Notes: Constitution

As of: September 19 - Monday

Article VII - Executive Branch

Power of the President
Section 17
Control power
Control is defined as the power of an officer 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 judgement of the former for that of
the latter. It includes the authority to order the doing of an act by a subordinate or to undo such an act or
to assume a power directly vested in him by law. (Cruz, 2002).
The control power of the President is directly derived from the Constitution. Thus, any law that will limit
the exercise of his control power is invalid. The members of the Cabinet as his alter ego are under the full
control of the President. He may appoint them as he sees fit, shuffle them at pleasure, and replace them in
his discretion without any legal inhibition whatsoever. (ibid).
Control vs. Supervision
Control is different from supervision. To supervise is to oversee that subordinate officers perform their
duties. If the subordinates fail or neglect to fulfill them, then the officer may take such action or steps as
prescribed by law to make them perform these duties.
-

Power of supervision does not exclude the power to sanction

Also includes the power to dismiss public officials

If you are a Presidential appointee, the President cannot dismiss you without valid reason.
It must be distinguished if they are career or non-career to be protected by security of tenure.
-

Non-career can be dismissed by mere loss of confidence

Career officials are protected by security of tenure

The "take-care" clause

The President is considered as the Law Enforcer. He is to enforce the Constitution, statutes, judicial
decisions, administrative rules and regulations and municipal ordinances, as well as treaties entered into
by the government. The President cannot choose what he just would like to enforce or what he deemed
lawful. He is to execute and implement all laws unless it is declared unconstitutional by the judiciary.
Source: http://politicsandgovernance.blogspot.com/2010/07/control-power.html

Section 18
Military Power
The military power enables the President to:
1. command all the armed forces of the Philippines;
2. suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; and
3. declare martial law.

Command of the Armed Forces

Based on the constitutional principle of the supremacy of the civilian authority over the military, the
President is held as the Commander-in-Chief of all the armed forces. Whenever necessary, he may call
out such armed forces to prevent or suppress violence, invasion or rebellion only.
- Calling out power
Has no specific grounds to be invoked, but it can be invoked under the discretion of the President to
suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. It utilizes the help of the AFP alongside the PNP to
suppress lawless violence.
-

Discretion of the President

A political question and therefore not a justiciable one
The President has broader scope in this power for it includes control of AFP with the PNP
There must be a period

Does not give the President extra constitutional power unless given by the Congress Art VI, Section 23
(David v Arroyo)
When is there a lawful warrantless arrest?
1. When in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing or is
attempting to commit an offense;
2. When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to arrested has committed it;
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place
where he is serving final judgement or is temporarily confined while his case is pending;
4. Hot pursuit.

Habeas Corpus
The writ of habeas corpus is a writ directed to the person detaining another, commanding him to produce
the body of the prisoner at a designated time and place, with the day and cause of his caption and
detention, to do, to submit to, and receive whatever the court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in
his behalf. It is a high prerogative common law writ of ancient origin the great object of which is the
liberation of those who may be in prison without sufficient cause. (Moran)
The President is entrusted the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Note that what
is suspended is not the writ itself but only the privilege of it. This means that when the court receives an
application for the writ, and it finds the petition in proper form, it will issue the writ as a matter of course,
i.e., the court will issue an order commanding the production before the court of the person allegedly
detained, at a time and place stated in the order, and requiring the true cause of his detention to be shown
to the court. If the return to the writ shows that the person in custody was apprehended and detained in
areas where the privilege of the writ has been suspended or for crimes mentioned in the executive
proclamation, the court will suspend further proceedings in the action. (Cruz, 2002)

Martial Law
Martial law refers to that law which has application when the military arm does not supersede civilian
authority but is called upon to aid it in the execution of its civil function.
During martial law, there is no new powers given to the executive, no extension of arbitrary authority is
recognized, no civil rights are suspended. The relations between the state and its citizens is unchanged.
The interference that may be caused to personal freedom or property rights must always be based on
necessity.
Limitations of the Military Powers
The military powers of the President are not absolute. The following are the limitations on the military
powers of the President:
1. He may call out the armed forces when it becomes necessary to prevent or suppress lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion only.
2. The grounds for the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus and the proclamation
of martial law are now limited only to invasion or rebellion, when the public safely requires it.
3. The duration of such suspension or proclamation shall not exceed sixty days, following which it
shall be automatically lifted.
4. Within forty-eight hours after such suspension or proclamation, the President shall personally or
in writing report his action to the Congress. If not in session, Congress must convene within 24
hours without need of a call.
5. The Congress may then, by a majority vote of all its members voting jointly, revoke his action.
6. The revocation may not be set aside by the President.
7. By the same veto and in the same manner, the Congress may, upon initiative of the President,
extend his suspension or proclamation for a period to be determined by the Congress if the
invasion or rebellion shall continue and the public safety requires the extension.
8. The action of the President and the Congress shall be subject to review by the Supreme Court
which shall have the authority to determine the sufficiency of the factual basis of such action.
This matter is no longer considered a political question and may be raised in an appropriate
proceeding by any citizen. Moreover, the Supreme Court must decide the challenge within thirty
days from the time it is filed.
9. Martial law does not automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the
operation of the Constitution. The civil courts and the legislative bodies shall remain open.
Military courts and agencies are not conferred jurisdiction over civilians where the civil courts are
functioning.
10. The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons facing
charges of rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion.
11. Any person arrested for such offense must be judicially charged therewith within three days.
Otherwise he shall be released.
Source: http://politicsandgovernance.blogspot.com/2010/07/military-power.html

Section 19
Executive clemency
-

Not on impeachment
Cannot do away with contempt of court
Pardon will dissolve civil liability

Pardon cannot result into reinstatement (Oposa v Factoran)

Absolute pardon Restores your legibility but not your former position
Section 21
Treaty making powers (Foreign affairs power)
-

Exclusive to the executive branch

Entering into Treaties and Executive agreements

Treaties - are international agreements entered into by the Philippines which require legislative
concurrence after executive ratification.
-

Effective only when ratified. Treaty by itself is valid but cannot be enforced unless allowed by
the senate.

Executive Agreements - similar to treaties except that they do not require legislative concurrence.
An executive agreement is as binding as a treaty. (Bayan v Zamora)

Deportation and Extradition

Extradition Bilateral in nature.
May come into effect when the Philippine government and an international government sign an
agreement through a treaty to be ratified by their respective implementing bodies.
-

A person may be extradited by virtue of a treaty if the crime is extraditable

There must be a treaty from both countries

Deportation Unilateral in nature.

Call of the President.
-

May be done by the President directly or upon recommendation of Immigration and Deportation
Bureau
Can only be done to foreign aliens.

Appointment powers
1. Coterminous When the term of the President ends so the does this position of the appointed
official
2. Career Their employment does not necessarily end but they return to their mother department
Ex. Ambassador returns to the VFA

Article VIII Judicial Branch

Section 1-5
Judicial power
-

Article VIII, Section 1, Par.1 (Vested in the Supreme Court)

Article VIII, Section 1, Par. 2 (Scope of the judicial power)

Jurisdiction Authority to exercise Judicial power.

-

Can be territorial.
If there is no jurisdiction all actions are null and void.

Judicial Review
It is only an aspect of Judicial power.
It is the power of the court to find out if the actions of the Executive or the Legislative are in accordance
with the constitution. It questions the actions of the government.
-

Any branch of the government or instrumentality is subject to Judicial Review

Does not remove political question
A grave abuse of discretion is required in order for it to be reviewable by the courts

Limitation to the power of Judicial Review:

(Macasiano v NHA)
The essential requisites for a successful judicial inquiry/review into the constitutionality of a law are:
1. the existence of an actual case or controversy involving a conflict of legal rights susceptible of
judicial determination,
2. the constitutional question must be raised by a proper property,
3. the constitutional question must be raised at the opportunity, and
4. the resolution of the constitutional question must be necessary to the decision of the case.
or
(IBP v Zamora)
When questions of constitutional significance are raised, the Court can exercise its power of judicial
review only if the following requisites are complied with, namely:
1.
2.
3.
4.

the existence of an actual and appropriate case;

a personal and substantial interest of the party raising the constitutional question;
the exercise of judicial review is pleaded at the earliest opportunity; and
the constitutional question is the lis mota of the case.

Section 2
Role of Congress
Can Congress create a law to define, prescribe, or limit the jurisdiction of the Courts?
-

Yes. As long as they respect the security of tenure once they reorganize.
And there has to be a provision in the law that where the Judges have options to transfer.

Section 5
(David v Arroyo)
Is it possible that a case declared moot and academic be reviewed by the SC?
Yes
1. There is a grave violation of the Constitution.
2. The exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is involved.
3. When constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the
bench, the bar, and the public.
4. The case is capable of repetition yet evading review.

What if majority vote is not reached in the Supreme Court?

-

It will be heard en banc

RTC decision of conviction Reversed

-

In favor of the accused on the Doctrine of presumption innocence until proven guilty.

RTC decision declaring the law unconstitutional Reversed

-

On the Doctrine of Presumption of Constitutionality

Original Case filed in the SC Dismissed

Ex.
If a person files a petition questioning the Constitutionality of declaration of Martial Law and no majority
vote is reached Petition shall be dismissed on grounds that the actions of the President shall assumed
Constitutional.

If the case has no standing can the SC decide?

Yes - The requirement of the Supreme court for standing is lax.
Instances of relax of requirements:

1.
2.
3.
4.

Involves constitutional issues.

Tax payers suit. (against illegal disbursement of public funds)
If an election law is invalid. (voter)
Where the issues are of transcendental and paramount importance not only to the public but also
to the Bench and the Bar, they should be resolved for the guidance of all. (concerned citizen)
(Biraogo v PTC)

Declaratory relief - refers to a judgment of a court which determines the rights of parties without
ordering anything be done or awarding damages.
By seeking a declaratory judgment, the party making the request is seeking for an official declaration of
the status of a matter in controversy.
Doctrine of Operative Fact Acts done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared
unconstitutional remain valid, but not when the acts are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality.
The doctrine of operative fact, as an exception to the general rule, only applies as a matter of equity and
fair play. It nullifies the effects of an unconstitutional law by recognizing that the existence of a statute
prior to a determination of unconstitutionality is an operative fact and may have consequences which
cannot always be ignored.

Drilon v Lim
Article X, Section 5(2), of the Constitution vests in the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over final
judgments and orders of lower courts in all cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty,
international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance,
or regulation is in question.

Aurelo v CA
Section 1, Rule 13, Part III of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure is not applicable to proceedings before
the regular courts.
Constitutionally speaking, the COMELEC cannot adopt a rule prohibiting the filing of certain
pleadings in the regular courts. The power to promulgate rules concerning pleadings, practice and
procedure in all courts is vested on the Supreme Court (Constitution, Art VIII, Sec. 5 [5]).