post-enactment features dilute / weakens the Congressional
oversight and violate Sec. 14, Art. VI of the Constitution, thus
impairing public accountability.
 44
Political Law Updates

▪ The SC declared that Sec. 8, PD 910 (Presidential Pork Barrel) as

unconstitutional as it gives the President unbridled discretion to
determine for what purpose the funds will be used and it constitutes an
undue delegation of legislative power as it gives the President wide
latitude to use the Malampaya funds for any other purpose he may direct
and, in effect, allows him to unilaterally appropriate public funds beyond
the purview of the law.
- If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the
general appropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the general
appropriations law for the preceding year shall be deemed re-enacted
and shall remain in force and effect until the general appropriations bill is
passed by the Congress.
▪ The existence of appropriations and the availability of funds are
indispensable requisites to, or conditions sine qua non form the execution
of government contracts.
▪ Impoundment refers to the refusal of the president for whatever reason
to spend funds made available by Congress.
▪ The SC held that the president does not possess the authority to scrap
the special appropriations act for the construction of the new bridge. His
refusal to spend the funds appropriated for the purpose is unlawful.
Power of Legislative Investigation
- Purposes of congressional inquiries: EC PCS
1. To gather information for the enactment of laws;
2. To check the performances of agencies of the government;
3. To check the consequences or reaction of the public on laws passed;
and,
4. To check on how the money is being spent.
- The power of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation
encompasses everything that concerns the administration of existing laws,
as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes.
▪ The objective of conducting inquiries in aid legislation is to elicit
information to be used for legislation, while in the power to conduct a
question hour, and its objective is to obtain information in pursuit of
Impeachment refers to the power of Congress to remove a public official for
congress’ oversight function.
serious crimes or misconduct as provided in the Constitution and it is a
mechanism designed to check abuse of power.
▪ The power of inquiry is given to each Houses and to their respective
committees. There must be a direct conferral of the power to the
committees.
▪ The mere filing of a criminal or an administrative complaint before a court
or a quasi-judicial body should not automatically bar the conduct of
legislative inquiry; otherwise, it would be extremely easy to subvert any
intended inquiry by Congress through the convenient ploy of instituting a
criminal or an administrative complaint.
▪ The SC held that the legislative inquiry does not violate the petitioner’s
right to privacy as the right of the people to access information on
matters of public concern generally prevails over the right to the privacy
of ordinary financial transactions.
▪ The SC, employing the rational basis relationship test, there is no
infringement of the individual’s right to privacy as the requirement to
disclose information is for a valid purpose.
- The SC noted the wide latitude given to the Houses of Congress in the
conduct of legislation inquiries and would not fault the Senate for approving
the resolution on the very same day that it was submitted.
- A legislative act will not be declared invalid for non-compliance with the
internal rules of the house.
The bill becomes a law in the following cases: AOF
1. The president approves the same and signs it;
2. The congress overrides the presidential veto;
3. The president fails to act upon the bill for thirty days from receipt
thereof.
▪ The president is expected to faithfully implement the purpose for which
congress appropriated funds. Generally, he cannot replace legislative
discretion with his own personal judgment as to the wisdom of a law (bar
2013)
- Punishment of a contumacious witness may include imprisonment, for
the duration of the session. The Senate, being a continuing bod, may
order imprisonment for an indefinite period, but principles of due process
and equal protection will have to be considered.
▪ House committees have the power to order POE or private individuals to
appear and testify and non-compliance of the order will be cited for
contempt and ordered to be arrested.
- The SC held that a distinction to be made between the power to conduct
inquiries in aid of legislation, the aim of which is to elicit information that
may be used for legislation, and the power to conduct a question hour,
the objective of which is to obtain information in pursuit of Congress’s
oversight function. **
▪ The requirement for Cabinet Members to secure president consent under
Sec. 1 of EO 464 is limited only to appearances in the question hour,
but it cannot be applied to appearances of department heads in inquiries
in aid of legislation.
▪ The heads of departments or cabinet members are required to appear in
congressional inquiries, except when there is a valid claim of executive
privilege made either by the president or by the executive secretary,
acting for the president.
▪ The SC held that the grant of authority to the oversight committee to
screen beneficiaries is unconstitutional as it violates the principles of
separation of powers. By being involved in the implementation of the
law, the committee is exercising executive power. **
- Impeachable Officers: President, Vice President, Chief Justice and
Associates Justices of the SC, Chairmen and Members of the
Constitutional Commissions and the Ombudsman. The foregoing
enumeration is exclusive.
- Grounds for impeachment: Culpable violation of the Constitution -
deliberate, 2) treachery, 3) bribery, 4) graft and corruption, 5) other high
crimes and 6) betrayal of public trust. CTB GOB **
- The SC the special prosecutor cannot conduct an investigation into alleged
misconduct of a SC justice, with the intent to file a criminal information, as
this would violate the security of tenure of the SC justices.
- An impeachable officer who is a member of the Philippine Bar cannot be
disbarred without first being impeached.
- The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate
all cases of impeachment.
▪ The SC said that the impeachment case is deemed initiated when the
complaint, with the accompanying resolution of indorsement, has been
filed with the House of Representatives and referred to the appropriate
committee (Committee on Justice).

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
 45
Political Law Updates
1. A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any member
of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution
of endorsement by any member thereof.
2. Included in the Order of Business within 10 session days, and
referred to the proper Committee within 3 session days.
➢ If the verified complaint is filed by at least 1/3 of all the members
of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of
Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed and
there is no need to refer the same to the proper Committee.
3. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its
members, shall submit its report to the House within 60 session days
from such referral, together with corresponding resolution.
4. A vote of at least 1/3 of all the member of the House shall be
necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of
Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution.
The vote of each member shall be recorded.
Limitation on initiating of impeachment case – not more than once within
a period of one year against the same official.
▪ the One-Year Bar Rule in an impeachment proceeding is to be reckoned
from the time the impeachment is referred to the Committee on Justice.
- The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of
impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath
or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief
Justice of the SC shall preside, but shall not vote.
▪ A decision of conviction must be concurred in by at least 2/3 of all the
members of the Senate.
▪ The effect of conviction is removal from the office and disqualification to
hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines. But the party
convicted shall be liable and subject to prosecution, trial and punishment
according to law.
- The SC said that the power of judicial review includes the power to review
justiciable issues in an impeachment proceeding.
Executive department
- The Congress is authorized by the constitution to proclaim the winning
candidates for the position of the President and V. President.
▪ The SC declared Sec.18.5 of RA 9189 (Overseas Absentee Voting
Act) which grants authority to the COMELEC to proclaim all winning
candidates as unconstitutional as it is repugnant to Sec. 4, Art. VII of the
Constitution vesting in Congress the authority to proclaim the winning
candidates for the position of Pres. and V. President.
▪ The SC held that the creation of the Joint Committee does not constitute
grave abuse and cannot be said to have deprived petitioner and the
other members of Congress of their congressional prerogatives, because
under the House Rules, the decisions and final report of said of said
Committee shall be subject to the approval of the joint session of both
Houses of Congress, voting separately.
▪ The SC held that there is no constitutional or statutory basis for
COMELEC to undertake a separate and an unofficial tabulation of results,
whether manually or electronically.
- The SC shall be the sole judge of all contest relating to the election, returns
and qualifications of the President or V. President, and may promulgate its
rules for the purpose.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The PET is not separate and distinct entity from the supreme court as it
was constituted in the implementation of Sec. 4, Art. VII of the constitution
and it thus faithfully complies with constitutional directive.
▪ The adoption of a separate seal, as well as the change in the
nomenclature of the Chief Justice and Associate Justice into Chairman
and members of the Tribunal respectively, was designed simply to
highlight the singularity and exclusivity of the Tribunal’s functions as a
special electoral court.
- No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for
more than 4 years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any
time. (SS QE)
Immunity from Suit
- The SC held that the President is immune from suit (civil liability), she may
not be prevented from instituting suit.
▪ After his tenure, the Chief Executive cannot invoke immunity from suit
for civil damages arising out of acts done by him while he was President
which were not performed in the exercise of official duties.
▪ Department Secretary is an alter-ego of the President and he cannot
invoke the President’s immunity from suit in case against him, because
the questioned acts are not the acts of the President but merely of those
of a Department Secretary.
• Executive Privilege has been defined as the right of the President and
high-level executive branch officials to withhold information from
Congress, the Courts, and the public. Thus, Presidential conversations,
correspondence, or discussing during the closed-door Cabinet meetings,
like the internal deliberations of the SC and other collegiate courts, or
executive sessions of either of the House of Congress, are recognized as
confidential.
▪ The necessity for withholding the information must be of such
information must be of such a high degree as to outweigh the public
interest in enforcing that obligation in a particular case.
▪ It is essentially limited only to the President and to the Executive
Secretary, by order of the President, the power to invoke the privilege as
highly exceptional nature of the privilege.
▪ Operational proximity test refers to communications which are close
enough to the President to be revelatory of his deliberations or to pose a
risk to the candor of his advisers are covered by the executive privilege.
▪ The SC held that the President, as Commander-in-Chief of the AFP,
has the authority to prevent officers of the AFP from appearing before the
Senate to testify before a legislative investigation.
Disqualification
- the President, Vice President, Members of the Cabinet, their
Undersecretaries, Deputies and Assistants shall not hold any other office
or employment during their tenure. (PVC UDS)
▪ The V. President may be appointed as member of the cabinet without the
required confirmation of Confirmation on Appointments. (bar 2017)
▪ The prohibition does not apply to officials without additional
compensation in an ex officio capacity which is by virtue of office or act
done in an official character or as a consequence of office. (EXO VOC)
➢ Ex officio means an authority derived from official character merely
but rather annexed to official position.
➢ The prohibition must not be construed as applying to posts occupied
by the Executive Officials without additional compensation in an ex-
 46
Political Law Updates
officio capacity, as provided by law and as required by the primary
functions of the said official’ office.
➢ The Ex-Officio position being actually and in legal contemplation
part of the principal office, it follows that the official concerned has
no right to receive additional compensation for his services in said
position. These services are already deemed paid for and covered by
the compensation attached to the principal office.
▪ The ex officio capacity imposes additional duties and functions on said
officials and these services are deemed paid already paid for and covered
by the compensation attached to the principal office.
- PVC UDS shall not directly or indirectly practice any other profession,
participate in any business or by financially interested in any contract
with, or in any franchise or special proceedings granted by the GSAI
thereof, including GOCC. Likewise, they shall avoid conflict of interest in
the conduct of their office and shall not receive any other emoluments
from the government or any other source.
Rules on Succession:
1. Death or permanent disability of the President-elect – the Vice President-
elect shall become President;
2. President fails to qualify – Vice President-elect shall act as President
until the President-elect shall have qualified;
3. President shall not have been chosen – Vice President-elect shall act as
President until a President shall have been chosen and qualified;
4. No President and Vice President chosen nor shall have qualified, or both
shall have died or become permanently disabled – the Senate President
or, in case of his inability, the Speaker of the House of Representatives
shall act as President until a President or a Vice President shall have
been chosen and qualified. In the event of inability of the officials
mentioned, Congress shall, by law, provide for the manner in which one
who is to act as President shall be selected until a President or a Vice-
President shall have qualified.
- Death, permanently disability, removal from office, or resignation of the
President – Vice President shall become the President.
- The SC declared that the elements of a valid resignation are 1) intent to
resign and 2) act of relinquishment.
- When President transmits to the Senate President and the Speaker House
of House his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers
and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration
to the contrary; such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice
President as Acting President. **
- When a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit Senate
President and the Speaker their written declaration that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President
shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting
President.
▪ When a majority of the Cabinet members transmits within 5 days to the
Senate President and Speaker their written declaration that the President
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, Congress shall
decide the case and determines by 2/3 vote of both Houses, voting
separately, that the President is unable to discharge the powers and
duties of his office, the Vice President shall act as President; otherwise,
the President shall continue exercising the powers and duties of his
office.
- In case vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall
nominate a Vice President from among the members of the Senate and
the House of Representatives who shall assume office upon confirmation
by a majority vote of all the members of both Houses of Congress voting
separately.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
Executive power of the President
- EP vested to the President of the Republic of the Philippines and the
President is vested with power to execute, administer and carry out laws
into practical operation.
▪ The executive power is the power to enforce and administer the laws.
The SC said that as the administrative head of the government, the
President is vested with the power to execute, administer and carry out
laws into practical operation.
- The president’s power of general supervision over local governments
could be exercised by him only as may be provided by law.
- It is not for the President to determine the validity of a law since this is a
question addressed to the judiciary. Thus, until and unless a law is declared
unconstitutional, the President has a duty to execute it regardless of his
doubts on its validity.
Power of Appointments of the President:
- The President shall nominate and, with the consent of the Commission on
Appointments, appoint the heads of the executive departments,
ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or officers of the armed
forces from the rank of colonel naval captain, and other officers whose
appointments are vested in him in the Constitution.
▪ Likewise, he shall appoint all other officers of the Government whose
appointments are not otherwise provided for by law, and those whom he
may be authorized by law to appoint.
▪ The power of appointment includes the power of removal – applies only
to appointment of cabinet secretaries.
Regular appointment is one made by the president while congress is in
session, takes effect only after confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments, and once approved, continues until the end of the term of
the appointee.
▪ Permanent appointments are those extended to persons possessing
the requisites eligibility and thus protected by the constitutional guarantee
of security of tenure.
Temporary appointments are given to persons without such eligibility,
revocable at will and without the necessity of just cause or a valid
investigation, made on the understanding that the appointment power
has not yet decided on a permanent appointee and that the temporary
appointee may be replaced at any time a permanent choice.
➢ A temporary appointment and a designation are not subject to
confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. Such
confirmation, if given erroneously, will not make the incumbent a
permanent appointee.
➢ It was held that where a person is merely designated and not
appointed, the implication is that he shall hold the office only in a
temporary capacity and may be replaced at will by the appointing
authority.
Ad Interim appointment is one made by the president while congress is
not in session, take effect immediately, but ceases to be valid if disapproved
by the Commission on Appointments or upon the next adjournment of
congress. The appointment is deemed by-passed through inaction. It is
intended to prevent interruptions in vital government services that would
otherwise results from prolonged vacancies in government offices.
▪ It is a permanent appointment because it takes effect immediately and
can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has
qualified into office and the fact that it is subject confirmation by the
Commission on Appointments does not alter its permanent character. ***
 47
Political Law Updates
▪ An interim appointment can be terminated from office when: 1)
disapproval of the appointment by the Commission on Appointment; and
2) adjournment by Congress without the Commission on Appointment
acting on the appointment. Absent of such decision, the President is free
to renew the ad interim appointment.
➢ The essence of an appointment in an acting capacity is its
temporary nature.
➢ The Congress, through law, cannot impose on the President the
obligation to appoint automatically the undersecretary as her
temporary alter ego as an alter ego, whether temporary or
permanent, holds a position of great trust and confidence.
▪ The appointment of the Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights
is not otherwise provided for in the Constitution in the law. Thus, there is
no necessity for such appointment to be passed upon by the Commission
on Appointment.
- Congress, through law, cannot impose on the president the obligation to
appoint automatically the undersecretary as his temporary alter ego.
• Doctrine of Qualified Agency or Alter Ego Principle – the acts of the
secretaries performed and promulgated in the regular course of business
are, unless disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive,
presumptively the acts of the President. (AS PP RCB PAP)
▪ The SC held that when Cabinet Members are acting as an ex-officio
members of a BOD, as designated by law, they implement the plan not
as alter ego of the President but pursuant to the law. ***
- The SC declared that an appointment is deemed complete only upon its
acceptance. Pending such acceptance, which is optional to the appointee,
the appointment may still be withdrawn. Appointment to a public office
cannot be forced upon any citizen except for the purpose of defenses of
the State under Sec. 4, Art. II.
- Appointment is essentially a discretionary power and must be performed
by the officer in which it is vested according to his best lights, the only
conditions being that the appointee, if issued a permanent appointment,
should possess the minimum qualification requirements. Such discretion
includes the determination of the nature or character of the appointment,
whether the appointment is temporary or permanent.
Midnight Appointments by the President
- Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up
to the end of his term, a President or acting President shall not make
appointments except temporary appointments to executive positions when
continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger
public safety.
▪ The prohibition applies only to presidential appointments.
▪ There is no law that prohibits local executive officials from making
appointments during the last days of their tenure, but CSC may issue an
IRR prohibiting local chief executives from making appointments during
the last days of their tenure
▪ The prohibition does not apply to appointment of members of the SC.
▪ The presidential power of appointment may be limited by Congress
through its power to prescribe qualifications for public office; and the
judiciary may annul appointment made by the President if the appointee
is not qualified or has not been validly confirmed.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- The power of removal may be implied from the power of appointment.
However, the President cannot remove officials appointed by him where
the Constitution prescribes certain methods for separation of such officers
from public service.
▪ Members of the career service of the Civil Service who are appointed by
the President may be directly disciplined by him.
▪ Members of the Cabinet and such officers whose continuity in office
depends upon the pleasure of the President may be replaced at any time,
but legally speaking, their separation is effected not by removal but by
expiration of their term.
Cabinet secretary
- Public officials given the rank equivalent to a secretary, undersecretary, or
assistant secretary are not covered by the prohibition in Art. VII Sec. 13
nor is the solicitor general affected thereby.
Control power
- Control is the power of an officer to alter or modify or nullity or set aside
what a subordinate officer had done in the performance of his duties and to
substitute the judgment of the former for that of the latter. On the contrary,
Supervision means overseeing, or the power or authority of an officer to
see that subordinate officers perform their duties, and if the latter fail or
neglect to fulfill them, then the former may take such action or steps as
prescribed by law to make them perform these duties.
- The president has power to reorganize the offices and agencies in the
executive department in line with the president’s constitutionally granted
power of control over the executive offices and by virtue of previous
delegation of the legislative power to reorganize executive offices under
existing statutes.
- The Administrative Code authorizes the President to reorganize the offices
and agencies in the executive department in line with the President’s
constitutionality granted power of control over executive offices and by
virtue of previous delegation of the legislative power to reorganize
executive offices under existing statutes: **
1. To reconstruct the internal organization of the Office of the President
(OP) by abolishing, consolidating or merging units thereof or
transferring functions from one unit to another; and,
2. To transfer functions of officers from the OP to any other department
or agency in the executive branch and vice versa.
- The President’s power to reorganize the executive branch is also an
exercise of his residual powers pursuant to the Administrative Code which
grants the President broad organization powers to implement
reorganization measures. It also grants the President, the continuing
authority, to reorganize the national government which includes the power
to group, consolidate bureaus and agencies to abolish offices, to transfer
functions, to create and classify functions, services and activities and to
standardize salaries and materials.
▪ The Office of the President is the nerve center of the Executive Branch.
To remain effective and efficient, the Office of the President must be
capable of being shaped and reshaped by the President in the manner
he deems fit to carry out his directives and policies.
▪ The abolition of the PAGC and the transfer of its functions to a division
specially created within the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for
Legal Affairs (ODESLA) is properly within the prerogative of the
President under his continuing delegated legislative authority to
reorganize his own office pursuant to the Administrative Code. *** CDLA
- The President must exercise good faith in carrying out the reorganization
of any branch or agency of the executive department if it is for the purpose
of economy or to make bureaucracy more efficient.
 48
Political Law Updates
• The Alter Ego Principle / Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency
recognizes the establishment of a single execution, all executives and
administrative organizations are adjuncts of the Executive Department, the
heads of the various executive departments are assistants and agents of
the Chief Executive.
Exception in cases where 1) the Chief Executive is required by the
Constitution or law to act in person or 2) the exigencies of the situation
demand that he act personally, the multifarious executive and
administrative functions of the Chief Executive are performed by and
through the executive departments, and the acts of the Secretaries of such
departments performed and promulgated in the regular course of business
are, unless disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive,
presumptively the acts of the Chief Executive. ***
➢ The SC held that the Executive Secretary had the authority to enter into
the Agreement to Arbitrate with ABS-CBN, since he was acting on
behalf of the President who had the power to negotiate such
agreement.
➢ The SC held that the power of the President to reorganize the National
Government may validly be delegated to his Cabinet Members
exercising control over a particular executive department.
➢ A Department Secretary, even if he is an alter-ego of the President,
cannot invoke the President’s immunity from suit in a case filed against
him, inasmuch as the questioned acts are not those of the President.
➢ Decisions of the Department Secretary carries the presumptive
approval of the President, and there is no need to appeal the decision
to the President in order to complete exhaustion of administrative
remedies. ***
- The power of control may be exercised by the President only over the acts,
not over the actor.
Supervision:
- The president exercises only the power of general supervision over local
governments.
▪ The president can interfere in the affairs and activities of a LGU if he finds
that the latter had acted in a manner contrary to law. Likewise, the
President or any of his alter egos, cannot interfere in local affairs as long
as the concerned LGUs within the parameters of the law and the
Constitution. **
▪ If the president interferes in the affairs of the LGU without justifiable
cause, it would violate the principle of local autonomy and the doctrine
of separation of powers of the executive and the legislative
departments in governing municipal corporations.
➢ Sec. 187, RA 7160, which authorizes the Sec. of Justice to review the
constitutionality or legality of a tax ordinance – and, if warranted, to
revoke it on either or both grounds – is valid, does not confer the power
of control over LGU in the Sec. of Justice, as even if the latter can set
aside a tax ordinance, he cannot substitute his judgment for that LGU.
➢ A basic feature of local fiscal autonomy is the automatic release of
LGU shares in the national internal revenue as this is mandated by the
Constitution.
Military Powers – the President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed
forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out
such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or
rebellion. In cases of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it,
he may, for a period not exceeding 60 days, suspend the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- The constitutional validity of the president’s proclamation of martial law
or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is first, a
political question in the hands of Congress, before it becomes a
justiciable question in the hands of court. ***
- Certain liberties of persons in the military service, including the freedom
of speech, may be circumscribed by rules of military discipline.
- Under the calling-out power, the President may summon the armed forces
her in suppressing lawless violence, rebellion or invasion as this involves
police action.
- When the president calls out the armed forces to suppress lawless
violence, rebellion or invasion, he necessarily exercises a discretionary
power solely vested in his wisdom. LRI
▪ The Court cannot overrule the President’s discretionary or substitute its
own. The only criterion is that whenever it becomes necessary, the
President may call out the armed forces.
▪ The SC said that the President has discretionary authority to declare a
state of rebellion and the Court may only look into the sufficiency of the
factual basis for the exercise of the power.
▪ The SC held that the authorities may only resort to warrantless arrests of
persons suspected of rebellion as provided under Sec. 5, Rule 113 of the
Rules of Court.
- A mere declaration of state of rebellion cannot diminish or violate
constitutionally protected rights.
- a local chief executive of a LGU is not endowed with the power to call
out the armed forces at his own bidding. Otherwise, such exercise by the
local chief executive is ultra vires.
- A provincial governor is not endowed with the power to call out the armed
forces at own bidding. The calling-out power contemplated under the
Constitution exclusively belongs to the President, and an exercise of the
same by another official, even if he is the local chief executive, is ultra vires.
- The SC held that an officer whose name was dropped from the roll of
officers cannot be considered to be outside the jurisdiction of military
authorities when military justice proceedings were initiated against him
before the termination of his services. Once jurisdiction has been acquired
over the office, it continues until it his case is terminated. ***
Veto Powers:
- Pocket veto is exercised when the president is considered to have rejected
a bill submitted to him for his approval while congress is in recess.
- Item veto or partial veto is the power of the president to nullify or cancel
specific provisions of a bill, usually a budget appropriations bill, without
vetoing the entire legislative package.
The distinctions between a pardon and an amnesty are the following:
NGAACE
1. As to nature. Amnesty is addressed to political offenses. Pardon refers to
infraction of laws of the State or ordinary offenses.
2. As to grantee. Amnesty is granted to a class of persons. Pardon is granted
to individuals.
3. As to acceptance. Amnesty need not be accepted; pardon must be
accepted.
4. As to concurrence of congress. Amnesty requires the concurrence of
congress. Pardon does not need the concurrence of congress.
 49
Political Law Updates
5. As to act. Amnesty is a public act. Pardon is a private act of the president.
6. As to effectivity. Amnesty looks forward and puts the offense into oblivion.
Pardon looks backward and relieves the pardonee of the consequences of
the offense.
- Limitations of Pardoning Power of the President: 1) It can only be
granted only after conviction, 2) It cannot be granted in cases of civil or
legislative contempt, 3) It cannot be granted in cases of violation of
election cases without favorable recommendation of the COMELEC 4) It
cannot be granted in cases of impeachment, 5) It cannot restore to public
offices forfeited, 6) It cannot absolve conviction of civil liability CIERA ***
▪ The grant of conditional pardon and the subsequent dismissal of the
appeal did not relieve the accused of civil liability.
- The SC held that the person released under an amnesty proclamation
stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense.
▪ It was held that to avail of the benefits of an amnesty proclamation, one
must admit his guilt of the offense covered by the proclamation. ***
The distinction between the power of the President’s authority to declare a
State of rebellion and authority to proclaim a State of national emergency
is as follows: ***
▪ The power of the President to declare a State of rebellion is based on the
power of the President as Chief Executive and Commander-in-chief of the
Armed forces of the Philippines. It is not necessary for the President to
declare a State of rebellion before calling out the Armed Forces of the
Philippines to suppress it. The proclamation only gives notice to the nation
that such a state exists and that Armed Forces of the Philippines may be
called upon to suppress it.
▪ In a proclamation of a State of national emergency, the President is
already calling out the Armed Forces of the Philippines to suppress not
only rebellion but also lawless violence.
Borrowing Power – the President may contract or guarantee foreign loans
on behalf of the Philippines with prior concurrence of the Monetary Board, and
subject to such limitations as may be provided by law
.
Diplomatic Power – No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and
effective unless concurred in by at least 2/3 of all members of the Senate.
Budgetary Power – the President shall submit to Congress 30 days from the
opening of every regular session, as the basis of the general appropriations
act, a budget of expenditures and source of financing, including receipts from
existing and proposed revenue measures.
Judiciary department
Judicial Power includes the duty of the Court to settle actual controversy
involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting
to lack or excess jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
Government.
- The Court is not precluded from examining its own ruling and rectifying
errors of judgment if blind and stubborn adherence to res judicata would
involve the sacrifice of justice to technicality.
Jurisdiction
- The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and apportion the
jurisdiction of the various courts, but may not deprive the SC of its
jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Sec. 5, Art. VIII.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the SC as
provided in the Constitution without its advice and concurrence.
- Members of the Court and Court officials and employees may not be
compelled to testify on matters that are part of the internal deliberations
and actions of the Court in the exercise of its adjudicatory functions and
duties.
- the principle of comity or inter-departmental courtesy demands that the
highest officials of each department be exempt from the compulsory
processes of other departments.
- The ombudsman is duty bound to have all cases against judges and court
personnel filed before it referred to the SC.
- Only in cases where the penalty actually imposed is death must the trial
court forward the records of the case to the SC for automatic review.
- A court can still render a decision despite it has been rendered moot, it can
still pass upon the main issue for the guidance for both bar and bench.
Constitutional Safeguards to insure the independence of the Judiciary
1. The SC is a constitutional body and it may not be abolished by the
legislature;
2. The members of the SC are removable only by impeachment;
3. The SC may not be deprived of its minimum original and appellate
jurisdiction may not be increased without its advice and concurrence;
4. The SC has administrative supervision over all inferior courts and
personnel;
5. The SC has the exclusive power to discipline judges / justices of interior
courts;
6. The SC has the Judiciary have security of tenure;
7. The members of the Judiciary may not be designated to any agency
performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions;
8. Salaries of judges may not be reduced as the Judiciary enjoys fiscal
autonomy;
9. The SC, alone, may initiate and promulgate of the Rules of Court.
10. The SC, alone, may order temporary details of judges.
11. The SC can appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary.
Appointment to the Judiciary
- Members of the Judiciary are appointed by the President of the Philippines
from among a list of at least 3 nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar
Council for every vacancy and the appointment shall need no confirmation.
▪ Any vacancy in the SC shall be filled within 90 days from the occurrence
thereof. It is not covered by the rules on prohibition against midnight
appointees as the temporary and acting appointments can undermine /
weaken the independence of the Judiciary.
▪ For lower Courts, the President shall issue the appointment within 90
days from the submission by the JBC of such list.
▪ As to the composition of the Judicial Bar and Council (JBC), the Ex-
Officio members are the Chief Justice, the Sec. of Justice and a
representative of Congress; while the Regular members are a
representative of the IBP, a professor of law, a retired justice of the SC
ad a representative of the private sector.
➢ The Constitution mandates that the JBC be composed of 7 members
only. Thus, the inclusion of another member, whether with one vote,
or half or it, violates that constitutional mandate.
➢ Any member of Congress, whether from the Senate or House of
Representative, is constitutionally empowered to represent the entire
Congress. **
 50
Political Law Updates
➢ The regular members shall be appointed by the President for a term
of 4 years, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments.
They shall receive emoluments as may be determined by the SC.
➢ The SC subscribed to the view that in cases where an objection to an
applicant’s qualification is raised, the observance of due process
neither negates nor renders illusory the fulfillment of the duty of JBC
to recommend.
➢ It is a body under supervision of the SC and it is not covered by the
publication requirements of the Administrative Code. ***
Decisions
Powers
- When the required number is not obtained in a decision rendered by a
division, the case shall be decided En Banc.
▪ Cases may be distinguished from matters as follows, the cases are
decided; while matters are resolved. On the basis of this distinction, only
cases are referred to the SC En Banc for decision whenever the required
number of votes is not obtained.
▪ No doctrine or principle of law laid down by the SC in a decision rendered
En Banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court
sitting En Banc.
▪ Question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the
correct application of law or jurisprudence to a certain set of facts; or
when the issue does not call for an examination of the probative value of
the evidence presented, the truth or falsehood of facts being admitted.
- The reorganization of the divisions of the Court is purely an internal
matter in which the petitioner has no business at all. With its new
membership, the Court is not obliged to follow blindly a decision upholding
a party’s case when, after its re-examination
- A petition for certiorari is a proper remedy to question the act of any
branch or instrumentality of the government on the ground of grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, even if the branch,
instrumentality or agency does not exercise judicial, quasi-judicial or
ministerial functions.
- Only in cases where the penalty actually imposed is death must the trial
court forward the records of the case to the SC for automatic review of the
conviction. Where the penalty imposed is merely reclusion perpetua, the
accused should appeal the decision of conviction, otherwise, the judgment
of conviction, otherwise, the judgement of conviction will become final and
executory.
- A decision need not be complete recital of the evidence presented as long
as the factual and legal basis are clearly and distinctly set forth supporting
the conclusions drawn therefrom, the decision arrived at is valid.
- Conclusions in any case submitted to it for decision shall be reached in
consultation before the case is assigned to a member for the writing of the
opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice
shall be issued. This requirement is applicable also to lower collegiate
courts.
➢ This requirement does not apply to administrative cases and to
minute resolution dismissing a petition for habeas corpus, certiorari and
mandamus, provided a legal basis is given therein.
- A decision is considered promulgated when the decision has already been
issued and filed with the clerk of court. Thus, if not yet filed with clerk of
court, justices still have control over the decision and they can still change
their votes.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- The SC held that while there is a constitutional mandate stating that no
decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly
and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based, such provision does
not apply in Cadet Cudia’s case. There is no specific form and content
required in a decision issued in disciplinary proceedings. The Honor
Code and Honor System Handbook also has no written rule on the mater.
***
- The SC held that once a law has been declared unconstitutional, it
cannot be cured by reincorporation or reenactment of the same or
similar law or provision, thus it remains unconstitutional, unless
circumstances have changed as to warrant a reverse conclusion. ***
- The temporary assignment of judges of lower courts to other stations as
public interest may require, but the assignment shall not exceed 6 months
without the consent of the judge concerned.
- The SC has the power to order change the venue or place of trial, to avoid
miscarriage of justice.
- The SC has the rule making power – promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice and
procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated
Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. (PE CR P3 API LAU)
Limitations on the rule-making power – the rules must provide a simplified
and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases; they must
be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and must not diminish,
increase or modify substantive rights.
▪ The Integrated Bar is a State-organized Bar, to which every lawyer must
belong, as distinguished from a bar association organized by individual
lawyers themselves, membership in which is voluntary. Integration of the
Bar is essentially a process by which every member of the Bar is afforded
an opportunity to do his share in carrying out the objectives of the Bar as
well as obliged to bear his portion of its responsibilities.
▪ Payment of dues is necessary consequence of membership in the IBP,
of which no one is exempt. This means that the compulsory nature of
payment of dues subsists for as long as one’s membership in the IBP
remains regardless of the lack of practice, or the type of practice, the
member is engaged.
▪ The practice of law is not a property right but a privilege, and as such
must bow to the inherent regulatory power of the SC to exact compliance
with the lawyer’s public responsibilities.
▪ The SC wields a continuing power of supervision over the IBP and its
affairs, and it has the plenary power to amend, modify or repeal the IBP
by-laws, in accordance with policies it deems necessary, practicable and
appropriate in the prevailing circumstances.
▪ The SC can supervise the IBP by ensuring the legality and correctness
of the exercise of its powers as to the means and manner, and by
interpreting for it the constitutional provisions, laws and regulations
affecting the means and manner of the exercise of its power.
▪ The Congress cannot amend the Rules of Court as the power to
promulgate rules of pleading, practice and procedure is no longer shared
by the Court with Congress or Executive.
- The Ombudsman may not initiate or investigate a criminal or
administrative complaint before his office against a judge as he must first
indorse the case to the SC for appropriate action. ***
 51
Political Law Updates
Tenure of Judges / Justices
- SC Justices may be removed only by impeachment.
- Judges shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of
seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their
office.
- The SC En Banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower courts,
or order their dismissal by a vote of a majority vote of the members who
actually took part in the deliberations on the issues and voted thereon.
- The SC held that the SC has the exclusive administrative supervision
(EAS) over all courts and its personnel, the Ombudsman cannot determine
for itself and by itself whether a criminal complaint against a judge or court
employee involves an administrative matter. The Ombudsman is duty
bound to have all cases against judges and court personnel filed before it
referred to the SC.
- The SC said that judges cannot be disciplined for every erroneous order or
decision rendered in the absence of a clear showing of ill motive, malice or
bad faith. The absence of bad faith will not totally exculpate him from
charges of incompetence and ignorance of law when they render
decisions that are totally bereft of factual and legal bases. **
- The SC said that when the inefficiency springs from a failure to consider
so basic and elementary a rule, a law or a principle in the discharge of his
duties, a judge is either too incompetent and underserving of the position
and title he holds, or he is too vicious that the oversight or omission was
deliberately done in bad faith and in grave of judicial authority.
- No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines
(weaken) the security of tenure of its members.
- The imposition of income tax on salaries of judges does not violate the
constitutional prohibition against decrease in salaries.
- The suspension from service of the judge cannot be used as justification
for undue delay in the resolution of cases.
- The court does not lose jurisdiction over the case, despite the lapse of the
mandatory period, but the erring judge or justice may be subjected to
administrative sanctions for the delay.
Constitutional Commission
Safeguards insuring independence of the Commissions, namely the CSC,
COMELEC and COA:
1. They are constitutionally created and they cannot be abolished by a
special law, but only by constitutional amendment or revision;
2. Each is conferred certain powers and functions which cannot be reduced
by statute;
3. The chairmen and members are appointed by the President with the
consent of the Commission on Appointments.
4. The chairmen and members cannot be removed, except by impeachment;
grounds: 1) Culpable violation of the Constitution - deliberate, 2)
treachery, 3) bribery, 4) graft and corruption, 5) other high crimes and 6)
betrayal of public trust. CTB GOB
. independence vested in the CSC by the Constitution.
5. They are given a term of office of 7 years;
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- Rotational scheme of appointment (RSA) – the first appointees shall
serve terms of 7, 5, and 3 years, respectively. It is intended to prevent
the possibility of one president appointing all the commissioners.
- In order to preserve the periodic succession mandated by the
constitution, the rotational plan requires two conditions: 1) The terms of
the 1st commissioners should start a common date; and 2) Any vacancy
due to death, resignation or disability before the expiration of the tern
shall be filled only for the unexpired balance of the term DRD.
- Promotional appointment of a commissioner to chairman is
permissible, provided the new appointee’s tenure in both capacities does
not exceed 7 years. ***
6. Chairmen and members may not be reappointed or appointed in acting
capacity.
- The SC held that when an interim appointment is not confirmed as it
was by-passed or that there was not ample time for the Commission on
Appointments to pass upon the same, another ad interim appointment
may be extended to the appointee without violating the Constitution.
7. The commissions enjoy fiscal autonomy.
- The SC has held that the “no report, no release” policy may not be validly
enforced against offices vested with fiscal autonomy.
▪ The Commission on Human Rights does not enjoy fiscal autonomy.
▪ The Congress is not prohibited from reducing the appropriations of
constitutional commissions below the amount appropriated for them for
the previous years.
8. They are an independent body
- The CSC chairman cannot be a member of a government entity that is
under the control of the president without impairing the independence
vested in the CSC by the constitution.
- Disqualification – chairmen and commissioners, during their term of
office, are prohibited (phi): 1) To hold any other office or employment in
the GSAI-GOCC, 2) Practice their profession or 3) Be financially
interested in any contract with the GSAI-GOCC.
▪ Members of the Constitutional Commissions are not covered by the
general prohibition in Sec. 13, Art. VII but they are governed by Sec.
7(2), Art. IX-B, that allows them by law or by the primary function of
his office.
▪ Public officer in an Ex-Officio Capacity as provided by law or as
required by the primary functions of his position, there is no violation of
the rule against holding multiple offices, because the other posts do
not comprise any other office but are properly an imposition of
additional duties and functions on the said officer. ***
➢ However, he is prohibited from receiving any additional
compensation for his services in the said position, because these
services are deemed already paid for and covered by the
compensation attached to his principal office. ***
➢ CSC chairman cannot be a member of government entity that is
under the control of the President without impairing the
 52
Political Law Updates
Decisions
- Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of its members any case
or matter brought before it within 60 days from the date of its submission
for decision or resolution.
▪ The SC construed that the majority vote of all members, not only of
those who participated in the deliberations and voted thereon in order
that a valid decision may be made by the Constitutional Commissions.
▪ The SC held that the votes of the Commissioners who had retired prior
to the promulgation of the decision should be considered as withdrawn,
as if they had no signed the resolution at all, and only the votes of the
remaining Commissioners considered for the purpose of deciding the
controversy.
▪ When the COMELEC En Banc is equally divided in an opinion, and the
necessary majority cannot be had, there shall be a rehearing. If, on
rehearing, no majority decision is reached, the action or proceeding shall
be dismissed if originally commenced in the Commission; in appealed
cases, the judgement or order appealed from shall stand affirmed and in
all incidental matters, the petition or motion shall be denied.
➢ A protesting candidate cannot file a petition with the SC when the
COMELEC vote is equally divided and a rehearing is not conducted;
otherwise, the petition shall be considered premature and shall be
dismissed.
- The SC held that when it reviews a decision of the COMELEC, the Court
exercises extraordinary jurisdiction; thus, the proceeding is limited to issues
involving grave abuse of discretion resulting in lack or excess of jurisdiction,
and does not ordinarily empower the Court to review the factual findings of
the Commission.
Civil Service Commission
- As a central personnel agency of the Government, to establish a career
service and adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity,
responsiveness, progressiveness and courtesy in the civil service.
- The power of the CSC includes the authority to recall an appointment
initially approved in disregard of applicable provisions of the CSC law and
regulations.
Jurisdiction
- The CSC has original jurisdiction to hear and decide a complaint for
cheating in the CS examinations committed by government employees.
The fact that the complaint was filed by the CSC itself does not mean that
it cannot be an impartial judge.
▪ It has appellate jurisdiction over cases of grievance procedure
established by CS law.
- It is the intent of the CSC Law, in requiring the establishment of a grievance
procedure, the decisions of lower level officials, in cases involving
personnel actions, be appealed to the agency head, then to the CSC. The
RTC does not have jurisdiction over such personnel actions.
- The SC held that both the appointing authority and the appointee are real
parties in interest, and both have legal standing, in a suit assailing a CSC
order disapproving an appointment.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Although the appointee has no vested right to the position, it was his
eligibility that was being questioned. He should be granted the
opportunity to prove his eligibility.
Appointment:
- To be a member of the Career Executive Service (CES) and be entitled to
security of tenure, the officer must: 1) pass the career executive service
examination, 2) be conferred Career Executive Service eligibility, 3) comply
with the other requirements prescribed by the CES Board, and 4) be
appointed to a CES by the President.
▪ A CES officer may be transferred or reassigned from one position to
another without losing his rank which follows him whenever he is
transferred or reassigned.
▪ A career executive service officer suffers no diminution in salary even if
assigned to a CES position with lower salary grade, as he is
compensated according to his CES rank, and not on the basis of the
position or office which he occupies.
▪ When the appointee does not possess the required executive service
eligibility, his appointment will never attain permanency.
- The SC held that, under the Administrative Code of 1987, the CSC is
expressly empowered to declare positions in the CS as primarily
confidential.
- Termination of a temporary appointment may be with or without cause as
the appointee serves merely at the pleasure of the appointing power.
- The CSC cannot convert temporary appointment into a permanent one, as
it would constitute an arrogation of a power properly belonging to the
appointing authority.
Role of the CSC:
- Its functions and authority are limited to approving or reviewing
appointments to determine their compliance with requirements of the civil
service law.
▪ A permanent appointment can issue only to a person who possesses
all the requirements for the position to which he is appointed, except in
the absence of appropriate eligible, he or she may be appointed to the
position merely in a temporary capacity for a period of 12 months, unless
sooner terminated by the appointing authority.
A temporary appointee who accepts the position with the condition that
he shall surrender the office when called upon to do so by the appointing
authority.
▪ The CSC cannot direct the appointment of its own choice, even on the
ground that the latter is more qualified than the appointing authority’s
choice.
▪ The CSC cannot convert a temporary appointment into a permanent one,
as it would constitute an arrogation of a power property belonging to the
appointing authority.
▪ The CSC may approve as merely temporary an appointment intended to
be permanent where the appointee does not possess the requisite
eligibility and the exigency of the service demands that the position be
filled up, even in a temporary capacity.
 53
Political Law Updates

- To determine if the appointee possesses the qualifications and appropriate - It is well-settled rule that he who, while occupying one office, accepts
eligibility and it does not have the power to terminate employment or to another incompatible with the first, ipso facto vacates the first office and
drop members from the rolls. his title thereto is thereby terminated without any other act of proceeding.

Disqualifications - No officer or employee in the civil service shall engage, directly or

- No candidate who has lost in any election shall, within one year after such
election, be appointed to any office in the Government or any GOCC or in
any of their subsidiaries.
- No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any
capacity to any public office or position during his tenure.
- No appointive official shall hold any other office or employment in the
government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including
GOCC or their subsidiaries, unless otherwise allowed by law or by the
primary functions of his position.
Double compensation
▪ Public officer in an Ex-Officio Capacity as provided by law or as required
by the primary functions of his position, there is no violation of the rule
against holding multiple offices, because the other posts do not
comprise any other office but are properly an imposition of additional
duties and functions on the said officer. ***
Security of tenure
- No officer or employee of the civil service shall be removed or suspended
except for cause provided by law.
▪ Presidential Appointee is under the direct disciplinary authority of the
President.
indirectly, in any electioneering or partisan political campaign, including
the military establishment in the active military service and not to reservist.
▪ POE holding political offices who are allowed to take part in political and
electoral activities, except to solicit contributions from their subordinates
or commit acts prohibited under the Election Code.
- The right to organize and join unions, associations or societies cannot be
curtailed, government employees may not engage in strikes to demand
changes in the terms and conditions of employment because the terms and
conditions of employment are provided by law. ****
- No POE shall receive additional, double or indirect compensation, unless:
1) specifically authorized by law, 2) nor accept, without the consent of
Congress, any gift, office or title of any kind from any foreign government.
Pensions and gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double or
indirect compensation.
▪ A retiree can continue to receive pension or gratuity even after he accepts
another government position to which another compensation is attached,
but he cannot credit his years of service in the Judiciary in the
computation of the separation pay to which he may be entitled under
RA 7924 for the termination of his last employment. To allow this would
countenance double compensation for exactly the same service.

Commission on Audit
▪ Uncontested transfer of the officer, resulting in demotion in rank or
salary, is a violation of the security of tenure clause in the Constitution.
Jurisdiction:
- When an employee is illegally dismissed, and his reinstatement is later
- The COA may, with its expanded powers, validly veto appropriations
ordered by the Court, for all legal intents and purposes he is considered as
which violate rules on unnecessary, irregular, extravagant or
not having left his office, and notwithstanding the silence of the decision,
unconscionable expenses.
he is entitled to payment of back wages.
- COA has jurisdiction over GOCC with and without original charters.
▪ The SC declared that the payment of back wages during the period of
suspension of a civil servant who is subsequently reinstated is proper
▪ COA has jurisdiction over local water districts as they are GOCCs with
only if he is found innocent of the charges and the suspension is
special charter under PD 198.
unjustified.
▪ It may stop the payment of the price stipulated in government contracts
- Valid abolition of office does not violate the constitutional guarantee of
when found to be irregular, extravagant or unconscionable.
security of tenure. However, pretended abolition of office is a flimsy excuse
to justify dismissal.
- No law shall be passed exempting any entity of government, or any
investment of public funds, from the jurisdiction of the COA.
▪ Reorganization of office does not necessarily result in abolition of the
office, and does not justify he preplacement of permanent officers and
- No government administrative agency or body shall engage the services
employees. But where, as a result of the reorganization, employees were
of a private lawyer without written conformity and acquiescence of the
effectively demoted by their assignment to positions lower than those
OGCC and the written concurrence of the COA. Noncompliance,
they previously held, there is violation of security of tenure, and the CSC
otherwise, renders the engagement as unauthorized.
may order their reinstatement.
Local Government
- A career service officer or employee who has been unlawfully ousted
from his office has one year within which to file an action in court to recover
- A public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all
his office, otherwise the right to recover the same prescribes.
times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility,
integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice and lead
- It is well-settled rule that he who, while occupying one office, accepts
modest lives. (POE U RILE AP JLML)
another incompatible with the first, ipso facto vacates the first office and his
title thereto is terminated without any other act of proceeding.
Public officers

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
 54
Political Law Updates

- The SC ruled that the Public Officer is not a property but one unlawfully
ousted from it may institute an action to recover the same, flowing from
the de jure officer’s right to office. Likewise, while public office is not
property to which one may acquire a vested right, it is nevertheless a
protected right.
▪ One’s employment, profession or trade or calling is a property right, and
the wrongful interference therewith is an actionable wrong. Thus, an
order of suspension, without opportunity for hearing, violates property
rights.
1. De facto officer is a person appointed or elected to an unconstitutional
law, before the law s declared to be such.
▪ De facto officers ae entitled to emoluments attached to office for actual
services rendered.
2. De jure officer is who is deemed, in all respects, legally appointed and
qualified and whose term of office has not expired.
Powers:
3. De facto municipal corporation is one defectively created as not to be
a de jure corporation but is nevertheless the result of a bona fide attempt
to incorporate under existing statutory authority, coupled with the
exercise of corporate powers, and recognized by the courts as such on
the ground of public policy in all proceedings except a direct attack by the
state questioning its corporate existence.
▪ Motion for reconsideration is prohibited pleading and does not interrupt
the running of the 5-day period of appeal.
- COMELEC En Banc shall take cognizance of:
▪ MR of a decision of a division;
▪ Petition for correction of manifest errors alleging an erroneous copying of
figures from the election return to the statement of votes by precinct;
▪ Power of the COMELEC to prosecute cases of violation of election laws
involves the exercise of administrative powers which may be exercised
directly by the commission en banc;
▪ Cases when the commission does not exercise its adjudicatory or quasi-
judicial powers.
- It has jurisdiction to settle the struggle for leadership within the party.
- It cannot simply adopt measures or regulations just because it feels that it
is the right thing to do.
- Statutory power to cite for contempt, but the power may be exercised only
when the comelec is engaged in the exercise of quasi-judicial powers.
- To annul the results of a plebiscite.
- To conduct preliminary investigation of all offenses punishable under
omnibus election code (oec) and to prosecute the same:

4. Municipal corporation by estoppel is a corporation which is a
defectively formed as not to be a de facto corporation in relation to some
who dealt with and acquiesced in its exercise of its corporate functions or
entered into a contract with it.
Principle of holdover means that in absence of an express or implied
constitutional or statutory provision to the contrary, an officer is entitled
Certificate of candidacy (coc):
to hold his office until his successor is appointed or chosen and has been
qualified.
Notes:
• Discretionary duty of a public officer can be delegated if the delegation is
authorized.
• An ordinance is valid exercise of police power; the right to privacy yields
to certain paramount rights of the public and defers to the exercise of
police power.
Actions which may be filed:
Commission on Election
1. Election protest; requisites:
Jurisdiction:
- Cases to be heard and decided in division:
1. All election cases, including pre-proclamation contests;
2. Petition to cancel certificate of candidacy;
3. Cases appealed from the RTC exercising in its original jurisdiction;
4. Petition for certiorari from the decision of RTC or MTC is to be
resolved in division before it may be heard En Banc.
- COMELEC in division has original and exclusive jurisdiction over election
contests involving regional/provincial/city officials.
- COMELEC in division has appellate jurisdiction over:
▪ To delegate the power to the provincial prosecutor;
▪ To appeal the dismissal of a criminal case by the trial court.
- It has residual powers to conduct special elections even beyond the
deadline prescribed by law.
- When a person files two coc for different offices, he becomes ineligible for
either of the position.
- A cancelled coc void ab initio cannot give rise to a valid candidacy and
much less to valid votes.
▪ The 2nd placer candidate is deemed to have garnered the highest number
of votes and is entitled to hold the corresponding elective position.
a. Must be filed by the candidate who has filed coc and has been voted
upon for the same office;
b. On the grounds of fraud, terrorism, irregularities or illegal acts
committed before, during and after the casting of votes.
c. It must be filed within 10 days from the proclamation of the results of
the election
- Its purpose is to ascertain whether the candidate proclaimed by the board
of canvassers is the true and lawful choice of the electorate.
- As a rule, the filing of an election or quo warranto precludes the
subsequent filing of a pre-proclamation controversy or amounts to an
abandonment of one earlier filed.

1. Decision rendered by the RTC, exercising its original and exclusive - Failure of the protestant to pay the basic docket fee, the protest should
jurisdiction over election contests involving elective municipal officials; be dismissed.
2. Decision rendered by the MTC, exercising its original and exclusive - The death of the protestant does not extinguish an election protest.
jurisdiction over election contests involving elective barangay officials.
2. Quo warranto; requisites:

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
 55
Political Law Updates
a. Filed by any registered voter in the constituency;
b. On the grounds of inegibility or disloyalty to the republic of the
philippines;
c. It must be filed within 10 days from the proclamation of the results of
the election.
- An acting appointee has no cause of action to file a petition for quo
warranto against the new appointee.
- The person instituting the quo warranto proceedings in his own behalf
must show that he is entitled to the office in dispute, otherwise the action
may be dismissed at any stage.
Distinctions of quo warranto in elective v. Appointive:
a. Elective office, the issue is the eligibility of the officer-elect; the court or
tribunal cannot declare the protestant or the candidate who obtained the
2nd highest number votes as having been elected.
b. Appointive office – the issue is the legality of the appointment; the court
determines who among the parties has legal title to the office.
Distinctions of a petition for disqualification v. Petition to deny due
course of coc:
a. In disqualification case – he is a technically a candidate but he is
prohibited to continue as a candidate.
b. In denial of due course to or cancel of coc – he is not treated as
candidate at all; it is as if he/she never filed a coc.
c. Effects disqualification and / or cancellation of coc:
i. If the decision is not yet final, the candidate can be voted as the votes
are counted;
ii. If the decision is final, the candidate cannot be voted as the votes are
considered as stray votes.
Rule on substitution:
• Oec provides that if after the last day for the filing of the coc, an official
candidate of a registered or accredited political party dies, withdraws, or is
disqualified (dwd) for any cause, only a person belonging to, and certified by
the same political party may file a coc to replace the candidate who dwd.
Note:
- The ballot cannot override the constitutional and statutory requirements for
qualification and disqualification of candidates.
- Comelec cannot motu propio deny due course to or cancel an alleged
nuisance coc without providing the candidate his opportunity to be heard.
Constitutionally mandated agency / office:
Office of the Ombudsman
1. Appointment – the ombudsman and deputies are appointed by the
president from the list prepared by the judicial bar council.
2. Term – he will serve for 7 years without reappointment.
3. The Ombudsman will enjoy fiscal autonomy.
Jurisdiction
- it has jurisdiction to investigate POE of GOCC with original charter and it
has no jurisdiction over employees of GOCC organized under Corporation
Code.
- It may start an investigation on the basis of any anonymous letter without
violation the equal protection clause. For purposes of initiating a
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
preliminary investigation before the Office of the Ombudsman, a complaint
in any form or manner is sufficient. ***
- It is clothed with authority to conduct preliminary investigation and to
prosecute all criminal cases involving POE, within the jurisdiction of regular
courts and Sandiganbayan.
▪ The SC held that the Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction over a private
individual, except when the private individual is charged either as a co-
principal, accomplice or accessory of a public officer who has been
charged with a crime within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. (C-
PAA) ***
▪ It can investigate criminal offenses committed by POE which have no
relation to their office.
- A decision of the Ombudsman in administrative cases shall be executed
as a matter of course; an appeal shall not stop the decision from being
executory.
- The President has no authority to remove a Deputy Ombudsman
because it would violate the independence of the Office of Ombudsman. It
is the Ombudsman who exercises administrative disciplinary
jurisdiction over the Deputies.
▪ The inclusion of the Office of the Special Prosecutor with the Office of the
Ombudsman does not ipso facto mean that the OSP must be afforded
the same levels of constitutional independence as that of the
Ombudsman and the Deputy is attached and, therefore, coordinated with
the Office of the Ombudsman.
- The Office of the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate employees
of GOCC organized under the Corporation Code.
- The OSP may prosecute before the Sandiganbayan judges accused of
graft and corruption, even if they come under the administrative
supervision of the SC.
- The Ombudsman or his deputy is authorized to preventively suspend any
officer or employee under his authority pending an investigation
irrespective of whether such officer or employee is employed in the Office
of the Ombudsman. There is no need for a preliminary hearing such as that
required in a petition for bail.
- The Ombudsman has the power to investigate and prosecute any illegal
act or omission of any public official is not an exclusive authority, but a
shared or concurrent authority in respect of the offense charged.
▪ The Ombudsman has concurrent administrative disciplinary
authority with the proper committee of the Department of Education over
public teachers. (CADA)
- The Ombudsman is clothed with authority to conduct preliminary
investigation and to prosecute all criminal cases involving public officers
and employees, not only those within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan, but those within the jurisdiction of regular courts as well.
- The SC held that while the Ombudsman has the discretion to determine
whether an information should be withdrawn and a criminal case should be
dismissed, and to move for the withdrawal of such information or dismissal
of a criminal case, the final disposition of the said motion and of the case
is addressed to the sound discretion of the Sandiganbayan, subject only to
the caveat that the action of the Sandiganbayan must not impair the
substantial rights of the accused and the right of the People to due process
of law.
 56
Political Law Updates
- Pursuant to Sec. 25, RA 6770, the Ombudsman has the power to impose
penalties in administrative cases. And in connection with this administrative
disciplinary authority, the Ombudsman and his deputies are expressly
given the power to preventively suspend POE facing administrative
charges, in accordance with Sec. 24, RA 6770.
- The SC upheld the constitutionality of Secs. 15, 21 and 25, RA 6770 and
ruled that the Ombudsman has the constitutional power to directly remove
from government service an erring public official, other than a Member of
Congress or of the Judiciary.
- The SC held that Sec. 14 (2) and Sec. 27 (4), Ra 6770 are held
unconstitutional because Congress cannot interfere with matters of
procedure of the Ombudsman as it enjoys independence and Congress
cannot increase the appellate jurisdiction of SC without its advice and
concurrence; otherwise, there is clear violation of separation of powers.
**
- When a public official has been found guilty of an administrative charge by
the Office of the Ombudsman and the penalty imposed is suspension for
more than one month, an appeal may be made to Court of Appeals.
However, such appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory,
and the implementation of the decision follows as a matter of course. ***
- The decision of the Ombudsman is final and executory and unappealable
but still subject to judicial review if it fails the test of arbitrariness, or upon
proof of grave abuse of discretion, fraud or error of law, or when the
Ombudsman grossly misappreciates evidence of such nature as to
compel a contrary conclusion.
Powers
- It has power to cite contempt while conducting preliminary investigation.
- It can impose penalties in administrative cases, such as to preventively
suspend poe, in pursuance to his administrative disciplinary authority.
Ill-gotten Wealth – the right of the State to recover properties unlawfully
acquired by POE, from them or from their nominees or transferees, shall not
be barred by prescription, laches or estoppel.
- The above rule applies only to civil actions for recovery of ill-gotten wealth
and not to criminal cases. Thus, prosecution of offenses arising from,
relating, or incident to, or involving ill-gotten wealth in the said provision
may be barred by prescription. **
- Also, the said rule against estoppel does not apply in the case of the grant
of criminal and civil immunity, including the immunity against being
compelled to testify in any foreign or domestic proceeding, other than the
civil and arbitration cases identified in the immunity agreement.
Criminal Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
- It has jurisdiction over felonies committed by public officials in relation to
their office. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction if 1) the offense is
committed by a public official or an employee (POE) mentioned in Sec. 4,
par. A, and the offense is committed in relation to his office.
▪ The offense must be a constituent element of the crime as defined by
statute.
▪ There must be direct relation between the commission of the crime and
the office being held by the accused.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ An offense maybe said to have been committed in relation to the office
if the offense is intimately connected with the office of the offender and
perpetrated while he was in the performance of his official functions even
if public office is not an element of the offense charged.
▪ Even if the public office is not an element of an offense but it was shown1)
that the offense was committed while in performance of his official duty
and 2) that the offense could not have been committed had he not held
his office.
- Those that are classified as Grade 26 and below may still fall within the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan provided that they hold position thus
enumerated by the same law.
▪ It is not only the salary grade that determines the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan.
▪ The compensation is not an essential element of a public office and is
merely incidental to the public office.
- there are two classes of public office-related crimes under subparagraph
(b) of Section 4, RA 8249:
1) those crimes or felonies in which the A) public office is a constituent
element as defined by statute and B) the relation between the crime
and the offense committed cannot exist without the office;
2) offenses or felonies which are intimately connected with public office
and are perpetrated by the POE while in the performance of his official
functions, through improper or irregular conduct.
- Those money laundering cases committed by public officers and private
persons who are in conspiracy with such public officers shall be under the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
Commission on Human Rights
Features of CHR:
1. Composition: Chairman and 4 members must be natural citizens and a
majority of whom shall be members of the bar.
2. The term of office and other qualifications and disabilities of the members
of the commission shall be provided by law.
3. They are appointed by President of the Philippines, without need of
confirmation by the Commission on Appointments.
4. The commission does not enjoy fiscal autonomy.
- Findings of the commission of human rights violations are merely
investigative in character and not binding on the courts.
▪ The CHR may investigate, receive evidence and make findings of facts
as regards claimed human rights violations involving civil and political
rights, but such fact finding is not adjudication, and cannot be likened to
the judicial function of a court of justice or even a quasi-judicial agency
or official.
- CHR, not being a court of justice, cannot issue writs of injunction or a
restraining order against supposed violators of human rights.
- It has the power to cite in contempt only in case of violation of its adopted
operational guidelines and rules of procedure essential to carry out its
investigatorial powers.
- The SC held that evicting squatters is not a violation of human rights.
National Economy and Patrimony
 57
Political Law Updates
• Regalian Doctrine refers to all agricultural, timber and mineral lands are
subject to the dominion of the State.
▪ Before any land may classified from the forest group and converted into
alienable or disposable land for agricultural or other purposes, there
must be a positive act from the Government.
➢ The mere transfer of the title issued by the Director of Lands does
not confer ownership over the property covered by such title where
the property is part of the public forest.
➢ The absence of proof that property is privately owned, the
presumption is that it belongs to the State.
➢ Where there is no showing that the land had been classified as
alienable before the title was issued, any possession thereof, no
matter how lengthy cannot ripen into ownership.
▪ Imperium is the government authority to possess and own property in
its sovereign capacity; while dominium is the land owned by the State
in its proprietary character.
- The classification of public lands is an exclusive prerogative of the
executive department through the Office of the President. Courts have no
authority to do so.
▪ The President, through a presidential proclamation or executive order,
can classify or reclassify land to be included or excluded from the public
domain. Likewise, the DENR Secretary is empowered by law to approve
a land classification and declare such land as alienable and disposable
(AD)
➢ The classification of public lands is a function of the executive branch
of government, director of the Land Management Bureau.
➢ The decision of the director of LMB, when approved by the Sec. of
DENR, is conclusive upon the courts.
▪ Forest land cannot be owned by private persons; it is not registrable,
and possession thereof, no matter how lengthy, cannot convert it into
private land, unless the land is reclassified and considered disposable
and alienable. **
▪ Foreshore land is part of the land which is between the high and low
water, and left dry by the flux and reflux of the tides. It is part of the
alienable land of the public domain and may be disposed of only by lease
and not otherwise. ***
▪ The 1987 Constitution prohibits private corporations from acquiring
alienable lands of the public domain.
- Acquisitive prescription is proper only when alienable and disposable
lands are expressly declared by the State to be no longer intended for
public service or for the development of the national wealth that the land
can be acquired.
▪ The reckoning for the period of possession is the actual possession of
the property and it is sufficient for the property sought to be registered to
be alienable and disposable at the time of the application for registration
of title is filed.
▪ The SC held that the application for land registration is required that
the applicant, by himself or through his predecessors-in-interest, has
been 1) in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and 2)
occupation of alienable and disposable land of the public domain 3)
under bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier. (Bar
2014) *
➢ The SC requires that the property sought to be registered as already
alienable and disposable at the time the application for registration is
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
filed and not during the entire period of possession, or since June 12,
1945.
➢ The property to be acquired of land of public domain must be
patrimonial or private in character in order to be susceptible to
acquisitive prescription. There must be an express declaration by the
State that such land is no longer needed for public service or for the
development of the national wealth to convert it as such.
▪ The SC held that possession of the property prior to the classification of
the property as alienable or disposable cannot be credited as part of
the thirty (30) years required under Sec. 48 of CA No. 141, as amended.
(Bar 2016) **
- The exploration, development and utilization of natural resources shall be
under the full control and supervision of the state. (EDU NR CSS)
▪ The SC held that Electronic Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) did not violate
Sec. 2, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution since the National Power Corporation
(NPC) shall continue to be the holder of the water permit even as the
operational control and day-to-day management of Angat Hydro-
Electric Power Plant (AHEPP) is turned over to Korean Water Resources
Corporation. **
▪ Use and enjoyment of the nation’s marine wealth in its archipelagic
waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone exclusively for
Filipino citizens.
- Franchise, certificate or any other form of authorization for the operation
of a public utility, only citizens of the Philippines or corporations at least
60% of whose capital is Filipino owned.
▪ The SC held that the capital, in Sec. 11, Art. XII, refers to the total
common shares entitled to vote in the election of directors.
▪ Capital refers the total common shares only and not to the total
outstanding capital stock (combined total of common and non-voting
preferred shares).
▪ The SC held that both legal and beneficial ownership of 60% of the
outstanding capital stock must rest in the hands of Filipino nationals in
accordance with the constitutional mandate. **
▪ The SC a franchise to operate a public utility is not an exclusive private
property of the franchisee. No franchisee can demand or acquire
exclusivity in the operation of a public utility. Thus, a franchisee cannot
complain of seizure or taking of property because of the issuance of
another franchise to a competitor.
- The SC held that where a corporation and its non-Filipino stockholders own
stocks in a SEC-registered enterprise, 1) at least 60% of the OCS and
entitled to vote of each corporations must be owned and held by citizens of
the Philippines and 2) at least 60% of the members of the BODs of each
corporations must be citizens of the Philippines, in order that the
corporation shall be considered a Philippine national.
▪ LIBERAL RULE or CONTROL TEST – shares belongings to corporation
or partnership at least 60% of the capital of which is owned by FILIPINO
citizens shall be considered as if Philippine Nationality.
▪ GRANDFATHER RULE is a method of determining the nationality of a
corporation which in turn is owned by another corporation by breaking
down the EQUITY STRUCTURE of the shareholders of the corporation.
➢ It is only employed when the 60% Filipino ownership is in doubt as to
the LOCUS of the BENEFICIAL ownership and control.
 58
Political Law Updates
➢ the GR should not be used to determine the Filipino ownership and
control in a corporation as it could result in an otherwise foreign
corporation rendered qualified to perform nationalized or partly
nationalized activities.
➢ It is only when the CT is first complied with that the GR may be
applied. The CONTROL TEST is still the prevailing mode of
determining whether or not a corporation is a Filipino corporation
▪ The SC held that a franchise from Congress is not required before each
and every public utility may operate, unless there is a law that specifically
requires a legislative franchise for the operation of a public utility,
particular agencies in the executive department may issue authorizations
or licenses for the operation of certain classes of public utilities.
➢ It does not require a franchise before one can own the facilities
needed to operate a public utility so long as it does not operate them
to serve the public and what constitutes a public utility is not their
ownership but their use to the public.
➢ Radio and television companies do not own the airwaves and
frequencies; they are merely given the temporary privilege of using
them. A franchise is a privilege subject to amendment, and the
provision of BP 881 granting free time to the COMELEC is an
amendment of the franchise of radio and television stations.
- No private lands shall be transferred or conveyed, except to individuals,
corporations or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public
domain and with the exception in cases of hereditary succession.
▪ An alien is disqualified to acquire and own lands in the Philippines, except
in cases of hereditary succession – intestate, for the purpose
conservation of the national economy and patrimony.
▪ The purchase by a foreigner of a private property in the Philippines results
no trust and no reimbursement will be allowed as it would permit him to
enjoy the fruits of the property which he is not allowed to own and the
sale of land as to him was null and void.
▪ Effects of acquisition of public / private property by an alien 1) he can
never recover the money he spent thereof, 2) no implied trust was
created in his favor, and 3) no declaration can be made that the subject
property forms part of the conjugal/community property of the spouses.
**
▪ Land tenure is not indispensable to the free exercise of religious
profession and worship. Thus, a religious corporation, controlled by
non-Filipinos, cannot acquire and own lands even for a religious use or
purpose.
➢ For a religious corporation sole to acquire lands, it must appear that
at least 60% of the faithful or its members are citizens of the
Philippines in order to comply with the citizenship requirement. This
is so regardless of the citizenship of the incumbent inasmuch as a
corporation sole is merely an administrator of the temporalities or
properties titled in its name and for the benefit of its members. **
▪ Pursuant to the Public Land Act, the Director of Lands has the authority
and the specific duty to conduct investigations of alleged fraud in
obtaining free patents and the corresponding titles to alienable public
lands, and if facts disclosed in the investigation warrant, to file the
corresponding court action for reversion of the land to the State.
➢ The action of the State for reversion to public domain of land
fraudulently granted to private individuals is imprescriptible.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
➢ It is the State alone which may institute reversion proceedings
against public lands allegedly acquired through fraud and
misrepresentation.
Preference for Filipino Labor – the State shall promote the preferential use
of Filipino labor, domestic materials and locally produced goods and adopt
measures that help make them competitive.
Practice of Profession – the practice of professions in the Philippines shall be
limited to Filipino citizens, save in cases prescribed by law.
Monopolies – the State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public
interest so requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition
shall be allowed.
- The SC held that monopolies are not per se prohibited by the Constitution
but may be permitted to exist to aid the government in carrying on an
enterprise or to aid in the performance of various services and functions in
the interest of the public and since they are subject to abused that can inflict
severe prejudice to the public, they are subjected to a higher level of State
regulation than an ordinary undertaking.
- The World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement does not violate Sec. 19,
Art. II because it should be read and understood in relation to Secs. 1 and
13, XII, which require pursuit of a trade policy that serves the general welfare
and utilizes all forms and arrangements of exchange on the basis of equality
and reciprocity.
- The SC held that trade must be subjected to some form of regulation for the
public good and public interest must be held over business interest.
Social Justice
Labor
- The SC held that employees in the Civil Service may not resort to strike,
walkouts and other temporary work stoppages to pressure the
Government to accede to their demands.
▪ The ability to strike is not essential to the right to association, and that the
right of the sovereign to prohibit strikers or work stoppages was clearly
recognized at common law.
Urban Land and Housing Reform
- Pursuant to Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA), urban or rural
poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor their dwellings demolished, except
In accordance with law and in just and humane manner. No resettlement of
urban or rural dwellers shall be undertaken without adequate consultation
with them and the communities where they are to be located.
- The UDHA allows summary evictions and demolitions in cases where
persons or entities occupy danger areas and persons or entities occupy
danger areas and when persons or entities occupy areas where
government infrastructure projects with available funding are about to be
implemented. Likewise, there can be evictions and demolitions without any
court order as enumerated in Secs. 28 (a and b).
- The mode of expropriation is subjected to two conditions: 1) it shall be
resorted to only when he other modes of acquisition have been exhausted,
and 2) parcels owned by small property owners are exempt from such
acquisition.
Education
- The SC upheld the constitutionality of the National Medical Admission
Test (NMAT) as a requirement for admission to medical school. The NMAT
does not violate the right of the citizens to quality education at all levels as
to ensure quality education for future doctors, and protects public health by
making sure of the competence of future medical practitioners.
 59
Political Law Updates
▪ The Constitutional mandate to protect and promote the right of all citizens
to quality education at all levels is directed to the State and not to the
school.
▪ All rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Charter, their exercise may be
so regulated pursuant to the police power of the State to safeguard
health, morals, peace, education, order, safety and general welfare of the
people.
▪ The Court said that the requirement that a school must first obtain
government authorization before operating is based on the State policy
that educational programs and/or operations shall be of good quality
and, therefore, shall at least satisfy minimum standards with respect to
curricula, teaching staff, physical plant and facilities and administrative
and management viability.
Educational Institutions
- No educational institution shall be established exclusively for aliens, and no
group of aliens shall comprise more than 1/3 of the enrolment in any school,
except schools for foreign diplomatic personnel and their dependents,
and for other foreign temporary residents.
- SC held that the provision as to the highest budgetary priority to
education has been construed to be merely directory and it does not follow
that the hands of Congress be so hamstrung as to deprive it of the power
to respond to the imperatives of national interest and the attainment of other
State policies and objectives. **
Academic Freedom
- Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.
▪ A school establishment has the freedom to determine: 1) who may teach;
ii.) what may be taught; 3) how it shall be taught; and 4) who may be
admitted to study.
Limitations: 1) dominant police power of the State; and 2) The social
interests of the community.
➢ The SC held that the school may not be forced to reopen at the
instance of the striking students.
➢ The SC held that the students do not shed their constitutionally-
protected rights of free expression at the school gates.
➢ The only valid grounds to deny readmission of students are
academic deficiency and breach of the school’s reasonable rules of
conduct.
➢ The SC held that the PRC cannot interfere with the conduct of review
that review schools and centers believe would best enable their
enrollees to meet the standards required before becoming full-
fledged public accountants.
▪ The matter of admission of students is within the ambit of academic
freedom and beyond the province of the Courts to decide.
▪ It is within the sound discretion of the University to determine whether a
student may be conferred graduation honors.
➢ The SC held that where it is shown that the conferment of an honor
or distinction was obtained through fraud, the university has the right
to revoke or withdraw the honor or distinction conferred. The right of
the University does not terminate upon the graduation of the student.
- The SC held that while students have the right to freely choose their field
of study to existing curricula, and to continue their course therein up to
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
graduation, such right is subject to the established academic and
disciplinary standards laid down by the academic institutions.
- The Court has always recognized the right of schools to impose
disciplinary sanctions, which includes the power to dismiss or expel
students who violate reasonable school rules.
The Family
- The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation.
Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total
development
- Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family
and shall be protected by the State.
General Provision
Flag of the Philippines shall be red, white and blue, with a sun and three
stars, as consecrated and honored by the people and recognized by law.
Name – the Congress may, by law, adopt a new name for the country, a
national anthem, or a national seal, which shall all be truly reflective and
symbolic of the ideals, history and traditions of the people. Such law shall take
effect only upon its ratification by the people in a national referendum. (N-
CAS)
Sequestration
- The SC held that a writ of sequestration may be issued only upon authority
of at least 2 PCGG Commissioners.
▪ The PCGG may not delegate to its representatives and subordinates its
authority to sequester, any such delegation is invalid and ineffective.
▪ The PCGG cannot perform acts of strict ownership of sequestered
property. The PCGG is a mere conservator. It may not vote the share in
a corporation and elect the members of the BODs.
▪ Pursuant to Sec. 5, EO 14 vests in the PCGG the power to grant immunity
to witnesses.
▪ The SC sustained the authority of the PCGG to enter into compromise
agreements involving ill-gotten wealth and to grant immunity in civil and
criminal cases, without need of prior Congressional approval.
Administrative Code
Admin. Agencies are created by: 1) Constitution, 2) Statute and 3) Authority of
law – by virtue of a delegated power
- The power to create includes the power to destroy.
Powers of Administrative Bodies (AB):
1. Quasi-legislative power or rule-making power – the power to make rules
and regulations which results in delegated legislation that is within the
confines of the granting statute and the doctrine of non-delegability and
separation of powers.
- It is the exercise of a delegated legislative power, involving no
discretion as to what the law shall be, but merely the authority to fix the
details in the execution or enforcement of a policy set out in the law itself.
 60
Political Law Updates

- AB may exercise quasi-legislative powers only if there exists a law which
delegates these powers to them. The rules so promulgated must be
within the confines of the granting statute and must involve no discretion
as to what the law shall be but merely the authority to fix the details in the
execution or enforcement of the policy set out in the law itself.
▪ IRRs issued by ab pursuant to the powers delegated to them have the
force and effect of law. They are binding on all persons subject to them
and the courts will take judicial notice.
▪ Both letters of instruction and executive orders are presidential
issuances; one may repeal or otherwise alter, modify or amend the
other depending on which comes later.
- Administrative regulations (AR) cannot extend the law or amend
legislative enactment, for settled is the rule that AR must be in harmony
with provision of the law.
- No constitutional requirement for a hearing in the promulgation of a
general regulation by an ab, except when the nature of the AR is
subordinate legislation designed to implement the law by providing
details and before it is adopted there must be a hearing under the
administrative code.
- Kinds of Administrative Regulations:
- Administrative Rules with Penal Sanctions; additional requisites: 5)
a. Supplementary or detailed legislation – is in the nature of
subordinate legislation and designed to implement a primary
legislation by providing details thereof and publication is a
requirement.
- There is no constitutional requirement for a hearing in the promulgation
▪ They are rules and regulations to fix the details in the execution and
enforcement of a policy set out in the law. They usually implement
existing law, imposing general, extra-statutory obligations pursuant
to authority properly delegated by Congress.
publication in the official gazette or in a newspaper of general
circulation. (LSRP) ***
▪ The implementation of statute is limited to what is provided for in the
legislative enactment and Administrative Regulation cannot override,
supplant or modify the law.
▪ Administrative implementing rules and regulations (IRRs) adopted
by a particular department of the Government under legislative
authority must be in harmony with the provisions of the law, and
should be issued for the sole purpose of carrying the law’s general
provisions into effect.
▪ Publication must be in full, or it is no publication at all.
▪ The administrative rules and regulations the purpose of which is to
enforce or implement an existing law pursuant to a valid delegation,
must be published in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of
general circulation, except interpretative regulations and those
merely internal in nature – regulating only the personnel of the
administrative agency, not the general public.
▪ A petition for prohibition is not the proper remedy to assail IRR
issued in the exercise of quasi-legislative functions.
the law must itself declare as punishable for violation of the administrative
rule or regulation, 6) the law should define or fix the penalty for the
violation of the administrative rule or regulation.
of a general regulation by an administrative body.
▪ Where the rule procedural, or where the rules are, in effect, merely
legal opinions, there is no notice required.

b. Interpretative legislation – they are rules and regulations construing
or interpreting the provisions of a statute to be enforced and they are
intended to clarify or explain existing statutory regulations and
publication is not a requirement.
2.
▪ They are binding on all concerned until they are changed and they
have the force and effect of law, and are entitled to great respect.
c. Contingent legislation – they are rules and regulations made by an
administrative authority on the existence of certain facts or things upon
which the enforcement of the law depends.
- Function of prescribing rates by Administrative Agency may either be a
legislative or an adjudicative function.
▪ Notice is not required in the preparation of substantive rules where the
class to be affected is large and the questions to be resolved involve
the use of discretion committed to the rule-making body.
Determinative power
- Power to compel the attendance of witnesses not inherent in AB; but
an Admin. Officer authorized to take testimony or evidence is deemed
authorized to administer oath, summon witnesses, require production
of documents, etc.
- Power to punish contempt must be expressly granted to the charter of
ab; and when so granted, may be exercised only when administrative
body is actually performing quasi-judicial functions.

1. If it were a legislative function, the grant of prior notice and hearing
to the affected parties is not a requirement of due process.
2. If it were a quasi-judicial function, prior notice and hearing are
essential to the validity of such rates.
▪ Where the rules and the rates are meant to apply to all enterprises of a
given kind throughout the country, they may partake of a legislative
character. But if they apply exclusively to a particular party, based upon
a finding of fact, then its function is quasi-judicial in character.
- Requisites of Administrative Regulation (AR): 1) there must be a valid
law which delegates legislative powers to the administrative agency, 2)
within the scope and purview of the law, 3) reasonable and 4)
3. Quasi-judicial or adjudicatory power – ab is granted the authority to
promulgate its own rules of procedure, provided they do not increase,
diminish or modify substantive rights, and subject to disapproval by the sc.
- The requisites of procedural due process must be complied with.
1. Right to hearing
2. Tribunal must consider evidence presented
3. Decision must have something to support itself
4. Evidence must be substantial
5. Decision must be based on the evidence adduced at the hearing
or at least contained in the record and disclosed o the parties
6. The board or its judges must act on its or their independence
consideration of the facts and the law of the case, and

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
 61
Political Law Updates
7. Decision must be based on substantial evidence and must state
the facts and the law on which it was based.
- Substantial evidence refers to relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.
• Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative remedies applies only to
judicial review of decisions of administrative agencies in the exercise of
their quasi-judicial power. It has no application to their exercise of rule-
making power.
- The right to counsel is not necessary in administrative due process.
▪ The SC held that there was a violation of administrative due process
where the teacher was dismissed by the University without having
been given full opportunity to confront the witness against her.
▪ The right to due process is not violated, even in the absence of notice,
as long as the parties are given the opportunity to be heard.
▪ Opportunity to be heard, either through oral arguments or pleadings,
is accorded, there is no denial of procedural due process.
▪ Technical rules of procedure and evidence are not strictly applied in
administrative proceedings; it cannot be fully equated to due process
in its strict judicial sense.
▪ The law simply requires that the civil servant to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him in a clear and concise
manner to give him the chance to answer the allegations intelligently.
▪ Administrative determinations where notice and hearing are not
necessary for due process:
1. Grant of provisional authority for increased rate, or to engage in
a particular line of business;
2. Summary proceedings of distraint and levy the property of a
delinquent taxpayer;
3. Cancellation of a passport where no abuse of discretion is
committed by Sec. of Foreign Affairs;
4. Summary abatement of a nuisance per se which affects the
immediate safety of persons or property;
5. Preventive suspension of a POE pending investigation of admin.
charges filed against him.
- Power to punish contempt is inherently judicial; it may be exercised
only if expressly conferred by law, and when administrative body is
engaged in the performance of its quasi-judicial powers.
- Only the court can award damages, except those authorized by law:
NLRC, HLURB etc.
- Only the court can grant immunity, except those authorized by law:
CHR, PCGG etc.
- Decisions and orders of administrative agencies have upon their
finality, the force and binding effect of a final judgment within the
purview of the doctrine of res judicata.
▪ Rules of res judicata forbids the reopening of a matter once
determined by competent authority acting within their exclusive
jurisdiction.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The doctrine of res judicata applies to adversary administrative
proceedings.
▪ The doctrine does not apply in admin. adjudication relative to
citizenship, except when the following conditions are present: 1) the
question of citizenship is resolved by a Court or an admin. body as a
material issue in the controversy after a full-blown trial hearing, 2)
with the active participation of the Sol. Gen., and 3) the finding made
by administrative body on the citizenship issue is affirmed by the SC.
***
▪ The doctrine does not apply where the admin. decision of the WCC
Referee awards the employee less than what the law provides.
- The subsequent desistance by the complainant does not free the
public officer from liability, as the purpose of an administrative
proceeding is to protect the public service based on the time-honored
principle that a public office is a public trust. **
- Administrative agencies which have concurrent jurisdiction over a
matter, the admin agency that first takes cognizance of the complaint
shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of the others.
▪ The HLURB has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes involving
homeowners’ associations.
▪ The DECS Regional Director has the authority to issue a return-to-
work order, to initiate administrative charges, and to constitute an
investigating panel.
▪ The Department of Energy has jurisdiction over disputes involving
direct connection of electric power and not the Energy Regulatory
Board.
Exhaustion of Admin. Remedies:
- Wherever there is an available administrative remedy provided by law, no
judicial recourse can be made until all such remedies have been availed of
and exhausted. Noncompliance of such rule is a ground for dismissal for lack
of cause of action.
▪ The doctrine of administrative remedies applies only to judicial review
of decisions of administrative agencies in the exercise of their quasi-judicial
power. It has no application to their exercise of rule-making power.
▪ The body that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise
jurisdiction to the exclusion of the others.
▪ The thrust of the rule is that courts must allow administrative agencies to
carry out their functions and discharge their responsibilities within the
specialized areas of their respective competence.
▪ It is well settled that findings of fact of quasi-judicial agencies are
generally accorded respect and even finality by the Court, if supported by
substantial evidence, in recognition of their expertise on the specific
matters under their jurisdiction.
▪ The SC held that it is beyond the province of the Court to analyze and weigh
the parties’ evidence all over again in reviewing administrative decisions.
An exception to this rule lies when there is serious ground to believe that a
possible miscarriage of justice would thereby result if the Court simply
accepts the administrative body’s full findings.
▪ The administrative decision in matters within the executive jurisdiction
can only be set aside on proof of grave abuse of discretion, fraud, collusion
or error of law.
 62
Political Law Updates
▪ The SC held that Courts will not generally interfere with purely
administrative matters addressed to the sound discretion of government
agencies, unless there a clear showing of arbitrary, capricious of grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
• Principles of Comity and Convenience require that the courts stay their
hand until the administrative process are completed.
• Doctrine of Primary Administrative Jurisdiction prevents the court from
arrogating unto itself the authority to resolve controversy which falls under
the jurisdiction of a tribunal possessed with special competence.
▪ It applies only where the administrative agency exercises its quasi-judicial
or adjudicatory powers.
• Doctrine of Res Judicata forbids the reopening of a matter once determined
by competent authority acting within their exclusive jurisdiction.
▪ It applies only to adversary administrative proceedings.
▪ It does not apply in administrative adjudication relative to citizenship,
except if the following conditions are present: 1) when a person’s
citizenship is resolved by a court or administrative body as a material use
in the controversy, after a full blown hearing, 2) with the active
participation of the solicitor general or his representative; and, 3) the
finding on his citizenship is affirmed by the SC.
• Doctrine of Prior Resort / Doctrine of Primary Administrative
Jurisdiction – where there is competence or jurisdiction vested upon an
administrative body to act upon a matter, no resort to the courts may be made
before such administrative body shall have acted upon the matter. But this
rule applies only where the administrative agency exercises quasi-judicial or
adjudicatory functions.
▪ The doctrine prevents the court from arrogating unto itself the authority to
resolve a controversy which falls under the jurisdiction of tribunal
possessed with special competence.
▪ It is a basic rule that the Courts will not interfere in matters which are
addressed to the sound discretion of government agencies entrusted with
the regulation of activities coming under the special technical knowledge
and training of such agencies.
▪ Courts cannot take cognizance of cases pending before administrative
agencies of special competence.
▪ The SC held that the CARP Law vests the Department of Agrarian Reform
with quasi-judicial powers and since the law does not distinguish, the
jurisdiction of DARAB should, therefore, include all agricultural lands under
the coverage of the CARP, including private lands devoted to or suitable
for agriculture. Thus, DARAB may properly take cognizance of the case
involving a complaint for redemption, it being a case concerning the rights
of respondents as tenants on agricultural land.
▪ The COA has the primary jurisdiction over money claims against
government agencies and instrumentalities, but the scope of the authority
of the COA to take cognizance of claims is circumscribed to mean only
liquidated claims, or those determined or readily determinable from
vouchers, invoices and such other papers within reach of accounting
officers.
• Doctrine of finality of administrative action – no resort to the courts will
be allowed unless the administrative action has been completed and there is
nothing left to be done in the administrative structure.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- The effect of failure to exhaust administrative remedies is that the jurisdiction
of the court is not affected, but the complainant is deprived of a cause of
action which is a ground for a motion to dismiss. However, if no motion to
dismiss is filed on this ground, there is deemed to be a waiver.
- The doctrine of non-inference by trial courts with co-equal administrative
bodies is intended to ensure judicial stability in the administration of justice
whereby the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction may not be
opened, modified or vacated by any Court of concurrent jurisidiction.
- Exceptions to the Doctrine of primary jurisdiction:
1. there is estoppel on the part of the party invoking the doctrine;
2. the challenged administrative act is patently illegal, amounting to lack of
jurisdiction;
3. there is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will irretrievable prejudice
the complainant;
4. the amount involved is relatively small;
5. the question involved is purely legal and will ultimately have to be decided by
the courts of justice;
6. judicial intervention is urgent;
7. when its application may cause great and irreparable damage;
8. the controverted acts violated due process;
9. the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has been rendered moot;
10. there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy: (PSAR)
11. when strong public interest is involved.
Suffrage and Election Laws
Suffrage is the right to vote in the election of officers chosen by the people and
in the determination of questions submitted to the people. It includes within the
scope election, plebiscite, initiative and referendum.
- The SC held that fundamental to the idea of democracy and a republican
State is the right of the people to determine their own destiny through the
choice of leaders they may have in government.
▪ The SC held that Sec. 9 of the COMELEC Resolution No. 9618 which
limited the airtime within which national candidates and political parties
was violative of the people’s right to suffrage. Candidates and political
parties need adequate breathing space – including the means to
disseminate their ideas.
- Regular election is provided by law for the election of officers either nation-
wide or in certain subdivisions thereof, after the expiration of the full of the
former officers.
Special election is held to fill vacancy before the expiration of the term for
which the incumbent was elected.
- National Right Theory – suffrage is a natural and inherent right of every
citizen who is not disqualified by reason of his own reprehensible conduct
or unfitness.
Social Expediency – suffrage is a public or function conferred upon the
citizen for reasons of social expediency, conferred upon those who are fit
and capable of discharging it.
Tribal Theory – it is a necessary attribute of membership in the State.
Feudal Theory – it is an adjunct of a particular status, generally tenurial in
character, vested privilege usually accompanying ownership of land.
Ethical Theory – it is a necessary and essential means for the
development of society.
 63
Political Law Updates
- RA 9369 (Automated Election System) is the response of Congress to
the constitutional mandate to provide a system for securing the secrecy and
sanctity of the ballot.
- Election period – the election period shall commence 90 days before the
day of the election and shall end 30 days thereafter, unless otherwise fixed
by the COMELEC.
Commission on Election
- Cases to be heard and decided in Division:
▪ All election cases, including pre-proclamation contests, originally
cognizable by the COMELEC in the exercise of its power under Sec. 2(2),
Art. IX-C of the Constitution.
▪ Proceeding to cancel the certificate of candidacy involve the exercise of
the quasi-judicial powers of the COMELEC which the COMELEC in
division should first decide.
▪ Cases appealed from RTC and MTC have to be heard and decided in
division before they may be heard en banc upon the filing of a motion
for the reconsideration of the division decision. And even if not raised
as an issue, the SC may motu, consider and resolve the question of
jurisdiction.
➢ A petition for certiorari from the decision of RTC or MTC is to be
resolved in division before it may be heard banc.
Cases to be heard and decided in En Banc
▪ A motion for reconsideration of a decision of division.
▪ A petition for correction of manifest errors alleging an erroneous copying
of figures from the election return to the Statement of Votes by precint.
▪ The COMELEC En Banc has authority to resolve any question pertaining
to proceedings of the Board of Canvassers.
▪ The power of the Comelec to prosecute cases of violation of election
laws involves the exercise of administrative powers which may be
exercised directly by Comelec En Banc.
- Only decisions of the Comelec En Banc may bro brought to the SC on
certiorari under Rule 64, ROC.
▪ The SC has no power to review via certiorari an interlocutory order or
even a final resolution of a division of the Comelec. The only exception
to this rule is where grave abuse of discretion committed by the
Comelec division is apparent on the face of the order or resolution.
▪ The SC held that when the Court could review orders and decision of the
COMELEC in electoral contests despite not having been reviewed by
the Comelec En Banc, as follows: 1) if it will present the miscarriage of
justice, 2) the issue involves a principle of social justice, 3) the issue
involves a the protection of labor, 4) the decision or resolution sought to
be set aside is a nullity, and 5) the need for relief is extremely urgent and
certiorari is the only adequate and speedy remedy available.
▪ The SC held that determinations made by the Comelec which are merely
administrative, not quasi-judicial, in character, may be challenged in an
ordinary civil action before the courts.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC held that a breach of the fundamental right of expression by
COMELEC is a grave abuse of discretion and thus, the constitutionality
of the notice and letter coming from the Comelec is within the Court’s
power to review.
Constitutional powers and duties of the Comelec:
- Election means by which the people choose their officials for a definite and
fixed period, and to whom they entrust for the time being the exercise of
the powers of government.
Plebiscite is the submission of constitutional amendments of important
legislative measures to the people for ratification.
Initiative is the power of the people to propose amendments to the
Constitution, or to propose and enact legislation through an election called
for the purpose.
Referendum is the power of the electorate to approve or reject national or
local legislation through an election called for the purpose.
Recall is the termination of official relationship of a local elective official for
loss of confidence prior to the expiration of his term through the term of the
electorate.
1. The Comelec En Banc may promulgate its own rules concerning pleading
and practice before it or before any of its offices.
Limitations: 1) must not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights, 2)
they shall remain effective unless disapproved by the SC, 3) procedural
rules in election cases are designed to achieve not only a correct but also
an expeditious determination of the popular will of the electorate.
▪ The power to promulgate by the Comelec of rules and regulations to
enforce and administer all election laws includes the determination, within
the parameters fixed by law, of appropriate periods for the
accomplishment of pre-election acts like filing for registration under the
party-list system.
▪ The Comelec has the power to liberally interpret or even suspend its
rules of procedure in the interest of justice, including obtaining a speedy
disposition of all matters pending before it.
➢ The SC held that the Commission may suspend reglementary
periods prescribed in its Rules, or the requirement of a certificate of
non-forum shopping, in the interest of justice and speedy resolution
of cases.
▪ The SC held that demurer to evidence shall not apply to election cases,
even by analogy or in a suppletory character, because the application
of the Rules would not be practicable and convenient.
▪ The Comelec has the power to ascertain the identity of a political party
and its legitimate officers. It includes the settlement of the struggle for
leadership within the party.
▪ The SC declared unconstitutional Sec. 5.4 of RA 9005, prohibiting
publication of election survey results, because the grant of authority to
the Comelec to regulate the enjoyment and utilization of franchises for
the operation of media of communication is limited to ensuring equal
opportunity, time, space and right to reply, as well as uniform and
reasonable rates of charges for the use of such media facilities for public
information campaigns for and among candidates.
 64
Political Law Updates
The SC invalidated a Comelec resolution prohibiting radio and TV
commentators and newspaper columnists from commenting on the
issues involved in the forthcoming plebiscite for the ratification of the
organic law establishing the CAR and media practitioners exercising their
freedom of expression during plebiscite periods are neither the franchise
holders nor the candidates.
2. Power to declare failure of election:
- There are three instances where a failure of election may be declared,
namely: 1) the election in any polling place had not been held on the date
fixed on account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or
another analogous causes, 2) the election in any polling place had been
suspended before the hour fixed by law for the closing of the voting on
account of force majeure, violence, terrorism, fraud or another analogous
causes, or after he voting or during the preparation and transmission of
the election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof, such election
results in a failure to elect on account of force majeure, violence,
terrorism, fraud or another analogous causes.
▪ The SC held that for the Comelec to conduct a hearing on verified
petition to declare a failure of election, it is necessary that the petition
must show face two conditions: 1) that no voting has taken in the
precinct on the date fixed by law or, even if there was voting, the
election nevertheless resulted in a failure to elect; and 2) the votes not
cast would affect the results of the election.
▪ Since there was a failure of elections, the petitioners can legally remain
in their elective office in a hold-over capacity, pursuant to Sec. 5, RA
9164 explicitly provides that incumbent barangay officials may continue
in office in a hold-over capacity until their successors have been
elected and shall have qualified.
▪ Comelec cannot deny due course or cancel certificate of candidacy in
due form without proper proceedings.
▪ The denial of petitioner’s request for special registration of voters in the
youth sector who failed to register within the prescribed period was a valid
exercise of its power to administer all laws and regulation
3. The Comelec has the exclusive jurisdiction over all pre-proclamation
cases.
- The express grant of power to the Comelec to resolve election contests
carries with it the grant of all other powers necessary, proper or incidental
to the effective and efficient exercise of the power expressly granted.
- To be considered a member of the House of Representative, there must
be concurrence of all the following requisites: 1) a valid proclamation, 2)
a proper oath, and 3) assumption of office. Any of one of the foregoing,
the Comelec is not divested of jurisdiction over the controversy. **
- The Comelec is without the power to partially or totally annul a
proclamation or suspend the effects of a proclamation without notice and
hearing, as this could constitute a violation of the due process clause.
- The Comelec has jurisdiction over appeals from decision of RTC in
election contests involving elective municipal officials, then it is also the
Comelec that has the authority to issue a writ of certiorari in aid of its
appellate jurisdiction.
- The right of a party to seek execution pending appeal is strictly
construed. The grant of the motion is dependent on the public interest
involved, the shortness of the remaining portion of the term, and the
length of time that the protest has pending.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The judgments which may be executed pending appeals are not only
those rendered by the trial court, but by the Comelec as well.
▪ The Comelec cannot deprive the RTC of its competence to order
execution of judgment pending appeal, because the mere filing of an
appeal does not divest the trial court of its jurisdiction over the case and
the authority to resolve pending incidents.
▪ The SC held that the RTC may grant a motion for execution pending
appeal when there are valid and special reasons to grant the same,
such as 1) the public interest involved or the will of the electorate; 2)
the shortness of the remaining portion of the term; or 3) the length of
time that the election protest has been pending.
4. Decide all questions affecting elections, including determination of the
number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and
inspectors, and registration of voters.
- It is the Comelec that ultimately determines whether or not to effect a
change in the location of polling places, after notice and hearing,
although it may be initiated by a written petition of the majority of the
voters, or by agreement of political parties.
- The Comelec has the authority to effect the re-clustering of precincts
when necessary to prevent failure of election and promote free, orderly
and honest elections. Unless clearly illegal, or constituting grave abuse
of discretion, the Court cannot interfere with the actions of the Comelec
in this respect.
5. Power to cite for contempt. The Comelec has the statutory power to cite
for contempt, but the power may be exercised only when the Comelec is
engaged in the exercise of quasi-judicial powers.
6. Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, organizations, or
coalitions which, in addition to other requirements, must present their
platform or program of government, and accredit citizens’ arms of the
Comelec.
- Religions denominations and sects shall not be registered.
- The power vested by Sec. 2(5), Art. IX-C of the Constitution and Sec.
61 of BP 881 in the Comelec to register political parties and ascertain the
eligibility of groups to participate in the elections is purely administrative
in character. This process does not
- Grounds for cancellation of registration. Under RA 7941, the Comelec
may motu propio or upon a verified complaint of any interested party,
refuse or cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration of any
national, regional or sector party, organization or coalition on any of the
following grounds:
▪ 1) It is a religious sect or denomination, organization or association
organized for religion purposes, 2) it advocates violence or unlawful
means to seek its goal, 3) it is a foreign party or organization, 4) it is
receiving support from any government, foreign political party,
foundation or organization, whether directly or through any of its
officers or member, or indirectly through third parties, for partisan
election purposes, 5) it violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or
regulations relating to elections, 6) it declares unlawful statement in is
petition, 7) it has ceased to exist for at least one year, 8) it fails to
participate in the last two preceding elections, or fails to obtain at least
2% of the votes cast under the party-list system in the two preceding
election for the constituency in which it was registered
 65
Political Law Updates
▪ Moral disapproval, without more, s not sufficient governmental
interest to justify exclusion of homosexuals from participation in the
party-list system. The LGBT is a sector that can be represented in the
party-list system even if it is not specifically enumerated in the law. The
crucial element is not whether a sector is specifically enumerated, but
whether a particular organization complies with the requirements of the
Constitution and RA 7941.
➢ Homosexual conduct is not against generally accepted public
morals. The Philippines has not seen fit to criminalize homosexual
conduct.
▪ The following guidelines shall be followed in order that a political party
registered under the party-list system may be entitled to a sea in the
HR: 1) must represent marginalized and under-represented sectors,
2) major political parties must comply with this statutory policy, 3) party
must not disqualified under RA 7941, 4) the party must not be adjunct
of an entity or project funded by the government, 5) the party and its
nominees must comply with the requirements of the law, 6) the
nominees must also represent a marginalized or under-represented
sector; and 7) the nominee must able to contribute to the formulation
and enactment of appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation.
7. File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for
inclusion and exclusion of voters, investigate and, where appropriate,
prosecute cases of violations of election laws, including acts or omissions
constituting election frauds, offenses and malpractices.
- Under Sec. 265, BP 881, the Comelec is granted the exclusive power to
conduct preliminary investigation of all offenses punishable under the
Omnibus Election Code and to prosecute the same.
- It is well-settled that the finding of probable cause in the prosecution of
election offenses rests in the Comelec’s sound discretion and such power
includes the authority to decide whether to appeal the dismissal of a
criminal case by the trial court.
- The Comelec is authorized to avail the assistance of other prosecuting
arms of government and thus, it may validly delegate the power to the
Provincial Prosecutor.
- The mere physical transfer of the employee’s office area from its old
location to the Office of the Mayor “some little steps” away, did not
constitute a violation of Sec. 261 (f), BP 881. Transfer and detail must be
understood in their technical and legal meanings, and the petitioner’s
argument that the prohibition encompassed any and all kinds and manner
of personnel movement is unacceptable.
- Election offenses are generally mala prohibita and proof of criminal
intent is not necessary and good faith, ignorance or lack of malice is not
a defense, the commission of the prohibited act is sufficient.
- The prescriptive period for election offense is five (5) years from date
of commission for the offenses enumerated in Sec. 261, BP 881.
Qualification of candidates
- Qualifications prescribed by law are continuing requirements and must
be possessed for the duration of the officer’s active tenure. Once any of the
prescribed qualifications is lost, his title to the office may be seasonably
challenged.
▪ Philippine citizenship is required to ensure that no alien shall govern our
people.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Repatriation retroacts to the date of the filing of his application for
repatriation.
▪ The following are the guidelines to determine a candidate’s compliance
with the residency requirement: 1) every person has a domicile or
residence somewhere, 2) where once established, the domicile remains
until he acquires a new one, and 3) a person can have but one domicile
at a time.
➢ A change of residence requires an actual and deliberate
abandonment, because one cannot have two legal residences at the
same time. Where there is no such proof of abandonment, the
residence of origin should be deemed to continue.
➢ Where a dwelling qualifies as a residence, the dwelling where a
person permanently resides, intends to return to and remain, his or
her capacity or inclination to decorate the place or the lack of it, is
immaterial.
Disqualification of candidates
- Grounds for disqualification: 1) declared as incompetent or insane by
competent authority, 2) sentenced by final judgement for subversion,
insurrection, rebellion, or any offense for which he has been sentenced to
a penalty of more than 18 months imprisonment, 3) sentenced by final
judgment for a crime involving moral turpitude, 4) any person who is a
permanent resident of or an immigration to a foreign country, unless he
has waived his status as such.
▪ Violation of the Anti-Fencing Law involves moral turpitude.
▪ The SC held that a green card is ample proof that the holder thereof is a
permanent resident of, or an immigrant to, the United States.
Additional grounds for disqualification and applicable only to candidates
for elective local office only:
1. those sentenced by final judgment for an offense punishable by one
year or more imprisonment, and within two years after serving
sentence,
2. those removed from office as a result of an administrative case,
3. those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to
the Republic of the Philippines,
4. those with dual citizenship,
5. fugitives from justice in criminal and non-political cases here and
abroad,
6. permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have acquired
the right to reside abroad, and continue to avail of the same right,
7. those who are feeble-minded or insane,
8. one who has given money or other material consideration to influence,
induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing electoral
functions,
9. one who committed acts of terrorism to enhance his candidacy,
10. one who spent in his election, campaign an amount in excess of that
allowed by this Code.
▪ The SC clarified the dual citizenship disqualification and reconciled it
with Sec. 5, Art. IV of the Constitution on dual allegiance. One is
disqualified only if he conspicuously or deliberately obtains dual
citizenship, thus, owing allegiance to two states.
▪ Sec. 5(2) of RA 9225 which categorically requires a former Filipino who
reacquires Philippine citizenship by taking oath of allegiance under RA
9225, to state clearly and unequivocal terms that he is renouncing all
 66
Political Law Updates
foreign citizenship, failing which he is disqualified from running for an
elective public office. The SC declared that foreign citizenship must be
formally rejected through an affidavit duly sworn before an officer
authorized to administer oath.
▪ Dual citizenship by naturalization are required to take not only the Oath
Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, but also to personally
renounce foreign citizenship in order to qualify as a candidate for public
office.
➢ If he should he still use his foreign passport, he is divested (strip)
of his Filipino citizenship which he acquired by taking the required
oath of allegiance.
➢ If he represents himself as a foreign citizen, he voluntarily and
effectively reverted to his earlier status as a dual citizen.
Certificate of Candidacy
- Effect of filing certificate of candidacy is that any person who files his COC
shall be considered as a candidate at the start of the campaign period for
which he filed his COC, provided that unlawful acts or omissions applicable
to a candidate shall take effect only upon the start of the aforesaid
campaign period.
Likewise, any person holding a public appointive office or position,
including active members of the armed forces, and officers and employees
on GOCC shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office and must
vacate the same at the start of the day of the filing of his certificate of
candidacy.
▪ The SC held that, under the Law on Election, no candidate can be held
liable for premature campaigning, because he shall be considered a
candidate only at start of the campaign period. Furthermore, unlawful
acts or omissions applicable to a candidate shall take effect only upon
the start of the aforesaid campaign period.
▪ The appointive public officials who file COC shall be considered ipso
facto resigned from their appointive public office on the day of filing such
certificate of candidacy.
▪ The law applies even to employees of GOCC without original charter.
▪ While the COC is required to be under oath, the election of a candidate
cannot be annulled on the sole ground of formal defects in the certificate,
such as lack of the required oath.
➢ The SC held that nowhere in Sec. 40 of the LGC will one find that a
defective COC is a ground for disqualifying a candidate. Neither
does it specify that a defective notarization is a ground for
disqualification of a candidate.
➢ It is enough that a candidate is a registered voter in the precinct
where he intends to vote which should be in the district where he is
running for office.
- Death, withdrawal or disqualification of candidate. If, after the last day
for the filing of COC, an official candidate of a registered political party does,
withdraws or is disqualified for any cause, only a person belonging to and
certified by the same political party may file a certificate of candidacy for
the office not later than mid-day of the day of the election. DWD
▪ The SC held that the existence of a valid COC is a condition sine qua
non for a disqualified candidate to be validly substituted.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC ruled that a cancelled COC void ab initio cannot give rise to a
valid candidacy, and much less to valid votes. If one’s COC is void ab
initio, then he was never a candidate at all, and all the votes cast in his
favor are stray votes. If he obtained the highest number of votes, then it
is the second placer who should be proclaimed the winner.
▪ When a person who is not qualified is voted for and eventually garners
the highest number of votes, even the will of the electorate expressed
through the ballot cannot cure the defect in the qualification of the
candidate.
▪ The SC held that the withdrawal of the withdrawal, for the purpose of
reviving the certificate of candidacy, must be made within the period
provided by law for the filing of the COC.
▪ When a person files two certificates of candidacy for different offices,
he becomes ineligible for either position. He may withdraw one of his
certificates by filing a sworn declaration with the Comelec before the
deadline for the filing of a COC.
▪ The Comelec shall have only ministerial duty to receive and
acknowledge receipt of the COC.
➢ The SC held that the Comelec has no discretion to give or not to give
due course to a COC filed in due form. While the Commission may
look into patent defects in the certificate, it may not inquire into
matters not appearing on the face of the certificate.
➢ The SC held that Comelec has no discretion to give or not to give die
curse to COC, that it may not unilaterally cancel a COC filed in form
without proper notice and hearing. (UC NH)
However, the SC held that the Comelec is mandated to enforce and
administer all laws relative to conduct of an election. As such, it is the
duty of the Comelec to cancel, motu propio, the COC who is clearly
disqualified under the law to run for public office, notwithstanding the
absence of any petition initiating a quasi-judicial proceeding for the
resolution for the resolution of the same.
➢ The Comelec may, motu propio, or upon verified petition of an
interested party, refuse to give due course to or cancel a COC if it is
shown that the said certificate was filed 1) to put the election process
in mockery or disrepute, 2) to cause confusion among the voters
by the similarity of the names of the registered candidates, 3) by other
circumstances or acts which clearly demonstrate that the candidate
has no bona fide intention to run for the office for which the certificate
has been filed, and thus, prevent a faithful determination of the true
will of the electorate.
* To minimize the logical confusion caused by nuisance
candidates, their certificates of candidacy may be denied due
course or cancelled by the Comelec. The Comelec commits grave
abuse of discretion if it denies die course to or cancels a COC
without affording the candidate an opportunity to be heard.
o The SC held that ballots indicating only the similar surname of
two candidates for the same position may, in appropriate cases,
be counted in favor of the bona fide candidate and not considered
stray, even if the other candidates was declared a nuisance
candidate by final judgment only after the elections.
* The prohibition against nuisance candidates is aimed precisely at
preventing uncertainty and confusion in ascertaining the true will of
the electorate.
 67
Political Law Updates
- Petition to deny due course or to cancel a COC:
▪ Sec. 78, BP 881, a verified petition may be filed exclusively on the ground
that any material representation contained in the certificate as required
under Sec. 74 is false. The petition may be filed not later than 25 days
from the time of the filing of the COC and shall be decided, after due
notice and hearing, not later than 15 days before the election.
➢ The representation in the contents of the COC must refer to material
matters in order to justify the cancellation of the COC. Material
representation under the OEC refers to qualifications for elective
office, residency, age, citizenship as provided in the LGC, coupled
with a showing that there was an intent to deceive the electorate.
* The candidate’s nickname does not pertain to his eligibility or
qualification for office, and cannot be considered a material
misrepresentation.
* The false representation must pertain to a material fact, not to a
mere innocuous mistake.
* The petition treats the person as not candidate and COC he filed is
treated as never been filed.
* A person disqualified under Sec. 78 on the ground false
representation on a material fact would make the votes for such
candidate null and void, and deemed stray, because the person is
considered not to have been a candidate at all.
➢ Sec. 78, a petition to deny due course or to cancel a COC may be
distinguished from Sec. 253, a petition for quo warranto is as follows:
Sec. 78 petition is filed before proclamation, while Sec. 253 petition
is filed after proclamation of the winning candidate. ***
▪ Sec. 68, BP 881, it is a petition for disqualification case based on any
of the grounds enumerated, such as vote-buying, terrorism,
overspending, etc.
➢ A petition for disqualification cannot be treated as a petition for quo
warranto, as the former is unquestionably premature.
➢ If the disqualification is based on the grounds mentioned in Sec. 68,
the person is still considered technically to have been a candidate,
although proscribed to continue as such only because of supervening
infractions which do not deny his statutory eligibility.
➢ Sec. 68 petition technically consider the person as candidate but
prohibits the candidate to continue
- The effect of disqualification under Sec. 6, RA 6646, the candidate who
has been declared by final judgment to be disqualified shall not be voted
for, and the votes cast for him shall not be counted. If, for any reason a
candidate is not declared by final judgment before the election to be
disqualified and he is voted for and receives the winning number of votes
in such election, the Court or Commission shall continue with the trial and
hearing of the action, inquiry or protest and, upon motion of the complaint
or any intervenor, may during the pendency thereof order the suspension
of the proclamation of such candidate whenever the evidence of his guilt is
strong.
Campaign, Election Propaganda; Contributions and Expenses
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
Election campaign or partisan political activity refers to an act designed to
promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate o candidates to public
office.
- Public expressions or opinions or discussions of probable issues in a
forthcoming election or on attributes of or criticisms against probable
candidates proposed to be nominated in a forthcoming political party
convention shall not be construed as party of any election campaign or
partisan political activity.
- It shall be unlawful for any person or any party to engage in election
campaign or partisan political activity except during the campaign period.
▪ The SC enumerated the elements of the offense, as follows: 1) a person
engages in election campaign or partisan political activity as defined in
Sec. 79, BP 881, 2) the act is designated to promote the election or defeat
of a particular candidate, 3) the act is done outside the campaign period.
- Lawful election propaganda.
▪ Sec. 4, RA 9006, requires that print advertisements donated to a
candidate shall not be published without the written acceptance of the
said candidate, which written acceptance shall be attached to the
advertising contract and submitted to the Comelec.
▪ The SC upheld the validity of the Comelec resolution that all propaganda
materials, including advertisements on print, in radio, or on television,
showing the image or mentioning the name of a person who, subsequent
to the placement or display thereof, becomes a candidate for public office,
be immediately removed, otherwise this shall be presumed as premature
campaigning in violation of the provisions of BP 881.
Election Protest
- Requisites: 1) must be filed by a candidate who has filed a certificate of
candidacy and has been voted upon for the same office, 2) on grounds pf
fraud, terrorism, irregularities or illegal acts committed during and after the
casting and counting of votes, and 3) within 10 days from proclamation of
the results of the election.
▪ The purpose of an election protest is to ascertain whether the candidate
proclaimed by the board of canvassers is the true and lawful choice of
the electorate.
➢ The protestant ordinarily prays that the official count as reflected in
the election returns be set aside in favor of a revision and recount
of the ballots, the results of which should be made to prevail over
those reflected in the returns pursuant to the doctrine that in an
election contest where what is involved is the number of votes of
each candidate, the best and most conclusive evidence are the
ballots.
➢ It has been held that before the ballots found in a box can be used to
set aside the returns, the court must be sure that it has before it the
same ballots deposited by the voters.
➢ When the ballots are unavailable or cannot be produced, then
recourse can be made to untampered and unaltered election returns
or other election documents as evidence.
* In automated elections, the picture images of the ballots, as
scanned and recorded by the PCOS, are likewise official ballots
that faithfully capture in electronic form the votes cast by the voter.
 68
Political Law Updates
* The SC held that ballot images in the compact flash (CF) cards,
as well as the printouts of such images, are the functional
equivalent of the official ballots filled up by the voters, and may
be used in an election protest. Both are original documents and
carry the same evidentiary weigh as the official physical ballot.
▪ The filing of an election protest or quo warranto precludes the
subsequent filing of a pre-proclamation controversy or amounts to an
abandonment of one earlier filed.
Exceptions: 1) the Board of Canvassers was improperly constituted, 2)
Quo warranto is not the proper remedy, 3) what was filed was not really
an election protest or quo warranto but a petition to annul proclamation,
4) the filing of an election contest was expressly made without prejudice
to the pre-proclamation controversy or was made ad cautelam or 5) the
proclamation was null and void.
▪ The period for filing an election protest is suspended by the pendency of
a pre-proclamation contest.
▪ The death of the protestant does not extinguish an election protest.
▪ The SC said that if persons not real parties in the action could be allowed
to intervene, proceedings will be unnecessarily complicated, expensive
and interminable and this is not the policy of the law.
Quo Warranto
- Requisites: 1) filed by any registered voter in the constituency, 2) on
grounds of ineligibility or disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines, and
3) within 10 days from proclamation of the results.
- The distinctions between quo warranto in elective and appointive offices
in the following manner:
As to the issue involved. For elective office, the issue is the eligibility of
the officer elect; while for appointive office, the issue is the legality of the
appointment.
As to the effect if the petition is granted. For elective office, the votes for
the protestee is considered stray and the protestant who obtained the 2nd
highest number of votes would be proclaimed. For appointive office, the
determines who of the parties has the legal title to the office.
Local Government
Principle of Local Autonomy
- It means decentralization and administrative autonomy of LGUs
- It grants the local governments the power to streamline and reorganize
as to organizational structure and staffing pattern.
▪ The SC held that the streamlining of organization for a more efficient
system must pass the test of good faith
▪ The SC held that RH Law does not infringe upon the autonomy of local
government since it is a nationally-funded projects, facilities, programs
and services, unless a LGU is particularly designated as an
implementing agency and an LGU has no power over a program for
which funding has been provide by the national government under the
annual GAA. Likewise, LGUs are merely encouraged to provide RH
services and it is not mandatory; therefore, the RH does not amount to
an encroachment by the national government upon the autonomy
enjoyed by LGUs.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- Administrative autonomy may involve devolution of powers, but subject
to limitations like following national policies or standards, and those
provided by the Local Government Code, as the structuring of local
governments and the allocation of powers, responsibilities and resources
among the different local government units and local officials have been
placed by the Constitution in the hands of Congress.
- The exercise of local autonomy remains subject to the power of control by
Congress, and the power of general supervision by the president. **
▪ President or any of his alter egos, cannot interfere in local affairs as long
as the concerned LGU acts within the parameters of the law and the
Constitution. Any directive, otherwise, would violate the principle of
local autonomy and the doctrine of separation of powers of the
executive and the legislative departments in governing municipal
corporations.
➢ The President can only interfere in the affairs and activities of a LGU
if he finds that the latter had acted contrary to law.
➢ Any directive by the President or any of his alter egos seeking to
alter the wisdom of a law conforming judgment on local affairs of a
local government unit is a patent nullity, because it violates the
principles of local autonomy as well as the doctrine of separation
of powers of the executive and the legislative departments in
governing municipal corporations.
➢ The SC held that the Liga ng mga Barangay is not subject to control
by the Chief Executive or his alter ego. As the entity exercising
supervision over the Liga, the DILG’s authority is limited to seeing to
it that the rules are followed; it cannot lay down such rules itself, nor
does it have the discretion to modify or replace them. **
▪ The SC held that the basic relationship between the national legislature
and the LGUs has not been enfeebled by the new provisions in the
Constitution strengthening the policy of local autonomy. Without meaning
to detract from that policy, Congress retains control of the LGUs
although in a significantly reduced degree now than under the previous
Constitution. The power to create still includes the power to destroy.
Corporation
- An artificial being created by operation of law, having the right of succession
and the powers, attributes and properties expressly authorized by law or
incident to its existence.
- Classification of corporations according to purpose: 1) public is organized
for the government of a portion of the State, 2) private is formed for some
private purpose, benefit, air or end, 3) quasi-public is a private corporation
that renders public service or supplies public wants.
- Classification of public corporation: 1) quasi-corporation is created by
State for a narrow or limited purpose, and 2) municipal corporation is a
body politic and corporate constituted by the incorporation of the
inhabitants for the purpose of local government.
- Dual nature and functions: 1) public or government – it acts as agent of
the State for the government of the territory and the inhabitants, 2) private
or proprietary – it acts as an agent of the community in the administration
of local affairs. As such, it acts as a separate entity, for its own purposes,
and not as a subdivision of the State.
▪ The SC held that the Shari’a District Courts have no jurisdiction over
real actions where one of the parties to the controversy is a non-Muslim.
The Shari’a District Court is concurrent jurisdiction with civil courts over
real actions is applicable solely when both parties are Muslims. Where
one of the parties is non-Muslim, the action must be filed before the
regular courts.
 69
Political Law Updates
▪ The SC held that the Regional Governor of the ARMM has the power
to appoint officers in the region’s civil service. However, if there is no
regional law providing for the qualifications for the position at the time of
appointment, the appointee must satisfy the civil service eligibilities
required for the position in the national government to be appointed in a
permanent capacity.
▪ The SC held that the delegation granted by Congress to the ARMM to
create provinces and cities is unconstitutional, because the Congress
cannot validly delegate the ``legislative districts for the House
of Representatives, since the power to increase the allowable
membership in the House of Representatives and to reapportion
legislative districts, is vested exclusively in Congress. **
Creation, Conversion and Dissolution of LGUs:
- Substantial requirements:
1. Compliance with the economic viability of: 1) Income and land or, 2)
Income and population requirements:
▪ Incomes: minimum requirement 1) Municipality – P2.5M, 2) City –
P100M, 3) Highly Urbanized City – P50M, 4) Province – P20M
➢ The SC held that the Internal Revenue Allotments (IRA) should
be included in the computation of the average annual income of
the municipality for purposes of determining whether the
municipality may be validly converted into a city, but under RA
9009, it is specifically provided that for conversion to cities, the
municipality’s income should not include the IRA. ***
▪ Population: minimum requirement 1) Barangay – 2,000 inhabitants,
except in Metro Manila and other metropolitan political subdivisions
or in highly urbanized cities where the requirement is 5,000
inhabitants; 2) Municipality – 25,000; 3) City – 150,000; 4) Highly
Urbanized City – 200,000; 5) Province – 250,000.
▪ Land Area – it must be contiguous (adjoining / connecting), unless
it comprises two or more islands or separated by a LGU independent
of the others; properly identified by metes and bounds with technical
descriptions and sufficient to provide for such basic services and
facilities to meet the requirements of its populace. Area requirements
are: 1) Municipality – 50 sq. km.; 2) City – 100 sq. km.; and 3)
Province – 2000 sq. km.
➢ The compliance with the foregoing indicators shall be attested
to by the Department of Finance, National Statistics Office, and
Land Management Bureau of the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources.
➢ The SC held that the requirement that the territory of newly-
created LGUs be identified by metes and bounds is intended to
provide the means by which the area of the LGU may be
reasonably ascertained, as a tool in the establishment of the
LGU. As long as the territorial jurisdiction of the newly created
City may be reasonably ascertained by referring to common
boundaries with neighboring municipalities.
➢ The SC held that when the LGU to be created is a municipality,
city or province, and it consists of two of more islands, it is
exempt from the land area requirement.
2. Plebiscite by a majority votes cast in political units directly affected.
▪ The SC held that the conversion of a component city into highly
urbanized city, the registered voters of the entire province should
participate in the plebiscite, not just the residents of the concerned
city.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The SC held that the conversion from an independent component
city to a component city without the submitting it for plebiscite violates
Sec. 10 of the LGC. Likewise, the changes will result from the
downgrading of the LGU since it will be placed under the
administrative supervision of the provincial governor and such
ordinances will be reviewed by the Provincial Board of the Province.
▪ The SC held that a plebiscite for creating a new province would
include the participation of the residents of the mother province or
municipality in order to conform to the constitutional requirement.
- The power to increase the allowable membership in the HR and to
reapportion legislative districts is vested exclusively in congress.
- The Constitution does not require a plebiscite for the creation of a new
legislative district by a legislative reapportionment. It is required only for
the creation of new LGUs. ***
Division and Merger, Abolition of LGUs
- Division and merger of LGUs shall comply with the abovementioned
requirements provided that such division shall not reduce the income,
population or land area of the LGU(s) concerned to less than the minimum
requirements prescribed, provided further the income classification of the
original LGU(s) shall not below its current income classification to the
division.
• De facto municipal corporations; requisites: 1) valid law authorizing
incorporation; 2) attempt in good faith to organize under it; 3) colorable
compliance with the law; and, 4) assumption of corporate powers. LGCA
▪ The SC held declared Sec. 68, Revised Admin. Code as
unconstitutional which authorized the President to create municipalities
through Executive Order. With this declaration, municipalities created by
Executive Order could not claim to be de facto municipal corporation,
because there was no valid law authorizing incorporation.
▪ The SC held that no collateral attack shall lie an inquiry into the legal
existence of a municipal corporation is reserved to the State in a
proceeding for quo warranto or other direct proceeding.
▪ The SC held that when a municipality created by virtue of an executive
order and it has been existing for 16 years before the ruling in Pelaez v.
Auditor General was promulgated, and various governmental acts
throughout the years all indicate the State’s recognition and
acknowledgement of the existence of the municipal corporation, then
the municipal corporation should be considered as a regular, de jure
municipality. ***
General Powers and Attributes of LGUs
• General welfare clause – every LGU shall exercise powers expressly
granted by law, impliedly therefrom, inherently and necessary essential to
the promotion of the general welfare.
▪ Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government units shall
ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and
enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of
the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the
development of appropriate and self-reliant and technological
capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and
social justice, promote full employment among its residents, maintain
peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their
inhabitants.
▪ The general welfare clause is the Statutory grant of police power to LGUs.
▪ The differences between an ordinance and a resolution are the
following:
 70
Political Law Updates
1. As to nature. The ordinance is a law, while a resolution is a
declaration of sentiment or option of a law-making body on a specific
matter.
2. As to readings required by law. The ordinance required three
readings in order to be valid, while for a resolution does not require
the reading requirement, unless decided otherwise by a majority of
the members of the Sangguanian.
3. As to character. An ordinance possess a general and permanent
character, while a resolution is upon a specific matter of a temporary
nature.
➢ The SC held that the authority to be granted to the local chief
executive to enter into obligations binding on the LGU must be
made pursuant to a law or an ordinance. When made through a
mere resolution, it shall not confer any right to a person.
▪ Limitations: 1) exercisable only within territorial limits of the LGU, except
for protection of water supply, 2) equal protection clause, 3) due process
clause, 4) must not contrary to the Constitution and the laws.
➢ The SC held that the Sangguniang Bayan resolution ordering the
closure or the transfer of petitioner’s gasoline station was not a valid
exercise of the police power. The Court found that there was a failure
by the municipal officials to comply with due process clause.
➢ The SC held that the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority
(MMDA) does not have the power to declare a thing a nuisance, only
courts of law have such authority.
➢ A LGU may, in the exercise of police power under the general
welfare clause, order the closure of a bank for failure to secure the
appropriate mayor’s permit and business licenses.
➢ The SC held that the ordinance prohibiting the issuance of a
business permit to, and cancelling any business permit of any
establishment allowing its premises to be used as a casino, and the
ordinance prohibiting the operation of a casino, were declared invalid
for being contrary to PD 1869 (Charter of PAGCOR) which has the
character and forced of a statute.
➢ The Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA), not the
municipal government, which has the exclusive jurisdiction to issue
permits for the enjoyment of fishery privileges in Laguna de Bay, by
virtue of RA 4850, PD 813 and EO 927, because RA 7160 did not
repeal the charter of LLDA.
➢ The SC held that Municipality cannot grant exclusive fishing
privileges without prior public bidding and for a period of more than
5 years and violates Fisheries Law.
➢ The SC held that authority for the rule that the power to issue permits
to operate cockpits is vested in the Mayor, in line with the policy of
local autonomy.
➢ The SC held that the ordinance requiring owners of commercial
cemeteries to reserve 6% of their burial lots for burial grounds of
paupers was held invalid as it was not an exercise of the police
power, but of eminent domain. ***
➢ Zoning ordinance reclassifying residential into commercial or light
industries area is a valid exercise of the police power.
➢ A mayor cannot be compelled by mandamus to issue a business
permit, because the exercise of the same is a delegated police power
and, thus, discretionary in nature. **
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
- Requisites for ordinance(s) to be valid: 1) must not contravene the
constitution; 2) must not be unfair or oppressive; 3) must not be partial or
discriminatory; 4) must not prohibit, but may regulate trade; 5) Must not be
unreasonable; and 6) must be general in application and consistent with
public policy. CUP-RUG
- Limitations: 1) exercisable only within territorial limits of the LGU, 2) equal
protection clause 3) due process clause, 4) must not be contrary to law, 5)
only courts of law have the power to declare a thing a nuisance
- Procedure of approval of Ordinance. It shall be passed by the concerned
Sanggunian.
1. If the local chief executive approves the same, affixing his signature on
each and every page thereof.
2. If the local chief executive vetoes the same, and the veto is overridden
by 2/3 vote of all the members of the Sanggunian. The local chief
executive may veto the ordinance, only once, on the ground that the
ordinance is ultra vires, or that it is prejudicial to the public welfare.
The local chief executive may veto any particular item(s) of an
appropriation ordinance, an ordinance or resolution adopting a
development plan and public investment program, or an ordinance
directing the payment of money or creating liability.
The veto shall not affect the items which are not objected to. The
veto shall be communicated by the local chief executive to the
Sanggunian within 15 days in case of a province, or 10 days in case
of a city or municipality; otherwise, the ordinance shall be deemed
approved, as if he signed it.
▪ The SC held that the LGC imposes upon the City Mayor the duty to
enforce all laws and ordinances relative to the governance of the City.
As Chief executive of the City, he has the duty to enforce an
ordinance as long as it has not been repealed by the Sanggunian or
annulled by the Courts. He has no choice; it is his ministerial duty to
do.
▪ The Punong Barangay has no veto power.
- Procedure of the Review Power by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan:
1. Within 3 days after approval, the secretary of the Sangguniang
Panglungsod in component cities or Sangguniang Bayan shall forward
to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for review copies of approved
ordinances and resolutions approving the local development plans and
public investment programs formulated by the Local Development
Councils.
2. The Sanggunian Panlalawigan shall review the same within 30 days; if
it finds that the ordinance or resolution is beyond the power conferred
upon the Sangguniang Panglungsod or Sangguniang Bayan
concerned, it shall declare such ordinance or resolution invalid or in
part. If no action is taken within 30 days, the ordinance or resolution is
presumed consistent with law, and therefore, valid.
- The ordinance shall take effect after 10 days from the date a copy thereof
is posted in a bulletin board at the entrance of the Provincial Capitol, or
City, Municipal or Barangay Hall, and in at least two other conspicuous
places in the local government unit concerned.
▪ Ordinances with penal sanctions shall be published in a newspaper of
general circulation within the province where the local legislative body
concerned belongs.
- Tests to determine the validity of an ordinance:
 71
Political Law Updates
1. Formal test – 1) whether it was enacted within the corporate powers
of the LGU and 2) whether it was passed in accordance with the
procedure prescribed by law
2. Substantive test – involving inherent merit, like the conformity of the
ordinance to the Constitution and Statutes, as well as with the
requirements of fairness and reason, and its consistency with public
policy.
▪ The immobilization of illegally parked vehicles by clamping their
tires was deemed necessary because the transgressors were not
around at the time of apprehension. Under such circumstances,
notice and hearing would be superfluous.
▪ Subdivision streets belong to the owner of the subdivision until
donated to the government or until expropriated upon the payment
of just compensation.
▪ The only instance when the local government unit may choose not to
absorb national government agency personnel is when absorption is
not administratively viable, meaning it would result in duplication of
functions, in which case the national agency personnel shall be
retained by the national government.
▪ The LGC did not fully devolve (transfer / delegate) the enforcement
of the small-scale mining law to the provincial government, as its
enforcement is subject to the supervision, control and review of the
DENR, which is in charge, subject to law and higher authority, of
carrying out the State’s constitutional mandate to control and
supervise the exploration, development, utilization of the country’s
natural resources.
➢ The DENR Secretary has the power to review and, therefore,
decide the issue on the validity of the issuance of the Small-Scale
Mining Permits by the Provincial Governor, as recommended by
the Provincial Mining Regulatory Board.
▪ The SC held declared that settling the rate of additional levy for the
special education fund at less than 1% is within the taxing power of
local government units, consistent with the guiding constitutional
principle of local autonomy.
▪ The SC held that the exercise by local governments of the power to
tax is ordained by the present Constitution, only guidelines and
limitations that may be established by Congress can define and limit
such power of local governments.
▪ The SC held that Sec. of Justice to review the constitutionality or
legality of a tax ordinance and, if warranted, to revoke it on either or
both grounds is valid, and does not confer the power of control over
the LGUs in the Sec. of Justice, as even if the latter can set aside a
tax ordinance, he cannot substitute his own judgment for that of the
LGU.
▪ The SC held that an ordinance passed by the Sanggunian Bayan
(SB) cannot be declared invalid by the Sangguanian Panglungsod
(SP), unless the said ordinance is beyond the power of the SB.
Eminent Domain
- A LGU may, through its chief executive and acting pursuant to an
ordinance, exercise the power of eminent domain for public use, or
purpose, or welfare for the benefit of the poor and the landless, upon
payment of just compensation, pursuant to the provisions of the
Constitution and pertinent laws.
▪ The power of eminent domain may not be exercised unless a valid and
definite offer has been previously made to the owner and such offer was
not accepted.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ The LGU may immediately take possession of the property upon the filing
of the expropriation proceedings and upon making a deposit with the
proper court of at least 15% of the FMV of the property based on the
current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated.
▪ The amount to be paid for the expropriated property shall be determined
by the proper court, based on the FMV at the time of the taking of
property.
- Limitations: 1) exercised only by the Local Chief Executive, acting
pursuant to a valid ordinance, 2) for public use or purpose or welfare, for
the benefit of the poor and the landless, 3) only after a valid and definite
offer had been made to, and not accepted by, the owner. LOPO
- The SC held that Sanggunian Panlalawigan cannot validly disapprove the
resolution of the municipality expropriating a parcel of land for the
establishment of a government center. The power of eminent domain is
explicitly granted to the municipal under the LGC.
- The distinction of conversion from reclassification is as follows:
As to nature. Conversion is the act of changing the current use of a piece
of agricultural land into some other use as approved by the DAR, while
reclassification is the act of specifying how agricultural land shall be
utilized for non-agricultural uses, such as residential, industrial and
commercial, as embodied in the land use plan, subject to the requirements
and procedure for land use conversion.
▪ The mere reclassification of an agricultural land does not automatically
allow a land owner to change its use. He has to undergo the process of
conversion before he is permitted to use the agricultural land for other
purposes.
▪ The SC held that requiring prior DAR clearance for land re-classification
does not violate the principle of local autonomy. Sec. 20, RA 7160
provides that nothing in this section shall be construed as repealing or
modifying in any manner the provisions of RA 6657. Thus, the authority
of DAR is recognized by the Local Government Code.
Corporate Powers
- LGUs shall enjoy full autonomy in the exercise of their proprietary functions
and in the management of their economic enterprises, subject to limitations
provided in the Code and other applicable laws.
- The corporate powers of the LGUs:
1. To have continuous succession in its corporate name.
2. To sue and be sued – the rule us that suit is commence by the Local
Executive, upon authority of the Sanggunian, except when the City
Councilors, by themselves and as representatives of or on behalf of the
City, bring the action to prevent unlawful disbursement of city funds.
▪ Only the Provincial or City Fiscal or the Municipal Attorney can
represent a province, city or municipality. The LGU’s authority to
employ a private lawyer is limited to situation where the Provincial
Fiscal is disqualified to represent it, and the fact of disqualification
must appear on record.
▪ The SC held that OSG cannot be compelled to represent a
municipality in a lawsuit.
3. To have and use a corporate seal.
4. To acquire and convey real or personal property.
 72
Political Law Updates
▪ The LGU may alienate only patrimonial property, upon proper
authority.
▪ Town Plazas are properties of public dominion; they may be
occupied temporarily, but only for the duration of an emergency.
▪ A public plaza is beyond the commerce of man, and it cannot be
the subject of lease or other contractual undertaking. And, even
assuming the existence of a valid lease of the public plaza or part
thereof, the municipal resolution effectively terminated the
agreement, for it is settled that the police power cannot be
surrendered or bargained away through the medium of a contract.
▪ Public streets or thoroughfares are property for public use,
outside the commerce of man, may not be the subject of lease or
other contracts. ***
▪ PD 957, as amended by PD 1216, mandates that open spaces in a
subdivision shall be donated to the LGU where the subdivision is
situated. The decree does not prohibit the imposition of the conditions
on the donation provided that the conditions are not contrary to law,
morals, good customs, public order or public policy, although it
prohibits any construction to be made on the minimum area required
for an open space in a subdivision. ***
- Requisites of valid municipal contract:
1. The LGU has the express, implied or inherent power to enter into the
particular contract;
2. The contract is entered into by the proper department, board,
committee, officer or agent. Unless, otherwise, provided by the Code,
no contract may be entered into by the local chief executive on behalf
of the local government unit without prior authorization by the
Sanggunian concerned.
▪ The municipal mayor is required to secure the prior authorization of
the Sanggunian Bayan before entering into a contract on behalf of
the municipality.
3. The contract must comply with certain substantive requirements; when
the expenditure of public fund is to be made, there must be an actual
appropriation and a certificate of availability of funds.
4. The contract must comply with the formal requirements of written
contracts.
▪ The SC held that there is no provision in the law that prohibits the city
mayor from entering into contracts for the public welfare unless and
until there is a prior authority from the city council.
▪ The City Mayor has the authority to sign, on behalf of the City, a
Lease Contract over market stall and the contract is not invalidated
by the failure of the mayor to appear before the notary public.
▪ A municipal zoning ordinance, as a police measure, prevails over
the non-impairment clause. **
▪ Breach of contractual obligations by the City of Manila renders the
City liable for damages pursuant to the principle of respondeat
superior.
Ultra Vires Contracts arises when a contract is entered into without
compliance with the 1st and 3rd requisites, the same is ultra vires and is
null and void. Such cannot be ratified or validated.
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
▪ Ratification of defective municipal contracts is possible only when
there is non-compliance with the 2nd and / or the 4th requirements.
Ratification may either be express or implied.
• Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability applies when the LGU is obligated
upon an implied contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefit
accepted or appropriated by it.
Municipal Liability,
- LGUs and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to
persons or damages to property.
- The LGU is liable in damages for death or injuries suffered by reason of
the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings and
other public works.
▪ The city is liable for death or injuries due to defective roads attaches even
if the road does not belong to the LGU, as long as the city exercises
control or supervision over said road.
- If the LGU: 1) engaged in governmental functions, it is not liable. 2)
Engaged in proprietary functions, it is liable.
▪ The SC held that the municipality was not held liable for torts committed
by a regular employee, even if the dump truck used belonged to the
municipality, inasmuch as the employee was discharging governmental
functions / public works.
▪ The SC held that operation of a public cemetery is a proprietary function
of the City of Manila. The City is liable for the tortious acts of its
employees, under the principle of respondeat superior.
▪ A municipal corporation, like an ordinary person, is liable on a contract it
enters into, provided that the contract is intra vires.
▪ Doctrine of estoppel does not apply against the municipal corporation.
▪ Doctrine of implied municipal liability applies when a municipality
become obligated upon an implied contract to pay a reasonable value
of the benefits accepted or appropriated by it as to which it has the
general power to contract.
➢ The doctrine applies to all cases where money or other property of a
party is received under such circumstances that the general law,
independent of an express contract, implies an obligation to do
justice with respect to the same.
Local Officials
Liability of public officers (PO):
- As a rule, a PO is not liable for injuries sustained by another as a
consequence of official acts done within the scope of his official authority
except as otherwise provided by law.
▪ A PO shall not be civilly liable for act done in the performance of his official
duties, unless there is a clear showing of bad faith, malice or negligence.
▪ No subordinate officer or employee shall be civilly liable for acts done by
him in good faith in the performance of his duties. However, he shall be
liable for willful or negligent acts done by him which are contrary to law,
morals, public policy and good customs even if he acted under orders or
instructions of his superior.
▪ A PO shall be personally liable on the contracts he enters into if he acted
without, or exceeded his authority.
 73
Political Law Updates

Three-term limit
▪ The temporary inability of an elective official to exercise his functions due
3-Term Limit Rule to preventive suspension is not an interruption of his term, because it
Rule: did not involve loss of title to the office.

1. He must have been elected in the same position for the 3 ▪ If a candidate was proclaimed for three consecutive terms but did not
consecutive terms; and, serve it in full because of loss in an election protest he is not disqualified.
2. He must have completely served the 3 consecutive terms.
Rules on Succession
Note:
- A permanent vacancy arises when an elective local official fills a higher
- Voluntary severance from the office – count the term. vacant office, refuses to assume office, fails to qualify, dies, is removed
from office, voluntarily resigns, or is permanently incapacitated to
▪ Removal / suspension / resignation discharge the functions of his office. DRA QVI

- Involuntary severance from the office – do not count the term. Rules on succession
Appointing Vacant position in the Sanggunian
Cases 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Validity authority
I E – r/s/r E E E X President or A member of the Sanggunian Panlalawigan /
Ii E – rs E E E Y Executive Panglungsod of highly urbanized city and
Iii E – re E E E Y Secretary independent component city
Iv E E-v E E X Governor A member of the Sanggunian Panglungsod of
V E E E– E X component city and the Sanggunian Bayan
ra City or municipal Sanggunian Barangay (SB) upon recommendation
VI E-C E E E X mayor of the SB concerned.

Note: - In case of vacancy in the Sanggunian concerned, only the nominee of the
E – elected political party under which the Sanggunian Member concerned had been
R / s / r – resign / suspended / removed elected and whose elevation to the position next high in rank created the
Rs – rule on succession last vacancy in the Sanggunian shall be appointed.
V – void / disqualified
Re – recall ▪ A nomination and a certificate of membership of the appointee from
Ra – reapportioned legislative district / LGU the highest official of the political party concerned are conditions sine qua
C – Conversion non, and any appointment without such nomination and certificate shall
X – not valid be null and void and shall be a ground for administrative action against
Y – valid the official concerned.

- The 3-term limit refers to the terms for which the official concerned was ▪ In case Sanggunian member is elevated to the position of vice mayor and
elected and has fully served the terms. such elevation creates vacancy, the party-list of the sanggunian member
elevated to the position shall nominate for the replacement of permanent
▪ The SC held that the three-term limit for elective local government occurs. ***
officials to apply, two conditions must concur: 1) the official concerned
has been elected for three consecutive terms in the same LGU, and 2) ▪ In case of vacancy in the Sanggunian Bayan and the Sanggunian
he has served three consecutive terms. ES *** member who ceased from office did not belong to any political party, the
replacement must be 1) recommended by the Sangguniang Bayan and
▪ The involuntary severance from office for any length of time interrupts 2) appointed by the Governor. **
continuity of service and prevents the service before and after the
interruption from being joined together to form continuous service or ▪ The appointment to any vacancy caused by the cessation from office of
consecutive terms. a member of the Sangguniang Barangay must be made by the mayor
upon recommendation of the Sanggunian.
▪ Recall election is not covered by the prohibition as the recall election is
no longer immediate re-election after three consecutive terms and the - Sec. 45, LGC provides that in case of a permanent vacancy in the
intervening period constitutes an involuntary interruption in the continuity Sanggunian Bayan created by the cessation in office of a member who
of service. ** does not belong to any political party, the Governor shall appoint a qualified
person recommended by the Sangguniang Bayan. **
- The SC held that in computing the three term limit, only the term for which
the local official was elected should be considered. The second sentence Public officers
of Sec. 8, Art. X of the Constitution states that the voluntary renunciation Public office Multiple office Add’l
shall not be considered as interruption of the continuity of the service for compensation
the full term for which he was elected. I Constitutional Strictly prohibited None
commission
▪ A mayor who served three consecutive terms and did not seek a fourth Ii Cabinet Allowed if in ex officio None
term but ran and won in the recall election was not an immediate members capacity when it is 1)
reelection. allowed by law and 2)
required by the primary
▪ If a municipality in which a mayor served for three consecutive was fuctions of office
converted to a city, he cannot run as City Mayor in the first election. For Iii Others Same above Allowance;
purposes of applying the three term limit, the office of the municipal mayor honoraria; per
should not be considered as different from that of the City Mayor. diem only

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
 74
Political Law Updates
Settlement of Boundary Dispute
- Boundary disputes between and among the LGUs shall, as much as
possible, be settled amicably. The rules on settlement of disputes are:
1. Involving two or more barangays in the same City or Municipality –
referred to the Sangguniang Panglungsod or Sangguniang Bayan.
2. Involving two or more municipalities in the same Province – referred to
the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.
▪ The Sanggunian Panlalawigan is vested with the function, not only
to bring the contending parties together and intervening or assisting
in the amicable settlement of the dispute, but with the original
jurisdiction to hear and decide the case in accordance with the
procedure laid down in the law and its implementing rules and
regulations.
▪ The RTC can decide the case only on appeal, should any party
aggrieved by the decision of the Sangguanian elevate the same.
3. Involving Municipalities or component cities in different provinces –
jointly referred to the Sanggunians of the Provinces concerned.
4. Involving a component city or municipality on the one hand and a highly
urbanized city on the other, or two or more highly urbanized cities –
jointly referred to the respective Sanggunians of the parties.
▪ The SC held that Commission on the Settlement of Land
Problems (COSLAP) is without jurisdiction over the boundary
dispute between the City and the Municipality involving a
controversy over a housing area administered by the NHA.
- In the event the Sanggunian fails to effect a settlement within 60 days
from the date the dispute was referred to it, it shall issue a certification to
this effect. The dispute shall then be formally tried by the Sanggunian
concerned which shall decide the issue within 60 days from the date of
certification.
- Within the time and manner prescribed by the ROC, any party may elevate
the decision of the Sanggunian concerned to the proper RTC having
jurisdiction over the are in dispute which shall decide the appeal within 1
year from the filing thereof.
- The boundaries must be clear for they define the limits of the territorial
jurisdiction of the local government unit.
Law on Public Officers
Qualifications:
- The applicant must possess mandatory requirements as provided by law:
age, citizenship, residence and educational (ACRE) and eligibility
requirement.
▪ National elected and constitutional positions – natural born citizen; local
elected and appointive positions – both natural and naturalized positions.
➢ Philippine citizenship is required in order to ensure that no alien shall
govern the Filipino people.
▪ Change of residence requires an actual and deliberate abandonment,
because one cannot have two legal residences at the same time; where
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
there is no such proof of abandonment, the residence of origin should be
deemed to continue.
Disqualification:
- Loss of any of the qualifications during incumbency will be a ground for
termination.
Other office:
- When another office is held by a PO in an ex officio capacity, as provided
by law and as required by the primary functions of his office, there is no
violation, because such other office does not comprise “any other position.
▪ An ex officio position is part of the principal office, but such official is not
entitled to receive additional compensation for his services in the said
position because his services are already paid for and covered by the
compensation attached to his principal office.
De facto office is defined as one who has the reputation of being the officer
that he assumes to be, and yet is not a good officer in point of law.
- Elements of a de facto office: 1) a validly existing public office; 2) actual
physical possession of said office; 3) color of title to the office, 4) under a
known appointment or election pursuant to an unconstitutional law, before
the law is declared unconstitutional.
- As a rule, the rightful incumbent or a public office may recover from an officer
de facto the salary received by the latter during the time of his wrongful
tenure, even though he entered into the office in good faith and under the
color of title.
▪ However, where there is no de jure PO, the officer de facto who in good
faith has had possession of the office and has discharged the duties
pertaining thereto, is legally entitled to the emoluments of the office, and
may, in an appropriate action, recover the salary and other compensation
attached to the office.
Acts of a de facto officer:
- The acts of such officer insofar they affect the public are valid, binding and
with full legal effect.
▪ It is intended to protect the public and individuals who get involved in the
official acts of persons discharging the duties of a public office.
- If the official acts benefited the PO, such act is invalid.
Employment status:
1. Permanent appointment is extended to a person possessing the requisite
qualifications, including the eligibility required, for the position, and thus
protected by the constitutional guaranty of security of tenure.
2. Temporary appointment is an acting appointment; it is extended to one
who may not possess the requisite qualifications or eligibility required by
law for the position, and revocable at will, without necessity of just cause
or a valid investigation.
- Acquisition of an appropriate CS eligibility by a temporary appointee will
not ipso facto convert the temporary appointment into permanent one; a
new appointment is necessary.
-
 75
Political Law Updates
As uniformly held by dole and CSC, a contractual appointment is of the
same nature as a temporary appointment. Thus, when the contract was
not renewed, there was no dismissal but an expiration of term.
- A temporary appointment is for a fixed period, the appointment may be
revoked only at the expiration of the period, or if revocation is made
before such expiration, the same has to be for a valid and just cause.
Elements of a valid appointment:
1. Authority to appoint and evidence of the exercise of the authority;
2. Transmittal of the appointment paper and evidence of the transmittal;
3. A vacant position at the time of appointment; and,
4. Receipt of the appointment paper and acceptance of the appointment by
the appointee who possess all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications.
Steps in the appointing process:
- For regular appointments:
1. Nomination by the president;
2. Confirmation by the commission on appointments;
3. Issuance of the commission;
4. Acceptance by the appointee.
▪ In case of ad interim appointments – the nomination, issuance of the
appointment and acceptance by the appointee precede the confirmation
by the commission on appointment.
- For appointments which do not require confirmation: 1) appointment by the
appointing authority; 2) Issuance of the commission; and, 3) Acceptance by
the appointee.
- For appointment to the career service of the CS, attestation by the CSC is
required.
▪ The CSC is authorized to check if the appointee 1) possess the
qualifications and, 2) appropriate eligibility.
▪ Its functions and authority are limited to approving or reviewing
appointments to determine their compliance with the Civil Service Law.
▪ It does not have the power to terminate employment or to drop members
from the rolls.
- Appointment is essentially a discretionary power and must be performed by
the officer in whom it is vested according to his best lights, the only condition
being that the appointee should possess the minimum qualification
requirements prescribed by law for the position.
▪ The CSC cannot revoke the appointment on the ground that another
employee is better qualified, for that will constitute an encroachment on the
discretion vested in the appointing authority.
▪ Appointment is generally a political question so long as the appointee
fulfills the minimum qualification requirements prescribed by the law for the
position.
▪ Appointing authority exercised the right of choice, freely exercising its best
judgement, in determining the best qualified applicants from those who had
the necessary qualifications and eligibilities.
- Principle of holdover means that in the absence of an express or implied
constitutional or statutory provision to the contrary, an officer is entitled to
ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB
Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University
hold his office until his successor is appointed or chosen and has been
qualified.
- Next-in-Rank Rule applies when a vacancy occurs, employees next-in-rank
should be considered for promotion.
▪ One who is next-in-rank is given preferential consideration for promotion;
but it does not necessarily follow that he alone and no one else can be
appointed.
▪ To successfully protest the issuance of an appointment, the employee next
in rank prove his or her status as a qualified next-in-rank; otherwise, the
protest shall be dismissed.
Transfer:
- Unconsented transfer violates security of tenure – a transfer that results in
promotion or demotion, advancement or reduction, or a transfer that aims to
lure the employee away from his permanent position, cannot be done without
the employee’s consent for that would constitute removal from the office.
- Career executive service personnel can be shifted from one office to another
without violating their right to security of tenure, because their status and
salaries are based on their ranks and not on the positions to which they are
assigned.
- Secondment is a movement of an employee from one department or agency
to another which is temporary in nature; it may or may not require the
issuance of an appointment and may involve an increase in compensation
and benefits.
- Reassignment is a movement of an employee from one organizational unit
to another in the same department or agency, which does not involve a
reduction in rank, status, or salary.
▪ It is management prerogative vested in CSC and, for that matter, in any
department or agency embraced in the CSC, it does not constitute removal
without cause.
▪ Lack of specific duration of the reassignment was tantamount to a floating
assignment, thus diminution in rank or status.
Removal / Suspension:
- As a rule, no officer or employee in the civil service shall be removed or
suspended, except for cause as provided by law.
▪ Demotion is a tantamount to unlawful removal if no cause is shown for it or
if it is not part of any disciplinary action.
▪ Reassignment made in the exigency out of service is not a demotion of
rank.
▪ Uncontested transfer resulting in demotion in rank or salary is tantamount
to removal without just cause.
• Doctrine of necessary implication – all powers necessary for the effective
exercise of the express powers are deemed impliedly granted.
• Nepotism – all appointments made in favor of a relative of the appointing or
recommending authority, or the chief of the bureau or office, or of the persons
exercising immediate supervision over him, are prohibited.
Preventive suspension, an employee who is under PS pending appeal
investigation is not entitled to compensation because such suspension is not a
 76
Political Law Updates

penalty but only a means of enabling the disciplining authority to conduct an

unhampered investigation.

ATTY. HENRY S. PAYTE, JR., REA, REB

Lecturer, Ateneo de Naga University