CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
and Set-up of the Philippine Judicial
Academy, A.M. No. 01-1-04-SC (2006)].
The provision in the Charter of the GSIS,
i.e., Section 39 of RA No. 8291, which
exempts it from “all taxes, assessments,
fees, charges or duties of all kinds,” cannot
operate to exempt it from the payment of
legal fees. Unlike the 1935 and 1973
Constitutions, which empowered Congress
to repeal, alter or supplement the rules of
the Supreme Court concerning pleading,
practice and procedure, the 1987
Constitution removed this power from
Congress. Hence, the Supreme Court now
has the sole authority to promulgate rules
concerning pleading, practice and
procedure in all courts [GSIS v. Caballero
G.R. No. 158090 (2010)].
12. The SC alone may initiate rules of court.
[Sec. 5 (5), Art. VIII]
The separation of powers among the three
co-equal branches of our government has
erected an impregnable wall that keeps the
power to promulgate rules of pleading,
practice and procedure within the sole
province of the Supreme Court. The other
branches trespass upon this prerogative if
they enact laws or issue orders that
effectively repeal, alter or modify any of the
procedural rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court. [Estipona Jr. v. Lobrigo,
G.R. No. 226679 (2017)].
13. Only the SC may order the temporary detail
of judges. [Sec. 5(3), Art. VIII]
14. The SC can appoint all officials and
employees of the judiciary. [Sec. 5(6), Art.
VIII]
Judicial Restraint
The judiciary will not interfere with its co-equal
branches when:
1. There is no showing of grave abuse of
discretion.
PPA v. Court of Appeals: If there is no showing
of grave abuse of discretion on the part of a
Page 89 of 116
branch or instrumentality of the government,
the court will decline exercising its power of
judicial review [G.R. No. 115786-87 (1996)].
Chavez v. COMELEC: Judicial review shall
involve only those resulting in grave abuse of
discretion by virtue of an agency’s quasi-
judicial powers, and not those arising from its
administrative functions [G.R. No. 105323
(1992)]
2. The issue is a political question.
Even when all requisites for justiciability have
been met, judicial review will not be exercised
when the issue involves a political question.
But see Francisco v. House of
Representatives, G.R. No. 160261 (2004): At
the same time, the Court has the duty to
determine whether or not there has been grave
abuse of discretion by any instrumentality of
government under its expanded judicial review
powers. This allowed the SC to interfere in a
traditionally purely political process, i.e.
impeachment, when questions on compliance
with Constitutional processes were involved.
Guidelines for determining whether or not a
question is political [Baker v. Carr (369 US
186), as cited in Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos.
146710-15 (2001)]:
1. There is a textually demonstrable
constitutional commitment of the issue to a
political department;
2. Lack of judicially discoverable and
manageable standards for resolving it;
3. The impossibility of deciding without an initial
policy determination of a kind clearly for
nonjudicial discretion;
4. Impossibility of a court’s undertaking
independent resolution without expressing lack
of the respect due coordinate branches of
government;
5. An unusual need for unquestioning
adherence to a political decision already made;
6. Potentiality of embarrassment from
multifarious pronouncements by various
departments on one question.
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

experience [Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No.

C. APPOINTMENTS TO 100113 (1991)].
THE JUDICIARY Note: In the case of judges of the lower courts,
the Congress may prescribe other
qualifications. [Sec. 7(2), Art. VIII]
1. Qualifications of Members of
the Judiciary Disqualification from Other Positions or
Offices
Justices RTC Judge MTC/MCTC
of the SC (Sec. 15, Judge (Sec. Sec. 12, Art. VIII. The Members of the
and the B.P. 129) 26, B.P. 129) Supreme Court and of other courts
Collegiate established by law shall not be designated to
Courts any agency performing quasi-judicial or
Citizenship administrative functions.
Natural-born citizen
The SC and its members should not and
Age cannot be required to exercise any power or to
At least 40 At least 35 At least 30 perform any trust or to assume any duty not
years of years of age years of age pertaining to or connected with the
age administering of judicial functions [Meralco v.
Experience Pasay Transportation Co., G.R. No. L-37838
(1932)].
15 years or Has been Has been
more as a engaged for engaged for 2. Judicial and Bar Council
judge of a at least 10 at least 5
lower court years in the years in the
OR has practice of practice of a. Composition
been law OR has law OR has
engaged in held public held public Ex-officio members [Sec. 8(1), Art. VIII]
the office in the office in the a. Chief Justice as ex-officio Chairman
practice of PH requiring PH requiring b. Secretary of Justice
law in the admission to admission to c. One representative of Congress
PH for the the practice the practice
same of law as an of law as an Regular members [Sec. 8(1), Art. VIII]
period indispensable indispensable a. Representative of the Integrated Bar
requisite requisite b. Professor of law
c. Retired member of the SC
Tenure [Sec. 11, Art. VIII]
d. Representative of private sector
Hold office during good behavior until they
reach the age of 70 OR become Secretary ex-officio [Sec. 8(3), Art. VIII,
incapacitated to discharge their duties Const.]: Clerk of Court of the SC, who shall
Qualifications [Sec. 7(3), Art. VIII] keep a record of its proceedings; not a member
of the JBC.
Person of proven competence, integrity,
probity, and independence In the absence of the Chief Justice because of
his impeachment, the most Senior Justice of
Note: “Practice of law” is not confined to the Supreme Court, who is not an applicant for
litigation. It means any activity in and out of Chief Justice, should participate in the
court, which requires the application of law, deliberations for the selection of nominees for
legal procedure, knowledge, training and the said vacant post and preside over the
proceedings, pursuant to Section 12 of
Page 90 of 116
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Republic Act No. 296, or the Judiciary Act of
1948 [Famela Dulay v. Judicial and Bar
Council, G.R. No. 202143 (2012)].
Appointment, Tenure, Salary of JBC
Members
Ex-officio members: the position in the Council
is good only while the person is the occupant
of the office.
Only ONE representative from Congress:
Former practices of giving ½ vote or 1 full vote
each for the Chairmen of the House and
Senate Committees on Justice is invalid. Any
member of Congress, whether from the upper
or lower house, is constitutionally empowered
to represent the entire Congress.
The framers intended the JBC to be composed
of 7 members only. Intent is for each co-equal
branch of government to have one
representative. There is no dichotomy between
the Senate and HOR when Congress interacts
with other branches. The lone representative
from Congress is entitled to one full vote
[Chavez v. JBC, G.R. No. 202242 (2012)].
Regular Members [Sec. 8(2), Art. VIII]: The
regular members shall be appointed by the
President with the consent of the Commission
on Appointments.
The term of the regular members is 4 years.
But the term of those initially appointed shall be
staggered in the following way so as to create
continuity in the council:
1. IBP representative: 4 years
2. Law professor: 3 years
3. Retired justice: 2 years
4. Private sector: 1 year
b. Powers
Primary Function: Recommend appointees to
the judiciary; may exercise such other
functions and duties as the SC may assign to
it. [Sec. 8(5), Art. VIII]
Note: Judges may not be appointed in any
acting or temporary capacity as this would
undermine the independence of the judiciary.
Page 91 of 116
Supervisory authority of SC over JBC
The supervisory authority of the Court over the
JBC covers the overseeing of compliance with
its rules [Jardeleza v. Judicial and Bar Council,
G.R. No. 213181 (2014)].
Supervisory power, when contrasted with
control, is the power of mere oversight over an
inferior body; it does not include any restraining
authority over such body. [Aguinaldo v. Aquino,
G.R. No. 224302 (2016)].
Procedure of Appointment
The JBC shall submit a list of three (3)
nominees for every vacancy to the President
[Sec. 9, Art. VIII]
↓
Any vacancy in the Supreme Court shall be
filed within ninety (90) days from the
occurrence thereof [Sec. 4(1), Art. VIII]
For lower courts, the President shall issue
the appointment within ninety (90) days from
the submission by the JBC of such list [Sec.
9, Art. VIII]
Note: The prohibition against midnight
appointments does not apply to the judiciary
[See De Castro v. JBC, G.R. No. 191002
(2010)].
D. THE SUPREME COURT
1. Composition
a. Chief Justice and 14 Associate Justices
b. May sit en banc or in divisions of three, five,
or seven members
c. Vacancy shall be filled within 90 days from
the occurrence thereof
d. Strict Composition: There is but one
Supreme Court whose membership
appointments are permanent [Vargas v.
Rilloraza, G.R No. L-1612 (1948)]
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
How many divisions can it have?
2 divisions 7 members
3 divisions 5 members
5 divisions 3 members
En banc
Note: They have full discretion on the number
of divisions. Right now, they sit in 3 Divisions.
En Banc and Division Cases
En banc: Cases decided with the concurrence
of a majority of the Members who actually took
part in the deliberations and voted.
Instances when the SC Sits En Banc
a. Those involving the constitutionality,
application, or operation of:
1. Treaty
2. Orders
3. International or executive agreement
4. Law
5. Presidential decrees
6. Instructions
7. Proclamations
8. Ordinances
9. Other regulations
b. Exercise of the power to discipline judges
of lower courts, or order their dismissal
[Sec. 11, Art. VIII]
c. Discipline of judges can be done by a
division, BUT En Banc decides cases for
dismissal, disbarment, suspension for
more than 1 year, or fine of more than
P10,000 [People v. Gacott, G.R. No.
116049 (1995)]
d. Cases or matters heard by a Division
where the required number of votes to
decide or resolve these is not met [Sec.
4(3), Art. VIII]
e. Modifying or reversing a doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the court in a
decision rendered en banc or in division
[Sec. 4(3), Art. VIII]
f. Actions instituted by citizens to test the
validity of a proclamation of Martial law or
Page 92 of 116
suspension of the privilege of the writ [Sec.
18, Art. VII]
g. When sitting as Presidential Electoral
Tribunal [Sec. 4(7), Art. VII]
h. All other cases which under the Rules of
Court are required to be heard by the SC
en banc. [Sec. 4(2), Art. VIII]
Requirements and Procedures in Divisions
a. Cases decided with the concurrence of a
majority of the Members who actually took
part in the deliberations and voted
b. In no case without the concurrence of at
least three (3) of such Members
c. When a required number is not obtained,
the case shall be decided en banc.
i. Cases v. Matters. Only cases are
referred to En Banc for decision
when required votes are not
obtained.
ii. Cases are of first instance; matters
are those after the first instance,
e.g. MRs and post-decision
motions.
iii. Failure to resolve a motion
because of a tie does not leave the
case undecided. MR is merely lost
[See Fortrich v. Corona, G.R. No.
131457 (1998)].
The SC En Banc is not an appellate court vis-
à-vis its Divisions. The only constraint is that
any doctrine or principle of law laid down by the
Court, either rendered en banc or in division,
may be overturned or reversed only by the
Court sitting en banc [PUP v. Firestone
Ceramics, G.R. No. 143513 (2001)].
There is but one Supreme Court of the
Philippine Islands. It is the jurisdiction of this
Supreme Court, which cannot be diminished.
The Supreme Court remains a unit
notwithstanding it works in divisions. Although
it may have two divisions, it is but a single
court. Actions considered in any one of these
divisions and decisions rendered therein are, in
effect, by the same Tribunal. The two divisions
of this court are not to be considered as two
separate and distinct courts but as divisions of
one and the same court [US v. Limsiongco, G.
R. No. 16217 (1920)].
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
2. Powers and Functions
Procedural Rule-Making
Sec. 5, Art. VIII. The Supreme Court shall
have the following powers: […]
Promulgate rules concerning the protection
and enforcement of constitutional rights,
pleading, practice, and procedure in all
courts, the admission to the practice of law,
the integrated bar, and legal assistance to
the under-privileged.
The 1987 Constitution took away the power of
Congress to repeal, alter, or supplement rules
concerning pleading, practice and procedure.
The power to promulgate rules of pleading,
practice and procedure is no longer shared by
the Court with Congress, more so with the
Executive [Echegar#ay v. Secretary of Justice,
G.R. No. 132601 (1999)].
Limitations
a. Shall provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for speedy disposition of cases
b. Uniform for all courts in the same grade
c. Shall not diminish, increase or modify
substantive rights
Administrative Supervision Over Lower
Courts
Administrative Powers of the Supreme Court
a. Assign temporarily judges of lower courts
to other stations as public interest may
require;
b. Shall not exceed 6 months without the
consent of the judge concerned;
c. Order a change of venue or place of trial to
avoid a miscarriage of justice;
d. Appoint all officials and employees of the
Judiciary in accordance with the Civil
Service Law;
e. Supervision over all courts and the
personnel thereof;
f. Discipline judges of lower courts or order
their dismissal.
Note: The qualifications of judges of lower
courts as stated by the Constitution are
minimum requirements. The JBC may
Page 93 of 116
determine or add more qualifications when
such policies are necessary and incidental to
the function conferred in the Constitution
[Villanueva v. JBC, G.R. No. 211833 (2015)].
Period for Deciding Cases [Sec. 15(1), Art.
VIII]
Supreme Lower Other Lower
Court Collegiate Courts
Courts
24 months 12 months, 3 months,
unless unless
reduced by reduced by
the SC the SC
Notes:
a. Period counted from date of submission.
b. Case deemed submitted upon filing of the
last pleading, brief or memorandum required
by the Rules or the court [Sec. 15(2), Art. VIII].
Upon expiration of the period, the Chief Justice
or presiding judge shall issue a certification
stating why the decision or resolution has not
been rendered within the period [Sec. 15(3),
Art. VIII].
This provision is merely directory and failure to
decide on time would not deprive the
corresponding courts of jurisdiction or render
their decisions invalid [De Roma v. CA, G.R.
No. L-46903 (1987)].
The failure to decide cases within the 90-day
period required by law constitutes a ground for
administrative liability against the defaulting
judge. [People v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 143702
(2001)].
The Sandiganbayan, while of the same level as
the Court of Appeals, functions as a trial court.
Therefore, the period for deciding cases which
applies to the Sandiganbayan is the three (3)
month period, not the twelve (12) month period
[In Re: Problems of Delays in Cases before the
Sandiganbayan, A. M. No. 00-8-05- SC
(2001)].
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Original and Appellate Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and
determine a case [US v. Limsiongco, G. R. No.
16217 (1920)].
Original Jurisdiction [Sec. 5(1), Art. VIII]
a. Cases affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls
b. Petition for certiorari
c. Petition for prohibition
d. Petition for mandamus
e. Petition for quo warranto
f. Petition for habeas corpus
Note: Original jurisdiction also extends to writs
of amparo, habeas data, and the
environmental writ of kalikasan.
The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to
issue writs of certiorari (as well as prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and
injunction) is not exclusive. Its jurisdiction is
concurrent with the CA, and with the RTC in
proper cases [Cruz v. Judge Gingoyon, G.R.
No. 170404 (2011)].
Appellate Jurisdiction [Sec. 5(2), Art. VIII]: on
appeal or certiorari (as the Rules of Court
provide), SC may review, revise, reverse,
modify, or affirm final judgments and orders of
lower courts in:
a. Cases involving the constitutionality or
validity of any treaty, international or
executive agreement, law, presidential
decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance, or regulation, except in
circumstances where the Court believes
that resolving the issue of constitutionality
of a law or regulation at the first instance is
of paramount importance and immediately
affects the social, economic and moral
well-being of the people [Moldex Realty v.
HLURB, G.R. No. 149719 (2007)];
b. Cases involving the legality of any tax,
impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty
imposed in relation thereto;
c. Cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower
court is in issue;
d. Criminal cases where the penalty imposed
is reclusion perpetua or higher;
Page 94 of 116
e. Cases where only a question of law is
involved;
Note: A party who has not appealed from a
decision may not obtain any affirmative relief
from the appellate court other than what he had
obtained from the lower court, if any, whose
decision is brought up on appeal [Daabay v.
Coca-Cola Bottlers, G.R. No. 199890 (2013)].
Doctrine of judicial stability or non-
interference: No court can interfere by
injunction with the judgments or orders of
another court of concurrent jurisdiction having
the power to grant the relief sought by
injunction. The rationale for the rule is founded
on the concept of jurisdiction: a court that
acquires jurisdiction over the case and renders
judgment therein has jurisdiction over its
judgment, to the exclusion of all other
coordinate courts, for its execution and over all
its incidents, and to control, in furtherance of
justice, the conduct of ministerial officers acting
in connection with this judgment [United Alloy
Philippines v. UCPB, G.R. No. 179257 (2015)].
Finality of Judgments: A decision that has
acquired finality becomes immutable and
unalterable and may no longer be modified in
any respect even if the modification is meant to
correct erroneous conclusions of fact or law
and whether it was made by the court that
rendered it or by the highest court of the land
[Genato v. Viola, G.R. No. 169706 (2010)].
Exceptions
a. The correction of clerical errors;
b. Nunc pro tunc entries which cause no
prejudice to any party;
c. Void judgments;
d. Whenever circumstances transpire after
the finality of the decision rendering its
execution unjust and inequitable.
Note: “Finality of Judgment” means that while
the court loses jurisdiction to amend, alter, and
modify the decision, it does not lose its power
over the case with respect to enforcement and
execution. The Court can suspend the
enforcement of a sentence. Presidential
reprieve does not preclude Court control over
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
the enforcement of decisions after finality. This
is in the Court’s exercise of its judicial power
[Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No.
132601 (1999)].
Judicial Privilege: A form of deliberative
process privilege; Court records which are pre-
decisional and deliberative in nature are thus
protected and cannot be the subject of a
subpoena.
A document is pre-decisional if it precedes, in
temporal sequence, the decision to which it
relates.
A material is deliberative on the other hand, if it
reflects the give-and-take of the consultative
process. The key question is whether
disclosure of the information would discourage
candid discussion within the agency.
Judicial Privilege is an exception to the general
rule of transparency as regards access to court
records. Court deliberations are traditionally
considered privileged communication.
SUMMARY OF RULES
The following are privileged documents or
communications, and are not subject to
disclosure:
a. Court actions such as the result of the
raffle of cases and the actions taken by the
Court on each case included in the agenda
of the Court’s session on acts done
material to pending cases, except where a
party litigant requests information on the
result of the raffle of the case, pursuant to
Rule 7, Section 3 of the Internal Rules of
the Supreme Court (IRSC);
b. Court deliberations or the deliberations of
the Members in court sessions on cases
and matters pending before the Court;
c. Court records which are “pre-decisional”
and “deliberative” in nature, in particular,
documents and other communications
which are part of or related to the
deliberative process, i.e., notes, drafts,
research papers, internal discussions,
internal memoranda, records of internal
deliberations, and similar papers.
Page 95 of 116
Additional Rules:
a. Confidential Information secured by
justices, judges, court officials and
employees in the course of their official
functions, mentioned in (2) and (3) above,
is privileged even after their term of office.
b. Records of cases that are still pending for
decision are privileged materials that
cannot be disclosed, except only for
pleadings, orders and resolutions that
have been made available by the court to
the general public.
c. The principle of comity or inter-
departmental courtesy demands that the
highest officials of each department be
exempt from the compulsory processes of
the other departments.
d. These privileges belong to the Supreme
Court as an institution, not to any justice or
judge in his or her individual capacity.
Since the Court is higher than the
individual justices or judges, no sitting or
retired justice or judge, not even the Chief
Justice, may claim.
Requirements for Decisions and
Resolutions
Sec. 13, Art. VIII. The conclusions of the
Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for
decision en banc or in division shall be
reached in consultation before the case is
assigned to a Member for the writing of the
opinion of the Court. A certification to this
effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be
issued and a copy thereof attached to the
record of the case and served upon the
parties. Any Member who took no part, or
dissented, or abstained from a decision or
resolution must state the reason therefor.
The same requirements shall be observed
by all lower collegiate courts.
Sec. 14, Art. VIII. No decision shall be
rendered by any court without expressing
therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the
law on which it is based.
No petition for review or motion for
reconsideration of a decision of the court
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
shall be refused due course or denied
without stating the legal basis therefor.
A "Resolution" is not a "Decision" within the
meaning of Sec. 14 of Art. VIII. This mandate
applies only in cases "submitted for decision,"
i.e., given due course and after the filing of
Briefs or Memoranda and/or other pleadings,
as the case may be. It does not apply to an
Order or Resolution refusing due course to a
Petition for Certiorari [Nunal v. COA, G.R. No.
78648 (1989)].
CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSIONS
1. The Commission on Elections,
2. Commission on Audit, and
3. Civil Service Commission
The grant of a constitutional commission’s
rulemaking power is untouchable by Congress,
absent a constitutional amendment or revision.
The laws that the Commission interprets and
enforces fall within the prerogative of
Congress. As an administrative agency, its
quasi-legislative power is subject to the same
limitations applicable to other administrative
bodies [Trade and Investment Development
Corporation of the Philippines v. Civil Service
Commission, G.R. No. 182249 (2013)].
A. CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS TO
ENSURE INDEPENDENCE OF
COMMISSIONS
1. They are constitutionally created, hence
may not be abolished by statute.
2. Each commission is vested with powers
and functions which cannot be reduced by
statute.
3. Expressly defined in the Constitution as
independent constitutional bodies.
4. The Chairmen and members may not be
removed except by impeachment.
5. Fixed term of office of 7 years.
Page 96 of 116
6. The Chairmen and members may not be
appointed in an acting capacity.
7. The salaries of the Chairmen and members
may not be decreased during their tenure.
8. The Commissions enjoy fiscal autonomy.
9. Each Commission may promulgate its own
procedural rules, provided they do not
diminish, increase or modify substantive
rights (though subject to disapproval by
the Supreme Court).
10. The Commission may appoint their own
officials and employees in accordance
with Civil Service Law.
Promotional Appointment of Commissioner
to Chairman
Sec. 1(2), Article IX-D of the Constitution does
not prohibit a promotional appointment from
commissioner to chairman as long as:
1. The commissioner has not served the
full term of 7 years; and
2. The appointment to any vacancy shall
be only for the unexpired portion of the
term of the predecessor. [Sec. 1(2),
Article IX-D]
3. The promotional appointment must
conform to the rotational plan or the
staggering of terms in the commission
membership [Funa v. Commission on
Audit, G.R. No. 192791 (2012)].
Jurisprudence on Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-D
1. The appointment of members of any of the
three (3) constitutional commissions, after
the expiration of the uneven terms of office
of the first set of commissioners, shall
always be for a fixed term of seven (7)
years; an appointment for a lesser period
is void and unconstitutional. The
appointing authority cannot validly shorten
the full term of seven (7) years in case of
the expiration of the term as this will result
in the distortion of the rotational system
prescribed by the Constitution.
2. Appointments to vacancies resulting from
certain causes (death, resignation,
disability or impeachment) shall only be for
the unexpired portion of the term of the
predecessor; such appointments cannot
be less than the unexpired portion (as it will
disrupt the staggering).
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
3. Members of the Commission who were
appointed for a full term of seven (7) years
and who served the entire period, are
barred from reappointment to any position
in the Commission. The first appointees in
the Commission under the Constitution are
also covered by the prohibition against
reappointment.
4. A commissioner who resigns after serving
in the Commission for less than seven (7)
years is eligible for an appointment as
Chairman for the unexpired portion of the
term of the departing chairman. Such
appointment is not covered by the ban on
reappointment, provided that the
aggregate period of the length of service
will not exceed seven (7) years and
provided further that the vacancy in the
position of Chairman resulted from death,
resignation, disability or removal by
impeachment. This is not a reappointment,
but effectively a new appointment
(considered a promotion).
5. Any member of the Commission cannot be
appointed or designated in a temporary or
acting capacity [Funa v. Commission on
Audit, G.R. No. 192791 (2012)].
Term of Office of each Commission Member
The terms of the first Chairman and
Commissioners of the Constitutional
Commissions under the 1987 Constitution
must start on a common date, irrespective of
the variations in the dates of appointments and
qualifications of the appointees, in order that
the expiration of the first terms of seven (7), five
(5), and three (3) years should lead to the
regular recurrence of the two (2) year interval
between the expiration of the terms. This
common appropriate starting point must be on
February 2, 1987, the date of the adoption of
the 1987 Constitution [Gaminde v. Commission
on Audit, G. R. No. 140335 (2000)].
Term – the time during which the officer may
claim to hold office as of right, and fixes the
interval after which the several incumbents
shall succeed one another.
Tenure – term during which the incumbent
actually holds the office. The term of office is
Page 97 of 116
not affected by the hold-over. The tenure may
be shorter than the term for reasons within or
beyond the power of the incumbent.
B. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS;
COMPOSITION AND
QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Sec. 3, Art. IX-B. The Civil Service
Commission, as the central personnel
agency of the Government, shall establish a
career service and adopt measures to
promote morale, efficiency, integrity,
responsiveness, progressiveness, and
courtesy in the civil service. It shall
strengthen the merit and rewards system,
integrate all human resources development
programs for all levels and ranks, and
institutionalize a management climate
conducive to public accountability. It shall
submit to the President and the Congress an
annual report on its personnel programs.
Functions
a. In the exercise of its powers to implement
R.A. No. 6850, the CSC enjoys a wide
latitude of discretion, and may not be
compelled by mandamus [Torregoza v.
Civil Service Commission, G.R. No.
101526 (1992)].
b. Under the Administrative Code of 1987,
the Civil Service Commission has the
power to hear and decide administrative
cases instituted before it directly or on
appeal, including contested appointments.
c. The Commission has original jurisdiction
to hear and decide a complaint for
cheating in the Civil Service examinations
committed by government employees
[Cruz v. CSC, G.R. No. 144464 (2001)].
d. It is the intent of the Civil Service Law, in
requiring the establishment of a grievance
procedure, that decisions of lower level
officials (in cases involving personnel
actions) be appealed to the agency head,
then to the Civil Service Commission
[Olanda v. Bugayong, G.R. No. 140917
(2003)].
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
As the central personnel agency of the
government, the CSC has broad authority to
pass upon all civil service matters. The
mandate of the CSC should therefore be read
as the comprehensive authority to perform all
functions necessary to ensure the efficient
administration of the entire civil service,
including the Central Executive Service (CES).
[Career Executive Service Board v. Civil
Service Commission, G.R. No. 197762 (2017)].
Scope of the Civil Service
Embraces all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies of the
Government, including GOCCs with original
charters [Sec. 2(1), Art. IX-B, Constitution].
The Civil Service does not include government-
owned or controlled corporations which are
organized as subsidiaries of government-
owned or controlled corporations under the
general corporation law [National Service
Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No. L-69870 (1988)].
Composition
A Chairman and two (2) Commissioners
Qualifications: [Sec. 1(1), Art. IX-B]
a. Natural-born citizens of the Philippines;
b. At the time of their appointment, at least 35
years of age;
c. With proven capacity for public
administration; and
d. Must not have been candidates for any
elective position in the election
immediately preceding their appointment.
Term of office
Seven (7) years (except those first appointed)
Classes of Service: [CSC v. Sojor, G.R. No.
168766 (2008)]
a. Career Service: Characterized by entrance
(a) based on merit and fitness to be
determined, as far as practicable, by
competitive examinations, OR (b) based
on highly technical qualifications; with
opportunity for advancement to higher
career positions and security of tenure.
Page 98 of 116
1. Open career positions: Where prior
qualification in an appropriate
examination is required.
2. Closed career positions: e.g. scientific
or highly technical in nature;
3. Career Executive Service: e.g.
undersecretaries, bureau directors
4. Career Officers: Other than those
belonging to the Career Executive
Service who are appointed by the
President, e.g. those in the foreign
service
5. Positions in the AFP, although
governed by a different merit system
6. Personnel of GOCCs with original
charters
7. Permanent laborers, whether skilled,
semiskilled or unskilled
b. Non-career Service: Characterized by
entrance on bases other than those of the
usual tests utilized for the career service;
tenure limited to a period specified by law,
or which is co-terminus with that of the
appointing authority or subject to his
pleasure, or which is limited to the duration
1. Elective officials, and their personal
and confidential staff;
2. Department heads and officials of
Cabinet rank who hold office at the
pleasure of the President, and their
personal and confidential staff;
3. Chairmen and members of
commissions and bureaus with fixed
terms;
4. Contractual personnel;
5. Emergency and seasonal personnel.
Note: Except as otherwise provided by the
Constitution or by law, the Civil Service
Commission shall have the final authority to
pass upon the removal, separation and
suspension of all officers and employees in the
civil service and upon all matters relating to the
conduct, discipline and efficiency of such
officers and employees [CSC v. Sojor, supra].
Appointments in the Civil Service
The role of the CSC in the appointing process
is limited to the determination of qualifications
of the candidates for appointments and plays
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
no role in the choice of the person to be
appointed [BERNAS at 1052]
General Rule: Made only according to merit
and fitness to be determined, as far as
practicable, by competitive examination
Exceptions
a. Policy determining: Where the officer lays
down principal or fundamental guidelines
or rules; or formulates a method of action
for government or any of its subdivisions;
e.g. department head.
b. Primarily confidential: Denoting not only
confidence in the aptitude of the appointee
for the duties of the office but primarily
close intimacy which ensures freedom of
intercourse without embarrassment or
freedom from misgivings or betrayals on
confidential matters of state [De los Santos
v. Mallare, G.R. No. L-3881 (1950)]; OR one
declared to be so by the President of the
Philippines upon the recommendation of
the CSC, subject to judicial review [Salazar
v. Mathay, G.R. No. L-44061 (1976)].
c. Highly technical: Requires possession of
technical skill or training in supreme
degree [De los Santos v. Mallare, supra].
Disqualifications [Art. IX-B]:
1. No candidate who has lost in any election
shall within one (1) year after such election,
be appointed to any office in the
Government or any GOCC or in any of its
subsidiaries. [Sec. 6]
2. No elective official shall be eligible for
appointment or designation in any
capacity to any public office or position
during his tenure. [Sec. 7[1]]
3. Unless otherwise allowed by law OR by the
primary functions of his position, no
appointive official shall hold any other
office or employment in the Government or
any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof including GOCCs or their
subsidiaries. [Sec. 7(2)]
4. No officer or employee in the civil service
shall engage directly or indirectly, in any
electioneering or partisan political activity.
[Sec. 2(4)]
Page 99 of 116
Removal or Suspension only for Cause
No officer or employee of the civil service shall
be removed or suspended except for cause
provided by law. [Sec. 2 (2)]
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
Powers and functions
a. Enforce all laws relating to the conduct of
election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum
and recall
Initiative: The power of the people to
propose amendments to the Constitution or
to propose and enact legislation through an
election called for that purpose. There are
3 systems of initiative: Initiative on the
Constitution, initiative on statutes, and
initiative on local legislation [Sec. 3(a), R.A.
6735].
Referendum: The power of the electorate
to approve or reject legislation through an
election called for that purpose. There are
2 classes: referendum on statutes or
referendum on local laws [Sec. 3(c), R.A.
6735].
Recall: The termination of official
relationship of a local elective official for
loss of confidence prior to the expiration of
his term through the will of the electorate.
Plebiscite: The submission of constitutional
amendments or important legislative
measures to the people for ratification.
b. Recommend to the Congress effective
measures to minimize election spending,
and to prevent and penalize all forms of
election frauds, offenses, malpractices,
and nuisance candidacies
c. Submit to the President and the Congress,
a comprehensive report on the conduct of
each election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum, or recall
d. Decide administrative questions pertaining
to election except the right to vote (the
jurisdiction of which is with the judiciary)
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Power to declare failure of election: The
COMELEC may exercise such power motu
proprio or upon a verified petition, and the
hearing of the case shall be summary in
nature [Sison v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
134096 (1998)].
e. File petitions in court for inclusion or
exclusion of voters
f. Investigate and prosecute cases of
violations of election laws
Note: RA 9369 (Sec. 43) of the Automated
Election System Law of January, 2007
grants to the Department of Justice
concurrent jurisdiction to investigate and
prosecute violations of election law.
However, the COMELEC may validly
delegate this power to the Provincial Fiscal
[People v. Judge Basilia, G.R. No. 83938-
40 (1989)].
g. Recommend pardon, amnesty, parole or
suspension of sentence of election law
violators
h. Deputize law enforcement agencies and
instrumentalities of the Government for the
exclusive purpose of ensuring free,
orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible
elections
i. Recommend to the President the removal
of any officer or employee it has deputized
for violation or disregard of, or
disobedience to its directive
j. Registration of political parties,
organizations and coalitions and
accreditation of citizens’ arms
k. Regulation of public utilities and media of
information
While respondent COMELEC cited the
Constitution, laws and jurisprudence to
support their position that they had the
power to regulate the tarpaulin, however,
all these provisions pertain to candidates
and political parties. xxx COMELEC does
not have the authority to regulate the
enjoyment of the preferred right to freedom
of expression exercised by a non-
candidate. Regulation of election
paraphernalia will still be constitutionally
Page 100 of 116
valid if it reaches into speech of persons
who are not candidates or who do not
speak as members of a political party if
they are not candidates, only if what is
regulated is declarative speech that, taken
as a whole, has for its principal object the
endorsement of a candidate only.
The regulation (a) should be provided by
law, (b) reasonable, (c) narrowly tailored to
meet the objective of enhancing the
opportunity of all candidates to be heard
and considering the primacy of the
guarantee of free expression, and (d)
demonstrably the least restrictive means to
achieve that object. The regulation must
only be with respect to the time, place and
manner of the rendition of the message. In
no situation may the speech be prohibited
or censored on the basis of its content.
[The Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC, GR
No. 205728, January 21, 2015].
Note: This power may be exercised only
over the media, not over practitioners of
media. Thus, a COMELEC resolution
prohibiting radio and TV commentators and
newspaper columnists from commenting
on the issues involved in the forthcoming
plebiscite for the ratification of the organic
law establishing the CAR was held invalid
[Sanidad v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-44640
(1976)].
l. Decide election cases
The Commission on Elections may sit en
banc or in two divisions and shall
promulgate its rules of procedure in order
to expedite disposition of election cases.
[Sec. 3, Art. IX-C].
Cases which must be heard by division
a. All election cases, including pre-
proclamation contests originally
cognizable by the Commission in the
exercise of its powers under Sec. 2(2), Art
IX-C.
Pre-proclamation contests or controversies
are election cases which are instituted prior
to the proclamation of the winning
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
candidate. They are deemed to be still in
the administrative stage.
It includes the questions of:
1. The legality of the composition of
the Board of Canvassers, and
2. Questions of fraudulent election
returns.
a. An election contest, on the
other hand, only occurs
after the proclamation of a
winner. Only after a winner
has been proclaimed can
there be an actual
"contest", with a contestant
who seeks not only to oust
the intruder but also to
have himself installed into
office.
b. Jurisdiction over a petition
to cancel a certificate of
candidacy.
c. Even cases appealed from
the RTC or MTC have to be
heard and decided in
division before they may be
heard en banc.
If the COMELEC exercises its quasi-judicial
functions then the case must be heard through
a division. Upon motion for reconsideration of
a decision, the case is heard en banc [Manzala
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176211 (2007)].
If the COMELEC exercises its administrative
functions then it must act en banc [Bautista v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 15496-97 (2003)].
A motion for reconsideration of a decision or
resolution of the Comelec En Banc or of a
division may be granted upon vote of a majority
of the members of the en banc or of a division,
as the case may be, who actually took part in
the deliberation of the motion. If the voting
results in a tie, the motion, the motion for
reconsideration is deemed denied. [Legaspi v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 21657 (2016)].
Page 101 of 116
Composition
A Chairman and six (6) Commissioners.
Qualifications
a. Must be natural-born citizens;
b. At least 35 years of age;
c. Holders of a college degree;
d. Have not been candidates in the
immediately preceding election;
e. Majority, including the Chairman, must be
members of the Philippine Bar who have
been engaged in the practice of law for at
least ten (10) years. [Sec. 1, Art. IX-C,
Constitution]
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
Powers and Functions
Examine, audit, and settle accounts pertaining
to government funds or property: its revenue,
receipts, expenditures, and uses
Post-audit basis:
● Constitutional bodies, commissions, and
offices;
● Autonomous state colleges and
universities;
● GOCCs with no original charters and their
subsidiaries;
● Non-governmental entities receiving
subsidy or equity, directly or indirectly, from
or through the Government, which are
required by law or the granting institution to
submit such an audit as a condition of
subsidy or equity.
Complementing the constitutional power of the
COA to audit accounts of “non–governmental
entities receiving subsidy or equity, directly or
indirectly, from or through the government” is
Section 11(1), Book V of the Administrative
Code, which authorizes the COA to audit
accounts of non–governmental entities
“required to pay xxx or have government
share” but only with respect to “funds xxx
coming from or through the government.”
COA does not have the exclusive power to
examine and audit government agencies. The
framers of the Constitution were fully aware of
the need to allow independent private audit of
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
certain government agencies in addition to the
COA audit [DBP v. COA, G.R. No. 88435
(2002)].
The COA has the exclusive authority to
• Define the scope of its audit and
examination;
• Establish techniques and methods
required;
• Promulgate accounting and auditing rules
and regulations.
This includes giving the COA Assistant
Commissioner and General Counsel the
authority to deputize a special audit team [The
Special Audit Team, Commission on Audit v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174788 (2013)].
Note: No law shall be passed exempting any
entity of the Government or its subsidiaries in
any guise whatever, or any investment of
public funds, from the jurisdiction of the
Commission on Audit [Sec. 3, Art. IX-D,
Constitution].
Congress cannot exempt 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
[Petitioner Corporations v. Executive
Secretary, G.R. Nos. 147036-37 & 147811
(2012)].
Composition
A Chairman and two (2) Commissioners
Qualifications
a. Natural born Filipino citizens
b. At least thirty-five (35) years of age
c. CPAs with not less than ten (10) years of
auditing experience OR members of the
Philippine bar with at least ten (10) years
practice of law
Note: At no time shall all members belong to
the same profession.
Page 102 of 116
C. PROHIBITED OFFICES
AND INTERESTS
No member of the Constitutional Commissions
shall, during their tenure:
1. Hold any other office or employment. This
is similar to the prohibition against
executive officers. It applies to both public
and private offices and employment;
2. Engage in the practice of any profession;
3. Engage in the active management or
control of any business which in any way
may be affected by the functions of his
office; or
4. Be financially interested, directly or
indirectly, in any contract with, or in any
franchise or privilege granted by, the
Government, its subdivisions, agencies or
instrumentalities, including GOCCs or their
subsidiaries [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A].
The CSC Chairman cannot be a member of a
government entity that is under the control of
the President without impairing the
independence vested in the CSC by the 1987
Constitution [Funa v. Civil Service
Commission, G.R. No. 191672 (2014)].
D. JURISDICTION
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
The CSC has been granted by the Constitution
and the Administrative Code jurisdiction over
all civil service positions in the government
service, whether career or non-career. [Civil
Service Commission v. Sojor, G.R. No. 168766
(2008)]; see CSC Resolution No. 991936
detailing the disciplinary and non-disciplinary
jurisdiction].
The Board of Regents (BOR) of a state
university has the sole power of administration
over the university. But xxx there is no showing
that such power is exclusive. The CSC has
concurrent jurisdiction over a president of a
state university [CSC v. Sojor, supra].
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Appellate Jurisdiction
The appellate power of the CSC will only apply
when the subject of the administrative cases
filed against erring employees is in connection
with the duties and functions of their office, and
not in cases where the acts of the complainant
arose from cheating in the civil service
examinations [Cruz v. CSC, G.R. No. 144464,
(2001)].
In administrative disciplinary cases decided by
the COA, the proper remedy in case of an
adverse decision is an appeal to the Civil
Service Commission and not a petition for
certiorari before SC under Rule 64 [Galindo v.
Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 210788
(2017)].
The Philippine National Red Cross, although
not a GOCC, is sui generis in character. The
sui generis character of PNRC requires the
court to approach controversies involving the
PNRC on a case-to-case basis. Since the issue
involves the enforcement of labor laws and
penal statutes, PNRC can be treated as a
GOCC. Thus, the CSC has jurisdiction.
Moreover, the CSC has appellate jurisdiction
on administrative disciplinary cases involving
the imposition of a penalty of suspension of
more than 30 days or fine in an amount
exceeding 30 days’ salary [Torres v. De Leon,
G.R. No. 199440 (2016)].
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
The Constitution vested upon the COMELEC
judicial powers to decide all contests relating to
elective local officials as therein provided
[Garcia v. De Jesus, G.R. No. 97108-09
(1992)].
Exclusive Jurisdiction
All contests relating to the elections, returns
and qualifications of all elective regional,
provincial, and city officials.
Jurisdiction over intra-party disputes
The COMELEC’s powers and functions under
the Constitution, "include the ascertainment of
the identity of the political party and its
legitimate officers responsible for its acts." The
power to register political parties necessarily
Page 103 of 116
involves the determination of the persons who
must act on its behalf. Thus, the COMELEC
may resolve an intra-party leadership dispute,
in a proper case brought before it, as an
incident of its power to register political parties
[Lokin v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 193808 (2012)].
Appellate Jurisdiction
All contests involving elected municipal officials
decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction or
involving elective barangay officials decided by
a court of limited jurisdiction [Garcia v. De
Jesus, supra].
Jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari
Interpreting the phrase "in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction,” if a case may be appealed to a
particular court or judicial tribunal or body, then
said court or judicial tribunal or body has
jurisdiction to issue the extraordinary writ of
certiorari, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction
[Bulilis v. Nuez, G.R. No. 195953 (2011)].
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
LGUs, though granted local fiscal autonomy,
are still within the audit jurisdiction of the COA
[Veloso v. COA, G.R. No. 193677 (2011)].
The Boy Scouts of the Philippines (BSP) is a
public corporation and its funds are subject to
the COA’s audit jurisdiction [Boy Scouts of the
Philippines v. COA, G.R. No. 177131 (2011)].
The Constitution formally embodies the long-
established rule that private entities who
handle government funds or subsidies in trust
may be examined or audited in their handling
of said funds by government auditors [Blue Bar
Coconut Philippines, Inc. v. Tantuico, G.R. No.
L-47051 (1988)].
Primary jurisdiction over money claims
Limited to liquidated claims: The COA has
primary jurisdiction to pass upon a private
entity’s money claims against a provincial
gov’t. However, the scope of the COA’s
authority to take cognizance of claims is
circumscribed by cases holding statutes of
similar import to mean only liquidated claims,
or those determined or readily determinable
from vouchers, invoices, and such other
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
papers within reach of accounting officers.
[Euro-Med Laboratories, Phil. Inc. v. Province
of Batangas, G.R. No. 148106 (2006)]
No jurisdiction over their validity or
constitutionality: The jurisdiction of the COA
over money claims against the government
does not include the power to rule on the
constitutionality or validity.
E. REVIEW OF FINAL ORDERS,
RESOLUTIONS, AND
DECISIONS
Rendered in Exercise of Quasi-Judicial
Functions
Decisions
Each Commission shall decide by a majority
vote of all its members (NOT only those who
participated in the deliberations) any case or
matter brought before it within 60 days from the
date of its submission for decision or resolution
[Sec. 7, Art. IX-A].
Any decision, order or ruling of each
Commission may be brought to the SC on
certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty
(30) days from receipt of the copy thereof.
In resolving cases brought before it on appeal,
respondent COA is not required to limit its
review only to the grounds relied upon by a
government agency’s auditor with respect to
disallowing certain disbursements of public
funds. Such would render COA’s vital
constitutional power unduly limited and thereby
useless and ineffective [Yap v. COA, G.R. No
158562 (2010)].
Certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
Limited to decisions rendered in actions or
proceedings taken cognizance of by the
Commissions in the exercise of their quasi-
judicial powers.
The Court exercises extraordinary jurisdiction,
thus, the proceeding is limited only to issues
involving grave abuse of discretion resulting in
lack or excess of jurisdiction, and does not
ordinarily empower the Court to review the
Page 104 of 116
factual findings of the Commission [Aratuc v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. L-49705-09 (1999)].
Synthesis on the Rules of Modes of Review
1. Decisions, order or ruling of the
Commissions in the exercise of their quasi-
judicial functions may be reviewed by the
Supreme Court.
2. The mode of review is a petition for
certiorari under Rule 64 (not Rule 65).
3. Exception: The Rules of Civil Procedure,
however, provides for a different legal route
in the case of the Civil Service
Commission. In the case of CSC, Rule 43
will be applied, and the case will be brought
to the Court of Appeals.
Rendered in the Exercise of Administrative
Functions
Sec. 4, Art. IX-A. The Constitutional
Commissions shall appoint its own officials in
accordance with law.
Sec. 6, Art. IX-A. Each Commission en banc
may promulgate its own rules concerning
pleadings and practice before it or before
any of its offices. Such rules however shall
not diminish, increase, or modify substantive
rights
Sec. 8, Art. IX-A. Each Commission shall
perform such other functions as may be
provided by law.
Note: Parts IX.-XIII. of the bar syllabus are
contained in succeeding parts of the reviewer.
NATIONAL ECONOMY AND
PATRIMONY
Goals [Sec. 1, Art. XII]
1. More equitable distribution of opportunities,
income and wealth;
2. Sustained increase in amount of goods and
services produced by the nation for the
benefit of the people; and
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

3. Expanding production as the key to raising Rules on Educational

the quality of life for all, especially the
agricultural Institutions
underprivileged.
lands [Sec. [Sec. 4(2),
3, Art. XII] Art. XIV]
Regalian Doctrine (1) Citizens Congress
Sec. 2, Art. XII. All lands of the public may lease may
domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, only < 500 increase
and other mineral oils, all forces of potential ha. (2) Filipino
energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, Citizens may equity
flora and fauna, and other natural resources acquire by participation.
are owned by the State. With the exception purchase,
of agricultural lands, all other natural homestead
resources shall not be alienated. [...] or grant only
< 12 ha.
Nationality and Citizenship Requirement Practice of Areas of
Provisions professions, Investment
Filipino Filipino Filipino save in as Congress
Citizens, or Citizens, or Citizens, or cases may
100% 60-40 70-30 provided by prescribe
Filipino Filipino Filipino law [Sec. (Congress
Corporation Corporation Corporation 14(2), Art. may
s s s XII] prescribe a
higher
Use and Co- Engagement percentage)
enjoyment of production, in advertising [Sec. 10, Art.
marine Joint Industry XII]
wealth, venture, and [Sec. 11, Art.
exclusive to Production XVI] Small-scale Operation of
Filipino sharing utilization of public
citizens [Sec. agreements natural utilities [Sec.
2, par. 2, Art. over natural resources, 11, Art. XII]
XII] resources as may be
[Sec. 2(1), provided by Cannot be
Art. XII] law [Sec. for longer
Agreements 2(3), Art. XII] period than
shall not 50 years
exceed a
period of 25 Executive
years and
renewable managing
for another officers must
25 years be Filipino

Note: The Constitution holds that private

corporations or associations may not hold
alienable lands of the public domain except by
lease, for a period not exceeding 25 years,
renewable for not more than 25 years, and not
to exceed 1000 ha. in area, [Sec. 3, Art. XII] but

Page 105 of 116

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
the Constitution does not specify the capital
requirements for such corporations.
A joint venture falls within the purview of an
“association” pursuant to Sec. 11, Art. XII and
must comply with the 60-40% Filipino foreign
capitalization requirement [JG Summit
Holdings v. CA, G.R. No. 124293 (2000)].
What “capital” is covered – The 60%
requirement applies to both the voting control
and the beneficial ownership of the public
utility. Therefore, it shall apply uniformly,
separately, and across the board to all classes
of shares, regardless of nomenclature or
category, comprising the capital of the
corporation (e.g. 60% of common stock, 60%
of preferred voting stock, and 60% of preferred
non-voting stock) [Gamboa v. Teves, G.R. No.
176579 (2012)].
Two tests are employed to determine whether
the Nationality Requirement was met:
1. Control Test - Filipinos must own at least
60% of the corporation’s capital. This test
is generally used, however when there is
doubt as to the “beneficial ownership” and
“control” of the corporation, it must be
subject to the grandfather test.
2. Grandfather Test - Where percentage of
Filipino equity in a corporation is computed
by attributing the nationality of the second
or even subsequent tier of ownership to
determine the nationality of the corporate
shareholder [Narra Nickel Mining Dev’t
Corp. v. Redmont Consolidated Mines
Corp., G.R. No. 195580 (2015)].
Note: If the Filipino has the voting power of the
"specific stock", or the Filipino has the
investment power over the "specific stock", or
both, then such Filipino is the "beneficial
owner" of that "specific stock." Being
considered Filipino, that "specific stock" is then
to be counted as part of the 60% Filipino
ownership requirement under the Constitution.
The right to the dividends, jus fruendi - a right
emanating from ownership of that "specific
stock" necessarily accrues to its Filipino
"beneficial owner" [Roy III v. Herbosa, G.R. No.
207246 (2016)].
Page 106 of 116
Filipino First
Sec. 10, Art. XII. In the grant of rights,
privileges, and concessions covering the
national economy and patrimony, the State
shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.
The State shall regulate and exercise
authority over foreign investments within its
national jurisdiction and in accordance with
its national goals and priorities.
Such provision is per se enforceable and
requires no further guidelines or implementing
rules or laws for its operation [Manila Prince
Hotel v. GSIS, G.R. No. 122156 (1997)].
The Constitution does not impose a policy of
Filipino monopoly of the economic
environment. It does not rule out the entry of
foreign investments, goods, and services.
While it does not encourage their unlimited
entry into the country, it does not prohibit them
either. In fact, it allows an exchange on the
basis of equality and reciprocity, frowning only
on foreign competition that is unfair. [Tañada v.
Angara, G.R. No. 118295 (1997)].
Sec. 12, Art. XII. The State shall promote the
preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic
materials and locally produced goods, and
adopt measures that help make them
competitive.
A. EXPLORATION AND
DEVELOPMENT, AND
UTILIZATION OF NATURAL
RESOURCES
The State, being the owner of the natural
resources, is accorded the primary power and
responsibility in the exploration, development
and utilization thereof. As such it may
undertake these activities through four modes:
1. The State may directly undertake such
activities;
2. The State may enter into co-production,
joint venture or production-sharing
agreements with Filipino citizens or
qualified corporations;
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

3. Congress may, by law, allow small-scale FTAA (1987 Service Contract

utilization of natural resources by Filipino
Constitution) (1973 Constitution)
citizens; or
4. For the large-scale exploration, Parties
development and utilization of minerals,
petroleum and other mineral oils, the
President may enter into agreements with Only the President A Filipino citizen,
(in behalf of the corporation or
foreign-owned corporations involving
State), and only with association with a
technical or financial assistance subject to
corporations “foreign person or
the following limitations:
entity”
a. As to Parties. Only the President, in
behalf of the State, may enter into Size of Activities
these agreements, and only with
corporations.
b. As to Size of the Activities. Only Only large-scale Contractor provides
large-scale exploration, exploration, all necessary
development and utilization is development and services and
allowed, i.e., very capital-intensive utilization technology and the
activities. requisite financing,
performs the
c. The natural resources subject of
exploration work
the activities is restricted to
obligations, and
minerals, petroleum and other
assumes all
mineral oils, the intent being to limit
exploration risks
service contracts to those areas
where Filipino capital may not be Natural Resources Covered
sufficient.
d. Consistency with the Provisions of
Statute. The FTAA must be in Minerals, petroleum Virtually the entire
accordance with the terms and and other mineral range of the
conditions provided by law. oils country’s natural
resources
e. The FTAA must be based on real
contributions to economic growth
Scope of Agreements
and general welfare of the country.
f. The FTAA must contain
rudimentary stipulations for the Involving either Contractor provides
promotions of the development and financial or technical financial or technical
assistance resources,
use of local scientific and technical
undertakes the
resources.
exploitation or
g. Notification Requirement. The production of a given
President shall notify Congress of resource, or directly
every FTAA entered into within 30 manages the
days from its execution. productive enterprise,
h. Scope of the FTAA. Only for operations of the
agreements involving either exploration and
financial or technical assistance exploitation of the
and does not include “service resources or the
contracts” and “management or disposition of
other forms of assistance” [La marketing or
Bugal-B’Laan Tribal Assn. v. resources
Ramos, G.R. No. 127882 (2004)].

Page 107 of 116

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

Service Contracts Not Prohibited

The following are valid:
B. FRANCHISES, AUTHORITY, AND
CERTIFICATES FOR PUBLIC
1. Financial and Technical Assistance
UTILITIES
Agreements (FTAA): even supposing they
are service contracts, these are not
No franchise, certificate, or any other form of
prohibited agreements in the
authorization for the operation of a public utility
contemplation of the Constitution
shall be granted except to citizens of the
2. Philippine Mining Law (RA 7942)
Philippines or to corporations or
3. Its Implementing Rules and Regulations,
associations organized under the laws of
insofar as they relate to financial and
the Philippines at least 60% of whose
technical agreements
capital is owned by such citizens, nor shall
such franchise, certificate, or authorization be
The Constitution should be construed to grant
exclusive in character or for a longer period
the President and Congress sufficient
than fifty years [xxx] [Sec. 11, Art. XII].
discretion and reasonable leeway to enable
them to attract foreign investments and
Nature of a Franchise
expertise, as well as to secure for our people
1. It is a privilege not a right
and our posterity the blessings of prosperity
2. Shall NOT be exclusive;
and peace.
3. Shall NOT be for a period of more than 50
years;
It is not unconstitutional to allow a wide degree
4. Shall be subject to amendment, alteration
of discretion to the Chief Executive, given the
or repeal by Congress [Id.].
nature and complexity of such agreements, the
humongous amounts of capital and financing
Congress does not have the exclusive power
required for large-scale mining operations, the
to issue franchises. Administrative bodies (i.e.
complicated technology needed, and the
LTFRB, Energy Regulatory Board) may be
intricacies of international trade, coupled with
empowered by law to do so. [Albano v. Reyes,
the State’s need to maintain flexibility in its
G.R. No. 83551 (1989)].
dealings, in order to preserve and enhance our
country’s competitiveness in world markets [La
What constitutes a public utility is not the
Bugal-B’laan Tribal Assn. v. Ramos, supra].
ownership but the use to the public. The
Constitution requires a franchise for the
Requisites for a valid service contract operation of public utilities. However, it does
under the Constitution
not require a franchise before one can own the
1. A general law that will set standards or
facilities needed to operate a public utility so
uniform terms, conditions, and
long as it does not operate them to serve the
requirements
public [Tatad v. Garcia, G.R. No. 114222
2. The president shall be the signatory for the
(1995)], e.g. X Company may own an airline
government
without the need of a franchise. But in
3. Within thirty (30) days of the executed operating an air transport business, franchise
agreement, the President shall report it to is required.
Congress
A franchise partakes the nature of a grant
which is beyond the purview of the non-
impairment clause of the Constitution. Under
Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution,
PAGCOR’s franchise is subject to amendment,
alteration or repeal by Congress [PAGCOR v
BIR, G.R. No. 172087 (2011)].

Page 108 of 116

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

Exceptions
C. ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP, AND 1. Hereditary succession [Sec. 7, Art. XII]
TRANSFER OF PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE LANDS 2. A natural-born citizen of the Philippines who
has lost his Philippine citizenship may be a
transferee of private lands, subject to
Lands of the Public Domain are classified into:
limitations provided by law. [Sec. 8, Art. XII]
1. Agricultural Lands
2. Forest or Timber Lands
3. Mineral Lands
The primary purpose of the constitutional
4. National Park [Sec. 3, Art. XII]
prohibition disqualifying aliens from acquiring
lands of the public domain and private lands is
Note: The classification of public lands is a
the conservation of the national economy and
function of the executive branch, specifically
patrimony. [Muller v. Muller, G.R. 149615
the Director of the Land Management Bureau
(2006)].
(formerly Director of Lands). The decision of
the Director, when approved by the Secretary
Consequence of sale to non-citizens: Any sale
of the DENR, as to questions of fact, is
or transfer in violation of the prohibition is null
conclusive upon the courts [Republic v.
Imperial, G.R. No. 130906, (1999)]. and void [Ong Ching Po v. CA, G.R. No.
113472-73 (1994)]. When a disqualified
Alienable lands of the public domain shall be foreigner later sells it to a qualified owner (e.g.
Filipino citizen), the defect is cured. The
limited to agricultural lands [Sec. 3, Art. XII].
qualified buyer owns the land [See Godinez v.
Pak Luen, G.R. No L-36731 (1983)].
To prove that the land subject of an application
for registration is alienable, an applicant must
Can a former owner file an action to recover the
conclusively establish the existence of a
property? Yes. The Court in Philippine Banking
positive act of the government such as a
Corp. v. Lui She [G.R. No. L-17587 (1967)]
presidential proclamation or an executive order
provided an exception to the application of the
or a legislative act or statute [Republic v.
principle of in pari delicto. Thus, the action will
Candymaker, Inc., G.R. No. 163766 (2006)].
lie.
Foreshore land is that part of the land which is
However, land sold to an alien which was later
between the high and low water, and left dry by
transferred to a Filipino citizen OR when the
the flux and reflux of the tides. It is part of the
alien later becomes a Filipino citizen can no
alienable land of the public domain and may be
longer be recovered by the vendor, because
disposed of only by lease and not otherwise
there is no longer any public policy involved
[Republic v. Imperial, supra].
[Sarsosa vda. de Barsobia v. Cuenco, G.R. No.
L-33048 (1982); Republic v. IAC, G.R. No.
Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more
74170 (1989].
than 500 ha. or acquire not more than 12
hectares thereof by purchase, homestead, or
Foreigners are allowed to own condominium
grant [Sec. 3, Art. XII].
units and shares in condominium corporations
up to not more than 40% of the total and
Private Lands
outstanding capital stock of a Filipino-owned or
General Rule: No private lands shall be
controlled corporation. Under this set up, the
transferred or conveyed except to individuals,
ownership of the land is legally separated from
corporations, or associations qualified to
the unit itself. The land is owned by a
acquire or hold lands of the public domain [Sec.
Condominium Corporation and the unit owner
7, Art. XII].
is simply a member in this Condominium
Corporation. As long as 60% of the members
of this Condominium Corporation are Filipinos,
Page 109 of 116
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
the remaining members can be foreigners
[Hulst v. PR Builders, G.R. No. 156364 (2008)].
In Matthews v. Taylor, the Court upheld the
validity of an Agreement of Lease of a parcel of
land entered into by a Filipino wife without the
consent of her British husband. Being an alien,
the husband is absolutely prohibited from
acquiring private and public lands in the
Philippines even if he claims that he provided
funds for such acquisition. [G.R. No. 164584
(2009)].
D. PRACTICE OF
PROFESSIONS
Sec. 14, Art. XII. The practice of all
professions in the Philippines shall be limited
to Filipino citizens, save in the case
prescribed by law.
Like the legal profession, the practice of
medicine is not a right but a privilege burdened
with conditions as it directly involves the very
lives of the people. A fortiori, this power
includes the power of Congress to prescribe
the qualifications for the practice of professions
or trades which affect the public welfare, the
public health, the public morals, and the public
safety; and to regulate or control such
professions or trades, even to the point of
revoking such right altogether [Imbong v.
Ochoa, supra].
The Philippines allows Japanese nationals to
practice the medical profession, provided he
has taken and passed the medical board
examination and upon submission of a proof of
reciprocity between Japan and the Philippines
in admitting foreigners into the practice of
medicine. It is enough that the laws in the
foreign country permit a Filipino to get license
and practice therein. xxx However, the power
to regulate the exercise of a profession or
pursuit of an occupation cannot be exercised
by the State or its agents in an arbitrary,
despotic or oppressive manner [Board of
Medicine v. Ota, G.R. No. 166097 (2008)].
Page 110 of 116
E. ORGANIZATION AND REGULATION
OF CORPORATIONS, PRIVATE AND
PUBLIC
Sec. 6, Art. XII. The use of property bears a
social function, and all economic agents
shall contribute to the common good.
Individuals and private groups, including
corporations, cooperatives, and similar
collective organizations, shall have the right
to own, establish, and operate economic
enterprises, subject to the duty of the State
to promote distributive justice and to
intervene when the common good so
demands.
Sec. 18, Art. XII. The State may, in the
interest of national welfare or defense,
establish and operate vital industries and,
upon payment of just compensation, transfer
to public ownership utilities and other private
enterprises to be operated by the
Government.
F. MONOPOLIES, RESTRAINT OF
TRADE AND UNFAIR
COMPETITION
Sec. 19, Art. XII. The State shall regulate or
prohibit monopolies when the public interest
so requires. No combinations in restraint of
trade or unfair competition shall be allowed.
The Constitution does not totally prohibit the
operation of monopolies. It mandates the State
to regulate them when public interest so
requires [Eastern Assurance & Surety
Corporation v. LTFRB, G.R. No. 149717
(2003)].
Monopolies are not per se prohibited by the
Constitution but may be permitted to exist to aid
the government in carrying on an enterprise or
to aid in the performance of various services
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
and functions in the interest of the public.
Nonetheless, a determination must first be
made as to whether public interest
requires a

Page 111 of 116

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
monopoly. [Agan, Jr. v. PIATCO, G.R. No.
155001 (2003)].
Despite the fact that our present Constitution
enshrines free enterprise as a policy,
nonetheless, the Government reserves the
power to intervene to promote the general
welfare. Free enterprise does not call for
removal of protective regulations. It must be
clearly explained and proven by competent
evidence just exactly how such protective
regulation would result in the restraint of trade
[Pest Management Association of the
Philippines v. Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority
cited in Pharmaceutical and Health Care
Association of the Philippines v. Duque, G.R.
173034 (2007)].
SOCIAL JUSTICE AND
HUMAN RIGHTS
A. CONCEPT OF SOCIAL
JUSTICE
Sec. 10, Art. II. The State shall promote
social justice in all phases of national
development.
Sec. 1, Art. XIII. The Congress shall give
highest priority to the enactment of measures
that protect and enhance the right of all the
people to human dignity, reduce social,
economic, and political inequalities, and
remove cultural inequities by equitably
diffusing wealth and political power for the
common good. To this end, the State shall
regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and
disposition of property and its increments.
Sec. 2, Art. XIII. The promotion of social
justice shall include the commitment to
create economic opportunities based on
freedom of initiative and self-reliance.
Page 112 of 116
Social justice means the promotion of the
welfare of all the people, the adoption by the
Government of measures calculated to insure
economic stability of all the competent
elements of society, through the maintenance
of a proper economic and social equilibrium in
the interrelations of the members of the
community, constitutionally, through the
adoption of measures legally justifiable, or
extra-constitutionally, through the exercise of
powers underlying the existence of all
governments on the time-honored principle of
salus populi est suprema lex.
Social justice, therefore, must be founded on
the recognition of the necessity of
interdependence among divers and diverse
units of a society and of the protection that
should be equally and evenly extended to all
groups as a combined force in our social and
economic life, consistent with the fundamental
and paramount objective of the state of
promoting the health, comfort, and quiet of all
persons, and of bringing about "the greatest
good to the greatest number" [Calalang v.
Williams, G.R. 47800 (1940)].
B. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, AND
CULTURAL RIGHTS
Economic and Social
Sec. 18, Art. II. The State affirms labor as a
primary social economic force. It shall
protect the rights of workers and promote
their welfare.
Sec. 3, Art. XIII. The State shall afford full
protection to labor, local and overseas,
organized and unorganized, and promote full
employment and equality of employment
opportunities for all.
It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to
self-organization, collective bargaining and
negotiations, and peaceful concerted
activities, including the right to strike in
accordance with law. They shall be entitled
to security of tenure, humane conditions of
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
work, and a living wage. They shall also
participate in policy and decision-making
processes affecting their rights and benefits
as may be provided by law. [xxx]
Agrarian And Natural Resources Reform
Sec. 4, Art. XIII. The State shall, by law,
undertake an agrarian reform program
founded on the right of farmers and regular
farmworkers, who are landless, to own
directly or collectively the lands they till or, in
the case of other farmworkers, to receive a
just share of the fruits thereof. [xxx]
Sec. 5, Art. XIII. The State shall recognize
the right of farmers, farmworkers, and
landowners, as well as cooperatives, and
other independent farmers’ organizations to
participate in the planning, organization, and
management of the program, and shall
provide support to agriculture through
appropriate technology and research, and
adequate financial, production, marketing,
and other support services.
Sec. 7, Art. XIII. The State shall protect the
rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of
local communities, to the preferential use of
local marine and fishing resources, both
inland and offshore. It shall provide support
to such fishermen through appropriate
technology and research, adequate
financial, production, and marketing
assistance, and other services. [xxx]
Urban Land Reform And Housing
Sec. 9, Art. XIII. The State shall, by law, and
for the common good, undertake, in
cooperation with the public sector, a
continuing program of urban land reform and
housing which will make available at
affordable cost decent housing and basic
services to underprivileged and homeless
citizens in urban centers and resettlements
areas. It shall also promote adequate
employment opportunities to such citizens.
Page 113 of 116
In the implementation of such program the
State shall respect the rights of small
property owners.
Sec. 10, Art. XIII. Urban or rural poor
dwellers shall not be evicted nor their
dwellings demolished, except in accordance
with law and in a just and humane manner.
[xxx]
The constitutional requirement (under Sec 10,
Art XIII) that the eviction and demolition be in
accordance with law and conducted in a just
and humane manner does not mean that the
validity or legality of the demolition or eviction
is hinged on the existence of a resettlement
area designated or earmarked by the
government. What is meant by "in
accordance with law" and "just and humane
manner" is that the person to be evicted be
accorded due process or an opportunity to
controvert the allegation that his or her
occupation or possession of the property
involved is unlawful or against the will of
the landowner; that should the illegal or
unlawful occupation be proven, the
occupant be sufficiently notified before
actual eviction or demolition is done; and
that there be no loss of lives, physical
injuries or unnecessary loss of or damage
to properties. Precisely, the enactment of an
anti-squatting law affords the alleged
"squatters" the opportunity to present their
case before a competent court where their
rights will be amply protected and due process
strictly observed [People v. Leachon, G.R. No.
108725-26 (1998)].
To ensure that evictions and demolitions
are conducted in a just and human manner,
Sec. 28, Par. 2 of RA 7279 commands
officials to comply with the prescribed
procedure in executing eviction and/or
demolition orders:
i. Notice upon the effected persons or entities
at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of
eviction or demolition;
ii. Adequate consultations on the matter of
settlement with the duly designated
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

representatives of the families to be resettled shall endeavor to provide free medical care
and the affected communities in the areas
to paupers.
where they are to be relocated;
iii. Presence of local government officials or Women
their representatives during eviction or Sec. 14, Art. XIII. The State shall protect
demolition; working women by providing safe and
iv. Proper identification of all persons taking part healthful working conditions, taking into
in the demolition; account their maternal functions, and such
v. Execution of eviction or demolition only facilities and opportunities that will enhance
during regular office hours from Mondays to their welfare and enable them to realize their
Fridays and during good weather, unless the full potential in the service of the nation.
affected families consent otherwise;
vi. No use of heavy equipment for demolition
In Saudia v. Rebesencio [G.R. No. 198587
except for structures that are permanent and
(2015)], Rebesencio et. al. were not granted
of concrete materials;
with their maternity leaves and were
vii. Proper uniforms for members of the
subsequently terminated by Saudia due to their
Philippine National Police who shall occupy
pregnancy. The Court ruled that Saudia's
the first line of law enforcement and observe
policy is discriminatory.
proper disturbance control procedures; and
viii. Adequate relocation, whether temporary or
There is the glaringly discriminatory nature of
permanent: Provided, however, That in
Saudia's policy since it entails the termination
cases of eviction and demolition pursuant to
of employment of flight attendants who become
a court order involving underprivileged and
pregnant. At the risk of stating the obvious,
homeless citizens, relocation shall be
pregnancy is an occurrence that pertains
undertaken by the local government unit
specifically to women. Saudia's policy excludes
concerned and the National Housing
from and restricts employment on the basis of
Authority with the assistance of other
no other consideration but sex.
government agencies within forty-five (45)
days from service of notice of final judgment
It would be the height of iniquity to view
by the court, after which period the said order
pregnancy as a disability so permanent and
shall be executed: Provided, further, That
immutable that it must entail the termination of
should relocation not be possible within the
one's employment. The respondents were
said period, financial assistance in the
illegally terminated.
amount equivalent to the prevailing minimum
daily wage multiplied by sixty (60) days shall
Role And Rights Of Peoples Organizations
be extended to the affected families by the
local government unit concerned [Kalipunan Sec. 15, Art. XIII. The State shall respect the
ng Damayang Mahihirap v. Robredo, G.R. role of independent people’s organizations to
No. 200903 (2014)]. enable the people to pursue and protect,
within the democratic framework, their
Health legitimate and collective interests and
aspirations through peaceful and lawful
Sec. 11, Art. XIII. The State shall adopt an
means. [xxx]
integrated and comprehensive approach to
health development which shall endeavor to
make essential goods, health and other Cultural
social services available to all the people at
affordable cost. There shall be priority for the Sec. 22, Art. II. The State recognizes and
needs of the underprivileged sick, elderly, promotes the rights of indigenous cultural
disabled, women, and children. The State communities within the framework of
national unity and development.

Page 114 of 116

 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Sec. 5, Art. XII. The State, subject to the
provisions of this Constitution and national
development policies and programs, shall
protect the rights of indigenous cultural
communities to their ancestral lands to
ensure their economic, social, and cultural
well-being.
Sec. 15, Art. XIV. Arts and letters shall enjoy
the patronage of the State. The State shall
conserve, promote, and popularize the
nation’s historical and cultural heritage and
resources, as well as artistic creations.
Sec. 17, Art. XIV. The State shall recognize,
respect, and protect the rights of indigenous
cultural communities to preserve and
develop their cultures, traditions, and
institutions. It shall consider these rights in
the formulation of national plans and
policies.
VII. Monitor the Philippine Government's
C. COMMISSION ON
HUMAN RIGHTS
VIII. Grant immunity from prosecution to any
Sec. 17, Art. XIII. (1) There is hereby created
an independent office called the Commission
on Human Rights.
xxx
(3) Until this Commission is constituted, the
existing Presidential Committee on Human
Rights shall continue to exercise its present
functions and powers.
xxx
Page 115 of 116
1. Powers
I. Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any
party, all forms of human rights violations
involving civil and political rights;
II. Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of
procedure, and cite for contempt for
violations thereof in accordance with the
Rules of Court;
III. Provide appropriate legal measures for the
protection of human rights of all persons
within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos
residing abroad, and provide for preventive
measures and legal aid services to the
underprivileged whose human rights have
been violated or need protection;
IV. Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons,
or detention facilities;
V. Establish a continuing program of research,
education, and information to enhance
respect for the primacy of human rights;
VI. Recommend to Congress effective
measures to promote human rights and to
provide for compensation to victims of
violations of human rights, or their families;
compliance with international treaty
obligations on human rights;
person whose testimony or whose
possession of documents or other evidence
is necessary or convenient to determine the
truth in any investigation conducted by it or
under its authority;
IX. Request the assistance of any department,
bureau, office, or agency in the performance
of its functions;
X. Appoint its officers and employees in
accordance with law; and
XI. Perform such other duties and functions as
may be provided by law. [Sec. 18, Art. XIII]
The Constitution clearly and categorically
grants to the Commission the power to
investigate all forms of human rights violations
involving civil and political rights. But it cannot
try and decide cases (or hear and determine
causes) as courts of justice, or even quasi-
judicial bodies do. To investigate is not to
adjudicate or adjudge. [Cariño v. CHR, G.R.
No. 96681 (1991)].
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

The Commission is not a court of justice or a

quasi-judicial body. The Commission cannot
try and resolve cases on merits as it is not
within its power to investigate. Its power to
investigate is only fact-finding. When providing
preventive measures, it can file a case before
a court to represent victims [EPZA v. CHR,
G.R. No. 101476 (1992)].

2. Composition and
Qualification of Members

Sec. 17, Art. XIII.

xxx (2) The Commission shall be composed
of a Chairman and four Members who must
be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and
a majority of whom shall be members of the
Bar. The term of office and other
qualifications and disabilities of the Members
of the Commission shall be provided by law.

Page 116 of 116