GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

PREAMBLE

We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and
humane society and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote
the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity
the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice,
freedom, love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy

Under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, if a law or contract violates any norm of the
constitution that law or contract whether promulgated by the legislative or by the executive branch or
entered into by private persons for private purposes is null and void and without any force and effect.
Thus, since the Constitution is the fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the nation, it is
deemed written in every statute and contract.
Self-executing and non-self-executing provisions
A provision which lays down a general principle, such as those found in Art. II of the 1987
Constitution, is usually not self-executing. But a provision which is complete in itself and becomes
operative without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation, or that which supplies sufficient
rule by means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected, is self-executing. Thus a
constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred and the liability
imposed are fixed by the constitution itself, so that they can be determined by an examination and
construction of its terms, and there is no language indicating that the subject is referred to the
legislature for action.
 in case of doubt, the Constitution should be considered self-executing rather than non-
self-executing … as a contrary rule would give the legislature discretion to determine
when, or whether, they shall be effective.
Constitutional Construction
1. First, verba legis, that is, wherever possible, the words used in the Constitution must be given
their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed.
a) As the Constitution is not primarily a lawyer's document, it being essential for the rule of
law to obtain that it should ever be present in the people's consciousness, its language
as much as possible should be understood in the sense they have in common use.
2. Second, where there is ambiguity, ratio legis est anima (the reason of the law is its soul).
The words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of its framers.
a) Thus, it has been held that the Court in construing a Constitution should bear in mind
the object sought to be accomplished by its adoption, and the evils, if any, sought to be
prevented or remedied.
3. Finally, ut magis valeat quam pereat (It may rather become operative than null). The
Constitution is to be interpreted as a whole.
 a) When they adopted subsection 2, they permitted, if not willed, that said provision should
function to the full extent of its substance and its terms, not by itself alone, but in
conjunction with all other provisions of that great document.

AMENDMENTS & REVISIONS (Art. XVII, 1987 Constitution)

 Amendment refers to isolated or piecemeal change only while Revision is a revamp or

rewriting of the whole instrument.
NOTE: Refer to Isagani Cruz’s book for better definition: Lambino vs COMELEC
 Quantitative Test
 Qualitative Test

Procedure
1. Proposal (Section 1,2, and 3 of Article XVII)
a. Constituent Assembly (Amendments and Revision)
i. Upon a vote of ¾ of all its members
b. Constitutional Convention (Amendments and Revision)
i. By a vote of 2/3 of all its members or by a majority vote of all its members, submit
to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.
c. People’s Initiative (Amendments only)
i. Upon a petition of at least 12 per centum of the total number of registered voters,
of which every legislative district must be represented by at least 3 per centum of
the registered voters therein.
ii. No amendment under this section shall be authorized within five years following
the ratification of this Constitution nor oftener than once every five years
thereafter.

2. Ratification
a. Doctrine of Proper Submission
The plebiscite must provide the voter not only sufficient time but ample basis for an intelligent
appraisal of the nature of the amendment per se as well as its relation to the other parts of the
Constitution with which it has to form a harmonious whole.
We believe the word "submitted" can only mean that the government, within its maximum
capabilities, should strain every effort to inform citizen of the provisions to be amended, and
the proposed amendments and the meaning, nature and effects thereof.
b. Timeframe of the plebiscite
A plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the
approval of such amendment or revision.
 THE CONCEPT OF THE STATE
ARTICLE I

National Territory

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters
embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction,
consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the
subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form
part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

 Archipelagic Doctrine – we connect the outermost points of our archipelago with straight
baselines and consider all the waters enclosed thereby as internal waters. The entire
archipelago is regarded as one integrated unit instead of being fragmented into so
many thousand islands.

Types of Government
1. De Jure Government – has rightful title but no power or control, either because this has been
withdrawn from it or because it has not yet actually entered into the exercise thereof.

2. De Facto Government – is a government of fact, that is, it actually exercises power or control
but without legal title.

Three Kinds of De Facto Government

1. The first, or government de facto in a proper legal sense, is that government that gets
possession and control of, or usurps, by force or by the voice of the majority , the rightful
legal governments and maintains itself against the will of the latter, such as the government of
England under the Commonwealth, first by Parliament and later by Cromwell as Protector.
2. The second is that which is established and maintained by military forces who invade and
occupy a territory of the enemy in the course of war, and which is denominated a government
of paramount force, as the cases of Castine, in Maine, which was reduced to British
possession in the war of 1812, and Tampico, Mexico, occupied during the war with Mexico, by
the troops of the United States.
3. And the third is that established as an independent government by the inhabitants of a country
who rise in insurrection against the parent state of such as the government of the Southern
Confederacy in revolt against the Union during the war of secession.
  A government-owned or controlled corporation engaged in proprietary functions cannot be
considered part of the Government for purposes of exemption from the application of the
statute of limitations.

SOVEREIGNTY
 Sovereignty is the supreme and uncontrollable power inherent in a State by which that State is
governed.
Concept of Sovereignty as Auto-limitation
While sovereignty has traditionally been deemed absolute and all-encompassing on the domestic level, it is
however subject to restrictions and limitations voluntarily agreed to by the Philippines, expressly or
impliedly, as a member of the family of nations.
International treaties, whether relating to nuclear disarmament, human rights, the environment, the law of
the sea, or trade, constrain domestic political sovereignty through the assumption of external obligations.
The point is that, as shown by the foregoing treaties, a portion of sovereignty may be waived without
violating the Constitution, based on the rationale that the Philippines "adopts the generally accepted
principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of . . .
cooperation and amity with all nations."

Belligerent Occupation without a Change of Sovereignty

1. Sovereignty is not deemed suspended although acts of sovereignty cannot be exercised by the
legitimate authority.
2. The political laws of the occupied territory are merely suspended, subject to the revival
under the jus postliminium (things taken by the enemy are restored to their former state, when
coming again under the power of the nation to which they belong) upon the end of occupation.
3. Non-political laws are deemed continued unless changed by the belligerent occupant.
4. The rule does not apply to the law on treason because allegiance is owed by the inhabitants
to their legitimate government.
5. As for judicial decisions, the same are valid during the occupation and even beyond except
those of a political complexion which are automatically annulled upon the restoration of
the legitimate authority.

Change of Sovereignty
1. Where there is a change of sovereignty, the political laws of the former sovereign are not
merely suspended but abrogated unless they are retained by positive act of the new
sovereign.
2. Non-political laws continue in operation unless they are changed by the new sovereign or are
contrary to its institutions.

Doctrine of Parens Patriae (Parent of the nation)

The role of the state as the guardian of the rights of the people or the provider of protection to those
unable to care for themselves. In fulfilling this duty, the State may resort to the exercise of its inherent
powers: police power, eminent domain, and power of taxation.
 It is an inherent right of the State to act as parens patriae to aid parents in the moral
development of the youth.

STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUITS

Art. XVI, Sec. 3: “The State may not be sued without its consent.”
Logical and Practical: A sovereign is exempt from suit not because of any formal conception or
obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the
authority that makes the law on which the right depends.

It is logical because you must not use a given right against the provider and it is practical because
without state immunity from suits, public service would be immensely hindered, and the public
endangered.

Suit Against the State

1. The test is whether, assuming the decision is rendered against the public officer impleaded,
enforcement thereof will require affirmative act from the State, such as the appropriation
of the needed amount to satisfy the judgment.
o If it does, the suit is one against the State and its inclusion as party defendant is
necessary.
2. However, if the officer impleaded may by himself alone comply with the decision of the court
without the necessity of involving the State, then the suit can prosper against him.

Effect when public officer acts without or in excess of jurisdiction

Where a public officer acts without or in excess of jurisdiction, any injury or damages caused
by him is his own personal liability; hence, non-suability does not apply. If a public official was in the
regular performance of his official functions, any liability would have to be paid by the state.

Suits against Agencies of the Philippine Government

Two types of government agencies:

 Incorporated
o An incorporated agency has a charter of its own that invests it with a separate
juridical entity.
o The test of its suability is found in its charter.
 Unincorporated (Merged in the general machinery of the government)
o The general rule is that because it is not incorporated, it possesses no juridical
personality of its own, the suit is against the agency’s principal, i.e., the State.
 o It is necessary to determine the nature of the functions in which the agency is
engaged, so as to hold suable if they are proprietary and not suable if they are
governmental.
o The test in every case is the nature of the primary functions being discharged despite
the agency engages in proprietary enterprises as incidental function.

Recovery of the Value of Property (Without Just Compensation)

o The Doctrine of State Immunity from suit cannot serve as an instrument for perpetrating an
injustice on a citizen.
o If there were an observance of procedural regularity, petitioners would not be in the said
plaint they are now.
o It is unthinkable then that precisely because there was a failure to abide what the law
requires, the government would stand to benefit.
o Where private property is to be taken in expropriation without just compensation being paid,
the defense of immunity from suit cannot be set up by the State against an action for
payment by the owners.

Garnishment in the Hands of Public Officers

o Having the mantle of State immunity, any monetary possession in the hands of its public
officers cannot be subject to the garnishment by the Sheriff of Manila because by permitting
such act would permit indirectly what is prohibited directly.

AGAINST FOREIGN STATES, OFFICIALS,

FUNCTIONARIES

a. Section 2, Article II (generally-accepted principle of IL, e.g., par in parem non habet
imperium and par in parem non habet jurisdictionem)
Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the
generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and
adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all
nations.
 The principle of the sovereign equality of the State - an equal does not have power
over an equal.
b. Section 21 of Article VII (treaty law)
SECTION 21. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless
concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
Restrictive Application of the Doctrine of State Immunity
The application of the doctrine of immunity from suit has been restricted to sovereign or governmental
activities (jure emperii). The mantle of state immunity cannot be extended to commercial, private and
proprietary acts (jure gestionis).
GENERAL RULE: The facts that a foreign state enters into a contract with a private party in
the host state would not necessarily result in the waiver of its sovereign immunity. The character or
nature of the contract would still be determined.
o When a state enters into a commercial transaction, then it descends to the level of
a private individual.
Financial Liability on the Foreign State
 Sovereign immunity applies when the judgment would result not only in the recovery of
possession of the property by the plaintiff but also in a financial liability to the foreign
government, meaning that the suit was ultimately one against the foreign government itself,
which did not give its consent to the suit.
 Officials and functionaries of a foreign state may invoke sovereign immunity if they are in
the regular performance of their functions.

Decision without Trial re State Immunity

General Rule: the trial court can rule on the issue of sovereign immunity without going to trial
if there are sufficient pleadings to examine and base its conclusions on; if the pleadings on
record are insufficient to rule on the issue, sovereign immunity cannot be raised to cause the
dismissal of the case without trial, instead the issue of WON the defendant has sovereign
immunity is one of the issues that the trial court has to decide after presentation of evidence

Means to establish claim and the Determination of the Executive Branch of sovereign
immunity

GENERAL RULE: In Public International Law, when a state or international agency wishes to
plead sovereign or diplomatic immunity in a foreign court, it requests the Foreign Office of
the state where it is sued to convey to the court that said defendant is entitled to
immunity.
 The determination of the executive arm of government that a state or instrumentality
is entitled to sovereign or diplomatic immunity is a political question that is
conclusive upon the courts.
 Where the plea of immunity is recognized and affirmed by the executive branch, it is
the duty of the courts to accept this claim so as not to embarrass the executive
arm of the government in conducting the country's foreign relations.

Implied Consent
1. When the state commences litigation.
2. Violation of the Constitution, thereby perpetuating injustice.
3. When a foreign State enters into a proprietary contract.
Suability v Liability v Execution of Judgment
 The mere fact that the State is suable does not mean that it is liable.
 Suability is the result of the express or implied consent of the state to be sued but liability
depends on the applicable law and the established facts.
 General Rule: Public funds cannot be the object of a garnishment proceeding even if the state
previously gave its consent to be sued and the court has adjudged it liable; Rationale based on
public policy: diversion of public funds already appropriated by law for specific objects would
disrupt public services.
 EXC: Funds of public corporations that can sue and be sued not exempt from garnishment.

ARTICLE II: PRINCIPLES & STATE POLICIES

Purpose of Article II
 The Supreme Court has made it clear that most of its provisions are to be considered as “mere
legislative guides, which absent enabling legislation, do not embody enforceable constitutional
rights.”
 They are used by the judiciary as aids or as guides in the exercise of its power of judicial review, and by the
legislature in its enactment of laws.

Republicanism
 A republic is a representative government, a government run by and for the people. It is not a
pure democracy where the people govern themselves directly.
 The essence of republicanism is representation and renovation, the selection by the citizenry
or a corps of public functionaries who derive their mandate from the people and act on their
behalf, serving for a limited period only, after which they are replaced or retained at the option
of their principal.
 Obviously, a republican government is a responsible government whose officials hold and
discharge their positions as a public trust and shall, according to the Constitution, “at all times
be accountable to the people” they are sworn to serve.
 The purpose of a republican government, it is almost needles to state, is the promotion of the
common welfare according to the will of the people themselves.
Supremacy of Civilian Authority

 Article II Section 3: The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts
the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the
policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.
 Article VII Section 18: The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the
Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or
suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety
requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the xprivilege of the writ of habeas
corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.
 Article XVI Section 4 and 5: [Important]
 Article XVIII Section 24: Private armies and other armed groups not recognized by duly constituted
authority shall be dismantled. All paramilitary forces including Civilian Home Defense Forces not
consistent with the citizen armed force established in this Constitution, shall be dissolved or, where
appropriate, converted into the regular force.
The Incorporation Clause
SECTION 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted
principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice,
freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.
An international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law either by:

1. Transformation – requires local legislation so that an international law be transformed into

domestic law.
2. Incorporation – this applies when, by mere constitutional declaration, international law is
deemed to have the force of domestic law.
Treaties become part of the law of the land through transformation pursuant to Article VII, Section 21
of the Constitution: No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at
least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

Examples of Generally Accepted Principles of International Law:

 Renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy
 Principle of sovereign immunity
 Person’s right to life liberty, property, and due process
 Pacta sunt servanda
 Treaties cannot contravene the Constitution.
 Still, statutes enjoy preeminence over international agreements. In case of conflict between a
law and a treaty, it is the statute that must prevail.

Social Justice
Social justice is "neither communism, nor despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy," but the
humanization of laws and the equalization of social and economic forces by the State so that justice
in its rational and objectively secular conception may at least be approximated.
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.

Separation of Church and State

 Benevolent neutrality thus recognizes that religion plays an important role in the public life.
 With religion looked upon with benevolence and not hostility, benevolent neutrality allows
accommodation of religion under certain circumstances.
 Their purpose or effect therefore is to remove a burden on, or facilitate the exercise of, a
person's or institution's religion.
 An accommodationist holds that it is good public policy, and sometimes constitutionally
required, for the state to make conscious and deliberate efforts to avoid interference with
religious freedom. On the other hand, the strict neutrality adherent believes that it is good
 public policy, and also constitutionally required, for the government to avoid religion-specific
policy even at the cost of inhibiting religious exercise.
Three questions the State should consider following the benevolent neutrality-accomodation:

1. (h)as the statute or government action created a burden on the free exercise of religion?
2. (i)s there a sufficiently compelling state interest to justify this infringement of religious liberty?
3. (h)as the state in achieving its legitimate purposes used the least intrusive means possible so
that the free exercise is not infringed any more than necessary to achieve the legitimate goal of
the state?