CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEWER (FINAL EXAM)

Evora, Rexlyn Anne. M., JD 1-1

TOPIC
CASE LAW
TERMS DEFINED OR ENUNCIATED IN THE
CASE
Privilege from
PhilCoA vs
(Summary) Congress enjoys privilege from
Arrest
Mathay
arrest on civil and criminal matters with
penalties not more than 6 years imprisonment

Vera vs Avelino

Legislative
Prohibitions

Punzalan vs.
Mendoza

PROVISIONS

THINGS TO REMEMBER

Art.6.11 privilege from arrest

in all offenses punishable
by not more than 6 years
imprisonment

(Summary)Extent of Parliamentary Immunity:

No one may prevent the Members of the
Congress from performing the duties of their
office, such as attending meetings, casting
votes etc.
unless the penalty is more than 6 years, any
public officer who shall, while the Congress is
in session, arrest or search any member
thereof, shall be punished by the penalty of
prision correccional
Prohibition to hold any other employment or
office in the govt without forfeiting his seat is
given to prevent incompatibility of office duties

Art.6.13 Prohibitions
1. hold
any
other
employment or office
in the govt without
forfeiting his seat
2. be appointed in any
office
created
or
emoluments thereof
increased during the
term fir which he was
elected
Art.6.14 Prohibitions
1. personally appear as
counsel
2. be interested directly
or indirectly in any
contract, franchise,
or special privilege
granted by the govt
3. shall not intervene in
any matter before
any office of the

Note: 2 views on
disqualification on
Art.6.13
1st- perpetual injunction
2nd termination of
prohibition upon
expiration of term

Congressiona
l Session

US vs Pons

Quorum

Avelino vs
Cueco

Journal

Artorga vs.
Villegas

Primicias and
Gardener vs
Paredes and
Clarin
Electoral
Tribunal

Dueas vs
HRET

Abbas vs. SET

Lazatin vs.
HRET

Angara vs.
Electoral

SINE DIE SESSION: It is the act of stopping the

hands of the clock in order to afford the
legislative body to continue its session. All
bills enacted during sine die session are valid
and conclusive.
The quorum should consist majority of each
House
Note: majority of those who are within Phil
jurisdiction
The journal of the proceedings of each House
is no ordinary record. The Constitution
requires it. The journal is a conclusive and
definite evidence.
(Summary) Judiciary shall not inquire or order
the journal to be corrected.

(summary) There are two separate electoral

tribunals (one for Senate, and one for House of
Rep)

(summary) The Electoral Tribunal cannot

legally function without the participation of the
legislative component. There must be both
judiciary and legislative component.

(summary)
The Electoral Tribunal may
promulgate rules and regulations relative to
matters concerning the power of being the sole
judge of all contests relating to the election,
returns, and qualifications of the House of Rep.

(summary) The decision made by the Electoral

Tribunal is generally not subject to judicial
review unless there is a grave abuse of

government for his

pecuniary benefit
Art.6.15- Congress shall
convene on the 4th Monday
of July

Art. 6.16.2 A majority of

each House shall constitute
the quorum to do business
Art. 6.14 yeas and nays of
proceedings
Art.6.26.2 yeas and nays of
the final reading of the bill
Art.6.27.1 yeas and nays of
veto and overriding the veto

Art.6.17 Electoral Tribunal is

composed of (3) Justices of
the SC and (6) members of
the house as the case may
be. Senior justice shall be
the chairman.

Commission
on
Appointments

Commission

discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.

Bondoc vs.
Pineda

(summary) The ouster of the legislative

member of the tribunal on the ground of party
discipline is internal and is not political. But
such is justiciable through determination of a
valid cause of such disciplinary action.
(summary) Political realignment which is
permanent in character may change the
composition of the Comm. On Appointment.
The realignment is valid when there is:
1) successful electoral protest
2) expulsion of the member from political
party
3) affiliation of the member to another
political party
If
the
realignment
is
temporary
alliance/factional division, members may not be
changed or disturbed.

Daza vs.
Singson

Cayetano vs.
Monsod

Inquiry in Aid
of Legislation

Art.6.18 composition:
SenatePres:ex officio
Chairman
(12) members of Senate
(12) members of House of
Rep
*proportional representation
of political parties/ parties
and organizations of the
party-lists represented
therein

(Summary) The judgement of the commission

on appointment is not subject to judicial
review.

Teng vs. Mitra

(Summary) The seats in the Comm. On

Appointments is based on proportional
representation of political parties/ parties and
organizations of the party-lists represented
therein

Guingina Jr. vs.

Gonzales

The Constitution does not require the complete

12 members. The quorum shall be sufficient to
do business.
Art.6.21
-must be exercised in aid of
legislation in accordance to

duly published rules of

procedures
-rights of persons appearing
or
affected
shall
be
respected
Legislative
Power given
to President

Power
Congress

of

Limitations of
Legislative
Powers

Aglipay vs Ruiz

No public funds shall be appropriated or used

in the benefit of any church, system of religion,
etc.

Art.6.23.2 In times of war or

other natl emergency, the
Congress may by law ,
authorize the Pres. for a
limited period and subj. to
such restrictions as it may
prescribe, to exercise
powers necessary and
proper to carry out a
declared natl policy.
Non-legislative powers:
Art.6.23.1 declare
existence of state of war
Art.7.21-concurrence of
senate in treaties & intl
agreements
Art.7.4.4-5 canvassing
body for election of Pres.
and VP
Art.7.9.2 concurrence to
grant amnesty
Art.11.3.1-initiate
impeachment
Art.11.3.6- try and decide
impeachment cases
Procedural Limitations:
Art.26.2- 3 readings
Art.6.24 Approp, rev, and
tariff
bills
originate
exclusively from the House
of Rep.
Substantive Limitations:
Art.6.26.1- embraced in 1
subject which is expressed
in the title

Conditions:
1. war or natl
emergency
2. in virtue of a law
enacted by
Congress
3. natl policy
4. limited period and
subject to
restrictions
Powers: May be
legislative or Nonlegislative

Limitations: may be
substantive or
procedural

Art.3.22- no ex post facto

and bill of attainder
Art.6.29.2 no public money
or property appropriated for
religious
sect,
priest,
ministers etc.

Types of Bill

Assoc. of Small
Land Owners of
the Phil. Vs Hon.
Sec. of Agrarian
Reform

That fund, as earlier noted, is itself being

questioned on the ground that it does not
conform to the requirements of a valid
appropriation as specified in the Constitution.
Clearly, however, Proc. No. 131 is not an
appropriation measure even if it does provide
for the creation of said fund, for that is not its
principal purpose. An appropriation law is one
the primary and specific purpose of which is to
authorize the release of public funds from the
treasury.
The creation of the fund is only incidental to
the main objective of the proclamation, which
is agrarian reform.

Revenue: designed to
raise revenue or money
Private:
one
affects purely
interest

which
private

Bill of local application:

one affecting purely local
or municipal concerns

Preparation of
Bills

Tolentino vs.
Sec. of Finance

The consti invested power to the House of Rep.

due to the fact that they are more sensitive to
local needs and problems.
Senators are expected to address problems in
a natl level

Garcia vs. Exec.

Secretary

The printing and (3) readings may be

dispensed with provided that the Pres. certifies
the necessity of the immediate enactment to
meet public emergency or calamity.

Tolentino vs.
Sec. of Finance

The 3rd version (the one prepared by

conference committee in case of conflict of 2
Houses) must be germane to the subject.

Art.6.24 - Approp, rev, and

tariff
bills
originate
exclusively from the House
of Rep. but the Senate may
propose or concur with
amendments
Art.6.26.2 3 readings
except when the Pres.
certifies

The 3rd version does not need 3 readings. Only

those bills passed for the 1st time are required
of the 3 readings.
Limitations of
Appropriation
by Congress

Demetria vs.
Alba

Assoc. of Small
Land Owners of
the Phil. Vs Hon.
Sec. of Agrarian
Reform

Pascual vs. Sec.

of Public Works

The Constitution provides that no law shall be

passed
authorizing
any
transfer
of
appropriations, however, the President, the
Prime Minister, the Speaker, the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court, and the heads of
constitutional commissions may by law be
authorized to augment any item in the general
appropriations law for their respective offices
from savings in other items of their respective
appropriations.

Extra-constitutional limitations:
1.must be for public purpose
2. amount must be certain and definite

The legislature is without power to

appropriate public revenue for anything but
public purpose. The taxing power must be

Limitations:
Art.6.25.1
Art.6.25.2
Art.6.25.4-special
appropriations bill
Art.6.25.5- augmentation
Art.6.29.2- no public money
or property appropriated for
religious
sect,
priest,
ministers etc.

2 conditions for
augmentation:
1. transfer is for
augmenting an item in
the gen. approp.law for
their own dept.
2. funds must come from
their savings

exercised for public purposes only and the

money raised by taxation can be expended
only for public purposes and not for the
advantage of private individuals.
Apostolic
Prefect of Mt. "While the word 'tax' in its broad
Province vs
meaning, includes both general taxes and
Treasurer of
special assessments, and in a general sense a
Baguio
tax is an assessment, and an assessment is a
tax, yet there is a recognized distinction
between them in that assessment is confined
to local impositions upon property for the
payment of the cost of public improvements in
its immediate vicinity and levied with reference
to special benefits to the property assessed.
The differences between a special
assessment and a tax are that (1) a special
assessment can be levied only on land; (2) a
special assessment cannot (at least in most
states) be made a personal liability of the
person assessed; (3) a special assessment is
based wholly on benefits; and (4) a special
assessment is exceptional both as to time and
locality.
A charge imposed only on property
owners benefited is a special assessment
rather than a tax notwithstanding the statute
calls it a tax." In the case at bar, the Prefect
cannot
claim
exemption
because
the
assessment is not taxation per se but rather a
system for the benefits of the inhabitants of the
city.

One Subject
expressed in
the Title of Bill

Phil. Judges vs.

Prado

"Every bill passed by the Congress shall

embrace only one subject which shall be
expressed
in
the
title
thereof."
The title of the bill is not required to be an
index to the body of the act, or to be as
comprehensive as to cover every single detail
of the measure. It has been held that if the title
fairly indicates the general subject, and
reasonably covers all the provisions of the act,
and is not calculated to mislead the legislature
or the people, there is sufficient compliance
with the constitutional requirement.

Government of
the Philippine
Islands vs. El
Hogar Filipino

"An act concerning the laws of the state,"

would be good, and the convention and people
who framed and adopted the constitution
would be convicted of the folly of elaborately
constructing a grave constitutional limitation of
legislative power upon a most important
subject, which the legislature could at once
circumvent by a mere verbal trick. The word
"subject" is used in the constitution embrace
but "one subject" it necessarily implies what
everybody knows that there are numerous
subjects of the legislation, and declares that
only one of these subjects shall embraced in
any one act. All subjects cannot be conjured
into one subject by the mere magic of a word in
a title.

Enrolled Bill
vs. Journal

US vs. Espirito
Santo

Morales vs.

In dealing with the problem now before us the

words "and for other purposes "found at the
end of the caption of Act No. 2792, must be laid
completely out of consideration. They express
nothing, and amount to nothing as a
compliance with the constitutional requirement
to which attention has been directed.

(Summary) The one subject embraced in one

Art. 6.24 Every bill passed

by the Congress shall
embrace only one subject
which shall be expressed in
the title thereof

Purpose of
only one subject which
shall be expressed in the
title thereof:
1.to prevent log-rolling
legislation
2. to prevent fraud
3. to fairly inform the
people

Subido

title is not required in local ordinances. They

are not bills passed by the Congress.

(Summary) With respect to matters not

expressly required to record in the Journal, the
enrolled bill prevails.
Mistakes in printing is not subject to judicial
correction. The remedy shall be by amendment
or curative legislation not a judicial act.

How Bill
Becomes A
Law

Gonzales vs.
Macaraig Jr.

The Constitution provides that only a particular

item or items may be vetoed. The power to
disapprove any item or items in an appropriate
bill does not grant the authority to veto a part
of an item and to approve the remaining
portion of the same item.
If the veto is declared void, the same produces
no effect whatsoever.

Initiative and
Referendum

Defensor
Santiago vs.
COMELEC

RA.
No.
6735
deals
with, inter
alia,
people's initiative to amend the Constitution.
Its Section 2 on Statement of Policy explicitly
affirms, recognizes, and guarantees that
power; and its Section 3, which enumerates the
three systems of initiative, includes initiative
on the Constitution and defines the same as
the power to propose amendments to the
Constitution. Likewise, its Section 5 repeatedly
mentions initiative on the Constitution.

Art. 6.27.2 The President

shall have the power to veto
any particular item or items
in an appropriation, revenue
or tariff bill but the veto
shall not affect the item or
items to which he does not
object.

Modes on how bill

becomes a law:
1.When the Pres. signs it
2. Presidents veto
overridden by 2/3
3. Non-communication of
veto after 30 days
Veto: is a destructive
participation of the Pres.
in the legislative power. It
is discretionary and may
be based on any
grounds.

Art.6.32
Congress
shall
provide for a system of
Initiative and referendum

RA 6735
Initiative: reserved power
of the people to directly
propose and enact laws
Referendum: process by
which any act or law or
part thereof passed by
Congress or local govt
legislature is submitted
to the people for their
approval
RA 6735

Executive
Department
Executive:
Qualifications,
Term of office

Executives
Authority

Osmea vs.
COMELEC

Govt vs.
Springer

La Perla Cigar &

Cigarette
Factory vs.
Capapas

Planas vs. Gil

Health of the
President

Valmonte vs.
Belmonte Jr.

it is not competent for the legislature to extend

the term of officers by providing that they shall
hold over until their successors are elected and
qualified where the constitution has in effect or
by clear implication prescribed the term and
when the Constitution fixes the day on which
the official term shall begin, there is no
legislative authority to continue the office
beyond that period, even though the
successors fail to qualify within the time.

(summary) When he is advised by his legal

department that a certain act, or any part
thereof, of the Legislature is illegal and void, he
may do one of two things:
1.Ignore the implementation

Art.7.1. executive power

shall be vested in the Pres.
of the Phil
Art.7.2 Pres.
1.Natural born citizen
2. registered voter
3. able to read and write
4. atleast 40 y/o on the day
of election

Role: enforce laws

enacted by the Congress
Note: Hold over is not
allowed

Art.7.3.1 Vice Pres.

Same as Pres.
Art.7.4.1 Pres: no reelection
Art.7.4.2VP: no VP shall
serve for more than 2
consecutive terms
Art.7.4.4-5 Congress as
canvassing body of Pres.
and VP elections
Who may determine that the
pres. is unable to discharge
powers
Art. 7.11.1-voluntary
Art.7.11.2- cabinet members

2.challenge the constitutionality of the law

(summary) The Pres. is devoid of suspending
the operation of any statute.

Execution of laws is an obligation rather than

conferment of power.
"Public concern" like "public interest" is a term
that eludes exact definition. Both terms
embrace a broad spectrum of subjects which
the public may want to know, either because
these directly affect their lives, or simply

Art.7.12 In case of serious

illness, the public shall be
informed
Members of Cabinet in
charge of natl security and

Note: the state of health

of the Pres. is of public
concern

Prohibitions

Privileges and
Powers of the
President In
General

Civil Liberties
Union v
Executive
Secretary

In Re: Saturnino
Bermudez

because such matters naturally arouse the

interest of an ordinary citizen. In the final
analysis, it is for the courts to determine on a
case by case basis whether the matter at issue
is of interest or importance, as it relates to or
affects the public.
(summary)The Cabinet members who held
positions in E.O. 284 may not be ordered to
refund the emoluments. They are legally
entitled to the emoluments de facto.

It is elementary that incumbent Presidents are

immune from suit or from being brought to
court during the period of their incumbency
and tenure.

foreign relations and Chief

of Staffs of AFP shall not be
denied access to the Pres.

Art.7.13. 1 Pres, VP,

Members of the Cabinet,
and their deputies or assts.
Shall not, unless provided
by law, hold any other office
or employment during their
tenure
Exceptions to Art.7.13.1
Art.7.3.2 VP as member of
cabinet
Art.8.8.1 Sec. of Justice as
member of JBC
Art.IX-B. sec.7 par.2 those
primary to the function of
their position (e.g. sec. of
finance as member of the
monetary board)
Powers of the Pres.
Art.7.1 and Art.7.5: power to
execute laws of the land
Art.7.16.: appointment and
removal

Soliven vs.
Makasiar

(summary) Rationale of immunity from suits: to

assure that the Pres. may exercise his duties
free from distraction as this position demands
undivided attention.

Soliven vs.
Makasiar

(summary) The Pres. can waive his Presidential

immunity. The immunity is by virtue of office
and may be invoked by the person holding the
office.

Art.7.17: control over

executive dept.
Art.7.18: military power

Inherent powers may be exercised unless the

Pardon: It is an act of
grace
proceeding from the
power entrusted with the
execution of laws which
exempts the individual o
whom it is bestowed
from the punishment the
law inflicts for the crime
he has committed.
a. Absolute pardon
b. conditional pardon

Art.7.19 : pardoning power

Art. 7 sec. 16 and 21:
diplomatic powers
Salazar vs. Achacosa:
power to deport alien

Amnesty: It is an act of
the sovereign power
granting oblivion or
general pardon for a past
offense, and is rarely, if

Marcos et.al. vs.

Manglapus

constitution forbids it.

Residual Powers are unstated powers which
resides in the Pres. to do anything not
forbidden by the Consti. It is to promote
welfare of the people as steward of the people
and protector of peace.

Art. 10. 4. : supervisory

power over local govt
Art.7.20 : power to contract
loan
Marcos et.al. vs. Manglapus:
Residual power

Marcos et.al. vs.

Manglapus

There should be balancing of welfare and

common good over the exercise of rights.

Laurel vs.
Garcia

Q: Does the Chief Executive, her officers and

agents, have the authority and jurisdiction, to
sell the Roppongi property?
A: As property of public dominion, the
Roppongi lot is outside the commerce of man.
It cannot be alienated. Its ownership is a
special collective ownership for general use
and enjoyment, an application to the
satisfaction of collective needs, and resides in
the social group. The purpose is not to serve
the State as a juridical person, but the citizens;
it is intended for the common and public
welfare and cannot be the object of
appropriation.
The Roppongi property is correctly classified
under paragraph 2 of Article 420 of the Civil
Code as property belonging to the State and
intended for some public service.
Q: If the property ceased to be public domain
can the Pres. sell it without legislative
authority?
A:

No.

There

is an

imperative need of

exercised in favour of a
single individual, and is
usually exerted in behalf
of certain classes of
persons, who are subject
to trial but have not yet
been convicted.

Commutation: It is a
change of the decision of
the Court made by the
Chief executive by
reducing the degree of
penalty inflicted upon the
convict, or by decreasing
the length of
imprisonment or amount
of fine.

legislative authority.
Powers of
Appointment
of the
President

Rimonte vs CSC

Appointment is an essentially discretionary

power and must be performed by the officer
vested with such power according to his best
lights, the only condition being that the
appointee should possess the qualifications
required by law. If he does, then the
appointment cannot be faulted on the ground
that there are others better qualified who
should have been preferred. Indeed, this is a
prerogative of the appointing authority which
he alone can decide.

Other officers:
1.regular members of the
Judicial Bar Council
except :Art.8.8.2 (ex officio)

Art.7.16.2 Ad interim
appointments:
appointments during
recess of Congress.

2.Chairman of the Civil

Service :Art IX-B sec.1

Such appointments shall

be effective only until
disapproval by
Commission on
Appointments or until
the next adjourn of
Congress

3.COMELEC Chairman: Art.

IX-C sec.2
4.Chairman ofCOA :Art. IX-D

Sarmiento III vs
Mison

It is readily apparent that under the provisions

of the 1987 Constitution, just quoted, there are
four (4) groups of officers whom the President
shall appoint. These four (4) groups, to which
we will hereafter refer from time to time, are:
First, the heads of the executive
departments, ambassadors, other
public ministers and consuls,
officers of the armed forces from
the rank of colonel or naval
captain, and other officers whose
appointments are vested in him
in this Constitution; 2
Second, all other officers of the
Government whose appointments
are not otherwise provided for by
law; 3
Third, those whom the President
may be authorized by law to
appoint;
Fourth, officers lower in
rank 4 whose appointments the
Congress may by law vest in the
President alone.
The first group of officers is clearly appointed
with the consent of the Commission on

5.members of the regional

consultative
commission:
Art.10.18
6.sectoral representative of
the House of Rep: functus
officio

Art.7.16. The President shall

nominate and, with the
consent of the Commission
on Appointments, appoint
the heads of the executive
departments, ambassadors,
other public ministers and
consuls, or officers of the
armed forces from the rank
of colonel or naval captain,
and other officers whose
appointments are vested in
him in this Constitution. He
shall also appoint all other
officers of the Government
whose appointments are not
otherwise provided for by

The power of removal is

inherent in the power to
appoint but subject to
the following limitations:
1.impeachable officials:
Heads/chairman of
constitutional
commissions,
ombudsman, and
justices of the SC
2.Judges of lower court:
subj. to disciplinary
measures of SC
3. No officer or employee
in the civil service shall
be removed or
suspended except for
cause as provided by
law.

Appointments. Appointments of such officers

are initiated by nomination and, if the
nomination is confirmed by the Commission on
Appointments, the President appoints.
Intention: It is not difficult for the Court to state
that the framers of the 1987 Constitution and
the people adopting it, struck a "middle
ground" by requiring the consent
(confirmation) of the Commission on
Appointments for the first group of
appointments and leaving to the President,
without such confirmation, the appointment of
other officers, i.e., those in the second and
third groups as well as those in the fourth
group, i.e., officers of lower rank.
That an appointment to the said position
(Central Bank Governor) is not among the
appointments which have to be confirmed by
the Commission on Appointments
Note: Chairman of NLRC, ad Human Rights are
also not included in the 1st group

Tarrosa vs.
Singson

President shall have the power to make

appointments during the recess of the
Congress, but such appointments shall be
effective only until disapproval by the
Commission on Appointments or until the next
adjournment of the Congress." It is an
appointment permanent in nature, and the
circumstance that it is subject to confirmation
by the Commission on Appointments does not
alter
its
permanent
character.
An ad
interim appointment is disapproved certainly
for a reason other than that its provisional
period has expired. Said appointment is of
course distinguishable from an "acting"
appointment which is merely temporary, good
until another permanent appointment is
issued.
But it is common sense to believe that after the

law, and those whom he

may be authorized by law to
appoint. The Congress may,
by law, vest the appointment
of other officers lower in
rank in the President alone,
in the courts, or in the
heads
of
department,
agencies, commissions, or
boards.

Limitations/Prohibitions to
Appointment Powers:
Art.7.13.2 : spouses,
descendants, ascendants
and collateral relatives up to
4th civil degree
Art.7.15. : 2 months before
the preceding
elections/midnight
appointments
Art.7.16 : Several
appointments need
confirmation from the
Commission on
Appointments
Art.8.9 : Nominees prepared
by the Judicial Bar Council

Summers vs.
Ozaeta

proclamation of the election of President

Macapagal, his was no more than a "caretaker" administration. He was duty bound to
prepare for the orderly transfer of authority the
incoming President, and he should not do acts
which he ought to know, would embarrass or
obstruct the policies of his successor.

He may or he may not accept the appointment

or nomination. "there is no Power in this
country which can compel a man to accept an
office."

Aytona vs.
Castillo et.al.

Lacson vs.
Romero

Villaluz vs.
Zaldivar

The President of the Philippines has

jurisdiction to investigate and remove him as
Administrator of the Motor Vehicles Office
since he is a presidential appointee who
belongs to the non-competitive or unclassified
service under Sec 5 of Republic Act No. 2260;
being a presidential appointee, Villaluz belongs
to the non-competitive or unclassified service
of the government and as such he can only be
investigated and removed from office after due
hearing by the President of the Philippines
under the principle that the power to remove
is inherent in the power to appoint

Prosecutor belongs to career under civil

service
"No officer or employee in the Civil Service
shall be removed or suspended except for
cause as provided by law."

Delos Santos
vs. Mallare

Extent of
Power of the
Pres. over
Executive
Departments

Military
Powers

Carpio vs
Executive Sec.

This presidential power of control over the

executive branch of government extends over
all executive officers from Cabinet Secretary to
the lowliest clerk.
"The power of [the
President] to alter or modify or nullify or set
aside what a subordinate officer had done in
the performance of his duties and to substitute
the judgment of the former with that of the
latter." It is said to be at the very "heart of the
meaning of Chief Executive."

Ang-angco vs
Castillo

The Secretary is the alter ego of the President

in that dept.

Roque vs
Director of
Lands

The power of control under this provision

implies the right of the President to interfere in
the exercise of such discretion as may be
vested by law in the officers of the executive
departments, bureaus, or offices of the national
government, as well as to act in lieu of such
officers."

Aquino vs.
Military
Commission

To preserve the safety of the nation in times of

national peril, the President of the Philippines
necessarily
possesses
broad
authority
compatible with the imperative requirements of
the emergency. On the basis of this, he has

Art.7.17 The Pres. shall have

control over the exec.
Depts., bureaus, and offices.

Art.7.18
The Pres. as commander in
chief of Armed Forces
1.call upon the armed forces
to prevent and suppress

Martial Law: All laws

represented or
administered by military
forces

authorized in General Order No. 8 (September

27, 1972) the Court of Staff, Armed Forces of
the Philippines, to create military tribunals to
try and decide cases "of military personnel and
such other cases as may be referred to them."
In General Order No. 12 (September 30, 1972),
the military tribunals were vested with
jurisdiction "exclusive of the civil courts",
among others, over crimes against public
order, violations of the Anti-Subversion Act,
violations of the laws on firearms, and other
crimes which, in the face of the emergency, are
directly related to the quelling of the rebellion
and preservation of the safety and security of
the Republic. In order to ensure a more orderly
administration of justice in the cases triable by
the said military tribunals, Presidential Decree
No. 39 was promulgated on November 7,1972,
providing for the "Rules Governing the
Creation, Composition, Jurisdiction, Procedure
and Other Matters Relevant to Military
Tribunals."
Aquino vs.
Military
Commission

Olaguer vs.
Military
Commission No.
34

lawless violence
2.Suspension of privilege of
writ of habeas corpus
3. declare martial law
Note: 2 and 3 is applicable
only in case when there is
invasion or rebellion, when
public safety requires

Checks on Military Powers:

Legislative check:
Art.7.18.1 majority of the
Members of the Congress
may revoke such
proclamation or suspension
Judicial Check:
Art.7.18.3 The SC may
review in appropriate
proceeding filed by any
citizen, the sufficient factual
basis of such suspension or
proclamation

All orders and decrees by Marcos under 1973

Constitution were valid.
Provisions which Forestall
the Military Power of the
Pres.
Note: but such laws and decrees were already
obliterated by the 1987 Constitution
Accordingly, it is Our considered opinion, and
We so hold, that a military commission or
tribunal cannot try and exercise jurisdiction,
even during the period of martial law, over
civilians for offenses allegedly committed by
them as long as the civil courts are open and
functioning, and that any judgment rendered by
such body relating to a civilian is null and void

Art.7.18.1
1.is applicable only in case
when there is invasion or
rebellion, when public
safety requires
2.subject to revocation via
legislative review
3.only for 60 days
Art.7.18.3 may be judicially

for lack of jurisdiction on the part of the

military tribunal concerned. 51 For the same
reasons, Our pronouncement in Aquino, Jr. v.
Military Commission No. 2 52 and all decided
cases affirming the same, in so far as they are
inconsistent with this pronouncement, should
be deemed abandoned.

Aquino Jr. vs.

Enrile

reviewed

Art.7.18.4 martial law does

not suspend the operation
of the Constitution

The declaration of martial law is justiciable.

(Art.7.18.3)
Note: before Martial Law, such declaration is a
political question. However, 1987 Constitution
expressly provides that it is now justiciable.

Lansang vs.
Garcia
The presidents decision to suspend the writ
was by fact constitutional hence VALID, as he
has three available courses to suppress
rebellion. First, to call out the military, second
to suspend the privilege of writ and lastly to
declare martial law.

Pardoning
Power

In Re:
Sumulong
Torres vs.
Director of
Bureau of
Corrections

A conditional pardon is in the nature of a

contract between the sovereign power or the
Chief Executive and the convicted criminal to
the effect that the former will release the latter
subject to the condition that if he does not
comply with the terms of the pardon, he will be
recommitted to prison to serve the unexpired
portion of the sentence or an additional one.
Pardon: It is an act of grace proceeding from
the power entrusted with the execution of laws
which exempts the individual o whom it is
bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts

Art.7.19. 1
may grant pardon except for
impeachment
may grant reprieves,
commutation, pardon, and
remit fines and forfeiture
AFTER conviction.

Limitations:
1.Art.7.19.1 maybe given
after conviction

In case of conditional
pardon, if the same has
not yet been delivered
and accepted, it can be
withdrawn.

Effects of absolute
pardon:
Based on the Innocence:
Pardon Affirms his
innocence and makes

De Leon vs. Dir.

Of Prisons

People vs. Salle

Jr.

Reprieve

Commutation
Amnesty

People vs. Vera

for the crime he has committed.

a. Absolute pardon
b. conditional pardon

The commutation of the penalty is impressed

with legal significance. That is an exercise of
executive clemency embraced in the pardoning
power. Once granted, it is binding and
effective. It serves to put an end to this appeal.
If appeal is not withdrawn, pardon cannot be
extended.

2.Art7.19.1 not in cases of

impeachment
3.Art. IX C sec.5 no pardon
for violation of election
laws, rules, and regulations
4.Art. 36 RPC- cannot
exempt culprit from civil
liability
5. Does not restore forfeited
or vacated public office:
(Munsanto vs. Factorn Jr.)
6. conditional pardon does
not exempt the convict from
payment of the civil
indemnity
(People vs Nacional)
7. determination as to
whether there is a violation
of the conditions of pardon
exclusively rests in the chief
executive(In re: sumulong
Torres)
8. cannot be exercised on
legislative or judicial
contempt : based on the
doctrine of separation of
powers

him a new man. It frees

the individual from all the
attendant penalties and
legal disabilities and
restores him all his civil
rights.

Art.7.19.2 power to grant

amnesty with the
concurrence of majority of
the Members of the
Congress.

Amnesty: It is an act of
the sovereign power
granting oblivion or
general pardon for a past
offense, and is rarely, if
exercised in favour of a
single individual, and is
usually exerted in behalf
of certain classes of
persons, who are subject

However, pardon cannot

bring back the persons
reputation of integrity,
honesty and fair dealing.

Reprieve is the withdrawal or withholding of

execution of punishment. It postpones the
execution of sentence on a certain date.

to trial but have not yet

been convicted.

Commutation: It is a
change of the decision of
the Court made by the
Chief executive by
reducing the degree of
penalty inflicted upon the
convict, or by decreasing
the length of
imprisonment or amount
of fine.
People vs. Vera
Parole

Conviction by
Final
Judgement

People vs. Salle

Jr.

Violation of
Conditions of
Pardon

In Re:
Sumulong
Torres

Parole is a method by which a prisoner who

has served a portion of his sentence is
conditionally released but remain in legal
custody, the condition being that in case of
misbehaviour, he shall be imprisoned. A parole
does not pardon the prisoner.
1.when there is no appeal seasonably perfected
2. when the accused commenced to serve the
sentence
3. when the accused waived his right to appeal
4. when the accused applied for probation
1. Conditional pardon takes the
nature of a contract (see
previous definition)
2. Upon breach of the conditions of
the pardon, the President (based
on the Revised Administrative
Code) is empowered to order rearrest
3. Determination rests exclusively
in
the
President
however
erroneous may his findings be
Note: due process may not be invoked since it
has been duly served in a judicial trial. Due
process has been ceased the Constitutional
way.

Case
Analysis: On
executive
clemency

Garcia v.
Chairman on
COA

Q: Chairman Ely was charged criminally

(Qualified theft) and administratively
(dishonesty). He was acquitted in the criminal
case but was held guilty in the admin. Case. In
case pardon was by the President, may he be
automatically reinstated to his former office?
A: Yes. However, there are 2 rules which must
be followed:
1. If the acquittal of the accused in the crim
case was founded on his innocence,
then the pardon makes him a new man
and saves him from all punitive effects
of the offense. It cleans his name and
reputation. Therefore, he is entitled to
automatic reinstitution. The pardon
affirms his innocence.
2. However, if the accused was acquitted
on the ground of lack of proof beyond
reasonable doubt, the pardoned cannot
be automatically reinstated to his
position. He needs to apply for
reappointment. (Monsanto vs. Factoran)

Llamas vs.
Orbos

Free Telephone
Workers Union
vs. Minister of
Labor and
Employment
Duration of
Attachment of

The contention of Llamas that the executive

pardon shall apply only in crim cases is
untenable. The constitution did not distinguish
bet. Crim and admin case. If the law does not
distinguish, so do we.

It is clearly within the power granted to the

executive to modify and reverse a ruling issued
by a subordinate agency against an erring
official.

Q: How long are the conditions attached?

Pardon vs Amnesty
1. Pardon must be
pleaded and is not of
judicial notice; Amnesty
is of judicial notice.
2. Pardon may be
granted to an individual
after conviction generally
for all types of crimes
(subj. to exceptions);
Amnesty is granted to a
class of persons before
criminal prosecution or
after conviction generally
for political crimes.
3. Pardon looks forward,
Amnesty looks
backward.

conditions of
pardon

People vs
Ynares

Conditions last and endure during the lifetime

of the pardoned. (1936)

Infante vs.
Provincial
Warden

Conditions must be co-terminus with the

original sentence based on the principle that a
pardon must be an act of grace, not an act of
repression. (1952)
Note: Infante case overruled People vs. Ynares

Cristobal vs.
Labrador

Monsanto vs.
Factoran

Amnesty

People vs.
Pasilan

In case a person who has already served fully

his sentence was pardoned by the chief, the
pardon will extinguish the accessory penalties
and restore his civil and political rights.

Q: May the absolute pardon restore ipso facto

an official position?
A: No. The pardon only restore reappointment
forfeited by virtue of conviction.
Q: Is the admission of guilt necessary to avail
amnesty?
A: Yes. It is necessary that the person must
admit guilt as a pre-condition.

Vera vs. People

Amnesty presupposes the commission of a

crime, and when an accused maintains that he
has not committed a crime, he cannot have any
use for amnesty.

Macaga-an vs.
People

Q: A former military officer who became a rebel

was convicted for rebellion and is concurrently
serving his sentence. The Pres. grants

Art. IXC sec. 5: no executive

clemency to those who
violated election regulations
without favourable
recommendation from
COMELEC

amnesty. Will he be qualified to avail?

A: Yes. To extend benefits to all those who are
within the terms of amnesty proclamation.

Diplomatic
Power

Peoples
Movement for
Press Freedom
vs Manglapus

By constitutional fiat and by the intrinsic

nature of his office, the President, as head of
State, is the sole organ and authority in the
external affairs of the country. In many ways,
the President is the chief architect of the
nation's foreign policy; his "dominance in the
field of foreign relations is (then)
conceded." Wielding vast powers and
influence, his conduct in the external affairs of
the nation, as Jefferson describes, is
executive altogether.

Provisions Repository of
Diplomatic Powers
Art.7.1
Art.7.16- nominate
ambassadors
Art.7.21- treaties and int.
agreement
Art.7.20- contract foreign
loan on behalf of RP

Treaties are formal

documents which require
ratification with the approval
of two thirds of the Senate.
Executive agreements
become binding through
executive action without the
need of a vote by the
Senate or by Congress.
International agreements
involving political issues or
changes of national policy
and those involving
international arrangements
of a permanent character
usually take the form of
treaties. But international
agreements
embodying adjustments of
detail carrying out wellestablished national policies
and traditions and those
involving arrangements of a
more or less temporary
nature usually take the form
of executive agreements.
(Commissioner of Customs
and Collector of Customs
vs. Eastern Sea Trading)

Power to
Deport Aliens

Forbes vs. Tiaco

and Crossfield

The Pres. may deport or accept aliens subject

to constitutional and statutory restrictions. In
the absence of constitutional and statutory
authority, the Pres. may deport and accept

Note: No, Filipino citizen

may not be expelled from
his own country not only
due to absence of any

Qua Chee Gan

vs. Deportation
Board

aliens. This power is inherent in the

sovereignty and is a discretionary act of the
Pres.
2 modes of deportation:
1. Order of Pres. after due process
2. By commission of immigration upon the
recommendation by board of
commission (Commonwealth Act)

law which authorize

expulsion even if the
person is obnoxious and
dangerous since no state
will accept the banished.
Expulsion is addressed
only to foreign nationals.
Note: The Congress
(legislative) may
prescribe methods on
the deportation of aliens.
However, the Presidents
power to deport can only
be controlled but cannot
be taken away. This right
cannot be destroyed or
bartered.

Judiciary

Assoc. of Small
Land Owners of
the Phil. Vs Hon.
Sec. of Agrarian
Reform

Although holding neither purse nor sword, the

judiciary can check and nullify acts of either
the legislative or the executive or both when
not conforming to the fundamental law.
(doctrine of judicial supremacy).

Art.8.1.2- judicial power to

settle disputes and
determine whether there is
grave abuse of discretion3
Qualifications:
Art.8.7.1-3

Lopez vs. Roxas

The judiciacy has the authority to settle

justiciable disputes and controversies
involving rights enforceable or demandable or
redress violation of such rights.

Art.8.7.3 Common
qualifications of all
members of the judiciary(SC
and lower courts)

Note: The Pres. may

issue warrant of arrest
for deporting an
obnoxious alien only for
the purpose of carrying
out a final judgement of
deportation.(this is not
subj. to judicial review)
Judiacy is the weakest:
misnomer
Judiciary is the most
passive dept. because it
can only adjucate
justiciable or when there
there is a bon fide
controversy before them.
The judiciary cannot
motu proprio act on
case/take cognizance
unless designated to it.

Arroyo vs.
HRET

Bondoc vs.
Pineda

Manalo vs.
Rolda n

Nitafan vs. CIR

The primary purpose is to eliminate the

defense of political question which under the
former consti deprives the Consti from
authority to review

Political question" doctrine, the accepted

meaning of which is that 'where the matter
involved is left to a decision by the people acting
in their sovereign capacity or to the sole
determination by either or both the legislative or
executive branch of the government, it is beyond
judicial cognizance. Thus it was that in suits
where the party proceeded against was either the
President or Congress, or any of its branches for
that matter, the courts refused to act."

Whenever any branch exceeds its authority,

disregards law, and exercised grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction, the SC has the authority to review.

The Court held that the salaries of

Justices and Judges are properly
subject to a general income tax law
applicable to all income earners and
that the payment of such income tax by
Justices and Judges does not fall within
the constitutional protection against
decrease of their salaries during their
continuance in office and the ruling
that "the imposition of income tax upon
the salary of judges is a diminution
thereof, and so violates the
Constitution" in Perfecto vs. Meer, as
affirmed in Endencia vs. David must be

On salary:
Art8.3- Salary shall be fixed
by law.During their
continuance in office, their
salary shall not decrease.
On jurisdiction of SC:
The Congress may define,
apportion, prescribe the
jurisdiction of courts, but no
law shall be passed
reorganizing the judiciary
which undermines the
security of tenure of the
Members.

Removal from office:

SC Members: by
impeachment
Lower courts: may be
disciplined by SC en banc
Art.8.11

Constitutional basis of SC
power to review:

Judicial power: power to

apply laws to
contests/cases or
dispute concerning
legally recognized rights.
Art.8.1.2

Judicial review:
Review, reverse, modify
or affirm an appeal on
certiorari.
Art.8.5.2

Justiciable vs political
question:
Justiciable: issue that
affects civil, personal, or
property rights. These
are real and not
theoretical.
Political: under Consti.
To be decided by the
person according to their
sovereign capacity and
to which there is
discretionary authority.

Art.8.5 appellate
jurisdiction
Art.8.1.2 in case of grave
abuse of discretion
Functions of Judicial
review:
1.Legitimizing/positive
power: Art.8.4.2

1.Legitimizing/positive
power: act of sustaining
the validity or
constitutionality
2.Checking/negative
power: act of explicitly
pronouncing a law or act

Torres vs.
Gonzales

Romulo vs.
Yniguez

Lawyers
League of the
Phil. Vs Aquino

People vs Vera

declared discarded. The framers of the

fundamental law, as the alter ego of
the people, have expressed in clear and
unmistakable terms the meaning and
import of Section 10, Article VIII, of the
1987 Constitution that they have
adopted.

The grant of pardon and the determination of the

terms and conditions of a conditional pardon are
purely executive acts which are not subject to
judicial scrutiny.

The Court cannot by mandamus compel the

Batasan to give due course to the impeachment
complaint.

The legitimacy of the Aquino government is not a

justiciable matter but belongs to the realm of
politics where only the people are the judge. The
Court further held that:
1. the people have accepted the Aquino
government which is in effective control of the
entire country; 2. it is not merely a de facto
government but in fact and law a de jure
government; and
3. the community of nations has recognized the
legitimacy of the new government

2.Checking/negative power:
Occena vs COMELEC
3.symbolic/teaching
function: Salonga vs Cruz

Cases which are decided en

Banc:
Art.8 sec. 4 par. 2
Cases involving
constitutionality
Art.8 sec. 4 par. 3 Cases on
matters heard by a division
without concurrence of 3
Members
Art. 7 sec.4 par. 7: contest
relating to elections of Pres.
and VP

unconstitutional
3. symbolic/teaching
function: act of
conveying to the
Members of the bench,
as well as the bar, the
controlling doctrinal law
or jurisprudencial
pronouncement

Requisites of judicial
review:
1.Existence of an actual
case/controversy
(Dumlao vs.COMELEC)
2.issue must be raised
by the proper party
3.issue must be raised at
the earliest time possible

Cases where SC modifies a

doctrine laid down en banc

3.It must be necessary of

the final determination of
the case

Art.8.11 Dismissal on
Discipline of judges of lower
court

LUZ FARMS vs. THE

On Fiscal Autonomy:
Art.8.3 nd Art. 6.25.1

HONORABLE SECRETARY
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
AGRARIAN REFORM
Note: the ff.are considered
interested/proper parties:

VirJen Shipping
and Marine
Services vs.

Summary: The State is a proper party in a

controversy. This is in order to prevent a
moral wound that an unconstitutional law
may produce

2 views on Constitutionality
of a Statute:
Orthodox view: An
unconstitutional law is no
law at all. It confers no right,

1.Minors in a class
suit(Oposa vs. Factoran
Jr.)
2.Voters in election
questioning its validity

NLRC

A division of the SC may not review the

decision of another. The decision of one
division is the decision of SC itself as one and
singular court.
Note: In case of conflict in decisions of one
division to another: The case may be brought
to SC en banc

The lower court may declare the

unconstitutionality of a law, however the
declaration is only binding to the party litigants
Ynot vs IAC

IN RE:
DESIGNATION OF
JUDGE
RODOLFO U.
MANZANO AS
MEMBER OF THE
ILOCOS NORTE
PROVINCIAL
COMMITTEE ON
JUSTICE.

Soncuya vs. Natl

Loan and
Investment Board

The Constitution prohibits the designation of

members of the judiciary to any agency performing
quasi-judicial or administrative functions (Section 12,
Article VIII, Constitution.).

Decision is a judgement rendered by a court of

justice or other competent tribunal after the
presentation of respective positions of the
parties in an ordinary or criminal case or upon
a stipulation of facts upon which the
disposition of the case is based.

Period (Art.8.15.1) is merely directory and not

mandatory.

Q: is the pronouncement of the SC subject to

further review?

imposes no obligation,
affords no protection, and
creates no office.

Unorthodox view:
Since the law is given a
presumption of
constitutionality, it must be
given due respect and
obedience.
Agbayani vs PNB

Unacceptability of orthodox
view: retroactivity cannot be
justified. Cruz vs. Enrile

3.Concerned citizens, if
the issue is of
transcendental
importance (Civil
Liberties vs executive
secretary)
4.Legislators (Tatad vs
Garcia et.al)
4.Tax Payers, if it
involves misapplication
of govt. funds (Lozada
vs. COMELEC)

Marcelino vs.
Cruz

Angara vs.
Electoral
Commissions

A: No. It is elementary that the Supreme Court

is supreme.
That in cases of conflict between the several
departments and among the agencies thereof, the
judiciary, with the Supreme Court as the final arbiter,
is the only constitutional mechanism devised finally to
resolve the conflict and allocate constitutional
boundaries.

A law may be partly unconstitutional. If the valid

portion can stand alone, it shall remain constitutional.

Calili vs. Wood

Industries and CA