PoliticalLaw BarQA 2009-2017

POLITICAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. The Philippine Constitution
A. Constitution: definition, nature and concepts 1

B. Parts 2
C. Amendments and revisions 2
D. Self-executing and non-self-executing provisions 6
E. General provisions 6
II. General Considerations
A. National territory 6
1. Archipelagic doctrine
B. State immunity 10
C. General principles and state policies 14
D. Separation of powers 19
E. Checks and balances 20
F. Delegation of powers 21
G. Forms of government 22
III. Legislative Department
A. Who may exercise legislative power 23

1. Congress
2. Regional/Local legislative power
3. People’s initiative on statutes
a) Initiative and referendum
4. The President under a martial law rule or in a revolutionary government
B. Houses of Congress 26
1. Senate
2. House of Representatives
a) District representatives and questions of apportionment
b) Party-list system
C. Legislative privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications 30
D. Quorum and voting majorities 32
E. Discipline of members 32
F. Electoral tribunals and the Commission on Appointments 32
1. Nature
2. Powers
G. Powers of Congress 33
1. Legislative
a) Legislative inquiries and the oversight functions
b) Bicameral conference committee
c) Limitations on legislative power
(i) Limitations on revenue, appropriations and tariff
measures
(ii) Presidential veto and Congressional override
2. Non-legislative
a) Informing function
b) Power of impeachment
c) Other non-legislative powers
IV. Executive Department
A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications 39

1. Presidential immunity
2. Presidential privilege
B. Powers 40
1. Executive and administrative powers in general 40
2. Power of appointment 41
a) In general
b) Commission on Appointments confirmation
c) Midnight appointments
d) Power of removal
3. Power of control and supervision 44
a) Doctrine of qualified political agency
b) Executive departments and offices
c) Local government units
4. Military powers 47
5. Pardoning power48
a) Nature and limitations
b) Forms of executive clemency
6. Diplomatic power 49
7. Powers relative to appropriation measures 53
8. Delegated powers 55
9. Veto powers 55
10. Residual powers 55
11. Executive privilege 56
C. Rules of Succession
V. Judicial Department
A. Concepts 57
1. Judicial power 57
2. Judicial review 59
a) Operative fact doctrine
b) Moot questions
c) Political question doctrine
B. Safeguards of Judicial independence 62
C. Judicial restraint 63
D. Appointments to the Judiciary 63
E. Supreme Court 64
1. En banc and division cases
2. Procedural rule-making
3. Administrative supervision over lower courts
4. Original and appellate jurisdiction
F. Judicial privilege
VI. Constitutional Commissions
A. Constitutional safeguards to ensure independence of commissions 70

B. Powers and functions of each commission 72
C. Prohibited offices and interests 72
D. Jurisdiction of each constitutional commission 75
E. Review of final orders, resolutions and decisions 75
1. Rendered in the exercise of quasi-judicial functions
2. Rendered in the exercise of administrative functions
VII. Bill of Rights
A. Fundamental powers of the state (police power, eminent domain, taxation)

75
1.Concept, application and limits
2.Requisites for valid exercise
3.Similarities and differences
4.Delegation
B. Private acts and the Bill of Rights 78
C. Due process – the rights to life, liberty & property 78
1. Relativity of due process
2. Procedural and substantive due process
3. Constitutional and statutory due process
4. Hierarchy of rights
5. Judicial standards of review
6. Void-for-vagueness doctrine
D. Equal protection 83
1. Concept
2. Requisites for valid classification
3. Standards of judicial review
a) Rational Basis Test
b) Strict Scrutiny Test
c) Intermediate Scrutiny Test
E. Searches and seizures 85
1. Concept
2. Warrant requirement
a) Requisites
3. Warrantless searches
4. Warrantless arrests
5. Administrative arrests
6. Drug, alcohol and blood tests
F. Privacy of communications and correspondence 92
1. Private and public communications
2. Intrusion, when allowed
3. Writ of habeas data
G. Freedom of expression 93
1. Concept and scope
a) Prior restraint (censorship)
b) Subsequent punishment
2. Content-based and content-neutral regulations
a) Tests
b) Applications
3. Facial challenges and the overbreadth doctrine
4. Tests
5. State regulation of different types of mass media
6. Commercial speech
7. Private vs. government speech
8. Heckler’s veto
H. Freedom of religion 101
1. Non-establishment clause
a) Concept and basis
b) Acts permitted and not permitted by the clause
c) Test
2. Free exercise clause
3. Tests
a) Clear and Present Danger Test
b) Compelling State Interest Test
c) Conscientious Objector Test
I. Liberty of abode and freedom of movement 106
1. Limitations
2. Right to travel
a) Watch-list and hold departure orders
3. Return to one’s country
J. Right to information 107
1. Limitations
2. Publication of laws and regulations
3. Access to court records
4. Right to information relative to:
a) Government contract negotiations
b) Diplomatic negotiations
K. Right of association 108
L. Eminent domain 108
1. Concept
2. Expansive concept of “public use”
3. Just compensation
a) Determination
b) Effect of delay
4. Abandonment of intended use and right of repurchase
5. Miscellaneous application
M. Contract clause 110
1. Contemporary application of the contract clause
N. Legal assistance and free access to courts 110
O. Rights of suspects 110
1. Availability
2. Requisites
3. Waiver
P. Rights of the accused 114
1. Criminal due process
2. Bail
3. Presumption of innocence
4. Right to be heard
5. Assistance of counsel
6. Right to be informed
7. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial
8. Right of confrontation
9. Compulsory process
10. Trials in absentia
Q. Writ of habeas corpus 119
R. Writs of amparo, habeas data, and kalikasan 119
S. Self-incrimination clause 121
1. Scope and coverage
a) Foreign laws
2. Application
3. Immunity statutes
T. Involuntary servitude and political prisoners 124
U. Excessive fines and cruel and inhuman punishments 124
V. Non-imprisonment for debts 125
W. Double jeopardy 125
1. Requisites
2. Motions for reconsideration and appeals
3. Dismissal with consent of accused
X. Ex post facto laws and bills of attainder 126
VIII. Citizenship
A. Who are Filipino citizens 126

B. Modes of acquiring citizenship 130
C. Naturalization and denaturalization 131
D. Dual citizenship and dual allegiance 131
E. Loss and re-acquisition of Philippine citizenship 132
F. Natural-born citizens and public office 134
IX. Law on Public Officers
A. General principles 134

B. Modes of acquiring title to public office 134
C. Modes and kinds of appointment 134
D. Eligibility and qualification requirements 135
E. Disabilities and inhibitions of public officers 135
F. Powers and duties of public officers 135
G. Rights of public officers 135
H. Liabilities of public officers 135
1. Preventive suspension and back salaries
2. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and back salaries
I. Immunity of public officers 135
J. De facto officers 139
K. Termination of official relation 141
L. The Civil Service 141
1. Scope
2. Appointments to the civil service
3. Personnel actions
M. Accountability of public officers 142
1. Impeachment
2. Ombudsman (Sections 5 to 14, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, in
relation to R.A. No. 6770, or otherwise known as "The
Ombudsman Act of 1989.")
a) Functions
b) Judicial review in administrative proceedings
c) Judicial review in penal proceedings
3. Sandiganbayan
4. Ill-gotten wealth
N. Term limits……………………………………………………………………....149
X. Administrative Law
A. General principles 150

B. Administrative agencies 150
1. Definition
2. Manner of creation
3. Kinds
C. Powers of administrative agencies 150
1. Quasi-legislative (rule-making) power
a) Kinds of administrative rules and regulations
b) Requisites for validity
2. Quasi-judicial (adjudicatory) power
a) Administrative due process
b) Administrative appeal and review
c) Administrative res judicata
3. Fact-finding, investigative, licensing and rate-fixing powers
D. Judicial recourse and review 153
1. Doctrine of primary administrative jurisdiction
2. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
3. Doctrine of finality of administrative action
XI. Election Law
A. Suffrage 155
B. Qualification and disqualification of voters 155
C. Registration of voters 155
D. Inclusion and exclusion proceedings 155
E. Political parties 155
1. Jurisdiction of the COMELEC over political parties
2. Registration
F. Candidacy 156
1. Qualifications of candidates
2. Filing of certificates of candidacy
a) Effect of filing
b) Substitution of candidates
c) Ministerial duty of COMELEC to receive certificate
d) Nuisance candidates
e) Petition to deny or cancel certificates of candidacy
f) Effect of disqualification
g) Withdrawal of candidates
G. Campaign 157
1. Premature campaigning
2. Prohibited contributions
3. Lawful and prohibited election propaganda
4. Limitations on expenses
5. Statement of contributions and expenses
H. Board of Election Inspectors and Board of Canvassers 158
1. Composition
2. Powers
I. Remedies and jurisdiction in election law 158
1. Petition not to give due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy
2. Petition for disqualification
3. Petition to declare failure of elections
4. Pre-proclamation controversy
5. Election protest
6. Quo warranto
J. Prosecution of election offenses 165
XII. Local Governments
A. Public corporations 165

1. Concept
a) Distinguished from government-owned or controlled
corporations
2. Classifications
a) Quasi-corporations
b) Municipal corporations
B. Municipal corporations 165
1. Elements
2. Nature and functions
3. Requisites for creation, conversion, division, merger or dissolution
C. Principles of local autonomy 168
D. Powers of local government units (LGUs) 169
1. Police power (general welfare clause) 170
2. Eminent domain 171
3. Taxing power 171
4. Closure and opening of roads 171
5. Legislative power 171
a) Requisites for valid ordinance
b) Local initiative and referendum
6. Corporate powers 171
a) To sue and be sued
b) To acquire and sell property
c) To enter into contracts
(i) Requisites
(ii) Ultra vires contracts
7. Liability of LGUs 172
8. Settlement of boundary disputes 172
9. Succession of elective officials172
10. Discipline of local officials 173
a) Elective officials
(i) Grounds
(ii) Jurisdiction
(iii) Preventive suspension
(iv) Removal
(v) Administrative appeal
(vi) Doctrine of condonation
b) Appointive officials
11. Recall 173
12. Term limits 173
XIII. National Economy and Patrimony

A. Regalian doctrine 175
B. Nationalist and citizenship requirement provisions 175
C. Exploration, development and utilization of natural resources 178
D. Franchises, authority and certificates for public utilities 178
E. Acquisition, ownership and transfer of public and private lands 178
F. Practice of professions 179
G. Organization and regulation of corporations, private and public 179
H. Monopolies, restraint of trade and unfair competition 179
XIV. Social Justice and Human Rights
A. Concept of social justice 179

B. Commission on Human Rights 179
XV. Education, Science, Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports
A. Academic freedom 180
XVI. Public International Law
A. Concepts 181
1. Obligations erga omnes
2. Jus cogens
3. Concept of ex aequo et bono
B. International and national law 187
C. Sources 187
D. Subjects 187
1. States
2. International organizations
3. Individuals
E. Diplomatic and consular law 188
F. Treaties 189
G. Nationality and statelessness 189
1. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
H. State responsibility 191
1. Doctrine of state responsibility
I. Jurisdiction of States 193
1. Territoriality principle
2. Nationality principle and statelessness
3. Protective principle
4. Universality principle
5. Passive personality principle
6. Conflicts of jurisdiction
J. Treatment of aliens 194
1. Extradition
a) Fundamental principles
b) Procedure
c) Distinguished from deportation
K. International Human Rights Law 194
1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
3. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
L. International Humanitarian Law and neutrality 195
1. Categories of armed conflicts
a) International armed conflicts
b) Internal or non-international armed conflict
c) War of national liberation
2. Core international obligations of states in International Humanitarian
Law
3. Principles of International Humanitarian Law
a) Treatment of civilians
b) Prisoners of war
4. Law on neutrality
M. Law of the sea 196
1. Baselines
2. Archipelagic states
a) Straight archipelagic baselines
b) Archipelagic waters
c) Archipelagic sea lanes passage
3. Internal waters
4. Territorial sea
5. Exclusive economic zone
6. Continental shelf
a) Extended continental shelf
7. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
N. Madrid Protocol and the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial
Property
O. International environmental law
1. Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration
P. International economic law
POLITICAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
I. The Philippine Constitution
A. Constitution: definition, nature and concepts
Constitution is defined by Cooley as:

a. a body of statutory, administrative and political provisions by which the three
branches of government are defined;
b. a body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty
are habitually exercised;
c. a body of rules and edicts emanating from the rulings of courts and written
guidelines of the executive and the legislature by which government is governed;
d. a body of interpretations and rules by which the three branches of government are
judged for purposes of sovereign compliance with good corporate governance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b. Cooley, Constitutional Limitations, p. 4 (2012 BAR)
In Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc., 582 SCRA 254 (2009), the
Supreme Court declared as violative of the Equal Protection Clause the 5th
paragraph of §10 R.A. No. 8042 (Migrant Workers and Overseas
Filipinos Act of 1995) for discriminating against illegally dismissed OFWs
who still had more than a year to their contract compared to those who
only had less than a year remaining. The next year, Congress enacted R.A.
No 10222, an amendment to the Migrant Workers and Overseas
Filipinos Act, which practically reinstated the provision struck down in
Serrano.
Seamacho, an overseas seafarer who still had two years remaining on his
contract when he was illegally terminated, and who would only be entitled
to a maximum of six-month’s pay under the reinstated provision, engages
you as his counsel. How are you to argue that the new law is invalid insofar
as it brings back to the statute books a provision that has already been
struck down by the Court? (5%). (2014 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will argue that since Section 10 of Republic Act No. 8042 has already been
declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, its nullity cannot be cured by
reincorporation or reenactment of the same or a similar law or provision. Once a
law has been declared unconstitutional, it remains unconstitutional unless
circumstances have so changed as to warrant a reverse conclusion (Sameer
Overseas Placement Agency v. Cabiles, G.R. No. 170139, August 5, 2014).
Page 1 of 198
Political and Public International Law
Congressman Sugar Oll authored a bill called House Bill No, 0056 which
legalizes jueteng. When the Bill became law (RA 10156), Fr. Nosu Gal, a
priest, filed a petition seeking for the nullification of RA 10156 on th
ground that it is unconstitutional as it violates Section 13, Article II, of the
1987 Constitution which states that "The state recognizes the vital role of
the youth in nation-building and shall promote and protect their physical,
moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being". Fr. Gal filed the petition
as a concerned citizen and as taxpayer. Does Fr. Gal have locus standi?
(2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. No, because Fr. Gal has no personal and substantial interest that will be
prejudiced by the implementation of the law;
b. No, the law concerns neither citizens nor expenditure of public funds;
c. Yes, because the issue is of transcendental importance;
d. Yes, because as priest, Fr. Gal has special interest in the well-being of the youth.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) Basco Vs. Philippine Amusements And Gaming Represntatives, 415 Scra 44. It
Is Suggested That Either (A) Or (C) May Be Accepted As A Correct Answer
One advantage of a written Constitution is its (2011 BAR)

(A) reliability.
(B) permanence.
(C) flexibility.
(D) expediency.
B. Parts
The three essential parts of a Constitution are:

a. the bill of rights, governmental organization and functions, and method
of amendment;
b. the preamble, the bill of rights, and provisions on checks and
balances;
c. the national territory, the declaration of principles and state policies, and the
transitory provisions;
d. the executive department, the legislative department and the judiciary.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Nachura, Outline review in political Law, p, 3 (2012 BAR)
C. Amendments and revisions
The constitutional provision on initiative and referendum is not self-executory.
Page 2 of 198
This is so because it requires:
a. an implementing resolution from the COMELEC;
b. an implementing resolution from the Supreme Court;
c. an implementing legislation;
d. an implementing resolution from the party-list representative of the House
of Representatives.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. SECTION 32, ARTCLE IV OF CONSTITUTION (2012 BAR)
In an amendment to the constitution by "initiative and referendum", the

"initiative" phase is meant that the people propose the amendments.
There is a valid proposal when a proposition has received the approval
of:
a. at least 3% of the persons of majority age of each district, and 12% of the
registered voters of the region from proposal emanates;
b. at least 3% of the registered voters of each province and 12% of the total number
of registered voters nationwide;
c. at least 3% of the registered voters of each district and 12% of the total number
of registered voters nationwide;
d. more than 3% of the 3% of the registered voters of each district but less than
12% of the total number of registered voters nationwide.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. SECTION 2, ARTICLE XVII OF CONSTITUTION (2012 BAR)
With the passage of time, the members of the House of Representatives

increased with the creation of new legislative districts and the
corresponding adjustments in the number of party-list representatives. At a
time when the House membership was already 290, a great number of the
members decided that it was time to propose amendments to the
Constitution. The Senators, however, were cool to the idea. But the
members of the House insisted. They accordingly convened Congress into
a constituent assembly in spite of the opposition of the majority of the
members of the Senate. When the votes were counted, 275 members of the
House of Representatives approved the proposed amendments.
Only 10 Senators supported such proposals. The proponents now claim that
the proposals were validly made, since more than the required three-fourths
vote of Congress has been obtained. The 14 Senators who voted against
the proposals claim that the proposals needed not three-fourths vote of
the entire Congress but each house. Since the required number of votes
in the Senate was not obtained, then there could be no valid proposals, so
argued the Senators. Were the proposals validly adopted by Congress?
Page 3 of 198
(5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The proposal were not validly adopted, because the ten (10) Senators who
voted in favor of the proposed amendments constituted less than three-
fourths of all the Members of the Senate. Although Section 1, Article XVII of
the Constitution did not expressly provide that the Senate and the House
of Representatives must vote separately, when the Legislature consist of two (2)
houses, the determination of one house is to be submitted to the separate
determination of the other house iller v. Mardo, 2 SCRA 898 [1961]. (2014 BAR)
Constituent power refers to the authority (1%) (2014 BAR)
(A) of public officials to command respect

(B) given to Congress to enact police power measures
(C) to propose constitutional amendments or revisions
(D) of the people to take back the power entrusted to those in government
(E) of the President to call out the armed forces to suppress lawless violence
A priority thrust of the Administration is the change of the form of government

from unitary to federal. The change can be effected only through constitutional
amendment or revision.
(a) What are the methods of amending the Constitution? Explain briefly each
method. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Constitution may be amended or revised by the vote of at least three fourths of all
the Members of Congress, acting as a Constituent Assembly, by way of a proposal
(Article XVII, Sec. 10) of the 1987 Constitution).
Any amendment or revision under this provision shall be valid upon ratification by a
majority of 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 (Article XVII, Sec. 4
of the 1987 Constitution).
The Constitution may also be amended or revised by a Constitutional Convention.

Congress may, by the vote of at least two-thirds of all its members, call a Constitutional
Convention, or by a majority vote of all its Members subject to the electorate the calling
of a Constitutional Convention (Article XVII, Sec.3 of the 1987 Constitution). Any
amendment or revision under this provision shall be valid in the same manner as in
Article XVII, Sec. 1(1) of the 1987 Constitution.
Amendments to the Constitution may be directly proposed by the people through

initiative upon petition of at least 12% of the registered voters, and at least 3% of the
Page 4 of 198
registered voters in every legislative district must be represented (Article XVII, Sec. 2 of
the 1987 Constitution).
The people cannot propose revisions and may propose only amendments. The petition
must be signed by the required number of people, and the full text of the proposed
amendments must be embodied in the petition (Lambino v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos.
174153 & 174299, October 25, 2006, 503 SCRA 1650).
Any amendment under Article XVII, Sec. 2 of the 1987 Constitution, shall be valid when
ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than
sixty days nor later than ninety days after the certification by the Commission on
Elections of the sufficiency of the petition (Article XVII, Sec. 4 of the 1987 Constitution).
Jose Cruz and 20 others filed a petition with the COMELEC to hold a plebiscite
on their petition for initiative to amend the Constitution by shifting to a
unicameral parliamentary form of government. Assuming that the petition
has been signed by the required number of registered voters, will it
prosper? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, only Congress can exercise the power to amend the Constitution.
(B) Yes, the people can substantially amend the Constitution by direct action.
(C) Yes, provided Congress concurs in the amendment.
(D) No, since they seek, not an amendment, but a revision.
Cite at least three provisions of the Constitution that need to be amended or

revised to effect the change from unitary to federal, and briefly explain why? (3%)
(2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) Examples of provisions that need to be amended or revised to effect the change
from unitary to federal:
1. Article X, Sec. 3 must be omitted because the legislature will no longer define the
scope of the powers of the government.
2. Article X, Sec. 4 will have to be omitted. The President will no longer have the
power of supervision over local governments.
3. Article X, Sec. 5 must be omitted. Congress will no longer be allowed to impose
limitations on the power of taxation of local governments.
[Note: The panel wishes to recommend liberality in favor of the examinee for this
question, as answers can be gleaned from many articles and provisions of the
Constitution, among them Articles VI, VII, and X]. (2017 BAR EXAMS)
All public officers and employees shall take an oath to uphold and defend the
Constitution.
Page 5 of 198
FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The statement is true. This is expressly provided for in Section 4, Article IX-B of the
1987 Constitution.
SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The statement is false. The Constitution states: “All public officers and employees
shall take an oath or affirmation to uphold and defend this Constitution” (1987
Constitution, Art. IX-B, sec. 4).
D. Self-executing and non-self-executing provisions
Which one of the following is a non-self-executing provision of the

Constitution:
a. no law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech;
b. no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion;
c. no person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of
law;
d. the state shall encourage and support researches and studies
on the arts and culture.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. SECTION 15, ARTICLE XIV OF CONSTITUTION (2012 BAR)
E. GENERAL PROVISIONS
.
II. General Considerations
A. National territory
1. Archipelagic doctrine
(1) A bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in order to implement

faithfully the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS) to which the Philippines is a signatory. Congressman Pat
Rio Tek questioned the constitutionality of the bill on the ground that the
provisions of UNCLOS are violative of the provisions of the Constitution
defining the Philippine internal waters and territorial sea. Do you agree or
not with the said objection? Explain. (3%)
(2) Describe the following maritime regimes under UNCLOS (4%)
(a) Territorial sea
Page 6 of 198
(b) Contiguous zone
(c) Exclusive economic zone
(d) Continental shelf
ANSWER:
(1) I do not agree.

“The UNCLOS is a product of international negotiation that seeks to balance State
sovereignity (mare clausum) and the p[rinciple of freedom of the high seas (mare
liberum) . The freedom to use the world’s marine waters is one of the oldest
customary principles of international law. The UNCLOS gives to 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) the high seas. It also gives coastal States more
or less jurisdiction over foreign vessels depending on where the vessel is
located. Insofar as 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 t=o its bed and subsoil.” (Arigo v. Swift, G.R. No. 206510,
September 16, 2014)
UNCLOS III does not define the internal and territorial waters of states but merely
“prescribes the water-land ration, length and contour of n=baselines of
archipelagic States like the Philippines.”
“UNCLOS III has nothing to do with the acquisition (or loss) of territory,” It is a
multilateral treaty regulating, among others, sea-use rights over maritime zones
(i.e., the territorial waters [12 nautical miles from the baselines], exclusive
economic zone [200 nautical miles from the baselines]), and continental shelves
that UNCLOS III delimits.”
“UNCLOS III ans its ancillary baselines laws play no role in the acquisition,
enlargement or, as petitioners claim, diminution of territory. Under traditional
international law typology, States acquire (or conversely, lose) territory through
occupation, accretion, cession and prescription, not by executing multilateral
treaties on the regulations of sea-use rights or enacting statutes to comply with
the treaty’s terms to delimit maritime zones and continental shelves. Territorial
claims to land features are outside UNCLOS III, and are instead governed by the
rules on general international law.” (Magallona v. Ermita, G.R. No. 187167,
August 16, 2011, 655 SCRA 476)
(2) Under the provisions of UNCLOS III-

(a) The territorial waters of an archipelagic state shall extend up to 12 nautical
miles from its baselines;
(b) Its contiguous zone shall extend up to 24 nautical miles from its baselines;
(c) Its exclusive economic zone shall extend up to 200 nautical miles from its
Page 7 of 198
baselines; (Magallona v. Ermita, G.R. No. 187167, August 16, 20-11, 655
SCRA 476) while
(d) Its continental shelf “comprises the seabed and subsoil of the submarine
areas that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural
prolongation of its land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin, or
to a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth
of the territorial sea is measured where the outer edge of the continental
margin does not extend up to that distance.’ (UNCLOS III, Article 77)
Congress passed Republic Act No. 7711 to comply with the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
In a petition filed with the Supreme Court, Anak Ti Ilocos, an association

of Ilocano professionals, argued that Republic Act No. 7711 discarded the
definition of the Philippine territory under the Treaty of Paris and in
related treaties; excluded the Kalayaan Islands and the Scarborough
Shoals from the Philippine Archipelagic baselines; and converted internal
waters into archipelagic waters. Is the petition meritorious? (6%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the petition is not meritorious. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea has nothing to do with the acquisition or loss of territory. It merely
regulates sea-use rights over maritime zones, contiguous zones, exclusive
economic zones, and continental shelves which it delimits. The Kalayaan Islands
and the Scarborough Shoals are located at an appreciable distance from the
nearest shoreline of the Philippines= archipelago. A straight baseline loped
around them from the nearest baseline will violate Article 47(3) and Article 47(2)
of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea III. Whether the bodies of
water lying landward of the baselines of the Philippines are internal waters or
archipelagic waters, the Philippines retains jurisdiction over them (Magallona v.
Ermita, G.R. No. 187167, July 16, 2011, 655 SCRA 476). (2013 BAR)
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is true, or FALSE if the

statement is false. Explain your answer in not more than two (2) sentences.
(5%) (2009 Bar Question)
Under the archipelago doctrine, the waters around, between, and connecting
the islands of the archipelago form part of the territorial sea of the
archipelagic state.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
False. Under Article I of the Constitution, the water around, between and connecting
the islands of the Philippines form part of its internal waters. Under Article 49 (1)
of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, these waters do not form part of
Page 8 of 198
the territorial sea but are described as archipelagic waters.
(A) Define the archipelagic doctrine of national territory, state its rationale; and
explain how it is implemented through the straight baseline method. (2.5%)
(B) Section 2 of RA 9522 declared .the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) and
Scarborough Shoal as "Regimes of Islands." Professor Agaton contends
that since the law did not enclose said islands, then the Philippines lost its
sovereignty and jurisdiction over them. Is his contention correct? Explain.
(2.5%)
(2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) By the term "archipelagic doctrine of national territory" 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 or jurisdiction."
This archipelagic doctrine, so described under Article I of the Constitution, draws its
rationale from the status of the whole archipelago in sovereignty by which under
Part IV of the UNCLOS, the Philippines is defined as an Archipelagic State in
Article 46, thus:
a) archipelagic state means a State constituted wholly by one or more archipelagos
and may include other islands;
b) archipelago means a group of islands including parts of 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.
As an archipelagic state, the national territory is implemented by drawing its "straight

archipelagic baselines.' pursuant to Article 47 of the UNCLOS which prescribes
among its main elements, as follows:
1. By "joining the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of the
archipelago", including the main islands and an area in which the ratio of the area
of the water to the land, including atolls, is between 1 to land 9 to 1.
2 Mainly, the length of such baselines "shall not exceed 100 nautical lines..."
3 The drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any appreciable extent from the
general configuration of the archipelago."
(B) The contention Prof. Agaton is not correct at all.
"Regime of islands is a concept provided in Article 121 of the UNCLOS. It is a

definition of the island as "a naturally formed area a land, surrounded by water
Page 9 of 198
which is above water at high tide."
On the other hand, this provision, is differentiated from "rocks" which cannot sustain
human habitation of their own. -
The importance of the difference between a natural island and rock is that an island is
provided with territorial sea, exclusive economic zo and continental shelf,
whereas rocks have no exclusive economic zone and continental shelf.
This is the difference by which RA 9522 introduced into the KIG and separately
Panatag or Scarborough Shoal is an island.
"Regime of Islands", has no relevance to acquisition or loss of sovereignty. RA 9522

has the effect of possibly dividing the area in question into island and rocks,
apparently to make clear for each the maritime zones involved in the definition of
island or of rocks.
B. State immunity
The Ambassador of the Republic of Kafirista referred to you for handling, the
case of the Embassy’s Maintenance Agreement with CBM, a private
domestic company engaged in maintenance work. The Agreement binds
CBM, for a defined fee, to maintain the Embassy’s elevators, air-
conditioning units and electrical facilities. Section 10 of the Agreement
provides that the Agreement shall be governed by Philippine laws and that
any legal action shall be brought before the proper court of Makati.
Kafiristan terminated the Agreement because CBM allegedly did not comply
with their agreed maintenance standards.
CBM contested the termination and filed a complaint against Kafiristan before
the Regional Trial Court of Makati. The Ambassador wants you to file a
motion to dismiss on the ground of state immunity from suit and to oppose
the position that under Section 10 of the Agreement, Kafiristan expressly
waives its immunity from suit.
Under these facts, can the Embassy successfully invoke immunity from suit?
(6%) (2013 BAR)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the Embassy can invoke immunity from suit. Section 10 of the Maintenance
Agreement is not necessarily a waiver of sovereign immunity from suit. It was
meant to apply in case the Republic of Kafiristan elects to sue in the local courts
or waives its immunity by a subsequent act. The establishment of a diplomatic
Page 10 of 198
mission is a sovereign function. This encompasses its maintenance and upkeep.
The Maintenance Agreement was in pursuit of a sovereign activity (Republic of
the Indonesia v. Vinzon, G.R. No. 154705, June 26, 2003, 405 SCRA 126).
In the last quarter of 2012, about 5,000 container vans of imported goods
intended for the Christmas Season were seized by agents of the
Bureau of Customs. The imported goods were released only on January 10,
2013. A group of importers got together and filed an action for damages
before the Regional Trial Court of Manila against the Department of Finance
and Bureau of Customs.
The Bureau of Customs raised the defense of immunity from suit and,
alternatively, that liability should lie with XYZ Corp. which the Bureau
had contracted for the lease of ten (10) high powered van cranes but
delivered only five (5) of these cranes, thus causing the delay in its cargo-
handling operations. It appears that the Bureau, despite demand, did not
pay XYZ Corp. the Php1.0 Million deposit and advance rental required under
their contract. (2013 BAR)
(A) Will the action by the group of importers prosper? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) No. The action by the group of importers will not prosper. The primary function of
the Bureau of Customs is governmental, y=that of assessing and collecting
lawful revenues from imported articles and all other tariff and customs duties,
fees, charges, fines and penalties (Mobil Philippines Exploration, Inc. v. Customs
Arrastre Service, 18 SCRA 120)
(B) Can XYZ Corp. sue the Bureau of Customs to collect rentals for the
delivered cranes? (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B ) No. XYZ Corporation cannot sue the Bureau of Customs to collect rentals for the
delivered cranes, The contract was a necessary incident to the performance of its
governmental function. To property collect the revenues and customs duties,
the Bureau of Customs must check to determine if the declaration of the importers
tallies with the landed merchandise. The cranes are needed to haul the landed
merchandise to a suitable place for inspection. (Mobil Philippines Exploration
v. Customs Arrastre Service, 18 SCRA 1120).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, XYZ Corporation cannot sue the Bureau of Customs because it has no
Page 11 of 198
juridical personality separate from that of the Republic of the Philippines (Mobil
Philippines Exploration v. Customs Arrastre Service, 18 SCRA 1120).
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

Yes, XYZ Corporation may sue the Bureau of Customs because the contact is
connected with a propriety function, the operation of the arrastre service
(Philippine Refining Company v. Court of Appeals, 256 SCRA 667). Besides,
XYZ Corporation leased its van cranes, because the Bureau of Customs
undertook to pay its rentals. Justice and equity demand that the bureau of
Customs should not be allowed to invoke state immunity from suit (Republ;ic v.
Unimex-Micro Electonics GmBH, 518 SCRA 19).
Mr. Sinco Sued the government for damages. After trial, the court ruled in his
favor and awarded damages amounting to P50 million against the
government. To satisfy the judgment against the government, which valid
option is available to Mr. Sinco? (1%) (2013 BAR)
(A) Garnish the government funds deposited at the Land Bank.

(B) File a claim with the Commission on Audit (COA) pursuant to Commonwealth
Act 327, as amended by Presidential Decree 1445.
(C) Make representations with the Congress to appropriated the amount to satisfy
the judgment.
(D) FIle a petition for mandamus in court to compel Congress to appripriate P50 million
to satisfy the judgment.
(E) Proceed to execute the judgment as provided by the Rules of Court because the
State allowed itself to be sued.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B)(University of the Philippines v. Dizon, G.R. No. 171182, August 23, 2012, 679
SCRA 54).
The LISS Liberty, a warship of the United States (U.S.), entered Philippine
archipelagic waters on its way to Australia. Because of the negligence of
the naval officials on board, the vessel ran aground off the island of
Palawan, damaging coral reefs and other marine resources in the area.
Officials of Palawan filed a suit for damages against the naval officials for
their negligence, and against the U.S., based on Articles 30 and 31 of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Article 31
provides that the Flag State shall bear international responsibility for any
loss or damage to the Coastal State resulting from noncompliance by a
warship with the laws and regulations of the coastal State concerning
passage through the territorial sea. The U.S. Government raised the
defenses that:
Page 12 of 198
(A) The Philippine courts cannot exercise jurisdiction over another sovereign
State, including its warship and naval officials. (2.5%)
(B) The United States is not a signatory to UNCLOS and thus cannot be bound
by its provisions. (2.5%)
Rule on the validity of the defenses raised by the U.S., with reasons. (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The defenses raised by the U.S. Government are not valid.
(A) This defense relies on sovereign immunity from suit as advanced by he U.S.
Government. But the suit filed by the Officials of Palawan draws its strength rpm
Article 30 and 31 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
However, the U.S. defense is defeated by the UNCLOS through the application of
Article 32 which provides:
With such exceptions as are contained in sub-section A and in Articles 30 and 37,
nothing in this Convention affects the immunities of warships and other
government ships operated for non-commercial purposes. [emphasis added]"
In reality the supreme relevance of Article 32 quoted above is actualized by quoting

an existing U.S. government document sourced from Dispatch Supplement, Law
of the Sea Convention: Letters of Transmittal and Submittal and Commentary, as
follows:
"Article 32 provides, in effect that the only rules in the Convention derogating from the
immunities of warships and government ships operated for non-government
purposes are those found in Articles 17-26, 30 and 31 (February 7995, Vol. 6,
Supplement No.1 p.12).
(B) The U.S. Government turns to the defense that it is not bound by the UNCLOS for
the reason that it is not a State Party or a signatory.
However, to be bound by the principle, it does not have to be a party to a treaty or
convention. If it has the normative status of a customary norm of international law,
it is binding .on all states. This appears to be the holding of the principle of
immunity of warship in question, as upheld by the OS. Government in the
document cited above (Ibid., at p.17).
It states from the UNCLOS, thus:

The Convention protects and strengthens the key principle of sovereign immunity for
war-ships...Although not a new concept, sovereign immunity is a principle or of
vital importance to the United States. The Convention provides for a universally
recognized formulation of this principle...
Page 13 of 198
Article 32 provides that, with such exceptions as are contained in subsection A and in
Articles 30 and 31... nothing in the Convention affects the immunities of
warships...
Under the doctrine of immunity from suit, the State cannot be sued without its
consent. How may the consent be given by the State? Explain your answer. (3%)
(2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The State may be sued, with its consent, either expressly or impliedly. Only Congress
can give a written waiver of immunity from suit in the form of a law (United States v.
Ginto, G.R. Nos. 76607, 79470, 80018 & 80258, February 26, 1990, 182 SCRA 664);
Republic v. Feliciano, G.R. No.L-70853, March 12, 1987, 148 SCRA 424).
If a government agency undertakes a proprietary function, It waives its Immunity from

suit When the Philippines Tourism Authority entered into a contract for the construction
of a golf course, it engaged in a proprietary function (Philippine Tourism Authority v.
Philippine Golf Development and Equipment, Inc., G.R. No. 176628, March 19, 2012,
668 SCRA 408).
B. The doctrine of immunity from suit in favor of the State extends to public
officials in the performance of their official duties. May such officials be sued
nonetheless to prevent or to undo their oppressive or illegal acts, or to compel
them to act? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Public officials may be sued if they acted oppressively or illegally in the performance of
their duties. A suit against a public officer who acted illegally is not a suit against the
state (Aberca v. Ver, G.R. No. 69866, April 15, 1988, 160 SCRA 590).
A public official may be compelled to act through a writ of mandamus. The main
objective of mandamus is to compel the performance of a ministerial duty on the part of
the respondent official; however, the writ does not issue to control or review the
exercise of discretion or to compel a course of conduct. The writ of prohibition can also
be availed of, as it is an extraordinary writ which can be directed against a public officer
ordering said officer to desist from further proceedings when said proceedings are
without or in excess of said officer's jurisdiction, or are accompanied with grave abuse
of discretion (Rule 65, Revised Rules of Court).
Lastly, a public officer is by law not immune from damages in his/her personal capacity
for acts done in bad faith which, being outside the scope of his authority, are no longer
protected by the mantle of immunity for official actions (Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune
Tobacco Corp., G.R. No. 141309, June 19, 2007, 525 SCRA 11).
Page 14 of 198
C. Do government-owned or -controlled corporations also enjoy the immunity
of the State from suit? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A government-owned or controlled corporation may be sued. A suit against it is not a

suit against the State, because it has a separate juridical personality (Sock! Security
Systems v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-41299, February 21, 1983, 120 SCRA 707).
C. General Principles and State Policies
The separation of Church and State is most clearly violated when

_______________. (1%) (2013 BAR)
(A) the State funds a road project whose effect is to make a church more
accessible to its adherents
(B) the state declares the birthplace of a founder of a religious sect as a national
historical site
(C) the State expropriates church property in order to construct an expressway that,
among others, provides easy access to the Church’s main cathedral
(D) the State gives vehicles to bishops to assist the in church-related charitable
projects
(E) the State allows prayers in schools for minor children without securing the prior
consent of their parents.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(E) the state allows prayers in schools for minor children without securing the prior
consent of their parents.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
(D)
The system of checks and balances operates when

(A) the President nullifies a conviction in a criminal case by pardoning the offender.
(B) Congress increases the budget proposal of the President.
(C) the President does not release the countryside development funds to members of
Congress.
(D) Congress expands the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, as defined by
the Constitution.

Page 15 of 198
A law that makes military service for women merely voluntary is constitutional.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
False. In the defense of the state, all citizens may be required by law to render
personal, military or civil service (Section 4, Article II of the Constitution). The duty
is imposed on all citizens without distinction as to gender.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
It may make military service voluntary on females because of substantial difference.
Angelina, a married woman, is a Division Chief in the Department of Science

and Technology. She had been living with a married man, not her husband,
for the last fifteen (15) years. Administratively charged with immorality and
conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, she admits her live-in
arrangement, but maintains that this conjugal understanding is in
conformity with their religious beliefs. As members of the religious sect,
Yahweh’s Observers, they had executed a Declaration of Pledging
Faithfulness which has been confirmed and blessed by their Council of
Elders. At the formal investigation of the administrative case, the Grand
Elder of the sect affirmed Angelina’s testimony and attested to the sincerity
of Angelina and her partner in the profession of their faith. If you were to
judge this case, will you exonerate Angelina? Reasons. (3%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Angelina should be exonerated. First, it has not been shown that there is compelling
state interest which will be undermined by granting her an exemption. Second, it
has not been shown that the least intrusive means possible was used so that the
free exercise of religion is not infringed any more than necessary (Estrada v.
Escritor, 492 SCRA 1 [2006]).
Meanwhile, Jenny, also a member of Yahweh’s Observers, was severely

disappointed at the manner the Grand Elder validated what she considered
was an obviously immoral conjugal arrangement between Angelina and her
partner. Jenny filed suit in court, seeking the removal of the Grand Elder
from the religious sect on the ground that his act in supporting Angelina
not only ruined the reputation of their religion, but also violated the
constitutional policy upholding the sanctity of marriage and the solidarity of
the family. Will Jenny’s case prosper?
Explain your answer. (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
Page 16 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The case will not prosper. This involves the performance of the official functions of
religious authorities. Because of separation of Church and State, courts must
respect the autonomy of the religious sect in such matters (Taruc v. De la Cruz,
453 SCRA 123 [2005]).
The Philippine Government is negotiating a new security treaty with the United
States which could involve engagement in joint military operations of the
two countries’ armed forces. A loose organization of Filipinos, the Kabataan
at Matatandang Makabansa (KMM) wrote the Department of Foreign Affairs
(DFA) and the Department of National Defense (DND) demanding disclosure
of the details of the negotiations, as well as copies of the minutes of the
meetings. The DFA and the DND refused, contending that premature
disclosure of the offers and counter- offers between the parties could
jeopardize on-going negotiations with another country. KMM filed suit to
compel disclosure of the negotiation details, and be granted access to the
records of the meetings, invoking the constitutional right of the people to
information on matters of public concern.
Decide with reasons. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The petition of KMM must be denied. Diplomatic negotiations are privileged in order
to encourage a frank exchange of exploratory ideas between the parties by
shielding the negotiations from public view (Akbayan Citizens Action Party v.
Aquino, 558 SCRA 468 [2008]).
Will your answer be the same if the information sought by KMM pertains to
contracts entered into by the Government in its proprietary or commercial
capacity? Why or why not? (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
KMM is entitled to have access to information pertaining to government contracts

entered into by the Government in the exercise of its proprietary or commercial
capacity. The right to information under the Constitution does not exclude
contracts of public interest and are not privileged (Section 7, Article III of the
Constitution; Valmonte v. Belmonte, 170 SCRA256 [1989]).
Several concerned residents of the areas fronting Manila Bay, among them a
group of students who are minors, filed a suit against the Metro Manila
Development Authority (MMDA), the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR), the Department of Health (DOH), the Department
Page 17 of 198
of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Education (DepEd), the Department
of Interior and Local Government (DILG), and a number of other executive
agencies, asking the court to order them to perform their duties relating to
the cleanup, rehabilitation and protection of Manila Bay. The complaint
alleges that the continued neglect by defendants and their failure to prevent
and abate pollution in Manila Bay constitute a violation of ;the petitioners :
constitutional right to life, health and a balanced ecology.
(A) If the defendants assert that the students/petitioners who are minors do not
have locus standi to file the action, is the assertion correct? Explain your
answer. (2.5%)
(B) In its decision which attained finality, the Court ordered the defendants to
clean up, rehabilitate and sanitize Manila Bay within eighteen (18) months,
and to submit to the Court periodic reports of their accomplishment, so that
the Court can monitor and oversee the activities undertaken by the
agencies in compliance with the Court's directives. Subsequently/a
resolution was issued extending the time periods within which the agencies
should comply with the directives covered by the final decision. A view was
raised that the Court's continued intervention after the cases has been
decided violates the doctrine separation of powers considering that the
government agencies all belong to the Executive Department and are under
the control of the President. Is this contention correct? Why or why not?
(2.5%). (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) The assertion that the students/petitioners who are minors have no locus standi is
erroneous. Pursuant to the obligation of the State under Section 16, Article II of
the Constitution to protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and
healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature, minors have
standing to sue based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility (Oposa v.
Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993, 224 SCRA 792).
(B) The order of the Supreme Court to the defendants to clean up, rehabilitate and
sanitize Manila Bay is an exercise of judicial power, because the execution of its
decision is an integral part of its adjudicative function. Since the submission of
periodic reports is needed to fully implement the decision, the Supreme Court can
issue a continuing writ of mandamus to the Metropolitan Manila Development
Authority until full compliance with its order is shown (Metropolitan Manila
Development Authority v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, G.R. Nos.
171947-48, February 15, 2011, 643 SCRA 90).
Congress passed a bill appropriating P100-billion. Part of themoney is to be

used for the purchase of a 200-hectare property in Antipolo..The rest shall
be spent for the development of the area and the construction of the
Page 18 of 198
Universal Temple for all the World's Faiths (UTAW-P). Whin completed, the
site will be open, free of charge, to all religions, beliefs, and faiths, where
each devotee or believer shall be accommodated and treated in a fair and
equal manner, without distinction, favor, or prejudice. There will aIso be
individual segments or zones in the area which can be used for the conduct
of whatever rituals, services, sacraments, or ceremonials that may be
required by the customs or practices of each particular religion. The
President approved the bill, happy in the thought that this could start the
healing process of our wounded country and encourage people of varied
and often conflicting faiths to live together in harmony and in peace.
The law is questioned in the ground that it violates Sec. 5, Article II of the
Constitution that "no law shall be made respecting an establishment of
religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," how will you resolve the
chaIlenge? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The contention must be rejected. The use of the site temple will not be limited to a
particular religious sect. It will be made available to all religious sects. The
temporary use of public property for religious purposes without discrimination
does not violate the Constitution (Ignacio V. De la Cruz No.L-6858, May
31,1956,99 Phil. 346; People v. Fernandez, 40 0G. 1089 [1956]).
ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED ANSWER

The contention is meritorious. The state cannot pass laws which aid one religion, all
religions, or prefer one religion over another (Emerson v. Board of Education, 330
U.S.A. 1 (1947]).
NOTE: It is recommended that both answers be accepted as correct and be given full
credit.
D. Separation of powers
Which phrase best completes the statement - The starting point of the principle
of separation of powers is the assumption of the division of the functions of
government into three distinct classes: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. the bill of rights, state policies, and social justice and human rights;
b. the accountability of public officers, the constitutional commissions, and the
national economy and patrimony;
c. the self-executing provisions, the non-self-executing provisions, and the self-
evident social justice provisions;
d. the executive, the legislative, and the judicial.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Page 19 of 198
D. CRUZ, PHILIPPINE POLITICAL LAW, 2005 ED., P.70
Senator Fleur De Lis is charged with plunder before the Sandiganbayan. After
finding the existence of probable cause, the court issues a warrant
for the Senator's arrest. The prosecution files a motion to suspend the
Senator relying on Section 5 of the Plunder Law. According to the
prosecution, the suspension should last until the termination of the case.
Senator Lis vigorously opposes the motion contending that only the Senate
can discipline its members; and that to allow his suspension by the Court
would violate the principle of separation of powers. Is Senator Lis's
contention tenable? Explain. (4%) 2015 BAR
ANSWER:
The Senators contention in untenable or “unavailing.” He can be validly

preventively suspended under the Plunder Law.
The power of each House of Congress to “punish its Members for disorderly
behavior,” and “suspend or expel a Member” by a vote of two-thirds of all its
Members subject to the qualification that the penalty of suspension, when
imposed, should not exceed sixty days” under Section 6 (3). Article VI of the
Constitution is “distinct” from the suspension under the Plunder Law, “which is
not a penalty but a preliminary, preventive measure, prescinding from the fact that
the latter is not being imposed on petitioner for misbehavior as a Member of thye
House of Representatvives.” (Ceferino Paredes, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, et al.,
G.R. No. 118364, 08 August 1995, cited in Santiago v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
128055, April 18, 2001)
The “Poverty Alleviation and Assistance Act "was passed to enhance the
capacity of the most marginalized families nationwide. A financial
assistance scheme called .conditional cash transfers" was initially funded
500 million pesos by Congress. One of the provisions of the law gave the
Joint-Congressional Oversight Committee authority to screen the list of
beneficiary families initially determined by the Secretary of Department of
Social Welfare and Development pursuant to the Department implementing
rules. Mang Pandoy, a resident of Smokey Mountain in Tondo, questioned
the authority of the Committee.
Is the grant of authority to the Oversight Committee to screen beneficiaries

constitutional? (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
Decide with reasons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 20 of 198
The grant of authority to the Oversight Committee ,to screen beneficiaries is
unconstitutional. It violates the principle of separation of powers. By being
involved in the implementation of the law, the Oversight Committee will be
exercising executive power. (Abakada Guro Party List v. Purisima, 562 SCRA 251
[2008].)
E. Checks and balances
Which of the following best exemplifies how the system of checks and
balances is carried out: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. the legislature passes a law that prohibits the president from commuting a
judiciary imposed sentence, as a check of the president;
b. the President pardons a convict as a way to set aside or modify a
judgment of the judiciary;
c. the judiciary overturns a pardon granted by the President as a check on
executions;
d. the President pardons an accused after arraignment in the interest of
justice.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
A. Section 19, Arcticle VII of Constituion
F. Delegation of powers
Which one of the following theories does not support the valid delegation of
authority by the Congress to an administrative agency: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. an administrative agency may "fill up the details" of a statute;

b. the legislature may leave to another body the ascertainment of facts necessary to
bring the law into actual operation;
c. an administrative agency has equal expertise with the legislature in crafting and
implementing laws;
d. contingent legislation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. UNITED BF HOMEONWERS ASSOCIATION VS BF HOMES INC. 310 SCRA

304
Section 8 of P.D. No. 910, entitled "Creating an Energy Development Board,

defining its. powers and functions, Providing funds therefor and for other
purposes," provides that: "All fees, revenues and receipts of the Board from any
and all sources x x x shall form part of a Special Fund to be used to finance
Page 21 of 198
energy resource development and exploitation programs and projects of the
government and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the
President"
The Malampaya NGO contends that, the provision constitutes an undue

delegation of legislative power since the phrase "and for such other purposes as
may be hereafter directed by the President gives the President unbridled
discretion to determine the purpose for which the funds will be used. On the
other hand, the government urges the application of ejusdem aerteris. (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
(A) Explain the "completeness test" and "sufficient standard test." (2.5%)
(B) Does the assailed portion of section 8 of PD 910 hurdle the two (2) tests?
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) The completeness test means that the law sets forth the policy to be executed,
carried out or implemented by the delegate (Abokada Guro rty List v. Ermita, G.R. No.
168056, October 18, 2005, 469 SCRA 1).
The "sufficient standard test" means the law lays down adequate guidelines or
limitations to map out the boundaries of the authority of the delegate and prevent the
delegate from running riot. The standard must specify the limits of the authority of the
delegate, announce the legislative policy and identify the condition under which it is to
be implemented (Milked° Gyro Party List v. Ermita, G.R. No. 168056, October 18, 2005,
469 SCRA 1).
(B) The assailed portion of Presidential Decree No. 910 does not satisfy the two tests.
The phrase and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President"
gives the President unbridled discretion to determine the purpose for which the funds
will be used. An infrastructure is any basic facility needed by society. The power to
determine what kind of infrastructure to prioritize and fund is a power to determine the
purpose of the appropriation and is an undue delegation of the power to appropriate
(Belgic° v. &boa, Jr., G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013, 710 SCRA 1).
The assailed provision does not fall uncle the principle of ejusdem generis. First, the
phrase "energy resource development and exploitation programs and projects. of the
government states a singular and general class. Second, it exhausts the class it
represents (Belgica v. Oche°, Jr., G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013, 710 SCRA 1).
G. Forms of government
In a unitary system of government, such as the government under the

Philippine Constitutor, local government can only be: ((2012 BAR EXAMS))
Page 22 of 198
a. an imperuim in imperio;
b. an infa-sovereign subdivision;
c. a sovereign nation;
d. a sovereign entity.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(b) Magtajas Vs. Pryce Properties Corporation, 234 Scra 255
The Constitution declares that the Philippines is a republican state.

Republicanism means: ((2012 BAR EXAMS))
a. the form of government must be presidential;
b. the representatives of the government are elected by the people;
c. sovereignty resides in the elected representatives of the government;
d. the form of government cannot be changed by the people.
A chief characteristic of the presidential form of government is: ((2012 BAR

EXAMS))
a. concentration of power in the judiciary thru the power of expanded judicial review;
b. supremacy of the presidency compared to the totality of powers of the legislative;
c. regular periodic election of the President for a fixed term;
d. unlimited term for the President for as long as elected by the people in free and
honest elections.
ANSWER:
(B) Free Telephone Workers Union vs. Minister of Labor and Employment; 108
scra 757; and (c) section 4, article vii of constitution.
It is suggested that either (b) or (c) may be accepted as a correct answer
III. Legislative Department
A. Who may exercise legislative power
1. Congress
Identify which one is an invalid exercise of the legislative power: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. legislation by local government on purely local matters;
b. law granting an administrative agency the power to define policy and fix
standards on price control;
c. law authorizing the President, in times of war or other national emergency, for a
limited period, subject to prescribed restrictions, to exercise powers necessary
and proper to carry out a declared national policy;
Page 23 of 198
d. law authorizing the President to fix, within specific limits, tariff rates, import and
export quotas, and other duties, within the framework of the national
development program of the government.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. UNITED STATE VS. ANG TANG HO, 43 PHIL 1
Which of the following can be changed by an ordinary law enacted by

Congress? (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Commencement of the term of office of Senators;
b. Date of regular election for President and Vice Presidential;
c. Authority to transfer appropriation;
d. Regular election of the members of Congress.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
a. Commencement of the term of office of Senators;

SECTION 4, ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION; SECTION 4, ARTICLE VII OF
CONSTITUTION; (D) SECTION 8, ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
Congress shall have the sole power to declare the existence of a state of war
by vote of: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. three-fourths of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting jointly;
b. two-thirds of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting jointly;
c. two-thirds of both Houses in separate session assembled, voting jointly;
d. two-thirds of both Houses in joint session, voting separately.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 23(2) ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
Under the enrolled bill doctrine, the signing of a bill by both the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the President of the Senate and the certification by
the secretaries of both Houses of Congress that the bill was passed on a certain
date are conclusive on the bill's due enactment. Assuming there is a conflict
between the enrolled bill and the legislative journal, to the effect that the enrolled
bill signed by the Senate President and eventually approved by the President
turned out to be different from what the Senate actually passed as reflected in the
legislative journal.
(a) May the Senate President disregard the enrolled bill doctrine and consider
his signature as invalid and of no effect? (2.5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 24 of 198
(a) The Senate President may withdraw his signature from the bill since it was not
actually the bill that was approved by Congress, so there was no enrolled bill to speak
of (Astorga Villegas, G.R. No. L-23475, April 30, 1974, 56 SCRA 714).
(b) May the President thereafter withdraw his signature? Explain your answer.
(2.5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(b) Yes, he can because of the prior withdrawal of the signature of Senate President
and Speaker; accordingly, there could be no "enrolled bill" that could have been validly
approved (Astorga v. Villegas, G.R. No. L-23475, April 30, 1974,56 SCRA 714).
Sec. 26(2), Art. VI of the Constitution provides that no bill passed by either House
of Congress shall become a law unless it has passed three readings on separate
days and printed copies of it in its final form have been distributed to the
Members of the House three days before its passage.
Is there an exception to the provision? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR
QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The exception to this provision is when the President certifies to the necessity of its
immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or necessity (Article VI, Sec. 270) of the
1987 Philippine Constitution; and Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, G.R. No. 115455,
August 25, 1994, 235 SCRA 630).
2. Regional/Local legislative power
3. People’s initiative on statutes
Several citizens, unhappy with the proliferation of families dominating the

political landscape, decided to take matters into their own hands. They
proposed to come up with a people’s initiative defining political
dynasties. They started a signature campaign for the purpose of coming
up with a petition for that purpose. Some others expressed misgivings
about a people’s initiative for the purpose of proposing amendments to the
Constitution, however. They cited the Court’s decision in Santiago v.
Commission on Elections, 270 SCRA 106 (1997), as authority for their
position that there is yet no enabling law for such purpose. On the other
hand, there are also those who claim that the individual votes of the justices
in Lambino v. Commission on Elections, 505 SCRA 160 (2006), mean that
Santiago’s pronouncement has effectively been abandoned. If you were
consulted by those behind the new attempt at a people’s initiative,
Page 25 of 198
how would you advise them? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I shall advise those starting a people’s initiative that initiative to pass a law defining
political dynasties may proceed as their proposal is to enact a law only and not
to amend the constitution. The decision in Santiago v. Commission on
Elections, 270 SCRA 106 [1997], which has not been reversed, upheld the
adequacy of the provisions in Republic Act 6735 on initiative to enact a law.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
I shall advise those starting a people’s initiative that the ruling in Santiago vs.
Commission on Election that there is as yet no enabling law for an initiative has
not been reversed. According to Section 4(3), Article VIII of the Constitution, a
doctrine of law laid down in a decision rendered by the Supreme Court en banc
may not be reversed except if it is acting en banc. The majority opinion in
Lambino v.Commission on Elections (505 SCRA 160 [2006], refused to re-
examine the ruling in Santiago v. Commission on Elections (270 SCRA 106
[1997], because it was not necessary for deciding the case. The Justices who
voted to reverse the ruling constituted the minority.
What are the essential elements of a valid petition for a people’s initiative to
amend the 1987
Constitution? Discuss. (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The elements of a valid petition for a people’s initiative are the following:
1. At least twelve per cent (12%) of the registered voters, of which every legislative
district must be represented by at least three per cent (3%) of the registered
voters in it, should directly sign the entire proposal; and
2. The draft of the proposed amendment must be embodied in the petition (Lambino
v. Commission on Elections, 505 SCRA 160 [2006]).

A law making "Bayan Ko" the new national anthem of the Philippines, in lieu of
"Lupang Hinirang," is constitutional.
Page 26 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
True. Congress may by law adopt a new national anthem, but it shall take effect only upon
ratification by the people in a national referendum (Section 2, Article XVI of the
Constitution).
4. The President under a martial law rule or in a revolutionary government
B. Houses of Congress
1. Senate
A candidate for Senator must be at least 35 years old on (2011 BAR)

(A) the day he is duly proclaimed.
(B) the day the election is held.
(C) the day he files his certificate of candidacy.
(D) the day he takes his oath of office.
A few months before the end of the present Congress, Strongwill was invited
by the Senate to shed light in an inquiry relative to the alleged siphoning
and diverting of the pork barrel of members of Congress to non-existent or
fictitious projects. Strongwill has been identified in the news as the
principal actor responsible for the scandal, the leader of a non-
governmental organization which ostensibly funnelled the funds to certain
local government projects which existed only on paper. At the start of the
hearings before the Senate, Strongwill refused at once to cooperate. The
Senate cited him in contempt and sent him to jail until he would have seen
the light. The Congress, thereafter, adjourned sine die preparatory to the
assumption to office of the newly-elected members. In the meantime,
Strongwill languished behind bars and the remaining senators refused to
have him released, claiming that the Senate is a continuing body and,
therefore, he can be detained indefinitely. Are the senators right? (4%) 2014
BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Senators are right. The Senate is to be considered as a continuing body of

purposes of its exercise of its power punish for contempt. Accordingly, the
continuing validity of its orders punishing for contempt should not be affected by
its sine die adjournment (Arnault v. Nazareno, 87 Phil. 29 (1950).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The Senators are right. While the Senate as an institution is continuing in the conduct
of its day to day business, the Senate of each Congress acts separately from the
Page 27 of 198
Senate of the Congress before it. All pending matters terminate upon expiration of
each Congress (Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers
and Investigation, 564 SCRA 152 (2008).
2. House of Reperesentatives
a. District representatives and questions of apportionment
The rule in Article V1, Section 5 (3) of the Constitution that "Each
legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous,
compact and adjacent territory" is a prohibition against: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. re-apportionment;
b. commandeering of votes;
c. gerrymandering;
d. re-districting.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. NAVARRO VS. ERMITA,612 SCRA 131
Article V1, Section 5(3) of the Constitution requires that for a city to be entitled
to have at least one representative, its population shall be at least: (2012
BAR EXAMS)
a. 250,000;
b. 150,000;
c. 100,000;
d. 175,000.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. 250,000 SECTION 5(3), ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
Gerrymandering refers to the practice of: (1%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
(A) creating or dividing congressional districts in a manner intended to favor

a particular party or candidate
(B) truancy as applied to Members of Congress
(C) loafing among members of Congress
(D) coming up with guessing game when it comes to legislation
(E) commandeering large chunks of the budget for favored congressional
districts
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
Page 28 of 198
(A) Creating or dividing congressional districys in a manner intended to favor a
particular party or candidate
b. Party-list system
Greenpeas is an ideology-based political party fighting for environmental

causes. It decided to participate under the party-list system. When the
election results came in, it only obtained 1.99 percent of the votes cast
under the party-list system. Bluebean, a political observer, claimed that
Greenpeas is not entitled to any seat since it failed to obtain at least 2% of
the votes. Moreover, since it does not represent any of the marginalized and
underrepresented sectors of society, Greenpeas is not entitled to
participate under the party-list system. How valid are the observations of
Bluebean? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The claim of Bluebean that Greenpeas is not entitled to a seal under the party-list-
system because it obtained only 1.99 percent of the votes cast under the party-
list-system is not correct. Since the provision in Section 5 (2). Article VI of the
Cnstitution that the party-list representatives shall constitute twenty percent (20%)
of the total number of the members of the House of Representatives is
mandatory, after the parties receiving at least two percent (2%) of the total votes
case for the party-list system have been allocated one seat, the remaining seats
should be allocated among the parties by the proportional percentage of the votes
received by each party as against the total party-list votes (Barangay
Association for National Advancement and Transparency v. Commission on
Elections, 586 SCRA 211 (2009).
The claim of Bluebean that Greenpeas is not entitled to participate in the party-list
elections because it does not represent any marginalized and underrepresented
sectors of society is not correct. It is enough that its principal advocacy pertains
to the special interest of its sector (Atong Panglaum, Inc. v. Commission on
Election, 694 SCRA 477 (2013 BAR). (2014 BAR EXAMS)
The Partido ng Mapagkakatiwalaang Pilipino (PMP) is a major political party

which has participated in every election since the enactment of the 1987
Constitution. It has fielded candidates mostly for legislative district
elections. In fact, a number of its members were elected, and are actually
serving, in the House of Representatives. In the coming 2016 elections, the
PMP leadership intends to join the party-list system. Can PMP join the
party-list system without violating the Constitution and Republic Act (R.A.)
No. 7941? (4%) %) 2015 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 29 of 198
Yes. As for political parties, they may participate in the party-list race by registering
under the party-list system and no longer field congressional candidates. These
parties, if they field congressional candidates, however, are not barred from
participating in the party-list elections; what they need to do is register their
sectoral wing or party under the party-list system. This sectoral wing shall be
considered an “independent sectoral party” linked to a political party through
a coalition. ( Atong Paglaum vs COMELEC, April 2, 2013)
Rudy Domingo, 38 years old, natural-born Filipino and a resident of the

Philippines since birth, is a Manila-based entrepreneur who runs KABAKA,
a coalition of peoples' organizations from fisherfolk communities.
KABAKA's operations consist of empowering fisherfolk leaders through
livelihood projects and trainings on good governance. The Dutch
Foundation for Global Initiatives, a private organization registered in The
Netherlands, receives a huge subsidy from the Dutch Foreign Ministry,
which, in tum is allocated worldwide to the Foundation's partners like
KABAKA. Rudy seeks to register KABAKA as a party-list with himself as a
nominee of the coalition'. Will KABAKA and Rudy be qualified as a party-list
and a nominee, respectively? Decide with reasons. (4%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
KABAKA and Ruby are not qualified as a party list and as nominee, respectively,
since KABAKA is receiving a subsidy from the Dutch Foreign Ministry. Under
Section 2(5), Article IX-C of the Constitution, a political party which is supported
by any foreign government cannot be registered with the Commission on
Elections.
C. Legislative privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications
A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall be privileged from

arrest while Congress is in session for all offenses punishable by
imprisonment of not more than: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. life imprisonment;
b. reclusion perpetua;
c. six years imprisonment;
d. four years imprisonment.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. SECTION 11, ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
No Senator or member of the House of Representatives may personally appear

as counsel before: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
Page 30 of 198
a. any regional court;
b. any court of justice;
c. any inferior court;
d. any appellate court.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. SECTION 14, ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
In the May 2013 elections, the Allied Workers’ Group of the Philippines
(AWGP), representing land-based and sea-based workers in the
Philippines and overseas, won in the party list congressional elections.
Atty. Abling, a labor lawyer, is its nominee.
As part of the party’s advocacy and services, Congressman Abling

engages in labor counseling, particularly for local workers with claims
against their employers and for those who need representation in
collective bargaining negotiations with employers. When labor cases arise,
AWGP enters its appearance in representation of the workers and the
Congressman makes it a point to be there to accompany the workers,
although a retained counsel also formally enters his appearance and is
invariably there. Congressman Abling largely takes a passive role in the
proceedings although he occasionally speaks to supplement the retained
counsel’s statements. It is otherwise in CBA negotiations where he
actively participates.
Management lawyers, feeling aggrieved that a congressman should not

actively participate before labor tribunals and before employers because of
the influence a congressman can wield, filed a disbarment case against the
Congressman before the Supreme Court for his violation of the Code of
Professional Responsibility and for breach of trust, in relation
particularly with the prohibitions on legislators under the Constitution.
Is the cited ground for disbarment meritorious? (6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Being a congressman, Atty. Abling is disqualified under Article Vi, Section 14 of the
1987 Constitution from personally appearing as counsel before quasi-judicial and
other administrative bodies handling labor cases constitutes personal
appearance before them (Puyat v. De Guzman, G.R. No. L-5122, 1982, 1135
SCRA 33).His involvement in collective bargaining, negotiations also
involves practice of law, because he is making use of his legal knowledge for
the benefit of others (Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, September 3,
1991, 201 SCRA 210). The Bureau of Labor Relations is involved in collective
Page 31 of 198
bargaining negotiations (Article 250 of Labor Code)
Atty. Abling should not be disbarred but should be merely suspended from the
practice of law. Suspension is the appropriate penalty for involvement in the
unlawful practice of law (Tapay v. Bancolo, A.C. No. 9604, March 20, 2013, 694
SCRA 1).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
No, Congressman Abling cannot be disbarred. A retained counsel formally appears

for AWGP. His role is largely passive and cannot be considered as personal
appearance. His participation in the collective brgaining negotiations does not
entail personal appearance before an administrative bode (Article VI, Section 13
of the 1987 Constitution)
Senator Bondoc was charged with murder and detained at the Quezon City Jail.
He invoked, in seeking leave from the court to attend the session of the
Senate, his immunity from arrest as a Senator. How should the court rule on
his motion? (2011 BAR)
(A) Deny the motion unless the Senate issues a resolution certifying to the
urgency of his attendance at its sessions.
(B) Grant the motion provided he posts bail since he is not a flight risk.
(C) Grant the motion so as not to deprive the people who elected him their right to
be represented in the Senate.
(D) Deny the motion since immunity from arrest does not apply to a charge of
murder.
Congresswoman A is a co-owner of an industrial estate in Sta. Rosa, Laguna

which she had declared in her Statement of Assets and Liabilities. A
member of her political party authored a bill which would provide a 5-yeal
development plan for all industrial estates in the Southern Tagalog Region
to attract investors. The plan included an appropriation of 2 billion pesos
for construction of roads around the estates. When the bill finally became
law, a civil society watchdog questioned the constitutionality of the law as it
obviously benefitted Congresswoman A's industrial estate. Decide' with
reasons. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The law is constitutional. Section 12, Article VI of the Constitution does not prohibit
the enactment of a law which will benefit the business interests of a member of
the Senate or the House of Representatives. It only requires that if the member of
Congress whose business interests will be benefited by the law is the one who
will file the bill, he should notify the House concerned of the potential conflict of
interest.
Page 32 of 198
D.Quorum and voting majorities
E. Discipline of members
When an elective official's preventive suspension will result in depriving his

constituents of his services or representation, the court may (2011 BAR)
(A) require the investigating body to expedite the investigation.
(B) hold in abeyance the period of such suspension.
(C) direct the holding of an election to fill up the temporary vacancy.
(D) shorten the period of such suspension.
F. Electoral tribunals and the Commission on Appointments

1. Nature
2. Power
Sec. 17, Art. VI of the Constitution establishes an Electoral Tribunal for each of
the Houses of Congress, and makes each Electoral Tribunal "the sole judge of all
contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective
Members." On the other hand, Sec. 2(1), C (Commission on Elections), Alt IX of
the Constitution grants to the COMELEC the power to enforce and administer all
laws and regulations "relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum, and recall?'
Considering that there is no concurrence of jurisdiction between the Electoral

Tribunals and the COMELEC, state when the jurisdiction of the Electoral
Tribunals begins, and the COMELEC's jurisdiction ends. Explain your answer.
(4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
To be considered a Member of the House of Representatives, there must be a

concurrence of the following requisites: (1) a valid proclamation, (2) a proper oath, and
(3) assumption of office (Reyes v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207264, October 22, 2013, 699
SCRA 522). Once a winning candidate has been proclaimed and taken his oath, and
assumed office as a Member of the House of Representatives, the jurisdiction of the
Commission on Elections over the election contest ends, and the jurisdiction of the
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal begins (Vinzons-Chato v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 172131, April 2, 2007).
G. Powers of Congress
During a period of national emergency. Congress may grant emergency powers to

the President. State the conditions under which such a venture is allowed. (2010
Bar Question)
Page 33 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under Section 23(2), Article VI of the Constitution, Congress may grant the President
emergency powers subject to the following conditions:
1. There is a war or other national emergency;

2. The grant of emergency powers must be for a limited period;
3. The grant of emergency powers is subject to such restrictions as Congress may
prescribe; and
4. The emergency powers must be exercised to carry out a declared national policy.
True or False. A proclamation of a state of emergency is sufficient to allow the

President to take over any public utility. (0.5%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that a proclamation of emergency is .sufficient to allow the President

to take over any public utility is false. Since it is an aspect of emergency powers,
in accordance with Section 23(2), Article VI of the Constitution, there must be a
law delegating such power to the President. (David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, 489
SCRA 160 (2006).)
The President issued Proclamation 9517 declaring a state of emergency and

calling the armed forces to immediately carry out necessary measures to
suppress terrorism and lawless violence. In the same proclamation, he
directed the government's temporary takeover of the operations of all
privately owned communication utilities, prescribing reasonable terms for
the takeover. Is the takeover valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, it is an implied power flowing from the President's exercise of emergency
power.
(B) No, it is a power reserved for Congress alone.
(C) Yes, subject to ratification by Congress.
(D) No, it is a power exclusively reserved for the People's direct action.
1. Legislative
a. Legislative inquiries and the oversight functions
A statutory provision requiring the President or an administrative agency to

present the proposed implementing rules and regulations of a law to
Congress which by itself or through a committee formed by it, retains a
"right" or "power" to approve or disapprove such regulations before they
may take effect, is a: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. legislative encroachment;
b. legislative veto;
Page 34 of 198
c. legislative oversight;
d. legislative scrutiny.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) And (C) Abakada Guro Party List Vs Purisima, 562 Scra 251
It Is Suggested That Either (B) Or (C) May Be Accepted As A Correct Answer
The President issued an executive order directing all department heads to

secure his consent before agreeing to appear during question hour before
Congress on matters pertaining to their departments. Is the executive order
unconstitutional for suppressing information of public concern? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, because those department heads are his alter egos and he is but
exercising his right against self-incrimination.
(B) Yes, the President cannot control the initiative of the department heads
to conform with the oversight function of Congress.
(C) Yes, the President cannot withhold consent to the initiative of his
department heads as it will violate the principle of check and balance.
(D) No, the President has the power to withhold consent to appearance by
his department heads during question hour.
Congressman Nonoy delivered a privilege speech charging the Intercontinental

Universal Bank (IUB) with the sale of unregistered foreign securities, in
violation of R.A. 8799. He then filed, and the House of Representatives
unanimously approved, a Resolution directing the House Committee on
Good Government (HCGG) to conduct an inquiry on the matter, in aid of
legislation, in order to prevent the recurrence of any similar fraudulent
activity.
The HCGG immediately scheduled a hearing and invited the responsible

officials of IUB, the Chairman and Commissioners of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Governor of the Bangko Sentral ng
Pilipinas (BSP). On the date set for the hearing, only the SEC
Commissioners appeared, prompting Congressman Nonoy to move for the
issuance of the appropriate subpoena ad testificandumto compel the
attendance of the invited resource persons.
The IUB officials filed suit to prohibit HCGG from proceeding with the inquiry
and to quash the subpoena, raising the following arguments:
a. The subject of the legislative investigation is also the subject of criminal

and civil actions pending before the courts and the prosecutor’s office;
thus, the legislative inquiry would preempt judicial action; (3%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 35 of 198
The argument is not tenable; since this is an essential component of legislative
power, it cannot be made subordinate to criminal and civil actions. Otherwise, it
would be very easy to subvert any investigation in aid of legislation through the
convenient ploy of instituting criminal and civil actions (Standard Chartered Bank
[Philippine Branch] v. Senate Committee on Banks, Financial Institutions and
Currencies, 541 SCRA 456 [2007]).
b. Compelling the IUB officials, who are also respondents in the criminal and
civil cases in court, to testify at the inquiry would violate their
constitutional right against self-incrimination. (3%) Are the foregoing
arguments tenable? Reasons. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The argument is untenable. Since the IUB officials were not being subjected to a
criminal penalty, they cannot invoke their right against self-incrimination unless a
question calling for an incriminating answer is propounded (Standard Chartered
Bank [Philippine Branch] v. Senate Committee on Banks, Financial Institutions
and Currencies, 541 SCRA 456 [2007]).
c. May the Governor of the BSP validly invoke executive privilege and, thus,
refuse to attend the legislative inquiry? Why or why not? (3%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because the power to invoke executive privilege is limited to the President
(Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1 [2006]).
b. Bicameral conference committee
c. Limitations on legislative power

i. Limitations on revenue, appropriations and tariff measures
ii. Presidential veto and Congressional override
In the exercise of its power of legislative inquiries and oversight functions, the
House of Representatives or the Senate may only ask questions (2011 BAR)
(A) that the official called is willing to answer.
(B) that are relevant to the proposed legislation.
(C) to which the witness gave his prior consent.
(D) material to the subject of inquiry.
Provisions unrelated to an appropriation bill are considered prohibited. These

are called: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
Page 36 of 198
a. interlopers;
b. riders;
c. outriggers;
d. add-ons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) GARCIA VS. MATA, 65 SCRA 517
The requirement that "Every bill shall embrace only one subject which
shall be expressed in the title thereof" prevents: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. rollercoaster legislation;
b. log-rolling legislation;
c. rolling fields legislation;
d. loggerhead legislation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(B) COOLEY, CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS, P. 143
If by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the
general appropriations bill for the ensuring fiscal year, the general
appropriations law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. referred;
b. unacted;
c. refilled;
d. re-enacted.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 25(7), ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
Senator GSC proposed a bill increasing excise taxes on tobacco and

alcohol products. The generated incremental revenues shall be used for the
universal health care program for all Filipinos and for tobacco farmers’
livelihood. After the Senate passed the bill on third reading, it was
transmitted to the House of Representatives which approved the bill in
toto. The President eventually signed it into law. Atty. JFC filed a petition
before the Supreme Court, questioning the constitutionality of the new law.
Is the law constitutional? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) The law is constitutional because it is for a public purpose and has duly
satisfied the three-readings-on-separate-days rule in both Houses.
(B) The law is unconstitional because it violates the equal protection clause
Page 37 of 198
of the Constitution; it is limited only to alcohol and liquor products.
(C) It is constitutional because of the Enrolled Bill Theory.
(D) It is constitutional because it is valid in form and substance and
complied with the required lawmaking procedures.
(E) None of the above is correct.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(E)(Article VI, Section 24 of the 1987 Constitution).
A treaty which provides tax exemption needs no concurrence by a majority of

all the Members of the Congress. (0.5%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that a treaty which provides tax exemption needs no concurrence by a
majority of all the Members of Congress is true. It is only a law, not a treaty,
granting a tax exemption which requires the concurrence of a majority of all the
Members of Congress. (Section 28(4), Article VI of the Constitution.) Without
respect to its lawful substantive content, a treaty, to be valid and effective,
requires concurrence by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
(Sec. 24, Art. VII of the Constitution).
Congress passed a bill appropriating P50 million in assistance to locally based

television stations subject to the condition that the amount would be
available only in places where commercial national television stations do
not operate. The President approved the appropriation but vetoed the
condition. Was the veto valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, since the vetoed condition may be separated from the item.
(B) Yes, the President's veto power is absolute.
(C) No, since the veto amounted to a suppression of the freedom to communicate
through television.
(D) No, since the approval of the item carried with it the approval of the condition
attached to it.
Give the limitations on the power of the Congress to enact the General
Appropriations Act? Explain your answer. (5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Sections 24 and 25 of Article VI provide the limitations on the power of Congress to

enact General Appropriations Acts.
All 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
Page 38 of 198
Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments (Article VI,
Sec. 24 of the 1987 Constitution).
The Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by the President for
the operation of the Government as specified in the budget. The form, content, and
manner of preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law. No provision or
enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill 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. The procedure in
approving appropriations for the Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for
approving appropriations for other departments and agencies. A special appropriations
bill shall specify the purpose for which it is intended, and shall be supported by funds
actually available as certified by the National Treasurer, or to be raised by a
corresponding revenue proposed therein (Article VI, Sec. 25 of the 1987 Constitution).
No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the

President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions
may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for
their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations
(Article VI, Sec. 25 of the 1987 Constitution).
Discretionary funds appropriated for particular officials shall. be disbursed only for public
purposes to be supported .by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as
may be prescribed by 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 fiscal year shall be deemed reenacted and shall
remain in force and effect until the general appropriations bill is passed by the Congress
(Article VI, Sec. 25 of the 1987 Constitution).
2. Non-legislative
a. Informing function
b. Power of impeachment
c. Other non-legislative powers
May an incumbent Justice of the Supreme Court be disbarred as a lawyer?

(2011 BAR)
(A) No, it will amount to removal.
(B) No, his membership in the bar is secure.
(C) Yes, by the Supreme Court itself.
(D) Yes, by Congress in joint session.
Sec. 3, Art. XI of the Constitution states that [n]o impeachment proceedings shall
be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year."
What constitutes initiation of impeachment proceedings under the provision?
Page 39 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Initiation of impeachment proceedings under Article XI, Sec. 3 of the Constitution starts
with the filing of the complaint. The initiation of impeachment proceedings starts with the
filing of the complaint, and the vote of one-third of the House in a resolution of
impeachment does not initiate the impeachment proceedings which was already
initiated by the filing eta verified complaint under Section 3, paragraph (2), Article X1 of
the Constitution (Francisco v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261, November
10, 2003. 415 SCRA 44).
IV. Executive Department
A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications

1. Presidential immunity
2. Presidential privilege
The Chief Justice appointed X, the President’s sister, as Assistant Court

Administrator in the Supreme Court during the President's tenure. Claiming
that the Constitution prohibits the appointment in government of a
President’s relative, a taxpayer asks for its nullification. Will the challenge
prosper? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, since the appointment essentially violates the law against nepotism.
(B) Yes, because relatives of the President within the fourth civil degree cannot
be appointed as heads of offices in any department of government.
(C) No, X's appointment, although in the government, is not in the Executive
Department that the President heads.
(D) No, the position to which X was appointed is not among those prohibited
under the Constitution.
When the President contracted a personal loan during his incumbency, he may
be sued for sum of money (2011 BAR)
(A) during his term of office.
(B) during his tenure of office.
(C) after his term of office.
(D) after his tenure of office.
Upon complaint of the incumbent President of the Republic, "A" was charged
with libel before the Regional Trial Court. “A" moved to dismiss the
information on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction over the
offense charged because the President, being immune from suit, should
also be disqualified from filing a case against “A" in court
Resolve the motion. (2010 Bar Question)
Page 40 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The motion should be denied according to Soliven vs. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393, the
immunity of the President from suit is personal to the President. It may be invoked
by the President only and not by any other person.
During his incumbency, President Carlos shot to death one of his advisers
during a heated argument over a game of golf that they were playing. The
deceased adviser’s family filed a case of homicide against President Carlos
before the city prosecutor’s office. He moved to dismiss the case, invoking
presidential immunity from suit. Should the case be dismissed?
(A) Yes, his immunity covers his interactions with his official family, including the
deceased adviser.
(B) No, his immunity covers only work-related crimes.
(C) Yes, his immunity holds for the whole duration of his tenure.
(D) No, his immunity does not cover crimes involving moral turpitude.
Distinguish "presidential communications privilege" from "deliberative process

privilege." (3%). (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Presidential communications privilege applies to decision-making of the President.

The deliberative process privilege applies to decision-making of executive
officials. Unlike the "deliberative process privilege," "the presidential
communications privilege" applies to documents in their entirety and covers final
and post decisional matters, as well as pre-deliberative ones. The deliberative
process privilege includes advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations
comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are
formulated. (Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and
Investigations, 549 SCRA77 [2008].)
B. Powers
1. Executive and administrative powers in general
Which of the following statements is correct? (1%) (BAR 2013)

A. The President, with the concurrence of the Monetary Board, can guarantee a
foreign loan on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines.
B. Congress may, by law, provide limitations on the President's power to contract or
guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines.
C. In order to be valid and effective, treaties and executive agreements must be
concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
D. The President shall, at the end of every quarter of the calendar year, submit to
Congress a complete report of the loans contracted or guaranteed by the
Government or government-owned and controlled corporations.
Page 41 of 198
E. All the above choices are defective in some respects.
2. Power of appointment
a. In general
The President appointed Dexter I. Ty as Chairperson of the COMELEC on June 14,

2011 for a term of seven (7) years pursuant to the 1987 Constitution. His term of
office started on June 2, 2011 to end on June 2, 2018. Subsequently, the
President appointed Ms. Marikit as the third member of the COMELEC for a term
of seven (7) years starting June 2, 2014 until June 2, 2021. On June 2, 2015,
Chairperson Ty retired optionally after having served the government for thirty
(30) years. The President then appointed Commissioner Marikit as COMELEC
Chairperson. The Commission on Appointments confirmed her appointment. The
appointment papers expressly indicate that Marikit will serve as COMELEC
Chairperson "until the expiration of the original term of her office as COMELEC
Commissioner or on June 2, 2021." Matalino, a tax payer, files a petition for
certiorari before the Supreme Court asserting that the appointment of Marikit as
COMELEC Chairperson is unconstitutional for the following reasons: (1) The
appointment of Marikit as COMELEC Chairperson constituted a reappointment
which is proscribed by Section 1 (2), Article IX of the 1987 Constitution; and (2)
the term of office expressly stated in the appointment papers of Marikit likewise
contravenes the aforementioned constitutional provision. Will the constitutional
challenge succeed? Explain. (2015 BAR)
Answer:
The first argument is untenable since Commissioner Marikit was not reappointed but
actually was a promotional appointment as she had not yet fully served her term.
What the Constitution prohibits is a reappointment of a COMELEC Commissioner
after serving the seven-year term. On the second argument, the limitation of the
term of Commissioner Marikit as chairman until expiration of her original term on
June 2, 2021 is valid only until June 8, 2018, that is, the unexpired portion of the
last chairman’s term but invalid if until 2021 as it exceeds the limitation. A
promotional apportionment is allowed provided that the aggregate period of the
term of the appointee will not exceed seven years and that the rotational scheme
of staggering terms of the commission membership is maintained (Funa v. Ermita,
2012).
While Congress was in session, the President appointed eight acting

Secretaries. A group of Senators from the minority bloc questioned the
validity of the appointments in a petition before the Supreme Court on the
ground that while Congress is in session, no appointment that requires
confirmation by the Commission on Appointments can be made without the
latter’s consent and that an undersecretary should instead be
designated as Acting Secretary.
Should the petition be granted? (5%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
Page 42 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the petition should not be granted. The Department Head is an alter ego of the
president and must enjoy his confidence even if the appointment will be
merely temporary. The Senators cannot require the President to designate an
Undersecretary to be the temporary alter ego of the president (Pimentel Jr. v.
Ermita, 472 SCRA 587).
Since the Constitution is silent as to who can appoint the Chairman of the
Commission on Human Rights, the President appointed W to that position
without submitting his appointment to the Commission on Appointments
for confirmation. Is W’s appointment by the President valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, since the position of Chairman of the Commission was created by
statute, the appointment of its holder requires the consent of Congress.
(B) Yes, since the power to appoint in the government, if not lodged elsewhere,
belongs to the President as Chief Executive.
(C) Yes, since the power to fill up all government positions mentioned in the
Constitution has been lodged in the President.
(D) No, because absent any express authority under the Constitution, the power
to appoint does not exist.
An appointment held at the pleasure of the appointing power (2011 BAR)

(A) essentially temporary in nature.
(B) requires special qualifications of the appointee.
(C) requires justifiable reason for its termination.
(D) is co-extensive with the term of the public officer who appointed him.
A was a career Ambassador when he accepted an ad interim appointment as

cabinet Member. The Commision on Appointment bypassed his ad interim
appointment, however, and he was not re-appointed. Can he re-assume his
position as career Ambassador? (5%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The career Ambassador cannot re-assume his position as career Ambassador. His
ad interim appointment as Cabinet Member was a permanent appointment.
(Summers vs. Ozaeta, 81 Phil. 754 [1948]. He abandoned his position as
Ambassador when he accepted his appointment as Cabinet Member because as
Cabinet Member, he could not hold any other office during his tenure. (Section
13, Article VII, Constitution.)
The President's appointment of an acting secretary although Congress is in

session is (2011 BAR)
(A) voidable.
(B) valid.
Page 43 of 198
(C) invalid.
(D) unenforceable.
The President appoints the Vice President as his Administration's Housing Czar,
a position that requires the appointee to sit in the Cabinet. Although the
appointment of the members of the Cabinet requires confirmation by the
Commission on Appointment (CA), the Office of the President does not submit
the appointment to the CA. May the Vice President validly sit in the Cabinet?
(2.5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Vice President may validly sit in the Cabinet even jibe was not confirmed by the
Commission on Appointments. Under Article VII, Sec. 3 of the Constitution, the
appointment of the Vice President as cabinet member requires no confirmation '(Araullo
v. Aquino III, G.R. No. 209287, July I, 2014, 728 SCRA 1).
b. Commission on Appointments confirmation
Whose appointment is NOT subject to confirmation by the Commission on

Appointments? (2011 BAR)
(A) Chairman of the Civil Service Commission
(B) Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
(C) Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines
(D) Executive Secretary
c. Power of removal
d. Midnight appointments
Margie has been in the judiciary for a long time, starting from the lowest court.
Twenty (20) years from her first year in the judiciary, she was
nominated as a Justice in the Court of Appeals. Margie also happens to be a
first-degree cousin of the President. The Judicial and Bar Council included
her in the short-list submitted to the President whose term of office was
about to end - it was a month before the next presidential elections. Can
the President still make appointments to the judiciary during the so-
called midnight appointment ban period? Assuming that he can still make
appointments, could he appoint Margie, his cousin? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The President can make appointments to the Supreme Court two months before a
Page 44 of 198
presidential election until the end of his term but not to the rest of the Judiciary
like the Court of Appeals. Under Section 4(1), Article VIII of the Constitution,
vacancies in the Supreme Court shall be filled within ninety (90) days from
the occurrence of the vacancy. Under Section 9, Article VIII of the Constitution,
vacancies in the lower courts shall be filled within ninety (90) days from
submission of the list of nominees. These appointments to the courts, which is
what is sought to be prevented by the prohibition (De Castro v. Judicial and Bar
Council, 615 SCRA 666 (2010)
The President may also appoint his first cousin, Margie, as Justice of the Court of
Appeals. The prohibition in Section 13, Article VII of the Constitution against
appointment by the president of relatives within the fourth degree by
consanguinity or affinity does not include appointments to the judiciary.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER (FOR FIRST QUESTION):
The President cannot make appointments to the Judiciary during two months
before the presidential election until the end of his term because of the ban in
Section 15, Article VII of the Constitution. Despite the constitutional mandate
to fill vacancies in Judiciary within the prescribed periods, the prohibitions against
the appointments releases the President from the obligation to appoint within
them. The delay is excusable, since it will be impossible to comply with his
obligation. (2014 BAR EXAMS)
3. Power of control and supervision

a. Doctrine of qualified political agency
b. Executive departments and offices
c. Local government units
The independent economic planning agency of the Government as provided for

by the Constitution is the:
a. National Privatization Office;
b. National Productivity Commission;
c. National Economic Development Authority;
d. National Economic Council.
Who has control of the expenditure of public funds? (1%) (BAR 2013)
A. The Office of the President through the Department of Budget and
Management.
B. The House of Representatives from where all appropriation bills emanate.
C. The Senate through its Committee on Finance.
D. The Congress of the Republic of the Philippines.
E. Both the members of Congress and the President acting jointly, if so provided by
the General Appropriations Act.
The Independent Central Monetary Authority of the Government is the:
Page 45 of 198
a. Bankers Association of the Philippines;
b. Philippine Mission of the International Monetary Fund;
c. Central Bank of the Philippines;
d. World Bank, Philippine Affiliate.
When the President orders the Chief of the Philippine National Police to
suspend the issuance of permits to carry firearms outside the residence,
the President exercises (2011 BAR)
(A) the power of control.
(B) the Commander-in-Chief power.
(C) the power of supervision.
(D) the calling out power.

The President exercises the power of control over all executive departments
and agencies, including government-owned or controlled corporations.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
True. Under Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution the President has control of all
executive departments, bureaus and offices. His power of control extends to
agencies with respect to their administrative functions, even if they are performing
quasi-judicial functions (Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources,
347 SCRA 128 [2000]) and to government-owned or controlled corporations
(National Marketing Corporation v. Area, 29 SCRA 648 [1969]).
Under the so-called doctrine of qualified political agency, (1%) 2014 BAR
EXAMS
(A) civil servants must first qualify before they could be appointed to office
(B) all employees in the government are merely agents of the people
(C) the acts of subordinates presumptively of those of the heads of offices
disapproves them
(D) members of the Cabinet must have the absolute trust and confidence of the
President
A law provides that the Secretaries of the Departments of Finance and Trade
and Industry, the Governor of the Central Bank, the Director General
of the National Economic Development Authority, and the Chairperson
of the Philippine Overseas Construction Board shall sit as ex-officio
members of the Board of Directors (BOD) of a government owned and
controlled corporation (GOCC). The other four (4) members shall come
from the private sector. The BOD issues a resolution to implement a new
organizational structure, staffing pattern, a position classification
Page 46 of 198
system, and a new set of qualification standards. After the implementation
of the Resolution, Atty. Dipasupil questioned the legality of the Resolution
alleging that the BOD has no authority to do so. The BOD claims
otherwise arguing that the doctrine of qualified political agency applies to
the case. It contends that since its agency is attached to the Department of
Finance, whose head, the Secretary of Finance, is an alter ego of the
President, the BOD's acts were also the acts of the President. Is the
invocation of the doctrine by the BOD proper? Explain. 2015 BAR EXAMS
ANSWER:
The invocation by the Board of directors of the doctrine of qualified political

agency is not proper.
“The doctrine of qualified political agency essentially postulates that the heads of the
various executive departments are the alter egos of the President, and, thus,
the actions taken by such heads in the performance of their official duties are
deemed the acts of the President unless the President himself should
disapprove such acts. This doctrine is in recognition of the fact that in our
presidential form of government, all executive organizations are adjuncts of a
single Chief executive; that the heads of the executive Departments are
assistants and agents of the Chief Executive; and that the multiple executive
functions of the president as the Chief Executive are performed through the
Executive Departments.
The doctrine has been adopted here out of practical necessity,

considering that the President cannot be expected to personally perform the
multifarious functions of the executive office. The Cabinet Members sat on the
Board of Directors ex officio , or by reason of their office or function, “not
because of their direct appointment to the Board by the president. Evidently, it
was the law, not the President, that sat them in the Board.”
“Under the circumstances, when the members of the Board of Directors effected the
assailed… reorganization, thet were acting as the responsible members of the
Board of Directors” constituted pursuant to the law,” not as the alter egos of the
President.” (Trade and Investment Development Corporation of the Philippines v./
Manalang-Demigillo, G.R. No. 185571, March 5, 2013; Manalang-Demigillo v.
Trade and Investment Development Corporation of the Philippines, G.R. No.
168613, March 5, 2013)
Jax Liner applied for a public utility bus service from Bacolod to Dumaguete
from the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB).
BB Express opposed. LTFRB ruled in favor of Jax. BB appealed to the
Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC),
who reversed the LTFRB decision. Jax appealed to the Office of the
President which reinstated the LTFRB’s ruling. BB Express went to the
Page 47 of 198
Court of Appeals on certiorari questioning the decision of the Office of the
President on the ground that Office of the President has no jurisdiction over
the case in the absence of any law providing an appeal from DOTC to the
Office of the President. Will the petition prosper?
(A) No, exhaustion of administrative remedies up to the level of the President is a
pre-requisite to judicial recourse.
(B) No, the action of the DOTC Secretary bears only the implied approval of the
President who is not precluded from reviewing the decision of the former.
(C) Yes, when there is no law providing an appeal to the Office of the President,
no such appeal may be pursued.
(D) Yes, the doctrine of qualified political agency renders unnecessary a further
appeal to the Office of the President.
4. Military Powers
Distinguish the President's authority to declare a state of rebellion from the

authority to proclaim a state of national emergency. (2%) 2015 BAR EXAMS
ANSWER:
While both the power to declare a state of rebellion and the power to proclaim a
state of national emergency may be justified under the President’s general
Ordinance Powers under the provisions of the Administrative Code (Chapter
2, Book III of Executive Order No. 292 Administrative Code of 1987), the
power to declare a state of rebellion springs from the President’s so called “calling
out power” under Section 18 of Article VII of the Constitution, which provides that
“whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to
prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion,” (Sanlakas v.
Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 159085, February 3, 2004, 421 SCRA 656), while
the power to proclaim a state of national emergency can be said to be based
primarily on his duty to enforce the laws as well as to formulate policies to
be embodied in existing laws, consistent with the provisions of Section 17 of
Article VII of the Constitution. Under said provision, the President “sees to it that
all laws are enforced by the officials and employees of his department.”
Moreover, “in the exercise of such function, the President, if needed, may
employ the powers attached to this office as the Commander-in-Chief of all
armed forces of the country, including the Philippine National Police under
the Department of Interior and Local Government. “(David v. Arroyo, G.R. No.
171396, May 3, 2006)
It must be noted though, that without a law promulgated pursuant to the provisions of
Section 23(2) of Article VI, and Section 17 of Article XII, both of which authorize
the statutory delegation of emergency powers in favor of the President, he is
limited to the statutory delegation of emergency powers in favor of the President,
he is limited to the exercise of his calling-out power under Section 18 of Article VII
of the Constitution, and may not exercise emergency powers. (David V. Arroyo,
Page 48 of 198
G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006)
The President CANNOT call out the military (2011 BAR)

(A) to enforce customs laws.
(B) to secure shopping malls against terrorists.
(C) to arrest persons committing rebellion.
(D) to raid a suspected haven of lawless elements.
The President may proclaim martial law over a particular province subject to
revocation or extension
(A) by Congress,subject to ratification by the Supreme Court. (2011 BAR)
(B) by the Supreme Court.
(C) by Congress alone
(D) by Congress, upon recommendation of the respective Sangguniang
Panlalawigan.
5. Pardoning power
a. Nature and Limitation
b. Forms of Executive Clemency
The President cannot grant pardon in cases of impeachment. He may however

exercise such power when: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. A person convicted in an impeachment proceeding is subject to prosecution,

trial and punishment in an ordinary criminal action;
b. A person convicted in an impeachment proceeding is granted an absolute
pardon;
c. A person convicted in an impeachment proceeding files his appeal before the
Supreme Court;
d. None of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) SECTION 19, ARTICLE VII OF CONSTITUTION
Following COMELEC Chairman Bocay's conviction for acts of corruption in the

impeachment proceedings, he was indicted for plunder before the
Sandiganbayan and found guilty, as charged. Can he get Presidential
pardon on the plunder case? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, plunder is not a pardonable offense.
(B) No, conviction in a criminal case for the same acts charged in the
impeachment proceedings is not pardonable.
(C) Yes, convictions in two different fora for the same acts, are too harsh that
they are not beyond the reach of the President’s pardoning power.
Page 49 of 198
(D) Yes, conviction in court in a criminal action is subject to the President's
pardoning power.
What is the pardoning power of the President under Art VIII, Sec. 19 of the
Constitution? Is the exercise of the power absolute? (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the

President may grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, and remit fines and
forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment. Ile shall also have the power to grant
amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress (Article
VII Sec. 19 of the 1987 Constitution).
No pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of sentence for violation of election laws,

rules, and regulations shall be granted by the President without the favorable
recommendation of the Commission (Article IX-C, Sec. 5 of the 1987 Constitution).
The only instances in which the President may not extend pardon remain to be in: (I)
impeachment cases; (2) cases that have not yet resulted in a final conviction; and (3)
cases involving violations of election laws, rules and regulations in which there was no
favorable recommendation coming from the COMELEC. Any act Of Congress by way of
statute cannot operate to delimit the pardoning power of the President (Risos-Vidal v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 206666, January 21, 2015).
Distinguish pardon from amnesty. (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. Pardon can be given only after final conviction; amnesty can be given any time
and even before the Ming of a criminal case.
2. Pardon looks forward; amnesty looks backward, as if the accused never
committed a crime.
3. Pardon is given to individuals. Amnesty is given to a class of persons.
4. Pardon is given for all criminal offenses. Amnesty is given for political offenses.
5. Pardon does not require the concurrence of Congress. Amnesty requires the
concurrence of Congress.
6. Pardon must be proven, because it is a private act; amnesty need not be proven,
because it is a public act (Barriaquinto v. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-I278, January
21, 1949,82 Phils. 642).
6. Diplomatic power
Page 50 of 198
The President entered into an executive agreement with Vietnam for the supply
to the Philippines of animal feeds not to exceed 40,000 tons in any one
year. The Association of Animal Feed Sellers of the Philippines
questioned the executive agreement for being contrary to R.A. 462 which
prohibits the importation of animal feeds from Asian countries.
Is the challenge correct? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) Yes, the executive agreement is contrary to an existing domestic law.

(B) No, the President is solely in charge of foreign relations and all his actions in
this role form part of the law of the land.
(C) No, international agreements are sui generis and stand independently of our
domestic laws.
(D) Yes, the executive agreement is actually a treaty which does not take effect
without ratificaiton by the Senate.
(E) Yes, the challenge is correct because there is no law employering the
President to undertake the importation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A)(Gonzales v. Hechanova, G.R.No. L-21897, October 22, 1963, 9 SCRA 230).
The Philippines and the Republic of Kroi Sha established diplomatic

relations and immediately their respective Presidents signed the following:
(1) Executive Agreement allowing the Republic of Kroi Sha to establish its
embassy and consular offices within Metro Manila; and (2) Executive
Agreement allowing the Republic of Kroi Sha to bring to the Philippines its
military complement, warships, and armaments from time to time for a
period not exceeding one month for the purpose of training exercises with
the Philippine military forces and exempting from Philippine criminal
jurisdiction acts committed in the line of duty by foreign military personnel,
and from paying custom duties on all the goods brought by said foreign
forces into Philippine territory in connection with the holding of the
activities authorized under the said Executive Agreement. Senator
Maagap questioned the constitutionality of the said Executive Agreements
and demanded that the Executive Agreements be submitted to the Senate
for ratification pursuant to the Philippine Constitution. Is Senator Maagap
correct? Explain. ( 4 % ) 2015 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
It is submitted that only the first Executive Agreement regarding the

establishment of the embassy of Kroi Sha need not be submitted to the Senate
for its concurrence following the general rule that the Executive Agreements
need not to submitted to the Senate for its concurrence, under the
provisions of Section 21 of Article VII of the Constitution. (China National
Page 51 of 198
Machinery &^ Equipment Corporation v. Sta. Maria, G.R. No. 185572,
February 7, 2012, 665 SCRA 189)
The second Executive Agreement which allows the Republic of Kroi Sha to bring to
the Philippines its military complement, warships, and armaments from time
may be subject to the provisions of Section 25 of Article XVIII of the Constitution,
which provides that “foreign bases, troops or facilities shall not be allowed in the
Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and, when the
Congress so 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 of the contracting state.”
It should be noted that, under the Constitution, the Senate merely provides its
concurrence to, and does not ratify, treaties. It is the President who ratifies
treaties. (Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 15808, July 16, 2008, 462
SCRA 622)
Alternative Answer
Senator Maagap is wrong.
Executive Agreements need not be submitted to the Senate for its

concurrence, under the provisions of Section 21 of Article VII of the
Constitution. (China National Machinery & Equipment Corporation v. Sta. Maria,
G.R. NO. 185572, February 7, 2012, 665 SCRA 189) This would be true with
respect to both Executive Agreements in the problem, including the second one,
which allows the Republic of Kroi Sha to bring to the Philippines its military
complements, warships and armaments from time to time. Under Section 25 of
Article XVIII of the Constitution, only such agreements with the United States of
America would be required to be the subject of a treaty which would need the
concurrence of the Senate.
It should be noted that, under the Constitution, the Senate merely provides its
concurrence to, and does not ratify, treaties. It is the President who ratifies
treaties, (Pimentel v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 15808, July 16, 2008, 462
SCRA 622)
The President forged an executive agreement with Vietnam for a year supply of
animal feeds to the Philippines not to exceed 40,000 tons. The Association
of Animal Feed Sellers of the Philippines questioned the executive
agreement for being contrary to R.A. 462 which prohibits the importation of
animal feeds from Asian countries. Is the challenge correct? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, the executive agreement is contrary to our existing domestic law.
(B) No, the President is the sole organ of the government in external relations
and all his actions as such form part of the law of the land.
Page 52 of 198
(C) No, international agreements are sui generis which must stand independently
of our domestic laws.
(D) Yes, the executive agreement is actually a treaty which does not take effect
without ratification by the Senate.
The League of Filipino Political Scientists (LFPS) organized an international

conference on the human rights situation in Myanmar at the Central Luzon
State University (CLSU). An exiled Myanmar professor Sung Kui, critical of
the military government in Myanmar, was invited as keynote speaker. The
Secretary. of Foreign Affairs informed the President of the regional and
national security implications of having Prof. Kui address the conference.
The President thereupon instructed the immigration authorities to prevent
the entry of Prof. Kui into Philippine territory. The chancellor of CLSU
argued that the instruction violates the Constitution. Decide with reasons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The argument of the chancellor of Central Luzon State University is not valid. Since
an alien has no right to enter the Philippines, preventing Prof. Sing Kui from
entering the Philippines is not a violation of his rights. (Lee and Quigley, Consular
Law and Practice, 3rd ed., p. 220.) Since the President has the power of control
over. foreign relations, be has the power to ban aliens from entering the
Philippines. (United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation, 299 U.S. 304
[1936].)
The Philippihes entered into an international agreement with members of the

international community creating the International Economic Organization
(1E0) which will serve as a forum to address economic issues between
States, create standards, encourage greater volume of trade between its
members, and settle economic disputes. After the Philippine President
signed the agreement, the Philippine Senate demanded that the
international agreement be submitted to it for its ratification. The President
refused, arguing that it is an executive agreement that merely created an
international organization and it dwells mainly on addressing economic
issues among States.
Is the international agreement creating the 1E0 a treaty or an executive

agreement? Explain, (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The agreement creating the International Economic Organization (1E0) is an
executive agreement and not a treaty.
In Section 21, Article VII is the only provision of the Constitution which defines a
Page 53 of 198
"treaty or international agreement" as valid and effective law by reason of
concurrence of the Senate.
However, it is the intendment of the Constitution that such "treaty or international

agreement" does not include executive agreement which therefore is excluded
from the Senate's authority of concurrence over treaties.
ThIs constitutional intent is expressed in the proceedings of the Constitutional

Commission in its awareness that at the time the power of the President to
conclude executive agreement was clearly recognized by at least decisions of the
Supreme court establishing the principle that the President's power includes
conclusion of executive agreements which are valid without need of Senate
concurrence, Hence, logically the Treaty Clause in Section 21, Article VII is to be
interpreted as excluding executive agreement (Commissioner of Customs v.
Eastern Sea Trading, G.R. No. 1-14279, October 31,1961, 3 SCRA 351; USAFFE
Veterans Association v. Treasurer,, G.R. No. L-10500, June 30,1959,105 Phil.
1030).
Moreover, as the Supreme Court has pointed out in Pimentel v. Office of the
Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 158088, July 6, 2005, 462 SCRA 622), the
President has the sole power to ratify treaties. The Senate may be able to
exercise its authority of concurrence only if the 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.
It is only on the basis of the authority of the President to ratify treaties that the Senate
may act in concurrence under the Treaty clause of the Constitution.
7. Powers relative to appropriation measures
The President may contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the

Republic of the Philippines only upon prior concurrence of the: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. House of Representatives;
b. Senate;
c. Central Bank;
d. Monetary Board.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 20, ARTICLE VII OF CONSTITUTION
Page 54 of 198
Which of the following statements is correct? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) The President, with the concurrence of the Monetary Board, can
guarantee a foreign loan on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines.
(B) Congress may, by law, provide limitations on the President’s power to
contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Republic of the
Philippines.
(C) In order to be valid and effective, treaties and executive agreements must be
concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
(D) The President shall, at the end of every quarter of the calendar year, submit
to Congress a complete report of the loans contracted or guaranteed
by the Government or government-owned and controlled corporations.
(E) All the above choices are defective in some respects.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B)(Article VII, Section 20 of the 1987 Constitution).
The President, concerned about persistent reports of widespread

irregularities and shenanigans related to the alleged ghost projects with
which the pork barrel funds of members of Congress had been
associated, decided not to release the funds authorized under a Special
Appropriations Act for the construction of a new bridge. The Chief
Executive explained that, to properly conserve and preserve the limited
funds of the government, as well as to avoid further mistrust by the
people, such a project - which he considered as unnecessary since there
was an old bridge near the proposed bridge which was still functional -
should be scrapped. Does the President have such authority? (4%) 2014
BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Presidential has the authority to withhold the release of the funds under a
Special Appropriation Act for a Project which he considered unnecessary. The
faithful execution of the laws requires the President to desist from implementing a
law if by doing so will prejudice public interest. It is folly to require the
President to spend the entire amounts appropriated in the law in such a case.
(Philippine Constitution Association v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506 (1994).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The President does not possess the authority to scrap the Special appropriated
funds. Generally, he cannot replace legislative discretion with his own personal
judgment as to the wisdom of a law (Araullo v. Aquino G.R. No. 209287, July 1,
2014.) (2014 BAR EXAMS)
Page 55 of 198
The Executive Department has accumulated substantial savings from its
appropriations. Needing P3,000,000.00 for the conduct of a plebiscite for the
creation of a new city but has no funds appropriated soon by the Congress for
the purpose, the COMELEC requests the President to transfer funds from the
savings of the Executive Department in order to avoid a delay in the holding of
the plebiscite.
May the President validly exercise his power under the 1987 Constitution to
transfer funds from the savings of the Executive Department, and make a cross-
border transfer of P3,000,000.00 to the COMELEC by way of augmentation? Is
your answer the same if the transfer is treated as aid to the COMELEC? Explain
your answer. (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The President may not transfer savings to the Commission on Elections as aid. The
constitutional prohibition against the transfer of appropriations to other branches of
government or Constitutional Commission applies for whatever reason (Araullo v.
Aquino III, G.R. No. 209287, July 1, 2014, 728 SCRA 1).
8. Delegated powers
The President may set a limit on the country's import quota in the exercise of
his (2011 BAR)
(A) delegated power.
(B) concurring power.
(C) residual power.
(D) inherent power.
9. Veto powers
The power of the President to veto any particular part in an appropriation

revenue, or tariff bill, is called the: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. specific veto;
b. revenue veto;
c. item veto;
d. monetary veto.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) SECTION 27(2) ARTICLE VI OF CONSTITUTION
Page 56 of 198
Distinguish between “pocket veto” and “item veto.” (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A pocket veto is when the President is considered to have rejected a bill submitted to
him for his approval when Congress adjourns during the period given to the
President to approve or reject a bill.
On the other hand, an item veto, or partial veto, is the power of a President to nullify
or cancel specific provisions of a bill, usually a budget appropriations bill, without
vetoing the entire legislative package.
10. Residual powers

11. Executive privilege
Several senior officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines received

invitations from the Chairperson of the Senate Committees on National
Defense and Security for them to appear as resource persons in
scheduled public hearings regarding a wide range of subjects. The
invitations state that these public hearings were triggered by the privilege
speeches of the Senators that there was massive electoral fraud during the
last national elections. The invitees Brigadier General Matapang and
Lieutenant Coronel Makatuwiran, who were among those tasked to
maintain peace and order during the last election, refused to attend
because of an Executive Order banning all public officials enumerated in
paragraph 3 thereof from appearing before either house of Congress
without prior approval of the President to ensure adherence to the rule of
executive privilege. Among those included in the enumeration are "senior
officials of executive departments who, in the judgment of the department
heads, are covered by executive privilege." Several individuals and groups
challenge the constitutionality of the subject executive order because it
frustrates the power of the Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of
legislation under Section 21, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution. Decide the
case. (5%) 2015 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under Section 5, Article XVI of the Constitution, the President is the Commander-in-
Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. By virtue of this power, the
President can prevent the Brigadier General Matapang and Liutenant Colonel
Makatwiran from appearing before the Senate to testify before a legislative
investigation (Guidani v. Senga, 2006).
The provision in the Executive Order which authorized Department Secretaries to

invoke executive privilege in case senior officials in their departments are asked
to appear in a legislative investigation is unconstitutional. It is upon the President
Page 57 of 198
that executive power is vested. Only the President can make use of Executive
Privilege (Senate v. Ermita, 2006).
The House Committee on Appropriations conducted an inquiry in aid of

legislation into alleged irregular and anomalous disbursements of the
Countrywide Development Fund (CDF) and Congressional Initiative
Allocation (CIA) of Congressmen as exposed by X, a Division Chief of the
Department of Budget and Management (DBM). Implicated in the
questionable disbursement are high officials of the Palace. The House
Committee summoned X and the DBM Secretary to appear and testify. X
refused to appear, while the Secretary appeared but refused to testify
invoking executive privilege.
May X be compelled to appear and testify? If yes, what sanction may be

imposed on him? (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
X may be compelled to appear and testify. Only the President or the Executive
Secretary by order of the President can invoke executive privilege. (Senate of the
Philippines v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 13 (2006).) He can be cited for contempt and
ordered to be arrested. (De la Paz v. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,
579 SCRA 521 [2009].)
A department secretary may, with the President's consent, initiate his

appearance before the Senate or the House of Representatives which (2011
BAR)
(A) must seek the concurrence of the other House before acting.
(B) must hold an executive session to hear the department secretary.
(C) may altogether reject the initiative.
(D) must accept such initiated appearance.
Is the Budget Secretary shielded by executive privilege from responding to the

inquiries of the House Committee? Explain briefly. If the answer is no, is
there any sanction that may be imposed upon him? (3%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Secretary of Budget and Management is not shielded by executive privilege from
responding to the inquiries of the House Committee on Appropriations, because
the inquiry is aid of legislation and neither the President nor the Executive
Secretary by order of the President invoked executive privilege. (Senate of the
Philippines v. Ermita, 488m SCRA 1 (2006.) For refusing to testify, he may cited
for contempt and ordered to be arrested (De la Paz v Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations, 519 SCRA 521 [2009].)
Page 58 of 198
V. Judicial Department
A. Concepts
1. Judicial power
What is the concept of expanded judicial review under the 1987 Constitution?
(2015 BAR)
Answer:
The concept of expanded judicial review of the Supreme Court, the facial challenge to
the constitutionality laws is no longer limited to laws which violate the freedom of
speech but applies to all violations of fundamental rights under the Bill of Rights
(Imbong vs. Ochoa, 2014).
In addition, the remedies of certiorari and prohibition in the Supreme Court are broader
in scope and may be issued to correct errors of jurisdiction of judicial, quasi-judicial, or
ministerial actions and may be invoked to restrain any act of grave abuse of discretion
of any branch of government (Araullo vs, Aquino, 2014).
Differentiate the rule-making power or the power of the Supreme Court to

promulgate rules under Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution and judicial
legislation. (2%) (2015 BAR)
Suggested Answer:
Judicial legislation refers to the encroachment by the Judiciary upon the function of the
legislature by making law rather than declaring, construing or enforcing the law.
(Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, 3rd ed., p. 685).
Section 3 (5), Article VIII of Constitution granted the Supreme Court power to
promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. In
the exercise of this power, the Supreme Court promulgated the Rule on the Writ of
Amparo, the Rules on the Writ of Habeas Data, and the Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases.
Congress enacted R.A. No. 14344 creating the City of Masuwerte which took
effect on September 25, 2014. Section 23 of the law specifically exempts the City
of Masuwerte from the payment of legal fees in the cases that it would file and/or
prosecute in the courts of law. In two (2) cases that it filed, the City of Masuwerte
was assessed legal fees by the clerk of court pursuant to Rule 141 (Legal Fees) of
the Rules of Court. The City of Masuwerte questions the assessment claiming
that it is exempt from paying legal fees under Section 23 of its charter. Is the
claim of exemption tenable? Explain. (4%) (2015 BAR)
Suggested Answer:
The exemption from payment of legal fees is not valid. The rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court for the payment of legal fees were in the exercise of its rule-making
Page 59 of 198
power cannot be modified by a law granting an exemption from payment. (In Re
Exemption from Payment of Court and Sheriff’s Fees of Duly Registered Cooperatives,
668 SCRA 1 [2012]).
In her interview before the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), Commissioner
Annie Amorsolo of the National Labor Relations Commission claims that
she should be given credit for judicial service because as NLRC
Commissioner, she has the rank of a Justice of the Court of Appeals; she
adjudicates cases that are appealable to the Court of Appeals; she is
assigned car plate No. 10; and she is, by law, entitled to the rank, benefits
and privileges of a Court of Appeals Justice.
If you are a member of the JBC, would you give credit to this explanation? (6%)
2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, I will not give credence to the explanation of Commissioner Annie Amorsolo. Her
ranking merely means that she has the same salary and benefits as a Justice of
the Court of Appeals. However, she is not actually a Justice of the Court of
Appeals. The National labor Relations is not a court. She does not perform
judicial functions (Noblejas v. Teehankee, G.R. No. L-28790, APRIL 29, 1968, 23
SCRA 405).
2. Judicial review
The “Poverty Alleviation and Assistance Act "was passed to enhance the
capacity of the most marginalized families nationwide. A financial
assistance scheme called .conditional cash transfers" was initially funded
500 million pesos by Congress. One of the provisions of the law gave the
Joint-Congressional Oversight Committee authority to screen the list of
beneficiary families initially determined by the Secretary of Department of
Social Welfare and Development pursuant to the Department implementing
rules. Mang Pandoy, a resident of Smokey Mountain in Tondo, questioned
the authority of the Committee.
Does Mang Pandoy have legal standing to question the law? (2%) (2010 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
On the assumption that Mang Pandoy is a beneficiary of the financial legal

assistance, he has legal standing to question the law. He may be prejudiced by
the improper screening of the beneficiary families. (Province of Batangas v.
Romulo, 492 SCRA 736 [2004). Besides, since the implementation of the law will
Page 60 of 198
require the expenditure of public funds, as a taxpayer Mang Pandoy has legal
standing to question the law. (Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural
Resources, 347 SCRA 128 [2000].)
Define: Doctrine of necessary implication (1%) (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The doctrine of necessary implication means that every statute is understood by

implication to contain all such provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its
object and purpose, or to make effective rights, powers, privileges or jurisdiction
which it grants, including all such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may
be fairly and logically inferred from its terms. (Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines,
Inc. v. Secretary of Labor, 312 SCRA 104 [1999].)
The provision under the Constitution — that any member who took no part,
dissented, or inhibited from a decision or resolution must state the reason
for his dissent or non-participation — applies ______________. (1%) 2013
BAR EXAMS
(A) only to the Supreme Court

(B) to both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals
(C) to the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan
(D) to the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan and the
Court of Tax Appeals
(E) to all collegial judicial and quasi-judicial adjudicatory bodies
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D)(Article VIII, Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution).
A person who has a personal and substantial interest in the case, such that he
has sustained, or will sustain, direct injury as a result of its
enforcement is considered to have: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. understanding to challenge the governmental act;

b. standing to challenge the governmental act;
c. opportunity to challenge the governmental act;
d. familiarity to challenge the governmental act.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) PEOPLE VS VERA, 65 PHIL. 56
Mr. Yellow and Mr. Orange were the leading candidates in the
Page 61 of 198
vicepresidential elections. After elections, Yellow emerged as the winner by
a slim margin of 100,000 votes. Undaunted, Orange filed a protest with the
Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET). After due consideration of the facts
and the issues, the PET ruled that Orange was the real winner of the
elections and ordered his immediate proclamation. (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Aggrieved, Yellow filed with the Supreme Court a Petition for Certiorari
challenging the decision of the PET alleging grave abuse of discretion. Does
the Supreme Court have jurisdiction? Explain. (3%)
b. Would the answer in (a.) be the same if Yellow and Orange were
contending for a senatorial slot and it was the Senate Electoral Tribunal
(SET) who issued the challenged ruling? (3%)
c. What is the composition of the PET? (2%)
d. What is judicial power? Explain Briefly. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over the petition the presidential electoral
tribunal is not simply an agency to which the members of the supreme court were
assigned. It is notseparate from the supreme court. (macalintal vs. Presidential
electoral tribunal, 631 scra 239)
B. The supreme court would have jurisdiction if it were the senate electoral tribunal
who issued the challenged rulling. The supreme court can review its decision if it
acted with grave abuse of discretion. (lerias vs house of representative electoral
tribunal, 202 scra 808)
C. The presidential electoral tribunal is composed of the chief justice and associate
justice of the supreme court sitting en banc. (section 4, article vii of the
constitution.)
D. Judicial power- sec 1(1) art. 8 is the authority to settle justifiable

controversies or disputes involving right that are enforceable and
demandable before the courts of justice or the redress of wrong for
violation of such right. (lopez vs roxas, 17 scra 756.) It includes the duty of the
courts to settle actual controversies involving right which are legally demandable
and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has a grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch
or instrumentally of the government (section 1, article vii of constitution.)
Courts may still decide cases that have otherwise become academic when they
involve (2011 BAR)
(A) the basic interest of people.
(B) petitions for habeas corpus.
(C) acts of the Chief Executive.
(D) Presidential election protests.
Page 62 of 198
a. Operative fact doctrine
The "operative fact" doctrine of constitutional law is applied when a law is

declared: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. operative;
b. factual;
c. constitutional;
d. unconstitutional.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) DE AGBAYANI VS. PHILIPPINES NATIONAL BANK, 38 SCRA 429
Define/explain: Doctrine of operative facts (1%) (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The doctrine of operative facts means that before a law was declared
unconstitutional, its actual existence must be taken into account and whatever
was done while the law was in operation should be recognized as valid. (Rieta v.
People, 436 SCRA 273 [2004].)
When the Supreme Court nullified the decisions of the military tribunal for lack
of jurisdiction, it excluded from their coverage decisions of acquittal where
the defendants were deemed to have acquired a vested right. In so doing,
the Supreme Court applied (2011 BAR)
(A) the operative fact doctrine.
(B) the rule against double jeopardy.
(C) the doctrine of supervening event.
(D) the orthodox doctrine.
b. Moot Questions
Courts may dismiss a case on ground of mootness when (2011 BAR)

(A) the case is premature.
(B) petitioner lacks legal standing.
(C) the questioned law has been repealed.
(D) the issue of validity of law was not timely raised.
c. Political question doctrine
Where there is "the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution

without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government;
or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already
Page 63 of 198
made; or the potentially of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncement by
various departments on a question," describes what kind of political question:
a. adherence kind;
b. prudential kind;
c. respectful kind;
d. deference kind.
B. Safeguards of Judicial independence
According to Sec. 3, Art. VIII of the Constitution, the Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal
autonomy. What does the term fiscal autonomy signify? Explain your answer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The fiscal autonomy of the Judiciary means that the appropriation for the Judiciary may
not be reduced by Congress below the amount appropriated for the previous year, and
after approval, shall be automatically and regularly released (Article VIII, Sec. 3 of the
1987 Constitution).
Fiscal autonomy authorizes the Supreme Court to levy, assess and collect fees, and to
determine how its funds should be utilized (Bengwit v. G.R. No.103524, April
15,1992,208 SCRA 133).
C. Judicial restraint
D. Appointments to the Judiciary
Margie has been in the judiciary for a long time, starting from the lowest court.
Twenty (20) years from her first year in the judiciary, she was
nominated as a Justice in the Court of Appeals. Margie also happens to be a
first-degree cousin of the President. The Judicial and Bar Council included
her in the short-list submitted to the President whose term of office was
about to end - it was a month before the next presidential elections. Can
the President still make appointments to the judiciary during the so-
called midnight appointment ban period? Assuming that he can still make
appointments, could he appoint Margie, his cousin? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The President can make appointments to the Supreme Court two months before a
presidential election until the end of his term but not to the rest of the Judiciary
like the Court of Appeals. Under Section 4(1), Article VIII of the Constitution,
Page 64 of 198
vacancies in the Supreme Court shall be filled within ninety (90) days from
the occurrence of the vacancy. Under Section 9, Article VIII of the Constitution,
vacancies in the lower courts shall be filled within ninety (90) days from
submission of the list of nominees. These appointments to the courts, which is
what is sought to be prevented by the prohibition (De Castro v. Judicial and Bar
Council, 615 SCRA 666 (2010) The President may also appoint his first cousin,
Margie, as Justice of the Court of Appeals. The prohibition in Section 13,
Article VII of the Constitution against appointment by the president of relatives
within the fourth degree by consanguinity or affinity does not include
appointments to the judiciary.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER (FOR FIRST QUESTION);
The President cannot make appointments to the Judiciary during two months
before the presidential election until the end of his term because of the ban in
Section 15, Article VII of the Constitution. Despite the constitutional mandate
to fill vacancies in Judiciary within the prescribed periods, the prohibitions against
the appointments releases the President from the obligation to appoint within
them. The delay is excusable, since it will be impossible to comply with his
obligation. (2014 BAR EXAMS)
A judge of the Regional Trial Court derives his powers and duties from (2011
BAR)
(A) statute.
(B) the President, the appointing power.
(C) Supreme Court issuances.
(D) the rules of court.
Associate Justice A retires from the Supreme Court 90 days before the
forthcoming Presidential election. May the incumbent President still appoint
Justice A's successor? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, it will violate the Constitutional prohibition against midnight appointments.
(B) Yes, vacancies in the Supreme Court should be filled within 90 days from
occurrence of the vacancy.
(C) Yes, vacancies in the Supreme Court should be filled within 90 days from
submission of JBC nominees to the President.
(D) No, the incumbent President must yield to the choice of the next President
The President wants to appoint A to the vacant post of Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court because of his qualifications, competence, honesty, and
efficiency. But A’s name is not on the list of nominees that the Judicial and
Bar Council (JBC) submitted to the President. What should the President
do? (2011 BAR)
(A) Request the JBC to consider adding A to the list.
(B) Decline to appoint from the list.
(C) Appoint from the list.
Page 65 of 198
(D) Return the list to JBC.
E. Supreme Court
1. En banc and division cases
When the Supreme Court sits in division, cases can be decided by as few as a
minimum of: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. three votes;
b. four votes;
c. five votes;
d. six votes.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) SECTION 4(3), ARTICLE VII OF CONSTITUTION
When the Supreme Court sits en banc, cases are decided by the
concurrence of a majority of the members who: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. actually sent in memos on matters for deliberation and called in their votes
thereon;
b. actually participated in the oral arguments and voted thereon;
c. actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted
thereon;
d. actually took part in the voting thereon and took notes on the actual
deliberations.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) SECTION 4(2), ARTICLE VII OF CONSTITUTION
The Court had adopted the practice of announcing its decision in

important, controversial or interesting cases the moment the votes had
been taken among the justices, even as the final printed decision and
separate opinions are not yet available to the public. In a greatly
anticipated decision in a case of wide-ranging ramifications, the voting
was close - 8 for the majority, while 7 were for the other side. After the Court
had thus voted, it issued a press release announcing the result, with the
advice that the printed copy of the decision, together with the separate
opinions, were to be issued subsequently. The following day, however, one
of the members of the Court died. The Court then announced that it would
deliberate anew on the case since apparently the one who died belonged to
the majority. Citizens for Transparency, a group of civic-spirited
professionals and ordinary citizens dedicated to transparency and
accountability in the government, questioned the act of the Court. The
Page 66 of 198
petitioners claimed the decision had already been validly adopted and
promulgated. Therefore, it could no longer be recalled by the Court. At the
same time, the group also asked the Court to disclose to the public the
original decision and the separate opinions of the magistrates, together
with what they had deliberated on just before they came up with the press
release about the 8-7 decision. (6%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
(A) Was the announced 8-7 decision already validly promulgated and thus not
subject to recall?
(B) If the decision was not yet finalized at the time when the justice died, could
it still be promulgated?
(C) If the decision was still being finalized, should the Court release to the
public the majority decision and the separate opinions as originally
announced, together with their deliberations on the issues?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. The decision cannot be deemed to have been promulgated simply because of the
announcement of the voting in a press release, because the decision has not yet
been issued and filled with the Clerk of Court. Until the decision is filed with the
Clerk of Court, the Justices still have control over the decision and they
can still change their votes (Limkaichong v. Commission on Elections, 594
SCRA 434 (2009).
B. The decision can no longer be promulgated if the Justice who belonged to the
majority died, for lack of majority vote. The vote he cast is no longer valid, as he
was no longer an incumbent member of the Supreme Court (lao v. To-Chip, 158
SCRA 243 (1988)
C. The Supreme Court should not release to the public the majority opinion
and the separate opinions, as well as its deliberations. They are part of its
confidential internal deliberations. (Limkaichong v. Commission on Elections,
594 SCRA 434 (2009).
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER FOR (B):
The decision can be promulgated even if the Supreme Court en banc is equally
divided, if after the case was again deliberated upon, no majority decision was
reached. If the case is an original action, it should be dismissed. If it is an
appealed case, the decision appealed from should be affirmed if it is a civil case.
If it is a criminal case, the accused should be acquitted (Section 7, Rule 56 of the
Rules of Court; Section 3, Rule 125 Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure)
Page 67 of 198
2. Procedural rule-making
Congress enacted a law providing for trial by jury for those charged with crime
or offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or lifeimprisonment. The
law provides for the qualifications of members of the jury, the
guidelines for the bar and bench for their selection, the manner a trial by
jury shall operate, and the procedures to be followed.
Is the law constitutional? (6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The law providing for trial by jury is unconstitutional because of the omission
in Article VIII, Section 5 (5) of the 1987 Constitution of the provisions in
Article VIII, Section 13 of the 1935 Constitution and Article X, Section 5(5) 1973
Constitution, which both authorized the Legislature to repeal, alter or
supplement the rules of procedure promulgated by the Supreme Court.
Congress can no longer enact any law governing rules of procedure for the
courts (Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601, October 12,
1998, 301 SCRA 96).
Congress enacted a law exempting certain government institutions

providing social services from the payment of court fees. Atty. Kristopher
Timoteo challenged the constitutionality of the said law on the ground that
only the Supreme Court has the power to fix and exempt said entities from
the payment of court fees.
Congress, on the other hand, argues that the law is constitutional as it has the
power to enact said law for it was through legislative fiat that the
Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and the Special Allowance for Judges
and Justices (SAJJ), the funding of which are sourced from the fees
collected by the courts, were created. Thus, Congress further argues that if
it can enact a law utilizing court fees to fund the JDF and SAJJ, a fortiori it
can enact a law exempting the payment of court fees.
Discuss the constitutionality of the said law, taking into account the arguments
of both parties? (2014 BAR)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The law is constitutional. The Constitution has taken away the power of Congress to
repeal, alter or supplement the Rules of Court. The fiscal autonomy guaranteed
the Judiciary by Section 3, Article VIII of the Constitution recognized the authority
of the Supreme Court to levy, assess and collect fees. Congress cannot amend
the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court for the payment of legal fees by
granting exemptions (In re: Petition for Recognition of Exemption of the
Page 68 of 198
Government Service Insurance System from Payment of Legal Fees, 612 SCRA
193); In re: Exemption of National Power Corporation from Payment of
Filling/Docket Fees, 615 SCRA 1]; In re Exemption from Payment of Court and
Sheriff’s Fees of Duly
Congress passed a law, R.A. No. 15005, creating an administrative Board

principally tasked with the supervision and regulation of legal education.
The Board was attached to the Department of Education. It was empowered,
among others, to prescribe minimum standards for law admission and
minimum qualifications of faculty members, the basic curricula for the
course of study aligned to the requirements for admission to the Bar, law
practice and social consciousness, as well as to establish a law practice
internship as a requirement for taking the Bar which a law student shall
undergo anytime during the law course, and to adopt a system of
continuing legal education. Professor Boombastick, a long-time law
practitioner and lecturer in several prestigious law schools, assails the
constitutionality of the law arguing that it encroached on the prerogatives of
the Supreme Court to promulgate rules relative to admission to the practice
of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. If you
were Professor Boombastick’s understudy, how may you help him develop
clear, concise and cogent arguments in support of his position based on
the present Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court on judicial
independence and fiscal autonomy? (2014 BAR)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statutory authority granted to the administrative Board to promulgate rules and
regulations cannot encroach upon the exclusive authority of the Supreme Court to
regulate the admission to the practice of law (Section 5(5), Article VIII of the
Constitution). Thus, The Administrative Board cannot prescribe additional
standards for admission to the practice of law, adopt a course study which is
inconsistent with the requirements to take the bar examinations (Philippine
Lawyer’s Association v. Agrava, 105 Phil. 173). Since Congress has no power to
repeal, alter or supplement the Rules of Court, it cannot delegate such power to
the Administrative Board.

A law fixing the passing grade in the Bar examinations at 70%, with no grade
lower than 40% in any subject, is constitutional.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
False. Such a law entails amendment of the Rules of Court promulgated by the
Page 69 of 198
Supreme Court. The present Constitution has taken away the power of Congress
to alter the Rules of Court (Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, 301 SCRA 96
[1999]). The law will violate the principle of separation of powers.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
True. Deliberations in the ConCon reveal that Congress retains the power to amend
or alter the rules because the power to promulgate rules is essentially legislative
even though the power has been deleted in the 1987 Constitution. If the law,
however, is retroactive, it is unconstitutional because it is prejudicial.
Under Sec. 5, Article VIII of the Constitution, the Supreme Court shall have the
power to "promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights, pleading, practice and procedure in all courts x x x7
Section 23 of RA. No. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002 provides that " any person charged under any provision of this Act
regardless of the imposable penalty shall not be allowed to avail of the
provision on plea-bargaining. Patricio, a user who was charged with alleged
sale of shabu but who wants to enter a plea of guilty to a charge of
possession, questions the constitutionality of Sec. 23 on the ground that
Congress encroached on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court
under Sec. 5, Article VIII. He argues that plea-bargaining is procedural in
nature and is within the exclusive constitutional power of the Court. Is
Patricio correct? Explain your answer. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Patricio is not correct. Defining the penalty for a criminal offense involves the exercise
of legislative power (People v. Docuycuy, G.R. No. L-45127, May 5,1989,173
SCRA 90). When Section 23 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
prohibited plea-bargaining, Congress defined what should be the penalty for the
criminal offense. The power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules of
procedure is subject to the limitation that it should no modify substantive rights
(Section 5(5), Article VIII of the Constitution).
3. Administrative supervision over lower courts
Judge Lloyd was charged with serious misconduct before the Supreme Court.
The Court found him guilty and ordered him dismissed. Believing that the
decision was not immediately executory, he decided a case that had been
submitted for resolution. The decision became final and executory. But the
losing party filed a certiorari action with the Court of Appeals seeking to
annul the writ of execution issued in the case and bar Judge Lloyd from
further acting as judge. Can the relief against Judge Lloyd be granted?
(2011 BAR)
Page 70 of 198
(A) No, Judge Lloyd's right to stay as judge may be challenged only by direct
proceeding, not collaterally.
(B) Yes, the action against Judge Lloyd may be consolidated with the case before
the Court of Appeals and decided by it.
(C) Yes, Judge Lloyd 's right to stay as judge may be challenged as a necessary
incident of the certiorari action.
(D) No, the losing party has no standing to challenge Judge Lloyd's right to stay
as judge.
4. Original and appellate jurisdiction
Congress may increase the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: (1%)
2014 BAR EXAMS
(A) anytime it wants

(B) if requested by the Supreme Court
(C) upon recommendation of the President
(D) only with the advice and concurrence of the Supreme Court
(E) whenever it deems it appropriate, advisable or necessary.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) Only with the device and concurrence of the Supreme Court
VI. Constitutional Commissions
Patricio was elected member of the House of Representative in the May 2010
Elections. His opponent Jose questioned Patricio’s victory before the
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal and later with the Supreme
Court.
In the decision promulgated in November 2011, the Court ruled in Jose’s favor;
thus, Patricio was ousted from his seat in Congress. Within a year from that
decision, the President can appoint Patricio ________. (1%) 2013 BAR
EXAMS
(A) only as member of the board of directors of any government owned and
controlled corporation
(B) only as a deputy Ombudsman
(C) only as a Commissioner of the Civil Service Commission
(D) only as Chairman of the Commission on Elections
(E) to any position as no prohibition applies to Patricio
The Civil Service shall be administered by the Civil Service Commission

composed of a: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Chairman and a Commissioner;
Page 71 of 198
b. Chairman and two (2) Commissioners;
c. Chairman and three (3) Commissioners;
d. Chairman and four (4) Commissioners.
Which one of the following is NOT an independent Constitutional

Commission under Article IX, Section 1 of the Constitution: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. Commission on Elections;
b. Commission on Human Rights;
c. Civil Service Commission;
d. Commission on Audit.
A. Constitutional safeguards to ensure independence of commissions
The independent Constitutional Commissions enjoy: (2012 BAR EXAMS)

a. decisional autonomy;
b. organizational autonomy;
c. fiscal autonomy;
d. quasi-judicial autonomy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) SECTION 5, ARTICLE IX-A CONSTITUTION
Choose the least accurate statement about the independence guaranteed by

the 1987 Constitution to the following constitutional bodies: (1%) 2013 BAR
EXAMS
(A) The Constitution guarantees the COMELEC decisional and

institutional independence similar to that guaranteed to the Judiciary.
(B) All bodies labeled as “independent” by the Constitution enjoy fiscal

autonomy as an attribute of their independence.
(C) Not all bodies labeled as “independent” by the Constitution were

intended to be independent from the Executive branch of government.
(D) The Constitution guarantees various degrees of independence from the

other branches of government when it labels bodies as “independent”.
(E) The COMELEC, the COA, and the CSC enjoy the same degree of
independence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 72 of 198
(A)(Article IX-A of the 1987 Constitution).
Towards the end of the year, the Commission on Audit (COA) sought the
remainder of its appropriation from the Department of Budget and
Management (DBM). However, the DBM refused because the COA had not
yet submitted a report on the expenditures relative to the earlier
amount released to it. And, pursuant to the “no report, no release” policy of
the DBM, COA is not entitled to any further releases in the meantime. COA
counters that such a policy contravenes the guaranty of fiscal
autonomy granted by the Constitution. Is COA entitled to receive the rest of
its appropriations even without complying with the DBM policy? (4%) 2014
BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. COA is entitled to the rest of its appropriations even without complying
with the DBM policy. That the no report, no release policy may not be validly
enforced against offices vested with fiscal autonomy is not disputed. Indeed,
such policy cannot be enforced against offices possessing fiscal autonomy
without violating Article IX (A), Section 5 of the Constitution which provides:
Sec. 5. The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved

appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released. (Civil Service
Commission vs Department of Budget and Management, July 22, 2005)
Each of the Constitutional Commissions is expressly described as

"independent," exemplified by its (2011 BAR)
(A) immunity from suit.
(B) fiscal autonomy.
(C) finality of action.
(D) collegiality.
The Congress establishes by law Philippine Funds, Inc., a private corporation, to

receive foreign donations coming from abroad during national and local
calamities and disasters, and to enable the unhampered and speedy
disbursements of the donations through the mere action of its Board of Directors.
Thereby, delays in the release of the donated funds occasioned by the stringent
rules of procurement would be avoided. Also, the releases would not come under
the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit (COA).
(a) Is the law establishing Philippine Funds, Inc. constitutional? Explain your
answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The establishment of Philippine Funds, Inc. is valid. It was created to enable the speedy
Page 73 of 198
disbursements of donations for calamities and disasters. Public purpose is no longer
restricted to traditional government functions (Petitioner-Organization v.
Executive Secretary, G.R. Nos. 147036-37 & 147811, April 10, 2012, 269 SCRA 49).
Can the Congress pass the law that would exempt the foreign grants from the
jurisdiction of the COA? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Congress cannot exempt the foreign grants from the jurisdiction of the Commission on
Audit. Its jurisdiction extends to all government-owned or controlled corporations,
including those funded by donations through the Government (Art IX-D, Sec. 3 of the
1987 Philippine Constitution; and Petitioner-Corporation g Executive Secretary, G.R.
Nos. 147036-37 & 147811, April 10, 2012, 269 SCRA 49).
B. Powers and functions of each commission
The Commission on Elections is an independent body tasked to enforce all

laws relative to the conduct of elections. Hence, it may (2011 BAR)
(A) conduct two kinds of electoral count: a slow but official count; and a quick but
unofficial count.
(B) make an advance and unofficial canvass of election returns through electronic
transmission.
(C) undertake a separate and unofficial tabulation of the results of the election
manually.
(D) authorize the citizens arm to use election returns for unofficial count.
C. Prohibited offices and interests
The President appoints Emilio Melchor as Chairperson of the Civil Service

Commission. Upon confirmation of Melchor's appointment, the President issues
an executive order including him as Ex-Officio member of the Board of Trustees
of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), Employees Compensation
Commission (ECC), and the Board of Directors of the Philippine Health Insurance
Corporation (PHILHEALTH). Allegedly, this is based on the Administrative Code
of 1997 (E.O. No. 292), particularly Section 14, Chapter 3, Title I-A, Book V. This
provision reads: "The chairman of the CSC shall be a member of the Board of
Directors of other governing bodies of government entities whose functions
affect the career development, employment, status, rights, privileges, and welfare
of government officials and employees... " A taxpayer questions the designation
of Melchor as ex-officio member of the said corporations before the Supreme
Court based on two (2) grounds, to wit: (1) it violates the constitutional
prohibition on members of the Constitutional Commissions to hold any other
office or employment during his tenure; and (2) it impairs the independence of the
Page 74 of 198
CSC. Will the petition prosper? Explain. (4%) (2015 BAR)
Suggested Answer:
(1) The Chairperson Emilio Melchor’s holding ex-officio of the other offices under the
Executive Order mentioned in the problem would constitute a clear violation of the
special prohibition in Section 2 of Article IX-A of the Constitution, which strictly
provides that he shall, during his tenure, not hold any other office or employment.
Said constitutional provision does not make any distinction among the offices he
may not hold, or as to whether or not the functions attached to said offices would be
primarily related to his duties as Chairperson of the Civil Service Commission and
therefore may be held in an ex-officio capacity.
The GSIS, PHILHEALTH, ECC and HDMF are vested by their respective charters with
various powers and functions to carry out the purposes for which they were created.
While powers and functions associated with appointments, compensation and benefits
affect the career development, employment status, rights, privileges, and welfare of
government officials and employees, the GSIS, PHILHEALTH, ECC and HDMF are also
tasked to perform other corporate powers and functions that are not personnel-related.
All of these powers and functions, whether personnel-related or not, are carried out and
exercised by the respective Boards of the GSIS, PHILHEALTH, ECC and HDMF.
Hence, when the CSC Chairman sits as a member of the governing Boards of the
GSIS, PHILHEALTH, ECC and HDMF, he may exercise these powers and functions,
which are not anymore derived from his position as CSC Chairman, such as imposing
interest on unpaid or unremitted contributions, issuing guidelines for the accreditation of
health care providers, or approving restructuring proposals in the payment of unpaid
loan amortizations.
The CSC Chairman’s designation as a member of the governing Boards of the GSIS,
PHILHEALTH, ECC and HDMF entitles him to receive per diem, a form of additional
compensation that is disallowed by the concept of an ex officio position by virtue of its
clear contravention of the proscription set by Section 2, Article IX-A of the 1987
Constitution. This situation goes against the principle behind an ex officio position, and
must, therefore, be held unconstitutional.
(1) Apart from violating the prohibition against holding multiple offices, Melchor’s
designation as member of the governing Boards of the GSIS, PHILHEALTH, ECC
and HDMF impairs the independence of the CSC. Under Section 17, Article VII of
the Constitution, the President exercises control overall government offices in the
Executive Branch. An office that is legally not under the control of the President is
not part of the Executive Branch. (Funa v. The Chairman, Civil Service Commission,
G.R. No. 184740, February 11, 2010, 612 SCRA 308).
Professor Masipag who holds a plantilla or regular item in the University of the
Philippines (UP) is appointed as an Executive Assistant in the Court of
Appeals (CA). The professor is considered only on leave of absence in UP
Page 75 of 198
while he reports for work at the CA which shall pay him the salary of the
Executive Assistant. The appointment to the CA position was questioned,
but Professor Masipag countered that he will not collect the salary for both
positions; hence, he can not be accused of receiving double
compensation. Is the argument of the professor valid? Explain. (4%) 2015
BAR EXAMS
ANSWER:
Although Professor Masipag is correct in saying that “he cannot be accused

of receiving double compensation” as he would not actually be receiving
additional or double compensation, it is submitted that he may nevertheless not
be allowed to accept the position of Executive Assistant of the Court of Appeals
during his incumbency as a regular employee of the University of the Philippines,
as the former would be an incompatible office not allowed to be concurrently held
by him under the provisions of Article IX-B, Section 7 of the Constitution, the
second paragraph of which species that “unless otherwise allowed by law or by
the primary functions of his position, no appointive official shall hold any
other office in the Governement.”
What is the rotational scheme of appointments in the COMELEC? (2%) (2009

Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The rotational scheme of appointments in the Commissions on Elections refers to the

scheme in which there is a regular recurrence of a two-year interval between the
expiration of terms of the Chairman and the Commissioners. (Gamide vs.
Commission on Audit, 347 SCRA 655 [2000].)
What are the two conditions for its workability (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The two (2) conditions for the workability of the rotational scheme of appointments
are the following: (1) the terms of the first Chairman and Commissioners should
start on a common date, irrespective of variation of dates of their appointments
and qualifications, and (2) any vacancy due to the death, resignation or disability
before expiration of the term should be filled only for the unexpired balance of the
term. (Gaminde v. Commission on Audit, 347 SCRA 655 [2000].)
To what other constitutional offices does the rotational scheme of

appointments apply? (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 76 of 198
The rotational scheme of appointments applies also to the Judicial and Bar Council,
the Civil Service Commission, and the Commission on Audit. (Section 9(2), Article
VIII, Section 1(2), Article IX-B and Section 1(2), Article IX-D of the Constitution.)
D. Jurisdiction of each constitutional commission
The Comelec en banc cannot hear and decide a case at first instance EXCEPT
when (2011 BAR)
(A) a Division refers the case to it for direct action.
(B) the case involves a purely administrative matter.
(C) the inhibition of all the members of a Division is sought.
(D) a related case is pending before the Supreme Court en banc.
The COMELEC en banc shall decide a motion for reconsideration of (2011 BAR)
(A) the House or Representatives and the Senate electoral tribunals.
(B) the decision of the election registrar.
(C) the decision of the COMELEC division involving an election protest.
(D) its own decision involving an election protest.
E. Review of final orders, resolutions and decisions
VII. Bill of Rights
A. Fundamental powers of the state (police power, eminent domain, taxation)

1. Concept, application and limits
2. Requisites for valid exercise
3. Similarities and differences
4. Delegation
A tax is progressive when: ((2012 BAR EXAMS))

a. the rate fluctuates as the tax base decreases;
b. the rate increases as the tax base remains the same;
c. the rate increases as the tax base increases;
d. the rate decreases as the tax base increases.
The most essential, insistent and the least limitable of (government) powers,
extending as it does to all the great public needs, is: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. emergency power;
b. police power;
c. legislative power;
d. power to declare martial law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 77 of 198
(B) EDU VS. ERICTA, 35 SCRA 482
The totality of governmental power is contained in three great powers: (2012

BAR EXAMS)
a. police power, power of sequestration, power of foreign policy;
b. power of immigration, municipal power, legislative power;
c. executive power, legislative power, judicial power;
d. police power, power of eminent domain, power of taxation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
It is suggested that either (c) and (d) may be accepted as a correct answer.
The price of staple goods like rice may be regulated for the protection of the
consuming public through the exercise of (2011 BAR)
(A) power of subordinate legislation.
(B) emergency power.
(C) police power.
(D) residual power.
The city government filed a complaint for expropriation of 10 lots to build a

recreational complex for the members of the homeowners' association of
Sitio Sto. Tomas, the most populated residential compound in the city. The
lot owners challenged the purpose of the expropriation. Does the
expropriation have a valid purpose? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, because not everybody uses a recreational complex.
(B) No, because it intends to benefit a private organization.
(C) Yes, it is in accord with the general welfare clause.
(D) Yes, it serves the well-being of the local residents.
When the State requires private cemeteries to reserve 10% of their lots for
burial of the poor, it exercises its (2011 BAR)
(A) eminent domain power.
(B) zoning power.
(C) police power.
(D) taxing power.
The government sought to expropriate a parcel of land belonging to Y. The law

provides that, to get immediate possession of the land, the government
must deposit the equivalent of the land's zonal value. The government
insisted, however, that what apply are the rules of court which require an
initial deposit only of the assessed value of the property. Which should
prevail on this matter, the law or the rules of court? (2011 BAR)
(A) Both law and rules apply because just compensation should be fixed based
on its zonal or assessed value, whichever is higher.
(B) Both law and rules apply because just compensation should be fixed based
on its zonal or assessed value, whichever is lower.
Page 78 of 198
(C) The law should prevail since the right to just compensation is a substantive
right that Congress has the power to define.
(D) The rules of court should prevail since just compensation is a procedural
matter subject to the rule making power of the Supreme Court.
To address the pervasive problem of gambling, Congress is considering the

following options:
(1) prohibit all forms of gambling; (2) allow gambling only on Sundays; (3) allow
gambling only in government-owned casinos; and (4) remove all
prohibitions against gambling but impose a tax equivalent to 30% on all
winnings.
If Congress chooses the first option and passes the corresponding law
absolutely prohibiting all forms of gambling, can the law be validly attacked
on the ground that it is an invalid exercise of police power? Explain your
answer. (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The law absolutely prohibiting all forms of gambling is a valid exercise of police
power, because it is an evil that undermines the social, moral and economic
growth of the nation (People v. Punto, 68 Phil.
[1939]).
If Congress chooses the last option and passes the corresponding law
imposing a 30% tax on all winnings and prizes won from gambling, would
the law comply with the constitutional limitations on the exercise of the
power of taxation? Explain your answer. (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A tax of 30% on winnings from gambling does not violate due process as to the
reasonableness of the rate of the tax imposed. Taxes on non-useful enterprises
may be increased to restrain the number of persons who might otherwise engage
in it (Brmita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. v. City Mayor of
Manila, 20 SCRA 849 [1967]). Taxes may be imposed for the attainment of the
objective of police power (Lutz v. Araneta, 98 Phil. 148 [1955]).
The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority is authorized to confiscate a

driver's' license in the enforcement of traffic regulations. (0.5%) (2010 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority is authorized to
Page 79 of 198
confiscate a driver's license in the enforcement of traffic regulations is false. Since
Republic Act No. 7924 does not grant the Metropolitan Manila Development
Authority the authority to enact ordinances, the grant to it by Section 5(f) of
Republic Act No. 7924 of the power to confiscate drivers' licenses without the
need of any other law is an unauthorized exercise of police power. (Metropolitan
Manila Development Authority v. Garin, 456 SCRA 176 [2005].)
B. Private acts and the Bill of Rights
C. Due process – the rights to life, liberty & property
1. Relativity of due process

2. Procedural and substantive due process
3. Constitutional and statutory due process
X, a Filipino and Y, an American, both teach at the International Institute in

Manila. The institute gave X a salary rate of P1,000 per hour and Y, P1,250
per hour plus housing, transportation, shipping costs, and leave travel
allowance. The school cited the dislocation factor and limited tenure of Y to
justify his high salary rate and additional benefits. The same package was
given to the other foreign teachers. The Filipino teachers assailed such
differential treatment, claiming it is discriminatory and violates the equal
protection clause. Decide. (2011 BAR)
(A) The classification is based on superficial differences.
(B) The classification undermines the "Filipino First" policy.
(C) The distinction is fair considering the burden of teaching abroad.
(D) The distinction is substantial and uniformly applied to each class.
On November 7, 1990, nine lawyers of the Legal Department of Y Bank who

were all under Fred Torre, sent a complaint to management accusing Torre
of abusive conduct and mismanagement. Furnished with a copy of the
complaint, Torre denied the charges. Two days later, the lawyers and Torre
were called to a conference in the office of the Board Chairman to give their
respective sides of the controversy. However, no agreement was reached
thereat. Bank Director Romulo Moret was tasked to look further into the
matter. He met with the lawyers together with Torre several times but to no
avail. Moret then submitted a report sus-taining the charges of the lawyers.
The Board Chairman wrote Torre to inform him that the bank had chosen
the compassionate option of “waiting” for Torre’s resignation. Torre was
asked, without being dismissed, to turn over the documents of all cases
handled by him to another official of the bank but Torre refused to resign
and requested for a “full hearing”. Days later, he reiterated his request for a
“full hearing”, claiming that he had been “constructively dismissed”. Moret
assured Torre that he is “free to remain in the employ of the bank” even if
Page 80 of 198
he has no particular work assignment. After another request for a “full
hearing” was ignored, Torre filed a complaint with the arbitration branch of
NLRC for illegal dismissal. Reacting thereto, the bank terminated the
services of Torre.
Questions:
Was Torre “constructively dismissed” before he filed his complaint?
Given the multiple meetings held among the bank officials, the lawyers
and Torre, is it correct for him to say that he was not given an
opportunity to be heard? Explain your answers. (4%) (2010 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Torre was constructively dismissed, as held in Equitable Banking Corporation v.

National Labor Relations Commission, 273 SCRA 352. Allowing an employee to
report for work without being assigned any work constitutes constructive dismissal.
Torre is correct in saying that he was not given the chance to be heard. The meetings
in the nature of consultations and conferences cannot be considered as valid
substitutes for the proper observance of notice and hearing.
A law interfering with the rights of the person meets the requirements of
substantive due process when (2011 BAR)
(A) the means employed is not against public policy.
(B) it is in accord with the prescribed manner of enforcement as to time, place,
and person.
(C) all affected parties are given the chance to be heard.
(D) the interest of the general public, as distinguished from those of a particular
case, requires such interference.
On April 6, 1963, Police Officer Mario Gatdula was charged by the Mayor with
Grave Misconduct and Violation of Law before the Municipal Board. The
Board investigated Gatdula but before the case could be decided, the City
charter was approved. The City Fiscal, citing Section 30 of the city charter,
asserted that he was authorized thereunder to investigate city officers and
employees. The case against Gatdula was then forwarded to him, and a re-
investigation was conducted. The office of the Fiscal subsequently
recommended dismissal. On January 11, 1966, the City Mayor returned the
records of the case to the City Fiscal for the submission of an appropriate
resolution but no resolution was submitted. On March 3,-1968, the City
Fiscal transmitted the records to the City Mayor recommending that final
action thereon be made by the City Board of Investigators (CBI). Although
the CBI did not conduct an investigation, the records show that both the
Municipal Board and the Fiscal’s Office exhaustively heard the case with
both parties afforded ample opportunity to adduce their evidence and argue
Page 81 of 198
their cause. The Police Commission found Gatdula guilty on the basis of the
records forwarded by the CBI. Gatdula challenged the adverse decision o'f
the Police Commission theorizing that he was deprived of due process.
Questions: Is the Police Commission bound by the findings of the City
Fiscal? Is Gatdula’s protestation of lack or non- observance of due process
well-grounded? Explain your answers. (4%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Police Commission is not bound by the findings of the City Fiscal. In Mangubat v.
de Castro, 163 SCRA 608, it was held that the Police Commission is not
prohibited from making its own findings on the basis of its own evaluation of the
records. Likewise, the protestation of lack of due process is not well-grounded,
since the hearings before the Municipal Board and the City Fiscal offered Gatdula
the chance to be heard. There is no denial of due process if the decision was
rendered on the basis of evidence contained in the record and disclosed to the
parties affect
A criminal statute that "fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair

notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by statute" is: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. void for fair notice;

b. void for arbitrariness;
c. void for vagueness;
d. void conclusively.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) ESTRADA VS. SANDIGANBAYAN, 369 SCRA 394
Jojo filed a criminal complaint against Art for theft of a backpack worth P150.00
with the Office of the City Prosecutor of Manila. The crime is punishable with
arresto mayor to prision correccional in its minimum period, or not to exceed 4
years and 2 months. The case was assigned to .Prosecutor Tristan and he applied
Sec. 8(a) of Rule 112 which reads: "(a) If filed with the prosecutor.
If the complaint is filed directly with the prosecutor involving an offense

punishable by imprisonment of less than four (4) years, two (2) months and one
(1) day, the procedure outlined in Sec. 3(a) of this Rule shall be observed. The
Prosecutor shall act on the complaint within ten (10) days from its filing."
On the other hand, Sec. 3(a) of Rule 112 provides: "(a) The complaint shaII state
the address of the respondent and shall be accompanied by affidavits of the
complainant and his witnesses as well as other supporting documents to
establish probable cause. x x x
Page 82 of 198
Since Sec. 8(a) authorizes the Prosecutor to decide the complaint on the basis of
the affidavits and other supporting documents submitted by the omplainant,
Prosecutor Tristan did not notify Art nor require him to submit a counter-affidavit.
He proceeded to file the Information against Art with the Metropolitan Trial Court.
Art vehemently assails Sec. 8(a) of Rule 112 as unconstitutional and violative of
due process and his rights as an accused under the Constitution for he was not
informed of the complaint nor was he given the opportunity to raise his defenses
thereto before the Information was filed.
Rule on the constitutionality of Sec. 8(a) of Rule 112. Explain. (5%) (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The contention of Art is not meritorious. The right to be informed of the complaint and to
be given the opportunity to raise ones defenses does not apply to preliminary
investigation. Preliminary investigation is merely procedural. It may be dispensed with
without violating the right of the accused to due process (Bustos v. Lucero, 'SR. No.
2068, October 20,1948, 81 Phil. 640 [19481).
1. Hierarchy of rights
What do you understand by the term "heirarchy of civil liberties"? Explain.

(2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. The hierarchy of civil liberties means that freedom of expression and the rights of
peaceful assembly are superior to property rights. (Philippine blooming mills
employees organization vs. Philippine blooming mills company, inc. ., 51 scra
189.)
In the hierarchy of civil liberties, which right occupies the highest preferred
position: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. right to academic freedom;
b. right to a balanced and healthful ecology;
c. right to freedom of expression and of assembly;
d. right to equal health.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) PHILIPPINE BLOOMING MILLS EMPLOYEES ORGANIZATION VS.

PHILIPPINE BLOOMING COMPANY INC. SCRA 51 SCRA 189
2. Judicial standards of review
Page 83 of 198
3. “Overbreadth doctrine” and “Void-for-vagueness” doctrine
Compare and contrast “overbreadth doctrine” from “void-for-vagueness”

doctrine. (5%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
While the overbreadth doctrine decrees that a governmental purpose may not be
achieved by means in a statute which sweep unnecessary broadly and thereby
invades the area of protected freedom. A statute is void for vagueness when it
forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common
intelligence cannot necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application. (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 369 SCRA 394 [2001].)
An ordinance prohibits "notorious street gang members" from loitering in

public places. The police are to disperse them or, if they refuse, place them
under arrest. The ordinance enumerates which police officers can make
arrest and defines street gangs, membership in them, and public areas. The
ordinance was challenged for being vague regarding the meaning of
"notorious street gang members." Is the ordinance valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, it leaves the public uncertain as to what conduct it prohibits.
(B) No, since it discriminates between loitering in public places and loitering in
private places.
(C) Yes, it provides fair warning to gang members prior to arrest regarding their
unlawful conduct.
(D) Yes, it is sufficiently clear for the public to know what acts it prohibits.
The void-for-vagueness doctrine is a concept which means that: (1%) 2014

BAR EXAMS
(A) if a law is vague, then it must be void
(B) any law which could not be understood by laymen is a nullity
(C) if a law is incomprehensible to ordinary people such that they do not really
know what is required or prohibited, then the law must be struck down
(D) a government regulation that lacks clear standards is nonsensical and
useless as a guide for human conduct
(E) clarity in legal language is a mandate of due process.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) If a law is incomprehensible to ordinary people such that they do not really know
what is required or prohibited, then the law must be struck down.
4. Equal protection
Page 84 of 198
1. Concept
A law is passed intended to protect women and children from all forms of
violence. When a woman perceives an act to be an act of violence or a threat of
violence against her, she may apply for a Barangay Protection Order (BP0) to be
issued by the Barangay Chairman, which shall have the force and effect of law.
Conrado, against whom a BP0 had been issued on petition of his wife, went to
court to challenge the constitutionality of the law. He raises the following
grounds:
(A) The law violates the equal protection clause, because while it extends
protection to women who may be victims of violence by their husbands, it does
not extend the same protection to husbands who may be battered by their wives.
(25%)
(B) The grant of authority to the Barangay Chairman to issue a Barangay

Protection Order (BPO) constitutes an undue delegation of judicial power,
because obviously, the issuance of the BP0 entails the exercise of judicial power.
(2.5%)
Rule on the validity of the grounds raised by Conrado, with reasons. (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) The law does not violate the equal protection clause. It is based on substantial
distinctions. The unequal power relationship between women and men, the greater
likelihood for women than men to be victims of violence, and the widespread gender
bias and prejudice against women all make for real differences (Garcia v. ()dim, G.R.
No. 179267, June 25, 2013, 699 SCRA 352)
(B) The grant of authority to the Barangay Chairman to issue a Barangay Protection
Order is a purely executive function pursuant to his duty to enforce all laws and
ordinances and to maintain public order (Garcia v. Drilon, G.R. No.179267, June 25,
2013, 599 SCRA 352).
2. Requisites for valid classification

3. Standards of judicial review
a. Rational Basis Test
b. Strict Scrutiny Test
c. Intermediate Scrutiny Test
The Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Youth Association (GBTYA), an organization

of gay, bisexual, and transgender persons, filed for accreditation with the
COMELEC to join the forthcoming party-list elections. The COMELEC denied the
application for accreditation on the ground that GBTY A espouses immorality
which offends religious dogmas. GBTY A challenges the denial of its application
Page 85 of 198
based on moral grounds because it violates its right to equal protection of the
law.
a. What are the three (3) levels of test that are applied in equal protection cases?
Explain.
b. Which of the three (3) levels of test should be applied to the present case?
Explain. (2015 BAR)
Answer:
a. The three levels of test applied in equal protection cases are as follow:
First, the STRICT SCRUTINY TEST which is applied when the legislative classification
disadvantages a subject class or impinges upon a fundamental right, the statute
must fall unless the government can show that the classification serves a compelling
governmental interest.
Second, the INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY TEST, when the classification, while not
facially invidious, gives rise to recurring constitutional difficulties or disadvantages a
quasi-suspect class. The law must not only further an important government interest
and be related to that interest. The justification must be genuine and must not
depend on broad generalizations.
Lastly, the RATIONALITY TEST, if neither the strict nor the intermediate scrutiny is
appropriate, the statute will be tested for mere rationality. The presumption is in
favor of the classification, the reasonableness and fairness of state action and of
legitimate grounds of distinction.
b. Classification on the basis of sexual orientation is a quasi-subject classification that

prompts intermediate review. Sexual orientation has no relation to a person’s ability
to contribute to society. The discrimination that distinguishes the gays and lesbian
persons are beyond their control. The group lacks sufficient political strength to bring
an end to discrimination through political mean (Ang Ladlad v. COMELEC, 618
SCRA 32 [2010]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: (1) The three levels of tests that may be applied in equal
protection cases may be classified as follow: the STRICT SCRUTINY TEST, for laws
dealing with freedom of the mind or restricting the political processes; the RATIONAL
BASIS STANDARD for the review of economic legislation; and HEIGHTENED or
INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY for evaluating classifications based on gender and
legitimacy.
(2) It is submitted that the strict scrutiny test should be applied in this case because the
challenged classification restricts the political process.
Page 86 of 198
The equal protection clause allows valid classification of subjects that applies
(2011 BAR)
(A) only to present conditions.
(B) so long as it remains relevant to the government.
(C) for a limited period only.
(D) for as long as the problem to be corrected exists.
The equal protection clause is violated by ______________. (1%) 2013 BAR

EXAMS
(A) a law prohibiting motorcycles from plying on limited access highways.

(B) a law granting Value Added Tax exemption to electric cooperatives that
sells electricity to the “homeless poor.”
(C) a law providing that a policeman shall be preventively suspended until the
termination of a criminal case against him.
(D) a law providing higher salaries to teachers in public schools who are
“foreign hires.”
(E) a law that grants rights to local Filipino workers but denies the same rights
to overseas Filipino workers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
International School Alliance of Educator’s v. Quisumbing, G.R. 128845, June 1,
2000, 333 SCRA 13)
5. Searches and seizures

1. Concept
Pornographic materials in the form of tabloids, magazines and other printed

materials, proliferate and are being sold openly in the streets of Masaya City. The
city Mayor organized a task force which confiscated these materials. He then
ordered that the materials be burned in public. Dominador, publisher of the
magazine, "Plaything", filed a suit, raising the following constitutional issues: (a)
the confiscation of the materials constituted an illegal search and seizure,
because the same was done without a valid search warrant and (b) the
Confiscation, as well as the proposed destruction of the materials, is a denial of
the right to disseminate information, and thus, violates the constitutional right to
freedom of expression. Is either or both contentions proper? Explain your
answer. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(a) The confiscation of the materials constituted an illegal search and seizure, because
Page 87 of 198
it was done without a valid search warrant. It cannot be justified as a valid warrantless
search and seizure, because such search and seizure must have been an incident of a
lawful arrest. There was no lawful arrest (Pita v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 80806,
October 5,1989,178 SCRA 362)
(b) The argument of Dominador that pornographic materials are protected by the
constitutional right to freedom of expression is erroneous, Obscenity is not protected
expression (Fernando v. Court of 1 Appeals, G.R. No. 159751, December 6, 2006, 510
SCRA 351). Section 2 of Presidential Decree No. 969 requires the forfeiture and
destruction of pornographic materials (Nograles v. People, G.R. No. 191080, November
21, 2011, 660 SCRA 475).
Ernesto, a minor, while driving a motor vehicle, was stopped at a mobile

checkpoint. Noticing that Ernesto is a minor, ,SPO1 Jojo asked Ernesto to exhibit
his driver's license but Ernesto failed to produce it. S1301 Jojo requested Ernesto
to alight from the vehicle and the latter acceded. Upon observing a bulge in the
pants of Ernesto, the policeman frisked him and found an unlicensed .22-caliber
pistol inside Ernesto's right pocket. Ernesto was arrested, detained and charged.
At the trial, Ernesto, through his lawyer, argued that, policemen at mobile
checkpoints are empowered to conduct nothing more than a "visual search".
They cannot order the persons riding the vehicle to alight. They cannot frisk, or
conduct a body search of the driver or the passengers of the vehicle.
Ernesto's lawyer this posited that:
(A) The search conducted in violation of the Constitution and established

jurisprudence was an illegal search; thus, the gun which was seized in the course
of an illegal search is the "fruit of the poisonous tree" and is inadmissible in
evidence. (2.5%)
(B) The arrest made as a consequence of the invalid search was likewise illegal,
because an unlawful act (the search) cannot be made the bisis of a lawful arrest.
(2.5%)
Rule on the correctness of the foregoing arguments, with reasons. (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) The warrantless search of motor vehicles at checkpoints should be limited to a

visual search. Its occupants should not be subjected to a body search (Aniog, Jr. v.
Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 104961, October' 7,1994,237 SCRA 424).
The "stop and frisk rule" applies when a police officer observes suspicious activity or
unusual activity which may lead him to believe that a criminal act may be afoot. The
"stop and frisk" is merely a limited protective search of outer clothing for weapons (Luz
v. People, G.R. No.197788, February 29, 2012, 667 SCRA 421).
Page 88 of 198
(B) Since there was no valid warrantless search, the warrantless search was also
illegal. The unlicensed .22 caliber pistol is inadmissible in evidence (Luz v. People, G.R.
No. 197788, February 29, 2012, 667 SCRA 421)
2. Warrant requirement
a. Requisites
3. Warrantless searches
4. Warrantless arrests
5. Administrative arrests
6. Drug, alcohol and blood tests
Around 12:00 midnight, a team of police officers was on routine patrol in

Barangay Makatarungan when it noticed an open delivery van neatly covered with
banana leaves. Believing that the van was loaded with contraband, the team
leader flagged down the vehicle which was driven by Hades. He inquired from
Hades what was loaded on the van. Hades just gave the police officer a blank
stare and started to perspire profusely. The police officers then told Hades that
they will look inside the vehicle. Hades did not make any reply. The police officers
then lifted the banana leaves and saw several boxes. They opened the boxes and
discovered several kilos of shabu inside. Hades was charged with illegal
possession of illegal drugs. After due proceedings, he was convicted by the
trial court. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.
In his final bid for exoneration, Hades went to the Supreme Court claiming that
his constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures was violated
when the police officers searched his vehicle without a warrant; that the shabu
confiscated from him is thus inadmissible in evidence; and that there being no
evidence against him, he is entitled to an acquittal. For its part, the People of the
Philippines maintains that the case of Hades involved a consented warrantless
search which is legally recognized. The People adverts to the fact that Hades did
not offer any protest when the police officers asked him if they could look inside
the vehicle. Thus, any evidence obtained in the course thereof is admissible in
evidence. Whose claim is correct? Explain. (2015 BAR)
Answer:
The warrantless search was illegal. There was no probable cause to search the van.
The shabu was not immediately apparent. It was discovered only after they opened the
boxes. The mere passive silence of Hades did not constitute consent to the warrantless
search (Caballes v. CA, 373 SCRA 221 [2002]).
Using the description of the supplier of shabu given by persons who had been
arrested earlier for selling it, the police conducted a surveillance of the area
indicated. When they saw a man who fitted the description walking from the
apartment to his car, they approached and frisked him and he did not
Page 89 of 198
object. The search yielded an unlicensed gun tucked on his waist and
shabu in his car. Is the search valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, the man did not manifest any suspicious behavior that would give the
police sufficient reason to search him.
(B) Yes, the police acted on reliable information which proved correct when they
searched the man and his car.
(C) Yes, the man should be deemed to have waived his right to challenge the
search when he failed to object to the frisking.
(D) No, reliable information alone, absent any proof beyond reasonable doubt
that the man was actually committing an offense, will not validate the search.
An informer told the police that a Toyota Car with plate ABC 134 would deliver
an unspecified quantity of ecstacy in Forbes Park, Makati City. The officers
whom the police sent to watch the Forbes Park gates saw the described car
and flagged it down. When the driver stopped and lowered his window, an
officer saw a gun tucked on the driver's waist. The officer asked the driver
to step out and he did. When an officer looked inside the car, he saw many
tablets strewn on the driver's seat. The driver admitted they were ecstacy. Is
the search valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, the rule on warrantless search of moving vehicle does not allow
arbitrariness on the part of the police.
(B) Yes, the police officers had the duty to verify the truth of the information they
got and pursue it to the end.
(C) Yes, the police acted based on reliable information and the fact that an officer
saw the driver carrying a gun.
(D) No, police officers do not have unbridled discretion to conduct a warrantless
search of moving vehicles.
Crack agents of the Manila Police Anti-Narcotics Unit were on surveillance of a

cemetery where the sale and use of prohibited drugs were rumored to be
rampant. The team saw a man with reddish and glassy eyes walking
unsteadily towards them, but he immediately veered away upon seeing the
policemen. The team approached the man, introduced themselves as peace
officers, then asked what he had in his clenched fist. Because the man
refused to answer, a policeman pried the fist open and saw a plastic sachet
filled with crystalline substance. The team then took the man into custody
and submitted the contents of the sachet to forensic examination. The
crystalline substance in the sachet turned out to be shabu. The man was
accordingly charged in court.
During the trial, the accused:
Challenged the validity of his arrest; (2%) and (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 90 of 198
The warrantless arrest of the accused was valid. The cemetery was rumored to be a
place where the sale of drugs was rampant. The eyes of the accused were
reddish and glassy. He was walking unsteadily, veered away from the policemen
upon seeing them, and refused to say what was in his clenched fist. The
policemen had sufficient reason to stop him and investigate if he was high on
drugs. Since the investigation showed that the accused was in possession of
shabu, he could be arrested without the need for a warrant (Manalili v. Court of
Appeals, 280 SCRA 400 [1997]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The warrantless arrest of the accused was void. There was no overt act or suspicious
circumstances that would indicate that he was committing a crime. The search
preceded his arrest (People v. Tudtud, 412 SCRA 142 [2003]).
Objected to the admission in evidence of the prohibited drug, claiming that it

was obtained in an illegal search and seizure. (2%) Decide with reasons.
(2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Since the search and seizure of the shabu were incidental to a valid warrantless
arrest, the shabu is admissible in evidence (Manalili v. Court: of Appeals, 280
SCRA 400 [1997]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The search and seizure were illegal, because they preceded the arrest and were not
incidental to the arrest. The shabu confiscated as a result thereof is inadmissible
in evidence (People v. Tudtud, 412 SCRA 142 [2003]).
In what scenario is an extensive search of moving vehicles without warrant

valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) The police became suspicious on seeing something on the car’s back seat
covered with blanket.
(B) The police suspected an unfenced lot covered by rocks and bushes was
planted to marijuana.
(C) The police became suspicious when they saw a car believed to be of the
same model used by the killers of a city mayor.
(D) The driver sped away in his car when the police flagged him down at a
checkpoint.
A witnessed two hooded men with baseball bats enter the house of their next
door neighbor B. After a few seconds, he heard B shouting, "Huwag Pilo
babayaran kita agad. Then Asaw the two hooded men hitting B until the
Page 91 of 198
latter fell lifeless. The assailants escaped using a yellow motorcycle with a
fireball sticker on it toward the direction of an exclusive village nearby. A
reported the incident to POI Nuval. The following day, POI Nuval saw the
motorcycle parked in the garage of a house at Sta. Ines Street inside the
exclusive village. He inquired with the caretaker as to who owned the
motorcycle. The caretaker named the brothers Pilo and Ramon Maradona
who were then outside the country. POI Nuval insisted on getting inside the
garage. Out of fear, the caretaker allowed him. POI Nuval took 2 ski masks
and 2 bats beside the motorcycle. Was the search valid? What about the
seizure? Decide with reasons. (4%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The warrantless search and the seizure was not valid. It was not made as an incident
to a lawful warrantles arrest. (People v. Baula, 344 SCRA 663 [2000].) The
caretaker had no authority to waive the right of the brothers Pilo and Ramon
Maradona to waive their right against an unreasonable search and seizure.
(People v. Damaso, 212 SCRA547 [1992].) The warrantless seizure of the ski
masks and bats cannot be justified under the plain view doctrine, because they
were seized after an invalid intrusion into the house. (People v. Bolasa, 321
SCRA 459 [1999].)
Where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably
to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and
that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and dangerous and
he identifies himself and makes reasonable inquiries, but nothing serves to
dispel his reasonable fear for his own or other’s safety, he is entitled to
conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons for
weapons. Such search is constitutionally permissible and is known as a:
(2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. stop and search;

b. stop and frisk;
c. stop and interrogate;
d. stop and detain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) TERRY VS. OHIO, 392 U.S.I
When can evidence "in plain view" be seized without need of a search warrant?
Explain. (2%) (2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 92 of 198
Evidence in plain view can be seized without need of a search warrant if the following
elements are present.
1. There was a prior valid intrusion based on the valid warrantless arrest in which the
police were legally present pursuant of their duties;
2. The evidence was inadvertently discovered by the police who had the right to be
where they were:
3. The evidence must be immediately apparent; and
4. Plain view justified seizure of the evidence without further search. (del rosario vs.
People, 358 scra 372)
It is form of entrapment. The method is for an officer to pose as a buyer. He,

however, neither instigates nor induces the accused to commit a crime
because in these cases, the "seller" has already decided to commit a crime.
The offense happens right before the eyes of the officer. Under these
circumstances: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. there is a need for an administrative but not a judicial warrant for seizure of
goods and arrest of the offender;
b. there is need for a warrant for the seizure of the goods and for the arrest of
the offender;
c. there is no need for a warrant either for the seizure of the goods or for the
arrest of the offender;
d. the offender can be arrested but there is a need for a separate warrant for the
seizure of the goods.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) PEOPLE VS BOHOL, 560 SCRA 232
Paragraphs c, d and f of Section 36 of Republic Act No. 9165 provide:
"Sec. 36. Authorized drug testing, x x x The following shall be subjected to

undergo drug testing: x x x.
c. Students of secondary and tertiary schools x x x;
d. Officers and employees of public and private offices x x x;.
f. All persons charged before the prosecutor's office with a criminal offense
having an imposable imprisonment of not less than 6 years and 1 day;"
Petitioners contend that the assailed portions of Sec. 36 are unconstitutional for
Page 93 of 198
violating the right to privacy, the right against unreasonable searches and
seizures and the equal protection clause. Decide if the assailed provisions are
unconstitutional. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The drug testing of students of secondary and tertiary schools is valid.
Deterring their use of drugs by random drug testing is as important as enhancing

efficient enforcement.
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.
Public officials and employees are required by the Constitution to be accountable at all
times to the people and to serve them with utmost responsibility and efficiency.
The mandatory testing of all persons charged before the prosecutor's office of a criminal
offense punishable with imprisonment of at least six years and one day is void. They are
not randomly picked and are not beyond suspicions. They do not consent to the
procedure or waive their right to privacy (Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs
Board, G.R. Nos. 157870,158633 &161658, November 3, 2008, 570 SCRA 410).
F. Privacy of communications and correspondence

1. Private and public communications
2. Intrusion, when allowed
3. Writ of habeasdata
Under Article III, Section 2 of the Bill of Rights, which provides for the exclusion
of evidence that violate the right to privacy of communication and
correspondence, to come under the exclusionary rule, the evidence must be
obtained by:
a. private individuals acting on their own;
b. government agents;
c. private individuals acting on orders of superiors;
d. former high government officials.
In a criminal prosecution for murder, the prosecution presented, as witness, an

employee of the Manila Hotel who produced in court a videotape recording
showing the heated exchange between the accused and the victim that took
place at the lobby of the hotel barely 30 minutes before the killing. The
accused objects to the admission of the videotape recording on the ground
that it was taken without his knowledge or consent, in violation of his right
to privacy and the Anti-Wire Tapping law. Resolve the objection with
reasons. (3%) (2010 Bar Question)
Page 94 of 198
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The objection should be overruled. What the law prohibits is the overhearing,
intercepting, and recording of private communications. Since the exchange of
heated words was not private, its videotape recording is not prohibited (Navarro v.
Court of Appeals, 313 SCRA 153 [1999]).
The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except
upon lawful order of the court or when (2011 BAR)
(A) public safety or public health requires otherwise as prescribed by law.
(B) dictated by the need to maintain public peace and order.
(C) public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.
(D) public safety or order requires otherwise as determined by the President.
G. Freedom of expression
1. Concept and scope
a. Prior restraint (censorship)
b. Subsequent punishment
2. Content-based and content-neutral regulations
a. Tests
b. Applications
3. Facial challenges and the overbreadth doctrine
4. Tests
5. State regulation of different types of mass media
6. Commercial speech
7. Private vs. government speech
8. Heckler's veto
An example of a content based restraint on free speech is a regulation

prescribing (2011 BAR)
(A) maximum tolerance of pro-government demonstrations.
(B) a no rally-no permit policy.
(C) when, where, and how lawful assemblies are to be conducted.
(D) calibrated response to rallies that have become violent.
Executive Secretary Chua issued an order prohibiting the holding of rallies

along Mendiola because it hampers the traffic flow to Malacanang. A group
of militants questioned the order for being unconstitutional and filed a case
against Secretary Chua to restrain him from enforcing the order. Secretary
Chua raised state immunity from suit claiming that the state cannot be sued
without its consent. Is the claim correct? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, public officers may be sued to restrain him from enforcing an act claimed
to be unconstitutional.
(B) Yes, the order was not a proprietary act of the government.
(C) No, only the president may raise the defense of immunity from suit.
Page 95 of 198
(D) Yes, Secretary Chua cannot be sued for acts done in pursuance to his public
office.
The KKK Television Network (KKK-TV) aired the documentary, “Case Law: How
the Supreme Court Decides,” without obtaining the necessary permit
required by P.D. 1986. Consequently, the Movie and Television Review and
Classification Board (MTRCB) suspended the airing of KKK- TV programs.
MTRCB declared that under P.D. 1986, it has the power of prior review over
all television programs, except “newsreels” and programs “by the
Government”, and the subject documentary does not fall under either of
these two classes. The suspension order was ostensibly based on
Memorandum Circular No. 98-17 which grants MTRCB the authority to issue
such an order.
KKK-TV filed a certiorari petition in court, raising the following issues:
The act of MTRCB constitutes “prior restraint” and violates the constitutionally
guaranteed freedom of expression; (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contention of KKK-TV is not tenable. The prior restraint is a valid exercise of
police power. Television is a medium which reaches even the eyes and ears of
children (Iglesia ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals, 259 SCRA 529 [1996]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The memo circular is unconstitutional. The act of the Movie and Television Review
and Classification Board constitutes prior restraint and violates freedom of
expression. Any system of prior restraint has against it a heavy presumption
against its validity. Prior restraint is an abridgment of the freedom of expression.
There is no showing that the airing of the programs would constitute a clear and
present danger (New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 [1971]).
While Memorandum Circular No. 98-17 was issued and published in a

newspaper of general circulation, a copy thereof was never filed with the
Office of the National Register of the University of the Philippines Law
Center. (2%) Resolve. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In accordance with Chapter 2, Book VII of the Administrative Code of 1987,

Memorandum Circular No. 98-17 must be filed with the University of the
Philippines Law Center. It cannot be enforced until it has been filed with the
University of the Philippines Law Center (Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 541 SCRA 316 [2007]).
Page 96 of 198
"Chilling effect" is a concept used in the area of constitutional litigation
affecting: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. protected speech;
b. protected executive privilege;
c. protected legislative discretion;
d. protected judicial discretion
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. CHAVEZ VS. GONZALES, 545 SCRA 411
In a protest rally' along Padre Faura Street, Manila, Pedrong Pula took up the
stage and began shouting "kayong mga kurakot kayo! Magsi-resign na
kayo! Kung hindi, manggugulo kami dito!" ("you corrupt officials, you better
resign now, or else we will cause trouble here!") simultaneously, he brought
out a rock the size of a· fist and pretended to hurl it at the flagpole area of a
government building. He did not actually throw the rock. (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Police officers who were monitoring the situation immediately approached

Pedrong Pula and arrested him. He was prosecuted for seditious speech
and was convicted. On appeal, Pedrong Pula argued he was merely
exercising his freedom of speech and freedom of expression guaranteed by
the Bill of Rights. Decide with reasons. (5%)
b. xxx;
c. What are the two (2) basic prohibitions of the freedom of speech and of the
press clause? Explain. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Pedrong Pula should be acquitted, his freedom of speech should not be limited in
the absence of a clear and present danger of a substantive evil that the state had
the right to prevent. He pretended to hurl a rock but did not actually throw it. He
did not commit any act of lawless violence. (David Vs. Macapagal Arroyo, 489
Scra 160)
B. xxx
C. The two basic prohibitions on freedom of speech and freedom of the press are
prior restraint and subsequent punishment. (Chavez Vs Gonzales, 545 Scra 411)
The complementing regime that best characterizes the guarantees of freedom

of speech and of the press are: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
Page 97 of 198
a. prior punishment and moderate punishment;
b. prior censorship and subsequent remedies;
c. no prior restraint and subsequent punishment;
d. no prior restraint and no subsequent punishment.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) CHAVEZ VS GONZALES, 545 SCRA 441
Surveys Galore is an outfit involved in conducting nationwide surveys. In one

such survey, it asked the people about the degree of trust and confidence
they had in several institutions of the government. When the results came
in, the judiciary was shown to be less trusted than most of the government
offices. The results were then published by the mass media. Assension, a
trial court judge, felt particularly offended by the news. He then issued a
show-cause order against Surveys Galore directing the survey entity to
explain why it should not be cited in contempt for coming up with such a
survey and publishing the results which were so unflattering and degrading
to the dignity of the judiciary. Surveys Galore immediately assailed the
show-cause order of Judge Assension, arguing that it is violative of the
constitutional guaranty of freedom of expression.
Is Surveys Galore’s petition meritorious? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Surveys Galore’s petition is meritorious. Unwarranted attacks on the dignity of

the courts cannot be disguised as free speech, for the exercise of said right
cannot be used to impair the independence and efficiency of courts or public
respect therefore and confidence therein . Without the sub judice rule and the
contempt power, the courts will be powerless to protect their integrity and
independence that are essential in the orderly and effective dispensation and
administration of justice.
This, of course, is not meant to stifle all forms of criticism against the court. As the
third branch of the government, the courts remain accountable to the people. The
peoples freedom to criticize the government includes the right to criticize the
courts, their proceedings and decisions. This is the principle of open justice,
which is fundamental to our democratic society and ensures that (a) there is a
safeguard against judicial arbitrariness or idiosyncrasy, and that (b) the publics
confidence in the administration of justice is maintained.[ The criticism must,
however, be fair, made in good faith, and not spill over the walls of decency and
propriety. And to enhance the open court principle and allow the people to make
fair and reasoned criticism of the courts, the sub judice rule excludes from its
coverage fair and accurate reports (without comment) of what have actually taken
place in open court.
Page 98 of 198
In sum, the court, in a pending litigation, must be shielded from embarrassment or
influence in its all-important duty of deciding the case. Any publication pending a
suit, reflecting upon the court, the parties, the officers of the court, the counsel,
etc., with reference to the suit, or tending to influence the decision of the
controversy, is contempt of court and is punishable. The resulting (but temporary)
curtailment of speech because of the sub judice rule is necessary and justified by
the more compelling interests to uphold the rights of the accused and promote the
fair and orderly administration of justice.
However, in the cae of Surveys Galore there is no pending case before the court.
Thus, the subjudice rule does not apply. Surveys Galore’s petition is meritorious.
The guarantee of freedom of expression signifies: (1%) 2014 BAR EXAMS

(A) absolute freedom to express oneself
(B) freedom from prior restraint
(C) right to freely speak on anything without limitations
(D) the right of the government to regulate speech
(E) the right of broadcast stations to air any program.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) Freedom from prior restraint
a. What is the doctrine of "overbreath"? In what context can it be correctly

applied? Not correctly applied? Explain (5%)
b. What is the doctrine of "void for vagueness"? In what context can it be

correctly applied? Not correctly applied? Explain (5%)(2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. A Statement Is Overbroad When A Governmental Purpose To Control Or Prevent

Activities Constitutionally Subject To State Regulations Is Sought To Be Achieved
By Means Which Sweep Unnecessarily Broadly And Invade The Area Of
Protected Freedom. It Applies Both To Free Speech Case And Penal Statutes.
However, A Facial Challenge On The Ground Of Overbreadth Can Only Be Made
In Free Speech Cases Because Of Its Chilling Effect Upon Protected Speech. A
Facial Challenge On The Ground Of Overbreadth Is Not Applicable To Challenge
On The Ground Of Overbreadth Is Not Applicable To Penal Statutes, Because In
General They Have An In Terrorem Effect. (Southern Hemisphere Engagement
Network, Inc. Vs Anti Terrorism Council, 632 Scra 146.)
Note: The Word “Overbreath” Should Read “Overbreadth” Because Breath Has No
Limit Especially If It Is Bad Breath.
Page 99 of 198
b. A Statute Is Vague When It Lacks Comprehensible Standards That Men Of
Common Intelligence That Guess Its Meaning And Differ As To Its Application. Its
Applies To Both Free Speech Cases And Penal Statues. However, A Facial
Challenge On The Ground Of Vagueness Can Be Made Only In Free Speech
Cases. It Does Not Apply To Penal Statutes. (Southern Hemisphere Engagement
Network, Inc. Vs. Anti- Terrorism Council, 632 Scra 146.)
In keeping with the modern age of instant and incessant information and
transformation, Congress passed Cybercrime Prevention Act to regulate
access to and use of the amenities of the cyberspace. While ostensibly the
law is intended to protect the interests of society, some of its provisions
were also seen as impermissibly invading and impairing widely cherished
liberties of the people particularly the freedom of expression. Before the law
could even be implemented, petitions were filed in the Supreme Court
questioning said provisions by people who felt threatened, for themselves
as well as for the benefit of others who may be similarly affected but not
minded enough to challenge the law. The Solicitor General countered that
there is no basis for the exercise of the power of judicial review since there
has yet been no violation of the law, and therefore, there is no actual case
or controversy to speak of, aside from the fact that the petitioners have no
locus standi since they do not claim to be in imminent danger of being
prosecuted under the law. Can the Court proceed to decide the case even if
the law has not yet become effective? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Supreme Court can proceed to decide the case even if the law has not yet
become effective. Since the petitions filed sought to nullify the Cybercrime
Prevention Act, Because it violated several provisions of the Bill of Rights, the
Supreme Court became duty-bound to settle the dispute (Tanada v. Angara, 272
SCRA 18 (1997). Since it is alleged that the CYbercrime Prevention Act violates
various provisions of the Bill of Rights, including freedom of speech, freedom of
the press, and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, the issues
raised are of paramount public interest of transcendental importance and with far-
reaching constitutional implications that justify dispensation with locus standi and
exercise of the power of judicial review by the Supreme Court (Chavez v.
Gonzalesm 545 Scra 441 (2008). 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.
The overbreadth doctrine posits that the government: (1%)2014 BAR EXAMS
(A) must know the extent of its power
(B) when it exercises too much power it is like someone with bad breath –it is
not healthy to society
(C) can enact laws which can reach outside its borders, like long-arm statues
(D) the government is prohibited in banning unprotected speech if a substantial
Page 100 of 198

amount of protected speech is restrained or chilled in the process
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) The government is prohibited in banning unprotected speech if a substantial

amount of protected speech is restrained or chilled in the process.
When is a facial challenge to the constitutionality of a law on the ground of

violation of the Bill of Rights traditionally allowed? Explain your answer.
(3%) 2015 BAR EXAMS
ANSWER:
“In United States (US) constitutional law, a facial challenge, also known as a First
Amendment Challenge, is one that is launched to assail the validity of statues
concerning not only protected speech, but also all other rights in the First
Amendment.
This include religious freedom, freedom of the press, and the rights of the people to
peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
After all, the fundamental right to religious freedom, freedom of the press and
peaceful assembly are but component rights of the right to one’s freedom of
expression, as they are modes which one’s thoughts are externalized.
“In this jurisdiction, the application of doctrines originating from the U.S. has been
generally maintained, albeit with some modifications. While this Court has
withheld the application of facial challenges to strictly penal statues, it has
expanded its scope to cover statues not only regulating free speech, but also
those involving religious freedom, and other fundamentals rights. The underlying
reason for this modification is simple. For unlike its counterpart in the U.S., this
Court, under its expanded jurisdiction, is mandated by the Fundamental Law not
only to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable
and enforceable, but also 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 the Government.” (Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. No.
204819, April 8, 2014, 721 SCRA 146)
The Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Youth Association (GBTYA), an organization of

gay, bisexual, and transgender persons, filed for accreditation with the COMELEC
to join the forthcoming party-list elections. The COMELEC denied the application
for accreditation on the ground that GBTY A espouses immorality which offends
religious dogmas. GBTY A challenges the denial of its application based on moral
grounds because it violates its right to equal protection of the law.
Which one of the following is not a proper test in cases of challenges to

governmental acts that may violate protected speech: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. clear and present danger;
Page 101 of 198

b. balancing of interests;
c. reasonable relation;
d. dangerous tendency.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) CHAVEZ VS. GONZALES, 545 SCRA 411
Commercial speech is entitled to: (2012 BAR EXAMS)

a. more protection compared to other constitutionally guaranteed expression;
b. equal protection compared to other constitutionally guaranteed expression;
c. lesser protection compared to other constitutionally guaranteed expression;
d. none of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) IGLESIA NI CRISTO VS. COURT OF APPEALS, 259 SCRA 529
In a protest rally' along Padre Faura Street, Manila, Pedrong Pula took up the
stage and began shouting "kayong mga kurakot kayo! Magsi-resign na
kayo! Kung hindi, manggugulo kami dito!" ("you corrupt officials, you better
resign now, or else we will cause trouble here!") simultaneously, he brought
out a rock the size of a· fist and pretended to hurl it at the flagpole area of a
government building. He did not actually throw the rock. (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. xxx;
b. What is "commercial speech"? Is it entitled to constitutional protection?
What must be shown in order for government to curtail "commercial
speech"? Explain. (3%)
c. xxx
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. Commercial speech is communication which involves only the commercial

interests of the speaker and the audience such as advertisements. ( Black’s Law
Dictionary, 9th Ed.,P. 1529) Commercial speech is entitled to constitutional
protection. (Ayer Productions Pty., Ltd Vs Capulong, 160 Scra 861.) Commercial
speech may be required to be submitted to a government agency for review to
protect public interest by preventing false or deceptive claims. (Pharmaceutical
And Health Care Association Of The Philippines Vs. Duque, 535 Scra 265.)
No liability can attach to a false, defamatory statement if it relates to official

conduct, unless the public official concerned proves that the statement was
with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was
false or not. This is known as what rule? (2012 BAR EXAMS)
Page 102 of 198

a. libel malice rule;
b. actual malice rule;
c. malice in fact rule;
d. legal malice rule.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) VASQUEZ VS. COURT OF APPEALS , 314 SCRA 460
In the law of libel and protected speech, a person who, by his

accomplishments, fame, or mode of living, or by adopting a profession or
calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs,
and his character, has become a: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. public figure;
b. celebrity;
c. public official;
d. de facto public officer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) AYERS PRODUCTION PTY., LTD VS CAPULONG,160 SCRA 861
H. Freedom of religion
1. Non-establishment clause
a. Concept and basis
b. Acts permitted and not permitted by the clause
c. Test
2. Free exercise clause
Fernando filed an administrative complaint against his co-teacher, Amelia,

claiming that the latter is living with a married man who is not her husband.
Fernando charged Amelia with committing "disgraceful and immoral conduct" in
violation of the Revised Administrative Code and, thus, should not be allowed to
remain employed in the government. Amelia, on the other hand, claims that she
and her partner are members of a religious sect that allows members of the
congregation who have been abandoned by their respective spouses to enter
marital relations under a Declaration of Pleading Faithfulness." Having made
such Declaration, she argues that she cannot be charged with committing
immoral conduct for she is entitled to free exercise of religion under the
Constitution.
(A) Is Amelia administratively liable? State your reasons briefly. (2.5%)
(B) Briefly explain the concept of "benevolent neutrality." (5%) (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
Page 103 of 198

SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) Amelia is not administratively liable. There is no compelling state interest that
justifies inhibiting the free exercise of religious beliefs. The means used by the
government to achieve its legitimate objective is not the least intrusive means (Estrada
v. Escritor, AM No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006, 492 SCRA 1)
(B) Benevolent neutrality means that with respect to governmental actions,

accommodation of religion may be permitted to allow individuals and groups to exercise
their religion without hindrance. What is sought is not a declaration of unconstitutionality
of the law but an exemption from its application (Estrada v, Escritor, AM No. P-02-1651,
e 22, 2006, 492 SCRA 1).
3. Tests
a. Clear and Present Danger Test
b. Compelling State Interest Test
c. Conscientious Objector Test
Section 28, Title VI, Chapter 9, of the Administrative Code of 1987 requires all
educational institutions to observe a simple and dignified flag ceremony,
including the playing or singing of the Philippine National Anthem, pursuant
to rules to be promulgated by the Secretary of Education Culture and
Sports. The refusal of a teacher, student or pupil to attend or participate in
the flag ceremony is a ground for dismissal after due investigation. The
Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports issued a memorandum
implementing said provision of law. As ordered, the flag ceremony would be
held on Mondays at 7:30 a.m, during class days. A group of teachers,
students and pupils requested the Secretary that they be exempted from
attending the flag ceremony on the ground that attendance thereto was
against their religious belief. The Secretary denied the request. The
teachers, students and pupils concerned went to Court to have the
memorandum circular declared null and void.
Decide the case. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The teachers and the students should be exempted from the flag ceremony. As held
in Ebralinag vs. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu. 251 SCRA 569, to
compel them to participate in the flag ceremony will violate their freedom of
religion. Freedom of religion cannot be impaired except upon the showing of a
clear and present danger of a substantive evil which the State has a right to
prevent. The refusal of the teachers and the students to participate in the flag
ceremony does not pose a clear and present danger.
To instill religious awareness in the students of Doña Trinidad High School, a
Page 104 of 198

public school in Bulacan, the Parent Teacher’s Association of the school
contributed funds for the construction of a grotto and chapel where
ecumenical religious services and seminars are being held after school
hours. The use of the school grounds for these purposes was questioned
by a parent who does not belong to any religious group. As his complaint
was not addressed by the school, officials, he filed and administrative
complaint against the principal before the DECS is the principal liable?
Explain briefly. (5%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The principal is liable. Although the grotto and the chapel can be used by different
religious sects without discrimination, the land occupied by the grotto and the
chapel will be permanently devoted to religious use without being required to pay
rent. This violates the prohibition against the establishment of religion enshrine in
Section 5 of the Bill of Rights. (Opinion No. 12 of the Secretary of Justice dated
February 2, 1979.) Although religion is allowed to be taught in public elementary
and high schools, it should be without additional cost to the government. (Section
3(3), Article XIV of the Constitution.)
The free exercise and non-establishment clauses pertain to which right under
the Bill of Rights: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. liberty of movement;
b. liberty of abode;
c. religion;
d. life and liberty.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) SECTION 5, ARTICLE III OF CONSTITUTION
The Constitution provides that the "separation of church and state shall be
inviolable." This is implemented most by the constitutional principles
embodied in: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. the free exercise clause;

b. the non-establishment clause;
c. . the freedom of religious belief clause;
d. the freedom of religion clause.
SUGGESTED ANSWER;
B. SECTION 5, ARTICLE III OF CONSTITUTION
Page 105 of 198

a. xxx;
b. Distinguish fully between the "free exercise of religion clause" and the "non-
establishment of religion clause". (3%) (2012 BAR EXAMS)
c. xxx
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. The freedom of exercise of religion entails the right to believe, which is absolute,
and the right to act on one’s belief , which is subject to regulation. As a rule , the
freedom of exercise of religion can be restricted only if there is a clear and
present danger of a substantive evil which the state has the right to prevent.
(iglesia ni cristo vs. Court of appeals, 259 scra 529.)
The non establishment clause implements the principle of seperation of church and
state. The state cannot set up a church. Pass laws that aid one religion, and all
religions, prefer one religion over another force or influence a person to go to or
remain away from church against his will, of force him to profess a belief or
disbelief in any religion. (everson vs. Board of education, 330 u.s 1.)
The Gangnam Style’s Witnesses (whose tenets are derogatory to the Catholic
Church), applied for a permit to use the public plaza and kiosk to hold their
religious meeting on the occasion of their founding anniversary. Mayor
Lebron allowed them to use the north-western part of the plaza but not the
kiosk (which is a few meters away from the Catholic church). Members of
the Gangnam Style Witnesses claim that the act of Mayor Lebron is a
violation of their freedom of assembly and religion. Is this correct? (2012
BAR EXAMS)
a. No, because this is valid exercise of police power;

b. Yes, because the plaza being of public use can be used by anybody
regardless of religious belief;
c. No, because historical experience shows that peace and order may be
disturbed whenever two opposing religious groups or beliefs expound their
dogmas;
d. Yes, because there is no clear and present danger in holding a religious
meeting by another religious group near a catholic church.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Ignacio vs. Dela Cruz, 99 phil. 346; and (d) Iglesia ni Cristo vs. Court of Appeals,
259 scra 529. It is suggested that either (c) or (d) may be accepted as a correct
answer
Allmighty Apostles is a relatively new religious group and movement with fast-
growing membership. One time, DeepThroat, an investigative reporter,
made a research and study as to what the group’s leader, Maskeraid was
Page 106 of 198

actually doing. DeepThroat eventually came up with the conclusion that
Maskeraid was a phony who is just fooling the simpleminded people to part
with their money in exchange for the promise of eternal happiness in some
far-away heaven. This was published in a newspaper which caused much
agitation among the followers of Maskeraid. Some threatened violence
against DeepThroat, while some others already started destroying
properties while hurting those selling the newspaper. The local authorities,
afraid of the public disorder that such followers might do, decided to ban
the distribution of the newspaper containing the article. DeepThroat went to
court complaining about the prohibition placed on the dissemination of his
article. He claims that the act of the authorities partakes of the nature of
heckler’s veto, thus a violation of the guaranty of press freedom. On the
other hand, the authorities counter that the act was necessary to protect the
public order and the greater interest of the community. If you were the
judge, how would you resolve the issue? (4%)2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If I were the judge, I would rule that the distribution of the newspaper cannot be
banned. Freedom of the news should be allowed although it induces a condition
of unrest and stirs people to anger. Freedom of the press includes freedom of
circulation (Chavez v. Gonzales, 545 SCRA 441 (2008).
When governmental action that restricts freedom of the press is based on content, it
is given the strictest scrutiny and the government must shoe that there is a clear
and present danger of the substantive evil which the government has the right to
prevent. The threats of violence and even the destruction of properties while
hurting those selling the newspaper do not constitute a clear and present danger
as to warrant curtailment of the right of Deep Throat to distribute the newspaper
(Chavez v. Gonzales 545 SCRA 441 (2008)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The action of the government is justified.
The fact that some people had already started destroying properties while hurting
those selling the newspaper can be validly considered by the government as a
clear and present danger, which will justify its banning of the further distribution of
the newspaper containing the article. The test for limitations on freedom of
expression continues to be the cleas and present danger rule-that words are used
in such circumstances and are of such a nature as ro create a clear and present
danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the lawmaker has a
right to prevent (Chavez vs. Gonzales, 545 SCRA 441 92008).
Candida has been administratively charged of immorality for openly living with
Manuel, a married man. Candida urges that her conjugal arrangement with
Page 107 of 198

Manuel fully conforms with their religious beliefs and with the teachings of
their church.
In resolving whether Candida should be administratively penalized which is the

best test to apply? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) Clear and Present Danger Test

(B) Compelling State Interest Test
(C) Balancing of Interests Test
(D) Conscientious Objector Test
(E) Dangerous Tendency Test
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B)(Estrada v. Escritor, A.M.No. P-02-1651, August 4, 2003, 492 SCRA 1)
To fulfill a campaign promise to the poor folk in a far-flung area in Mindanao, the
President requested his friend, Pastor Roy, to devote his ministry to them. The
President would pay Pastor Roy a monthly stipend of P50,00000 from his
discretionary fund, and would also erect a modest house of worship in the
locality in an area of the latter's choice. Does the President thereby violate any
provisions of the Constitution? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The President violated Sec. 29 (2), Article VI of the Constitution. Public money can be
given to Pastor Roy only when he is assigned to the armed forces, a penal institution, or
government orphanage or leprosarium. No public money can be given for the benefit of
the church for the construction of a house of worship.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER
The President violated Sec. 5 of Article III of the Constitution, also known as the non-
establishment clause, which states that no law shall be made respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, and that the free
exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or
preference, shall forever be allowed. Such payment of a monthly stipend and the
erection of the house is a preference which falls under this prohibition.
I. Liberty of abode and freedom of movement

1. Limitations
2. Right to travel
a. Watch-list and hold departure orders
3. Return to one's country
Page 108 of 198

Mr. Violet was convicted by the RTC of Estafa. On appeal, he filed with the
Court of Appeals a Motion to Fix Bail for Provisional Liberty Pending
Appeal. The Court of Appeals granted the motion and set a bail amount in
the sum of Five (5) Million Pesos, subject to the conditions that he secure
"a certification/guaranty from the Mayor of the place of his residence that
he is a resident of the area and that he will remain to be a resident therein
until final judgment is rendered or in case he transfers residence, it must be
with prior notice to the court". Further, he was ordered to surrender his
passport to the Division Clerk of Court for safekeeping until the court
orders its return.
a. Mr. Violet challenges the conditions imposed by the Court of Appeals as

violative of his liberty of abode and right to travel. Decide with reasons.
(5%)
b. Are "liberty of abode" and "the right to travel" absolute rights? Explain. What
are the respective exception/s to each right if any? (5%) (2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. the right to change adobe and the right to travel are not absolute. The liberty of
changing adobe may be unpaired upon order to the court. The order of the court
of appeals is lawful, because the purpose is to ensure that the accused will be
available whenever his presence is required. He is not being prevented from
changing his adobe. He is merely being required to inform the court of appeals if
he does. (YAP vs Court of Appeals, 358 scra 564).
b. The liberty of adobe and the right to travel are not absolute the liberty of adobe and
of changing it can be imposed within the limits prescribed by law upon lawful
order of the court. The right to travel may be unpaired in the interest of national
security, public safety, or public health as may be provided by law. (section 6,
article III of the Constitution.) In addition , the court has the inherent power to
restrict the right of an accused who has pending criminal case to travel abroad to
maintain its jurisdiction over him. (Santiago vs Vasquez, 217 scra 633.)
J. Right to information
1. Limitations
2. Publication of laws and regulations
3. Access to court records
4. Right to information relative to:
a. Government contract negotiations
b. Diplomatic negotiations
At the Senate impeachment trial of Justice Pablo P. San Quintin, Hon. Emilio A.
Tan, Congressman and Impeachment Panel Manager, wrote the Supreme Court
Page 109 of 198

requesting that the prosecutors be allowed to examine the court records of
Stewards Association of the Philippines, Inc. (SAP!) v. Filipinas Air, et al., G.R.
No. 987654, a case that is still pending. The High Court __________. (1%) (BAR
2013)
A. may grant the request by reason of inter-departmental courtesy
B. may grant the request as the records of the Filipinas Air case are public records
C. should deny the request since records of cases that are pending for decision are
privileged except only for pleadings, orders and resolutions that are available to
the public
D. should deny the request because it violates the Court's independence and the
doctrine of separation of powers
E. should grant the request because of the sui generis nature of the power of
impeachment, provided that the Bill of Rights is not violated
Which one is NOT a recognized limitation to the right to information on matters

of public concern: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. national security matters;
b. trade secrets and banking transactions;
c. criminal matters or classified law enforcement matters;
d. government research data used as a basis for policy development.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 7, ARTICLE III OF CONSTITUTION
K. Right of association
Bona fide associations of citizens which demonstrate capacity of promote the

public interest and with identifiable leadership, membership, and structure are:
a. independent party-list organizations;
b. independent sectoral organizations;
c. independent indigenous organizations;
d. independent people’s organizations.
Offended by the President's remarks that the Bureau of Customs is a pit of misfits
and the corrupt, the Bureau of Customs Employees Association composed of
3,000 workers seeks your legal advice on how best to protest what it views to be
the President's baseless remarks. (BAR 2013)
A prudent legal advice is that __________. (1%)
A. employees can go on mass leave of absence for one week
B. employees can march and rally at Mendiola every Monday
C. employees can barricade the gates of the Port of Manila at South Harbor and call
for the resignation of the incumbent Commissioner of Customs
D. employees can wear black arm bands and pins with the word "UNFAIR"
inscribed
Page 110 of 198

E. None of the above can legally be done.
L. Eminent domain
1. Concept
2. Expansive concept of “public use”
3. Just compensation
a. Determination
b. Effect of delay
The Government, through Secretary Toogoody of the Department of

Transportation (DOTr), filed a complaint for eminent domain to acquire a 1,000-
hectare property in Bulacan, owned by Baldomero. The court granted the
expropriation, fixed the amount of just compensation, and installed the
Government in full possession of the property.
(A) If the Government does not immediately pay the amount fixed by the court as
just compensation, can Baldomero successfully demand the return of the
property to him? Explain your answer. (2.5%)
(B) If the Government paid full compensation but after two years it abandoned its
plan to build an airport on the property, can Baldomero compel the Government
to resell the property back to him? Explain your answer. (2.5%) (2016 BAR
EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) If the government does not pay Baldomero the just compensation immediately, he
cannot demand the return of the property to him. Instead, legal interest should be paid
from the time of taking of the property until actual payment in full (Republic v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No.146587, July 2, 2002, 383 SCRA 611).
(B) With respect to the element of public use, the expropriator should: commit to use the
property for the purpose stated in the petition. If not, it is incumbent upon it to return the
property to the owner, if the owner desires to reacquire it. Otherwise, the judgment of
expropriation will lack the element of public use. The owner will be denied due process
and the judgment will violate his right to justice (Mactan-Cebu Airport Authority v.
Lozado, Sr, G.R. No. 176625, February 25, 2010, 613 SCRA 618). If the just
compensation was not paid within 5 year from finality of judgment, the owner is entitled
to recover the property (Republic v. Lan, G.R. No.161656, June 29, 2005, 462 SCRA
265).
4. Abandonment of intended use and right of repurchase

5. Miscellaneous application
Which one of the following circumstances is NOT an element of taking under

eminent domain:
Page 111 of 198

a. entering upon public property for a momentary period;
b. under color of legal authority;
c. devoting it to public use;
d. as substantially to cust the owner of all beneficial ownership.
Market value for purposes of determining just compensation in eminent

domain has been described as the fair value of property: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. between one who desires to purchase and one does not desire to sell;
b. between one who desires to purchase and one who wants to delay
selling;
c. between one who desires to purchase and one who desires to sell;
d. between one who desires to purchase on terms and one who desires to
sell after a period of time.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) CITY OF MANILA VS. ESTRADA, 25 PHIL. 208
The National Power and Grid Corporation (NPGC), a government entity

involved in power generation distribution, had its transmission lines
traverse some fields belonging to Farmerjoe. NPGC did so without
instituting any expropriation proceedings. Farmerjoe, not knowing any
better, did not immediately press his claim for payment until after ten years
later when a son of his took up Law and told him that he had a right to claim
compensation. That was then the only time that Farmerjoe earnestly
demanded payment. When the NPGC ignored him, he instituted a case for
payment of just compensation. In defense, NPGC pointed out that the claim
had already prescribed since under its Charter it is clearly provided
that “actions for damages must be filed within five years after the rights of way,
transmission lines, substations, plants or other facilities shall have been
established and that after said period, no suit shall be brought to question
the said rights of way, transmission lines, substations, plants or other
facilities.” If you were the lawyer of Farmerjoe, how would you protect and
vindicate the rights of your client? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
As held in NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. SPOUSES BERNARDO AND

MINDALUZ SALUDARES G. R. No. 189127, April 25, 2012; the right to recover
just compensation is enshrined in no less than our Bill of Rights, which states in
clear and categorical language that private property shall not be taken for public
use without just compensation. This constitutional mandate cannot be defeated
by statutory prescription.
Page 112 of 198

Thus, It would be a confiscatory act on the part of the government to take the
property of respondent spouses for a public purpose and deprive them of their
right to just compensation, solely because they failed to institute inverse
condemnation proceedings within five years from the time the transmission lines
were constructed.
M. Contract clause
1. Contemporary application of the contract clause
N. Legal assistance and free access to courts
O. Rights of suspects
1. Availability
The contents of the vault of ABC Company consisting of cash and documents
were stolen. Paulyn, the treasurer of ABC, was invited by the Makati City Police
Department to shed light on the amount of cash stolen and the details of the
missing documents. Paulyn obliged and volunteered the information asked.
Later, Paulyn was charged with qualified theft together with suspects. Paulyn
claims her rights under the Constitution and pertinent laws were blatantly
violated. The police explained that they were just gathering evidence when
Paulyn was invitedlor a conference and she was not a suspect at that time. Rule
on her defense. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the defense of Paulyn is not valid. When she was invited for questioning by the
Makati City Police Department and she volunteered information, he was not yet a
suspect. Her constitutional tights of a person under investigation for the commission of
an offense under Settion 120), Article I of the Constitution begins to operate when the
investigation ceases to be a general inquiry upon an unsolved crime and begins to be
aimed upon a particular suspect who has been taken into custody and the questions
tend to elicit incriminating statements (People v. Marra,_G.R. No. 108494, September
20,1994, 236 SCRA 565).
2. Requisites
3. Waiver
Under Article III, Section 12 of the Constitution, any person under investigation
for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his
right to remain silent, etc. The investigation referred to is called: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. preliminary investigation;
b. summary investigation;
Page 113 of 198

c. criminal investigation;
d. custodial investigation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) People vs Sunga, 339 scra 624; (c) Galman vs. Pamaran 138 SCRA 294; and (d)
Section 12, Article iii of Constitution
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) KHETIN VS. VILLAREAL, 42 PHIL. 886
Mr. Brown, a cigarette vendor, was invited by PO1 White to a nearby police
station. Upon arriving at the police station, Brown was asked to stand side-
by-side with five (5) other cigarette vendors in a police line-up. PO1 White
informed them that they were looking for a certain cigarette vendor who
snatched the purse of a passer-by and the line-up was to allow the victim to
point at the vendor who snatched her purse. No questions were to be asked
from the vendors. (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Brown, afraid of a "set up" against him, demanded that he be allowed to

secure his lawyer and for him to be present during the police line-up. Is
Brown entitled to counsel? Explain (5%)
b. Would the answer in (a.) be the same if Brown was specifically invited by
White because an eyewitness to the crime identified him as the perpetrator?
Explain. (3%)
c. Briefly enumerate the so-called "Miranda Rights". (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Brown is not entitled to counsel during the police line up. He was not yet being
asked to answer for a criminal offense. (garaboa vs. Cruzm 162 scra 642.)
B. Brown would be entitled to the assistance of a lawyer. He was already considered

as a suspect and was therefore entitled to the right under custodial investigation.
(People vs Legaspi, 331 scra 95.);
C. The Miranda warning means that a person in custody who will be interrogated
must be informed of the following.
1. He has right to remain silent.

2. anything said can be used as evidence against him;
3. he has the right to have counsel during the investigation; and
4. he must be informed that if he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent
Page 114 of 198

him. (Miranda vs. Arizona , 384 U.S 436)
A robbery with homicide had taken place and Lito, Badong, and Rollie were
invited for questioning based on the information furnished by a neighbor
that he saw them come out of the victim’s house at the time of the
robbery/killing. The police confronted the three with this and other
information they had gathered, and pointedly accused them of committing
the crime.
Lito initially resisted, but eventually broke down and admitted his participation
in the crime. Elated by this break and desirous of securing a written
confession soonest, the police called City Attorney Juan Buan to serve as
the trio’s counsel
and to advise them about their rights during the investigation.
Badong and Rollie, weakened in spirit by Lito’s early admission, likewise

admitted their participation.The trio thus signed a joint extrajudicial
confessionwhich served as the main evidence against them attheir trial.
They were convicted based on their confession. Should the judgment of

conviction be affirmed or reversed on appeal?
(5%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The judgment of conviction should be reversed on appeal. It relied mainly on the

extra judicial confession of the accused. The lawyer assisting them must be
independent. City Attorney Juan Buan is not independent. As City Attorney, he
provided legal support to the City Mayor in performing his duties which include
the maintenance of peace and order (People v. Sunga, 399 SCRA 624).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The judgment of conviction should be affirmed if the accused failed to object when
their extrajudicial confession was offered in evidence which was rendered it
admissible (People v. Samus, 389 SCRA 93).
The police got a report about a shooting incident during a town fiesta. One
person was killed. The police immediately went to the scene and started
asking the people about what they witnessed. In due time, they were
pointed to Edward Gunman, a security guard, as the possible malefactor.
Edward was then having refreshment in one of the eateries when the police
approached him. They asked him if he had a gun to which question he
answered yes. Then they asked if he had seen anybody shot in the vicinity
just a few minutes earlier and this time he said he did not know about it.
After a few more questions, one of the policemen asked Edward if he was
Page 115 of 198

the shooter. He said no, but then the policeman who asked him told him
that several witnesses pointed to him as the shooter. Whereupon Edward
broke down and started explaining that it was a matter of selfdefense.
Edward was eventually charged with murder. During his trial, the
statements he made to the police were introduced as evidence against him.
He objected claiming that they were inadmissible since he was not given his
Miranda rights. On the other hand, the prosecution countered that there was
no need for such rights to be given since he was not yet arrested at the time
of the questioning. If you were the judge, how would you rule on the issue?
(4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would rule in favour of Edward. The statements made are inadmissible. It was made
in violation of the constitutional rights of Edwards. Custodial investigation refers to
any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been
taken into custody. The rights are available when the person interrogated is
already treaded as a particular suspect and the investigation is no longer a
general inquiry into an unsolved crime. However, during this stage, no complaint
or criminal case has been filed yet. As such, the person suspected to have
committed a crime is not yet an accused, since no case was instituted against
him.
However, in the case of Edward, the questioning made was more than just a general
inquiry into an unsolved crime. It was already in the accusatory stage in which the
Miranda rights must be given to the accused.
As he was entering a bar, Arnold — who was holding an unlit cigarette in this
right hand — was handed a match box by someone standing near the
doorway. Arnold unthinkingly opened the matchbox to light his cigarette
and as he did so, a sprinkle of dried leaves fell out, which the guard noticed.
The guard immediately frisked Arnold, grabbed the matchbox, and sniffed
its contents. After confirming that the matchbox contained marijuana, he
immediately arrested Arnold and called in the police. At the police station,
the guard narrated to the police that he personally caught Arnold in
possession of dried marijuana leaves. Arnold did not contest the guard’s
statement; he steadfastly remained silent and refused to give any written
statement. Later in court, the guard testified and narrated the statements he
gave the police over Arnold’s counsel’s objections. While Arnold presented
his own witnesses to prove that his possession and apprehension had been
set-up, he himself did not testify. The court convicted Arnold, relying largely
on his admission of the charge by silence at the police investigation and
during trial.
From the constitutional law perspective, was the court correct in its ruling?
(6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
Page 116 of 198

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The court was wrong in relying on the silence of Arnold during the police investigation
and during the trial. Under Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution, he had
the right to remain silent. His silence cannot be taken as a tacit admission,
otherwise, his right to remain silent would be rendered nugatory. Considering that
his right against self-incrimination protects his right to remain silent, he cannot be
penalized for exercising it (People v. Galvez, G.R. No. 157221, March 30, 2007,
519 SCRA 521).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The court correctly convicted Arnold. There is no showing that the evidence for the
prosecution was insufficient. When Arnold remained silent, he runs the risk of an
interference of guilt from non-production of evidence in his behalf (People v. Solis
G.R. No. 124127, June 29, 1998, 128 SCRA 217).
After X, a rape suspect, was apprised of his right to silence and to counsel, he
told the investigators that he was waiving his right to have his own counsel
or to be provided one. He made his waiver in the presence of a retired
Judge who was assigned to assist and explain to him the consequences of
such waiver. Is the waiver valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, the waiver was not reduced in writing.
(B) Yes, the mere fact that the lawyer was a retired judge does not cast doubt on
his competence and independence.
(C) Yes, the waiver was made voluntarily, expressly, and with assistance of
counsel.
(D) No, a retired Judge is not a competent and independent counsel.
P. Rights of the accused

1. Criminal due process
2. Bail
3. Presumption of innocence
4. Right to be heard
5. Assistance of counsel
6. Right to be informed
7. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial
8. Right of confrontation
9. Compulsory process
10. Trials inabsentia
The right of the accused to be informed is violated if:
Page 117 of 198

a. he was accused of killing his wife by strangulation but it was proven that
his wife died of poisoning;
b. it was proven that he killed somebody on a date different from the one
alleged in the information;
c. he was charged with parricide but was convicted of murder, because it
turned out that he and the victim were not married;
d. the accused was charged with commission of acts of lasciviousness and
was convicted of unjust vexation.
During promulgation of sentence, the presence of the accused is mandatory

but he may appear by counsel or representative when (2011 BAR)
(A) he is charged with a light offense.
(B) he was able to cross-examine the prosecution’s witnesses.
(C) he waives his right to be present.
(D) he is convicted of a bailable offense.
William, a private American citizen, a university graduate and frequent visitor to

the Philippines, was inside the U.S. embassy when he got into a heated
argument with a private Filipino citizen. Then, in front of many shocked
witnesses, he killed the person he was arguing with. The police came, and
brought him to the nearest police station. Upon reaching the station, the
police investigator, in halting English, informed William of his Miranda
rights, and assigned him an independent local counsel. William refused the
services of the lawyer, and insisted that he be assisted by a Filipino lawyer
currently based in the U.S. The request was denied, and the counsel
assigned by the police stayed for the duration of the investigation.
William protested his arrest.
He argued that since the incident took place inside the U.S. embassy,
Philippine courts have no jurisdiction because the U.S. embassy grounds
are not part of Philippine territory; thus, technically, no crime under
Philippine law was committed. Is William correct? Explain your answer.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
William is not correct. The premises occupied by the United States Embassy do not
constitute territory of the United States but of the Philippines. Crimes committed
within them are subject to the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines. Since
William has no diplomatic immunity, the Philippines can prosecute him if it
acquires custody over him (Reagan v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 30
SCRA 968 [1969]).
Page 118 of 198

He also claimed that his Miranda rights were violated because he was not given
the lawyer of his choice; that being an American, he should have been
informed of his rights in proper English; and that he should have been
informed of his rights as soon as he was taken into custody, not when he
was already at the police station. Was William denied his Miranda rights?
Why or why not? (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The fact that the police officer gave him the Miranda warning in halting English does
not detract from its validity. Under Section 2 (b) of Republic Act No. 7438, it is
sufficient that the language used was known to and understood by him. William
need not be given the Miranda warning before the investigation started. William
was not denied his Miranda rights. It is not practical to require the police officer to
provide a lawyer of his own choice from the United States (Gamboa v. Cruz, 162
SCRA
(a) [1988]).
If William applies for bail, claiming that he is entitled thereto under the
“international standard of justice” and that he comes from a U.S. State that
has outlawed capital punishment, should William be granted bail as a
matter of right? Reasons. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
William should not be granted bail as a matter of right. He is subject to Philippine

criminal jurisdiction, therefore, his right to bail must be determined on the basis of
Section 13, Article III of the Constitution.
An information for murder was filed against X. After examining the case
records forwarded to him by the prosecution, the trial judge granted bail to
X based on the prosecution's manifestation that it was not objecting to the
grant of bail. Is the trial judge correct? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, the trial judge may evaluate the strength or weakness of the
evidence based on the case records forwarded to him.
(B) No, the trial judge should have held a hearing to ascertain the quality of
the evidence of guilt that the prosecution had against X.
(C) No, the trial judge should have conducted a hearing to ascertain first
whether or not X was validly arrested.
(D) Yes, the trial judge may reasonably rely on the prosecution's
manifestation that he had no objection to the grant of bail.
Norberto Malasmas was accused of estafa before the Regional Trial Court of
Manila. After the trial, he was found guilty. On appeal, his conviction was
Page 119 of 198

affirmed by the Court of Appeals. After the records of his case had been
remanded to the Regional Trial Court for execution, and after the latter
Court had set the date for the promulgation of judgment, the accused filed a
motion with the Court of Appeals to set aside the entry of judgment, and to
remand the case to the Regional Trial Court for new trial on the ground that
he had just discovered that “Atty. Leonilo Maporma” whom he had chosen
and who had acted as his counsel before the trial court and the Court of
Appeals, is not a lawyer. Resolved the motion of the accused with reasons.
(2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The motion should be granted and the entry of judgment should be set aside. An
accused is entitled to be heard by himself or counsel. (Art. Ill, sec. 14(2)). Unless
he is represented by an attorney, there is a great danger that any defense
presented in his behalf will be inadequate considering the legal requisite and skill
needed in court proceedings. There would certainly be a denial of due process.
(Delgado v. Court of Appeals, 145 SCRA 357 (1986)).
All persons charged shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties,

except those charged with: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. offenses punishable by death when evidence of guilt is strong;

b. offenses punishable by life imprisonment when evidence of guilt is strong;
c. offenses punishable by death when evidence of guilt is weak;
d. offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 13, ARTICLE III OF CONSTITUTION
Accused was charged with slight illegal detention. On the day set for the trial,
the trial court proceeded as follows:
"Court: to the accused:

Q: "Do you have an attorney or are you going to plead guilty?"
A: "I have no lawyer and i will plead guilty."
Accused was then arraigned, pleaded guilty, was found guilty and sentenced.
On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed. The accused was deprived of his:
(2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. right to cross-examination;
b. right to be presumed innocent;
Page 120 of 198

c. right to counsel;
d. right to production of evidence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) PEOPLE VS HOLGADO, 85 PHIL 752
The constitutional right of an accused "to meet the witnesses face to face" is
primarily for the purpose of affording the accused an opportunity to: (2012
BAR EXAMS)
a. identify the witness;

b. cross-examine the witness;
c. be informed of the witness;
d. be heard.
Criminal trial may proceed, notwithstanding the absence of the accused

provided that he has been duly notified, and his failure to appear is
unjustifiable, after: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. preliminary investigation;
b. arraignment;
c. sentencing;
d. prosecution has rested its case.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) SECTION 19, ARTICLE III OF CONSTITUTION
The requisites of a valid trial in absentia exclude: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Wherein his/her failure to appear is unjustifiable;

b. Wherein he/she allows himself/herself to be identified by the witness in
his/her absence, without further unqualified admitting that every time a
witness mentions a name by which he/she is known, it shall be understood
to refer to him/her;
c. Wherein he/she has been duly notified of the trial;
d. Wherein the accused has already been arraigned.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) CARREDO VS. PEOPLE, 183 SCRA 373
Q. Writ of habeas corpus
Page 121 of 198

Accused X pleaded not guilty to the charge of homicide against him. Since he
was admitted to bail, they sent him notices to attend the hearings of his
case. But he did not show up, despite notice, in four successive hearings
without offering any justification. The prosecution moved to present
evidence in absentia but the court denied the motion on the ground that the
accused has a right to be present at his trial. Is the court correct? (2011
BAR)
(A) No, the court is mandated to hold trial in absentia when the accused had
been arraigned, had notice, and his absence was unjustified.
(B) Yes, it remains discretionary on the court whether to conduct trial in
absentia even if the accused had been arraigned and had notice and did
not justify his absence.
(C) Yes, it is within the court's discretion to determine how many
postponements it will grant the accused before trying him in absentia.
(D) No, the court may reject trial in absentia only on grounds of fraud,
accident, mistake, or excusable negligence.
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in
cases of: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. imminent danger of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it;
b. grave danger of invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it;
c. clear and present danger of invasion or rebellion when the public safety
requires it;
d. invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 18, ARTICLE VII OF CONSTITUTION
R. Writs of amparo, habeas data, and kalikasan
Conrad is widely known in the neighborhood as a drug addict. He is also

suspected of being a member of the notorious “Akyat-Condo Gang” that
has previously broken into and looted condominium units in the area.
Retired Army Colonel Sangre — who is known as an anti-terrorism fighter
who disclaimed human and constitutional rights and has been nicknamed
“terror of Mindanao” — is now the Head of Security of Capricorn Land
Corporation, the owner and developer of Sagittarius Estates where a series
of robberies has recently taken place.
On March 1, 2013, Conrad informed his mother, Vannie, that uniformed security
guards had invited him for a talk in their office but he refused to come. Later
that day, however, Conrad appeared to have relented; he was seen walking
Page 122 of 198

into the security office flanked by two security guards. Nobody saw him
leave the office afterwards.
Conrad did not go home that night and was never seen again. The following
week and after a week-long search, Vannie feared the worst because of Col.
Sangre’s reputation. She thus reported Conrad’s disappearance to the
police. When nothing concrete resulted from the police investigation,
Vannie — a the advice of counsel — filed a petition for a writ of amparo to
compel Col. Sangre and the Sagittarius Security Office to produce Conrad
and to hold them liable and responsible for Conrad’s disappearance.
(A) Did Vannie’s counsel give the correct legal advice? (6%)
(B) If the petition would prosper, can Col. Sangre be held liable and/or
responsible for Conrad’s disappearance? (6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) The advice of Vannie’s counsel that she file a petition for a writ of amparo is not
correct. In order that a writ of amparo can be availed of against a private
individual for the disappearance of someone, the involvement of the government
is indispensable. There is no shoeing of any participation of the government in
Conrad’s disappearance (Navia v. Pardico, G.R. No. 184467, June 19, 2012, 673
SCRA 618).
(B) No, Col. Sangre cannot be held responsible for the disappearance of Conrad.
Command responsibility has no applicability to an amparo proceeding (Rubrico v.
Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 183871, February 18, 2010., 613 SCRA 233). It may
be established merely to enable the court to craft the appropriate remedies
against the responsible parties (Balao v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 186050,
December 13, 2011, 662 SCRA 312).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Although the writ of amparo does not pinpoint criminal culpability for a
disappearance, it determines responsibility, for the purpose of imposing the
appropriate remedy. Responsibility refers to the extent the actors have been
established to have participated in an enforced disappearance, as a measure of
the remedy, to be crafted, such as the directive to file the appropriate criminal and
civil cases against the responsible parties (Razon Jr. v. Tagitis, G.R. No. 182498,
December 3, 2009, 606 SCRA 598).
Command responsibility pertains to the responsibility of commanders for crimes

committed by subordinate members of the armed forces or other persons subject
to their control in international wars or domestic conflicts. The doctrine has now
found application in civil actions for human rights abuses, and in proceedings
Page 123 of 198

seeking the privilege of the writ of amparo. (a) What are the elements to be
established in order to hold the superior or commander liable under the doctrine
of command responsibility? (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The doctrine of command responsibility can be invoked to determine the author who is
accountable for, and has the duty to address the disappearance and harassment
complained of to enable the courts to devise remedial measures that may be
appropriate under the premises to protect their rights covered by the writ of amparo. To
hold someone liable under the doctrine of command responsibility, the following
elements must obtain:
1. the existence of a superior-subordinate relationship between the accused as
superior and the perpetrator of the crime as his subordinate;
2. the superior knew or had reason to know that the crime was about to be or had
been committed;
3. and the superior failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to
prevent the criminal acts or punish the perpetrators thereof (Rodriguez v.
Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805, November 15, 2011, 660 SCRA 843).
May the doctrine of command responsibility apply to the President for the abuses
of the armed forces (AFP and PNP) given his unique role as the commander-in-
chief of all the armed forces? Explain your answer. (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The president, being the commander-In-chief of all armed forces, necessarily

possesses control over the military that qualifies him as a superior within the purview of
the command responsibility doctrine. The Incumbent President is immune from suit
during his incumbency. The immunity, however, exists only during the incumbency of
the President. Once his or her term has ended, he or she may be held accountable
under this doctrine (Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 191805, November 15,
2011, 660 SCRA 843).
S. Self-incrimination clause
1. Scope and coverage
a. Foreign laws
2. Application
3. Immunity statutes
The right of the state to prosecute crimes by available evidence must yield to
the right of: 2013 BAR EXAMS
A. the accused against self- incrimination.
B. another state to extradite a fugitive from justice.
C. the state to deport undesirable aliens.
D. the complainant to drop the case against the accused
Page 124 of 198

The right of the accused against self-incrimination will be violated if: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. he is charged with violation of the Anti-Money Laundering Act and he was
required to produce his bank passbook;
b. he is a public officer charged with amassing ill-gotten wealth and his
statement of assets and liabilities will be presented as evidence;
c. his gun was subjected to a ballistics test;
d. a sample of his blood was taken if his blood type matches the blood type
found at the scene of the crime.
As he was entering a bar, Arnold — who was holding an unlit cigarette in this
right hand — was handed a match box by someone standing near the
doorway. Arnold unthinkingly opened the matchbox to light his cigarette
and as he did so, a sprinkle of dried leaves fell out, which the guard noticed.
The guard immediately frisked Arnold, grabbed the matchbox, and sniffed
its contents. After confirming that the matchbox contained marijuana, he
immediately arrested Arnold and called in the police.
At the police station, the guard narrated to the police that he personally caught
Arnold in possession of dried marijuana leaves. Arnold did not contest the
guard’s statement; he steadfastly remained silent and refused to give any
written statement. Later in court, the guard testified and narrated the
statements he gave the police over Arnold’s counsel’s objections. While
Arnold presented his own witnesses to prove that his possession and
apprehension had been set-up, he himself did not testify.
The court convicted Arnold, relying largely on his admission of the charge by
silence at the police investigation and during trial.
From the constitutional law perspective, was the court correct in its ruling?
(6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The court was wrong in relying on the silence of Arnold during the police investigation
and during the trial. Under Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution, he had
the right to remain silent. His silence cannot be taken as a tacit admission,
otherwise, his right to remain silent would be rendered nugatory. Considering that
his right against self-incrimination protects his right to remain silent, he cannot be
penalized for exercising it (People v. Galvez, G.R. No. 157221, March 30, 2007,
519 SCRA 521).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The court correctly convicted Arnold. There is no showing that the evidence for the
Page 125 of 198

prosecution was insufficient. When Arnold remained silent, he runs the risk of an
interference of guilt from non-production of evidence in his behalf (People v. Solis
G.R. No. 124127, June 29, 1998, 128 SCRA 217).
Alienmae is a foreign tourist. She was asked certain questions in regard to a

complaint that was filed against her by someone who claimed to have been
defrauded by her. Alienmae answered all the questions asked, except in
regard to some matters in which she invoked her right against self-
incrimination. When she was pressed to elucidate, she said that the
questions being asked might tend to elicit incriminating answers insofar as
her home state is concerned. Could Alienmae invoke the right against
selfincrimination if the fear of incrimination is in regard to her foreign law?
(4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Alienmae cannot invoke her right against self-incrimination even if the fear of
incrimination is in regard to her foreign law. Under the territoriality principle, the
general rule is that a state has jurisdiction over all persons and property within its
territory. The
jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessary, exclusive, and absolute.
However, the are a few exceptions on when a state cannot exercise jurisdiction
even within its own territory, to wit: 1) foreign states, head of states, diplomatic
representatives, and consults to a certain degree; 2) foreign state property; 3)
acts of state; 4) foreign merchant vessels exercising rights of innocent passage or
arrival under stress; 5) foreign armies passing through or stationed in its territories
with its permission; and 6) such other persons or property, including organisations
like the United Nations, over which it may, by agreement, waive jurisdiction.
Seeing that the circumstances surrounding Alienmae do not fall under those
exceptions, that she is a foreign tourist who received a complaint for fraud, such
principle of territoriality can be exercised by the State to get the information it
needs to proceed with the case.
The right of the State to prosecute crimes by available evidence must yield to
the right of (2011 BAR)
(A) the accused against self-incrimination.
(B) another State to extradite a fugitive from justice.
(C) the State to deport undesirable aliens.
(D) the complainant to drop the case against the accused.
A, the wife of an alleged victim of enforced disappearance, applied for the

issuance of a Writ of Amparo before a Regional Trial Court in Tarlac. Upon
motion of A, the court issued inspection and production orders addressed
Page 126 of 198

to the AFP Chief of Staff to allow entry at Camp Aquino and permit the
copying of relevant documents, including the list of detainees, if any.
Accompanied by court-designated Commission on Human Rights (CHR)
lawyers, A took photographs ofa suspected isolation cell where her
husband was allegedly seen being held for three days and tortured before
he finally disappeared. The CHR lawyers requested one Lt. Valdez for a
photocopy of the master plan of Camp Aquino and to confirm in writing that
he had custody of the master plan. Lt. Valdez objected on the ground that it
may violate his right against self-incrimination. Decide with reasons. (4%)
(2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The objection of Lt. Valdez is not valid. The right against self -incrimination refers to
testimonial evidence and does not apply to the production of a photocopy of the
master plan of Camp Aquino, because it is a public record. He cannot object to
the request for him to confirm his custody of the master plan, because he is the
public officer who had custody of it. (Almonte v. Vasquez, 244 SCRA 286 [1995].)
T. Involuntary servitude and political prisoners
Involuntary servitude may be required as (2011 BAR)

(A) part of rehabilitation of one duly charged with a crime.
(B) substitute penalty for one who has been duly tried for a crime.
(C) punishment for a crime where one has been duly convicted.
(D) condition precedent to one's valid arraignment.
U. Excessive fines and cruel and inhuman punishments
The Constitution prohibits cruel and inhuman punishments which involve (2011
BAR)
(A) torture or lingering suffering.
(B) primitive and gross penalties.
(C) unusual penal methods.
(D) degrading and queer penalties.
The death penalty shall not be imposed: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. unless for compelling reasons involving death penalty crimes and the
executive hereafter provides for it;
b. unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes and a constitutional
amendment provides for it;
c. unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes and Congress
hereafter provides for it;
d. unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes and the Supreme
Page 127 of 198

Court hereafter upholds it.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) SECTION(1) ARTICLE III OF CONSTITUTION
V. Non-imprisonment for debts

W. Double jeopardy
1. Requisites
2. Motions for reconsideration and appeals
3. Dismissal with consent of accused
Butchoy installed a jumper cable. He was prosecuted under a Makati ordinance

penalizing such act. He moved for its dismissal on the ground that the
jumper cable was within the territorial jurisdiction of Mandaluyong and not
Makati. The case was dismissed. The City of Mandaluyong thereafter filed a
case against him for theft under the Revised Penal Code (RCP). Is there
double jeopardy? (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. No. The first jeopardy was terminated with his express consent;
b. Yes. This is double jeopardy of the second kind – prosecution for the same
act under an ordinance and a law;
c. Yes. He is prosecuted for the same offense which has already been
dismissed by the City of Makati;
d. No. The second kind of double jeopardy under Section 21, Article III only
contemplates conviction or acquittal which could terminate a first jeopardy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) Zapatos Vs People, 411 Scra 148
In which of the following would there be no double jeopardy even if a

subsequent case is filed? (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. Pot is accused before the RTC of qualified theft. After innumerable

postponements against Pot’s wishes, he moves for dismissal for denial of
the right to a speedy trial. Prosecutor objected. Dismissal granted;
b. Pot is accused before the RTC of qualified theft. After innumerable

postponements against Pot’s wishes, the prosecutor moves for dismissal
with the consent of Pot. Granted;
c. Pot is accused before the RTC of qualified theft. After innumerable

postponements against Pot’s wishes, he moves for dismissal for denial of
the right to a speedy trial. Prosecutor posts no objections. Dismissal
granted;
Page 128 of 198

d. Pot is accused before the RTC of qualified theft. After innumerable
postponements against Pot’s wishes, the prosecutor moves for dismissal
over the objections of Pot. Granted.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) SECTION 8, RULE 117 OF THE RULES ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
There is double jeopardy when the dismissal of the first case is (2011 BAR)
(A) made at the instance of the accused invoking his right to fair trial.
(B) made upon motion of the accused without objection from the prosecution.
(C) made provisionally without objection from the accused.
(D) based on the objection of the accused to the prosecution's motion to
postpone trial.
X. Ex post facto laws and bills of attainder
An ex post facto law has been defined as one: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. which aggravates a crime or makes it lesser than when it was committed;

b. which mitigates a crime or makes it lesser than when it was committed;
c. which aggravates a crime or makes it greater than when it was committed;
d. which aggravates a crime or makes it non-criminal after it was committed.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) REPUBLIC VS. EUGENIO, 545 SCRA 384
A bill of attainder is: (2012 BAR EXAMS)

a. an executive act which inflicts punishment without tender;
b. a judicial act which inflicts punishment without tender;
c. a legislative act which inflicts punishment without trial;
d. a legislative act which pardons punishment after tender.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) PEOPLE VS. FERREWR, 48 SCRA 382
VIII. Citizenship
A. Who are Filipino citizens
A child born under either the 1973 or the 1987 Constitution, whose father or
mother is a Filipino citizen at the time of his birth, is ________. (1%) 2013
Page 129 of 198

BAR EXAMS
(A) not a Filipino citizen as his father and mother must both be Filipino citizens
at the time of his birth
(B) not a Filipino citizen if his other is a Filipino citizen but his father is not, at
the time of his birth
(C) a Filipino citizen no matter where he or she may be born
(D) a Filipino citizen provided the child is born in the Philippines
(E) a Filipino citizen if he or she so elects upon reaching the age of 21
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C)Article III, Section 1(2) of the 1973 Constitution). (Article IV, Section 1(2) of the
1987 Constitution).
Rosebud is a natural-born Filipino woman who got married to Rockcold, a

citizen of State Frozen. By virtue of the laws of Frozen, any person who
marries its citizens would automatically be deemed its own citizen. After ten
years of marriage, Rosebud, who has split her time between the Philippines
and Frozen, decided to run for Congress. Her opponent sought her
disqualification, however, claiming that she is no longer a natural-born
citizen. In any event, she could not seek elective position since she never
renounced her foreign citizenship pursuant to the Citizenship Retention and
Reacquisition Act (R.A. No. 9225). Is Rosebud disqualified to run by reason
of citizenship? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, because Rosebud never lost her status as a natural-born citizen by reason of
marriage to a foreigner. In addition to her status as a natural born citizen, she
acquired the citizenship of her husband by operation of law and not by a voluntary
act of acquisition thereof and voluntary renunciation of her former citizenship.
In relation to election protest, what is prohibited is dual allegiance. Allegiance to a

foreign state is acquired through an express and voluntary act of renouncing once
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and swearing allegiance to a foreign
state e.g. enlisting in the military services of another state.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
By naturalization according to the Bureau of Immigration of the Philippines is the

judicial act of adopting a foreigner and clothing him with the privileges of a native-
born citizen. It implies an act of renunciation of a former nationality and the fact of
entrance into a similar relation towards a new body politic. Rosebud never
renounced her Filipino citizenship. She acquired it by operation of the law of
Frozen Country. R.A. 9225, applies to those who lost their citizenship by some
Page 130 of 198

voluntary act of renunciation.
Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by
their act or omission, they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.. ex.
Naturalization to another country, service in the military etc. Sec. 3, RA 9225 xxx
Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, natural-born citizenship by
reason of their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country… Rosebud was not
naturalized but rather acquired the citizenship of Frozen country by operation of
law. In the case of she became a naturalized Australian citizen owing to her
marriage TEODORA SOBEJANA-CONDON, she became a NATURALIZED
CITIZEN owing to her marriage. Hence, the word Naturalized, means there must
be some form of voluntary act of renunciation. In the case of Rosebud it was by
virtue of the laws of Frozen, any person who marries its citizens would
automatically be deemed its own citizen.The case never mentioned any
naturalization process.
Discuss the evolution of the principle of jus sanguinis as basis of Filipino

citizenship under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions. (3%)2015 BAR
EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In the 1935 Constitution, Filipino citizenship was defined, classified and regulated by
Article IV, which stated that:
Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this
Constitution
(2) Those born in the Philippine Islands of foreign parents who, before the adoption
of the Constitution, had been elected to public office in the Philippine Islands
(3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines
(4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines, and upon reaching the age
of majority, elect Philippine citizenship
(5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
Section 2. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by

law.
As can be seen from the previous citizenship laws, the principle of jus sanguinis was
not applicable prior to the 1935 Constitution. Before Section 1, which considered
citizens those whose fathers were Filipino citizens, the prevailing doctrine had
been jus soli. By recognizing the principle of jus sanguinis, it was recognized that
a blood relationship would serve “as a better guarantee of loyalty to the country of
one’s parents” than jus soli.
Section 1(4) contemplated a situation where only the mother was a Filipino citizen,
Page 131 of 198

and gave the child an opportunity to elect Filipino citizenship only when he
reached the age of majority. Prior to his reaching such an age, he at most has an
inchoate right to Filipino citizenship. The provision is also applicable to mothers
who were Filipinos before acquiring the nationality of their foreign spouses. To
restrict its interpretation in such a way that the time of election was considered
controlling as to the status when the mother should be a Filipina would have
nullified the particular provision. For illegitimate children however, this provision
would not have been applicable, since the citizenship of the father would not then
be material, since an illegitimate child as a rule follows the nationality of the
mother.
The right to elect is governed by Commonwealth Act No. 652, which states the
requirements and procedure for election, and must be express:
Option to elect Philippine citizenship shall be expressed in a statement to be filed

and sworn to by the party concerned before any officer authorized to administer
oath and shall be filed with the nearest civil registrar. The party elected must
likewise accompany the aforementioned statement with the oath of allegiance to
the Constitution and the Government of the Philippines. Where the party
concerned resides abroad, he must make the statement before any officer of the
government of the Philippines authorized to administer oaths and must forward
such statement together with his oath of allegiance to the civil registrar of Manila.
1973 Constitution
Article III, Section 2 enumerates the following as citizens of the Philippines:

1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this
Constitution.
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines
3. Those who elect Philippine citizenship pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution of
nineteen hundred and thirty-five
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
The purpose of the first paragraph of the provision was to protect the continued
enjoyment of Philippine citizenship to those who already possess the right as of
17 January 1973.
The Section 2(2) followed the principle of jus sanguinis. However, unlike the 1935
Constitution, Filipino mothers were placed by the 1973 Constitution on equal
footing with Filipino fathers as far as the determination of the citizenship of their
children was concerned. The father or mother may be a natural-born Filipino or a
Filipino by naturalization or by election. The only important consideration here
was that the mother must be a Filipino at the time of the birth of the child. It must
be reiterated that this rule applied only to those born of a Filipino mother on or
after 17 January 1973.
Page 132 of 198

As the 1973 Constitution followed the doctrine of jus sanguinis, it disregarded the
place of birth of a person. As long as one was born of Filipino parents, he was
considered a Filipino. If he was born in a country where the rule of jus soli was
the prevailing principle, it would be a case of dual citizenship.
1987 Constitution
The 1987 Constitution builds on the previous Constitutions, but modifies provisions
which cannot be found in the 1973 and 1935 Constitution. Those who were
citizens during the adoption of the new Constitution were considered citizens.
However, this does not rectify any defects in the acquisition of such citizenship
under the 1935 or 1973 Constitution. “If a person’s citizenship was subject to
judicial challenge under the old law, it still remains subject to challenge under the
new – whether or not the judicial challenge had been commenced prior to the
effectivity of the new Constitution.”
The principle of jus sanguinis still applies, and in following the lead of the 1973
Constitution, the Filipino woman is placed on the same footing as Filipino men in
matters of citizenship. It is essential, however, that the mother is a Filipina when
the child is born. The principle of parental authority is still applicable in the new
Constitution, so this article only applies to legitimate children, not to adopted or
illegitimate ones. Mothers have parental authority over illegitimate children.
Adopted children, on the other hand, as they are not related by blood, do not
follow their adoptive parents’ citizenship, despite being under their parental
authority.
As for those who were born after the adoption of the 1973 Constitution of Filipino
mothers, the 1987 Constitution still provides the transitory provision that was also
in the 1973 Constitution: “Those born before 17 January 1973, of Filipino
mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.”
A child born in the United States to a Filipino mother and an American father is
(2011 BAR)
(A) a Filipino citizen by election.
(B) a repatriated Filipino citizen.
(C) a dual citizen.
(D) a natural born Filipino citizen.
B. Modes of acquiring citizenship
Basic Philippine law, in respect of the modes of acquiring citizenship, follows

the rule(s) of: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. jus soli and jus sanguinis;
b. naturalization and provides for jus soli;
c. jus sanguinis and provides for naturalization;
Page 133 of 198

d. none of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. SECTION 1, ARTICLE IV OF CONSTITUTION
C. Naturalization and denaturalization
Filipino citizenship may be acquired through judicial naturalization only by an

alien (2011 BAR)
(A) born, raised, and educated in the Philippines who has all the
qualifications and none of the disqualifications to become a Filipino
citizen.
(B) who has all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications to
become a Filipino citizen.
(C) born and raised in the Philippines who has all the qualifications and
none of the disqualifications to become a Filipino citizen.
(D) whose mother or father is a naturalized Filipino and who himself is
qualified to be naturalized.
The Special Committee on Naturalization is headed by (2011 BAR)

(A) the Secretary of Justice.
(B) the Secretary of Foreign Affairs.
(C) the National Security Adviser.
(D) the Solicitor General.
D. Dual citizenship and dual allegiance
Dual allegiance by citizen is: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. inimical to the national interest and is therefore proscribed by law;

b. inimical to the national interest and is therefore prescribed by law;
c. inimical to the national interest and therefore shall be dealt with by law;
d. inimical to the national interest and is therefore outside of coverage of
law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. SECTION 5, ARTICLE IV OF CONSTITUTION
Margarita was born in 1986 to a Filipino mother and Swedish father. She has
been living and continues to live in the US for the last 20 years and has also
been naturalized as a US citizen. She recently reacquired Philippine
citizenship under RA 9225, the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act
Page 134 of 198

of 2003. Can Margarita vote in the next national elections? (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. Yes. Dual citizens who are not residents may register under the Overseas
Absentee Voting Law.
b. Yes. Margarita is a Filipino citizen and thus may enjoy the right to suffrage
like everyone else without registering as an overseas absentee voter.
c. No. Margarita fails the residency requirement under Section 1, Article V of

the Constitution for Filipinos.
d. No. Dual citizens upon renunciation of their Filipino citizenship and

acquisition of foreign citizenship, have practically and legally abandoned
their domicile and severed their legal ties to their homeland as a
consequence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Macalintal Vs. Commision On Elections, 405 Scra 614

Dual citizenship is not the same as dual allegiance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
True. Dual citizenship arises when, as a result of the concurrent application of the
different laws of two or more states, a person is simultaneously considered a
national by those states and is involuntary.
Dual allegiance refers to the situation in which a person simultaneously owes by

some positive and voluntary act, loyalty to two or more states (Mercado v.
Manzano, 307 SCRA 630 [1999]).
E. Loss and re-acquisition of Philippine citizenship
Warlito, a natural-born Filipino, took up permanent residence in the United

States, and eventually acquired American citizenship. He then married
Shirley, an American, and sired three children. In August 2009, Warlito
decided to visit the Philippines with his wife and children: Johnny, 23 years
of age; Warlito, Jr., 20; and Luisa, 17.
Page 135 of 198

While in the Philippines, a friend informed him that he could reacquire
Philippine citizenship without necessarily losing U.S. nationality. Thus, he
took the oath of allegiance required under R.A. 9225.
Having reacquired Philippine citizenship, is Warlito a natural-born or a

naturalized Filipino citizen today? Explain your answer. (3%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Warlito is a natural-born Filipino citizen. Repatriation of Filipinos results in the

recovery of the original nationality. Since Warlito was a natural-born Filipino
citizen before he lost his Philippine citizenship, he was restored to his former
status as a natural- born Filipino citizen (Bengson v. House of Representatives
Electoral Tribunal, 357 SCRA 545 [2001]; R.A. 2630).
With Warlito having regained Philippine citizenship, will Shirley also become a
Filipino citizen? If so, why? If not, what would be the most speedy
procedure for Shirley to acquire Philippine citizenship? Explain. (3%) (2009
Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Shirley will not become a Filipino citizen, because under Republic Act No. 9225,
Warlito’s reacquisition of Philippine citizenship did not extend its benefits to
Shirley. She should instead file with the Bureau of Immigration a petition for the
cancellation of her alien certificate of registration on the ground that in
accordance with Section 15 of the Naturalization Law, because of her marriage to
Warlito, she should be deemed to have become a Filipino citizen. She must
allege and prove that she possesses none of the disqualifications to become a
naturalized Filipino citizen (Burca v. Republic, 51 SCRA 248 [1973]).
Do the children — Johnny, Warlito Jr., and Luisa —become Filipino citizens
with their father’s reacquisition of Philippine citizenship? Explain your
answer. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Under Section 18 of Republic Act No. 9225, only the unmarried children who are
below eighteen years of age of those who reacquire Philippine citizenship shall be
deemed Filipino citizens. Thus, only Luisa, who is seventeen years old, became a
Filipino citizen.
Onofre, a natural-born Filipino citizen, arrived in the United States in 1985. In

1990, he married Salvacion, a Mexican, and together they applied for and
obtained American citizenship in 2001. In 2015, the couple and their
Page 136 of 198

children—Alfred, 21 years of age, Robert, 16, and Marie, 14, who were all
born in the U.S.—returned to the Philippines on June 1, 2015, informed that
he could reacquire Philippine citizenship without losing his American
citizenship, Onofre went home to the Philippines and took the oath of
allegiance prescribed under R.A. No. 9225. On October 28, 2015, he filed a
Certificate of Candidacy to run in the May 9, 2016 elections for the position
of Congressman in his home province of Palawan, running against re-
electionist Congressman Prof undo.
(A) Did Onofre's reacquisition of Philippine citizenship benefit his wife,

Salvacion, and their minor children and confer upon them Filipino
citizenship? Explain your answer. (2.5%)
(B) Before the May 9,2016 elections, Profundo's lawyer filed a Petition to Deny
Due Course or to Cancel the Certificate of Candidacy against Onofre. What
grounds can he raise in his Petition to support it? Explain your answer.
(2.5%)
(2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) The reacquisition of Philippine citizenship by Onofre did not automatically make
his American wife, Salvacion, a Filipino citizen. Nowhere does Republic Act No.
9228 provide that the foreign wife of a former Filipino citizen who reacquired his
Filipino citizenship will automatically become a Filipino citizen.
Robert, who is 16 years old, and Marie, who is14 years old, also became Filipino
citizens. The unmarried children below eighteen (18) years of age, of those who
reacquire Philippine citizenship are also deemed citizens of the Philippines
(Section 4 of Republic Act No. 9225).
(B) The lawyer of Congressman Profundo can ask for the cancellation of the
certificate of candidacy on the ground that he did not execute an affidavit
renouncing his American citizenship as required by Section 5(2) of Republic Act
No.9225 and he lacked one-year residence in the Philippines as required by
Section 6, Article VI of the Constitution
F. Natural-born citizens and public office

IX. Law on Public Officers
A. General principles
B. Modes of acquiring title to public office
C. Modes and kinds of appointment
While Congress was not in session, the President appointed Antero as Secretary
of the Department of Tourism (DOT), Benito as Commissioner of the Bureau of
Immigration (BI), Clodualdo as Chairman of the Civil Service Commission (CSC),
Page 137 of 198

Dexter as Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR); and Emmanuel
as Philippine Ambassador to Cameroon. The following day, all the appointees
took their oath before the President, and commenced to perform the functions of
their respective offices.
(A) Characterize the appointments, whether permanent or temporary; and

whether regular or interim, with reasons. (2.5%)
(B) A civil society group, the Volunteers Against Misguided Politics (VAMP), files
suit, contesting the legality of the acts of the appointees and claiming that the
appointees should not have entered into the performance of the functions of their
respective offices, because their appointments had not yet been confirmed by the
Commission on Appointments. Is this claim of VAMP correct? Why or why not?
(2.5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) 1. The appointment of Antero as Secretary of Tourism is ad interim, because it is
subject to confirmation of the Commission on Appointments and was made while
Congress was not in session. He can start performing his duties upon his acceptance,
because it is permanent and cannot be withdrawn after its acceptance (Matibag v.
Benipayo, G.R. No. 149036, April 2, 2002, 380 SCRA 49).
2. The appointment of Benito as Commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration is regular

and permanent. It is not required to be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments.
He can start performing his duties upon acceptance of the appointment (Section 16,
Article VII of the Constitution).
3. The appointment of Clodualdo as Chairman of the Civil Service Commission is ad

interim, because it is subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments and
was made while Congress was not in session. He can start performing his duties upon
his acceptance of the appointment, because it is -permanent and cannot be withdrawn.
4. The appointment of Dexter as Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights is

regular and permanent upon his acceptance. It is not required to be confirmed by the
Commission on Appointments. He can start performing his duties upon his acceptance
(Bautista v. Salonga, G.R. No. 86439, Apri113,1989, 172 SCRA 160).
5. The appointment of Emmanuel as Ambassador to Cameroon is o interim, because it

is subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointment (Section 16, Article VII of
the Constitution).
(B) The claim of VAMP is not correct. The Commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration
and the Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights can immediately start
performing their functions upon acceptance since they are not required to be confirmed.
The Secretary of the Department of Tourism and the Chairman of the Civil Service
Commission, can immediately start performing their duties upon acceptance, since their
Page 138 of 198

ad interim appointment is permanent.
D. Eligibility and qualification requirements

E. Disabilities and inhibitions of public officers
F. Powers and duties of public officers
G. Rights of public officers
H. Liabilities of public officers
1. Preventive suspension and back salaries
2. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and back salaries
I. Immunity of public of public officers
SALN means: (2012 BAR EXAMS)

a. Summary of assets, liabilities and net worth;
b. Statement of assets in banks, liabilities and net worth;
c. Statement of assets, liabilities and net worth;
d. Statement of personal assets, liabilities and net worth.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) SECTION 17, ARTICLE XI OF CONSTITUTION
A private person constituted by the court as custodian of property attached to

secure a debt sought to be recovered in a civil proceeding is (2011 BAR)
(A) a private sheriff.
(B) a public officer.
(C) a private warehouseman.
(D) an agent of the party to whom the property will ultimately be awarded.
A temporary appointee to a public office who becomes a civil service eligible

during his tenure (2011 BAR)
(A) loses his temporary appointment without prejudice to his re-appointment
as permanent.
(B) has the right to demand conversion of his appointment to permanent.
(C) automatically becomes a permanent appointee.
(D) retains his temporary appointment.
The rule on nepotism does not apply to designations made in favor of a relative
of the authority making a designation. (0.5%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that the rule on nepotism does not apply to designations made in favor
of a relative if the authority making the designation is false. Designation
accomplishes the same purpose as appointment. (Laurel v. Civil Service
Commission, 203 SCRA195 [1991].)
Page 139 of 198

The School Principal of Ramon Magsaysay High School designated Maria, her
daughter, as public school teacher in her school. The designation was
assailed on ground of nepotism. Is such designation valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, because the law prohibits relatives from working within the same
government unit.
(B) Yes, because Maria’s position does not fall within the prohibition.
(C) No, because her mother is not the designating authority.
(D) No, because Maria is related to the supervising authority within the
prohibited degree of consanguinity.
During his campaign sortie in Barangay Salamanca, Mayor Galicia was arrested
at a PNP checkpoint for carrying high-powered firearms in his car. He was
charged and convicted for violation of the COMELEC gun ban. He did not
appeal his conviction and instead applied for executive clemency. Action on
the favorable recommendation of the Board of Pardons and Parole, the
President granted him pardon. Is he eligible to run again for an elective
position? Explain briefly. (5%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Mayor Galicia can run again for an elective office but not immediately. Under Section
40 of the Local Government Code, he cannot run for an elective local office within
two (2) years after serving sentence. Under Section 12 of the Omnibus Election
Code, he can run for and elective national office after the expiration of five (5)
years from his service of sentence. The pardon granted to him is not valid. The
offense involved a violation of the Omnibus Election Code and the pardon was
granted without the favorable recommendation of the Commission on elections.
(Section 5, Article IX-C of the Constitution.)
A discretionary duty of a public officer is never delegable. (0.5%) (2009 Bar

Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that a discretionary duty of a public officer can never be delegated is
false. It can be delegated, if the delegation is authorized (Mechem, A Treatise on
the Law of Public Offices and Officers, p. 368.)
Define:
Principle of holdover (1%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The principle of holdover means that in the absence of an express or implied
Page 140 of 198

constitutional of statutory provision to the contrary, an officer is entitled to hold his
office until his successor is appointed or chosen and has been qualified. (Topacio
Nueno v. Angeles, 76 Phil. 12 [1946].)
Amor sued for annulment of a deed of sale of Lot 1. While the case was
ongoing, Baltazar, an interested buyer, got a Certification from Atty. Crispin,
the Clerk of Court, that Lot 1 was not involved in any pending case before
the court. Acting on the certification, the Register of Deeds canceled the
notice of lis pendens annotated on Lot 1’s title. Amor filed a damage suit
against Atty. Crispin but the latter invoked good faith and immunity from
suit for acts relating to his official duty, claiming he was not yet the Clerk of
Court when Amor filed his action. Decide. (2011 BAR)
(A) Atty. Crispin is immune from suit since he enjoys the presumption of
regularity of performance of public duty.
(B) Atty. Crispin's defense is invalid since he issued his certification
recklessly without checking the facts.
(C) Atty. Crispin's defense is valid since he was unaware of the pendency
of the case.
(D) As Clerk of Court, Atty. Crispin enjoys absolute immunity from suit for
acts relating to his work.
Mario, a Bureau of Customs’ examiner, was administratively charged with

grave misconduct and preventively suspended pending investigation. The
head of office found him guilty as charged and ordered his dismissal. The
decision against him was executed pending appeal. The Civil Service
Commission (CSC) subsequently found him guilty and after considering a
number of mitigating circumstances, reduced his penalty to only one month
suspension. Is Mario entitled to back salaries?
(A) Yes, the reduction of the penalty means restoration of his right to back
salaries.
(B) No, the penalty of one month suspension carries with it the forfeiture of
back salaries.
(C) No, he is still guilty of grave misconduct, only the penalty was reduced.
(D) Yes, corresponding to the period of his suspension pending appeal less
one month.
Maximino, an employee of the Department of Education, is administratively

charged with dishonesty and gross misconduct. During the formal
investigation of the charges, the Secretary of Education preventively
suspended him for a period of sixty (60) days. On the 60th day of the
preventive suspension, the Secretary rendered a verdict, finding Maximino
guilty, and ordered his immediate dismissal from the service.
Maximino appealed to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), which affirmed the
Secretary’s decision. Maximino then elevated the matter to the Court of
Page 141 of 198

Appeals (CA). The CA reversed the CSC decision, exonerating Maximino.
The Secretary Of Education then petitions the Supreme Court (SC) for the
review of the CA decision.
Is the Secretary of Education a proper party to seek the review of the CA

decision exonerating Maximino? Reasons. (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Secretary of Education is not the proper party to seek a review of the decision of
the Court of Appeals, because he is the one who heard the case and imposed the
penalty. Being the disciplinary authority, the Secretary of Education should be
impartial and should not actively participate in prosecuting Maximino (National
Appellate Board of the National Police Commission v. Mamauag, 466 SCRA 624
[2005]).
If the SC affirms the CA decision, is Maximino entitled to recover back salaries

corresponding to the entire period he was out of the service? ^ Explain
your answer. (3%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Maximino cannot recover back salaries during his preventive suspension. The law
does not provide for it. Preventive suspension is not a penalty. During the
preventive suspension, he was not yet out of the service. However, he is entitled
to back wages from the time of his dismissal until his reinstatement. The
enforcement of the dismissal pending appeal was punitive, and he was
exonerated (Gloria v. Court of Appeals, 306 SCRA 287 [1999])
J. De facto officer
Rafael questioned the qualifications of Carlos as congressman of the Third

District of Manila on the ground that Carlos is a citizen of the USA. The
decision disqualifying Carlos for being a US citizen came only in March
2010, i.e., after the adjournment of the session of Congress on the 3rd year
of the position’s three-year term.
What was Carlos’ status during his incumbency as congressman? 2013 BAR
EXAMS
(A) He was a de jure officer, having been duly elected and proclaimed.
(B) He was not a public officer because he effectively was not entitled to be a
congressman.
(C) He was a de jure officer since he completed the service of his term before he
was disqualified.
Page 142 of 198

(D) He was a de facto officer since he had served and was only disqualified later.
(E) He neither possesses de jure nor de facto status as such determination is
pointless.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D)(Rodriguez v. Tan, G.R. No. L-3913, August 7, 1952, 91 Phil. 724).
Van sought to disqualify Manresa as congresswoman of the third district of

Manila on the ground that the latter is a greencard holder. By the time the
case was decided against Manresa, she had already served her full term as
congresswoman. What was Manresa's status during her incumbency as
congresswoman? (2011 BAR)
(A) She was a de jure officer, having been duly elected.
(B) She was not a public officer because she had no valid existing public
office.
(C) She was a de jure officer since she completed her term before she was
disqualified.
(D) She was a de facto officer since she was elected, served, and her
disqualification only came later.
A government that actually exercises power and control as opposed to the true
and lawful government is in terms of legitimacy (2011 BAR)
(A) a government of force.
(B) an interim government.
(C) a de facto government.
(D) an illegitimate government.

A de facto public officer is, by right, entitled to receive the salaries and
emoluments attached to the public office he holds.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
True. De facto officers are entitled to emoluments attached to the office for actual services
rendered Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, 194 SCRA 317 [1991]).
Mayor Lucia of Casidsid filed her certificate of candidacy for congresswoman

of the district covering Casidsid. Still, she continued to act as mayor of
Casidsid without collecting her salaries as such. When she lost the election
and a new mayor assumed office, she filed an action to collect the salaries
Page 143 of 198

she did not get while serving as mayor even when she ran for
congresswoman. Is her action correct? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, salaries can be waived and she waived them.
(B) No, because her acts as de facto officer are void insofar as she is
concerned.
(C) Yes, public policy demands that a de facto officer enjoy the same rights
of a de jure officer.
(D) Yes, it is but just that she be paid for the service she rendered.
True or False. A person who occupies an office that is defectively created is a

de facto officer. (0.5%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that a person who occupies an office that is defectively created is a de
facto officer is false. For him to be a de facto officer, the office must be validly
created. (Tuanda v. Sandiganbayan, 249 SCRA 342 [1995].)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that a person who occupies in office that is defectively created is a de
facto officer is true. The person appointed or elected pursuant to an
unconstitutional law is a de facto officer, before the law is declared to be such.
(State v. Caroll, 38 Conn. [1871].)
K. Termination of official relation

L. The Civil Service
1. Scope
2. Appointments to the civil service
3. Personnel actions
Where A is set for promotion to Administrative Assistant III and B to the post of
Administrative Assistant II vacated by A, the appointing authority must
(2011 BAR)
(A) submit to the CSC the two promotional appointments together for
approval.
(B) not appoint B until the CSC has approved A’s appointment.
(C) submit to the Civil Service Commission (CSC) the second appointment
after its approval of the first.
(D) simultaneously issue the appointments of A and B.
When the Civil Service Commission (CSC) approves the appointment of the
Executive Director of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory
Board who possesses all the prescribed qualifications, the CSC performs
(2011 BAR)
(A) a discretionary duty.
Page 144 of 198

(B) a mix discretionary and ministerial duty.
(C) a ministerial duty.
(D) a rule-making duty.
Acquisition of civil service eligibility during tenure of a temporary appointee

does not automatically translate to a permanent appointment. (0.5%) (2009
Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that the acquisition of civil service eligibility during the tenure of a
temporary appointee does not automatically translate to a permanent
appointment is true. A new appointment which is permanent is necessary.
(Province of Camarines Sur v. Court of AppeaIs, 246 SCRA281 [1995].)
The new Commissioner of Immigration, Mr. Suarez, issued an Office Order

directing the top immigration officials to tender courtesy resignation to give
him a free hand in reorganizing the agency. In compliance, Director Sison of
the Administrative Department tendered his resignation in writing which Mr.
Suarez immediately accepted. Director Sison went to court, assailing the
validity of his courtesy resignation and Mr. Suarez’s acceptance of the
same. Will the action prosper? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, Director Sison tendered his resignation and it was accepted.
(B) No, estoppel precludes Director Sison from disclaiming the resignation
he freely tendered.
(C) Yes,for so long as no one has yet been appointed to replace him,
Director Sison may still withdraw his resignation.
(D) Yes, Director Sison merely complied with the order of the head of office;
the element of clear intention to relinguish office is lacking.
The Solicitor General declines to institute a civil action on behalf of a

government agency due to his strained relation with its head, insisting that
the agency’s lawyers can file the action. Is the Solicitor General correct?
(2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, when he deems he cannot harmoniously and effectively work with
the requesting agency.
(B) No, he must, in choosing whether to prosecute an action, exercise his
discretion according to law and the best interest of the State.
(C) Yes, as in any lawyer-client relationship, he has the right to choose
whom to serve and represent.
(D) No, the Solicitor General's duty to represent the government, its offices
and officers is mandatory and absolute.
X, an administrative officer in the Department of Justice, was charged with

grave misconduct and preventively suspended for 90 days pending
investigation. Based on the evidence, the Secretary of Justice found X
Page 145 of 198

guilty as charged and dismissed him from the service. Pending appeal, X's
dismissal was executed. Subsequently, the Civil Service Commission (CSC)
reversed the Secretary’s decision and the reversal became final and
executory. What is the effect of X's exoneration? (2011 BAR)
(A) X is entitled to reinstatement and back salaries both during his 90 day
preventive suspension and his suspension pending appeal.
(B) X is entitled to reinstatement and back salaries corresponding only to
the period of delay caused by those prosecuting the case against him.
(C) X is entitled to reinstatement but not to back salaries on ground of
"damnum absque injuria."
(D) X is entitled to reinstatement and back salaries during his suspension
pending appeal.
M. Accountability of public officers

1. Impeachment
Cite at least two (2) grounds for impeachment and explain why you chose
them. (6%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The President can be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution and
betrayal of public trust. The Supreme Court has already ruled that the provision in
Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution requires a treaty even for the mere
temporary presence of foreign troops in the Philippines (Bayan v. Zamora, G.R.
No. 138570, October 10, 2000, 342 SCRA 499). The President cannot claim,
therefore, that he acted in good faith. (Report of the Special Committee in the
Impeachment of President Quirino, Congressional Record of the House of
President Quirino, Congressional Record of the House of Representatives, Vol.
IV, p. 1553). Betrayal of public trust includes violation of the oath of the office of
the President (Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 272). In his
oath of office, the President swore to preserve and defend the Constitution
(Article VII, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The President can be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution and graft
and corruption (Article XI, Section 2). By entering into the executive agreement,
the President violated Section 3€ of the Anti-Graft and corrupt Practices act
because of the undue injury to the republic of the Philippines.
A verified impeachment complaint was filed by two hundred (200) Members of

the House of Representatives against Madam Chief Justice Blue. The
complaint was immediately transmitted to the Senate for trial.
a. Madam Chief Justice Blue challenges such immediate transmittal to the
Page 146 of 198

Senate because the verified complaint 1) not included in the order of
business of the House, 2) was not referred to the House Committee on
Justice for hearing and consideration for sufficiency in form and substance,
and 3) was not submitted to the House Plenary for consideration as
enumerated in Paragraph (2), Section 3, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.
Decide with reasons. (5%)
b. What is the purpose of Impeachment? Does conviction prevent further

prosecution and punishment? Explain. (3%)
c. Enumerate the grounds for impeachment. Is graft and corruption a ground

for impeachment? (2%)(2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. since the verified complaint was filed by 200 members of the house of
representatives and they constituted at least one third of its Members, it need not
undergo the procedure in paragraph 2, section 3, article XI of the Constitution.
The verified complaint constitutes the article of impeachment, and the trial by the
senate should proceed forthwith. (section 3 (4), Article XI of the constitution.
b. the purpose of impeachment is not to punish but only to remove a public officer to
secure the people against gross political misdemeanors.( bernas, the 1987
constitution of the Philippines, A commentary, 2009 ed., p. 1150) Conviction does
not prevent further prosecution and punishment. The person convicted is subject
to prosecution and punishment according to law. (section 3(7), article of the
Constitution.)
c. the following are the grounds for Impeachment:

1. culpable violation of the constitution
2. Treason
3. Bribery
4. Graft and Corruption
5. Other high crimes; and
6. betrayal of public trust
Which one is NOT among the Constitutionally mandated grounds for

impeachment of impeachable officials: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. culpable violation of the Constitution;
b. treason, bribery, graft and corruption and other high crimes;
c. betrayal of public trust;
d. culpable violation of the duty to be at all times accountable to the people.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 2, ARTICLE XI OF CONSTITUTION
Page 147 of 198

Which is NOT an impeachable public officer: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. a justice of the Supreme Court;
b. a commissioner of the Comelec;
c. the administrator of the Supreme Court;
d. the Ombudsman.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 2, ARTICLE XI OF CONSTITUTION
Which has the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. the Senate;
b. the House of Representatives;
c. the Senate President;
d. the Speaker of the House of Representatives
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Section 3(1), Article of Constitution
At least one-third of all the members of the House of Representatives may file
articles of impeachment by: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. verified bill and resolution;
b. verified complaint and resolution;
c. verified notice and resolution;
d. verified complaint and notice.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) SECTION 3(1), ARTICLE XI OF CONSTITUTION
A public officer impeached and removed from office shall: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. nevertheless be immune from prosecution, trial and punishment according to
law;
b. nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial and punishment under
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act;
c. nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial and punishment
according to law;
d. nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial and punishment only for
criminal acts under the law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) SECTION 3(7), ARTICLE XI OF CONSTITUTION
Page 148 of 198

As a leading member of the Lapiang Mandirigma in the House of
Representatives, you were tasked by the party to initiate the moves to
impeach the President because he entered into an executive agreement
with the US Ambassador for the use of the former Subic Naval Base by the
US Navy, for free, i.e., without need to pay rent nor any kind of fees as a
show of goodwill to the U.S. because of the continuing harmonious RPUS
relations. Cite at least two (2) grounds for impeachment and explain why
you chose them. (6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The President can be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution and
betrayal of public trust. The Supreme Court has already ruled that the provision in
Article XVIII, Section 25 of the Constitution requires a treaty even for the mere
temporary presence of foreign troops in the Philippines (Bayan v. Zamora, G.R.
No. 138570, October 10, 2000, 342 SCRA 499). The President cannot claim,
therefore, that he acted in good faith. (Report of the Special Committee in the
Impeachment of President Quirino, Congressional Record of the House of
President Quirino, Congressional Record of the House of Representatives, Vol.
IV, p. 1553). Betrayal of public trust includes violation of the oath of the office of
the President (Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 272). In his
oath of office, the President swore to preserve and defend the Constitution
(Article VII, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The President can be impeached for culpable violation of the Constitution and graft
and corruption (Article XI, Section 2). By entering into the executive agreement,
the President violated Section 3€ of the Anti-Graft and corrupt Practices act
because of the undue injury to the republic of the Philippines.
The one-year-bar rule in impeachment proceedings is to be reckoned from the

time the (1%)2014 BAR EXAMS
(A) first impeachment complaint is filed

(B) impeachment complaint is referred to the Committee on Justice
(C) House of Representatives vote on the impeachment complaint
(D) House of Representatives endorses the Articles of Impeachment to the
Senate
Upon endorsement from the Senate where it was first mistakenly filed, the
House of Representatives Committee on Justice found the verified
complaint for impeachment against the President sufficient in form but
insufficient in substance. Within the same year, another impeachment suit
Page 149 of 198

was filed against the President who questioned the same for being violative
of the Constitution. Is the President correct? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, "initiated" means the Articles of Impeachment have been actually
filed with the Senate for trial; this did not yet happen.
(B) No, the first complaint was not deemed initiated because it was
originally filed with the Senate.
(C) Yes, the dismissal of the first impeachment proceeding bars the
initiation of another during the same term of the President.
(D) Yes, no impeachment proceeding can be filed against the President
more than once within a year.
2. Ombudsman (Sections 5 to 14, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, in

Relation to R.A. No. 6770, or otherwise known as "The Ombudsman
Act of 1989.")
a. Functions
b. Judicial review in administrative proceedings
c. Judicial review in penal proceedings
May a complaint for disbarment against the Ombudsman prosper during her
incumbency? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A complaint for disbarment cannot be filed against the Ombudsman during her
incumbency. Article XI, Sec. 8 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution imposes membership
of the Philippine Bar as a qualification to be an Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is
removable only by impeachment. If the Ombudsman were to be disbarred, he would be
removed from office without undergoing impeachment (Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987
Philippine Constitution).
Judge Red is the Executive Judge of Green City. Red is known to have corrupt
tendencies and has a reputation widely known among practicing lawyers for
accepting bribes. Ombudsman Grey, wishing to "clean up" the government
from errant public officials, initiated an investigation on the alleged
irregularities in the performance of duties of Judge Red.
a. Judge Red refused to recognize the authority of the Office of the

Ombudsman over him because according to him, any administrative action
against him or any court official or employee falls under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Decide with reasons. (5%)
b. Does the Ombudsman have authority to conduct investigation over crimes

or offenses committed by public officials that are NOT in connection or
related at all to the official’s discharge of his duties and functions? Explain.
Page 150 of 198

(3%)
c. Who are required by the Constitution to submit a declaration under oath of

his assets, liabilities, and net worth? (2%) (2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Since the complaint refers to the performance of the duties of judge red,
ombudsman grey should not act on it and should not act on it and should refer it
to the supreme court. His investigation will encroach upon the exclusive power of
administrative supervision of the supreme court over all courts. (Maceda vs.
Vasquez, 221 scra 464)
B. The ombudsman can investigate crime or offenses committed by public officers

which are not connected with the performance of their duties. Under section 13(1)
article xi of the constitution, the ombudsman can investigate any act or omission
of a public official which is illegal. (Deloso vs. Domingo, 191 scra 545.)
C. All public officers and employees are required to submit a declaration under oath
of their assets, liabilities and net worth. (section 17 article xi of the constitution)
The Ombudsman and his deputies are appointed by the President from a
list prepared by: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. the Integrated Bar of the Philippines;
b. the Commission on Appointments;
c. the Judicial and Bar Council;
d. the Supreme Court.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) SECTION 9, ARTICLE XI OF CONSTITUTION
The Office of the Special Prosecutor may file an information against a public
officer for graft (2011 BAR)
(A) on its own initiative subject to withdrawal of the information by the
Ombudsman.
(B) independently of the Ombudsman, except in plunder cases.
(C) only when authorized by the Ombudsman.
(D) independently of the Ombudsman.
When a witness is granted transactional immunity in exchange for his

testimony on how his immediate superior induced him to destroy public
records to cover up the latter's act of malversation of public funds, the
witness may NOT be prosecuted for (2011 BAR)
(A) direct contempt.
Page 151 of 198

(B) infidelity in the custody of public records.
(C) falsification of public documents.
(D) false testimony.

Decisions of the Ombudsman imposing penalties in administrative disciplinary

cases are merely recommendatory.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
False. Under Section 15(3] of the Ombudsman Act, the Ombudsman has the power
to ensure compliance with the imposition of penalty on public officers it finds at
fault by virtue of its disciplinary authority (Office of the Ombudsman v. Madriaga,
503 SCRA 631 [2006]).
3. Sandiganbayan
4. Ill-gotten wealth
The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee summoned X, a former department

secretary, to shed light on his alleged illicit acquisition of properties
claimed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government. X sought to
restrain the Committee from proceeding with its investigation because of a
pending criminal case against him before the Sandiganbayan for ill-gotten
wealth involving the same properties. Decide. The investigation may (2011
BAR)
(A) not be restrained on ground of separation of powers.
(B) be restrained on ground of prejudicial question.
(C) not be restrained on ground of presumed validity of legislative action.
(D) be restrained for being sub judice.
5. Term Limit
Sec 8 Article X of the 1987 Constitution provides that no elective official shall
serve for more than three (3) consecutive terms. Rule and explain briefly the
reason if the official is prohibited to run for another term in each of the
following situations: (a) if the official is a Vice-Mayor who assumed the
position of Mayor for the unexpired term under the Local Go r vernment
Code; (b) if the officials has served for three consecutive terms and did not
seek a 4th term but who won in a recall election; (c) if the position of Mayor
Page 152 of 198

of a town is abolished due to conversion of the town to a city; (d) if the
official is preventively suspended during his term but was exonerated; and
(e) if the official proclaimed as winner and assumes office but loses in an
election protest. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
a) In computing the three term limit, only the term for which the local official was
elected should be considered. The second sentence of Section 8, Article X of the
Constitution states that the voluntary renunciation shall not.be considered as
interruption of the continuity of the service for the full term for which he was
elected (Borja v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 133495, September 3, 1998,
295 5CRA 157)
b) A mayor who served three consecutive terms and did not seek a fourth tern but ran
and won in the recall election can serve, because the recall election was not an
immediate reelection (Socrates v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos.
154512,154683, 155083-84, November 12, 2002, 1 SCRA 547).
c) If a municipality in which a mayor served for three consecutive terms was

converted to a city, he cannot run as city mayor in the first election. For purposes
of applying the three term limit the office of the municipal mayor should not be
considered as different from that of the city mayor (Latasa v. Commission on
Election, G.R. No. 154829. December 10, 2003, 417 SCRA 601).
d) The temporary inability of an elective official to exercise his functions due to

preventive suspension is not an interruption-of his term because it did not involve
loss of title to the office (Aldovino, Jr. v Commission on Elections, G.R. No.
184836, December 23, 2009, 609 SCRA 234).
e) If a candidate was proclaimed for three consecutive terms but did no serve it in full
because of loss in an election protest he is not disqualified (Lonzanida v.
Commission on Elections, G.R. No, 135150, July 28 1999, 311 SCRA 602).
X. Administrative Law
A. General principles
B. Administrative agencies
1. Definition
2. Manner of creation
3. Kinds
C. Powers of administrative agencies
1. Quasi-legislative (rule-making) power
a. Kinds of administrative rules and regulations
b. Requisites for validity
2. Quasi-judicial (adjudicatory) power
a. Administrative due process
Page 153 of 198

b. Administrative appeal and review
c. Administrative res judicata
3. Fact-finding, investigative, licensing and rate-fixing powers
Which one of the following theories does not support the valid delegation of
authority by the Congress to an administrative agency: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. an administrative agency may "fill up the details" of a statute;
b. the legislature may leave to another body the ascertainment of facts
necessary to bring the law into actual operation;
c. an administrative agency has equal expertise with the legislature in crafting
and implementing laws;
d. contingent legislation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. UNITED BF HOMEONWERS ASSOCIATION VS BF HOMES INC. 310 SCRA 304
Which one of the enumeration below does not come under the Administrative
Code definition of a "rule": (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. agency statement of general applicability that implements or interprets a law;

b. fixes and describes the procedures in or practice requirements of, an
agency;
c. includes memoranda and statements concerning internal administration;
d. an agency process for the formulation of a final order.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) Section 2(2), Chapter 1, Book Vii Of Administrative Code
The requirement of the Administrative Code on "public participation" is that, if

not otherwise required by law, an agency shall: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. in all cases, publish or circulate notices of proposed rules and afford

interested parties the opportunity to submit their views prior to the adoption
of any rule;
b. in all clear and proper cases, publish or circulate notices of proposed rules
and afford interested parties the opportunity to submit their views prior to
the adoption of any rule;
c. as far as practicable, publish or circulate notices of proposed rules and

afford the party-list parties the opportunity to submit their views prior to the
adoption of any rule;
d. as far as practicable, publish or circulate notices of proposed rules and
Page 154 of 198

afford interested parties the opportunity to submit their views prior to the
adoption of any rule.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) Section 9(1), Chapter 2, Book Vii Of Administrative Code
Under the Administrative Code, "adjudication" means: (2012 BAR EXAMS)

a. whole or any part of any agency permit, certificate, or other form of
permission, or regulation of the exercise of a right or privilege;
b. an agency process for the formulation of a final order;
c. agency process for the formulation, amendment, or repeal of a rule;
d. agency process involving the grant, renewal, denial, revocation or
conditioning of a license.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) SECTION 2(9), CHAPTER 1, BOOK VII OF ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
One of the cardinal primary due process rights in administrative proceedings is

that evidence must be "substantial." "Substantial evidence" is: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. less than a mere scintilla;
b. less than preponderant scintilla;
c. more than a glint of scintilla;
d. more than a mere scintilla.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) Ang Tibay Vs Court Of Industrial Relations, 69 Phil. 635
Under the Administrative Code, in the fixing of rates, no rules or final order
shall be valid unless: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. the proposed rates shall have been submitted to the U.P. Law Center for
publication at least two weeks before the first hearing thereon;
b. the proposed rates shall have been published in the Official Gazette at least
two weeks before the final hearing thereon;
c. the proposed rates shall have been published in a newspaper of general

circulation at least two weeks before the first hearing thereon;
d. the proposed rates shall have been published in a newspaper of general

circulation at least two weeks before the final hearing thereon.
Page 155 of 198

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Section 9(2), Chapter 2, Book Vii Of Administrative Code
The Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) passed a rule authorizing

traffic enforcers to impound illegally parked vehicles, for the first offense,
and confiscate their registration plates for the second. The MMDA issued
this rule to implement a law that authorized it to suspend the licenses of
drivers who violate traffic rules. Is the MMDA rule valid? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, since the MMDA does not have rule-making power.
(B) Yes, it is a valid exercise of the power of subordinate legislation.
(C) Yes, it is an implicit consequence of the law upon which it acted.
(D) No, the rule goes beyond the sphere of the law.
A law authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to require the quarantine of

animals that suffer from dangerous communicable diseases at such place
and for such time he deems necessary to prevent their spread. The
Secretary of Agriculture issued a regulation, imposing a penalty of
imprisonment for 10 days on persons transporting quarantined animals
without his permission. The regulation is (2011 BAR)
(A) a valid exercise of the power of subordinate legislation.
(B) invalid for being ultra vires.
(C) a valid exercise of police power.
(D) invalid for being discriminatory.
An administrative rule that fixes rates is valid only when the proposed rates are
(2011 BAR)
(A) published and filed with the UP Law Center.
(B) published and hearings are conducted.
(C) published and posted in three public places.
(D) published and all stakeholders are personally notified.
Procedural due process in administrative proceedings (2011 BAR)

(A) requires the tribunal to consider the evidence presented.
(B) allows the losing party to file a motion for reconsideration.
(C) requires hearing the parties on oral argument.
(D) permits the parties to file memoranda.
The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) found Atlantic Homes,
Inc. liable in damages arising from its delayed release of the title to the
house and lot that it sold to Josephine. Atlantic appealed to the Office of the
President which rendered a one page decision, affirming the attached
HLURB judgment. Atlantic challenges the validity of the decision of the
Office of the President for not stating the facts and the law on which it is
based. Is the challenge correct? (2011 BAR)
Page 156 of 198

(A) No, the Office of the President is governed by its own rules respecting
review of cases appealed to it.
(B) Yes, the decision of the Office of the President must contain its own
crafted factual findings and legal conclusions.
(C) Yes, administrative due process demands that the Office of the
President make findings and conclusions independent of its
subordinate.
(D) No, the Office of the President is not precluded from adopting the
factual findings and legal conclusions contained in the HLURB decision.
D. Judicial recourse and review

1. Doctrine of primary administrative jurisdiction
2. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
3. Doctrine of finality of administrative action
In the judicial review of decisions of administrative agencies, the

Administrative Code requires that the review shall be made: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. on the basis of the pleadings taken as a whole;

b. on the basis of the record taken as a whole;
c. on the basis of the evidence taken as a whole;
d. on the basis of the memoranda taken as a whole.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) Section 25(7), Chapter 4, Book Vii Of Administrative Code
In the judicial review of decisions of administrative agencies, the

Administrative Code requires that, except when specifically provided
otherwise by law: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. the findings of law of agency when supported by substantial evidence, shall

be final;
b. the findings of fact of the agency when supported by preponderant evidence,
shall be final;
c. the findings of fact of the agency when supported by substantial evidence,
shall be final;
d. the findings of law of the agency when supported by credible evidence, shall
be final.
The Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources

(DENR) issued Memorandum Circular No. 123-15 prescribing the
administrative requirements for the conversion of a timber license
agreement (TLA) into an Integrated Forestry Management Agreement
Page 157 of 198

(IFMA). ABC Corporation, a holder of a TLA which is about to expire, claims
that the conditions for conversion imposed by the said circular are
unreasonable and arbitrary and a patent nullity because it violates the non-
impairment clause under the Bill of Rights of the 1987 Constitution.
ABC Corporation goes to court seeking the nullification of the subject circular.
The DENR moves to dismiss the case on the ground that ABC Corporation
has failed to exhaust administrative remedies which is fatal to its cause of
action. If you were the judge, will you grant the motion? EXPLAIN. 2015
BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The rule regarding exhaustion of administrative remedies is not a hard and fast rule.
It is not applicable:
(1) where the question in dispute is purely a legal one, or
(2) where the controverted act is patently illegal or was performed without jurisdiction
or in excess of jurisdiction; or
(3) where the respondent is a department secretary, whose acts as an alter ego of
the President bear the implied or assumed approval of the latter, unless actually
disapproved by him, or
(4) where there are circumstances indicating the urgency of judicial intervention,
(Gonzales vs. Hechanova, L-21897, October 22, 1963, 9 SCRA 230; Abaya vs.
Villegas, L-25641, December 17, 1966, 18 SCRA; Mitra vs. Subido, L-21691,
September 15, 1967, 21 SCRA 127)
Said principle may also be disregarded when it does not provide a plain, speedy and
adequate remedy, (Cipriano vs. Marcelino, 43 SCRA 291), when there is no due
process observed (Villanos vs. Subido, 45 SCRA 299), or where the protestant
has no other recourse (Sta. Maria vs. Lopez, 31 SCRA 637)
A. Distinguish the doctrine of primary jurisdiction from the doctrine of

exhaustion of administrative remedies.
B. Does the failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a case in

court oust said court of jurisdiction to hear the case? Explain. (2010 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. The doctrine of primary jurisdiction and the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative

remedies both deal with the proper relationships between the courts and
administrative agencies. The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
applies where a claim is cognizable in the first instance by an administrative
agency alone. Judicial interference is withheld until the administrative process
has been completed. As stated in Industrial Enterprises, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals,
Page 158 of 198

184 SCRA 426, the doctrine of primary Jurisdiction applies where a case is within
the concurrent Jurisdiction of the court and an administrative agency but the
determination of the case requires the technical expertise of the administrative
agency. In such a case, although the matter is within the jurisdiction of the court, it
must yield to the Jurisdiction of the administrative case.
B. No, the failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a case in court does
not oust the court of jurisdiction to hear the case. As held in Rosario vs. Court of
Appeals. 211 SCRA 384, the failure to exhaust administrative remedies does not
affect the jurisdiction of the court but results in the lack of a cause of action,
because a condition precedent that must be satisfied before action can be filed
was not fulfilled.
XI. Election Law
A. Suffrage
B. Qualification and disqualification of voters
C. Registration of voters
D. Inclusion and exclusion proceedings
The decision of the Regional Trial Court on appeals pertaining to inclusions or

exclusions from the list of voters (2011 BAR)
(A) is inappealable.
(B) is subject to an action for annulment.
(C) may be brought straight to the Supreme Court.
(D) is appealable to the Commission on Elections.
E. Political parties
1. Jurisdiction of the COMELEC over political parties
2. Registration
F. Candidacy
1. Qualifications of candidates
2. Filing of certificates of candidacy
a. Effect of filing
b. Substitution of candidates
c. Ministerial duty of COMELEC to receive certificate
d. Nuisance candidates
e. Petition to deny or cancel certificates of candidacy
f. Effect of disqualification
g. Withdrawal of candidates
Adela served as Mayor of Kasim for 2 consecutive terms. On her third term,
COMELEC ousted her in an election protest that Gudi, her opponent, filed
against her. Two years later, Gudi faced recall proceedings and Adela ran in
the recall election against him. Adela won and served as Mayor for Gudi's
Page 159 of 198

remaining term. Can Adela run again for Mayor in the next succeeding
election without violating the 3 term limit? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, she won the regular mayoralty election for two consecutive terms
and the recall election constitutes her third term.
(B) A. No, she already won the mayoralty election for 3 consecutive terms.
(C) Yes, her ouster from office in her third term interrupted the continuity of
her service as mayor.
(D) Yes, the fresh mandate given her during the recall election erased her
disqualification for a third term.
Congress enacted Republic Act No. 1234 requiring all candidates for public
offices to post an election bond equivalent to the one (1) year salary for the
position for which they are candidates. The bond shall be forfeited if the
candidates fail to obtain at least 10% of the votes cast. Is Republic Act No.
1234 valid? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) It is valid as the bond is a means of ensuring fair, honest, peaceful and
orderly elections.
(B) It is valid as the bond requirements ensures that only candidates with
sufficient means and who cannot be corrupted, can run for public office.
(C) It is invalid as the requirement effectively imposes a property qualification
to run for public office.
(D) It is invalid as the amount of the surety bond is excessive and
unconscionable.
(E) It is valid because it is a reasonable requirement; the Constitution itself
expressly supports the accountability of public officers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Marquera v. Borra, G.R. No. L-24761, September 7, 1965, 15 SCRA 7)
Where a candidate for the Senate stated in his certificate of candidacy that he
is single, when he is very much married, though separated, his certificate of
candidacy (2011 BAR)
(A) may be canceled.
(B) will subject him to a quo warranto action.
(C) remains valid.
(D) may be denied due course.
G. Campaign
1. Premature campaigning
2. Prohibited contributions
3. Lawful and prohibited election propaganda
4. Limitations on expenses
Page 160 of 198

5. Statement of contributions and expenses
Mayor Pink is eyeing re-election in the next mayoralty race. It was common
knowledge in the town that Mayor Pink will run for re-election in the coming
elections. The deadline for filing of Certificate of Candidacy (CoC) is on
March 23 and the campaign period commences the following day. One
month before the deadline, Pink has yet to file her CoC, but she has been
going around town giving away sacks of rice with the words "Mahal Tayo ni
Mayor Pink" printed on them, holding public gatherings and speaking about
how good the town is doing, giving away pink t-shirts with "Kay Mayor Pink
Ako" printed on them.
Mr. Green is the political opponent of Mayor Pink. In April, noticing that Mayor
Pink had gained advantage over him because of her activities before the
campaign period, he filed a petition to disqualify Mayor Pink for engaging in
an election campaign outside the designated period.
1. Which is the correct body to rule on the matter? Comelec en banc, or

Comelec division? Answer with reasons. (2%)
2. Rule on the petition. (5%) (2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. It Is The Commission On Elections En Banc Which Should Decide The Petition.

Since It Involves The Exercise Of The Administrative Powers Of The Commission
On Election, Section 3, Article Ix-C Of The Constitution Is Not Applicable. (Baytan
Vs. Commission On Elections, 396 Scra 703)
2. The Petition Should Be Denied. Under Section 80 Of The Omnibus Election Code
To Be Liable For Premature Campaigning He Must Be A Candidate, Unless He
Filed His Certificate Of Candidacy, He Is Not A Candidate. (Lanot Vs.
Commission On Elections, 507 Scra 114.)
H. Board of Election Inspectors and Board of Canvassers

1. Composition
2. Powers
I. Remedies and jurisdiction in election law

1. Petition not to give due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy
2. Petition for disqualification
3. Petition to declare failure of elections
4. Pre-proclamation controversy
5. Election protest
6. Quo warranto
Page 161 of 198

Beauty was proclaimed as the winning candidate for the position of
Representative in the House of Representatives three (3) days after the
elections in May. She then immediately took her oath of office. However,
there was a pending disqualification case against her, which case was
eventually decided by the COMELEC against her 10 days after the election.
Since she has already been proclaimed, she ignored that decision and did
not bother appealing it. The COMELEC then declared in the first week of
June that its decision holding that Beauty was not validly elected had
become final. Beauty then went to the Supreme Court questioning the
jurisdiction of the COMELEC claiming that since she had already been
proclaimed and had taken her oath of office, such election body had no
more right to come up with a decision – that the jurisdiction had already
been transferred to the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal. How
defensible is the argument of Beauty? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal has acquired exclusive jurisdiction

over the case of Beauty, since she has already been proclaimed. The
proclamation of the winning candidate is the operative fact that triggers the
exclusive jurisdiction of the house of Representative Electoral Tribunal over
election contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of the winning
candidate. The proclamation divests the Commission on Elections of jurisdiction
over the question of disqualifications pending before it at the time of the
proclamation. Any case pertaining to questions over the qualifications of a
winning candidate should be raised before the House of Representative Electoral
Tribunal (Limkaichong v. Commission on Elections, 583 SCRA 1 (2011 BAR);
Jalosjos, Jr. v. Commission on Election, 674 SCRA 530 (2013 BAR).
ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The argument of Beauty is untenable. For the House of Representatives Electoral

Tribunal to acquire jurisdiction over the disqualification case, she must be a
Member of the House of Representatives. Although she had been proclaimed and
had taken her oath of office, she had not yet assumed office. The terms of office
of the Members of the House of Representative begins at noon of the thirtieth day
of June next following their election (Reyes v. Commission on Elections, 699
SCRA 522 (2012 BAR). (2014 BAR EXAMS)
Gandang Bai filed her certificate of candidacy (COC) for municipal mayor
stating that she is eligible to run for the said position. Pasyo Maagap, who
also filed his COC for the same position, filed a petition to deny due course
or cancel Bai's COC under Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code for
material misrepresentation as before Bai filed her COC, she had already
Page 162 of 198

been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.
Hence, she is disqualified perpetually from holding any public office or from
being elected to any public office. Before the election, the COMELEC
cancelled Bai' s COC but her motion for reconsideration (MR) remained
pending even after the election. Bai garnered the highest number of votes
followed by Pasyo Maagap, who took his oath as Acting Mayor.
Thereafter, the COMELEC denied Bai's MR and declared her disqualified for
running for Mayor. P. Maagap asked the Department of Interior and Local
Government Secretary to be allowed to take his oath as permanent
municipal mayor. This request was opposed by Vice Mayor Umaasa,
invoking the rule on succession to the permanent vacancy in the Mayor's
office. Who between Pasyo Maagap and Vice Mayor Umaasa has the right to
occupy the position of Mayor? Explain your answer. (5%) 2015 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
We have declared that not even this Court has authority under any law to impose
upon and compel the people to accept a loser, as their representative or political
leader. The wreath of victory cannot be transferred from the disqualified winner to
the repudiated loser. The Court emphasized that the candidate obtaining the
second highest number of votes for the contested office could not assume the
office despite the disqualification of the first placer because the second placer
was "not the choice of the sovereign will." Surely, the Court explained, a minority
or defeated candidate could not be deemed elected to the office. There was to be
no question that the second placer lost in the election, was repudiated by the
electorate, and could not assume the vacated position. No law imposed upon and
compelled the people to accept a loser to be their political leader or their
representative.
The only time that a second placer is allowed to take the place of a disqualified
winning candidate is when two requisites concur, namely:
(a) the candidate who obtained the highest number of votes is disqualified; and
(b) the electorate was fully aware in fact and in law of that candidate’s disqualification
as to bring such awareness within the realm of notoriety but the electorate still
cast the plurality of the votes in favor of the ineligible candidate.
Under this sole exception, the electorate may be said to have waived the validity and
efficacy of their votes by notoriously misapplying their franchise or throwing away
their votes, in which case the eligible candidate with the second highest number
of votes may be deemed elected. But the exception did not apply in favor of
Pasyo Maagap simply because the second element was absent.
How do you differentiate the petition filed under Section 68 from the petition
filed under Section 78, both of the Omnibus Election Code? (3%)
Page 163 of 198

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The grounds for disqualification for a petition under Section 68 of the Omnibus
Election Code are specifically enumerated:
Sec. 68. Disqualifications. ‒ Any candidate who, in an action or protest in which he is

a party is declared by final decision by a competent court guilty of, or found by the
Commission of having (a) given money or other material consideration to
influence, induce or corrupt the voters or public officials performing
electoral functions; (b) committed acts of terrorism to enhance his
candidacy; (c) spent in his election campaign an amount in excess of that
allowed by this Code; (d) solicited, received or made any contribution
prohibited under Sections 89, 95, 96, 97 and 104; (e) violated any of
Sections 80, 83, 85, 86 and 261, paragraphs d, e, k, v, and cc, subparagraph
6, shall be disqualified from continuing as a candidate, or if he has been elected,
from holding the office. Any person who is a permanent resident of or an
immigrant to a foreign country shall not be qualified to run for any elective office
under this Code, unless said person has waived his status as permanent resident
or immigrant of a foreign country in accordance with the residence requirement
provided for in the election laws. (Emphasis supplied)
A petition for disqualification under Section 68 clearly refers to "the commission of

prohibited acts and possession of a permanent resident status in a foreign
country."20 All the offenses mentioned in Section 68 refer to election
offenses under the Omnibus Election Code, not to violations of other penal
laws. There is absolutely nothing in the language of Section 68 that would justify
including violation of the threeterm limit rule, or conviction by final judgment of the
crime of falsification under the Revised Penal Code, as one of the grounds or
offenses covered under Section 68. In Codilla, Sr. v. de Venecia,21 this Court
ruled:
[T]he jurisdiction of the COMELEC to disqualify candidates is limited to those

enumerated in Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code. All other election
offenses are beyond the ambit of COMELEC jurisdiction. They are criminal and
not administrative in nature. x x x
False Material Representation
Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code states that a certificate of candidacy may
be denied or cancelled when there is false material representation of the
contents of the certificate of candidacy:
Sec. 78. Petition to deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy. ‒ A

verified petition seeking to deny due course or to cancel a certificate of candidacy
may be filed by the person exclusively on the ground that any material
Page 164 of 198

representation contained therein as required under Section 74 hereof is
false. The petition may be filed at any time not later than twenty-five days from
the time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy and shall be decided, after due
notice and hearing, not later than fifteen days before the election.
Mayor Pink is eyeing re-election in the next mayoralty race. It was common
knowledge in the town that Mayor Pink will run for re-election in the coming
elections. The deadline for filing of Certificate of Candidacy (CoC) is on
March 23 and the campaign period commences the following day. One
month before the deadline, Pink has yet to file her CoC, but she has been
going around town giving away sacks of rice with the words "Mahal Tayo ni
Mayor Pink" printed on them, holding public gatherings and speaking about
how good the town is doing, giving away pink t-shirts with "Kay Mayor Pink
Ako" printed on them.
a. Mr. Green is the political opponent of Mayor Pink. In April, noticing that
Mayor Pink had gained advantage over him because of her activities before
the campaign period, he filed a petition to disqualify Mayor Pink for
engaging in an election campaign outside the designated period.
a.1. Which is the correct body to rule on the matter? Comelec en banc, or
Comelec division? Answer with reasons. (2%)
a.2. Rule on the petition. (5%)
b. Distinguish briefly between Quo Warranto in elective office and Quo

Warranto in appointive office. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. 1. It Is The Commission On Elections En Banc Which Should Decide The Petition.

Since It Involves The Exercise Of The Administrative Powers Of The Commission
On Election, Section 3, Article Ix-C Of The Constitution Is Not Applicable. (Baytan
Vs. Commission On Elections, 396 Scra 703)
A. 2. The Petition Should Be Denied. Under Section 80 Of The Omnibus Election

Code To Be Liable For Premature Campaigning He Must Be A Cabdidate, Unless
He Filed His Certificate Of Candidacy, He Is Not A Candidate. (Lanot Vs.
Commission On Elections, 507 Scra 114.)
B. In Quo Warranto In Elective Officer The Issue Is The Ineligibility Of The Elected
Candidate. (Section 3(E), Rule 1, Rules Of Procedure In Election Cases.) If He Is
Ineligible, The Candidate Who Got The Second Highest Number Of Votes Cannot
Be Proclaimed Elected. (Sinsuat Vs. Commission On Elections, 492 Scra 264.) A
Voter May File A Petition For Quo Warranto Against An Elected Candidate. The
Petition Should Be Filed Within Ten Days After The Proclamation Of The Elected
Page 165 of 198

Candidate.
In Quo Warranto In Appointive Office, The Issue Is The Legality Of The Appointment.
The Court Will Decide Who Between, The Parties Has The Legal Tittle To The
Office ( Nachura, Outline Reviewers In Political Law, P. 567.)
It Is The Solicitor General, A Public Prosecutor, Or A Person Claiming To Be Entitled

To The Public Office Can File A Petition For Quo Warranto Against An Appointive
Official. (Section 2 And 5, Rule 65 Of The Rules Of Court) The Petition Should Be
Filed Within One Year After The Cause Of Action Accrued. (Section 11, Rules 66
Of The Rules Of Court.)
As counsel for the protestant, where will you file an election protest involving a
contested elective position in: (2009 Bar Question)
a. the barangay?
b. the municipality?
c. the province?
d. the city?
e. the House of Representatives?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In accordance with Section 2(2), Article IX-C of the Constitution an election protest
involving the elective position enumerated below should be filed in the following
courts or tribunals:
a. Barangay - Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, or Municipal Trial
Court
b. Municipality - Regional Trial Court
c. Province - Commission on Elections
d. City - Commission on Elections
e. Under Section 17, Article VI of the Constitution, an election protest involving the
position of Member of the House of Representatives shall be filed In the House of
Representatives Electoral Tribunal.
Despite lingering questions about his Filipino citizenship and his one-year residence
in the district, Gabriel filed his certificate of candidacy for congressman before
the deadline set by law. His opponent, Vito, hires you as lawyer to contest
Gabriel’s candidacy.
Before election day, what action or actions will you institute against Gabriel,
and before which court, commission or tribunal will you file such action/s?
Reasons. (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
Page 166 of 198

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will file a petition to cancel the certificate of candidacy of Gabriel in the Commission on
Elections because of the false material representation that he is qualified to run for
congressman (Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code; Fermin v. Commission on
Elections, 574 SCRA 787 [2008]). The question of the disqualification of Gabriel cannot
be raised before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, because he is not yet
a member of the House of Representatives (Aquino v. Commission on Elections, 248
SCRA400 [1995]).
If, during the pendency of such action / s but before election day, Gabriel
withdraws his certificate of candidacy, can he be substituted as candidate?
If so, by whom and why? If not, why not? (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If Gabriel withdraws, he may be substituted by a candidate nominated by his political party.

Section 77 of the Omnibus Election Code states: “If after the last day for the filing of
certificates of candidacy, an official candidate of a registered or accredited political
party dies, 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 to replace the
candidate who died, withdrew or was disqualified.”
If the action/s instituted should be dismissed with finality before the election,
and Gabriel assumes office after being proclaimed the winner in the
election, can the issue of his candidacy and/or citizenship and residence
still be questioned? If so, what action or actions may be filed and where? If
not, why not? (2%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The question of the citizenship and residence of Gabriel can be questioned in the
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal by filing a quo warranto case. Since
it is within its jurisdiction to decide the question of the qualification of Gabriel, the
decision of the Commission on Elections does not constitute res judicata
(Jalandoni v. Crespo, HRET Case No. 01-020, March 6, 2003). Once a candidate
for member of the House of Representatives has been proclaimed, the House of
Representatives Electoral Tribunal acquires jurisdiction over election contests
relating to his qualifications (Guerrero v. Commission on Elections, 336 SCRA
458 [2000]).
Governor Paloma was administratively charged with abuse of authority before

the Office of the President. Pending hearing, he ran for reelection and won a
second term. He then moved to dismiss the charge against him based on
this supervening event. Should the motion be granted? (2011 BAR)
Page 167 of 198

(A) Yes, Governor Paloma's reelection is an expression of the electorate's
obedience to his will.
(B) No, Governor Paloma's reelection cannot extinguish his liability for
malfeasance in office.
(C) No, Governor Paloma's reelection does not render moot the
administrative case already pending when he filed his certificate of
candidacy for his reelection bid.
(D) Yes, Governor Paloma's reelection is an expression of the electorate's
restored trust.
Pre-proclamation controversies shall be heard (2011 BAR)

(A) summarily without need of trial.
(B) through trial by commissioner.
(C) ex parte.
(D) through speedy arbitration.
Xian and Yani ran for Congressman in the same district. During the
canvassing, Yani objected to several returns which he said were tampered
with. The board of canvassers did not entertain Yani's objections for lack of
authority to do so. Yani questions the law prohibiting the filing of pre-
proclamation cases involving the election of Congressmen since the
Constitution grants COMELEC jurisdiction over all pre-proclamation cases,
without distinction. Is Yani correct? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, the Constitution grants jurisdiction to COMELEC on all pre-
proclamation cases, without exception.
(B) No, COMELEC’s jurisdiction over pre-proclamation cases pertains only
to elections for regional, provincial, and city officials.
(C) No, COMELEC’s jurisdiction over pre-proclamation cases does not
include those that must be brought directly to the courts.
(D) Yes, any conflict between the law and the Constitution relative to
COMELEC's jurisdiction must be resolved in favor of the Constitution.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
According to Section 243 of the Omnibus Election Code, the following issues can be
properly raised
a) The composition or proceedings of the board of canvassers are illegal;
b) The canvassed election returns are incomplete, contain material defects, approved
to be tampered with, or contain discrepancy in the same returns or in other
authenticated copies;
c) The election returns were prepared under duress, threats, coercion, or intimidation,
or they are obviously manufactured or not authentic; and
d) Substitute or fraudulent returns in controverter polling places were canvassed, the
results of which materially affected the standing of the aggrieved candidate or
candidates.
Page 168 of 198

However, according to Section 15 of the Synchronized Election Law, no pre-
proclamation cases shall be allowed on matters relating to the preparation,
transmission, receipt, custody and appreciation of the election returns or the
certificates of canvass with respect to the positions of President, Vice-President,
Senator and Member of the House of Representatives. No pre-proclamation case
are allowed in the case of barangay elections.
J. Prosecution of election offenses
A candidate who commits vote buying on Election Day itself shall be

prosecuted by the
(A) COMELEC.
(B) Secretary of Justice.
(C) police and other law enforcement agencies.
(D) City or Provincial Prosecutor.
XII. Local Governments

A. Public corporations
1. Concept
a. Distinguished from government-owned or controlled
corporations
2. Classifications
a. Quasi-corporations
b. Municipal corporations
B. Municipal corporations
1. Elements
2. Nature and functions
3. Requisites for creation, conversion, division, merger or dissolution
From an existing province, Wideland, Congress created a new province,

Hundred Isles, consisting of several islands, with an aggregate area of 500
square kilometres. The law creating Hundred Isles was duly approved in a
plebiscite called for that purpose. Juan, a taxpayer and a resident of
Wideland, assailed the creation of Hundred Isles claiming that it did not
comply with the area requirement as set out in the Local Government Code,
i.e., an area of at least 2,000 square kilometres. The proponents justified the
creation, however, pointing out that the Rules and Regulations
Implementing the Local Government Code states that “the land area
requirement shall not apply where the proposed province is composed of
one (1) or more islands.” Accordingly, since the new province consists of
several islands, the area requirement need not be satisfied. How tenable is
the position of the proponents? (4%) 2014 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In exempting provinces composed of one or more islands from both the contiguity
Page 169 of 198

and land area requirements, Article 9 of the IRR cannot be considered
inconsistent with the criteria under Section 461 of the Local Government Code.
Far from being absolute regarding application of the requirement of a contiguous
territory of at least 2,000 square kilometers as certified by the Land Management
Bureau, Section 461 allows for said exemption by providing, under paragraph (b)
thereof, that (t)he territory need not be contiguous if (the new province) comprises
two or more islands or is separated by a chartered city or cities which do not
contribute to the income of the province. For as long as there is compliance with
the income requirement, the legislative intent is, after all, to the effect that the
land area and population requirements may be overridden by the established
economic viability of the proposed province.
On August 15, 2015, Congresswoman Dina Tatalo filed and sponsored House
Bill No. 5432, entitled "An Act Providing for the Apportionment of the Lone
District of the City of Pangarap." The bill eventually became a law, R.A. No.
1234. It mandated that the lone legislative district of the City of Pangarap
would now consist of two (2) districts. For the 2016 elections, the voters of
the City of Pangarap would be classified as belonging to either the first or
second district, depending on their place of residence. The constituents of
each district would elect their own representative to Congress as well as
eight (8) members of the Sangguniang Panglungsod. R.A. No. 1234
apportioned the City's barangays. The COMELEC thereafter promulgated
Resolution No. 2170 implementing R.A. No. 1234. Piolo Cruz assails the
COMELEC Resolution as unconstitutional.
According to him, R.A. No. 1234 cannot be implemented without conducting a

plebiscite because the apportionment under the law falls within the
meaning of creation, division, merger, abolition or substantial alteration of
boundaries of cities under Section 10, Article X of the 1987 Constitution. Is
the claim correct? Explain. 2015 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The pronounced distinction between Article VI, Section 5 and, Article X, Section 10 is
on the requirement of a plebiscite. The Constitution and the Local Government
Code expressly require a plebiscite to carry out any creation, division, merger,
abolition or alteration of boundary of a local government unit.
In contrast, no plebiscite requirement exists under the apportionment or

reapportionment provision. In Tobias v. Abalos, a case that arose from the
division of the congressional district formerly covering San Juan and
Mandaluyong into separate districts, we confirmed this distinction and the fact
that no plebiscite is needed in a legislative reapportionment. The plebiscite issue
came up because one was ordered and held for Mandaluyong in the course of its
conversion into a highly urbanized city, while none was held for San Juan. In
explaining why this happened, the Court ruled that no plebiscite was necessary
Page 170 of 198

for San Juan because the objective of the plebiscite was the conversion of
Mandaluyong into a highly urbanized city as required by Article X, Section 10 the
Local Government Code; the creation of a new legislative district only followed as
a consequence. In other words, the apportionment alone and by itself did not call
for a plebiscite, so that none was needed for San Juan where only a
reapportionment took place.
The need for a plebiscite under Article X, Section 10 and the lack of requirement for
one under Article VI, Section 5 can best be appreciated by a consideration of the
historical roots of these two provisions, the nature of the concepts they embody
as heretofore discussed, and their areas of application.
Its territory remains completely whole and intact; there is only the addition of another
legislative district and the delineation of the city into two districts for purposes of
representation in the House of Representatives. Thus, Article X, Section 10 of the
Constitution does not come into play and no plebiscite is necessary to validly
apportion the City of Pangarap into two districts.
Define: De facto municipal corporation (1%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A de facto municipal corporation is one so 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 is corporate
existence. (Angeles, Restatement of the Law on Local Governments, p. 23.)
Define: Municipal corporation by estoppels (1%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A municipal corporation by estoppels is a corporation which is so defectively formed

as not to be a de facto corporation but is considered a corporation in relation to
someone who dealt with it and acquiesced in its exercise of its corporate
functions or entered into a contract with it. (Martin, Public Corporations, 1985 ed.,
p. 20.)
True or False, Re-classification of land by a local government unit may be done

through a resolution. (0.5%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 171 of 198

The statement that a local government unit may reclassify land through a resolution is
false. Under Section 2 of the Local Government Code, the enactment of an
ordinance is required. (Department of Agrarian Reform v. Polo Coconut Plantation
Company, Inc., 564 SCRA78 [2008].)
Define devolution with respect to local government units. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Section 17(e) of the Local Government Code defines devolution as the act by which
the National Gov-ernment confers power and authority upon the various local
government units to perform specific functions and responsibilities.
A law converted the component city of Malumanay, Laguna into a highly

urbanized city. The Local Government Code (LGC) provides that the conversion
"shall take effect only after it is approved by the majority of votes cast in a
plebiscite to be held in the political units directly affected."
Before the COMELEC, Mayor Xenon of Malumanay City insists that only the
registered voters of the city should vote in the plebiscite because the city is the
only political unit directly affected by the conversion. Governor Yuri asserts that
all the registered voters of the entire province of Laguna should participate in the
plebiscite, because when the LGC speaks of the "qualified voters therein:. it
means all the voters of all the political units affected by such conversion, and that
includes all the voters of the entire province. He argues that the income,
population and area of Laguna will reduce. Who, between Mayor Xenon and
Governor Yuri, is correct? Explain your answer. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Governor Yuri is correct. All the registered voters of the Province of Laguna should be
included in the plebiscite. The conversion of the City of Malumanay into a highly
urbanized city will adversely affect the Province of Laguna and its residents. The
territory of the Province of Laguna will be reduced. Its share in the internal revenue
allotment Will be reduced, because the population and land area are included as basis
for determining its share. Once the City of Malumanay becomes a highly urbanized city,
the Province of Laguna will no longer share in the taxes collected by the City of
Malumanay, The City of Malumanay will be under the supervision of the President
instead of the Provinceof Laguna. Decisions of the City of Malumanay in administrative
cases involving barangay officials will no longer be appealable to the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan. The registered voters of the City of Malumanay will no longer be entitled
to vote for provincial officials. To limit the plebiscite to the voters of the City of
Malumanay would nullify the principle of majority rule (Umall v. Commission on
Elections, G.R. No. 203974, April 22, 2014, 723 SCRA 170).
C. Principles of local autonomy
Page 172 of 198

D. Powers of local government units (LGUs)
May the power of cities to raise revenues be limited by an executive order of

the President? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) Yes, because local government units are under the administrative control of
the President through the Department of Interior and Local Government.
(B) No, because local government units now enjoy full local fiscal autonomy.
(C) No, because only limitations established by Congress can define and limit
the powers of local governments.
(D Yes, because the President has the power and authority to impose
reasonable restrictions on the power of citie to raise revenues.
(E) Yes, if so provided in a city’s charter.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C)(Article X, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution).
Typhoon Bangis devastated the Province of Sinagtala. Roads and bridges were
destroyed which impeded the entry of vehicles into the area. This caused
food shortage resulting in massive looting of grocery stores and malls.
There is power outage also in the area. For these reasons, the governor of
the province declares a state of emergency in their province through
Proclamation No. 1. He also invoked Section 465 of the Local Government
Code of 1991 (R.A. No. 7160) which vests on the provincial governor the
power to carryout emergency measures during man-made and natural
disasters and calamities, and to call upon the appropriate national law
enforcement agencies to suppress disorder and lawless violence. In the
same proclamation, the governor called upon the members of the Philippine
National Police, with the assistance of the Armed Forces of the Philippines,
to set up checkpoints and chokepoints, conduct general searches and
seizures including arrests, and other actions necessary to ensure public
safety. Was the action of the provincial governor proper? Explain. ( 4%)
2015 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Given the foregoing, respondent provincial governor is not endowed with the power to
call upon the armed forces at his own bidding. In issuing the assailed
proclamation, Governor Tan exceeded his authority when he declared a state of
emergency and called upon the Armed Forces, the police. The calling-out powers
contemplated under the Constitution is exclusive to the President. An exercise by
another official, even if he is the local chief executive, is ultra vires, and may not
be justified by the invocation of Section 465 of the Local Government Code, The
Local Government Code does not involve the diminution of central powers
inherently vested in the National Government, especially not the prerogatives
Page 173 of 198

solely granted by the Constitution to the President in matters of security and
defense. The intent behind the powers granted to local government units is fiscal,
economic, and administrative in nature. The Code is concerned only with powers
that would make the delivery of basic services more effective to the
constituents,61 and should not be unduly stretched to confer calling-out powers
on local executives. (Kulayan vs Tan, July 3, 2012.)
1. Police power
The National Building Code and its implementing rules provide, inter alia, that
operators of shopping centers and malls should provide parking and loading
spaces, in accordance with a prescribed ratio. The Solicitor General, heeding the
call of the public for the provision of free parking spaces in malls, filed a case to
compel said business concerns to discontinue their practice of collecting parking
fees. The mall owners and operators oppose, saying that this is an invalid taking
of their property, thus a violation of due process. The Solicitor General justifies it,
however, claiming that it is a valid exercise of police power. Could the mall
owners and operators be validly compelled to provide free parking to their
customers? (2014 BAR)
Answer:
No, the mall owners and operators cannot be validly compelled to provide free parking
to their customers, because requiring them to provide free parking space to their
customers is beyond the scope of police powers. It unreasonably restricts the right to
use property for business purposes and amounts to confiscation of property (Office of
the Solicitor General v. Ayala Land, Inc., 600 SCRA 617).
ABC operates an industrial waste processing plant within Laoag City.

Occasionally, whenever fluid substances are released through a nearby
creek, obnoxious odor is emitted causing dizziness among residents in
Barangay La Paz. On complaint of the Punong Barangay, the City Mayor II
wrote ABC demanding that it abate the nuisance. This was ignored. An
invitation to attend a hearing called by the Sangguniang Panlungsod was
also declined by the president of ABC. The city government thereupon
issued a cease and desist order to stop the operations of the plant,
prompting ABC to file a petition for injunction before the Regional
Trial .Court, arguing that the city government did not have any power to
abate the alleged nuisance. Decide with reasons. (3%) (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The city government has no power to stop tile operations of the plant. Since its
operations is not a nuisance per se, the city government cannot abate it extra
judicially. A suit must be filed in court. (AC Enterprises, Inc. v. Frabelle Properties
Corporation, 506 SCRA 625 [2006].)
Page 174 of 198

2. Eminent domain
The Municipality of Bulalakaw, Leyte, passed Ordinance No. 1234, authorizing the
expropriation of two parcels of land situated in the poblacion as the site of a
freedom park, and appropriating the funds needed therefor. Upon review, the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte disapproved the ordinance because the
municipality has an existing freedom park which, though smaller in size, is still
suitable for the purpose, and to pursue expropriation would be needless
expenditure of the people’s money. Is the disapproval of the ordinance correct?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The disapproval of the ordinance is not correct. Under Section 56(c) (Local
Government Code), the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte can declare the
ordinance invalid only if it is beyond the power of the Sangguniang Bayan of
Bulalakaw. In the instant case, the ordinance is well within the power of the
Sangguniang Bayan. The disapproval of the ordinance by the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan of Leyte was outside its authority having been done on a matter
pertaining to the wisdom of the ordinance which pertains to the Sangguniang
Bayan [Moday v. Court of Appeals, 268 SCRA 586 [1997]).
True or False: A valid and definite offer to buy a property is a prerequisite to

expropriation initiated by a local government unit, (0.5%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that a valid and definite offer to buy a property' is a pre-requirement to
expropriation initiated by a local government is true. (Section 19, Local
Government Code.)
3. Taxing power
4. Closure and opening of roads
5. Legislative power
a. Requisites for valid ordinance
b. Local initiative and referendum
6. Corporate powers
a. To sue and be sued
b. To acquire and sell property
c. To enter into contracts
i. Requisites
Page 175 of 198

ii. Ultravires contracts
The Municipality of Pinatukdao is sued for damages arising from injuries

sustained by a pedestrian who was hit by a glass pane that fell from a
dilapidated window frame of the municipal hall. The municipality files a
motion to dismiss the complaint, invoking state immunity from suit.
Resolve the motion with reasons. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The motion to dismiss should be denied. Under Section 24 of the Local Government
Code and Article 2189 of the Civil Code, the Municipality of Pinatukdao is liable
for damages arising from injuries to person by reason of negligence of local
government units or local offices of the defective condition of the municipal hall,
which is under their control and supervision.
7. Liability of LGUs
8. Settlement of boundary disputes
A collision occurred involving a passenger jeepney driven by Leonardo, a

cargo truck driven by Joseph, and a dump truck driven by Lauro but owned
by the City of Cebu. Lauro was on his way to get a load of sand for the
repair of the road along Fuente Street, Cebu City. As a result of the
collision, 3 passengers of the jeepney died. Their families filed a complaint
for damages against Joseph who in turn filed a third party complaint
against the City of Cebu and Lauro. Is the City of Cebu liable for the tort
committed by its employee? (2011 BAR)
(A) The City of Cebu is not liable because its employee was engaged in the
discharge of a governmental function.
(B) The City of Cebu is liable for the tort committed by its employee while in
the discharge of a non-governmental function.
(C) The City of Cebu is liable in accord with the precept of respondeat
superior.
(D) The City of Cebu is not liable as a consequence of its non-suitability.
True or false. Boundary disputes between and among municipalities in the

same province may be filed immediately with the Regional Trial Court.
(0.5%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The statement that boundary disputes between and among municipalities in the same
province may be rued immediately with the Regional Trial Court is false. Under
Page 176 of 198

Section 118 of the Local Government Code, they should be referred for
settlement to the sangguniang panlalawigan. (Municipality of Sta. Fe v.
Municipality of Artao, 533 SCRA586 [2007].)
9. Succession of elective officials
10. Discipline of local officials

a. Elective officials
i. Grounds
ii. Jurisdiction
iii. Preventive suspension
iv. Removal
v. Administrative appeal
vi. Doctrine of condonation
b. Appointive officials
Alfredo was elected municipal mayor for 3 consecutive terms. During his third
term, the municipality became a city. Alfredo ran for city mayor during the
next immediately succeeding election. Voltaire sought his disqualification
citing the 3 term limit for elective officials. Will Voltaire's action prosper?
(2011 BAR)
(A) No, the 3 term limit should not apply to a person who is running for a
new position title.
(B) Yes, the 3 term limit applies regardless of any voluntary or involuntary
interruption in the service of the local elective official.
(C) Yes, the 3 term limit uniformly applies to the office of mayor, whether for
city or municipality.
(D) No, the 3 term limit should not apply to a local government unit that has
assumed a different corporate existence.
11. Recall
12. Term limits
Governor Diy was serving his third term when he lost his governorship in a
recall election. Who shall succeed Governor Diy in his office as Governor?
(1%) (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The candidate who received the highest number of votes in the recall will succeed
Page 177 of 198

Governor Diy. (Section 72 of the Local Government Code.)
Can Governor Diy run again as governor in the next election? (2%) (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Governor Diy can run again as governor. He did not fully serve his third term,
because he lost in the recall election. His third term should not be included in
computing the three-term limit. (Lonzanida v. Commision on Elections, 311 SCRA
602 [1999].)
Can Governor Diy refuse to run in the recall election and instead resign from
his position as governor? (2%) (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Governor Diy cannot refuse to run in the recall election. He is automatically

considered as duly registered candidate. (Section 71, Local Government Code.)
He is not allowed to resign. (Section 72, Local Government Code.)
Anton was the duly elected Mayor of Tunawi in the local elections of 2004. He
got 51% of all the votes cast. Fourteen months later, Victoria, who also ran
for mayor, filed with the Local Election Registrar, a petition for recall
against Anton. The COMELEC approved the petition and set a date for its
signing by other qualified voters in order to garner at least 25% of the total
number of Bar Examination Questionnaire for Political Law Set A registered
voters or total number of those who actually voted during the local election
in 2005, whichever is lower. Anton attacked the COMELEC resolution for
being invalid. Do you agree with Anton? (2011 BAR)
(A) No, the petition, though initiated by just one person, may be ratified by
at least 25% of the total number of registered voters.
(B) No, the petition, though initiated by just one person may be ratified by at
least 25% of those who actually voted during the 2004 local elections.
(C) Yes, the petition should be initiated by at least 25% of the total number
of registered voters who actually voted during the 2004 local elections.
(D) Yes,the petition should be initiated by at least 25% of the total number
of registered voters of Tunawi.
XIII. National Economy and Patrimony
The Philippine Environmentalists’ Organization for Nature, a duly recognized

non-governmental organization, intends to file suit to enjoin the Philippine
Government from allocating funds to operate a power plant at Mount Tuba
in a southern island. They claim that there was no consultation with the
indigenous cultural community which will be displaced from ancestral lands
essential to their livelihood and indispensable to their religious practices.
Page 178 of 198

A. The organization is based in Makati. All its officers live and work in Makati.
Not one of its officers or members belong to the affected indigenous
cultural community. Do they have the standing in this dispute? Explain.
(2010 Bar Question)
B. Would your answer be different if the Philippine Power Corporation, a

private company, were to operate the plant? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Under Section 5, Article XII of the Constitution, the State should protect the rights
of cultural indigenous communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their well -
being. Under Section 17, Article XIV of the Constitution, the State should protect
the rights of indigenous cultural communities to preserve and develop this
cultures, traditions, and institutions and should consider these rights in the
formulation of national plans and policies. The government violated these
provisions, because it decided to operate the power plant without consulting the
indigenous cultural community and the operation of the power plant will result in
its displacement.
If the projected lawsuit will be based on violation of the rights of the indigenous
cultural communities, the Philippine Environmentalists Organization will have no
standing to file the case. None of its officers and members belong to the
indigenous cultural community. None of their rights are affected.
If the lawsuit will seek to enjoin the use of public funds to operate the power plant, the
Philippine Environmentalists’ Organization, can file a taxpayer’s suit. As held in
Maceda vs. Macaraig, 197 SCRA 771, a taxpayer has standing to question the
illegal expenditure of public funds.
B) The Philippine Environmentalists Organization will have no standing to file the

case if it is a private company that will operate the power plant, because no public
funds will be spent for its operation. As held in Gonzales vs. Marcos, 65 SCRA
624, a taxpayer has no standing to file a case if no expenditure of public funds is
involved.
Since no member or officer of the Philippine Environmentalists’ Organization belongs

to the affected indigenous community, none of the rights of the Philippine
Environmentalists’ Organization and of its officers and members are affected. In
accordance with the ruling in National Economic Protectionism Association vs.
Ongpin, 171 SCRA 657, the organization has no standing to file the case.
A. Regalian doctrine
B. Nationalist and citizenship requirement provisions
Page 179 of 198

Pursuant to its mandate to manage the orderly sale, disposition and privatization
of the National Power Corporation's (NPC) generation assets, real estate and
other disposable assets, the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management
(PSALM) started the bidding process for the privatization of Angat Hydro Electric
Power Plant (AHEPP). After evaluation of the bids, K-Pop Energy Corporation, a
South Korean Company, was the highest bidder. Consequently, a notice of award
was issued to K-Pop. The Citizens' Party questioned the sale arguing that it
violates the constitutional provisions on the appropriation and utilization of a
natural resource which should be limited to Filipino citizens and corporations
which are at least 60% Filipino-owned. The PSALM countered that only the
hydroelectric facility is being sold and not the Angat Dam; and that the utilization
of water by a hydroelectric power plant does not constitute appropriation of water
from its natural source of water that enters the intake gate of the power plant
which is an artificial structure. Whose claim is correct? Explain. (2015 BAR)
Answer:
PSALM is correct. Foreign ownership of a hydroelectric power plant is not prohibited by
the Constitution. PSALM will not retain ownership of the Angat Dam. Angat Dam will
trap the natural flow of water from the river. The water supplied by PSALM will then be
used for power generation. Once the water is removed from its natural source, it ceases
to be part of the natural resources of the Philippines and may be acquired by the
foreigners (Initiatives for Dialogue vs. Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management
Corp., 2012).
BD Telecommunications, Inc. (BDTI), a Filipino-owned corporation, sold its

1,000 common shares of stock in the Philippine Telecommunications
Company (PTC), a public utility, to Australian Telecommunications (AT),
another stockholder of the PTC which also owns 1,000 common shares. A
Filipino stockholder of PTC questions the sale on the ground that it will
increase the common shares of AT, a foreign company, to more than 40% of
the capital (stock) of PTC in violation of the 40% limitation of foreign
ownership of a public utility. AT argues that the sale does not violate the 60-
40 ownership requirement in favor of Filipino citizens decreed in Section II,
Article XII of the 1987 Constitution because Filipinos still own 70% of the
capital of the PTC. AT points to the fact that it owns only 2,000
common voting shares and 1,000 non-voting preferred shares while Filipino
stockholders own 1,000 common shares and 6,000 preferred shares,
therefore, Filipino stockholders still own a majority of the outstanding
capital stock of the corporation, and both classes of shares have a par
value of Php 20.00 per share. Decide. (5%) 2015 BAR EXAMS
ANSWER:
“The application of the Grandfather Rule is justified by the circumstance of the case
to determine the nationality of petitioners. The use of the Grandfather Rule as a
Page 180 of 198

“Supplement” to the Control Test is not Prescribed by the Constitution…” “The
grandfather Rule, standing alone, 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. Hence, it is only when the control test is first complied with that the
Grandfather Rule may be applied. Put in another manner, if the subject
corporation’s Filipino equity falls below the threshold 60%, the corporation is
immediately considered foreignowned, in which case, the need to resort to the
Grandfather Rule disappears. As a corollary rule, even if the 60-40 Filipino to
foreign equity ratio is apparently met by the subject or investee corporation, a
resort to the Grandfather Rule is necessary if doubt exists as to the locus of the
“beneficial ownership” and “control” (Narra Nickel Mining and Development
Corporation v. Redmont Consolidated Mines Corporation, G.R. No. 195580,
January 28, 2015).
Althea, a Filipino citizen, bought a lot in the Philippines in 1975. Her

predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession of the lot since 1940, in the concept of owner. In 1988,
Althea became a naturalized Australian citizen. Is she qualified to apply for
registration of the lot in her name? (2011 BAR)
(A) Yes, provided she acquires back her Filipino citizenship.
(B) No, except when it can be proved that Australia has a counterpart
domestic law that also favors former Filipino citizens residing there.
(C) Yes, the lot is already private in character and as a former natural-born
Filipino, she can buy the lot and apply for its registration in her name.
(D) No, foreigners are not allowed to own lands in the Philippines.
The people may approve or reject a proposal to allow foreign investors to own
lands in the Philippines through an electoral process called (2011 BAR)
(A) referendum.
(B) plebiscite.
(C) initiative.
(D) certification.
Mass media in the Philippines may be owned and managed by (2011 BAR)
(A) corporations wholly owned and managed by Filipinos.
(B) corporations 60% owned by Filipinos.
(C) corporations wholly owned by Filipinos.
(D) corporations 60% owned and managed by Filipinos.
A bank acquired a large tract of land as the highest bidder in the foreclosure sale
of the mortgaged assets of its borrower. It appears that the land has been
originally registered under the Torrens system in 1922 pursuant to the provisions
of the Philippine Bill of 1902, the organic act of the Philippine Islands as a colony
Page 181 of 198

of the USA. Sec. 21 of the Philippine Bill of 1902 provided that "all valuable
mineral deposits in public lands in the Philippine Islands, both surveyed and
unsurveyed, are hereby declared to be free and open to exploration, occupation
and purchase, and the land in which they are found to occupation and purchase,
by citizens of the United States, or of said Islands." Sec. 27 of the law declared
that a holder of the mineral claim so located was entitled to all the minerals that
lie within his claim, but he could not mine outside the boundary lines of his claim.
The 1935 Constitution expressly prohibited the alienation of natural resources

except agricultural lands. Sec. 2, Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution contains a
similar prohibition, and proclaims that.all lands of the public domain, waters,
minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy,
fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources
are owned by the State. This provision enunciates the Regalian Doctrine.
May the Government, on the basis of the Regalian Doctrine enunciated in the
constitutional provisions, deny the bank its right as owner to the mineral
resources underneath the surface of its property as recognized under the
Philippine Bill of 1902? Explain your answer. (5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The government cannot deny the bank its right as owner of the mineral resources
underneath the surface of the property. The mining rights acquired under Philippine Bill
of 1902 before the effectivity of the 1935 Constitution were vested rights that cannot be
impaired by the Government (Yinhu Bicol Mining Corporation v. Trans-Asia Oil and
Energy Development Corporation, G.R. No. 207942, January 12,2015,745 SCRA 154).
C. Exploration, development and utilization of natural resources
In Oposa vs. Factoran, Jr., G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993, the Supreme Court
held that the personality of the petitioners to sue is based on the concept
of: ((2012 BAR EXAMS))
a. ecological responsibility;
b. environmental accountability;
c. intergenerational responsibility;
d. interdisciplinary responsibility.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) Oposa Vs. Factoran, 224 Scra 792
Small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens may be allowed

by (2011 BAR)
Page 182 of 198

(A) Congress.
(B) either the Senate or the House of Representatives.
(C) the President.
(D) the President with the consent of Congress.
D. Franchises, authority and certificates for public utilities

E. Acquisition, ownership and transfer of private lands

Aliens are absolutely prohibited from owning private lands in the Philippines.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
False. Under Section 7, Article XII of the Constitution, aliens may acquire private land
by hereditary succession. Under Section 8, Article XII of the Constitution, natural-
born citizens of the Philippines who lost their Filipino citizenship may be
transferees of private land.
F. Practice of professions
G. Organization and regulation of corporations, private and public
Sec. 11, Art. XII of the Constitution, provides: No franchise, certificate or any
other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted
except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized
under the laws of the Philippines at least sixty per centum of whose capital is
owned by such citizens x x x." Does the term "capital" mentioned in the cited
section refer to the total common shares only, or to the total outstanding capital
stock, or to both or "separately to each class of shares, whether common,
preferred non-voting, preferred voting or any class of shares?" Explain your
answer. (5%) (2016 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The-term "capital" mentioned in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers to the
total outstanding capital stock of public utilities. The requirement that at least sixty
percent of the capital must be owned by Filipino citizens applies separately to each
class of shares, whether common, preferred, non-voting, preferred voting, or any class
of shares. Mere legal title is not enough. Full beneficial ownership of sixty percent of the
outstanding capital stock is required (Gamboa v. Teves, G.R. 176579, June 28, 2011,
652 SCRA 690).
Page 183 of 198

H. Monopolies, restraint of trade and unfair competition
XIV. Social Justice and Human Rights
A. Concept of social justice
B. Commission on Human Rights
The principal function of the Commission on Human Rights is:

a. issue writs of injunction/ restraining orders;
b. investigatory ;
c. quasi-judicial;
d. rule-making.
XV. Education, Science, Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports
A. Academic freedom
Academic freedom shall be enjoyed: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. in all public institutions;

b. in all elementary and high schools;
c. in all schools;
d. in all institutions of higher learning.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D) SECTION 5(2), ARTICLE XIV OF CONSTITUTION
Bobby, an incoming third year college student, was denied admission by his
university, a premiere educational institution in Manila, after he failed in
three (3) major subjects in his sophomore year. The denial of admission
was based on the university’s rules and admission policies. Unable to cope
with the depression that his non-admission triggered, Bobby committed
suicide. His family sued the school for damages, citing the school’s grossly
unreasonable rules that resulted in the denial of admission. They argued
that these rules violated Bobby’s human rights and the priority
consideration that the Constitution gives to the education
of the youth.
You are counsel for the university. Explain your arguments in support of the
university’s case. (6%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 184 of 198

I shall argue that under Article XIV, Section 5(2) of the 1987 Constitution, the
educational institution enjoys academic freedom. Academic freedom includes its
rights to prescribe academic standards, policies and qualifications for the
admission of a student (University of San Agustin, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 100588, March 7, 1994, 230 SCRA 761).

An educational institution 100% foreign-owned may be validly established in

the Philippines.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
True. An educational institution which is 100% foreign-owned maybe established in the

Philippines if it is established by religious groups and mission boards (Section 4[2],
Article XIV of the Constitution).
XVI. Public International Law
A. Concepts
This doctrine considers the general or customary norms of international law as

a part of municipal law and are to be enforced as such, without regard as to
whether they are enacted as statutory or legislative rules or not: (2012 BAR
EXAMS)
a. accession
b. incorporation;
c. accretion;
d. adoption.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) Magallona , Fundamentals Of Public International Law, P, 523
What is the legal effect of decisions of the International Court of Justice in

cases submitted to it for resolution? (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) The decision is binding on all other countries in similar situations.

(B) The decision is not binding on any country, even the countries that are
parties to the case.
(C) The decision is binding only on the parties but only with respect to that
Page 185 of 198

particular case.
(D) The decision is not binding on the parties and is only advisory.
(E) The binding effect on the parties depends on their submission agreement.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C)(Article 59 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice).
President Black of the Republic of Pasensya (RP) had a telephone conversation

with President Blue of the People’s Republic of Conquerors (PRC). In that
conversation, both leaders agreed that they will both pullout all their
vessels, civilian or otherwise, sea crafts and other ships from the hotly
disputed Kalmado Shoal area within eight (8) days in order to deescalate
the situation. After eight days, all RP ships and vessels have left the area.
However, several military and civilian ships carrying the PRC flag remained
in the area and began construction of a dock that could provide fuel and
other supplies to vessels passing by.
A. Assuming that President Black and President Blue both had full capacity to
represent their states and negotiate with each other under their respective
systems of government, and further assuming that both leaders
acknowledge the existence of the conversation, is the verbal agreement via
telephone binding under international law? Explain. (5%)
B. Assuming the answer to (a.) is in affirmative, does that agreement constitute

a Treaty under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law on Treaties? (2%)
C. What are the sources of International Law? (2%)
D. What is opinio juris in International Law? (1%) (2012 BAR EXAMS)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. The Verbal Agreement By Telephone Is Binding Between The Parties On The

Basis Of Customary International Law. (In 1992 The Dispute Between Denmark
And Finland About The Construction Of A Bridge Was Settled By A Telephone
Conversation Between The Danish And Finnish Prime Ministers. In Return For
Payment By Denmark, Finland Agreed To Discontinue The Case It Filed. (Aust
Modern Treaty Law And Practice, P,7.)
B. The Verbal Agreement Does Not Constitute A Treaty Under The Vienna
Convention On The Law Of Treaties Article 3 Requires That For An International
Agreement To Be A Treaty, It Must Be In Written Form.
C. The Following Are The Sources Of International Law;
Page 186 of 198

1. International Conventions, Whether General Or Particular, Establishing Rules
Expressly Recognized By The Contesting States;
2. International Custom As Evidence Of A General Practice Accepted As Law;
3. The General Principles Of Law Recognized By Civilized Nations.
D. To Establish Customary International Law, Two Elements Must Concur, General

State Practice And Opinion Juris Sire Necessitates. State Practice Refers To The
Continuous Repetition Of The Same Or Similar Kind Of Acts Or Norms By States.
Opinio Juris Requires That The State Practice Or Norm Be Carried Out In Such A
Way As To Be Evidence Of The Belief That It Is Obligatory By The Existence Of A
Rule Of Law Requiring It. (Bayan Muna Vs. Romulo, 641 Scra 244.)
Carlos, a foreign national was charged with and convicted of a serious crime in
State X and sentenced to life imprisonment. His country applied for relief
with the International Court of Justice (ICJ), arguing that State X did not
inform Carlos of his right under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention to be
accorded legal assistance by his government. State X, as signatory to the
Vienna Convention, agreed to ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction over all
disputes regarding the interpretation or application of the Vienna
Convention. ICJ ruled that State X violated its obligation to provide consular
notification to the foreign national's country. ICJ also required State X to
review and reconsider the life sentence imposed on the foreign national.
State X then wrote the United Nations informing that it was withdrawing
from the Optional Protocol on Vienna Convention and was not bound by the
ICJ decision. What principle of international law did State X violate? (2011
BAR)
(A) Pacta Sunt Servanda
(B) Act of State Doctrine
(C) Protective Principle
(D) Jus Cogens
What is the difference between the principles of pacta stunt servanda and rebus
sic stantibus in international law? (2.5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
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 (Deutsche Bank
AG Manila Branch it Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 188550, August 19,
2013, 704 SCRA 216).
Rebus 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 (Article
Page 187 of 198

62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties).
Are the principles of pacta sunt servanda and rebus sic stantibus relevant in the
treaty relations between State A and State B? What about in the treaty relations
between State B and State C? Explain your answer. (2.5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Pacta sunt servanda was what bound State A and State B to comply with their
obligations under their mutual defense treaty, despite the existing trade agreements
between State Band State C. Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties, which enunciates the doctrine of rebus sic stantibus, on the other hand, can be
invoked by State B as the reason why it did not comply with its mutual defense treaty—
a treaty is concluded with the implied condition that it is intended to be binding only as
long as there is no vital change in the circumstances. To State B, compliance with the
treaty would jeopardize its vital trade development. Because of this unforeseen change
of circumstances combined with State B's non-compliance with its obligations under the
treaty in good faith, State A may now opt to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty.
1. Obligations erga omnes

2. Jus cogens
In international law, it is a norm which States cannot derogate or deviate

from their agreements: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. terra nullius;
b. opiniojuris;
c. jus cogens;
d. juscogentus.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Article 53 Of Vienna Convention On The Law Of Treaties
3. Concept of ex aequo et bono
Under international law, differentiate “hard law” from “soft law”. (3%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Hard law” is used to designate a norm or rule of conduct accepted and

recognized by the international community of states as a whole, as a source of
Page 188 of 198

law binding on them. “Hard law” produces obligations which when breached gives
rise to international responsibility and, consequently, to reparation.
On the other hand, “soft law” has no binding force and pertains to a statement or
declaration of principles with moral force on the conduct of states but no
normative character and without intent to create enforceable obligations. In the
development of international law, a number of “soft law” principles or declarations
have become the basis of norm-creation in treaty-making and in general practice
of states in customary-norm formation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Soft law has no binding force and pertains to a statement or declaration of principles
with moral force on the conduct of states but no normative character and without
intent to create enforceable obligations.
On the other hand, hard law is a norm or rule of conduct accepted and recognized by
the international community of states as a whole, as a source of law that is
binding on them. Hard law produces obligations which when breached gives rise
to international responsibility and, consequently, to reparation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Soft law is an expression' of non-binding norms, principles and practices that

influence State behavior. On the other hand, hard law involves binding rules of
international law (Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines
v. Duque, 535 SCRA 265 [2007]).
What is the concept of association under international law? (2%) (2009)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
An association is formed when two states of unequal power voluntarily establish

durable links. The associate delegates certain responsibilities to the other, the
principal, while maintaining its status as a state. It is an association between
sovereigns. The associated state arrangement has usually been used as a
transitional device of former colonies on their way to full independence. (Province
of North Cotabato v. Government of the Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel
on Ancestral Domain, 568 SCRA 402 [2008].)
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
Page 189 of 198

in UN General Assembly Resolution 1541 (XV) of 14 December 160: (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). Association is subject to UN approval.
Under the doctrine of immunity from suit, the State cannot be sued without its
consent. How may the consent be given by the State? Explain your answer. (3%)
(2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The State may be sued, with its consent, either expressly or impliedly. Only Congress
can give a written waiver of immunity from suit in the form of a law (United States v.
Ginto, G.R. Nos. 76607, 79470, 80018 & 80258, February 26, 1990, 182 SCRA 664);
Republic v. Feliciano, G.R. No.L-70853, March 12, 1987, 148 SCRA 424).
If a government agency undertakes a proprietary function, It waives its Immunity from

suit When the Philippines Tourism Authority entered into a contract for the construction
of a golf course, it engaged in a proprietary function (Philippine Tourism Authority v.
Philippine Golf Development and Equipment, Inc., G.R. No. 176628, March 19, 2012,
668 SCRA 408).
The doctrine of immunity from suit in favor of the State extends to public officials
in the performance of their official duties. May such officials be sued nonetheless
to prevent or to undo their oppressive or illegal acts, or to compel them to act?
Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Public officials may be sued if they acted oppressively or illegally in the performance of
their duties. A suit against a public officer who acted illegally is not a suit against the
state (Aberca v. Ver, G.R. No. 69866, April 15, 1988, 160 SCRA 590).
A public official may be compelled to act through a writ of mandamus. The main
objective of mandamus is to compel the performance of a ministerial duty on the part of
the respondent official; however, the writ does not issue to control or review the
exercise of discretion or to compel a course of conduct. The writ of prohibition can also
be availed of, as it is an extraordinary writ which can be directed against a public officer
ordering said officer to desist from further proceedings when said proceedings are
without or in excess of said officer's jurisdiction, or are accompanied with grave abuse
of discretion (Rule 65, Revised Rules of Court).
Lastly, a public officer is by law not immune from damages in his/her personal capacity
for acts done in bad faith which, being outside the scope of his authority, are no longer
protected by the mantle of immunity for official actions (Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune
Page 190 of 198

Tobacco Corp., G.R. No. 141309, June 19, 2007, 525 SCRA 11).
Do government-owned or -controlled corporations also enjoy the immunity of the

State from suit? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
A government-owned or controlled corporation may be sued. A suit against it is not a

suit against the State, because it has a separate juridical personality (Sock! Security
Systems v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-41299, February 21, 1983, 120 SCRA 707).
What is the right of legation, and how is it undertaken between states? Explain
your answer. (2%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The right of legation is the right accorded to a State to be represented by an

ambassador or diplomatic agent in another State (Coquia and Defensor-Santiago,
International Law and World Organizations, p.289).
Under this right, may a country like Malaysia insist that the Philippines
establishes a consulate in Sabah to look after the welfare of the Filipino migrants
in the area? Explain your answer. (2%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER;
Malaysia cannot insist that the Philippines establish a consulate in Sabah. Article 2 of
the Diplomatic Convention provides: "(t) he establishment of diplomatic mission takes
place by mutual consent". A State may conduct its diplomatic relations with another
State without establishing a diplomatic mission (Magallona, Fundamentals of Public
International Law, p.91).
B. International and national law

C. Sources
Under Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, which
one of the following is NOT considered a source of international law: (2012
BAR EXAMS)
a. international conventions;
b. international custom;
c. international humanitarian law;
d. general principles of law.
Page 191 of 198

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(c) Article 38 of Statute of the International Court of Justice International

Humanitarian Law is embodied in both Customary and Conventional International
Law. (fleck, The Handbook Of International Humanitarian Law, 2nd ed., p. 11
D. Subjects
1. States
In international law, the status of an entity as a State is accepted by other

States through this act. It is the "act by which another State acknowledges
that the political entity recognized possesses the attributes of statehood."
(2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. accession;
b. recognition;
c. acknowledgment;
d. attribution.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B) Brownlie, Principles Of Public International Law, 7th Ed., P.86
2. International organizations
3. Individuals
What is the appropriate remedy available to the victim's family under

international law? (3%) (2013 BAR)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The appropriate remedy available to the family of A is to seek diplomatic protection
from Great Britain to press a claim for reparation. (Brownlie, Principles of Public
International Law, 7th ed., pp. 460 and 477-478.) However, in order that the claim
will be allowable under customary international law, the family of A must first
exhaust the legal remedies available in Thailand. (Brownlie, Principles of Public
International Law, 7th ed., p. 492.)
E. Diplomatic and consular law
Ambassador Gaylor is State Juvenus diplomatic representative to State

Hinterlands. During one of his vacations, Ambassador Gaylor decided to
experience for himself the sights and sounds of State Paradise, a country known
Page 192 of 198

for its beauty and other attractions. While in State Paradise, Ambassador Gaylor
was caught in the company of children under suspicious circumstances. He was
arrested for violation of the strict anti-pedophilia statute of State Paradise. He
claims that he is immune from arrest and incarceration by virtue of his diplomatic
immunity. Does the claim of Ambassador Gaylor hold water? (2014 BAR)
Answer:
Ambassador Gaylor cannot invoke his diplomatic immunity. In accordance with
Paragraph 1, Article 31 of Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations, since State
Paradise is not his receiving state, he does not enjoy diplomatic immunity within its
territory. Under Paragraph 1, Article 40 of the Vienna Convention of diplomatic
Relations, he cannot be accorded diplomatic immunity in State Paradise, because he is
not passing through it to take up or return to his post or to return to State Paradise.
Ambassador Robert of State Alpha committed a very serious crime while he

headed his foreign mission in the Philippines. Is he subject to arrest by Philippine
authorities? Explain your answer. (3%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
In accordance with the Convention on the Protection and Punishment of Crimes Against
International Protected Persons Including Diplomatic Agents, the Philippines has the
obligation to either extradite or prosecute Ambassador Robert of State Alpha
(Magallona, Fundamentals of Public International Law, p. 68)
F. Treaties
State A and State B, two sovereign states, enter into a 10-year mutual defense
treaty. After five years, State A finds that the more progressive State B did not go
to the aid of State A when it was threatened by its strong neighbor State C. State
B reasoned that it had to be prudent and deliberate in reacting to State C because
of their existing trade treaties.
May State A now unilaterally withdraw from its mutual defense treaty with State
B? Explain your answer. (2.5%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
State A may unilaterally withdraw from the mutual defense treaty. State B committed a
material breach of the treaty by failing to come to the aid of State A (Art. 60 (i) of the
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties; Kolb, The Law of Treaties, p.220; Aust,
Modern Treaty Law and Practice, pp. 236-237).
The President signs an agreement with his counterpart in another country
Page 193 of 198

involving reciprocity in the treatment of each country's nationals residing in the
other's territory. However, he does not submit the agreement to the Senate for
concurrence. Sec. 211 Art. VII of the Constitution provides that no treaty or
international agreement shall be valid and effective without such concurrence. Is
the agreement signed by the President effective despite the lack of Senate
concurrence? Explain your answer. (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The agreement signed by the President is effective even if the Senate did not concur in
it. The agreement is in the nature of an executive agreement and need not be submitted
to the Senate for concurrence in its ratification (Saguisag V. Ochoa, Jr., G.R. Nos.
212426 & 212444, January 12. 2016, 779 SCRA 241).
G. Nationality and statelessness

1. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
The President alone without the concurrence of the Senate abrogated a treaty.
Assume that the other country- party to the treaty is agreeable to the
abrogation provided it complies with the Philippine Constitution. If a case
involving the validity of the treaty abrogation is brought to the Supreme
Court, how should it be resolved? (6%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Supreme Court should dismiss the case. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
(or of all lower courts) over a treaty is only with respect to questions of its
constitutionality or validity (See Art. VIII, sec. 5 (2) (a) of the 1987 Constitution). In
other words, the question should involve the constitutionality of a treaty or its
validity in relation to a statute (Gonzales v. Henchanova, 9 SCRA 230 [1963]). It
does not pertain to the termination (or abrogation) of a treaty.
The authority of the Senate over treaties is limited to concurrence (Art. VIII, sec. 21 of
the 1987 Constitution). There being no express constitutional provision regulating
the termination (or abrogation) of treaties, it is presumed that the power of the
President over treaty agreements and over foreign relations includes the authority
to “abrogate” (or more properly referred as “terminate”) treaties. The termination
of the treaty by the President without the concurrence of the Senate is not subject
to constitutional attack, there being no Senate authority to that effect.
The Philippines is a party to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Hence,
the said Convention thus becoming part of Philippine Law governs the act of the
President in terminating (or abrogating) the treaty. Article 54 of this Convention
provides that a treaty may be terminated “at any time by consent of all the
parties.” Apparently, the treaty in question is a bilateral treaty in which the other
Page 194 of 198

state is agreeable to its termination. Article 67 of the Convention adds the formal
requirement that the termination must be in an instrument communicated to the
other party signed by the Head of State or of Government or by the Minister of
Foreign Affairs.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The Supreme Court should dismiss the case. The case involved is a political
question, because it involves the authority of the President in the conduct of
foreign relations and the extent to which the Senate is authorized to negate the
action of the President. Since Section 21, Article VII of the Constitution is silent as
to the participation of the Senate in the abrogation of a treaty, the question may
be answered in different ways and should be decided by political standards rather
than judicially manageable standards (Goldwater vs. Carter, 444 U.S. 996
[1979J).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
While it is the President who negotiates and ratifies treaties and other international
agreements, it must be underscored that when the same has been concurred by
the qualified majority of the Senate, they become part of the law of the land.
Accordingly, it is submitted that the President alone cannot unilaterally abrogate a
treaty without Congressional authorization, in the same way that she would have
no authority to repeal a law.
Further, even as what the Constitution requires in the concurrence of the Senate in
treaties and international agreements entered into, not the abrogation of the
same, the same should not also be construed as empowering the President to
simply render nugatory a treaty that has already acquired the imprimatur of the
Senate (See Goldwater v. Carter, 444U.S. 996 [1979J, cited in Be mas, An
Introduction to Public International Law [2002] at 53).
H. State responsibility
A British photojournalist, was covering the violent protests of the Thai Red-
Shirts Movement in Bangkok. Despite warnings given by the Thai Prime
Minister to foreigners, specially journalists, A moved around the Thai
capital. In the course of his coverage, he was killed with a stray bullet which
was later identified as having come from the ranks of the Red-Shirts. The
wife of A sought relief from Thai authorities but was refused assistance.
Is there state responsibility on the part of Thailand? (2%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
There is no state responsibility on the part of 'Thailand. The wrongful act in question
Page 195 of 198

is an act of private individuals and not of an organ of the government or a state
official. Hence, it is not attributable to Thailand as its wrongful act for the purpose
of state responsibility.
What is the appropriate remedy available to the victim's family under

international law? (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The appropriate remedy available to the family of A is to seek diplomatic protection'

from Great Britain to press a claim for reparation. (Brownlie, Princlples of Public
International Law, 7th .ed., pp. 460 and 477-478.) However, in order that the claim
will be allowable under customary international law, the family of A must first
exhaust the legal remedies available in Thailand. (Brownlie, Principles of Public
International Law, 7th ed., p.492.)
A terrorist group called the Emerald Brigade is based in the State of Asyaland.
The government of Asyaland does not support the terrorist group, but being
a poor country, is powerless to stop it.
The Emerald Brigade launched an attack on the Philippines, firing two missiles
that killed thousands of Filipinos. It then warned that more attacks were
forthcoming. Through diplomatic channels, the Philippines demanded that
Asyaland stop the Emerald Brigade; otherwise, it will do whatever is
necessary to defend itself.
Receiving reliable intelligence reports of another imminent attack by the

Emerald Brigade, and it appearing that Asyaland was incapable of
preventing the assault, the Philippines sent a crack commando team to
Asyaland. The team stayed only for a few hours in Asyaland, succeeded in
killing the leaders and most of the members of the Emerald Brigade, then
immediately returned to the Philippines.
Was the Philippine action justified under the international law principle of “self-
defense”?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Philippine action cannot be justified as selfdefense. Self-defense is an act of

State by reason of an armed attack by another State. The acts of terrorism in this
case were acts of a private group and cannot be attributed to Asyaland, which
does not support the Emerald Brigade. Article 51 of the Charter of the United
Nations has no applicability, because self defense in Article 51 contemplates a
Page 196 of 198

response to a legitimate armed attack by a State against another State. The
attack by the Emerald Brigade is an attack by a private group without authority or
as an organ of Asyaland.
As a consequence of the foregoing incident, Asyaland charges the Philippines

with violation of Article 2.4 of the United Nations Charter that prohibits “the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any State.” The Philippines counters that its commando
team neither took any territory nor interfered in the political processes of
Asyaland. Which contention is correct? Reasons. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contention of Asyaland is correct. The Philippines violated Article 2(4) of the
Charter of the United Nations, which prohibits States from the threat or use of
force against the territorial integrity of any State.
Assume that the commando team captured a member of the Emerald Brigade
and brought him back to the Philippines. The Philippine Government insists
that a special international tribunal should try the terrorist. On the other
hand, the terrorist argues that terrorism is not an international crime and,
therefore, the municipal laws of the Philippines, which recognize access of
the accused to constitutional rights, should apply. Decide with reasons.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The terrorist should be tried in the Philippines. Section 58 of Republic Act No. 9372,
the Human Security Act provides for its extraterritorial application to individual
persons who, although outside the territorial limits of the Philippines, commit an
act of terrorism directly against Filipino citizens where their citizenship was a
factor in the commission of the crime.
I. Jurisdiction of States
1. Territoriality principle
2. Nationality principle and statelessness
3. Protective principle
4. Universality principle
5. Passive personality principle
6. Conflicts of jurisdiction
Compare and contrast the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and
International Court of Justice. (3%) (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Page 197 of 198

The jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice pertains to international
responsibility in the concept of civil liability, while that of the International Criminal
Court pertains to criminal liability.
While States are the subject of law in international responsibility under the jurisdiction
of the International Court of Justice, the criminal liability within the jurisdiction of
the International Criminal Court pertains to individual natural person. (Article 34(i)
of the Statute of the International Court of Justice; Articles 25 and 27 of the
Statute of the International Criminal Court.)
J. Treatment of aliens
1. Extradition
a. Fundamental principles
b. Procedure
c. Distinguished from deportation
An act or process by which a State, in compliance with a formal demand or

request, surrenders to another State an alleged offender or fugitive criminal
who has sought refuge in the territory of the first State, in order to stand
trial or complete his prison term: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. extramediation
b. exterrertioriality;
c. extradition;
d. extraterritoriality.
Extradition is the process pursuant to a treaty between two State parties for the
surrender by the requested State to the custody of the requesting State of a
fugitive criminal residing in the former. However, extradition depends on the
application of two principles --- the principle of specialty and the dual criminality
principle. Explain these principles. (4%) (2017 BAR QUESTION)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
The principle of specialty means that the State requesting extradition from another State
Is required to specify the crime as provided in the extradition treaty for which the fugitive
or the accused is to be extradited and to be tried only for the offense specified in the
extradition treaty (Magallona, Fundamentals of Public International Law, p.572).
The principle of dual criminality requires that the crime for which extradition is sought
must be recognized as a crime by both the requiring State and the State to which the
fugitives or the accused has fled (Magallona, Fundamentals of Public International Law,
p.578).
Page 198 of 198

K. International Human Rights Law
1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
3. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Which statement best completes the following phrase: (1%) (2009 Bar
Question) "Freedom from torture is a right
A. A .subject to derogation when national security is threatened. "

B. confined only during custodial investigation."
C. which is non-derogable both during peacetime and in a situation of armed
conflict."
D. both (a) and (b)
E. none of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The correct answer is letter "C".
Freedom from torture is non-derogable both during peacetime and in a situation of

armed conflict. Under Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, the State Parties may take measures in derogation of their obligations
under this Covenant in time of public emergency. But this derogation clause does
not apply to prohibition against torture, pursuant to Article 4(2) of the Covenant.
Hence, no derogation maybe made in regard to torture.
L. International Humanitarian Law and neutrality

1. Categories of armed conflicts
a. International armed conflicts
b. Internal or non-international armed conflict
c. War of national liberation
2. Core international obligations of states in International
Humanitarian Law
3. Principles of International Humanitarian Law
a. Treatment of civilians
b. Prisoners of war
4. Law on neutrality
The dictatorial regime of President A of the Republic of Gordon was toppled by

a combined force led by Gen. Abe, former royal guards and the secessionist
Gordon People’s Army. The new government constituted a Truth and
Reconciliation Commission to look into the serious crimes committed
under President A’s regime. After the hearings, the Commission
Page 199 of 198

recommended that an amnesty law be passed to cover even those involved
in mass killings of members of indigenous groups who opposed President
A. International human rights groups argued that the proposed amnesty law
is contrary to international law. Decide with reasons. (4%) (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The proposed amnesty law is contrary to international law. The mass killings of
members of indigenous groups constitute genocide under Article II(a), Convention
for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The proposed
amnesty law is against international law because it is incompatible with, or in
violation of the international obligation under Article IV of this
Convention that “Persons committing genocide… shall be punished, whether they are
constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.”
“The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace
or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to
prevent and to punish.”
Choose the statement which appropriately completes the opening phrase:

“State which resorts to retorsion in international law
A. must ensure that all states consent to its act.

B. cannot curtail migration from the offending state.
C. can expel the nationals of the offending state.
D. should apply proportionate response within appreciable limit.
E. None of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The correct answer is letter "D".
A State which resorts to retorsion in international law should apply proportionate

response' within appreciable limit. Retorsion is merely retaliation for discourteous,
unkind, unfair or unfriendly acts by acts of the same or similar kind. (Oppenheim's
International Law, Vol. II, 7th ed., p. 134.)
M. Law of the sea

1. Baselines
2. Archipelagic states
Page 200 of 198

a. Straight archipelagic baselines
b. Archipelagic waters
c. Archipelagic sea lanes passage
3. Internal waters
4. Territorial sea
5. Exclusive economic zone
6. Continental shelf
a. Extended continental shelf
7. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
It is a line from which the breadth of the territorial sea and other maritime
zones is measured: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. contiguous line;
b. economic line;
c. baseline;
d. archipelagic line.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Articles 5, 6 And 7, Convention On The Law Of The Sea
Under the United Nations Conference of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the
extent of the contiguous zone is: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. 3 nautical miles from the lowest water mark;

b. 12 miles from the outer limits;
c. 12 miles from the lowest water mark;
d. 200 miles from the outer limits.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(C) Article 3 And 5 Convention On The Law Of The Sea (Note In The Statement Of
The Problem, The Word “Conference” Should Read “Convention” None Of The
Items In This Mcq Is Correct. Reference To Lowest Water Mark May Not Be
Accurate Because This Applies Only To The Normal Baseline, Not To Straight
Baseline. Reference To “Outer Limit” Is Misleading Because It Does Not Indicate
The Maritime Zone Of Which It Is The Outer Limit, Such As The “Outer Limit Of
The Territorial Sea”)
It is a maritime zone adjacent to the territorial seas where the coastal state may
exercise certain protective jurisdiction: (2012 BAR EXAMS)
a. baseline zone;
b. contiguous zone;
Page 201 of 198

c. transit zone;
d. appurtenant zone.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Article, Convention On The Law Of The Sea
Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the exclusive economic zone
refers to an area _____________. (1%) 2013 BAR EXAMS
(A) that is at least 100 miles from the baselines from which the outer limit of the
territorial sea is measured
(B) that is at least 200 miles but not to exceed 300 miles from the baselines from
which the outer limit of the territorial sea is measured
(C) beyond and adjacent to a country’s territorial sea which cannot go beyond
200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the outer limit of the
territorial sea is measured
(D) that can go beyond 3 nautical miles but cannot extend 300 nautical miles from
the baselines from which the outer limit of the territorial sea is measured
(E) none of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(E)None of the above.

(Note: The nearest to the accurate answer may be © but it proposes that the EEZ
cannot go beyond 200 nautical miles “from the baseline from which the outer limit
of the territorial sea is measured.”
This is not correct because the baseline is the point from which the entire Breadth of
the territorial sea is measured pursuant to Article 57 of the UNCLOS, not only
from its outer limit as indicated in Letter (C). Letter (C) excludes the entire breadth
of the territorial sea of 12 n.m. from the EEZ contrary to the text of said Article 57.
If Letter (C) is followed, EEZ will only measure 200 n.m. minus-i2 n.m. of the territorial
sea, resulting in the EEZ measuring only 188 n.m. in breadth
N. Madrid Protocol and the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial
Property
O. International environmental law
1. Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration
P. International economic law
Page 202 of 198


PoliticalLaw BarQA 2009-2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PoliticalLaw BarQA 2009-2017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PoliticalLaw BarQA 2009-2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POLITICAL AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

I. The Philippine Constitution

A. Constitution: definition, nature and concepts 1

II. General Considerations

III. Legislative Department

A. Who may exercise legislative power 23

IV. Executive Department

A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications 39

VI. Constitutional Commissions

A. Constitutional safeguards to ensure independence of commissions 70

VII. Bill of Rights

A. Fundamental powers of the state (police power, eminent domain, taxation)

A. Who are Filipino citizens 126

IX. Law on Public Officers

A. General principles 134

A. General principles 150

XI. Election Law

A. Public corporations 165

XIII. National Economy and Patrimony

XIV. Social Justice and Human Rights

A. Concept of social justice 179

XV. Education, Science, Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports

A. Academic freedom 180

XVI. Public International Law

I. The Philippine Constitution

A. Constitution: definition, nature and concepts

Constitution is defined by Cooley as:

b. Cooley, Constitutional Limitations, p. 4 (2012 BAR)

One advantage of a written Constitution is its (2011 BAR)

The three essential parts of a Constitution are:

A. Nachura, Outline review in political Law, p, 3 (2012 BAR)

C. Amendments and revisions

The constitutional provision on initiative and referendum is not self-executory.

C. SECTION 32, ARTCLE IV OF CONSTITUTION (2012 BAR)

In an amendment to the constitution by "initiative and referendum", the

B. SECTION 2, ARTICLE XVII OF CONSTITUTION (2012 BAR)

With the passage of time, the members of the House of Representatives

Constituent power refers to the authority (1%) (2014 BAR)

(A) of public officials to command respect

A priority thrust of the Administration is the change of the form of government

The Constitution may also be amended or revised by a Constitutional Convention.

Amendments to the Constitution may be directly proposed by the people through

Cite at least three provisions of the Constitution that need to be amended or

SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

D. Self-executing and non-self-executing provisions

Which one of the following is a non-self-executing provision of the

D. SECTION 15, ARTICLE XIV OF CONSTITUTION (2012 BAR)

II. General Considerations

(1) A bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in order to implement

(2) Describe the following maritime regimes under UNCLOS (4%)

(a) Territorial sea

(1) I do not agree.

(2) Under the provisions of UNCLOS III-

In a petition filed with the Supreme Court, Anak Ti Ilocos, an association

TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is true, or FALSE if the

b) archipelago means a group of islands including parts of islands interconnecting

As an archipelagic state, the national territory is implemented by drawing its "straight

(B) The contention Prof. Agaton is not correct at all.