ARTICLE II

Declaration of Principles and State Policies

Principles

Sec. 1 Democratic and Republican State

Sec. 2 Renunciation of War; Doctrine of Incorporation; Adherence to policy of Peace,

Freedom, Amity-

PHARMACEUTICAL AND HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION VS. DUQUE III

Facts: Before the court is a petition for certiorari, seeking to nullify the
Administrative Order entitled, Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of Executive
Order No. 51 Otherwise known as the Milk Code, Relevant International Agreements,
Penalizing Violations thereof, And for Other Purposes (RIRR).

E.O. No. 51 or the Milk Code issued by the president Corazon Aquino on October 28,
1986, by virtue of legislative powers granted to the president under the Freedom
Constitution. One of its preambular clauses stating that the law seeks to give effect to Article
11 of the International Code of Marketing of Breast milk Substitutes (ICMBS), a
code adopted by the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981.

Issues: The constitutionality of RIRR issued by the DOH. Whether

pertinent international agreements entered into by the Philippines are part of the law of the
land and may be implemented by the DOH through RIRR; if in affirmative, whether the RIRR
is in accord with the international agreements?

Ruling: Under the 1987 Constitution, International laws can be a

domestic law through transformation (thru local legislation), or incorporation (mere
constitutional declaration i.e. treaties). The ICBMS had been transformed into domestic law
through local legislation such as the Milk Code which is almost a verbatim
reproduction of the ICBMS.

For WHA resolutions, the Court ruled that DOH failed to establish that the provisions
pertinent WHA resolutions are customary international law that may be deemed part of the
law of the land. For an international rule to be considered as a customary law, it must be
established such rule is being followed by states because they consider it as obligatory to
comply with such rules (OPINIO JURIS). The WHA may be classified as Soft-Law or non-
binding norms, principles and practices that influence state behavior which is not part of the
international law.

DOCTRINE OF INCORPORATION: Generally Accepted Principles of Law; section 2, article II

of the 1987 constitution, whereby the Philippines adopts a generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land, embodies the incorporation method. By
virtue of incorporation, generally accepted principles of international law refers to norms of
general or customary international law which are binding on all states.

Father Joaquin Bernas defines customary international laws as a general

and consistent practice of states followed by them from a sense of legal
obligation (OPINIO JURIS). This statement contains two basic elements of custom;
the material factor that is, how states behave, and the psychological or subjective
factor, that is, why they behave the way they do. The material factor includes
several elements: duration, consistency and generality of the practice of states.
Sec 3 Civilian Supremacy

IBP vs. ZAMORA

Facts: President Ejercito Estrada commanding the deployment of the

Philippine Marines to join the Philippine National Police in the visibility patrols around the
metropolis. Due to alarming violent crimes in Metro Manila, the president in a verbal
directive ordered the PNP and the Marines to conduct joint visibility patrol for the purpose of
prevention and suppression, which is headed by the PNP Chief.

The IBP contesting the constitutionality of the deployment of the

marines, that such deployment is in violation of Article II section 3 of the Constitution.

Issues: whether or not the calling of the armed forces to assist the PNP
in joint visibility patrols violates the constitutional provisions of civilian supremacy, over the
military and the civilian character of the PNP?

Ruling: the deployment of the Marines does not violate the civilian
supremacy clause nor does it not infringe the civilian character of the police force. The
calling of the marines constitutes permissible use of the military assets for civilian law
enforcement. The authority still belongs to the PNP. And thus the calling of the PNP and the
Marines to prevent crimes within the metro manila is in accordance with the civilian
supremacy clause of the constitution. The action by the president is still for the protection of
the people residing within the places enumerated in the LOI. It is still under the supremacy
of the sovereign people.

Sec. 4 The defense of the state- Posse Commitatus-

PEOPLE VS. LAGMAN AND ZOSA.

Facts: Tranquilo Lagman and Primitivo de Zosa, was charged of violation of

section 60 of the commonwealth Act No. 1, known as the National Defense Law when they
refuse to register in the military as required by law upon reaching the age of 20. Their
reason is that the former has a mother and brother to support while the latter has a father
independent to him and both dont wish to kill or be killed.

Issue: WON the National Defense Law was constitutional by virtue of section
4 article II of the 1987 constitution, which states that the defense of the state is the prime
duty of the government, and in fulfillment of this duty all citizens may be required by law to
render personal military or civil service?

Ruling: The National Defense Law does not go against the provision of the
constitution, thus it is in faithful compliance therewith. The duty of the Government to
defend the state cannot be performed except through an army. What justifies compulsory
military service is the defense of the state, whether actual or whether in preparation to
make it more effective, in case of need. It is a consequence of the duty of the government to
defend the state. Protecting the state leads to the protection of the people in return,
assailing the constitutional provision of section 4, article II of the constitution.
Sec 5 Maintenance of Peace and Order

Peace and Order must be promoted at all cost and even at the expense of justice and
could encourage the use of military solutions to what could normally be treated as social,
economic, and political problems. It is the protection of life, liberty, and property.

Sec 6 Separation of Church and State

IMBONG VS. OCHOA

Facts: R.A. 10354, Otherwise known as the Responsible Parenthood

and Reproductive Health Act Of 2012 (RH Law), was enacted by the congress on Dec. 21,
2012. Challenges from various sectors of the society, including the church as a whole,
started to raise their contention on the constitutionality of the said Law. The 14 petitioners
and 2 petitioner-in-intervention assails the constitutionality of the RH law on grounds that it
violates the right to life, right to health, right to protection against hazardous products, and
right to religious freedom and right to free speech.

Issue: WON the RH Law is unconstitutional depending on the given grounds?

Ruling: On the issue on freedom of religion, the principle of separation

of church and state is applicable, that is written on section 6 article II of the constitution,
manifesting its principle that it is based on mutual respect. The state cant meddle within
the internal affairs of the church, much less question its faith and dictate upon it. It cannot
favor one religion to discriminate against another. On the other hand, the church cannot
impose its beliefs and convictions on the state and the rest of the citizenry. It cannot
demand that the nation follow its beliefs, even if it sincerely believes that they are good for
the country.

STATE POLICIES

Sec 7- Independent Foreign Policy

Sec 8 Nuclear-Free Philippines

MAGALLONA VS. ERMITA

RA 3046 was passed in 1961 which provides the demarcation lines of the Philippine
baselines as an archipelago.

RA 5446 amended RA 3046 in terms of typographical errors.

On March 2009, RA 9522 took effect amending the RA 5466. With the compliance to the
UNCLOS III in which the Philippines is one of the signatory, shortening one baseline while
optimizing the other and classifying the Kalayaan Group of Island and Scarborough Shoal as
Regimes of the island.

*In relation to section 8 article II of the 1987 Constitution, the baseline laws protect
the Philippine territory for a nuclear free country. These borders set as a limit for foreign
vessels to pass within the Philippine territory with the threat of having nuclear weapons and
products use for its manufacture. The RA 9522 will be our defense on foreign state to bring
nuclear weapons inside our territory.
Sec 9 Just and Dynamic Social Order

ESPINA VS. ZAMORA

Facts: RA 8762, also known as the Retail Trade Liberalization Act of 2000, which
expressly repealed RA 1180 which absolutely prohibits foreign nationals from engaging in
the retail trade business. The former now allows them to do under four categories
enumerated in the Act. The petitioners assails the constitutionality of RA 8762 on grounds
that it violates section9, 19 and 20 of article II of the 1987 constitution which enjoins the
state to place the national economy under the control of Filipinos to achieve equal
distribution of opportunities, promote industrialization, and full employment, and protect
Filipino enterprise against unfair competition and trade policies.

Issue: WON RA 8762 is unconstitutional?

Ruling: The prime concern of the state is the promotion and establishment of a
socio-political and economic system that will ensure the independence of the nation and
aims to secure for the people the benefits of full employment, a high standard of living, and
equality in economic opportunities, security in old age, and other basic human rights. The
court lays down the ideals of economic nationalism, be expressing preference in favor of
qualified Filipinos in grant of rights privileges and concessions covering national economy
and patrimony and in use of Filipino Labor, domestic materials, and locally produced goods,
by mandating the state to adopt measures that help them make competitive and by
requiring the state to develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively
controlled by Filipinos.

The passage of RA 8762 promotes just and dynamic social, because it protects the
Filipinos as a whole regarding the control of our economy.

Sec 10 Promotion of Social Justice

BFAR VS. COA

Facts: Food Basket Allowance issued by the BFAR office, Cebu City was approved by
the Department of Agriculture and was given to BFAR Employees.

On post audit, the COA-LAO, Cebu City disallowed the grant of Food Basket
Allowance given to BFAR employees on grounds that it lacks legal basis for such granting of
incentives and it violates section 15 of the General Appropriations Act of 1999.

The petitioners invoke the section 9 and 10, Article II of the 1987 constitution for
their appeal on the incentives disallowance.

Issue: WON the disallowance made by the COA-LAO violates the provisions of the
1987 Constitution, article II section 9 and 10.

Ruling: the court ruled that the social justice provisions of the constitution are
not self-executing principles ready for enforcement through the courts. They are merely
statements of principles and policies. To give effect, legislative enactment is required. They
do not embody judicially enforceable constitutional rights but guidelines for legislation.

Sec 11 Human Dignity and Human Rights- the state values the dignity of every human
person and guarantees full respect for human rights.

Sec 12 Family as a basic autonomous social institution

Protect life of the unborn from conception

Primary Right and duty of parents

IMBONG VS. OCHOA

RIGHT TO LIFE- The petitioners assail the RH Law because it violates the right to life and
health of the unborn child under section 12, article II of the Constitution. The assailed
legislation allows the access to abortifacient or abortive effectively sanctions abortion. The
petitioners considers contraceptives that prevent the fertilized ovum to reach and be
implanted to mothers womb as an abortifacient, that contraceptives take effect after
fertilization and prior to implantation. They contend that fertilized ovum has already life and
the contraceptives kill such.

The court tends to discuss the proper interpretation of the constitutional provision under
article II section 12 stating thatIt shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of
the unborn form conception.. The issue arises from whether when does life begins. Does
conception refers to fertilization or implantation.

It is well known that the word conception traditionally means fertilization and where which
life begins. Considering the intent of the framers in making the RH Law, after their
deliberations, the term conception used in article II section 12 of the constitution, clearly
refers to the moment of fertilization.

The constitutional provision on right to life recognized the determination of whether a

contraceptive device is an abortifacient that kill and destroy the fertilized ovum should be
deemed an abortive and thus prohibited. Conversely, contraceptives that actually prevent
the union of the male sperm and female ovum, and those that similarly take action prior to
fertilization should be deemed non-abortive, and thus, constitutionally permissible.

FAMILY AND THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY- The court agrees that provisions of the RH Law
violate the constitutional provisions regarding the family as basic social institutions by
intruding into marital privacy and autonomy. They argue that it cultivates disunity and
fosters animosity in the family rather than promote its solidarity and total development. The
RH Law contains provisions which tend to wreck the family as a solid social institution. It
bars the husband from participating in the decision making process regarding their common
future progeny. Section 23(a) (2) (i) prohibits the other spouse to participate in the decision
making by giving absolute authority to the spouse who would undergo the medical
procedure.

Sec 13 Youth

Sec 14 Women

PHILIPPINE TELEGRAPGH AND TELEPHONE COMPANY VS. NLRC

Grace De Guzman was an employee of PT&T, and who was terminated on

grounds of dishonesty thru concealment of civil status and defalcation of company
funds. Grace De Guzman argues that it is her contracted marriage during her
employment to the company was the main reason for the company to terminate her,
being it prohibited by companys policies. Being terminated, De Guzman seeks relief
on court filing a petition for illegal dismissal which was granted by the courts.

The application of section 14 to the case:

 The constitution, cognizant of the disparity in rights between men and women
in almost all phases of social and political life, provides a set of protective provisions.
To site, section 14 article II of the 1987 constitution, expressly recognizes the role of
women in nation building and commands the state to ensure, at all times, the
fundamental equality before the law of man and woman. In relation to it, section 3 of
article XIII pointedly requires the state to afford full protection to labor and to
promote full employment equality including assurance of entitlement to tenurial
security of all workers. As well as section 14 of article XIII mandates that the state
shall protect working women through provisions for opportunities that would enable
them to reach their full potential.

Sec 15 Right to Health

IMBONG VS. OCHOA

RIGHT TO HEALTH- petitioners claim is that RH Law violates the constitutional provision on
the right to health because it requires the inclusion of hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine
devices, injectable and the family products and supplies in the national drug formulary and
the inclusion of the same of the same in the regular purchase of essential medicines and
supplies of all national hospitals. Petitioners posit that the risk of developing breast cancer
and cervical cancer is greatly increased in women who use oral contraceptives as to woman
who never used them. They also contend that the use of such is associated with a threefold
increase in venous thromboembolism, a twofold increase risk of schematic stroke, and an
indeterminate effect on the risk of myocardial infarction.

However, the court ruled still in favor or constitutionality. A component to the right to life is
the constitutional right to health. The constitution grants provisions protecting and
promoting the right to health. There is no threat on the right to health of the women
because the contraceptives sale, distribution and dispensation will still require the
prescription of a licensed physician.

Sec 16 Right to Balance and Healthful Ecology

OPOSA VS. FACTORAN

Facts: 34 minors represented by their parents filed a petition that bears upon the
right of the Filipinos to a balanced and healthful ecology which the petitioners dramatically
associate with the twin concepts of inter-generational responsibility and inter-generational
justice. They filed a suit against the secretary of DENR, praying that judgment be rendered
ordering the defendant, and his agents to

1. Cancel all existing Timber Licensing Agreements in the Country and;

2. Cease and desist from receiving, accepting, processing, renewing, or appraising ne TLA.

Issue: Do the petitioner-minor have a cause of action in filing a class suit to prevent
the misappropriation or impairment of Philippine Rainforest?

Ruling: the petitioner-minor assert that they represent their generation as well
as generations to come. The Supreme Court ruled that they can, for themselves, for others
of their generation, and for the succeeding generation, file a class suit. Their personality to
sue in behalf of succeeding generations is based on the concept of intergenerational
responsibility insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is concerned. Such a
right considers the rhythm and harmony of nature which indispensably include, inter alia,
the judicious disposition, utilization, management, renewal, and conservation of the
countrys forest, mineral, land, waters, fisheries, wildlife, offshore areas and other natural
resources to the end that their exploration, development, and utilization be equitably
accessible to the present as well as the future generations. Needless to say, every
generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that rhythm and harmony for the full
enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology.

MMDA VS. RESIDENTS OF MANILA

Facts: the concerned residents of the Manila Bay filed a complaint before the
RTC in Imus Cavite against several government agencies for the clean-up, rehabilitation, and
protection of manila bay. The petitioners invoke their constitutional right to life, right to
health, and right to a balance and healthful ecology, as a basis for filing the suit.

Ruling: the court ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering the government
agencies to jointly and solidarily, to clean up and rehabilitate manila bay and to restore its
waters to SB classification to make it fit for swimming, skin diving and other forms of contact
recreation. The importance of manila bay as a sea resource, playground, and as a historical
landmark cannot be over-emphasized. It is not yet too late in the day to restore the Manila
Bay to its former splendor and bring back the plants and sea life that once thrived in its blue
waters.

As the court stated that the right to balanced and healthful ecology need not even be
written in the constitution for it is assumed, like other civil and political rights guaranteed in
the Bill of Rights, to exist from the inception of mankind and it is an issue of transcendental
importance with intergenerational implications.

Sec 17 Priority to Education

Sec 18 Labor

JMM PROMOTION AND MANAGEMENT VS. CA

Facts: Due to the much-publicized death of Maricris Sioson, the former president
Cory Aquino ordered a total ban against the deployment of performing artists to Japan and
other foreign destination. The government created the Entertainment Industry Advisory
council (EIAC) which was tasked with issuing guidelines on the training, testing certification
and deployment of performing artist abroad. Pursuant to the formers recommendation, the
POEA imposed a new requirement, which is the Artist Record Book (ARB), which is issued to
artists successfully hurdled the tests, training and certification required for employment
overseas.

Issue: WON the action made by the government violates the constitutional
right to travel

Abridged existing contracts for employment

Deprived individual artists of their licenses without due process of law?

Ruling: the court ruled that the ARB requirement imposed by the POEA is
merely an exercise of the police power of the state. The Latin maxim salus populi suprema
lex embodies the character of the entire spectrum of public laws aimed at promoting the
general welfare of the people under States police power. The Philippines is one of the
largest labors sending country in Asia, and thus it is duty of the state to protect its people.
The ARB and other requirements are way of the state to protect its people specially those
performing artists deployed in the high risk destinations.
Sec 19 Self-Reliant and independent National Economy

TANADA VS. ANGARA

Facts: The establishment of World Trade Organizations was adopted in the

Philippines on December 14, 1994, ratified by the former president Fidel V. Ramos.

The petitioner contends that the provisions of the World Trade Organization as
well as the ministerial decisions and declarations and in the understanding of commitment
in financial services violate the Filipino First Policy.

Issue: WON the provisions of the agreement establishing the WTO contravene with
the provisions of section 19 article II of the 1987 Constitution.

Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled that these constitutional provisions are not
intended to be self-executing principles ready for enforcement through the courts. They do
not embody judicially enforceable constitutional rights but guidelines for legislation.

ESPINA VS. ZAMORA

In relation to section 19, article II of the 1987 Constitution, while it provides a development
of self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos, it does
not impose a policy of Filipino monopoly of the economic environment. The objective is
simply to prohibit foreign powers or interest from maneuvering our economic policies and
ensure that Filipinos are given preference at all times. The constitution take into account the
realities of the outside world as it requires the pursuit of a trade policy that serves the
general welfare and utilizes all forms and arrangements of exchange on the basis of equality
and reciprocity. In other words, the constitution does not rule out the entry of foreign
investments, goods and services.

Sec 20 Private Sector

Sec 21 Agrarian Reform

Sec 22 Indigenous Cultural Communities

Sec 23 Non-Governmental Organizations

Sec 24 Communications

Sec 25 Local Autonomy

BASCO VS. PAGCOR

Constitutional Law; Municipal corporations have no inherent power to tax; their power to tax
must always yield to a legislative act.

Local Autonomy; The principle of local autonomy under section 25 article II of the
constitution does not make local government sovereign within the state, it simply means
decentralization. Local Government has been described as a political subdivision of a nation
or state which is constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs.
 The petitioners alleged that the creation of PAGCOR shall be considered as null and
void for being contrary to morals, public policy and public order. It also contends that the
creation of PAGCOR waives the right of City of Manila to impose taxes and license fees.

Thus the petition is found without merit for the following reasons:

A. that the City of Manila being a mere municipal corporation has no inherent power to
impose taxes.

B. the charter of the city of manila is subject to control by congress. It should be stressed
that municipal corporations are mere creatures of congress, which has the power to create
and abolish municipal corporations due to its general legislative power.

This doctrine emanates from the supremacy of the national government over local
governments.

LINA VS. PANO

The power of local Government units to legislate and enact ordinances and resolutions is
merely a delegated power coming from the congress. Ordinances should not contravene an
existing statute enacted by congress.

Facts: The mayor of San Pedro, Laguna refused to issue a mayors permit to Tony
Calvento, who was a PCSO agent, on ground that it is violation of their ordinance that
prohibits any form of gambling.

Ruling: The game of Lotto is a duly authorized by the national government

through an act of congress, RA 1169 as amended by BP blg 42 which grants a franchise to
the PCSO and allows operating the lotteries. A local government unit cannot issue an
ordinance or a resolution that would seek to prohibit permits. Stated otherwise, what the
national legislature expressly allows by law, such as lotto, a provincial board may not
disallow by ordinance or resolution.

Sec 26 equal access to the public service; political dynasties

PAMATONG VS COMELEC

Facts: Pamatong filed his Certificate of Candidacy for President. Respondent

COMELEC declared petitioner as nuisance candidates who could not wage a nationwide
campaign and/or are not nominated by a political party or are not supported by a registered
political party with a national constituency. Pamatong claims that the respondent violated his
right to equal access to opportunities for public service under section 26 article II of the
constitution. He claims that the comelec erred in disqualifying him since he considers
himself as the most qualified candidate.

Issue: WON there is a constitutional right to run for o holds public office?

Ruling: No. what is recognized in Section 26 Article II of the constitution is

merely a privilege subject to limitations imposed by law. It neither bestows such a right nor
elevates the privilege to the level of an enforceable right. There is nothing in the plain
language of the provision which suggests such a thrust or justifies an interpretation of the
sort. It is considered as not self-executing.

BELGICA VS. OCHOA

With the topic of Pork-barrel in the Philippines, assailing the constitutionality of PDAF,
focusing on the issue on political dynasties, stating that pork barrel system enables
politicians who are member of political dynasties to accumulate the funds to perpetuate
themselves in power, is in contravention of section 26, article II of 1987 Constitution, which
prohibits political Dynasties.

The foregoing provision is considered as not self-executing due to the qualifying clause as
may be defined by law. In this respect, said provision does not, by and of itself, provide a
judicially enforceable constitutional right but merely specifies guideline for legislative or
executive plan. In any event, it is not clearly manifested that pork barrel system would be
able to propagate political dynasties.

Sec 27 Honesty and Integrity in Public Service

Sec 28 Full Public Disclosure

ANTOLIN VS. DOMONDON

Facts: Hazel Antolin failed in the CPA licensure exam she took in October 1997.
Believing that she passed the exam, she wrote to the Board of Accountancy requesting that
her answer sheets be re-corrected. She was shown her answer sheets but it was only shaded
marks. She then requested to have a copy of the answer keys and the grading system,
which was denied by the courts. She then took the CPA Licensure Exam dated May 1998,
passed and have taken her oath.

Issue: WON the petitioner had a constitutional right to demand access to the
Examination Papers?

Ruling: the state policy of full disclosure is limited to transactions involving

public interest, and is subject to reasonable conditions as prescribed by law. The court
has always grappled with the meaning of public Interest and public concern which
embrace a broad spectrum of subjects which the public may want to know, either these
directly affect their lives, or simply because such matters naturally arose the interest of an
ordinary citizen, and which are, in the final analysis, up to the courts to determine on a case
to case basis.